Author Archives: davidsmith4002

Vatican Betrayal of China Continues

While keeping the past, present and future victims of the Wuhan Chinese Coronavirus Covid-19 are on your mind and in your prayers, give an extra prayer for the oppressed Catholics of the Middle Kingdom, crushed by the Chinese communist Party and cynically abandoned by the Vicar of Christ.

The heroic Cardinal Zen of Hong Kong has repeatedly rung the alarm bell about this crisis (see an article in Gatestone here), pounding on the Vatican doors to get the attention of the “people’s pope” (or am I thinking of Princess Diana?).  As usual, only silence in response.

Join me in praying for the success of Cardinal Zen. And when you pray for Pope Francis, join me in praying for his enlightenment and repentance, rather than his intentions. I shudder to think what those really are.

Better Prayer Through Calculus

When I was learning calculus, back in the dark ages, I remember having great difficulty grasping the very basic concept of “the slope of a point.” It sounded completely illogical, then and now. After all, didn’t Euclid define a point as having location, but not dimension (no length, width, or size). Without at least length, how can it have slope, which describes a direction (up, down, left, right, angled…)?

Well, calculus and its sloping points turn out to have lots of valuable uses. (I’d list them now if I could remember any.)

But I do recall the procedure for demonstrating and determining the slope of a point. It involves gradually vanishing “limits”.  A limit (if I remember correctly, or even approximately) is the slope or angle of the smallest possible section of a graphed curve in the area of the point in question. You start with one inch on either side of the point, and measure the slope of that two-inch line between them. Then you repeat the process with half that distance, then keep halving it. Eventually, the series of those slope-measurements closes in on the slope of the particular point. Voila! Cool, no?

(Well, anyway, that’s how I remember it.  If I have gotten it wrong, I hope some helpful mathematician or engineer or calculist will write a comment straightening me out.  I’d hate to misinform my faithful readers.)

I said above that this all has many valuable uses, which I knew once long ago. But I have recently found a new one, for my prayer life.

Prayer takes place in time. We sing of the “Sweet Hour of Prayer.” We recite prescribed prayers (Ave, Our Father, Memorare, the Rosary, etc.); these prayers are of definite length in words spoken and therefore in time.  Monks and nuns pray at specific times throughout the day.

But this implies that the rest of our time is spent in non-prayer. Many of us seek to increase our time spent in prayer. Extending prayer time of course reduces our non-prayer time. But is there another way to increase prayer by converting non-prayer time into prayer time (NPT into PT, as it were)?

The calculus offers just this conversion, through reducing some prayers in length, seeking the minimum time.  Here is my example.

I tend to start all my prayers with thanksgiving, expressing gratitude to the Lord for my life full of His blessings. It just seems the natural place to start. If I had more complaints, it might be harder; but in my case, “Thank You, Lord” is most often my first thought. I run through my list of blessings: this day and moment, the time to finally seek Him, my loving wife, daughter and family, and the time to complete my slow-motion search for God.

My next thought is to beg His forgiveness for my lifetime of misusing His blessings in one sinful way after another. Then I ask for His guidance in the remaining time He is giving me. Then I ask His help for my loved ones suffering and in need of relief.

But this prayer, with so many blessings, can take quite a while. The calculus suggests that I shorten it, and I do. The end result surprised me when I first got to the final shortening, and said it out loud. “Thank You, Lord.” That was it.  My distilled essence of prayer (to mix chemical and mathematical metaphors.)

Amazingly, this “TYL” prayer only takes one second to pray.   This might seem like an easy out, a lazy man’s prayer, and a cheap grace. After all, it leaves out a lot: begging God’s mercy, seeking His guidance, and especially asking that He help those in need.

But what it lacks in completeness it makes up for (I hope) in frequency. I say it often: when I stop to admire a beautiful tree or flower in my garden, when I look into my lovely wife’s smiling face, when I hear beautiful music, or watch a colorful sunset.

And I find it becomes a habit even at less beautiful moments. When I groan from my aching joints as I rise from some difficult handyman job, I say “Thank you, Lord, that I can still do a job like this at my age.”

And the more I say my TYL prayer, the more blessings I notice.

It may sound strange (i.e., stupid) to say that shortening my prayers somehow increases my prayer time.  But I think it does.  Of course, I still say longer prayers in the morning and evening. (My blessings and my sins deserve detailed attention.)  But I also find the results of my TYL to be far longer-lasting than the prayer itself.   By thanking Him I remind myself that He walks with me always, and that I must remember to walk humbly with Him. I can sometimes  slip into a kind of prayerful attitude. It doesn’t last forever. But I hope that in time it will.

I have written elsewhere about this “Sacred Second” being remarkably similar to the length of my heartbeat.   I hope eventually to make my prayerful attitude as continual as my heartbeat, until that heart stops, and I can say TYL face-to-face.

Moleman, Chesler, Zweig on Dying Cities

I see that my friend Mister Hans Moleman has written an interesting reference to Buchmendel, a great short story by Stefan Zweig.  He being one of the greatest writers of all time (Zweig, not Moleman), I was intrigued by his (Moleman’s, not Zweig”s)  linkage with some reflections on the decay of cities (specifically “Old Manhattan”) by Dr. Phyllis Chesler.

My favorite of Zweig’s writing is his novel Beware of Pity.  “Buchmendel” is a great story.  Phyllis Chesler is a brilliant commentator.

And Moleman is pretty good, too. If you like his kind of stuff.

Three Random Questions

[NOTE: If I were a better writer, I would have developed each of these thoughts into a full-length essay.  But this is the best I can do right now.]

 

How does an atheist explain Euclid? In a purely material world, what is a perfect circle or a straight line or a point? These do not exist in nature. If they are mere ideas, mental constructs, thoughts made up of flashing neurons, then why do they work so well to explain reality?  Why does geometry work? Why can a mere thought become a building or a bridge?

 

 

Would it be fair to describe Richard Dawkins and his progeny as “Hard Shell Atheists”?

I am of course thinking of the term “Hard Shell Baptists”, coined to describe (indeed, self-describe) the “Primitive” or “Old School” who self-separated from the more mainstream Southern Baptists.   Starting in 19th century rural America, they rejected any religious activity beyond the church walls and home prayer; even missionary societies and Sunday schools were unacceptable to them. “If it isn’t explicitly ordered in scripture, it is untrue and unchristian.”

Some of today’s atheists sound vaguely similar, at least in tone.  “If it isn’t written in science, it is untrue.” “If it hasn’t been answered by science, it soon will.” “If it can’t be answered by science, it can’t be asked.”  Dawkins’ thinking often seems to be carefully isolated within a hard protective shell.   Some writers have called this “scientism”, a faith in science as the one and only path to understanding: “sola scientia”, instead of “sola scriptura”.

Am I being unfair? Maybe. I will try to pray for the enlightenment of all atheists.

 

 

When does purgatory begin? Not until we die (assuming we die in a state of grace)?As I understand it, purgatory is the state of suffering in expiation for the sins we have repented.  If so, then purgatory begins with repentance, and does not end with priestly absolution. “Ego te absolvo” is not the finish line.  The memory of our sins is the lifelong experience of the repentant sinner whenever he contemplates his own past. Every memory can conjure up the pain and shame of his sinfulness at its worst. At least it is so for me.

Perhaps this unwillingness or inability to cast off the memory of my sins is in itself a sin, an unwillingness to accept God’s merciful love.  If so, I am just digging my hole deeper.

But if this pain of remembered sin is in fact the act of purgation, if this is the unstated part of penance, then perhaps I should not resist.

Dante’s Purgatorio (purgatory) is by far the most interesting part of his Divine Comedy.  For me the Inferno (hell) is too darkly comcal, and Paradiso (heaven) is frankly too sweet.  But in Purgatory, our humanness is realistically but hopefully portrayed.

I think I will read some Dante tonight; you should too.  There are many good translations, with helpful notes explaining the characters in Dante’s world.  I recommend Anthony Esolen’s version (and everything else he ever wrote).

 

Reasonable Steps to Jesus

(With a little help from some scientists.)

1.  Astronomers have determined that the universe began at a certain point in time (14.5 billion years ago, more or less).  It appears to have been created from nothing, paralleling Genesis. (See NASA and Goddard Institute for Space Studies founder Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers).

2.  The universe obeys certain strict physical and mathematical laws and structure, making it comprehensible to human minds.  This suggests an intelligence guiding its creation.

3. Paleontologists have determined that life began, indeed exploded on earth as soon as the planet’s surface had cooled sufficiently to sustain it, within the first billion years of earth’s existence. (See Stephen Jay Gould, A Wonderful Life).   This suggests a universe predisposed towards life.

4.  Human self-consciousness triggered an innate sense of right and wrong in the earliest humans. This moral sense or  “Natural Law”  suggests a lawgiver.  (See NIH and Human Genome Project Director Francis Collins, The Language of God).

5.  Before the earthly life of Jesus, no philosophy or religion had elevated love above all other virtues.  None had ever valued the poor over the rich, the weak over the strong, the childish over the wise, the humble over the proud, or mercy over strict justice.

This, along with the Gospel testimonies and the amazingly rapid growth of Christianity (spread worldwide in three centuries by missionaries rather than armies, as was Islam), suggests that Jesus was, if not divine, at the very least the most unique human or spiritual leader of all time.

The god that could create the world and make it humanly understandable would also be capable of revealing his nature to us, in both indirect and direct ways (miracles).

So there I found myself, in five simple steps, standing at the door of the Church.  The fact that it took me seven decades to take those steps speaks to my own stubborn slowness rather than the difficulty of the steps themselves.  Others, perhaps less clever than I, seem to reach the door, and pass through it, quickly and easily.  I am just grateful that I have been given the time I needed.

 

NOTES and Quotes:

Francis Collins wrote “The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. He can be worshipped in the cathedral or in the laboratory. His creation is majestic, awesome, intricate, and beautiful.”

He also wrote that “God must be an incredible physicist…There is this phenomenal fine-tuning of the universe that makes complexity and, therefore life, possible.”

Robert Jastrow wrote “Far from disproving the existence of God, astronomers may be finding more circumstantial evidence that God exists.”

Circumstantial evidence is exactly what scientists provide us with every day.  Witness testimony is what we get from believers.  Together, the case is made strong.

 

 

 

Vatican Betrays Chinese Catholics. Again.

Sad but not entirely unexpected news:  The Pope has once again betrayed the suffering Catholics of Communist China.  Heroic Cardinal Zen has written an open letter to all his brothers in the Catholic hierarchy, denouncing the new Concordat that sold out the church’s true believers and subjected them to total control buy the Chinese Communist Party.

The letter has been published openly on the Catholic website OnePeterFive.com,  an invaluable resource for the church’s current crisis. (It was one of the first to publish Archbishop Vigano’s challenges to the Vatican’s longtime embrace of former Cardinal McCarrick.) Here is the publisher’s introduction of…

“…a letter that Cardinal Joseph Zen sent some time ago to all the cardinals, and that he has now decided to make public. Needless to say, the latest news coming from mainland China only confirms and augments the concerns expressed for some time by many people about the interim agreement signed by representatives of the Holy See and the government of Beijing.”

Cardinal Zen asks “can we passively witness this killing of the Church in China on the part of those who should be protecting and defending it from its enemies?”  A good question.  As directed to the present papal incumbent, the answer appears to be “Yes”.

I started by saying “the Pope has once again betrayed…”  I was thinking also of the earlier betrayal when one of his “social justice” people startled the world (and the Chinese Catholics who know better) with the declaration that “Right now, those who are best implementing the social doctrine of the Church are the Chinese.” The remark came from Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, two years ago.  The pope never disagreed, just as he has never responded to Archbishop Vigano’s j’accuse  August 2018, or to Cardinal Zen’s letter, presented to the Pope in July.

Yet another gratuitous slap in the face for those Catholics suffering persecution in China, and an embarrassment to the rest of us.

Read the full letter here.

Then say a prayer for Cardinal Zen and his flock.  And pray that more bishops will find their voices.

Squirrels?

“And now, for something completely different…”

That opening line from the old Monty Python show applies here.  My friend Mr. Moleman has posted a story by a new author, “Mr. X” (probably Moleman himself).  It is a charming tale about young love, revolutionary politics, teenage rebellion, and squirrels.  Yes, squirrels.

I read it and found it both delightful and thought-provoking; but mostly just delightful.  It is suitable for all ages. I think you will enjoy it too.

As I write this sitting in my study, I am looking out at two squirrels in my yard.  They are fascinating creatures, indeed; if they ever evolve the opposable thumb (as the story says they are trying to do), we are all doomed.

Anyway, HERE is the link to the complete story.  Or go to mistermoleman.com and check out all his stuff..

God is not Serendipitous

I have re-discovered yet another glaringly-obvious truism: There is no serendipity with God. If you do not seek him, you will not find him.

Serendipity is defined as “the faculty or phenomenon of finding valuable or agreeable things not sought for”.

And it seems to me that we cannot find God, nor even seek him, without a sense of sin. (More specifically, a sense of our own sinfulness. Everyone believes in the sinfulness of others, or at least certain others.)

If we cannot or choose not to see ourselves as sinners, then we will not find God because we will not see any reason to look for him.

This truth, I believe, is the real reason for the collapse of Christianity in the modern western world. Our sense of sinfulness has been washed away by our sense of victimhood and our belief in therapy as a substitute for morality.*

The victimhood cult became a thing when we re-codified the concept of justice. The Greek philosophical and Judeo-Christian sense of justice was doing justly to others.

The modern cults of identity politics and self esteem have redefined justice (actually reoriented it 180 degrees) from “treating others fairly” into “treating me fairly: ensuring that I and my group get what we deserve.” This melds the comfortable enjoyment of moral indignation and freedom from personal responsibility for, well, anything.

The therapy cult was best explained by Philip Rieff in The Triumph of the Therapeutic, and described elsewhere (by me) as PABGoo, short for “People Are Basically Good”. This gave pseudo-scientific cover for the (very French) proverb “to understand all is to forgive all”. It serves as the basis for the “he had a tough childhood” criminal defense, as well as the all-purpose “I just need rehab” defense for politicians and other celebrities caught in flagrante delicto (Latin for “with their pants down”).

Oversimplified, I know. Much else is involved, and I surely over-emphasize the newness of all this. But there it is: the darkest elements of human nature liberated by the combination of positivist “social science” and effective concentration.

——————————–

*There is at least one other path to seeking God: despair. Seeing the world spiraling into a moral calamity, and having lost all faith in human god-substitutes (Marxism, scientism, political liberalism, libertarianism, etc.), many go seeking God as the only Hope for a broken humanity. But people who are able to see the hopelessness of human-built reality are unlikely to continue nursing the sense of sinlessness in themselves. This dual awakening, to sin and to hopelessness, was my own path.  Now that I think about it, I suspect there are many others.

Why All the Stars, Ben?

Another spectacular APOD (Astronomy Picture Of the Day) from NASA and the Hubble telescope: the Starburst Galaxy (M94)!  “A mere 15 million light years distant,” NASA tells us; that means that a beam of its light takes 15 million years to reach us.  Containing billions of stars, to us it is a tiny, faint point of light in the night sky.

I know I seem to be obsessing on these NASA photos.  But every new image I see paints a wider, deeper, and more wonderful picture of the universe our Lord has created.  And the incomprehensible distance grows between this universe and its beginning in an infinitesimally small seed in the palm of God’s hand barely 14 billion years ago.

Every APOD is a proclamation of the greater glory of God.

AFTERTHOUGHT:  I remember when NASA first launched the Hubble Telescope into space, back in 1990.  Shortly after launch, they discovered its main mirror was warped.  The TV comedians had a field day, mocking the scientists for their incompetence and calling it a boondoggle.  But NASA’s Space Shuttle astronauts fixed it in 1993, and it has been exploring the universe (and sending us these dazzling images) ever since. It is projected to continue working until 2030 or even 2040.

Thanks, NASA!  If only every government program worked this well.

More on Truman and Msgr. Swetland

[A while back, I wrote a post about President Truman’s decision to use atomic weapons to end the war with Japan. I specifically objected to remarks by Msgr. Stuart Swetland on Relevant Radio.  He has since responded, and I re-responded.  The full original post is here.

And, as I noted then, my dissent indicates no disrespect for the excellent work done every day by Msgr. Swetland and Relevant Radio, which I love.]

My original post began…

On August 6, the terrible anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima, I was listening to the indispensable Catholic media outlet Relevant Radio, and I heard a curious interview with Msgr. Stuart Swetland on the subject of the day.

It made me think of Calvin Coolidge who is credited with many laconic (and probably apocryphal) anecdotes; my favorite is his supposed comment on returning from church one Sunday. Asked what the preacher spoke on, he answered: “Sin.” Further asked: “What did he say about it?”, Cal responded: “He was against it.”

Continue reading