Koan #40: Papal Inspiration

It is a simple fact. If God could inspire the writing of words from certain individuals to be true and perfect in their teachings, then He could inspire the speaking of words from certain individuals to be true and perfect in their teachings. Thus the idea of papal inspiration and infallibility should be no great stretch of faith for any Believer. And even more so, it would be arguably desired by God to ensure the doctrinal unity of the Faith and the explication of God-given morals to changing and developing social conditions. Thus the idea of papal infallibility cannot be denied from the fact that it could not be done nor can it be denied from the fact that it would not be done, as its written parallel already has been done. Let no non-Catholic Believer, therefore, deny it for such reasons, and if they do, let them re-evaluate such a position immediately and honestly if they wish to stay true to Christian truth.

Koan #38: Deceit and the Church

It is a most remarkable phenomenon to listen and read those that are deeply virulent and hateful in their attacks against the Catholic faith and the Church that protects it. Indeed, it is remarkable precisely because the attacks used are so often full of conscious distortions, exaggerations, misunderstandings, distractions, misinformation, half-information, dishonest omissions and at times, out-right and blatant lies; all of which are proven to be verifiably false with just a slight amount of investigative acumen. Yet what this fact raises is an even more fascinating point. For why, if the Catholic faith and its Church are such an easy target to defeat—as its opponents claim—must these distortions, exaggerations and falsehoods be employed? Why, if the Church and its claims and its teachings require no strong effort to crush, cannot the simple, plain and honest truth be employed in the task of doing so? Why is the extra tool of dishonesty used by all, from Unbelievers to Believing Dissenters, if the bare, pure and unadorned truth should suffice to discredit the Church? Perhaps—and an unwilling and unwanted explanation it will be for many—it is because this naked truth does not suffice to defeat the Church and what it teaches. Perhaps it is because if the full truth was actually spoken, it would bring people to the Church rather than push them away from it. And perhaps it is because the truth clings more tightly to the Church, than to any of its opponents. Thus in sum, these facts, if nothing else, show much concerning the “truth” that the opponents of the Church use, but even more, these facts show much concerning the actual Truth surrounding the Church herself.

Koan #31: The Truth of Abstinence

It is often touted by Her detractors, that when speaking of the Holy Church’s teaching on sexual control through abstinence, that this approach “simply does not work.” Yet it takes no great thought to know that abstinence does, of course, work completely and fully; it is, indeed, totally effective. But of course what such critics mean—in their twisting of words—is that abstinence is simply too difficult to do, thus clearly demonstrating that its “failure” is a failure of the individual’s will, not of the technique itself. And thus only the fool can claim that a failure of will is the same as a failure of technique, which simply reinforces the Church’s teaching on the most effective technique of sexual control. Truly, let one thus be frank with such opponents: abstinence has not been tried and determined defective, but rather, it has been found taxing and thus not tried.

Koan #26: The Argument from Atheist Converts

It is often said by the most fervent of Unbelievers that there exist no good arguments for why they should believe and follow the Faith, with all that the Faith entails and espouses. In the spirit of discourse and charity, it is, therefore, desirable to present such arguments, as has been done for millennia, to these most fervently unbelieving of Unbelievers in the hopes of achieving at least some reflection on both sides. And this is just such an attempt, although please note that it is an argument that is both audience specific and done with one’s tongue firmly in his cheek. Yet one must not digress. Thus, this particular argument for the Faith is known as the “Argument from Atheist Converts.” It carries forth as follows: 1. In recent years, and in western culture particularly, a rash of particularly vehement, ardent and evangelically vocal atheists have arisen. 2. These specific Unbelievers often claim that those that hold religious beliefs, and in particular Christianity, are the embodiment of a being that is irrational, emotive, unintelligent, non-“bright”, biased, unscientific, unreasonable, ridiculous, illogical and so forth (a further number of terms could be added, but the point is made). By contrast, the true Unbelievers of this age and culture are the embodiment of a being that is rational, un-emotive, intelligent, “bright”, objective, scientific, reasonable, serious, logical and so forth (again, a further number of terms could be added, but the point is made). 3. With this in mind, it follows that if anyone converts from unbelief to the Faith, then this conversion has great weight, value and assistive/authoritative proof for the strength, validity and worth of arguments made for the Faith, for how could an epitome of rationality, un-emotiveness, intelligence, “brightness”, objectivity, scientific literacy, reasonableness, seriousness and logicalness by converted by anything but the most powerful of arguments and evidence. By contrast, the conversion of a Believer to unbelief is nothing special, powerful or significant, for how could the conversion of an epitome of irrationality, emotiveness, unintelligence, non-“brightness”, bias, scientific illiteracy, unreasonableness, ridiculousness and illogicalness be significant or weight in favour of that particular view. It may, in fact, weaken it as it has been adopted by one with such weak mental facilities. 4. This means, therefore, that either the vehemently arrogant Unbeliever must concede the exponentially greater importance of the conversion of an Unbeliever to belief in contrast to the opposite, and thus the strength of the arguments, facts and evidence that converted such a Unbeliever, or the vehemently arrogant Unbeliever must concede that Unbelievers are not the hyper-rational, totally objective, extremely logical, etc. individuals that the latter so often claimed they are, but are rather subject to the same mental and psychological biases and issues that affect all persons. 5. This then naturally leads to the concession that the Unbelievers claimed objectivity and bias-free-truth-seeking focus in assessing the arguments for the Faith and its entailments are fallacious and unwarranted; they therefore hold no more weight than the Believer’s assessment of the same arguments. 6. Nor can this argument simply be dismissed by the Unbeliever through the claim that the converted Unbeliever simply became irrational and illogical instantly upon conversion, for how can one change so suddenly and momentarily from being the epitome of rationality and reason to its exact and extreme opposite. Such a claim is absurd and just demonstrates the emotional and mental protective barriers that such Unbelievers create for themselves to protect their psyches from the possibility that they are in error. Nor can the Unbeliever claim that the converting Unbeliever was never a “real” Unbeliever—entailing all the traits mentioned above—to begin with, for doing so commits the so-called “No True Scotsman” fallacy, a fallacy with Unbeliever so often use against those of the Faith. Let it therefore be realized, even though it must be granted that many already do, that the Unbeliever in no more rational or objective or logical than the Believer, nor do his assessments of the arguments for the Faith hold any more weight than the Believer’s.

Koan #25: The Church is Not a Force for Good in this World

It is an issue often raised by both Unbeliever and Believer alike, though it is primarily the former that uses it as a form of attack against the latter. And the issue itself is whether the Catholic Church has, is and will be a force for good in the world. Upon first glance, such a question may indeed seem interesting and intellectual, if not down-right critical to answer. Yet it only takes a further moment of actual reflection to see just what an inappropriate and twisted—even foolish—question that this is. Why? For the Catholic both knows and has been warned (John 15:18-25) that those that do not believe in the Church or follow her, will view what She teaches as “good for the world” as bad and what She teaches as “bad for the world”, they will see as good. Indeed, the world shall hate the Church, as the Church has been told, for what She holds morally dear. Therefore the Catholic can never convince the Unbeliever of the Church’s goodness in this world until he convinces the same Unbeliever to actually see and agree to the true good that the Church teaches. Till this is achieved, all that the Catholic states as good for the world will be seen as its reverse, or at the very least, it will be seen in a misaligned manner, rendering the Unbeliever’s view of it naturally skewed. And furthermore, as this world is fallen and as the men in it are wounded in conscience, it is no surprise that Catholicism and its teachings and its actions will be viewed as bad rather than good, for it presents a light that pierces through a darkness that does not wish to be penetrated, and even detests the light for its illuminating work. Let the Catholic thus be comforted in the knowledge that when any Unbeliever intones that the Church is not but a force for evil and pain in this world, it is simply confirming what the Catholic should expect, and consequently, it should serve to actually strengthen the Believer’s faith, not deteriorate it.

Koan #22: Arguing with Straw

The creation of arguments from little but straw! It is something that every one of the Catholic Faithful must watch for, and must not commit himself, lest he be hypocritical in his quest to bring truth to others. Yet it is also a thing that is often seen in the arguments presented by Unbelievers for their denial of the divine and by non-Catholics for their denial of the Faith. All of these claim to be putting forth arguments of intellectual rigour and strength, but are often, when inspected closely and exactly, simply making arguments of straw. They subtly twist meanings, definitions, words and phrases in the most inconspicuous of manners in order to fallaciously bolster the effectiveness of their argumentation or they argue against the weakest formulation of the Believer’s argument rather than the strongest one. Thus they argue against illusions rather than reality. Let the Believer, then, be both aware and leery of this truth. And let him assess any argument against the Faith or its Lord slowly, methodically and precisely, for fear that if he does not do so, he may be caught unaware of a hidden and fallacious straw, which if missed, would give the argument more weight than it is due.

Koan #20: Science or Scientists

Is the Faith at war with science? Should the Faith fear science? Does the Faith contradict science? Of course not. Is the truth at war with truth? Should the truth fear truth? Does the truth contradict truth? How absurd! Yet wait, for the Faith is at war with some scientists. And the Faith should fear some scientists. And the Faith indeed contradicts some scientists. This cannot be denied. Let the Faithful therefore, be wary of the scientist himself, not the tool he uses, just as the Faithful should be wary of all men in this fallen world. For the scientist is not immune from the biases, prejudices, narrow-mindedness, follies, faulty interpretations, partialities, preconceived notions, foregone conclusions, presuppositions, wilful blindness, emotional manipulations, unconscious predispositions, and evidentiary favouritisms that influences all men. And thus let the Faithful remain vigilant against any man and his words, whether he be one of science or not.

Koan #19: All Must Change

What is often scorned as too difficult and unnecessary by many an Unbeliever, ignored by many a hypocritical Believer, and imperfectly attempted by the true Faithful, is the understanding, knowledge and acceptance of this fact: when one chooses to pick up his Catholic Cross and follow the Lord Jesus Christ, then this changes everything. And it is not merely enough to say this one word, for its use is often employed but rarely fully elucidated. So what does “changing everything” mean in practical and direct terms? It means that the Believer must change: what he thinks about the Divine; what he listens to; how he listens to what he listens to; what he believes about his future life; what he watches; how he watches that which he has chosen to watch; what he reads; how he reads it; what he speaks about; how he articulates his words; what he debates; how he debates; how he deals with the political sphere; what he studies; how he studies it; what he thinks; how he thinks about it; what he questions; how he brings forth those questions; the morals that he holds dear; how he socializes with the world; who he socializes with in this world; where he socializes; what he socializes about when he does socialize; where he goes; how he uses his time; how he spends his money; how he treats the poor; the virtues that he develops; how he deals with strangers; the vices that he rejects; how he views suffering; how he interacts with his spouse; how he treats his children; how he sees the world; how he cares for himself; how he creates and arranges his personal priorities; the ethics that he applies; what he thinks about the human person; what he believes about his very existence; how he views the supernatural; how charitable he is; how materialistic he is; the philosophies he subscribes to; the work that he chooses; how he conducts himself in public; how he completes the work that he has chosen; how he feels; if he fasts; how he sees himself alone in the dark; how he thinks of human nature; how he thinks of good and evil; if he even believes in good and evil; how he controls and directs his emotions; how he views the environment; what he drinks; what he teaches his children; what he wears; what he eats; if he prays; how he walks and a further list of endless things. Now it was no doubt tedious to read such a list—incomplete though it is—as it may have been believed that such things were already known, and perhaps they were, but it is necessary to see them written forth, so that a full realization of the extent of the change required is plainly seen. Let the future Believer be ready for this. Let the current Believer practice it. And let the one who fears it or finds it foolish turn his back and walk away.

Koan #18: Can Protestantism Even Be True

It is incumbent on the Protestant, who claims to hold to Christian truth, to wonder if there truly is truth in Protestantism. For if there can only be one truth of Christian, doctrine, dogma and theology, and with approximately 140 different Protestant denominations in existence, the question of course becomes: which one holds the truth? Are more than one true? Are some partially true? Are any true? And how does the Protestant, ultimately basing his choice on his own interpretation of scripture, in the end know that his choice is true? Even more importantly, how does he ultimately know that his very interpretation is true, especially in light of so many others of the Protestant vein that sincerely believe the opposite? And if Protestants can be so confused about what Christian truth actually is, then how do they square this with the Christian’s knowledge that God is not the author of confusion (1 Cor 14:33)? And if the Church is the bulwark and pillar of truth (1 Tim 3:15), then how can such truth be contained in the contradictions and doctrinal differences of all the various Protestant denominations? Catholics, by contrast, are one in doctrine and teaching, and such problems of division do not exist there. And certainly the Catholic Church, being of one doctrine, is not the author of confusion. And certainly the Catholic Church, being one body, is not divided. And certainly the Catholic Church, being the teacher of one faith, can hold the Christian truth. And thus perhaps the Catholic Church, being as it is of one body, one doctrine, one faith and one truth, is indeed the very Church that Christ founded on earth. It is truly something the every Protestant should contemplate deeply.

Koan #13: Mere Christianity Meagre

It is often commendable and indeed necessary to approach an argumentation for the Christian faith using a tactic and method that employs the idea of “mere” Christianity, as it is often called, and which means the use of common doctrines and theologies that are generally accepted and acceptable by all Christian denominations, rather than denomination specific ones. Yet though as necessary as this may be at times, the Catholic Believer must be wary of employing this strategy too often, for being in possession of the fullness of Christian truth, the Catholic can avoid many of the pitfalls that arise for the theologies, doctrines and beliefs that plaque other Christian denominations but leave Catholicism untouched. Let the Catholic be guarded against this therefore, for mere Christianity is but a shadow compared to the full light of truth, which is what is truly needed to illuminate the dark corners of men’s souls.

Koan #4: "Christianity" Defeated but Catholicism Untouched

While both understandable due to geographical and cultural considerations, yet still strange when considered, is the fact that numerous Unbelievers claim that they have lost their belief due to deficiencies and contradictions within elements of the “Christian” faith as a whole, while at the same time not realizing that what they have done is only discover deficiencies with the theological ideas and doctrines of certain Christian sects. And thus furthermore, they believe they have achieved this personal argumentative success against the totality of what is understood as Christianity without ever having investigated the doctrines, teachings and philosophies of Catholicism, the largest and oldest and original Christian denomination in the world, and yet they still believe that they have defeated Christianity as a whole. But does the boxing contender believe that he has become the champion after only defeating someone who is fifth or sixth in line to the belt, or does he only become champion after have defeated the champion? Of course the latter is true. Why then, do so many Unbelievers act like the former rather than the latter? It is thus a wonder if such an Unbeliever can truly believe that they have defeated Christianity with their partial and denomination specific arguments, or rather should they realize that they only have a right to think that they have defeated Christianity, when they have done nothing of the sort, as Catholicism still stands firm.