About the "whys" and the "wherefores" and the "therefores" etc etc etc

Philosophy and theology have always had an interrelationship. They address some of the same questions. Philosophy existed first - the Israelites in the Hebrew Scriptures weren't awfully concerned about the abstractions of either philosophy or theology. They were much more concerned about how to relate, both one to another and to God. Judaism, as presented in the Old Testament, is a very concrete religion of every day life.

It did come about that ancient Judaism encountered Greek civilization. It was never an easy encounter for the Hebrew patterns of life and thought; the Greek was far more elegant and, frankly speaking, a lot more fun. Greek civilization came to dominate nearly every realm that it entered, even the Roman. Rome conquered Greece, then Greece conquered Rome. The language of the New Testament, and the mother tongue of Christianity, was not Hebrew or Latin or Aramaic. It was Greek.

So, with the interrelationship of languages and cultures the inevitable did happen.The Christian theologian Tertullian asked, "What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?" The answer: they wound up having much to do with one another. As Christianity evolved, theologians borrowed increasingly the vocabulary and concepts of philosophy. Such terms as:

Ontology - the nature of being. What is the meaning of existence? Never mind the meaning; what is 
existence? And, the question that theology may approach but with which philosophy has no luck: 

Why existence? Why is there anything at all? How would you answer this?

Epistemology - the nature of knowledge. How do we know? Do we start as blank slates, knowing only by our own senses, or are there things we know intuitively, without being told? When theologians examine this the question changes a bit: how can we obtain saving knowledge? Is our imagination primarily analogic - there are analogies that can be made between the Eternal and the existence we know - or is our imagination primarily dialectic - God is so wholly other, completely different, from anything we know that we cannot attain to any knowledge absent revelation, and even that can only be metaphoric? One of these  - analogical or dialectical - is prominent in Protestant thought; the other is the same in Catholic thought. I know I'm running the risk of oversimplifying, and I'm not going to tell you which is which. What is your approach?

Soteriology - the study of salvation. This term would have no meaning for philosophy. Saved - from what? To what?  For Christians, the question revolves around Jesus Christ. What does his Passion and Resurrection save us from? How does his sacrifice do that? What is needed from us - is Jesus' sacrifice the be-all-and-end-all of salvation, or do we have a role as well? The differences between the Catholics and the Protestants in the Reformation have been overstated. What think ye?

It is necessary to be careful in trying to relate philosophy and theology. The Greeks - I have Plato and Aristotle in mind - may have been close to truth in some areas, but their concept of the Deity was far off. For Plato, the Supreme Being was "The form (or the idea) of the good." That is not personal. It's a concept. You can't pray to a concept, and you can't establish a personal relationship with a concept. Karl Barth, a Swiss Reformed theologian, said "God has real hands - not claws like we have." The God of Christianity - and of Judaism, and of Islam - is a personal God. Aristotle's concept of God - "thought thinking about thought" - is even more abstract, even less personal. (BTW, if you want to start reading these philosophers, let me suggest that Plato is much more accessible for the beginner. Just sayin'.) So, be careful about borrowing too much.

So maybe I should have put a "Heavy sledding warning" at the top of this posting, but I don't think it was all that heavy. If it was, it was my aim to make it accessible. But I'd love your reactions to questions posed:

Why is there anything at all?
Analogic or dialectic? (with awareness that everyone operates in both modes at given times)

Who, exactly, was Jesus to you?

Thanks for hanging out for a few.

Beatitudes Part One

"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

Catholic youngsters are a pretty impressive lot. They go to some of the best schools. Catholic schools consistently have great test scores, and Catholic schools can, without permission or apology, keep faith education as part of the curriculum. The school uniform serves a purpose - less distinction between rich and poor, fashionable and not-so-fashionable. There is a code of conduct that is consistent and consistently applied. And - the biggest factor, in my opinion - Catholic schools can make demands in terms of parental involvement that public schools could not make. Perfect? No. Really, really good? You betcha.

At the college level some of the most distinguished colleges in the country - Georgetown and Notre Dame are among the most competitive in the country for admission - are Catholic. The youngsters who don't want to wander that far from home can go to a local Catholic college. Either way, there will be a great group of alumni to soften the blow when the real world intrudes. As it will.

And then something happens. I'm told this also happens in a lot of Protestant churches also. From about age 22 to about age 35 the young adults tend to lose interest. Most are not really hostile to their church of origin, and most would say, "You know, I really should get more active again" or "I really should go back."

And then, sometime around age 35-40 they do start to come back. There are many ideas suggested to explain the pattern. I think one possibility that makes sense is that, sometime around age 35-40 many people begin to be seriously confronted with the inexplicable.

Birth - either the mystery of birth or the mystery of the inability for this to happen.

Sickness. Why would someone who has never smoked in their life and whose home has not a trace of radon get lung cancer?

Death. There may be a scientific explanation of how - cancer, heart failure, stroke, complications of diabetes - but the "why" question escapes science. Why does a 40-year-old die from an aggressive form of prostate cancer while cigarettes may kill another person but take 90 years to do it?

In our family we are dealing with that right now. A family member has a condition called Progressive Supranuclear Palsy. I Googled it last night. This is a man who had always been a strong, vital person - Vietnam vet, Army Special Forces, a runner. He's one of the dearest, sweetest, most laid-back, accepting individuals you could ever know. Now he has a few months to, at the outside, a couple of years left.

Why? I can't explain. Neither can you. We're better off not even trying.

"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

Jesus' Sermon on the Mount - particularly the Beatitudes - are phrased in such a succinct, pithy manner, yet in a sentence like this one so much meaning is packed that we've spent the better part of 2,000 years trying to unpack it all.

"The poor in spirit" - those who recognize their utter dependence on God for everything.

"The poor in spirit" - those who realize that mysteries are mysteries to us, but in the end all is in God's hands. The poor in spirit do not occupy themselves with trying to impress God with their wisdom or their intelligence. The poor in spirit know they can't. They may not be comfortable with mystery, but they are comfortable with God.

The success of AA - for me, anyway - hinges on our recognition of our need for our Higher Power, whom I recognize as God. No one gets sober by the power of his own mind. No one gets clean by being arrogant.

So, during this season of Lent, I hope to become poorer in spirit and more humble in submitting myself to God.

Thanks for hanging out for a few. I'd love your reactions.

Late-night Musings and Ramblings

As I write, my wife and I are sitting across the dining room table from each other, each typing away on our laptops. We're geezers, so this is our idea of a hot Friday night date. Y'all go ahead and have your double Scotch. We'll pass the Pepto Bismol.

Someone earlier this week said on Facebook that they'd been carded for some activity for which they had to be at least 18. One day they'll learn to be flattered at being carded. Heck, I don't even get carded at an AARP meeting.

Our son-in-law, Chris, has been deployed to Afghanistan for the past year. His time there is up, and he is out of country, en route to the US. We couldn't be prouder. He won't be back in the USA for a few days yet - Monday or Tuesday - but at least he's out of Afghanistan.

Early on, while the Taliban was still in power and bin Laden was still in Afghanistan, someone suggested that we just bomb Afghanistan into the Stone Age. Which led to a question:

How do you bomb a place forward 500 years?

So Chris is serving. I was honored to serve in the Navy. (I'm a Vietnam-era vet who never saw the 'Nam - and I cry no sad tears over that.) My father-in-law was in the Army in WWII; one brother-in-law was in the Army in Korea, two others are Vietnam vets (not just Vietnam-era vets like me, but the real thing, one a Marine, the other in the Army.) Yet another brother-in-law on that side of the family served in the Air Force. (Air Force? How'd THAT guy get in here?) (jk!) My brother-in-law on the other side of the family - my sister's husband - was Army, Special Forces, also a Vietnam vet. That side of the family is also loaded with military and ex-military: Navy, Air Force. . .

I am in a family that serves. And, so one observation, strongly felt: every single person who serves honorably is my brother or sister. Every. Single. One. From the days of the Revolution until now. And when I read of a young soldier - sailor - airman - who is killed, a piece of my heart breaks. That was my brother or sister, and a bit of something that is mine is gone. And I get just a little bit angrier at politicians who think of soldiers as their personal toys to play with as they please. (Hear me, Mr. Bush? Rummy? Cheney? I'm sorry, Mr. Cheney - when it was your time to serve you had other priorities. And Mr. Bush was in the Texas Air National Guard - protecting Texas from all those marauding Oklahomans, I guess.)

Another observation, coming from the military and my background as a correctional officer at a maximum security adult joint. There's no such thing as an "individualist" - rugged or otherwise.

The individualist soldier gets himself/herself killed, and maybe their buddies along with. Oh, wait -  he's an individualist. He needs no buddies. Wrong!!! The military learned, long ago, that a soldier won't fight and die for flag, or freedom, or country. Those concepts are just to high-flown and abstract. But a soldier will fight to the death for his buddy. The Marines have a saying about a soldier they respect: they'll go "back-to-back" with that soldier. Need an explanation?

The individualist working in a prison also risks getting killed in the line of duty. You're no better than your backup.

In the faith community there are no individualists. The "you-and-me-Lord" spirituality has no scriptural warrant. In the Hebrew scriptures salvation was always a community affair. The New Testament notes that, in the earliest church, the members held all things in common. Paul, in writing to the Corinthians, made clear that all members, with all their variety of gifts, need each other. "There are many parts, yet one body."

Even as staunch a believer in the power of the individual as Ayn Rand forgot herself now and then. She tried to create the perfect person, the epitome of the individualist, in Howard Roark. Even setting aside for a moment that Roark was a rapist - oh, wait, that was just an individualist seeking his own pleasure - Roark depended on other people. If he hadn't found a market for his architectural style, he may still be a quarry laborer. You see, for a free market economy to work, even the strongest individual must have a free MARKET - consisting of other people. You know - the ones Rand would refer to as the "sniveling masses."

All of those who served are my brothers and sisters. We have needed each other. All of those in the community of faith are my sisters and brothers. We need each other. And I love each one dearly, and honor all as best I humanly can.

Thanks for hanging out for a few. Love your reactions, as always.