The Sacred Heart Experience

Throughout the course of this past year I have received the grace to accompany an elderly priest with Alzheimer's disease. Once a star soccer player he is now incapable of even bathing himself. He isn't capable of a conversations but he often repeats:

"Sacred Heart of Jesus...I trust in you!"

It has been a beautiful year, one in which I have learned how much we can learn to love Our Lord despite our smallness.

I've always been fascinated by Chapters 13 - 17 of St. John's Gospel. The Evangelist Saint John wrote them in his old-age and does not offer a chronological order of events - now having spent time with a senile octogenarian, one who has had much to teach me about life - I have begun to understand where, perhaps an order is missing but nonetheless a very deep experience is present.

This is an experience each Christian is called to - the Sacred Heart Experience. Below is an image of our Lord with His Sacred Heart which was scrawled onto the cement walls of a Polish Lieutenant who was awaiting his execution in Auschwitz. We can only imagine the thoughts that went through his mind as he awaited his iminent death. Sacred Heart of Jesus, I Trust in You!




Sacred Heart of Auschwitz
(more info)

Throughout our own lives we can grow in a Heart-to-Heart love for Jesus. That's true Christianity - not just dry words or some sort of intellectualism. It is a personal experience and personal response a Heart that calls out and says, each day as He said to St. Faustina:

Now, rest your head on My bosom, on My heart, and draw from it strength and power for these sufferings, because you will find neither relief nor help nor comfort anywhere else. Know that you will have much, much to suffer, but don't let this frighten you; I am with you. (Diary, 36)

What it takes to Prove that God Exists - (Part 3 of 5): The Truth through an Analogy

Proving God's existence is a very tedious task - something few people, even thinkers - achieve during their lifetime. Why bother proving God's existence? Because Inception doesn't work. And even if it did it wouldn't really fix the problem...

One more necessary factor in "proving" God's existence is The Truth of an Analogy.

In Wikipedia under "Analogy" it seems that some committee member decided to best define "Analogy" with the meticulously cumbersome:  

a cognitive process of transferring information or meaning from a particular subject (the analogue or source) to another particular subject (the target), and a linguistic expression corresponding to such a process.

I prefer the Google quick definition:

Since the beginning of time Man has had the capacity to think and articulate things metaphorically using similes and metaphors. Without them literature would be sloggish and in a cold Sovietesque way. Grammar Girl (my quick grammatical help-guide) gives "Simile and Metaphor" this sense:

Metaphors and similes both call attention to how two different things are similar, so people listening to you can apply the qualities of one thing to the other.

Though She (in this case Stever Robbins) doesn't link the notions of "Analogy" with "Simile" or "Metaphor" but you discover a similarity instantly.

Boiled down to just the essentials you will remember taking the SAT and having to choose a multiple choice that corresponded to the proportion represented mathematically such as:

1:2::2:4

Possibly represented in literature as such:

House : Family :: Beehive : Bees

or

As a "house" is to a "family" - so is a "beehive" to "bees"

Metaphors, Allegories and Hyperboles such as this one taken from Shakespeare show our mind's capability of 'connecting the dots' so-to-speak, of being able to see the similiarity yet their differences.

 

 All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances; - As you Like it, 2/7 

Mathematics and Physics especially requires the use of especially mathematical proportions. There is no need to assert some sort of "intelligent design" but that of our own intelligence. Our own minds' capabilities, and its use within Math and Physics - beyond that of literature tells us that it is applicable to reality. Our minds can retrieve from reality, certain real proportions. The above proportions are valid in their own ways (obviously Shakespeare's should be taken 'allegorically').

Finally an analogy which we draw from reality - I think this could be the most difficult part of what it takes to prove God's existence, for example: 

a Human : Living :: a Being : Doing

 

The example is of a Philosophical abstraction. Instead of "a Human" just about any other real thing (purely mental concepts are difficult to "abstract" since they are already abstract but are in some ways also possible as well to be conducted to "a Being").

 

As a real Human Being, say "Thomas", is in reality and is alive i denote that his act of being is "living", since that is what he does. This connection "a Human - Living" can be abstracted to "a Being - Doing". Do you see the abstraction in the above analogy? Taken one more step above it could be presented as such as:

Thomas : Blogging :: a Human : Living :: a Being : Doing

 

 This analogy is presented in so-to-speak "real-time". Notice that "a Being" is both, on the one hand, a noun (ex. a human being), as well as a verb? We're not constraining ourselves to do doing a Linguistic Analysis (i.e. Philosophy of Language) but we're trying to find out the reasons behind these occurrences. In this case we see that to be something - be it "a human" or "a car" or anything else requires us to be "a being" and that that being is in action, is Doing.

 

Therefore: All things are beings and all beings are doing (what Aristotle would have called 'Act') and that if we use a valid analogy the truth behind the 'logic' of the 'ana-logy' is not lost.

 

 

 

Part 4 is on Causation

 

What it takes to Prove that God Exists - (Part 2 of 5): Settling your Differences

I had said I was going to write on "Analogies" in this post but I realized there was something that I had forgotten to factor in to legitimately prove God's existence - Two things - The Law of Noncontradiction, in some ways, aka "Common Sense". I thank my friend Avery for reminding me about that.

Beyond Logic all of us admit to ourselves that 1 ≠ 2. There is no need to prove it, it's self-evident. This self-evident reality boils down to a Principle or Law of Non-Contradiction. Though some mathematician might consider he could find a way to prove that 1 = 2 but the fact is again, common sense. We don't need to arrive to a reasonable conclusion such as "ALL GREEKS ARE MORTAL".

But what is a "Principle" in this case? That's simple, a self-evident proposition. Wikipedia gives a lengthy complicated one, again, but in this case it's an obvious assumption. No one needs to prove to me that 1 ≠ 2 because One cannot also be Two at the same time and in the same way. It's 'Common Sense' as we say today.

What happens when you don't accept this? Ultimately you can't prove God exists...but before considering that you have to accept the fact - or reject the fact - the fact of what is true. You cannot have the coexistence of two opposite truths in one reality. A dog is a dog and not a cat (dog = dog; dog ≠ cat). When truth is rejected we consider that Relativism. You don't have to read the Wikipedia article on Relativism to figure out the validity of 'Truth or False' questions.

Finally, when Relativism enters the sphere of the moral life (which is a separate topic) that is considered 'Moral Relativism'. It is more difficult to accept the principle but - as true is to false, thus so is right to wrong:

True : False :: Right : Wrong

One last factor required to prove God's existence that flows from this entry is that of sincere and honest search for what is true. When there is no real desire to know what is true we end up making the truth maleable to our own whims...which is wrong.

(To be Continued.... Part 3 of 5: Speaking Metaphorically and Analogically)

What it takes to Prove that God Exists - (Part 1 of 5): 'Prove it'

"Prove it!" is something we often hear from the incredulous. But what exactly does it mean to "prove" something?

 

 

 

To prove something means to demonstrate that somethinge exists by evidence or argument.

 

Then what is an argument or evidence? Evidence is something you can give only through the senses, e.g. like when you drive up in your new red Mini Cooper you prove to someone that you have new car. But how exactly can you do that with God? Is it possible?...I think so, but only through an argument.

 

Since the time of Socrates an argument had three parts and three terms. Aristotle wrote his six-part work on Logic called the Organon (wiki article) which since then was considered the basic textbook for Logic until the Industrial Revolution, which while forging a new kind of Logic (Mathematical Logic), nonetheless continued using the same basic principles as those of the Organon.

 

To prove something through an argument you need a syllogism. A syllogism only occurs when there are three notions: a concept, a judgment, and through them a reasoning, in other words an argument.

 

CONCEPT (example: 'All Humans'): To prove a real syllogism you require real concepts but concepts can be validly employed in fiction as well, but the problem is that you're not proving anything...BTW - You need three concepts per syllogism. A sure sign of a bad syllogism is when you have less than or more than three concepts.

 



ALL HUMANS 

 

 

JUDGEMENT (example: "All Humans are Mortal"): It's necessary to put concepts together, and if you want to make it work in reality you need to make sure it's true, and in this case (example) it is. Here below are two judgements.

 

 

ALL HUMANS ARE MORTAL

ALL GREEKS ARE HUMAN



 

REASONING: After stringing together two true judgements we are ready to  create

 an argument (argument=reasoning)...

 

 

ALL HUMANS ARE MORTAL

ALL GREEKS ARE HUMAN

 

therefore, it follows that:

ALL GREEKS ARE MORTAL

 

 

To be Continued...Part 2 of 5 on Analogy



 

 





an Old Favorite Movie

It's been called "Les Mis"...

[Am I supposed to do a spoiler alert here?]

...When I told my confreres, after viewing the film, that "I think I have a new favorite movie" they kindly smiled and left it that. I think they had tears in their eyes too.

I guess it's not just another movie that I have enjoyed in the past (maybe enjoy is not the best word) but just as The Passion of Christ or The Lord of the Rings (all three of them) don't exactly fit within the parameters of a 'common' movie, nor do they reciprocally fit in each other's category. You've heard the question - like trying to figure out What's better? an Apple or an Orange?...etc.

Les Miserables by Victor Hugo is now it its 151st year and I confess despite that amount of time...I have yet to read it yet...let's wait till summer...so this is going to be a look at the musical, not at the book (Sorry!)

Rather than going through a long plot what is most intriguing are the characters and moreover their comparisons. Each of the figures seem to have a 'twin' character which complements and completes their place in the film. There are many different ways to view a movie, in this case the music and cinematography are exceptional. I have made a choice to keep to the characters since they are the ones that remind us of our own lives, they make a story real.

Jean Valjean - Javert

 

 

 The cat and mouse figures of the plot, the two male characters that bring life and resolution throughout the film. The theme proposed by the two in a few words: Justice and Mercy. Javert is the perfect example of Justice. Law for the law's sake is his motto and throughout the catch me if you can flights you discover an unchanging character, one who prays, yet is incapable of revealing a side less menacing, a necessary human warmth.

 

 

The criminal and failure Jean Valjean throws out his old identity through the mercy showed him by the Bishop (which we'll come back to at the end...as did the musical). The New Man is not Valjean-peasant, but Monsieur Le Maire (Mr. Mayor), Factory owner and hometown hero. Having received mercy he gives in kind, even when his own sake and reputation are on the line. Valjean's Mercy changes history.

 

 

 

Fantine - Eponine

 

 

 Can a movie be complete without a heroine? Does truth require feninine genius? I think so. The two female characters bring one essential element that makes life worth living: Love. Love brings life purpose. Fantine, the secret mother of Cosette loses her cover and her job, due to the Hatred of her fellow workers and finds the sad but only way out...prostitution. Valjean comes to her aid but it is too late. She dies leaving her daughter under his care, a sort of marriage of mercy, with Cosette as child. 

 

 

 

 

Eponine, helpless lover of Marius, once discovering that his heart is not for her but for Cosette, not as a mixed up jealous lover, but rescues the Valjeans (Jean and Cosette) from eminent capture. She doesn't stop there, just as Fantine did for Cosette, just so does Eponine do for Marius, offering her beautiful hair for her cause, Marius. Fantine had offered even her teeth. This shows the depths of love, that in some ways goes beyond the bridal, that of the maternal. Spiritual Motherhood is their theme, they live it giving more than just their spirit, they give - as our own mothers do - their own bodies and their lives.

 

 

Marius & Cosette - The Thénardiers

 



Now a couple of couples. The final resolution of the love (and the hatred) throughout the story is the marriage of Marius and Cosette. The marriage takes place in a beautiful palace with beautiful guests. The characters and the scene is juxtaposed by that of The Thénardiers, the first foster parents of Cosette, and owners of the town hotel of filth.

Similar in some respects because of the difficulties both couples have encountered throughout their different lives yet very different in that Cosette and Marius exude a noble graciousness finalized in their gratitude towards their Father, Jean Valjean (found interestingly enough due to The Thénardiers). Gratitude, sign of real love, is the song of their love for one another whereas Greed be is (literally) the song of the Thenardiers.

The Bishop

 

 

The musical ends with the cast - with the exception of Javert - singing their song of revolution. This beautiful film could not have omitted the clearly religious symbol of the Bishop. He was the first to extend his hand of mercy - albeit in what would have been in a difficult moment in French history. Without this Act one of Mercy and Forgiveness the rest of the film could not have happened and the final song, that of revolution, would never have occured.

"To love another person is to see the face of God", Jean Valjean exclaims as the Bishop reaches out to accept him into Heaven. Ultimately, the failure of success as a paradigm is what is asserted, in the end - life is not about successes - but that we les miserables of life, embrace the Mercy of God, which is, in the end, not a song of anger but that of joy.



Writing a blog during Exams...with Writer's Block

After finishing a 3 hour written exam on Philosophical Ethics I have to admit I have Writer's Block...

What I am determined I will not do to overcome it:

- Smoke pot (method used by Writing School of San Francisco)
- Get inebriated (method traditional to Ancient Greeks and Romans)
- Spend hours on Facebook or YouTube
- Get upset
- Admit defeat


What I will do to find inspiration:

- Pray
- Contemplate the beauty of God's Creation
- Read good books
- Have stimulating conversations and meet with good friends
- Smile more