The Ark and The Dove

Sight Unseen

If you could see God, you wouldn't be able to recognize Him as God.

The only way to appreciate God's full glory is to see him in his infinite nature. But you could never see his infinite nature with your natural eyes because if you could see it, then it would be separate from you...and if it were separate from you, it must have its own limits. That is, there must be some space between you and it that was not God in order to see all of Him...but then God would not be in that space, God would have His own limits or boundaries. And if God has limits, He must not be infinite. If He is not infinite, He must not be God.

Indeed, God could only make himself visible to our mortal senses by taking on a finite body...thus, we could not recognize his full nature. But even at the Second Coming and the Final Judgement, when Christ is supposed to appear in all of his Glory, we still aren't seeing all there is to see of God. If we did, there would be no need for a Beatific Vision. We could see Christ coming, and we might even see the sky filled with God's presence...but there would still be the problem of that distance between us, some space that it did not appear that God occupied.

So here's a crazy thought. Maybe the only way to truly perceive God's infinite nature would be to look at God from inside God. From within God, you would be able to see Him stretched infinitely in all directions around you. But you would be more than merely inside God if you were really inside God. God's being actually would have to  pass through in every aspect of your being as well. There would be no space between you and what you saw, not even the space you thought you were occupying. And perhaps this is why you can't experience the beatific vision until you are completely joined with God in Heaven.

If perfect bliss were seeing God from within God, then it only makes all the more poignant the nature of Hell -- seeing nothing but space apparently unoccupied by God. (And in life, those who spurned God probably cherished that seemingly unoccupied space most of all, since it gave them a sense of freedom and ownership, thus making it easier to see why they might choose Hell. Meanwhile, those who desire God spurned the seeming distance, making an existence within God seem all the more fitting a reward.)

Obviously, I'm just trying to stretch the ol' meditative muscles here, and in no way trying to assert any kind of hard belief (especially if Thomas finds something doctrinal that would contradict anything I've just said).

Do You Think This is the Kind of Thing St. Paul Dealt with?

I know, I know. I really shouldn't pick at it...but I just can't help myself.

Check out the Proviso to the Website for that whacky documentary everybody is talking about...

http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/movie_overview/disclaimer.html

or continue reading if you don't want to go to the other site. I'll...uhm...paraphrase for you.

Hey, folks! Have I got some great news for you! Remember that scandalous anti-semitic argument in the Gospel of Matthew that accuses the ancient Jewish authorities of starting a rumor that the Christians relocated the body? Well, guess what? Those ancient Jewish leaders weren't lying! What would they have to gain by lying? They were, in fact, revealing the truth. The rumors were the reality...Christ's body was removed and relocated in another tomb. It was those whacky Christians who were making up the lies about people lying! And don't worry your head about all those other things that the Gospel said were facts and not rumors...like Roman guards blocking the entrance, a really heavy rock, and the apostles cowering in fear. Because the really important part of the story is the part that the author told you was not, in fact, true.

But, hey, if you want to believe in the resurrection, just imagine he came back to life in the second tomb! Everybody make happy! But, you know what, if there really are remains of Jesus to be found, that's okay, too, because the Ascension doesn't have to mean a literal ascension. Did you sillies really think that Heaven was really up? Pshaw. That is soooo pre-Copernican. But as for all those other theological points you believe, like the glorified body that could walk through walls and stuff...well...better luck next time!

Well, that was my impression of what they said, at least. These guys have all the politeness and understanding of an Iranian President at a conference on the Holocaust.

Christ's New Tomb Discovered...Again!

Boy, Jesus sure did seem to make the rounds with those burial places, didn't he?

Now I really only have two comments worth making about this James Cameron documentary.

1) When the heck did James Cameron get so old looking? Usually shaving knocks a few years off your age, but he looks like he just shot ahead to 75!

2) Does anyone else think that the markers on Christ's alleged coffin look remotely like separatist emblem from the Star Wars prequels?

The sad thing is this story is coming off as so shaky that it makes the Da Vinci code look plausible. Anyone think it's really a mockumentary?

Why Robots Shouldn't Get a Vote...

Maybe this is just because I spent most of my weekend lying motionless on my sofa with a 104 degree fever watching the Battlestar Galactica Season 1 DVD set that Al lent me, but I think it's safe to say that even if we did at some point create artificially intelligent machines, they still shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Score one for the good guys

"Freud in Freefall: Robert Royal, president of the Faith and Reason Institute, writes in National Catholic Reporter that the scholarly opinion of Sigmund Freud is falling faster than sales of Britney Spears Perfume."  Full story from DallasNews Religion.

Down with the other two Masters of Suspicion as well!

Indult matters

The other night I promised to a friend an explanation of why although I would certainly welcome it, I'm not as excited about the rumored upcoming universal 1962 Missal indult as some people might suppose me to be.  I said I wasn't going to go into a long explanation on the spot, as it would have been tiresome to shout it at the top of my lungs the way I would have had to to be understood at that time in that place.

As I was about to sign on here and write a piece, I noticed that Dan of the Holy Whapping has written one that closely enough reflects enough of what I think and feel that I will just link to it.

I think what I'd really want as a long-term result from said indult when (if) it is ever promulgated (and I'm not holding my breath), is that wider permission for the older style of Mass will cause people to be reminded about some of the good perennially valid Catholic sensibilities (Vatican II and pre-Vatican II) that we've forgotten about or let slide since the 60s, and that these will be integrated with the good reforms we have already carried out, while we at the same time avoid or divest ourselves of the bad or lazy habits of preconciliar and postconciliar times (maybe I will muse on specific examples of what I mean in later posts).  Perhaps this may seem like an idealistic sort of hope, but since when does one ever make progress in the Christian life without a heavenly ideal to hope for?

Maybe they can have a barking meter

NJ residents with noisy dogs could face fines.

De Jesus claims he's De Messiah

Not to mention the Antichrist.

Have you heard of this guy?  There's this bizarre sect I keep hearing about in the news (probably mostly because of the popular taste for the bizarre) whose leader combines more run-of-the-mill Protestant doctrines such as "once saved always saved" and the so-called "health and wealth gospel" with weird stuff, like saying that he is Jesus. 

Now, though, he's decided that he's the Antichrist, and his followers are going out and getting 666 tattoos.  But that's not a Satanic thing, he says; it's a "good" thing, see, because it's a symbol of how he's replacing the Gospel with a new gospel of his own devising.  Sounds to me like reruns from gnosticism.

We'll have to see where this goes.  To be sure, he's an antichrist, but I think it's safe to say he seems like kind of a lightweight for the Man of Sin himself.

I might have to get one of these...

A "Bumper Stickers Are Not The Answer" bumper sticker.

Love that chicken from Pope Yes

There's a joke about KFC wanting to make a huge donation to the Church if the pope would only change the words of the Our Father to "give us this day our daily chicken."  In real life, though the restaurant is hoping the Pope will want to endorse the new fish dish they have rolled out for Lent. 

But when it comes to fast-food popery, KFC is the new kid on the block.  Popeyes Chicken is famous for having a logo that looks remarkably like it says "Pope Yes" (or used to, until very recently when they redid the lettering).  It has amused me to call it Pope Yes Chicken ever since since 2005, when I entertained this theory mostly based on how much it entertained me.  I have since learned that 1.) according to Wikipedia, they did at one point decide to have ads with Popeye The Sailor Man because of the similar name, which only confused people, as Popeye eats spinach (and on occasion oatmeal), but has never been known to like fried chicken and 2.) the official story is that the restaurant is for some reason named after the detective Popeye Doyle from The French Connection.

Right after Matt and I had a chuckle over how once you notice this you see it everywhere (especially around us, where there are several Popeyes with the old-style Pope yes sign), the Curt Jester posted on Pope Yes Chicken.

So, in the spirit of the season, here's your Pope Yes Chicken roundup:
Wikipedia: Popeyes    Daddy, why is there a restaurant called Pope Yes?   Not Just For Catholics Anymore   Pope Yes marketing idea   Pope Yes vs. The Incredible Hulk   Cacciaguida's take

As a final note, I think that as far as Lenten fare goes, KFC will not be able to compete with McDonalds: the McFishwich (or whatever it's called) is one of the more penitential foods I know.