pope-francis2

This version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week from 31 January 2015 – 08 February 2015.

Angelus

Daily Homilies (fervorinos)

General Audiences

Homilies

Letters

Speeches

Papal Tweets

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

CatholicAnswersLogoIn this episode of Catholic Answers Live (hour 2 of 1/13/15), Jimmy answers the following questions:

  • My father-in-law started a lay movement in the church and was killed about 35 years ago. Some documentation has been sent to the Vatican regarding possible sainthood. Because his work was secretive, my mother-in-law was not aware of the work he did for the Church. Is there a possibility of her ever gaining access to those documents to learn more about her husband’s life?
  • What is the Church teaching regarding the requirement of marriage prep for a couple already civilly married?
  • Were the polygamist marriages in the Old Testament valid? When it comes to polygamist marriages in Africa with converts to Catholicism, are those marriages considered valid?
  • Can I determine what the ten horns of the beast are from the Book of Revelation?
  • Why are the laws of the Church changing from pope to pope?
  • Are the different parishes allowed to rewrite the Gloria, Sanctus (Holy, Holy), and the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God) for Mass?
  • When it comes to NT Apocrypha, are these books still valid reading material even though they didn’t make it into the bible?
  • What is the difference between how angels intercede for us and how Mary intercedes for us?
  • As a Mormon, we believe in Apostasy/Restoration. But, I find this in every church (faith belief). What is the Catholic belief?
  • How is the Just War Doctrine applied in today’s society?

Use the player at the bottom of the post or CLICK HERE TO LISTEN.

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

Doctor-Who-Forest-of-the-night

In this podcast episode we review and analyze episode 10 of season 8, entitled ‘In the Forest of the Night’ and discuss the underlying themes, inside jokes and hidden gems.

Join Jimmy Akin, Stephanie Zimmer, Dom Bettinelli and Fr. Roderick for discussion, analysis and speculation!

Click this link to listen or use the player on the web site.

Links for this episode:

Check out Jimmy Akin’s blog Let’s Watch Doctor Who and Dom Bettinelli & Fr. Roderick’s podcast Secrets of Star Wars! Subscribe to the Feed | Subscribe with iTunes

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

CatholicAnswersLogoIn this episode of Catholic Answers Live (hour 1 of 1/13/15), Jimmy answers the following questions:

  • How do we account for the problem of evil prior to humanity?
  • Where is the evidence of the Real Presence in the Eucharist in the Bible?
  • Can you explain to me what was ironed out with the Lutheran Church in terms of justification during the papacy of Pope JP II?
  • Is there any set rule about a non-Catholic or a Catholic who is not in a state of grace receiving a blessing during Communion? If I consider taking a job that limits my ability to attend weekly Mass, would that be considered a sin?
  • Was God’s original plan for the world that there be no suffering?
  • How do I respond to my Protestant father-in-law about baptism and faith alone?
  • Is it morally wrong to do favors for my son like cleaning his house knowing he is cohabitating?
  • Regarding blessings at Mass, I see this as a golden opportunity for me to find out why the person did not receive Holy Communion. Then I can try to help them correct the situation in a pastoral way.

Use the player at the bottom of the post or CLICK HERE TO LISTEN.

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

Pope Francis waves to crowds as he arrives to his inauguration mass on 19 March 2013.

This version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week from 28 October 2014 – 31 January 2015

Angelus

Daily Homilies (fervorinos)

General Audiences

Homilies

Letters

Messages

Speeches

Papal Tweets

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

Gerhard-Ludwig-Müller“The image of the ‘seamless garment’ has been used by some theologians and Catholic politicians, in an intellectually dishonest manner.”

That’s a sentiment that many Catholics, particularly in the pro-life movement, have expressed.

What’s significant about this expression of the sentiment is the person who uttered it: the pope’s own doctrinal watchdog.

Here are 11 things to know and share . . .

 

1) What is the “seamless garment” argument?

It’s the claim that Catholic teaching on life is like a seamless garment, so that if you accept one part of it, you need to accept it all.

This is sometimes referred to as having a “consistent ethic of life.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistent_life_ethic

 

2) Where does the image of the seamless garment come from?

The image of the seamless garment is taken from the Gospel of John, where we read:

When the soldiers had crucified Jesus they took his garments and made four parts, one for each soldier; also his tunic.

But the tunic was without seam, woven from top to bottom; so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the scripture, “They parted my garments among them,
and for my clothing they cast lots” [John 19:23-24].

 

3) How has the Church historically used this image?

It has been commonly used as a symbol of the Church’s unity. You’ll see that in various Magisterial documents. For example, in 2007, Benedict XVI stated:

An indispensable characteristic of the Church is unity, symbolized by Christ’s seamless garment [General Audience, June 6, 2007].

 

4) How did this image get applied to the Church’s teaching on life?

Apparently, the image was first applied this way in 1971 by Catholic pacifism activist Eileen Egan.

In 1983, this use was popularized by Cardinal Joseph Bernardin.

 

5) What kinds of “life issues” have been proposed as belonging to the seamless garment?

Numerous things. Among them are abortion, euthanasia, nuclear war, capital punishment, and even poverty.

 

6) Who is the pope’s “doctrinal watchdog”?

This is a common way of referring to the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the department in Rome that is charged with protecting the Church’s teaching.

This is the position that Benedict XVI held before his election to the papacy. Today it is held by Cardinal Gerhard Muller (pictured).

 

7) Where did Cardinal Muller address the seamless garment argument?

He did so in an address he gave at a workshop sponsored by the Pontifical Academy for Life in 2013.

You can read the full text of his remarks here (pdf).

 

8) What did he say about it?

He began by giving an overview of the subject, saying:

We are all familiar with the image of the “seamless garment” which is used to illustrate how Catholic moral teaching is a consistent whole – uniting ethical, religious, and political threads in a unified moral vision.

Attributed to Cardinal Bernardin, the “seamless garment” image was used to great effect to root the Church’s response to various moral issues – from nuclear proliferation to poverty – within the overarching teaching on the sanctity of human life, from natural conception to natural death.

 

9) What did he say when he accused some of using it in an intellectually dishonest manner?

He said:

Unfortunately, however, it is also true that the image of the “seamless garment” has been used by some theologians and Catholic politicians, in an intellectually dishonest manner, to allow or at least to justify turning a blind eye to instances of abortion, contraception, or public funding for embryonic stem cell research, as long as these were simultaneously accompanied by opposition to the death penalty or promotion of economic development for the poor – issues which are also part of the fabric of Catholic moral teaching.

 

10) Did he say anything about why people use the argument this way?

Yes. He stated:

Often this abuse of the “seamless garment” theory stems from a natural tendency on the part of some in the Church to look for “common ground” with the surrounding culture; that is to say, to emphasize in their teaching and preaching those elements of Catholic doctrine that are acceptable to the non-Catholic ambient culture; for example, social justice, human rights, and other similar issues.

This is understandable and sometimes it is an appropriate pastoral strategy.

But what also must be taken into account is the difference which exists between those elements of Catholic teaching that may be attractive to the surrounding culture and those elements which are profoundly counter-cultural and which Catholics themselves need to hear proclaimed by their pastors.

 

11) What solutions did he propose?

He stressed that Church teaching must be presented as a whole, without turning a blind eye to particular aspects of it.

He particularly emphasized the need to proclaim the Church’s teaching on human sexuality as found in Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical Humanae vitae, saying:

The experience of the Church . . . demonstrates that where the Church has tried to accommodate her teaching to this secular understanding by deemphasizing the specific witness of her moral teaching, this has lead neither to a greater societal acceptance of the Church nor to a renewal in her own life.

Rather where the teaching of Humanae vitae has been down-played, or worse still ignored, we have witnessed a collapse of family life, an increase in extra-marital infidelity and a diminishment of vocations to the priesthood and consecrated life.

He had much more to say on this and related subjects, so be sure to check out the full text of his remarks, linked above.

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

Doctor-Who-Flatline-TARDIS

NOTE: I’ve gotten a bit behind in posting podcast episodes, so I’m going to try to catch up by posting a number of my appearances on other shows over a fairly short period. I’m also looking to resume completely new podcasts in the near future.

In this podcast episode of Secrets of Doctor Who, we review and analyse episode 9 of season 8, entitled ‘Flatline’ and highlight all the themes, inside jokes and easter eggs.

Join Jimmy Akin, Dom Bettinelli and Fr. Roderick for discussion, analysis and speculation!

Click this link to listen or use the player on the web site.

Links for this episode:

Check out Jimmy Akin’s blog Let’s Watch Doctor Who and Dom Bettinelli & Fr. Roderick’s podcast Secrets of Star Wars! Subscribe to the Feed | Subscribe with iTunes

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

CatholicAnswersLogoIn this episode of Catholic Answers Live (1/8/15), Jimmy answers the following questions:

  • Can you reconcile Natural Family Planning with Leviticus 18 about intimacy and the times and restrictions on intimacy?
  • Is it okay to listen to protestant preachers and go to their church to listen to them preach?
  • Why does the Catholic Church not refer to marriage as Holy Matrimony?
  • About purgatory, my friend is planning to leave the Catholic Church and purgatory is an issue for her. How can I help her understand that purgatory is biblical and a reasonable belief?
  • How can you explain how Mary can hear and answer so many prayers all at the same time? Does it have to do with God being infinite and Mary being outside of time with God?
  • About confession and the frequency: I have had priests discourage me from coming to the sacrament, and they say “That is not a sin” and I feel discouraged. What do you suggest?
  • About Mary being at the foot of the cross. I have heard some priests say that she was not at the foot of cross and I thought the Bible says that she is. Why would a priest say that she was not?
  • About the star of Bethlehem and the documentary “Bethlehem Star”, can Jimmy comment on how accurate is the film?
  • The book of Sirach: is that in the KJV? Is it in another book in the KJV that I can refer to my friend?

Use the player at the bottom of the post or CLICK HERE TO LISTEN. (LINK FIXED!)

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

epimenides_paradoxBack when I was a philosophy student, I had a fondness for logical paradoxes.

One of the most famous is the Liar’s Paradox, which takes different forms, like:

  • I am lying.
  • This sentence is false.

This paradox is particularly useful for talking androids to death in the Star Trek universe, though it has less immediate practical value in our own.

It’s a fun paradox, but I get tired of people dissing St. Paul over it.

Let’s talk about that . . .

 

People diss St. Paul over it?

Yeah. You see, sometimes people say that one version of the paradox is called the Epimenides Paradox, after a guy who lived around 600 B.C.

St. Paul quotes him, and some commentators claim that St. Paul didn’t understand what he was quoting—that he missed the paradox entirely.

 

Who was Epimenides and what was his paradox?

Epimenides (ep-ih-MEN-ih-DEES) was a native of Knossos on the island of Crete. He was apparently a poet and was regarded by some as a prophet. There are a lot of legends about his life, and we don’t actually know that much about him, but he is famous for having said:

Cretans, [are] always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies.

Being a Cretan himself, if Cretans were always liars then Epimenides would have had to have been lying when he said this.

People think that results in a paradox that’s a variation of “I am lying.”

That statement generates a paradox because if the person who utters it is lying then he is telling the truth, but if he is telling the truth then he is lying, and so on until the android’s head starts to smoke and our heroes are released from captivity from Oppressive Android Paradise.

 

Where does St. Paul quote this?

In his letter to Titus, who he has left behind on the island of Crete (Titus 1:5). He tells Titus to warn priests and bishops:

For there are many insubordinate men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially the circumcision party;  they must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for base gain what they have no right to teach.

One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” 

This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith [Titus 1:10-13].

 

What’s an example of someone dissing St. Paul about this?

In his book The Physics of the Impossible, Michio Kaku discusses the statement “I am a liar” and writes:

The second statement [i.e., “I am a liar”] is the famous liar’s paradox. The Cretan philosopher Epimenides used to illustrate this paradox by saying, “All Cretans are liars.”

However, Saint Paul missed the point entirely and wrote, in his epistle to Titus, “One of Crete’s own prophets has said it, ‘Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.’ He has surely told the truth” [p. 301].

Dr. Kaku may know physics, but he’s a bit shakier when it comes to philosophy and St. Paul.

Philosophically speaking, “I am a liar” is not a paradox.

A person can acknowledge that he is a liar (someone who tells lies on occasion, even frequently) without claiming to be lying at the moment. Saying “I am a liar” is not the same thing as saying “I am lying.”

He’s also wrong to accuse St. Paul of missing the point.

 

Why is he wrong to do that?

For one reason, St. Paul was a very smart guy and one who was more than capable of recognizing and using irony (cf. Gal. 5:11-12).

If Epimenides was trying to make an ironic, paradoxical statement about Cretans then a man of St. Paul’s intellect and educational attainments (Acts 22:3) should not be presumed to be a bumpkin just of the turnip truck who was incapable of recognizing it.

If we’re going to presume anything, we should presume that St. Paul was smart enough to pick up on what Epimenides was doing and use the quotation in the same way that it was in the original—i.e., that St. Paul understood the paradoxical nature of the statement and used it in the same, ironic way that Epimenides did.

But, before we presume anything, we should check the original context to find out what Epimenides was doing.

 

What happens when we check the original context?

Epimenides made his famous statement in a poem called Cretica. For a long time, we didn’t have the original context of Epimenides’ statement, but it was rediscovered by the English biblical scholar J. Rendel Harris and published in the early 20th century.

He reconstructed a Greek version of the original passage, which translates into English as follows:

They fashioned a tomb for you, holy and high one,
Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies.
But you are not dead: you live and abide forever,
For in you we live and move and have our being.

This text is spoken to Zeus, the “holy and high one” for whom the Cretans made a tomb.

 

What does Epimenides mean when he says Cretans are “always liars”?

Being from Crete himself, he surely does not mean this in the hyper-literal way that Norman the Android would take it.

Even Mr. Spock was capable of recognizing hyperbole when he heard it (sometimes), and Epimenides’ statement should be recognized as just that: It’s hyperbole, or exaggeration to make a point.

It is not that different than what Isaiah says when he sees his vision of God:

“Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!”

Then flew one of the seraphim to me, having in his hand a burning coal which he had taken with tongs from the altar. 

And he touched my mouth, and said: “Behold, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away, and your sin forgiven” [Is. 6:5-7].

The reference to “unclean lips” may be a reference to sin in a more general sense, but it can also be taken as a reference to lying and other sins of speech.

If taken this way, Isaiah would be admitting his own sins of speech and those of his people—without claiming that he was lying at this very moment—and Epimenides may be seen as doing the same thing.

Assuming he didn’t have something much more particular in mind.

 

Could Epimenides have had something more particular in mind?

Yes. According to one interpretation of the passage from Epimenides quoted above, he wasn’t just charging his countrymen with being liars in a general sense: He was charging them with a specific lie.

Look at the context: The Cretans have built a tomb for Zeus, which implies that Zeus is dead.

But according to Epimenides, Zeus is not dead, for “you are not dead: you live and abide forever.”

Some have thus understood Epimenides as accusing the Cretans of the specific lie of having said that Zeus was dead when he was not.

If so then, since he was affirming that Zeus was alive, Epimenides himself was not a party to this lie and thus could not have been affirming that “Cretans are always liars” in a hyper-literal sense.

In that case, the alleged paradox vanishes, for there is clearly a Cretan who rejects this lie—Epimenides himself!

 

Are there other ways of looking at this text?

Yes. While Epimenides is denying the common Cretan implication that Zeus is dead, he may have more in mind than this accusation.

The statement that Cretans are “always liars” is naturally read as a more general statement than just a charge about Zeus being dead.

This impression is reinforced by his references to them being “evil beasts, idle bellies.”

While the issue of Zeus being dead is clearly present, Epimenides seems to be making a more general charge of sinfulness on the part of Cretans.

This is a standard charge, not unlike those found in the Jewish prophets, and it does not give rise to a paradox.

 

Why doesn’t it give rise to a paradox?

Strictly speaking on logical grounds, if Epimenides the Cretan said “Cretans are always liars,” what prevents Epimenides from lying in that very statement?

If Epimenides is lying then he is uttering a knowing falsehood: He knows that Cretans are not always liars.

And there is nothing paradoxical about that.

Some Cretans tell the truth—at least some of the time—and Epimenides would be lying about that fact. His lie may be ironic, but it doesn’t give rise to a paradox. Some Cretans simply tell the truth.

In reality, though, this is logic chopping. Whatever degree of irony is present in his statement, Epimenides is actually making a general lament about the sinfulness of his countrymen, including their propensity to lie.

He is not trying to generate a logical paradox, as illustrated by the fact that nobody interpreted the statement that way for centuries.

 

Really? Nobody interpreted it that way for centuries?

Apparently not. It does not seem to have been taken that way until 1740, after the original context of what he said had been lost.

Epimenides himself wasn’t generating a paradox, and so the ancients—who had access to the original context—didn’t take him as doing so.

 

Did St. Paul have access to the original context?

It would seem so. Notice that the last line of the passage we quoted was “For in you we live and move and have our being.”

That same line is paraphrased by St. Paul in Acts 17, when he addresses the Aeropagus in Athens:

 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by man. . . . Yet he is not far from each one of us,  for ‘In him we live and move and have our being’ [Acts 17:24, 27-28].

 

St. Paul isn’t applying that to Zeus, is he?

No. The Greeks often adopted philosophical interpretations of their own mythology as symbolic of a higher divine reality with Zeus—or other gods—representing “God” in a generic sense.

Christian apologists thus sometimes used Greek quotations about divinity to make points about the true God, who had not revealed himself to the Greeks, which is what Paul is doing here (Acts 17:22-23).

The point remains that Paul shows knowledge of the broader context of Epimenides’ statement, since in Acts he quotes another portion of it.

He was thus in a good position to understand what Epimenides meant.

 

What about Paul’s statement to Titus that what Epimenides said is true?

Paul is not asserting that all Cretans are always liars. After all, he has left Titus in Crete to appoint priests and bishops for the Christian churches there (Titus 1:5-9).

These men are expected not to be liars, and that’s why Paul tells Titus to warn them against immorality.

The statement that what Epimenides says about Cretans is true does, however, resonate with the view of Cretan culture at the time.

 

What did people think about Cretan culture in the first century?

They thought it was pretty immoral. Biblical scholar William Mounce notes:

Hanson points out . . . that the Cretans had a reputation for stealing, and that during the first century B.C. Crete became famous for housing robbers and pirates.

Cicero states that “the Cretans . . . consider piracy and brigandage honorable” (Republic 3.9.15; LCL tr.; cf. also Josephus Ant. 17.5.5 §§117, 120; Polybius Hist. 6.46.3).

If this is an accurate characterization, it is no wonder that Paul’s requirements for church leaders (vv 5–9) are so basic.

His statement of approval, “This testimony is true,” is his way of giving apostolic authority to something said by a non-Christian.

Quinn says that Crete was famous for not having any wild animals (108; citing Plutarch De capienda 86C; Pliny Hist. 8.83).

This creates a powerful twist in the saying. While most countries had to deal with wild beasts, in Crete the same problem was posed by people who, in the absence of wild animals, assumed the role themselves [Word Biblical Commentary: vol. 46: Pastoral Epistles, at Titus 1:12].

First-century Crete thus had a reputation of being a place of pirates and thieves, not unlike Somalia had a few years ago during the wave of Somalian pirates.

The fact that some Cretans were becoming Christians was thus a sign of hope, but the fact that they lived in such a corrupt culture meant that extra warnings against immorality were needed.

 

So people shouldn’t diss St. Paul about the Epimenides “paradox”?

No. In the first place, St. Paul was a smart guy who would have been able to recognize an ironic, paradoxical statement about Cretans if that was what Epimenides had been making.

In reality, though, this was not what the earlier author was doing. He was making a general lament about his people’s sinfulness—with particular reference to their “God is dead” claims—without saying that the literally lied on every single occasion.

That’s why nobody claimed Epimenides was even making a paradoxical claim until very recently—long after the work was lost and before the original context was rediscovered.

St. Paul knew the original context, and he made an appropriate application to the Cretan culture of his own day.

Now, in case you didn’t click on the video link above, here’s a bit of fun with the cast of Star Trek and their own application of the Liar’s paradox.

What Now?

If you like the information I’ve presented here, you should join my Secret Information Club.

If you’re not familiar with it, the Secret Information Club is a free service that I operate by email.

I send out information on a variety of fascinating topics connected with the Catholic faith.

In fact, the very first thing you’ll get if you sign up is information about what Pope Benedict said about the book of Revelation.

He had a lot of interesting things to say!

If you’d like to find out what they are, just sign up at www.SecretInfoClub.com or use this handy sign-up form:

 

Just email me at jimmy@secretinfoclub.com if you have any difficulty.

In the meantime, what do you think?

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

KPBSsuicide2Recently, I appeared on the local PBS radio and television affiliate (KPBS) to discuss a new assisted suicide bill that has been introduced in the California legislature.

Although the station representatives weren’t initially aware of it, both I and the gentleman taking the opposing view were widowers who lost our wives to cancer.

They were surprised and supportive when this turned out to be the case, and it helped balance the discussion since we both had very moving personal stories.

We first did a 15-minute radio debate, which can be listened to through a specialized audio player at this link:

ttp://www.kpbs.org/news/2015/jan/21/brittany-maynard-family-pushing-california-right-d/

Look for the “KBPS Midday Edition” player, about half way down the page (just under the YouTube video).

They also had us discuss the subject on their “KPBS Evening Edition” television program, the video for which is here:

This was the first time that I met John La Grange, and we had very cordial discussions off the air. I gave him my condolences for his loss, and I told him that I would be praying for him and his late wife, which he appreciated. I’d ask others to do so as well. Thank you in advance!

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy