The Infamous "-ism" Project (Due October 26 & 27)

A Historical Examination of Injustice
Investigating the social, political, and economic ideologies that gave rise to injustice:

Goal: students will conduct research into one of the ideologies below to gain a better understanding of how it led to the rise of injustice. Students will then write a short, informative paper detailing their research and present their findings to the class.

Sources: While the internet is a seemingly endless font of knowledge, only a small percentage of the information available comes from a credible source. Therefore, students must submit an annotated bibliography attesting to the authorship and origin of their information. Every student must use at least two (2) books and no more than two (2) web-sites.

Potential Topics:
Feudalism
Nationalism
Colonialism
Rationalism
Industrialism
Socialism
Capitalism
Fascism

Research Questions:
1. Provide a definition of the ideology based on how it was implemented. (Avoid a simple dictionary-definition. Instead, synthesize your own definition.)

2. Identify the leading proponents of the “ism” and how they came to develop or embrace the ideology.

3. Explain the geographical and historical context: when and where was the ideology prominent? What circumstances was the ideology intended to rectify?

4. What problems or injustices were brought about as a result of the ideology? Who were the victims of those initial problems?

5. What is / was the Church’s response to the “ism”? What might the Church posit as the fatal flaw of the ideology? How does it fail or go wrong?

The informative essay should be approximately two pages in length and utilize APA format for citations.

The presentation should be approximately 5 minutes in length, introduce students to the main ideas of the questions listed above, and contain one technology component.

Objective Truth

We have completed our study of Objective Truth and from it you need to draw 10 major points:
1. It's definition
2 - 6. Alternative Theories of Truth (and their flaws)
7 - 10. Attacks upon the concept of Truth. (and their flaws)

Check out the Prezi below to pick up on these main points.

Rationalism & Liberalism

Your assignment today is to read "Rationalism...the heresy of modern times.", Which is actually a chapter from R.J. Meyer's The Science of the Saints, published in 1907. (You can find the full text online if you like - Google Books.)

Here below is a synopsis along with some questions for you to answer.

Synopsis:

Rationalism is detrimental to a life of faith because it sets up "unaided reason" as the ultimate standard of truth or falsehood, right and wrong.

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that "Grace builds on Nature". This means that human reason, which is a natural human ability, is aided or "built upon" by God's Grace. Rationalism strips away the role of grace - and ultimately the role of God - in human affairs.

Rationalism is usually veiled or disguised as another, seemingly beneficial, ideology. In the author's case, he deals with Liberalism. He laments having to use the term because it is so often misapplied or misunderstood, (and I lament having to use it as well, because it immediately calls to mind "liberal" politics, which are certainly related to, but by no means the extent of liberalism in our culture today.) However, since the term was used by the Church to label the popular system of ideas that oppose Christian teaching and moralit, in the end the author uses the term as well.

Liberalism Defined: it is literally "a system favorable to liberty". Being in America, we all have a fairly high opinion of liberty or freedom. If Mel Gibson taught our culture anything in the 1990's it was that Freedom is Good and the British are Bad. (While I take issue with the latter, the former is spot on.)

The problem is that liberalism demands freedom not only so that one may do good without being coerced, but so that one may also do evil - as though we have a natural right to do so. An example would be the issue of abortion. One would think that if there are two rival or opposing groups and one of them is Pro-Life, then the opposing faction would be Pro-Death. However, those who oppose the Pro-Life movement consider themselves to be "Pro-Choice", knowing that most people, particularly most Americans equate choice with freedom and freedom is good. (Likewise, they can then portray the Pro-Life movement as an "Anti-Choice" movement, a restriction of freedom.)

Meyer (the author) then looks to the origin of the Rationalist mindset, and points to the Protestant Reformation. (I wish that we had an extra month to study the Reformation, but alas, we must gloss over it and move on.) He points out that the Reformers established private judgement as the ultimate arbiter (decider) in all religious matters, and that one should have no external authority (or Magisterium) to guide personal decisions.

Martin Luther, for example, rejected some books of the Bible and didn't include them in "his" teaching. If Luther was free to go this far, what would stop someone else from rejecting other books? And why not reject the entire Bible itself? or Natural Law? or anything else. This is essentiallly what happened, and Western Europe began a slide down a slppery slope that lasted half a millenium. (We will explore these historical events later.)

Like a series of dominoes falling we have the Reformation, the Enlightenment, the French Revolution and Reign of Terror, Industrialization, Fascism, Communism, and ultimately the relativist nihilism which is our cultural atmosphere today.

Meyer points out that in the midst of this historical development we have come to demand respect for the rights of man while ignoring, if not denying the rights of God. We don't often think of God as having rights. He is, after all, omnipotent, and has no need of being protected by a Bill of Rights. But God does have natural rights - meaning they are part of His very nature. If God is truly God, the supreme Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer of the Universe, then is He not entitled to our worship and adoration? As evidence of this disregard for the Rights of God Meyer lists a number of things that have in fact happened or continue to happen in the name of liberty and progress.

Most liberalists, Meyer contends, don't think much for themselves, but rather depend upon self-interest, popularity, and a number of other factors to determine what it is they believe. This leads to a great diversity within liberalism, but their common thread is a rejection of the principle of authority, which is the foundation, he says, of faith.

Ironically, while liberalism hangs its hat on the idea of freedom (or tolerance) it is rather strict and intolerant for those who oppose it. Give an example to illustrate this idea:

Meyer cautions against drawing conclusions based on a man's words, when he may in fact mean something else, such as:______ give examples here as well.

Just as liberalism is a disguised form of rationalism, so to is liberalism often prone to disguise itself, appearing under the banners of: Progress, Patriotism, Philanthropy, et al. "It always follows thetendency of the age and floats along upon the tide of public opinion...."

What then, do Catholics need to be "liberated" from in the view of liberalism? From Creed? From the teaching authority of the Church (Magisterium)? From The liturgy and ritual of the sacraments? These things exist only to protect, provide for, guide, and support the people of God.

The arguement is made that Creed should be interepreted by the individual, who is free to reject what he dislikes, and embrace what he likes. (today this is commonly called "cafeteria catholicism"). The argument continues that the Church should be governed by democracy rather than a hierarchy. They see the liturgy as a theatrical performance rather than a sacred encounter with divine mystery, and they look down their noses at popular or traditional expressions of devotion. The vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience are chains that bind the will, and the religious orders of the Church are seen as warts, or worse, tumors on the body of Christ.

The author admits that the Church is in need of continual reform, but it is her Human element, not her Divine, that is subject to correction.

Finally, the liberal or progressive movement wants to set aside the past and place its loyalty at the feet of science. We have studied extensively how misguided this approach is, and will touch on it in class.

So the question remains, "is a liberalistic Catholic really a Catholic at all?"

For Black 2 --- Don't click the photo.

Pope Benedict to the Youth of Scotland

Pope Benedict, in his homily at a public mass in Scotland, made the following remarks to the young people gathered there, remarks I now share with you because they both reinforce what we have been learning, and because ultimately, they are directed at you.

"Finally, I would like to say a word to you, my dear young Catholics of Scotland. I urge you to lead lives worthy of our Lord (cf. Eph 4:1) and of yourselves. There are many temptations placed before you every day – drugs, money, sex, pornography, alcohol – which the world tells you will bring you happiness, yet these things are destructive and divisive.

There is only one thing which lasts: the love of Jesus Christ personally for each one of you. Search for him, know him and love him, and he will set you free from slavery to the glittering but superficial existence frequently proposed by today’s society. Put aside what is worthless and learn of your own dignity as children of God.

In today’s Gospel, Jesus asks us to pray for vocations: I pray that many of you will know and love Jesus Christ and, through that encounter, will dedicate yourselves completely to God, especially those of you who are called to the priesthood and religious life. This is the challenge the Lord gives to you today: the Church now belongs to you!"

For excellent coverage of the Papal Trip (and all other universal Church happenings, check out www.whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com)

Unit I Review

I. Stephen Hawking Article
A. Metaphysics (why) vs. Physics (how)
B. Knowledge (Fact) vs. Wisdom (Knowledge applied to experience in the pursuit of Truth)
C. "God of the Gaps" theory - and its flaw (parent analogy)
D. The Relationship between Science & Faith

II. The Allegory of the Cave
A. Be able to name & describe the elements of the Allegory.
B. Apply the Allegory to the Christian Narrative (the story of Chrsitianity)
C. Apply the Allegory to our Society
D. Apply the Allegory to the Matrix

III. Laughter will Save the World
A. Generation of Addicts
B. Escape from Reality
C. Laughter from Despair
D. Temptation of all thinking people: Ignorance is Bliss
E. We laugh due to incongruities: we are both human, and yet divine (made in God's Image).

IV. What it Means to be Human
A. Two different perspectives
1. Materialist
2. Idealist
B. The concept of Self is unique to humanity.
C. View persons as Subjects, not Objects
D. The Devil's work is to convince us to view persons as Objects, not Subjects
E. God is Personal (God is a "self")

V. Identity
A. We are unique in our capacity to fail to achieve our potential.
B. To lose our goodness is to lose our being. (when we fail to be good, we fail to be what we are intended to be.)
C. When we possess an object it in turn possesses us.
D. To attain ourselves we must give ourselves away.
E. Every choice we make has an impact on the core of our being, the part of our being that makes choices.

Identity by Peter Kreeft

The Article is available online at this link.

"Triangles can never be non-triangular, and rocks are always guaranteed to be rocky...but humans can be inhuman."

1. Why do you think we have the ability to be inhuman? Can you theorize any benefits from us having the capicity to be inhuman? Explain what the world would be like if we were as bound to our "humanness" as a triagle is to triangularity.

"Whatever is must be good." - Boethius

2. What is Boethius saying here? Does that mean nothing that exists is evil? How do you explain the presence of evil in the world if whatever is must be good?

"That's what happened in Eden. Once we laid hands on the fruit we desired, the horrible effect took place immediately: it laid its hands on us."

3. How are we possessed by that which we possess? Why is that, at least in Kreeft's estimation, a bad thing? Give some examples of being owned by what you own.

"Frodo and Sam...attain themselves and save their selves only because they give themselves away – for others, for the Shire, for the world;"

4. This statement defies logic: how can you attain something by losing it or giving it away? Explain how it is more noble, more dignified, to attain one's self by giving ones' self away?

" Gollum is obsessed with his cause, with his possession of the Ring. He almost has no self left, he's so selfish. He talks to himself more than to others. He makes no distinction between himself and his "Precious". He's confused about who he is."

5. Many of the "gurus" or experts in our culture say that the first step toward solving our individual (or social) problems is to "find ourselves." According to the line of thinking in the quote above, why might we never be able to truly find ourselves?

"Sauron is uncomfortably familiar. He's only an exaggeration or an enlargement of us, or at least, of one possibility for us."

6. What can be done to avoid the "monster we might become"? Sauron seems to have become a monster because he put so much of himself into something beyond himself. Aren't we encouraged to do this all the time with sports, hobbies, even school work? How do we keep from becoming defined by the things we put ourselves into?

"Countless people who are caught off guard, children especially, fall in love with Aslan...Aslan is Jesus. ... You feel towards Aslan, spontaneously, the way Jesus' contemporaries felt towards Him."

7. Are you familiar with the Narnia Chronicles? In what way is Aslan like Jesus? If you are not familiar: what is another example of a character from a story you know that is Christ-like? What makes the character like Jesus? Is it obvious from the start? Is it more effective if it is not obvious?

C.S. Lewis writes in Mere Christianity, which I know you ALL read this summer: " "Every time you make a choice you are turning the central part of you... into something a little different from what it was before. And taking your life as a whole, with all your innumerable choices, all your life long you are slowly turning this central thing into either a heavenly creature or a hellish creature...Each of us at each moment is progressing towards the one state or the other."

8.

9. What is Kreeft's solution for avoiding becoming a lowly worm, a proud pharisee, or a wishy-washy Charlie Brown?

"What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses his own self?" People hear that and resist it because it's direct and challenging because it's familiar. They read Tolkien's story and see it, and they can't resist it.