Another Theology Blog

In my previous post, I mentioned challenging Raving Atheist to a debate.  It doesn’t look like that’ll be happening after all, for obvious reasons.  

Hence, I’m pleased to announce that Raving Theist is now numbered among the saints, and perhaps in some mysterious way, always was.

But my love for civil debate hasn’t yet abated, so instead of arguing about God’s existence, Raving Theist and I will be arguing about the efficacy of debate.  Ironic, no?

It’s something as predictable as the change of the seasons; the village atheist, after a brief hiatus, emerges once again from the cold soil of silence into a new springtime of fresh rants.

But there’s something special about this particular atheist, or rather, about the village in which he resides.  You see, he’s a vocal advocate of the pro-life movement, and a volunteer at a crisis pregnancy center to boot.  He’s also a close friend of Dawn Eden, the Catholic apologist who wrote Thrill of the Chaste, and he often guest-posts on her blog.

Clearly, this man is not from the run-of-the-mill godless stock.  He’s something special; indeed, something very rare, and perhaps even endangered; he’s among the last of his kind, a representative of a philosophical school which died out a century ago.  

His philosophy came long before Ayn Rand’s objectivism, or Sartre’s existentialism; it preceded logical-positivism, secularism, modernism, postmodernism, and atheistic empiricism.  He is numbered among the classical, politically and socially conservative, rationalists.

What is his name?  No one really knows.  He stalks the Internet quietly, hidden beneath his online persona, “Raving Atheist,” whispering his dark musings to anyone who has an ear to hear, or a bone to pick.

Thus, I have chosen to challenge him to a debate concerning his worldview’s basic asumptions.  If it’s in accordance with Divine Providence, I will be joined by Mr. Wright, a devout Catholic philosopher and science fiction writer who converted to the Faith from an atheism roughly comparable to that of Raving Atheist’s.

So please stay-tuned.  This is a square-off you definitely don’t want to miss…that is, if it actually happens!

Several months ago, I made a pledge not to directly criticize any person, no matter what.  Obviously, there are exceptions to every rule, even those which do not admit of exceptions.  This is one such case.

I do hope the Good Bishop has also reminded Catholics struggling with homosexual inclinations that translating their orientation into disordered acts–be it in thought, word, or deed–is intrinsically sinful. Unfortunately, after browsing through His Eminence’ letter, this seems not to be the case.  

Though, my main complaint is Cardinal Mahony’s dishonesty:

“We are disappointed that the ballot information about Proposition 8 stated that the purpose of the initiative was ‘to ban gay marriage.’ From the very beginning, this was not our purpose.”

Not only is this statement blatantly false–gay marriage was deemed legal in California for a certain period of time, and thus any legislation abrogating such an arrangement is by definition a ban–it comes across as detached and condescending.

The reasons the faithful backed this ballot item are quite obvious; we feel that homosexual acts are either dangerous to the stability of society, an affront to the dignity of marriage, harmful to those who commit them, an insult to reason, a distortion and abuse of love, an abomination to God, or any number of the above.  Take your pick.

Moreover, we are not just opposed to same-sex unions, we are opposed to the legalization of any sexual intercourse had outside of lifelong marriage between one man and one woman.  Hence, we are opposed to divorce, except in cases involving abuse or fornication.  We are also opposed to sex-change operations, artificial contraception, self-mutilation, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning, biogenetic re-engineering of our fellow man, unjust war, unnecessary use of the death-penalty, and of course, abortion.

Any man who maintains otherwise is lying to you, or possibly to himself. 

LGBTQ folks need to know exactly why we oppose their demands, and where we stand on other issues as well.  Giving them anything less than the truth insults their dignity as members of the human family.  They deserve to hear straight-talk (no pun intended) from their brothers and sisters.

“When we observe the world around us, we may sometimes wonder if life is nothing but a series of random events. We may have heard people say, ‘Mrs. Zhang is such a nice lady. She is a vegetarian, practices the Dharma religiously, and gives to all kinds of social causes. Unfortunately, however, she is also a most unlucky person and has experienced a great deal of misfortune. This is most unfair–why do so many bad things happen to such a nice person? How can anyone believe in conditionality?’ At other times, we may come across this type of comment: ‘That person is such a crook. You would think that he should have to pay for all the horrible things he has done. But instead he is rich and powerful. People look up to him. Will he ever have to pay?’ True, when we see bad things happen to good people, or vice versa, our faith may be called into question. Actually, there is nothing here that is inconsistent with the Law of Cause and Effect. Let us go back to the example of Mrs. Zhang. The reason that she does not yet have a chance to enjoy any good fortune is because of her ‘karmic debts’ from the past. Once her ‘karmic debts’ are burned up through the process of doing good, good fortune will await her. As to those who seem to be able to forever evade the retribution of their bad actions, it is because they have stores of merit from their past lives. When their store of merit is consumed, then the effects of their unwholesome actions will come knocking at their doors” (Venerable Master Hsing Yun, Conditionality: The Law of Cause and Effect).

Overall, Hsing Yun presents an accurate and concise summary of Buddhism’s teachings on the problem of pain.  However, I find these teachings to be quite primitive and unsatisfactory, and ironically not at all different from the temporal reward/punishment theodicy of ancient Judaism.  

While not entirely wrong, doctrines that cling only to present reality when explaining the existence of suffering are fundamentally flawed.  Indeed, at first glance, they appear to deal with the presence of evil by merely dismissing it with the flick of a wrist, like some second-rate magician performing cheap parlor-tricks.  They can never fulfill our desire to know the answer to mankind’s greatest question:  why do innocent people suffer?  

Over the eons, many philosophers, prophets, politicians, doctors, poets, artists, and yes, even fishermen and carpenters, have risen to meet the challenge of finding an answer to this burning question.  Their conclusions have generally fallen into one of two categories: suffering just happens for no reason, and suffering happens for a reason.

Let’s discuss the former category, refute it’s proponents, and then proceed to consider the latter category.

Suffering Just Happens for no Reason

The “suffering just happens for no reason” category can be subdivided into three different schools of thought: determinism, randomism (for lack of a better term), and indifferentism.

Determinism:  In short, everything just happens because there isn’t a different way it could’ve happened. For example, Susie’s father, Bernard, died in a horrific automobile accident simply because, fourteen billion years ago, the initial conditions of the universe predetermined this outcome; a slight imbalance in quantity between matter and antimatter during the first few seconds after the Big Bang eventually led to the creation of stars, the emergence of life, and the death of Bernard. As a consequence, there’s no such thing as freewill. Whether behavior is determined by astrological signs, by selfish genes, or by environmental factors, one thing is absolutely certain: behavior is determined. Talking about human rights is pointless, unless you happen to think that equations like y=x have a right to free speech, or that baking soda must be allowed to react with vinegar due to its inherent dignity. Suffering just happens, and there’s no purpose to it.

Randomism:  Absolutely nothing is determined. Things just happen, but there isn’t any rhyme or reason to it. Everything ultimately has its origin in some lawless, chaotic sub-reality. Matter randomly appears from nowhere for no reason, produced by nothing. In other words, something comes from nothing, nothing comes from nothing, and nothing comes from something; anything and everything goes. Evolution is the only law, and even evolution could stop or go backwards at any time, because all physical laws, all properties of matter, energy, and existence, are created and destroyed by the random collisions of different realities, each vying for dominance and survival. Thus, all order is an illusion, and consequently, freewill is an illusion too, because essentially, there’s nothing making decisions. Deciding between this or that implies order, indeed, it implies an “orderer,” which cannot exist in a randomist universe, at least not in any intelligible sense.  Suffering just happens, because like everything else, it’s random, and there’s no purpose to it.

Indifferentism:  Suffering just happens…who cares why?

Critique: Suffering Just Happens for no Reason

Response to Determinism:  Who then, is the illusion of freewill fooling? If suffering is predetermined, like everything else, why do we resist and rebel against it? This philosophy is completely unintelligible, self-contradicting, and necessarily false. Suffering doesn’t happen because things couldn’t have happened in any other way. No, we call suffering, “suffering,” precisely because things could’ve happened in a different, and better way.

Response to Randomism:  If all order is an illusion, then how do you explain the existence of stable physical laws and such? Everything surely can’t originate in randomness. Even my freewill is not random. I carefully weigh the facts, and then choose; I don’t roll dice in my head! There’s always a reason behind my choices, even if I don’t acknowledge it. In a sense, I determine myself, at least within the constraints of my environment. How is this possible? I don’t know, but it happens each and every time I make a decision.

Response to Indifferentism:  Who cares why suffering happens? I do.

Suffering Happens for a Reason

I think, if we’re truly honest with ourselves, we must admit that all things happen for a reason, including suffering.

Actually, I think suffering happens for several reasons; here are the five main ones:

1) Freewill

All suffering is ultimately a consequence of the abuse of freewill. The highest good is love, but love must be chosen. By giving us the ability to choose, God opened up the possibility that we might choose wrongly, and thus decide against love.

2) Drive for Autonomy

By this, I mean the urge to set ourselves up as the absolute authority, and thus dethrone God. The cause of this urge is pride, an overestimation of self; that which is, by nature, constricted with limitations, can’t act as though it hasn’t got any limitations, not without doing harm to itself and everything around it. This is precisely what happened when Lucifer fell from heaven. We don’t know why Lucifer chose an inferior and exclusive love of self, rather than a superior and inclusive love of God; but, Lucifer chose what he chose, for reasons that are perhaps better left unknown. We too are often tempted to pursue exclusive autonomy. We too often make poor choices and reject a superior good in favor of an inferior good. Perhaps Lucifer’s reasons for rejecting God are so familiar to us, that we’ve forgotten them?

3) Cosmic Fall

When Satan fell from heaven, portions of creation joined in his rebellion. Parts of the universe began to decay, and soon, dissolution began to spread throughout the cosmos like a cancer. Natural disasters, diseases, and destruction of all kinds emerged.

4) Fall of Man

Eventually, God brought about the creation of something called Man. This creature, made in the image and likeness of his Lord, enjoyed a state of original happiness. Man was in harmony with nature, and also with himself. Being either male or female, he enjoyed the intimate communion and complementariness of the opposite sex, without any of the strife we now experience. But paradise wasn’t enough for him. After being persuaded by Satan, Man, represented by Adam and Eve, joined the dark rebellion that was slowly creeping across all creation. Thus, Man lost his immortality, and now he seeks to regain it at any cost. This too is a great cause of suffering.

5) Collateral Damage

Other beings with freewill make decisions that hurt us, either directly or indirectly.

Conclusion

Although we know why suffering happens in theory, individual cases, especially if they involve innocent people suffering, are much harder to deal with. Primarily, this is because such cases hit close to home; our emotions, which have become disordered as a result of the fall of Man, get involved in these cases, and this creates even more suffering.

Contrary to Venerable Master Hsing Yun’s opinion, with which I introduced this treatise, Mrs. Zhang isn’t suffering because of “karmic debt.” Most of her suffering is due to the cosmic fall, and collateral damage resulting from poor decisions made by others.

As for people who do evil, but seem not to suffer any consequences for their actions, a few things must be remembered. First of all, appearances can be deceiving. Such people may look happy on the outside, but be miserable on the inside. Second, the evil one may find such people useful; at least for the time being, he nurtures them, fattening them up for the slaughter. Lastly, as Christ said, God extends mercy and gifts to all beings, no matter what.

The Lord “…makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust” (Matthew 5:45).

“…but the universe is not intelligently designed, then you’re saying the universe just naturally came into existence, continues existence, through natural laws of nature, through physics, thermodynamics, the laws of gravity and energy, produced you, eventually, and then through you produced this book that proves that it has no natural intelligent design” (Stephen Colbert, concerning Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion).

This quote summarizes my views on the ridiculous implications of atheistic thought.  Basically, people who reject God are left without an adequate explanation for their own existence and experience.  Their vain attempts to construct a coherent worldview upon the ash and debris of a meaningless universe–which happens to be spiraling toward inevitable destruction, by the way–are completely illogical. 

The way I see it, four necessary absurdities follow from the acceptance of a purely naturalistic paradigm.  

Some might object at this point, saying that my logic is flawed, though I do not know how it possibly could be.  My response, if atheism (defined as the rejection of the supernatural) were true, would be to merely rearrange the logic gates in the objector’s brain, such that the input of my statements would result in the output of his recognition of their truth.  It would take exactly one inverter to do so.  

Well, I came across a very surprising article in the New York Times today.  The case for global warming is starting to look pretty cold, which in my opinion is a positive turn of events.  I can’t wait for the death knell of such atrocious pseudoscience.

Unfortunately, it now seems we’re up against a mega-apocalyptic-ice-age-of-doom.  In order to avert such catastrophes, guess what we’ll need to do?  This little jewel of a quote says everything:

The Nature paper…goes on to propose that humans, as long as they have a technologically powerful society, would be likely to avert such a slide into a long big chill by adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

So now we need to increase our carbon emissions?  Hold on.  I’m confused.  I thought we were cutting back on carbon emissions…

That doesn’t obviate the need to curb such emissions and the prospect of dangerous climate warming in the short run, Dr. Crowley said.

…okay, so we’re still cutting back…but just for right now?  That doesn’t make any sense!  If we need a steady build-up of greenhouse gasses, then don’t we need a steady build-up of greenhouse gases?

Honestly, I think these junk-scientists are getting nervous, because they know the winds of data have shifted in a dour direction, and the denial of tenure is nigh.

In other “science” news, some yahoo has discovered that warfare’s been around since the dawn of man. 

One question:  why are we paying these people?

If you wish to achieve true sanctity, keep these commandments.

• Spend time in solitude with God.  Search yourself and find out your faults.  Strive for perfection, and remain in awe of your own being, and that of the world around you.

• Avoid people who are worldly, and stay far away from folks obsessed with negativity.  Keep company only with persons who are genuinely spiritual.

• Read the writings of great men, such as the Church Fathers.  Meditate on the deeds of the Saints daily, imploring their constant intercession.  

• Live simply, praying, fasting, and focusing on your salvation and the salvation of those near you.  Witness to Christ always, but do so with a spirit of gentleness that shuns excessive apologetics. 

• If you ever encounter something that seems false, do not be troubled by it; put it aside and think only of what is good, beautiful, and true.  

Do all these things, and you will know the glory of Christ and his love.