Month: January 2005

A Recent E-Mail & Comment

I’m about to break my no-names-in-the-main-blog-area rule because a situation has come up down yonder and I want to head off potential confusion.

I’d like to share an e-mail I recently sent to Other Eric, who has told me that he does not have a problem with me blogging from our e-mail exchange. Here goes:

Eric,

I wanted to write and say, first of all, that I feel for the cross you

are carrying. We all carry crosses, and the struggle of same-sex

attraction is no different. It is a temptation to a different kind of

sin than most have, but all struggle with temptation. We all have fallen

natures, and God loves and cares for you as much as he does for me or

anyone else.

I also wanted to say that I appreciate your thoughtful comments on my

blog as you wrestle with this issue, and I understand how insensitive

the comments of some may be. I hope that my remarks are better in this

regard.

I agree that there comes an age in which the concerns I have expressed

on the blog lessen and eventually cease to apply. At some point in their

lives, children must come to become aware of the existence of

homosexuality and its moral status, because they will certainly run into

it as adults. Children cannot be shielded from the realities of life

forever. Their parents must prepare them to face not only the good

things in life but the bad and tragic things as well. The question is

when. This is a decision that I feel is best left up to individual

parents, as there is no obvious answer. Since multi-family schools must

make a common decision about it that is bound to be inappropriate for

some children, as they progress at different rates, I prefer

homeschooling situations where each family can make these decisions

based on the knowledge, temprament, and unique circumstances of their

own children.

I also agree that different individuals with homosexual temptations are

different. They are not all outspoken advocates of the gay lifestyle,

though many are. The same is true of the children they raise, and this

has to be taken into account in the decision to admit the children of

such couples into a school.

The situation of a child’s parents also have nothing to do with his

ability to receive the sacraments as long as he accepts the Catholic

faith (including its teaching on moral matters) and otherwise fulfills

the requirements for the sacraments.

I want to stress that I view you and all in similar situations as human

beings first above all. You may have same-sex attraction temptations,

but those are not determinitive of what you are. To tell the truth, I

don’t even like using "homosexual" as a noun. In a blog post, space

restrictions prevent me from using (repeatedly) the phrases that I

prefer–"*person* with homosexual temptations" and "*person* with

same-sex attraction"–but these phrases better reflect the reality of

the situations of individuals struggling with this condition, and I

would encourage you to think of yourself, not as a homosexual, but as a

*person* who happens to have same-sex temptations.

I’ve said such things in public before, and would be happy to blog to

this effect again, but didn’t want to use your e-mail as an occasion of

doing so in case you wanted it kept private.

I’m glad that you’re getting in touch with David Morrison, and I hope

he’s able to help you on your journey. Feel free to write me again, and

I hope you’ll keep reading the blog.

God bless, and take care!

Jimmy Akin

One of the other commenters down yonder noted that Other Eric’s e-mail address indicates his sexuality. I posted the following comment in response:

As his e-mail address indicates,

Other Eric is a person who has homosexual attractions and who openly

describes himself as gay.

He also has interacted respectfully with others on this blog, even

though of late we have been discussing issues that one would suppose

might pain him and that he might strongly disagree with.

In view of his respectful attitude and willingness to think through

these subjects, we owe him the same respect and willingness to think

through points he may make.

Just because someone practices the "gay lifestyle" does not mean

that he should not be treated with respect and engaged in dialog on

important issues, including the Church’s teachings regarding

homosexuality.

That’s what Christ, who died for Other Eric just as much for all of the rest of us, would have us do.

Thanks for understanding.

A Recent E-Mail & Comment

I’m about to break my no-names-in-the-main-blog-area rule because a situation has come up down yonder and I want to head off potential confusion.

I’d like to share an e-mail I recently sent to Other Eric, who has told me that he does not have a problem with me blogging from our e-mail exchange. Here goes:

Eric,

I wanted to write and say, first of all, that I feel for the cross you
are carrying. We all carry crosses, and the struggle of same-sex
attraction is no different. It is a temptation to a different kind of
sin than most have, but all struggle with temptation. We all have fallen
natures, and God loves and cares for you as much as he does for me or
anyone else.

I also wanted to say that I appreciate your thoughtful comments on my
blog as you wrestle with this issue, and I understand how insensitive
the comments of some may be. I hope that my remarks are better in this
regard.

I agree that there comes an age in which the concerns I have expressed
on the blog lessen and eventually cease to apply. At some point in their
lives, children must come to become aware of the existence of
homosexuality and its moral status, because they will certainly run into
it as adults. Children cannot be shielded from the realities of life
forever. Their parents must prepare them to face not only the good
things in life but the bad and tragic things as well. The question is
when. This is a decision that I feel is best left up to individual
parents, as there is no obvious answer. Since multi-family schools must
make a common decision about it that is bound to be inappropriate for
some children, as they progress at different rates, I prefer
homeschooling situations where each family can make these decisions
based on the knowledge, temprament, and unique circumstances of their
own children.

I also agree that different individuals with homosexual temptations are
different. They are not all outspoken advocates of the gay lifestyle,
though many are. The same is true of the children they raise, and this
has to be taken into account in the decision to admit the children of
such couples into a school.

The situation of a child’s parents also have nothing to do with his
ability to receive the sacraments as long as he accepts the Catholic
faith (including its teaching on moral matters) and otherwise fulfills
the requirements for the sacraments.

I want to stress that I view you and all in similar situations as human
beings first above all. You may have same-sex attraction temptations,
but those are not determinitive of what you are. To tell the truth, I
don’t even like using "homosexual" as a noun. In a blog post, space
restrictions prevent me from using (repeatedly) the phrases that I
prefer–"*person* with homosexual temptations" and "*person* with
same-sex attraction"–but these phrases better reflect the reality of
the situations of individuals struggling with this condition, and I
would encourage you to think of yourself, not as a homosexual, but as a
*person* who happens to have same-sex temptations.

I’ve said such things in public before, and would be happy to blog to
this effect again, but didn’t want to use your e-mail as an occasion of
doing so in case you wanted it kept private.

I’m glad that you’re getting in touch with David Morrison, and I hope
he’s able to help you on your journey. Feel free to write me again, and
I hope you’ll keep reading the blog.

God bless, and take care!

Jimmy Akin

One of the other commenters down yonder noted that Other Eric’s e-mail address indicates his sexuality. I posted the following comment in response:

As his e-mail address indicates,
Other Eric is a person who has homosexual attractions and who openly
describes himself as gay.

He also has interacted respectfully with others on this blog, even
though of late we have been discussing issues that one would suppose
might pain him and that he might strongly disagree with.

In view of his respectful attitude and willingness to think through
these subjects, we owe him the same respect and willingness to think
through points he may make.

Just because someone practices the "gay lifestyle" does not mean
that he should not be treated with respect and engaged in dialog on
important issues, including the Church’s teachings regarding
homosexuality.

That’s what Christ, who died for Other Eric just as much for all of the rest of us, would have us do.

Thanks for understanding.

Sci-Fi Roundup

While we’re talking about TV shows today, let’s note the new episdoes of sci-fi shows that will be debuting tonight:

Star Trek Enterprise:

"Observer Effect"
After Hoshi and Trip contract a deadly virus, two aliens possess the bodies of other crew members to observe humanity’s reaction to tragedy. NOTE: This is supposed to involve an alien race we met in The Original Series.

Incidentally, (SPOILERS):

[Enterprise writer/producer Manny] Coto also offered tidbits on the remaining episodes of the season: "In
the second half of the season, you can expect this: Stories that take
place on Andoria, a Klingon moon, Romulan outposts, Romulan Marauders,
Orion Privateers, Earth’s Moon, Mars, a 1701-class Federation starship
and more. And you’ll see a live Tholian… and a Gorn."


Coto emphasizes that whether the show returns for a fifth season remains to be seen.


"As to whether or not we’ll be back for Season 5, that’s always been up in the air. We’ll see what the future brings." [SOURCE.]

Stargate SG-1:

"Gemini", Episode #811.
When an enemy takes on the guise of one of the team, Carter’s emotions leave the planet susceptible to attack.
NOTE: Stargate SG-1 is not head-to-head with Enterprise, so you’ll have to TiVo, VCR, choose, or catch a re-run. I’d recommend Enterprise as your first-watch, then SG-1 later.

Stargate Atlantis:

"The Eye", Episode #111.
When the city is evacuated due to an approaching storm, the Genii launch and invasion.

Battlestar Galactica (new series):

"Bastille Day", Episode #103.
Apollo is held hostage on a prisoner ship by a group of convicts led by a freedom fighter convicted of terrorism. NOTE: The new Battlestar Galactica series has some very good aspects to it, but it’s got too much sexy stuff in it for me to recommend it. It’s also opposite Monk, so I recommend you watch Monk.

CHECK YOUR LOCAL LISTINGS.

MONK!!!

Monk_1 Yes!!!

The new season (or half-season) of Monk starts tonight!!!

What will happen? Will Monk be able to survive the tragic loss of his long-time caretaker and assistant, the beloved Sharona?

How will they explain her absence?

Who will replace her?

Will the new person be any good?

Will the audience accept her?

Will America’s favorite and hysterically-funny obsessive-compulsive detective jump the shark, as one reader ponders down yonder? (Though you really can’t tell that from just one show; shark jumps can be accurately discerned only in the rear view mirror.)

Monk is worried about these and many more questions. Just look at him! Can’t you see how worried he is?

Help Monk get over his new half-season jitters by tuning in and giving the new character a chance.

He can’t go off the air. He’s got crimes to solve!

CHECK YOUR LOCAL LISTINGS

Bless This Mess

Okay, I don’t normally watch network TV (or any TV), but this season I have found myself catching (occasionally) a couple of reality TV shows that are in proximity to Lost and 24.

These shows are called WifeSwap and (if I remember correctly) Trading Spouses. They are on ABC and FOX, respectively.

Both involve (from the 3-4 episodes I have seen) the mother of one family switching places with the mother of another family. When this happens then–formally or informally–the mother at first conforms to the rules of her new family and then begins to impose the rules that she is used to.

The producers of the shows seem to be trying to pick the most extreme (and clearly dysfunctional) families that they can find.

From my limited viewing experience of these shows, it seems that they involve pitting commonly stereotypical families against each others. Specifically: One mom comes from a messy, cluttered, rambunctious, and (usually) more-explicitly-Christian family than the other, who comes from from a clean, spartan, sedate, and (usually) less-explicitly-Christian family.

Part of the point of the shows is to see how the introduction of both moms affects both families. Inevitably, the "messy" mom comes across as more human than the "cleaner" mom–and the "messy" mom seems to have longer-lasting and more positive effects on the "clean" family than visa-versa.

That’s fiine with me.

Though I appreciate cleanliness (and especially hygiene), ultimately people are more important than things, and while venturing too far in either direction is unhealthy, it’s better to be messy, cluttered, rambunctious, and Christian than clean, spartan, sedate, and non-Christian.

Here’s to bigger famlies!

(Which regularly accompany the "messy" families rather than the "clean" moms.)

July 29, 2004 Show

LISTEN TO THE SHOW.

DOWNLOAD THE SHOW.

Highlights:

  • Does the Church have a position of the genetic presence of Mary in Jesus’ body and blood in the Eucharist?
  • Where did the Church get the practice of infant baptism?
  • Recommend a good bible for young students?  What is a dynamic equivalence translation?
  • Can you explain the Catholic practice of praying to the Saints?
  • Recommend a good book for a Fundamentalist to learn about the Catholic Church?
  • Explain the concept of God not forgiving the unrepentant?
  • Is the Lutheran doctrine of Jesus being present with the bread proved by 1 Cor 10:16?
  • Doesn’t it benefit us be forgiving and go beyond bitterness even when we don’t get a repentant signal from the other person?
  • Can we use the parallel verses in Deut 17 and Mt 18 to prove that disagreements about Scripture should be taken to the Church?
  • When we consume the body and blood of Christ are we consuming the resurrected body of Christ or His sacraficed Body?
  • Why did Jesus need to be crucified in order to save us?
  • What would change about Christianity if we knew Jesus had been married, as he was portrayed in the Da Vinci Code?

Beyond Silent E

Silent E is an interesting phenomenon in English orthography. It’s a letter, usually at the end of a word, that we don’t pronounce–as in the word "pronounce." That ends in an S-sound, not an E-sound.

Thing is, silent E didn’t used to be silent.

Our English-speaking forebears used to pronounce those Es, which is how they got into the words in the first place. Then, over time, they started droppin’ ’em (like I "drop" my Gs). But the letter in the written form of the word stayed, or "stay-ed" as our forebears would have said.

You can hear a reflection of this in the fact that converts often start by saying "Blessed art thou among women" and pronouncing "blessed" as "blesst" instead of "bless-ed."

So it seems that we can do without all those Es.

But can we do without the letter E altogether and still communicate meaningfully? It is, after all, the single most commonly-used letter in the English alphabet. just look at the number of times I’ve had to use it in this post to say what I wanted to say. Surely nobody could go on for, say, fifty-thousand words of meaningful text without using the letter E.

Oh, no?

CHECK OUT THIS NOVEL THAT IS TOTALLY E-FREE.

Why Accreditation Is Important

Of late there have been a bunch of unaccredited "doctorates" floating around Protestant apologetics circles. Recipients of them include "Dr." Bart Brewer, "Dr." James White, and "Dr." Eris Svendsen.

I don’t cotton to that.

I’m from an academic family. Grew up in a university family that ran in university circles in a university town. In fact, I was surprisingly old before I discovered that it was not normal for an adult male to have a doctorate.

I understand the importance of accreditation. One reason is that, as my experience of university families showed me, even those who have accredited doctorates in the hard sciences frequently do not have the sense to come in out of the rain. A doctorate is not only no guarantee of genius or even well-rounded intelligence, it’s no evidence of a functional human being. If you yank the quality control that accreditation provides out from under a Ph.D, you’re going to end up not only with people who have no horse sense but people who also don’t know the field their Ph.D allegedly qualifies them for.

Now, I have nothing at all against distance education. In fact, I’m in favor of it–as long as it’s accredited. I may well pursue distance education myself. But you won’t catch me waltzing around presenting myself as "Dr. Akin" unless I’ve earned a doctorate from an accredited school.

Non-accredited doctorates can do a great deal of harm to society. Not only in areas like apologetics, where others’ belief systems and the fates of their souls can be on the line, but in other areas as well.

LIKE THIS HORROR STORY INVOLVING NATIONAL SECURITY.