Further Reflections on Political Parties and the Religious Middle

I was thinking about things on my way to work today, and one of the things that crossed my mind is the fallacies that occur in the philosophies of our political parties, particularly in concern to social and moral issues.

I'm not a political genius, but here's how I see it breaking down.  The primary mistake Democrats as a whole make in their social-moral philosophy is thinking that social issues are actually individual issues, whereas Republicans, as a whole, overlook the value of free-will and personal choice.

Democrats believe that what happens in the bedroom or in the womb is an individual choice which doesn't affect the population as a whole.  Ironically, this is despite what the individual might think concerning the "moral rightness" of an act.  They say, "I believe abortion/Birth Control/Homosexual Marriage is wrong, but I have no right to impose that view on others, especially when it doesn't affect me".  Granted, some Democrats think abortion is a moral good, but that's not the point here.  What I'm trying to say is, we ARE our brother's (and sister's) keeper.  This is actually an act of love, despite what much of the modern secular world might think. Individual acts do affect the greater population both immediately and indirectly.  Abortion has negative effects on women, birth control in one woman can affect various sexual partners, the psychological ramifications of damaging acts affect how the individual relates with others, it leads others to do those immoral acts (through scandal), and from a theological standpoint it further corrupts the state of the world, increasing the presence of social sin.  All those baptized are part of the Body of Christ.  Sinful acts damage the world as a whole, not just the person(s) committing them.

However, some of these acts in and of themselves, should not be so far as outright banned on a federal level.  This is where, I think, Conservatives sometimes overlook the value of personal choice and free-will.  It's the same reason why the Church doesn't hold socialism as legitimate economic system.  Just as you can't FORCE people to give up their hard-earned money, you cannot FORCE people to uphold the positive norms in every and all instances.  While I agree that negative norms should be prohibited, we must still find a way to assure that people are able to live lives focused on a freedom to choose love rather than obey the religious law. 

Its a hard balance to tread.  I'm sure there are gaping holes in my argument.  I also realize that I'm arguing a primarily religious position.  Indeed, this is written mostly to my Christian brothers and sisters, those of whom think we should not hold each other accountable, those who think we need to control every action, and those of us who are stuck in the middle not knowing which side to take.

Being a Christian is hard work, often there is no apparent right answer.  However, I believe there is a middle way somewhere in this mess; a balance of Christian morality and civil law that helps people avoid moral evil and yet challenges them (without forcing) them to live out the fullness of the positive norm Christian Charity.  I have no answers, just observations about some of our problems.  I realize this was kind of a rambling post, but hopefully you found a nugget or two of Truth within it.

Peace.

A New Start

I have resolved to start blogging again--perhaps every day if I can force myself to keep up the motivation. I do this as an attempt to reignite the flame of inspiration back into my life. Long has it been since I've felt the joy of a new idea coursing through my mind, like a being of its own longing to come to life.

I don't think my life, or my mind, are boring per se... I only think that perhaps I fail to properly to consider the beauty and depth of life, or to fully embrace the capacity of my human mind to delve into the truths of reality to the extent to which I should.

And so, for now at least, this will become the post-it note of my mind in an effort to force myself to exercise the God-given gift of reflection. It may be interesting, it may be dull. It may be complex and simple all at the same time. It may be perfunctory, deep, silly, sad... it may be a multitude of many a thing. But Hopefully the last thing it will be is empty.

This is my soul's search for meaning, and so I invite you dear reader, if a reader you may be, to journey with me if you feel yourself brave enough. And with that dear reader, "Once more into the breach, dear friends".

On Happiness

The Church teaches that happiness comes solely from God, because only God and union with him as such can provide one a truly fulfilling happiness. However, popular wisdom seems to suggest also that one only has to choose to be happy in order to be happy. What are the dynamics of each of these statements and how do they relate to each other?

Happiness as coming solely from God: Nothing on the earth can make us entirely fulfilled or happy. Because we were created for union with an ultimate and infinite being, no immediate and finite pleasure can ever fully satisfy us. This is what Augustine means when he states that “our hearts are restless until they rest in you, O Lord.” Therefore, on earth true and absolutely fulfilling happiness is not able to received or attained. However, because the Lord desires to be happy, there must be some way in which we can get the fullness of happiness possible in this earthly life. Since happiness comes through union with Christ, the most obvious way in which we would receive happiness in this life would be through the primary means of union with Christ in this world… through the Sacraments, especially that of the Eucharist and the Holy Mass.

However, even though happiness comes most completely from God, that does not preclude our choice in the matter. Whereas God offers us virtually unlimited and free happiness by means of union with him through the Eucharist, a gift is merely an empty vessel unless it is properly received by the receiver. It like any of the other theological and spiritual gifts or virtues—God freely gives them to us, such as grace, but it is only through our full and willing acceptance of them that we can truly receive them and be transformed by them. This is how we as human persons have a choice in our happiness. We can choose to try to make our own finite happiness, and end up feeling unfulfilled, or we can willfully and joyfully accept the infinite happiness God gives to us and be happy even when are sad or suffering. When we are sad we only need to choose to be suffering with Christ, which is an acceptance of his infinite happiness and a step towards union with him. We need only to receive the Eucharist, which is the most important thing anyone can do each day. Therefore, we need only to praise and love God to be truly happy, for all other things are changing, finite, and in vain.

Therefore, these two ideas of happiness coming from God and human persons choosing to be happy are not contradictory to each other, but merely the choice to be happy is limited to choosing the ultimate and infinite, or choosing the immediate and finite.

On Missing and Longing

Question: What causes us to miss someone?

I often wonder why it is that I miss some people and don't miss others. I don't think the question can really be answered, its too complex, and I think it will always remain a mystery to me. However, I'm going to think out loud and give it my best try.

When you miss someone, it is because there is some factor in the relationship that is no longer present. On the surface it is a proximity issue...the person is no longer near you, with you, or in your presence. However, I think that it comes down to more than that, that you miss someone because of some sort of connection you have with them, and because of some sort of validation that they give to you.

I believe that humans need love because they were created by the source of love--God. This being said, humans constantly look for love, or to the return to God who is the source of all love and the only complete fulfillment of our need for love. We, being humans however, cannot typically achieve such a love here on earth (although arguably some Saints have), and so we look for it in other ways. Some people get it from money, others success/achievement, but most from other people. Therefore, when forming a relationship, we are in some ways, forming a relationship based on our desire for union with God. Disunion from God is Hell, and is torture for the Soul. Now, even though each relationship only gives us a tiny fraction of the longing we have for God, it is still enough to torment us when we lose it. Therefore, when we miss someone, we are longing for that smidgen of fulfillment that they provide us.

This can be solved in part of course by praying to God and forming a more intimate relationship with him. It can also be solved by realizing why we miss a person, that the person is, in someway, always with us, and by realizing that all separations are effectively temporary in one way or another. Emptiness is a result of the human condition...but it does not have to be blatantly accepted--we have the power to diminish it.

On the Essence of Beauty

Question: What is the essence of Beauty....what is it?

Part of beauty is something that pleases us. It is impossible to be disgusted by something that one considers beautiful, however, that perception is somewhat subjective. There is however, also objective beauty. For example, studies show that "average" faces are beautiful, and that things that are geometrically symmetrical tend to be perceived as universally beautiful. This means that beauty is not only an extrinsic entity, but also an intrinsic perception that in some sense is universally built into us. Because of this, the perception of beauty does not come from us, but from something greater than us, or the one who created us.

God created us, and so all beauty inevitably comes from him in some fashion. In fact, God is the Form of Beauty, or the most beautiful being in existence. This comes from his perfection, for that which is perfect is necessarily likewise beautiful. Therefore, all beauty is in fact participation in God, Perfection, and thus Holiness. That which is Holy is Beautiful.

This causes us to make the distinction between physical beauty and spiritual. Physical beauty is beauty observed with the senses, primarily by sight, but also through sound in the form of music. Spiritual beauty is the degree to which a person is in communion with God. This perhaps is a kind of distinction between perfection in the physical sense and perfection in the spiritual sense which can be defined more specifically as holiness. A person can have great physical beauty but hardly any spiritual beauty (holiness), and vice-versa.

Therefore, the essence of beauty is that which reflects some form of God, either physically or spiritually, through perfection (physically) and holiness (spiritually).