Habemus Papam!

... which is Latin for "We have a Pope!"
So, what can I add to the dialogue being the non-catholic that I am? Here's my take.
"Liberal Catholics"... walk away. This is a simple thing to understand and it applies to all of the world's religions.
The job of any religion is to dispense the revelation of god to the people. Now, we might all argue over who or what God is, but the fact is, if you believe in an eternal creator of the universe, HE WILL NOT CHANGE. HE CANNOT CHANGE. He is ALREADY eternal, and sufficiently powerful enough to create all that there is. How is is that you can believe in any god and then believe it is HIS job to change to serve YOUR needs?

What ever version of "truth" you subscribe to, truth was not handed down by said god lightly. He is omniscient. He is omnipresent. He foresaw that human beings would begin to apply a sliding scale to morality and he laid down the law to combat that. (At the minimum) 6000 years ago, the God of the Abraham was NOT unaware of the concept of practice of homosexuality. He, in fact, DEALT with the issue and said "Man shall not lie with man". If you cannot live with that decree, you are not obedient to the God of Abraham. (Which includes Christians [including catholics, orthodox and protestants], Jews and Muslims). It's really simple. He won't change his mind simply because we as a society have become comfortable with Homosexuality. He called it a moral wrong. If you are a Child of Abraham, it continues to be a moral wrong. If you do not consider it a moral wrong, you are not a Child of Abraham. You do not believe in THAT god. You may say "but interpretations change". They do. But there is no "interpretation" of that scripture that is going to allow the church to embrace gays. [EDIT] This is a poor choice of words on my part. Many churches do embrace homosexuals. I am talking specifically about the Abrahamic Faiths and their stance on the homosexual lifestyle. Now, the idea that priests cannot marry is extra biblical, but if the Catholic church were to turn on ideas like homosexuality, divorce, and core issues like that, it will only be shortly before it's demise. It is when doctrine swings in the wind that the religious institutions of the world will cease to be relevant.

Now, you may be arrogant enough to believe that you alone on the earth are enlightened, and that you can figure out your own cosmology. I can't get there. I think that a faith fundementally must be something larger than my own ego or intellect. However, if you are so very sure that you have it all figured out, you can just forego the comfort of the "church".

And yet the very large majority of us, sinners though we be, seek the comfort of a religious institution. Why is that? With all that has happened since the Enlightenment project began, why does man still long for God? I believe it is instinct.
We know that there something larger than us. Something that science cannot explain away. And I don't expect that He will conform himself to my image. I don't think you should expect it either.
------

And that's enough for now.

Brian Norwood

Platypi Design

Cultural contrasts

We have had a couple of interesting opportunities to observe our culture recently, and hopefully without too much editorializing, I'd like to look at them. By the way, I just got kicked off a jury, so while I believe that I am being fair and balanced, your mileage may vary.

Number One: Scott Peterson vs. Robert Blake
Two somewhat similar crimes, committed by two radically different individuals, with two radically different verdicts. Here's what I found notable.
Similarities include: brutal alleged homicides of the individual's wife. They were both high profile trials of significant length. Both prosecutors had largely circumstantial cases. Both featured hours of technical "expert testimony" that was, I believe, over the head of the average American. Both men were generally presumed to be guilty by the media.
Observed differences. While neither man was poor, Blake certainly had the larger war chest, by quite a bit. Blake was a celebrity, Peterson was not. Scott was in Modesto n(Central California), Blake was in LA. Laci Peterson was a strikingly attractive woman, while Bonnie Lee Bakley... well maybe I'll move on. "Everyone" loved Laci. Bonnie Lee has generally be painted as a person of questionable motives. Peterson, death penalty. Blake, acquitted.
So, hopefully I got the facts close enough that you'll really ponder the question "Does this seem fair?"

Case Two: The feeding tubes. Terri Schiavo vs Pope John Paul II
Similarities: The Tube
Differences: Status one was an allegedly persistently vegetative (this WAS disputed) wife and the other was the Pope.
One was a middle class 'burb wife, the other was the Pope. Easy enough to say he was the King of all Catholics and had the muscle of a small nation to back him up. Anyway...
One was sustained for years, and probably would have endured for years more with a feeding tube, the other tube added a few days of weakened struggle. John Paul died of health complications and old age. Terri Schiavo died of starvation.

Last but not least, Dying with Dignity. Johnnie Cochran vs Pope John Paul II
Well... Let's watch as this one unfolds.

------

And that's enough for now.

Brian Norwood

Platypi Design

Been forever indeed!!!!

Yes, I'm afraid like most bloggers, I have completely slacked off.
First, I would like to express my sentiments to the Catholic World for the loss of what history is likely to consider a very significant Pope. While I have some theological issues with the Roman Catholic Church, John Paul II was responsible for many things that have kept the Catholic Church relevant to the 21st century.
Expressing remorse and apology regarding the crusades, while hardly effecting anyone alive today, never the less was a powerful and much needed assurance to the world that the doctrines of peace, love, and mercy taught by the church actually motivate our leadership decisions. Atrocities committed in "god's" name (9/11 for example) are still atrocities. And while men attempt to usurp the authority of "god" to further their personal and political agendas, me must not let it be believed that it is "god's will" that we harm ANYONE, lest we pervert and violate the very truths that we hold dear.
Extension of the olive branch to the Jews was another long needed overture that this Pope performed. Christians as a whole are the adopted Children of Abraham, and to claim that The Crucifixion was a "Jewish Crime" neatly avoids the fact that it was a "human crime", avoids the fact that Jesus said he "willingly" laid down his life and that no one could take it from him, and avoids the fact that sacrifice is an essential component to the Doctrine of Salvation. John Paul II was a good, decent man, and a kingdom minded individual. May it be said to him, "Well done my faithful servant."

(Old) News Flash! California juries seem incapable of convicting celebrities of murder. Or anything else for that matter. I'm going to, for the purposes of this blog, concede that the murder case was circumstantial. But if you are going to acquit someone of murder solicitation because the witness was a shady character, we might as well take the law off the books. Folks, You don't solicit virgin Harvard Pre-Med Students who pass a drug screening to do your dirty deeds for you. You solicit the lowest forms of life our society can produce, because what you are asking is DESPICABLE! Why was the jury surprised that these were BAD people? Anyway....

I broke my phone and my wife was nice enough to let me get a new Camera Phone. So far be it from me to not take advantage of this opportunity to abuse more technology. I have set up a mob at platypi.textamerica.com for those of you interested.
------

And that's enough for now.

Brian Norwood

Platypi Design