A milestone for me ...

I probably passed this point some time ago. I just now noticed it. But I'm glad I did.

There's some duplication between the followers of both Outside the Asylum and the Impractical Catholic, as well as those who follow on Facebook and those who follow via Twitter. On top of which, some of the followers on Twitter are corporate accounts; who knows who is really paying attention on those?

Nevertheless, today on Twitter I reached the one hundred mark ... which means I most likely have more than one hundred followers. Hooray!

The whole point of blogging, for me, is to hopefully change hearts and minds. If there's one person out there I can bring to Christ — or even just move off center — it'll be worth the hassle. But to find that person, I gotta get my voice out there.

So thanks to those who have stuck with me so far, and who are sharing and re-tweeting my posts! You are great!

Betrayal: treating soldiers like garbage—UPDATED

Over on his fine Patheos blog Why I Am Catholic, my friend and fellow devil-dog Frank Weathers has posted a story from WaPo about the Air Force dumping the cremains of at least 274 American troops in a Virginia landfill. I've already left an angry rant on his combox, as well as posted it on my Facebook page, so I've blown off my initial head of steam.

But I'm still sickened and angry. On behalf of those I served so briefly with, and those in my family who served longer and with honor — especially my great-uncle 1LT Joseph P. Cronin, who lost his life at Montélimar, France, during the "Champagne Campaign" in August 1944, and whom the Army brought home at his parents' request after the war — I feel betrayed.

No. Strike that. Everyone who has ever served, or has known and loved someone who has served — we have all been betrayed.

Could I get a box of 36, please?

... Oh, and could you put it in English, so no one misses a single nuance?

"A REAL MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A REAL ST. NICHOLAS!"

A nation of crybabies?

Not an atheist display ... it's failed art (not my picture)

Over the last few months of blogging, I've tried very hard to become more charitable in what I write, particularly when engaging with certain "discrete minorities" (to use the pet legal phrase). Getting insulted and disrespected by others for shooting off your mouth is a cheap and easy "white martyrdom" ... in fact, to pat yourself on the back with the quote from Matthew 5:11-12 is to demean and devalue the witness of those who really suffer for the faith. So I'm trying not to go out of my way to provoke non-believers and anti-Christians.

But there are times ....

The picture is from a story about the display at the Loudoun County Courthouse in Loudoun, Va., that Matt Archbold at Creative Minority Report reprinted from Weasel Zippers. Matt, among others, thought that it was some bizarre protest against Christmas by atheists; it turns out that it was a bizarre — and very unsuccessful — protest against the commercialization of Christmas by a Christian. As someone quipped, "Just because no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist."

Formal proof: the reliability of the Church

Strictly speaking, this proof is directed only towards Protestants who concede and maintain the infallibility of Scripture. Reliability here is the key word to understanding infallibility: The Catholic Church's teachings in matters of faith and morals can be trusted ... you can rely on them. If you, Mr./Ms. Christian, don't concede or maintain the reliability of either Scripture or Tradition ... then on what do you rely?

Let:

• R = Holy Spirit is reliable (Rom 3:3-4; 2 Tim 2:13).
• G = Holy Spirit guides the Church (Jn 14:26, 16:13).
• C = Church is reliable

Method: Reductio ad absurdum

1.   R                                          P

2.   G                                          P

3.   R • G ⊃ C                             CP

4.   ~C                                        AP

5.   ~( R • G)                               3 & 4 MT

6.   ~R ∨ ~G                                5 DeM

7.   R • ~G     or      ~R • G         6 MImp[*]

8.   ~G           or      ~R               7 Simp

9.   ~G • G     or      ~R • R         1 & 8 or 2 & 8 Conj (Contradiction)

10.   R • G ⊃ C                           3-9 RAA

11. ∴ C                                     1,2 & 10 MP (QED)

Long explanation for the confused:

Reductio ad absurdum, or the Rule of Conditional Proof, is a method of argument that seeks to prove the truth of a conditional argument (“If A, then B”) indirectly, by showing a contradiction derived by assuming that the consequent (the B statement) is false.

From the "Lord Jones Dead" file

Journalism consists mostly of people saying "LORD JONES DEAD" to people who never knew Lord Jones was alive.

— G. K. Chesterton

I was exchanging comments on Twitter with a follower when I came across a subject I hadn't seen before. I clicked the link, and found out that Occupy Denton was shutting down. Here, courtesy of HotAirPundit, is why:

Man Found Dead at Occupy Denton Encampment 

ntdaily

A man was found dead in a tent at a vacant Occupy Denton campsite on UNT campus at about 5 p.m .Saturday.

According to UNT spokesman Buddy Price, the man was believed to be an Occupy Denton participant, and the cause and time of death were unknown at this time. He said no one was at the camp when police arrived on the scene.

Ask Tony: What's wrong with holding hands during the Our Father?

Recently, the bishop of Covington, Ky., Most Rev. Joseph D. Foys, issued a decree in his diocese that has liberal Catholics up in arms and conservatives rejoicing. Of special note is paragraph 4c:

Special note should also be made concerning the gesture for the Our Father. Only the priest is given the instruction to “extend” his hands. Neither the deacon nor the lay faithful are instructed to do this. No gesture is prescribed for the lay faithful in the Roman Missal; nor the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, therefore the extending or holding of hands by the faithful should not be performed [bold type mine].

Strictly speaking, this forbids the practice of laypeople taking the orans (literally "praying") position, where hand are held up and off to the side. But by extension, it also means the congregation is not to hold hands during the Our Father. This is why Bryan Cones, among others, has thrown a nutty about the decree.

Well, what's so bloody wrong with it? Why shouldn't we hold hands as a sign of unity and family?

Deconstructing "Coexist"

I don't own the copyright.

Anything I could say after this would only be lily-gilding.

OHR slaps down Banzhaf silliness

Not often you read about a government agency exercising common sense. Especially when the agency is in Washington DC, whether city or federal. But comes the news from CNA that Georgetown's resident thorn in the paw, law professor John Banzhaf, has been slapped good and hard by Wonderland on the Potomac's Office of Human Rights:

Catholic University single-sex dorm complaint dismissed

By Michelle Bauman

Washington D.C., Dec 1, 2011 / 05:51 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The D.C. Office of Human Rights has dismissed a complaint that The Catholic University of America’s single-sex dorm policy constitutes unlawful discrimination under the district’s Human Rights Act.

“We were confident from the beginning that our actions were entirely legal,” said John Garvey, president of The Catholic University of America, on Nov. 30.

John Banzhaf, a law professor at George Washington University, filed the legal complaint in response to an op-ed that Garvey wrote in the Wall Street Journal in June announcing that the university would be implementing single-sex housing in hopes of fighting binge drinking and hooking up.

On Nov. 29, the D.C. Office of Human Rights issued an order dismissing the complaint, saying that Banzhaf had failed to demonstrate that women under the new policy would lack “equivalent access to educational opportunities” or be subject to “material harm.”

The Office of Human Rights determined that Banzhaf’s arguments were based on “conjecture and speculation” rather than “factual allegations.” [Strike one!]

Banzhaf claimed that women are more frightened by walking alone outside of a single-sex residence hall and that women would be disadvantaged in attempts to network in academic disciplines in which they are a minority.

The order of dismissal noted that some of Banzhaf’s examples were ironically based on stereotypes of “women as the weaker sex,” and that there was no indication the university’s new policy was motivated by “a discriminatory animus against women,” as Banzhaf had contended. [Strike two!]

Banzhaf’s reasoning, the order noted, could also be used to prohibit single-sex restrooms, locker rooms and sports teams, “which would lead to absurd results.” [You're out!]

I wish I could say we've heard the last of Banzhaf. Alas, life doesn't work that way. For one, he still has another complaint with the OHR outstanding; we don't know if they're going to rule on it or simply put it in the circular file. For another, he might just be the type to sue the OHR for career endangerment and libel, and take the discrimination case to federal court anyway despite the negative weight of the ruling.

But for once, human justice has sufficed. And the heavens didn't fall.

From the "Tales of the bazaar" department

Laura Kristi, my cousin Steve Cronin's wife, just posted on Facebook: "Just saw a dude practically sprint out of Whole Foods to light up his cig. I'm confused."

Would that I could cartoon. That would make a lovely sight gag. Like Pamela Anderson putting on a fur coat in her attic, while glancing furtively for hidden paparazzi cameras. (Of course, based on her previous misadventures, she'd probably record it on camera herself; then a hacker would find the file on her computer.)

Doubtless, though, as another person replied, the smoker only worked at Whole Foods. In my experience, the only places where you find the ideologically committed are church offices and New Age crystal shops.

Oh, and abortion mills. ... And the Whatever Studies departments at universities. (Okay, this is beginning to look like Cardinal Ximenez in the Monty Python "Spanish Inquisition" sketches: "Amongst the places you find the ideologically committed are ....")

But still, I had to embroider that mental image. Not only was he smoking while working at Whole Foods, when he got home he put on a polyester suit with fur trim, and had a dinner of milk-fed veal with eggs. But he lit up a joint instead of knocking back a Jack and Coke because marijuana is natural.

Some people call it "hypocrisy"; I call it humanity. In some ways, the unconscious inconsistencies of people — especially the self-righteous — make this world much more interesting.