Catholicae Testudines

Does that make me some kind of weirdo or something?

Just because I don't think that pretending to be a heretic isn't really a funny joke.   

Not that I am under the impression that joking about serious things is always inappropriate.  On the contrary, the only really good jokes are about serious things.  Rather than expostulate about it at length, I will link to an excellent essay by Chesterton on this matter and how the opposite of "funny" is not "serious" but "not funny."  I think that one might also make a distinction between simple non-being of funniness and privation of funniness that ought to be present.

The end of this essay (which is a chapter of Heretics) also touches upon what one might call distributivism in the artistic sphere, which I may have written about before and may want to at some point.

Oh, here's my comeback (I'm never good at thinking of these on the spot).  "That's so funny I forgot to laugh."

Funny Coz It's True

I know it might sound snobby, but only grad students really understand the experience of grad school: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/comics.php

Anti- Da Vinci Code Strategery

If there's a movie I'm certain to hate, then I typically decide that they will receive zero money from me.  And indeed this happens.  However, since I hardly ever go to the movies anyway, typically only to movies I really want to see and support with my money, this doesn't have an awful lot of effect and as far as the movie execs are concerned there is no difference between my treatment of the ones I really loathe and the ones that I maybe would have gone to see except that there were other things I'd rather do instead.  It's kind of like if I decided not to smoke as a protest against the tobacco industry.  Since I don't smoke to begin with, what's the difference between that and what I'd normally do anyway?

A boycott is only really effective when the institution on the receiving end realizes what is happening.  I think this is what is behind Professional Movie Person Barbara Nicolosi's "How to Respond to Da Vinci Code Strategy" (please read the link).  The short version is that in order for the movie people to realize that they are being protested against, DVC has to be the big box office loser so that they realize that people went to the movies and deliberately chose something else.  Her suggestion is that the message would be especially clear if we picked this movie "Over the Hedge," which comes out on the same day as DVC.

Now ordinarily you would have to pay me to watch a movie about cartoon squirrels.  But I think I'd be willing to take one for the team, especially if people went along with me.  Pius, I know we talked about this.  Any of the Catholic Daughters want to come along?  As long as I'm going to go to the trouble, I will probably also have to write a letter to Sony Pictures explaining why I did this just so my effort doesn't go to waste. 

I also must say I really like what Barbara Nicolosi has to say on the subject of art (which she puts into practice in her job).  Perhaps I will explain more fully in a later post.

"'The Da Vinci Code' actually makes you more stupid about art, history, theology and comparative religion"

Catholic blogger Mark Shea is interviewed by Zenit on "The Da Vinci Deception," a book of which he is a co-author.

"The Da Vinci Code" has become the source for what I call "pseudo-knowledge" about the Christian faith.

Pseudo-knowledge is that stuff "everybody knows," such as the "fact" that Humphrey Bogart said "Play it again, Sam" -- except he didn't. Pseudo-knowledge doesn't matter much when the issue is the script of "Casablanca."

It matters greatly when it adversely affects the most sacred beliefs of a billion people, and when it levels the charge that the Catholic Church is essentially a vast "Murder Incorporated" network founded on maintaining the lie of Jesus' divinity and resurrection.

When that happens, very nasty genies get let out of bottles, as when the lies recorded by 19th-century czarist secret police forgers in the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" became the basis for what "everybody knew" about the Jews in the terrible anti-Semitic persecutions of the 20th century.

"The Da Vinci Code" has sold close to 30 million copies. In May, it will appear as a major film and will acquire even more unquestioned authority among millions of historically and theologically illiterate viewers -- unless Christians state the facts and help viewers recognize just how badly they've been had.

Vote Geek

So there's this geeky fiction contest at this Collectibles Website. Currently, they are holding a vote for fans to pick the fourth runner-up. I'm not even sure how I ended up reading such random things on such a strange website...but one cunning little narrative in particular caught my eye...it's a story called "Philistines"...I think its the fifth radio button down. You'll want to click that button before you hit the "Vote Now" button on the bottom of the page, which is, incidentally:
http://www.sideshowtoy.com/php/flashfictionChoice.php

So...that would be "Philistines"..."Vote Now," at the Website above. And, of course, if you don't think "Philistines" is a good story...well...the title says it all, doesn't it?

Happy Feast of the Chair of St. Peter

(I meant to get this up Wednesday, but it didn't happen)

In honor of this feast, which celebrates the authority of St. Peter (the chair or cathedra being a symbol of teaching authority), I will post a list of fifty instances of Petrine primacy from the New Testament.  I wish I had been clever and industrious enough to compile this list, but in fact it was made by apologist Dave Armstrong and appears in his book A Biblical Defense of Catholicism.  I hope he doesn't mind me putting it on the web because there are some people I know that need it.  The rest of the book is similarly excellent and I would recommend it to everyone.  The first three items are in the Gospel reading of today's [Wednesday's] Mass.

1.  Peter alone is the Rock upon which Jesus builds his Church (Mt. 16:18).  Christ appears here, not as the foundation, but as the architecht who "builds."  Moreover, Rock embodies a metaphor applied to him by Christ in a sense analogous to the suffering and despised Messiah (1 Pet. 2:4-8; cf. Matt. 21:42).  Without a solid foundation, a house falls.  The Good Shepherd (John 10:11) gives us other shepherds (pastors) as well (Eph. 4:11).

2.  Peter alone is given the keys of the kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 16:19).

3.  Peter is individually given the power to bind and loose (Matt. 16:19).

4.  Peter's name occurs first in all lists of Apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13).  Matthew even calls him the "first" (10:2).  (Judas Iscariot is invariably named last.)

5.  Peter is almost always named first whenever he appears with anyone else.  In one (only?) example to the contrary, Galatians 2:9, where he (Cephas) is listed after James and before John, he is clearly pre-eminent in the entire context (e.g., 1:18-19, 2:7-8).

6.  Peter alone among the Apostles receives a new name, Rock, solemnly conferred (John 1:42; Matt. 16:18).

7.  Likewise, Peter is regarded by Jesus as the Chief Shepherd after himself (John 21:15-17), singularly by name, and over the universal Church, even though others have a similar but subordinate role (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:2).

8.  Peter alone among the Apostles is mentioned by name as having been prayed for by Jesus Christ in order that his faith may not fail (Luke 22:32).

9.  Peter alone among the Apostles is exhorted by Jesus to "strengthen your brethren" (Luke 22:32).

10. Peter is the first to confess Christ's Messiahship and divinity (Matt. 16:16)

11. Peter alone is told that he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation (Matt. 16:17).

12. Peter is regarded by the Jews (Acts 4:1-13) as the leader and spokesman of Christianity.

13. Peter is regarded by the common people in the same way (Acts 2:37-41; 5:15).

14. Jesus Christ uniquely associates himself and Peter in the miracle of the tribute-money (Matt. 17:2-27).

15. Christ teaches from Peter's boat, and the miraculous catch of fish follows (Luke 5:1-11): perhaps a metaphor for the Pope as a "fisher of men" (cf. Matt. 4:19).

16. Peter was the first apostle to set out for and enter the empty tomb (Luke 24:12; John 20:26).

17. Peter is specified by an angel as the leader and representative of the Apostles (Mark 16:7).

18. Peter leads the Apostles in fishing (John 21:2-3, 11).  The "bark" (boat) of Peter has been regarded by Catholics as a figure of the Church, with Peter at the helm.

19. Peter alone casts himself into the sea to come to Jesus (John 21:7).

20. Peter's words are the first recorded and most important in the upper room before Pentecost (Acts 1:15-22).

21. Peter takes the lead in calling for a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:22).

22. Peter is the first person to speak (and the only one recorded) after Pentecost, so he was the first Christian to "preach the gospel" in the Church era (Acts 2:14-36).

23. Peter works the first miracle of the Church Age, healing a lame man (Acts 3:6-12).

24. Peter utters the first anathema (on Ananias and Sapphira), which is emphatically affirmed by God (Acts 5:2-11).

25. Peter's shadow works miracles (Acts 5:15).

26. Peter is the first after Christ to raise the dead (Acts 9:40).

27. Cornelius is told by an angel to seek out Peter for instruction in Christianity (Acts 10:1-6).

28. Peter is the first to receive the Gentiles, after a revelation from God (Acts 11:5-17).

29. Peter instructs the other Apostles on the catholicity (universality) of the Church (Acts 10:9-48).

30. Peter is the object of the first divine interposition on behalf of an individual in the Church Age (an angel delivers him from prison: Acts 12:1-17).

31. The whole Church (strongly implied) offers earnest prayer for Peter when he is imprisoned (Acts 12:5).

32. Peter opens and presides over the first council of Christianity and lays down principles afterward accepted by it (Acts 15:7-11).

33. Paul distinguishes the Lord's post-Resurrection appearances to Peter from those to other apostles (1 Cor. 15:4-8).  The two disciples on the road to Emmaus make the same distinction (Luke 24:34), in this instance mentioning only Peter (Simon), even though they themselves ahd just seen the risen Jesus within the previous hour. (Luke 24:33).

34. Peter is often spoken of as distinct among Apostles (Mark 1:36; Luke 9:28, 32; Acts 2:37, 5:29; 1 Cor 9:5).

35. Peter is often spokesman for the other Apostles, especially at climactic moments (Mark 8:29; Matt. 18:21; Luke 9:5, 12:41; John 6:67 ff.).

36. Peter's name is always the first listed of the "inner circle" of the disciples (Peter, James, and John - Matt. 17:1, 26:37, 40; Mark 5:37, 14:37).

37. Peter is often the central figure relating to Jesus in dramatic Gospel scenes, such as walking on the water (Matt. 14:28-32; Luke 5:1 ff.; Mark 10:28; Matt. 17:24 ff.).

38. Peter is the first to recognize and refute heresy, in Simon Magus (Acts 8:14-24).

39. Peter's name is mentioned more often than all the other disciples put together: 191 times (162 as Peter or Simon Peter, twenty-three as Simon, and six as Cephas).  John is next in frequency, with only forty-eight appearances, and Peter is present fifty percent of the time we find John in the Bible.  Fulton Sheen reckoned that all the other disciples were mentioned 130 times.  If this is correct, Peter is named a remarkable sixty percent of the time any disciple is referred to.

40. Peter's proclamation at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-41) contains a fully authoritative interpretation of Scipture, a doctrinal decision, and a disciplinary decree concerning members of the House of Israel (2:36) - an example of binding and loosing.

41. Peter was the first "charismatic," having judged authoritatively the first instance of the gift of tongues as genuine (Acts 2:14-21).

42. Peter is the first to preach Christian repentance and Baptism (Acts 2:38). 

43. Peter (presumably) leads the first recorded mass Baptism (Acts 2:41).

44. Peter commanded the first Gentile Christians to be baptized (Acts 10:44-48).

45. Peter was the first traveling missionary and first exercised what would now be called "visitation of the churches" (Acts 9:32-38, 43).  Paul preached at Damascus immediately after his conversion (Acts 9:20), but hadn't traveled there for that purpose.  (God changed his plans!)  His missionary journeys begin in Acts 13:12.

46. Paul went to Jerusalem specifically to see Peter for fifteen days in the beginning of his ministry (Gal. 1:18) and was commissioned by Peter, James, and John (Gal 2:9) to preach to the Gentiles.

47. Peter acts, by strong implication, as the chief bishop/shepherd of the Church (1 Pet. 5:1), since he exhorts all the other bishops, or elders.

48. Peter interprets prophecy (2 Pet. 1:16-21).

49. Peter corrects those who misuse Paul's writings (2 Pet. 3:15-16).

50. Peter wrote his first epistle from Rome, according to most scholars, as its bishop, and as the universal bishop (or Pope) of the early Church.  "Babylon" (1 Pet. 5:13) is regarded by many commentators as a code name for Rome.

The author concludes: [I]t strains credulity to hold that God would present St. Peter with such prominence in the Bible, without some meaning and import for later Church government.  The papacy is the most plausible interpretation and actual institutional fulfillment of this biblical evidence.  For why would God foreordain such a leadership function, only to cease after Peter's death?  Clearly the office of the papacy is paramount, not individual popes, and this was to be perpetual (apostolic succession), just as are the offices of bishop, deacon, teacher, and evangelist.

We Are So Much Cooler as Gangstas

Ever wonder what the Catholicae Testudines would sound like if we were gangsta rappers? Well, find out by going here

PARENTAL ADVISORY NOTICE: Link may contain objectionable language...yo.

Deconstruction

I dispute the statement that too much deconstruction is going on here.  In fact, I dispute that deconstruction is going on at all.  A deconstructionist asserts that words can only refer to other words, whereas I assert that words are symbols that stand for ideas, although the particular systems of which words stand for which ideas are constructed by human societies.  Nor have I attempted to demonstrate that statements about texts subvert their own meaning, as deconstructionists do. 

My writings in the last few days may bear some passing resemblance to deconstructionist theory in that I challenged some peoples' assumptions, including the idea that a text intrinsically possesses a "literal" meaning that has no reference to its interpreters.    However, it might be more accurate to say that rather than deconstructing any system, I have rather given a quick tour of certain systems and called attention to how they are constructed.  If they are sound, I called attention to that, but if unsound, I called attention to that.

In particular I called attention to how the Bible transcends the ephemeral world of social constructs even while living in it.  I think you will find that many things of the Church and of the Faith have this property, that they are in the world but not of the world.

Brain is Full

Read...too...much...bad...poetry...brain...short-circuting...

You know, sometimes I think that my posts on this blog are really just recording my descent into dissertation-driven madness...

While Paul was so speaking in his defense, Festus said in a loud voice, "You are mad, Paul; much learning is driving you mad." (Acts 26:24)

Uncanny

While it's good to go to CTP (formerly the graduate bible study...maybe we should start calling it FGBS) for the spiritual edification from reading the Bible, it invariably also brings very practical benefits (other than free dessert). For instance, we've been reading about the story of Absolom and David for the last month or so.
This,and I swear this by sheer coincidence, couldn't have been timed better for me because I've spent the last week reading countless, boring, and poorly written Restoration tracts. Dryden most famously recounts English politics in his poem Absolom and Achitophel...but even more useful have been the numerous allusions to Shimei and Hushai throughout less famous works.

This might come as a shock to some, but reading the Bible isn't just about spirituality (although this is its most important function). You can't really expect to be able to understand Western literature or Western literature without a deep knowledge of its Biblical roots. Indeed, I've probably learned more about the Good Book while doing graduate research at a secular University then I ever learned in sixteen years of Catholic education.