I wimped out....

I'm lazy, so I'm posting an old facebook note. My main point here is that while there is such a thing as absolute truth, people seem to take for granted that which may or may not be true. Like, modernist thought, for instance.

Here's a thing I've been thinking on concerning ideology, mainly drawn from a course I took in my first semester (a course that blew up my world): 

Essentially, I've learned that ideology is not a negative term. Rather, in this sense, it is the framework of what we could call "basic beliefs" that allow a person to more easily interact with their society. Without a framework of beliefs that say such basic beliefs as "This our society's current definition of the word 'God'," it would be impossible for humans to interact with each other. In essence, this paper (or at least my course) claims that every belief, from whether or not pelicans feed their young with their own blood (the reason that many old Christian prayers refer to Jesus as the "great Pelican," lol), to the definition of "Falling in love," is a belief that constructs the framework of countless beliefs that we call "ideology." This ideology, also, pervades every aspect of our lives, from our psyche, to our current economic system.

A case in point of an ideological belief's affect on our current lives:

 Descarte develops the idea "Cogito, ergo sum," "I think, therefore I am". 

(Now, whether or not Descarte intended these following interpretations of his statement is of no consequence, for this is the way his statement has affected the ideological framework of our society, and thus 

economic systems, etc.)

This statement implies: 

- Truth begins with MY human thought, MY human mind; the individual's thoughts, (evaluated from the individual's perspective); it is the bedrock of knowledge and truth, whereby we begin the journey of knowledge, faith, etc.

- Truth begins with MY mind, and other claimants of knowledge and authority, ie the church, the king, Scripture, etc. are obviously not the same as the MY mind

- Therefore, statements of the Church, king, etc. ought to be evaluated according according to my own sensibilities of truth, knowledge, and reason.

-Those beliefs which do not agree with my individual mind, (seeing as MY individual mind is the bedrock of truth and knowledge), are to be either ignored, modified, or rejected in order to conform more closely to my own particular notions of truth and reason.

-The  only way in my belief system, (which exists in my individual mind), can change is if a certain belief comes to seem more "rational," or "true" from extended evaluation (agan, this evaluation is from an individual's perspective).

     Now, other beliefs can possibly trace their origin to this statement, or at least are influenced by the "Cogito, ergo sum.":

-the percieved moral, political, and rational supremacy of the individual over institution

-this individual supremacy leads to the favorable view of democracy as the best current political system, with its emphasis on individual supremacy, and its belief that power is given to the institution by "the people" (or rather, the collective will of individuals)

- capitalism rises as the dominant economic structure, with its emphasis on individual work ethic, and attributing a person's economic status as the result of the individual's personal effort.

- Truth is relativized in an attempt to reconcile the seemingly contradictory beliefs that 1. an individual has the ultimate ability to find truth, and 2. Individuals have different beliefs concerning what is "true". Instead of denying or modifying the belief in the individual's ability to find truth, the different notions of individuals are called "THEIR truth" or "MY truth," or even going so far as to be self referentially incoherent and claim that "there is no truth."

it goes on and on. My point is, much of what we hold to be most dear is, in essence, the developments of society (Descartes himself would not have written "Cogito, ergo Sum" at all if the ideological framework of his time granted relevance and meaning to that statement.). I'm not saying that such beliefs are necessarily untrue, but we certainly should not take them for granted as being "true."

Sorry I wrote so dang much. You don't have to read all of it, but whatevs.

On Money Problems...

Dear readers (if there are any),

   Sorry for my not posting lately. I was out camping until yesterday, and yesterday I was too conflicted over what to write, (and I was also being lazy). I was going to write a post about Downfall, a very excellent film. But it's about Hitler. So instead of being a Debbie Downer and writing about National Socialism, I'm going to write about Western Capitalism.

   I know that half of you have stopped reading this post since I mentioned "Western Capitalism." But I promise not to write an essay about its origins, or destroy your patience with a long winded post about Marxist vs. Keynesian economics. I want to talk, instead, about us. And about big buildings.

   I currently have a tab on my browser that says "Men's 2012 spring fashion trends." I have a hymnal waiting for me at the post office, and I have been thinking of multiple cheap ways to get another tie to match my countless bengal striped shirts. I am quintessential consumer.

   And yet, why do I feel so scandalized when I see fancy churches, with stained glass and paintings and all those extra odds and ends? I buy stuff to make myself to look better; why should I feel like a church (which does a lot more to help the world in which we live) should be a sparse and warehouse of Jesus?

   The logic really breaks down when we compare churches to corporations. In medieval times, churches were the tallest buildings in the entire village. Now, in practically every city in the world, skylines are crowded with high rise condos and corporate offices, buildings dedicated to the pursuit of money and bastions of capitalist greed. We drive past these buildings without taking a second glance. Some of us even work in these giant buildings. Some people even revel in it, taking pictures in places like Times Square, literally the most advertised space in the entire world.

   And yet we feel disgusted when we see a big church. What's up with that? It seems so weird to me that we have all these huge skyscrapers that, according to Fr. Robert Barron, are "Monuments to consumerism" and "Temples of materialism" while most churches are struggling to maintain their mortgage payments.

   What does that say about us, the consumers? What are we doing to contribute to a world in which corporations can build massive spaces without batting an eye, and small tiny churches are going bankrupt? Even as a college student, I can see ways in which I can contribute more to my church, but I feel such a desire to spend my money on cute shirts, shoes, and other paraphernalia.

What's up with that?

Tie guy

PS After many of my protestant friend's concerns that my comparison between protestants and the devil could be construed as offensive, I have edited it to show that I am merely joking. Sorry for my veiled sardonicism.

PPS Hooray for Jessica Davis, who got baptized on Saturday!!!! Praise be to God who has now brought her fully into the (c)atholic Church!

PPPS If you don't want to see more days without posts, you better give me some ideas of what to write about            next.

 

Temptations of the good stuff

I stood there, bowling ball in hand, my fingers tightly gripping that lightweight ball made for short nerds like myself. Last frame. I had to make at least nine pins to break 50 points, because I'm a horrible player. I start my approach, my eyes fixed upon the ten pins menacingly pointed at me. I wound up my arm. Right before I set the ball rolling on the hardwood, I heard from behind me "Eucharist!" and "Holy Water!"

I foot faulted.

My stupid protestant friends, knowing how much of an obsessive Catholic I was, were able to distract me by letting such sweet words fall from their lips.

Just like the devil. 

(Yes, I'm comparing protestants to the devil. Deal with it. I'm totally joking, but deal (= .) Like my protestant friends, the devil often tempts me with truly awesome stuff. It's a sneaky temptation. He tempts me with the desire to be more holy, leading me on a path away from my true calling. My pride loves this "path to holiness" because it's so ostentatious, and everyone can see it. I spend hours reading Catholic blogs, looking up theological terminology, writing blog posts... anything that makes me FEEL more holy. I will learn all about the Council of Chalcedon, for example, and consider myself better for it.

I'm not trying to disparage learning about the faith and sharing it. If anything, all of us could use some education about our faith, myself included. But when we learn such knowledge at the expense of our true vocation, that's a sin.

For example: I'm writing a blog post right now; that's a good thing. But I'm not applying for jobs to pay for college, and I'm not checking my email to see if I have statistics homework due today (which I probably do). Thus, writing a blog post = bad thing. I hate statistics, and I love theology more than whipped cream and fruit loops (that stuff is awesome, btw). But my vocation right now is being a STUDENT, not a theologian or professional blogger. 

So with that in mind, I'm gonna get off this blog and do that homework that I'm pretty sure exists, and do a few job applications. So adios. If anyone actually reads this (I'm talking to you, the three people besides myself that voted on my recent poll!!!) please leave a comment telling me what to write about next. I have no creative ability.

Tie Guy

Update: I found out my homework isn't due to Oct. 3rd, but at least I know now that it exists.

Issues of the heart (in other words, the inevitable sex post)

Hello gang,

 I am exhausted and tired from an Intervarsity outreach thing I was doing today, but I promised I'd write a post on sexual purity, so here goes. (Just forgive me for any major grammar mistakes I might make)

When recent Gallup polls claim that 71% of  adults find premarital sex morally acceptable, you know something's wrong. And in college, that culture is even stronger. The culture of college is to "discover yourself, try new experiences, and experiment with different ways of life. On campus, this essentially translates to "do anything you want, sexual or otherwise, as long as you don't get arrested." Even in a relatively conservative college like Texas Tech, this mode of thought is very prevalent. When you're sitting in your dorm room on a Saturday night (for those like me that have no life), and you're putting headphones over your ears while trying to ignore the repetitive sound of squeaking bed springs, you realize that college is not going to be like those nostalgic fantasies of home that freshmen feel. But if I'm going to be honest with my loyal blog populace (which I think is a total of 1 person right now), then I have to acknowledge my own struggles with sexual purity.

I hate the phrase "struggling with (place sin here)." I know I just used it, but forget the previous paragraph. I hate it. I want to be ok with just saying, "I've been masturbating and watching porno since I was nine, and I'm sick of it."

Now, I can post that on a blog because I feel a relative sense of anonymity (partly because no one's gonna read this anyway), but, (as a guy that doesn't want to fulfill the girl-objectifying, sexual-pig stereotype) it's very hard to say that around other people, especially mixed company. But it's a fact; I've even had an account on a website created for those in sexually "free" lifestyles.

So now that most of you have stopped reading due to the TMI content (take a few deep breaths), I'd like to talk about love.
When comes to love, I'm pretty handicapped. I've been watching porno for so long that I've started connecting intimacy with sexual arousal. In previous dating relationships things have gotten quite a bit more physical than I would've preferred, because I've too often equated romantic love with sexual stuff. Certainly sex is a sublime expression of love, but more importantly it's an expression of matrimony. It's the physical enactment of what Jesus was saying by "the two shall become one flesh."

    And by that, we can also deduce that sex is not only a sign of union, but a sign of procreation. That's why the Catholic Church (and by extension, me) have an issue with contraception. "Safe sex" is that which denies the ability to "become one flesh." What is a better example of the one flesh ideal than a child who is, by definition, the combination of a parent's genetic material? Denying the possibility of conception is denying an essential aspect of true marital union.

   I realize that I'm not married. At this point I'm not sure I'll ever get married (part of me feels like I'd screw up any marriage I'd get into, part of me is still entertaining the idea of becoming a priest). I've never had to deal with the temptation that might come with sleeping in the same bed with someone, day after day, unable to have sex except on those days my wife is not in full baby-maker mode (infertile days). But I've at least made the personal decision that, for the sake of my wife, and the sake of our marriage, I'm not gonna use contraception.


That's right kids, if you're gonna have sex, make sure you don't use protection.


Now that I've left you with that unconventional piece advice, I'm gonna head to worship practice at the bunker church.

Happy birthday to Jessica Davis!!!

And if anyone does happen to read this, comment and let me know what to do for the next blog post because I have no idea what to write about. Now back to my busy day.

Tie Guy

Because everybody asks...

     When I tell people that I'm a convert to Catholicism, almost invariably they look puzzled and say something to the effect of :
     "Well, that's strange, most people are leaving Catholicism instead of joining it..."

     This is usually followed by a request to have coffee sometime and have me explain my "strange" and "unconventional" conversion.

     To be honest, I find this exceedingly annoying. It's probably one of the few ways I can get a girl to have coffee with me (A semi-date!), or have a social life in general, but as much as I like talking about myself, speaking about my conversion is so full of potholes. It's part of the nature of giving a testimony. Unless you're willing to write a book, one can only focus on one aspect of conversion in a reasonable coffee conversation. It doesn't account for many of the events in life that lead one to the Church. Trust me, if there were only a few reasons to convert to the Church, I wouldn't have done it. Thankfully, there were COUNTLESS factors that influenced my conversion.

    Maybe part of it was my Lutheran upbringing; Lutherans don't have nearly the same nasty feelings they've historically had toward the Church (though my twin brother still believes I'm under the dominion of the anti-Christ), and the doctrine is similar in many respects.
     
     Maybe it began the time I went to a Catholic wedding as a toddler, and thought the votive candles, the statuary, and the confessional booth were strange, exotic, and exceedingly cool.
   
     Maybe it was my compulsive attachment to the Lord of the Rings audio books. Tolkein gave me a love for tradition and ancient history, and throughout his stories there is an endless sense of longing for past eras of valor and truth. It's possibly the most Catholic book I've ever read.
   
     Maybe it was that devoted Catholic nun I met at a Catholic hospital, or that growing sense that the Catholic Church was the great middle finger to the rest of the world; an institution that stuck to its guns (metaphorically nowadays) on traditionally-held issues like contraception and transubstantiation, even as other denominations changed with the trends of culture.

   Maybe it was the fact that even though the Church stands against practically all of modern Western culture, it cares for more people and provides more help to the World than any other organization.
   
     Maybe it was partially the fact that every single girl I dated before my conversion was Catholic.


I dunno, to be quite honest.

     The biggest reason for my conversion, I guess, was my hunger for the Eucharist. The notion that God comes down to us under the appearance of bread and wine (rather than us ascending to Him) is in line with the whole history of salvation: throughout history, God constantly reaches out to His children, even suffering humiliation and death to have intimate communion with us. This Paschal Lamb, this King of kings, comes in the guise of such common, ordinary objects of bread and wine, in order to dwell fully within us and grant us grace for salvation. That drew me, I think, more than anything else.

But the reason I hate giving a testimony is that it's always focused on how I came to Catholicism, and it de-emphasizes the work of the Holy Spirit that brought me across the Tiber. So this post gives some reasoning behind my conversion, for those who wanna read, but really, look to the Holy Spirit, more than anything else, for my conversion. Without the work of the Holy Spirit in my life, I never would've made the profession of faith. Thanks be to God then, that he gave me the grace of conversion.

NEXT ON THE "TIE WEARING CATHOLIC":

PHILIP WILL REFLECT ON THE STRUGGLES OF SEXUAL PURITY ON A COLLEGE CAMPUS!!!!!!!!!!!

 WILL HE GIVE AN INSIGHTFUL AND POSSIBLY HUMOROUS TAKE ON ISSUES FACING THE MODERN YOUNG ADULTS OF TODAY???????!!!!!!

OR WILL HE BE A TOTAL FAILURE AT LIFE IN GENERAL AND (FIGURATIVELY) SCREW UP ON THIS SENSITIVE TOPIC???????!!!!!!!

TUNE IN NEXT TIME TO DISCOVER THE FATE OF THIS FANATICALLY NERDY FOLLOWER OF THE FAITH!!!!!!!!!!!