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."

Welcome, Steven D. Greydanus!

I’m going to have to devote my attention to other things the next couple of weeks and, though I will still be posting, I won’t be able to post as often as usual, so I’ve invited Steven D. Greydanus of the massively bodacious Decent Films Guide to join me as a guest blogger ’till I’m able to get back in the swing of things.

Hope y’all will show Steven a good time, as this is his first foray into blogging, and I hope y’all’ll also check out his excent films reviews on his own site.

Maybe here on the blog he’ll share with us some insight into upcoming movies, like the rumored new Superman film or something?

This Is Not Good

Newly revealed information about al-Qa’eda’s plan of attack suggests it will be a multi-pronged approach on multiple fronts, in multiple locations, by multiple means–including assassination.

Let’s hope that the capture of key figures involved in the plot and their hard drives will convince al-Qa’eda leadership that the operation has been so compromised that it needs to be called off.

Let’s also pray that the information that has been captured is sufficient to let the authorities capture the rest of terrorists involved in the plot and to continue to disrupt al-Qa’eda operations.

Lord, hear our prayer.

Stating The Obvious

I haven’t received any questions or complaints that would indicate confusion on the following point, but just as a precaution I want to clarify something to forestall any confusion arising in the future. What I want to clarify is this:

My blog is mine.

What I mean by that is that it is something I do on my own. I write it on my own time. I pay for it out of my own pocket. And the opinions that I express on it are mine.

My employer, Catholic Answers, does not give me time to blog. It does not pay for this blog. It does not ask for or give input concerning what I say on it (not even on this particular post, which I decided to write all on my own).

Consequently, when I blog I am writing purely in my capacity as a private individual, not as a representative of Catholic Answers.

For example, I might express opinions about political matters on my blog. I might even express opinions about particular political candidates. In so doing, I am speaking only for myself. Catholic Answers, as a non-profit corporation, does not take positions on political candidates or races.

Just wanted to clarify what should be obvious, in case anyone might potentially, hypothetically one day be confused about the matter.

Hope this helps!

Do I Need An Annulment?

This is a common question asked by a great many people. Often times they have heard that they might not need an annulment for various reasons (e.g., their prior wedding was outside the Catholic Church, it wasn’t a Christian wedding, it was done in a courthouse, one or both partners were not Catholics). Unfortunately, what they have heard is often incorrect.

Here is a simple list of questions to ask to determine whether an annulment is needed:

1) Does the person wish to get married or to possibly marry in the future?

2) Has the person attempted marriage before (meaning: has the person ever had anything that someone would regard as a wedding ceremony)?

3) Is the prior spouse still alive?

4) Is it the case that the Catholic Church has not yet investigated the marriage and found it to be null?

If the answer to all four of these questions is “yes” then the person needs an annulment.

These questions should be asked both for Catholics and non-Catholics, and they should be asked for each prior marriage the person has attempted.

The reasons that you sometimes hear suggested for why a person may not need an annulment do not actually mean that the person doesn’t need an annulment. More often, they are indicators that it will be easy to show that the marriage was null. For example, if a Catholic married outside the Church without a dispensation then the marriage was automatically null, and this will be easy to show when the annulment is sought. However, the annulment is still necessary.

In order to be faithful to Christ’s teachings on matrimony (Mark 10:2-12, see also Romans 7:2-3), the Church has a pastoral duty to investigate it whenever a person has attempted marriage and make sure that the person really is free to marry before giving that person permission to marry again. This investigation is commonly called the annulment process. It may be easy or hard to show nullity in a particular case, but the Church has a responsibility to Christ to investigate the matter.

The way to get the annulment process started is to call a local parish, explain that you would like to seek an annulment, and they can help you from there.

NOTE: There is one class of exception to the above. There are a few cases in which it is possible for a marriage to be dissolved. The most common such case is when two unbaptized people marry and then later one of them is baptized and the non-baptized partner will not continue living with the baptized partner (1 Cor. 7:12-15). However, even in cases such as this, where dissolution is technically possible, annulment is still generally the best way of handling the case. If you think such a case may apply in your situation, contact the marriage tribunal at your local Catholic diocese for further guidance.

Keyes to Obama: You Hold "The Slaveholder's Position"

Alan Keys, a conservative Catholic and Republican candidate for the Illinois seat in the U.S. Senate being contested this fall, laid into his rival, Barack Obama, accusing him of holding a position on abortion comparable to that of slaveowners regarding slaves. In both cases, a class of human beings is denied full humanity and then systematically exploited for the benefit of others.

According to the Associated Press story:

Up at dawn for a whirlwind round of broadcast interviews, the conservative former diplomat [Keyes] started his first full day of campaigning as the GOP candidate by saying Obama, a state senator from Chicago, had violated the principle that all men are created equal by voting against a bill that would have outlawed a form of late-term abortion.

Keyes said legalizing abortion deprives the unborn of their equal rights.

“I would still be picking cotton if the country’s moral principles had not been shaped by the Declaration of Independence,” Keyes said. He said Obama “has broken and rejected those principles– he has taken the slaveholder’s position.”

The remarks underscore the uniqueness of this Senate race in which both candidates, one an outspoken conservative and the other a favorite of party liberals, are black.

Obama, who has been basking in national celebrity since delivering the keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention, suggested Keyes is outside the moderate mainstream of state Republicans.

Asked specifically about the phrase “slaveholder’s position,” Obama said Keyes “should look to members of his own party to see if that’s appropriate if he’s going to use that kind of language.”

Faced with the Keyes onslaught, Obama was ambiguous on the number of times he would meet Keyes in debate:

Obama said Monday that there would be “a sufficient number of debates” between himself and Keyes– both men are Harvard-educated, polished debaters– but not the seven such clashes he had promised [former senate candidate Jack] Ryan.

IMPACTING HARD.

Keyes to Obama: You Hold “The Slaveholder’s Position”

Alan Keys, a conservative Catholic and Republican candidate for the Illinois seat in the U.S. Senate being contested this fall, laid into his rival, Barack Obama, accusing him of holding a position on abortion comparable to that of slaveowners regarding slaves. In both cases, a class of human beings is denied full humanity and then systematically exploited for the benefit of others.

According to the Associated Press story:

Up at dawn for a whirlwind round of broadcast interviews, the conservative former diplomat [Keyes] started his first full day of campaigning as the GOP candidate by saying Obama, a state senator from Chicago, had violated the principle that all men are created equal by voting against a bill that would have outlawed a form of late-term abortion.

Keyes said legalizing abortion deprives the unborn of their equal rights.

“I would still be picking cotton if the country’s moral principles had not been shaped by the Declaration of Independence,” Keyes said. He said Obama “has broken and rejected those principles– he has taken the slaveholder’s position.”

The remarks underscore the uniqueness of this Senate race in which both candidates, one an outspoken conservative and the other a favorite of party liberals, are black.

Obama, who has been basking in national celebrity since delivering the keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention, suggested Keyes is outside the moderate mainstream of state Republicans.

Asked specifically about the phrase “slaveholder’s position,” Obama said Keyes “should look to members of his own party to see if that’s appropriate if he’s going to use that kind of language.”

Faced with the Keyes onslaught, Obama was ambiguous on the number of times he would meet Keyes in debate:

Obama said Monday that there would be “a sufficient number of debates” between himself and Keyes– both men are Harvard-educated, polished debaters– but not the seven such clashes he had promised [former senate candidate Jack] Ryan.

IMPACTING HARD.

Good News For Catholics Trying To Conceive

Here’s an article by Matt Abbott on a new method seeking to help couples who are having difficulty conceiving.

The new method is billed as strictly in conformity with Catholic moral teaching (whereas so many fertility therapies are not).

Let’s hope it is as advertised and that it helps many couples end the heartbreak of infertility!

Bad News For Fundamentalist Mormons

Here’s an interesting story about what looks to be an impending crackdown on a polygamous Mormon offshoot that straddles the Arizona-Utah border.

I’m not happy about the editorial’s use of the word “cult”–a term I generally don’t favor because it’s basically a term of disparagement that you can apply to anyone you don’t like. In this case the article seems to consider a “cult” to be any religious group that displays “disregard for civil rights” (which could easily be applied to Catholics and Christians in general if homosexual marriage is regarded as something that is or should be a civil right).

Nevertheless, I’m heartened to see that it looks like a long-delayed legal crackdown on the group may be in motion.

The editorial also contains interesting insights into the psychological effects of polygamy, including the fact that young men tend to get driven away, as they would provide competition for the older men who want to take multiple wives. That’s something you’d expect: Since humans have an approximately fifty-fifty gender ratio, for some men to take multiple wives, other men must be denied them. The men most likely to be able to take multiple wives will be those with more power and money, who by nature will tend to be older. Eliminating the competition is one of the best ways to ensure that they get what they want.

Unexpected Pimsleur Praise Report

Ray mentioned that after starting Pimsleur Cantonese he quickly had occasion to use it after a Cantonese Mass when a woman started speaking to him in it.

I just had a similar unexpected experience.

One of the few flaws of the Pimsleur sets is that they don’t come with a vocabulary list, and sometimes I’m not 100% sure I’ve heard the word correctly on the CDs. Thus, whenever I’m working a Pimsleur set, I go out and buy a cheap-o phrasebook/dictionary to look up the spellings of words for confirmation. (Dover has a really good line of $4 phrasebook/dictionaries).

Tonight I went to the bookstore to get an inexpensive Japanese phrasebook/dictionary, and I couldn’t resist buying a few additional language books (e.g., a Japanese grammar, an Indonesian phrasebook, a Filipino [Tagalog] phrasebook). When I got to the checkout counter, a big, Hawaiian-shirted, Hawaiian-looking salesperson named Max looked at the books I was buying and asked if I was going to be traveling in Southeast Asia.

I said: “Naw, I’m just learning their languages.”

At which point he asked–in Japanese–if I understood Japanese.

I replied that I understand a little Japanese, and I apparently said it fluidly enough that his eyes got a little big (his surprise probably magnified by my customary cowboy attire) and he said, continuing in Japanese, that I was quite good.

I replied that I was not very good (the customary thing to say when given such a compliment in Japanese), and then added, switching to English, that I’m just starting out. He said, in English, that he was still impressed.

After paying for the books, we switched back to Japanese and I thanked him politely and we bade each other farewell.

So there you have it: proof of the effectiveness of the Pimsleur Method! Just 24 hours after starting to study Japanese and after only two half-hour lessons I successfully held my first unplanned, real-world conversation in the language. Yee-haw!

Just a Skosh of Ketchup

Given my previous post, you’ve no doubt encountered the word “skosh,” meaning “a little bit.” As in:

PERSON 1: Do you want some ketchup for your hotdog?

PERSON 2: Just a skosh.

You may never have encountered the word in writing, but you likely know it in its spoken form skosh.

What you probably don’t know is its origin: It’s Japanese.

In my previous post, I gave you what you needed to decode several Japanese words. One of them was skoshi, which is a popular contraction of sukoshi, which means “a little bit,” and that is where we get “skosh” (however you spell it).

That takes care of the word skosh. But what about ketchup?

It turns out, ketchup isn’t either an English word or a Japanese word. It’s a Malay word–that is, a word from Malaysia.

In Malaysia they make a sauce for food that is called kechap, and this sauce is remarkably similar to what we in the West call ketchup (not completely similar; it’s somewhat different from ketchup). That’s where the name comes from.

So what do I want on my hotdog (in a low-carb bun)?

Just a skosh of ketchup.