Author: Jimmy Akin

Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live."

Godless Pro-Lifers

Given the reproductive preferences of many atheists, the atheist dating service I linked earlier is not likely to be a major threat to civilization.

I mean, it’s not like it’s going to produce a world awash in atheists or anything.

Mankind always has been and will remain a religious species.

Some atheists, though, have come to recognize at least part of the truth of the pro-child mentality that is more common in religious circles.

Some are even pro-life.

A reader writes:

I found an interesting site devoted to the furtherance of the Pro-Life
movement. It’s run by Matthew Wallace, aka the Compleat Heretic. It’s the
official site for the Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League, or AAPL.

http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html

Here’s the list of members: http://www.godlessprolifers.org/members.html

It’s really interesting to read the "Nontheist postion" and then the
"Pro-Life position" of each member.

Indeed!

Marriages Not Made In Heaven

So I’m sure you’ve seen all those web ads for Catholic dating services, Protestant dating services, Jewish dating services, conservative dating services, and whatnot.

What’s next?

How about an

ATHEIST DATING SERVICE?

Upon looking at this site’s FAQs, I noticed that one of them was "Who runs FreeThinker’s Match Maker?" and immediately thought: "A lonely atheist guy?"

YUP.

How Victimized Are You?

The culture of victimization that has infected much of Western society has led to the creation of a culture consisting largely of victims.

John Leo offers a handy summary of some of the most absurd victim stories of 2005.

EXCERPTS:

CHILDREN OF WITCHES ARE VICTIMIZED BY HALLOWEEN. Coming to class dressed as a witch on Halloween is a violation of "equitable schools policies," according to the Toronto district school board. The board said it feared "traumatic shock" if children treat "the Christian sexist demonization of pagan religious beliefs as ‘fun.’"

BRITISH MUSLIMS ARE VICTIMIZED BY PIGLET AND PIGGY BANKS. Novelty pig calendars, toys, and even a tissue box featuring Winnie the Pooh and Piglet have been banned in the benefits department at Dudley Council, West Midlands, out of deference to Muslim sensibilities.

STUDENTS ARE VICTIMIZED BY THE DISAPPEARANCE OF LOW WEEKEND PRICES IN BARS. Pressured by the University of Wisconsin and a federal campaign against binge drinking, 24 bars near the Madison campus agreed to end cut-rate weekend prices. Three students and a Minneapolis law firm failed to convince a Wisconsin circuit judge that this represented conspiracy and price-fixing. But they are suing again in federal court. Legal costs to the bar owners so far: $250,000.

FIRED CBS EMPLOYEE IS VICTIMIZED BY VIACOM, CBS, VICIOUS BLOGGERS, THE PANEL THAT INVESTIGATED HER, AND A "MCCARTHYITE" PANEL MEMBER WHO ASKED IF SHE IS A LIBERAL. Mary Mapes complained last week that people were saying mean things about her and the discredited "60 Minutes II" segment she produced about President Bush’s military service. She felt "extremely battered" by "having my head kicked around a soccer stadium by much of the western world." No apology, though. For unknown reasons, Mapes’ new book is titled "Truth and Duty" rather than "I Messed Up Big Time and I’m Sorry."

GET THE STORY.

No, You Cannot Go To This Wedding

Unless you have a scuba tank.

I was going to use this picture as the basis of a photo caption and make the lead joke about underwater weddings. . . .

Until I found out that’s exactly what’s going on here!

Well, almost.

It’s actually a pair of models doing advertising, but what they’re advertising is an underwater wedding service (that is, a service for performing underwater wedding services).

The service is available in Hong Kong, so it’d be a destination wedding in more than one sense if you went to one of these things (which you could do as long as the marriage would be presumptively valid–and as long as you have a scuba tank).

And no, the Church would not approve of this kind of thing. It’s turning what should be a solemn moment into a spectacle.

Now, having a wedding in a Catholic church located in an undersea city in the year 2079, that’d be an entirely different thing.

In the meantime,

GET THE STORY.

Justice Alito On Religion & Free Speech

Professor Volokh has an interesting look at what a Justice Alito might do with respect to free speech and freedom of religion should he be seated on the Court.

Here’s the money quotes:

Supreme Court decisions involving the establishment clause [i.e., that the federal government shall not establish religion, which REALLY means that it can’t create a Church of the United States paralleling the Church of England, though which has been interpreted in all kinds of INSANE anti-religious ways since the days of Darth Earl Warren] have recently split more predictably down conservative-liberal lines. Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas have reasoned that government funding of programs may evenhandedly include religious institutions alongside secular institutions, and that the government’s own speech may include religious symbolism, at least when it’s generically monotheistic rather than specifically Christian.

Justices Stevens, Souter and Ginsburg have taken the opposite views. Justices Breyer and, especially, O’Connor have been swing votes, leaving the law not fully settled. Last year’s Ten Commandments cases, which upheld one display and struck down another, are the result.

It seems likely that a Justice Alito would give the conservatives a majority on issues involving funding and display. . . .

He also seems to conclude that equal treatment of religious institutions is not establishment, for instance holding that religious groups may have the same access as secular groups to public school bulletin boards. And he seems to lean toward viewing religious speech by the government–part of a longstanding American tradition–as constitutionally permissible, too.

GET THE (WHOLE) STORY.

A Correction

A reader writes:

Jimmy –one point of correction if I may

You write" Breaking the seal of confession is one of the gravest crimes that
exists in ecclesiastical law. Any priest (or anyone else bound by the seal,
such as a translator or an eavesdropper) who violates the seal is
automatically excommunicated and this excommunication is reserved to the
Holy See."

Regarding the translator or the eavesdropper — it is not automatic
excommunication. They are punished by a just penalty –and MAY be
excommunicated –but not automatically. See CIC below (and please note it
on the blog –there may be some out there that could get concerned)

Can. 1388 §1. A confessor who directly violates the sacramental seal incurs
a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; one who
does so only indirectly is to be punished according to the gravity of the
delict.

§2. An interpreter and the others mentioned in can. 983, §2 who violate
the secret are to be punished with a just penalty, not excluding
excommunication.

You’re correct!

My mistake. Sorry. Forgot about the second part of the canon. My memory that eavesdroppers, etc., are bound by the seal overrode my memory on their not being subject to the same automatic penalty.

I’m Baaaaaaack!

Got back from the 4th annual Catholic Answers cruise yesterday.

It was a long, rewarding, and exhausting trip. Things went very well. We were particularly pleased with how well the personal interaction with and among the attendees went this year.

It was a special treat to meet a couple of folks on the cruise who identified themselves as readers of the blog!

I Like Koalas!

Who doesn’t?

I mean, they’re furry and slow moving and cute.

What’s not to like?

Well, maybe the fact that they have razor sharp claws and that the males can’t stand each other and will battle and scar each other with their razor sharp claws, but those are minor things.

They’re still cute!

This is something I recognized even as a child.

In fact, the VERY FIRST THING THAT I BOUGHT WITH MY OWN MONEY was a toy koala.

A local drugstore had stuffed toys, and one was a really cute koala bear. It was made of really soft animal fur (brown rabbit, I think), and it had flexible black plastic claws, and brown plastic eyes, and when I was five years old I set my heart on it.

My parents, who were encouraging me to learn the use of money, allowed me to save up for it and do chores to earn more money, and so the little toy koala was the first thing I ever bought! YEE-HAW!

I’m afraid that I’ve lost track of it now, but I’m sure it’s still at my parents’ house, tucked away in a closet, and I’ll stumble across it again someday and take it out and let the memories come back.

The memory of the toy koala itself came back when I stumbled across

THIS ARTICLE ABOUT REAL KOALAS.

Really interesting stuff!

Koalas are most unique creatures.

As many people know, they live entirely on eucalyptus leaves (y’know, those sap trees that drip sap all over your car if you park under them in California?).

Eucalyptus leaves are poisonous to almost all creatures–but not to koalas!

Except when they are.

The article doesn’t mention this, but during a certain part of the eucalyptus tree’s annual cycle, they become so toxic that even koalas can’t eat them, at which point the little critters have to fast until the poison level in the trees goes down again.

LEARN MORE ABOUT THIS FASCINATING CREATURE OF GOD.

Blue Meanies?

There’s a new biography of the Beatles–a THOUSAND PAGE BIOGRAPHY–and in it the Fab Four don’t come across as all that "Fab."

Except maybe for Ringo.

According to Time Magazine’s reviewer:

The Fab Four hated the silly, lovable mop-top image they created, and
on that score alone they would probably love Spitz’s book. He marshals
a staggering mass of research in support of the conclusion, broadly
speaking, that Lennon was a drug-addled, attention-hungry rageoholic
who picked fights and cheated on his wife; Paul McCartney was a smarmy,
manipulative charmer; and George Harrison was dour and sour. Before you
lose faith entirely, it turns out Ringo really was just a lovable
goofball.

Well, at least there was one lovable goofball!

Or maybe more than one.

I haven’t read the book–or studied their lives in detail–so I really can’t say.

GET THE STORY.

Growing Up Potter

What’s it like to grow up as Harry Potter?

I don’ t know. And in fact nobody knows since Harry Potter is a fictional character.

But one kid has an unusual insight on the matter–Daniel Radcliffe–the kid who plays Harry Potter in the movies.

Time Magazine has a story about him and the other kids playing in the Potter films.

Reading the article makes for an interesting insight into the world of child actors.

The fact that the Harry Potter movies are so successful has kept the kids locked in an unusual sociological bubble for years, with years yet to go (apparently–unless they re-cast the parts).

Personally, I’m disturbed by some of the things child actors go through. I often see scenes in movies and TV shows where I find myself thinking, "I really hope they got the child actor off the set before they filmed what’s going on in this shot"–or realizing that they clearly DIDN’T.

I couldn’t imagine allowing a child of mine to grow up in the entertainment biz, and especially not becoming a central player in a franchise like Harry Potter. I’d want my kids to have much more normal experiences growing up. Even with precautions taken (like only letting the kids film for four hours a day), I’m afraid that the experience would fundamentally warp them as adults. After all, former child stars don’t have a very successful track record as a whole.

GET THE STORY.