Why is it that if a person is taking a test and there are two possible answers and the person guesses at the answer, they usually get it wrong? It should be a 50-50 chance of getting it correct but, it never works out that way. In the Navy we had a saying, we called it 50-50-90. When you had to come up with an either/or answer, you had a 50-50 chance of being wrong 90% of the time.
I was playing Texas Hold'm over my Independence Day vacation. I entered a tournament with my Dad and brother at the local Indian casino. It was a horrible tournament with lots of dumb rules. I made the final table and was playing very well. Suddenly, my 50-50-90 curse struck! I was in early position and went all-in (ten times the blind) with pocket Kings, I was called by the small blind who had pocket 9's. Everyone else folded. I had about a 90% chance of winning. I lost when he flopped a third 9. Bad luck is one thing, but for that guy to even give me any action was crazy. I don't mind being unlucky, but to be unlucky against someone who doesn't know how to play or bet just drives me up the wall. Two days later we had the annual family Hold em tournament. It's a friendly family game between uncles, brothers, dads, cousins, nephews, aunts, moms, grandparents/children. A nice relaxing game that pays the top three at a 50-30-20 rate. The champion pocketed about $120.00. I went from being chip leader to being out because of two bad beats. Both times the person (my nephew) filled an inside straight to beat my better hand. The second time he got runner runner!! I'm cursed! But it was fun, I don't mind losing to family, and he was pretty happy.
The temperature was 100+ in the shade every day. We spent lots of time sitting under shade drinking Corona's and eating barbeque. The kids had a blast playing in water all day and running around "Grandmother's". Bed time was usually 11:00 pm, that was when the kids finally got tired. Also, 11:00 pm was when the temperature finally got below 90 degrees. My boy and his cousin, who is about a year older, made their first independant trip to the local convenience store together. The store is in sight and about 3 blocks away. My brother and I sent them on a mission with the wagon. They were to retrieve 10 bags of ice. We gave them about $5.00 more than the price of the ice and told them they could do what they want with the change. They came back 30 minutes later with 10 bags of ice, 3 bags of marbles, a bag of water balloons, and a bag of chips. They were very pleased with themselves. We were pleased with them also.
Finally, I was presented with the temptation of getting in to a theology debate over the perpetual virginity of Mary. My folks have a friend who, as I understand, was raised Catholic but is now in some type of Pentacostal style church. She had a question for my Dad regarding the subject because she was reading a book that stated Catholics believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary. She was simply wondering if the book was accurate. I was called over to field the question. (GETTING SIDETRACKED HERE) You see, since my reversion to the Catholic Church, which involved lots of study of doctrine and theology, I can't be around my family without being asked faith/doctrine questions. Some of my relatives refer to me as "St. Pyro" or " The Deacon". I guess because of how serious I am about practicing the Catholic faith. Sometimes I'm asked questions because there is a sincere desire to understand, sometimes it's because the questioner wants to have a debate. In the past I enjoyed feeding either motivation. Now I choose not to debate, though I want to with every fiber of my being. But I do answer the seeking information questions (END OF SIDETRACK). So this person asks if the perpetual virginity of Mary is a true Catholic doctine. I told her that it was, and that it wasn't just Catholic "doctrine" but that it was Orthodox doctrine as well. I even informed her that Martin Luther and other Protestant Reformers professed it. She then countered with the "fact" from Scripture that Mary had other children (in fact Scripture never discusses Mary having other children, it refers to some other individuals as being the "brothers/bretheren" (english translation) of Jesus). I mentioned that two of the four "brothers" were named elsewhere in scripture as the sons of a different Mary and Clopas or Alphaeus. I began to explain the correlation between the Old Testament Ark of the Covenant and Mary as the New Testament "fulfillment" of the Ark of the Covenant. She wasn't interested and stated that as a faithful Jewish woman she would have done her duty and had other children with her husband. I then disengaged and ended with restating that what she read in her book was accurate and that yes Catholic teaching was that Mary was a perpetual virgin.
It's difficult to address any question about theology without first exploring the topic of authority. Does authority exclusively reside in individual interpretation of Scripture? Is authority shared between a divinely established ecclesial heirarchy and Scripture? Is it possible for an individual to be wrong in their personal theological conclusions derived from studying Scripture? Is it possible for a divinely established ecclesial heirarchy to be wrong when declaring theological truths? Exactly what did Jesus mean when he said "...the Spirit... will guide you into all truth..." John 16: 13.
I understand the difficulty with Mary. When I was away from the Church, I learned to have difficulty with Marian doctrine and the Communion of Saints. For me, I had to understand from where authority came. Only after a person gets a firm understanding of authority can they begin to fully explore all of God's revelation. To fully understand authority requires a trip through Christian history. It's not enough to read what is accepted now by (some) Christians as authoritative Scripture. A person needs to understand how the earliest Christians viewed Sacred Scripture. How they lived their faith life. How they operated in community. How they cooperated with eachother. How they interacted with those outside their communion. How they recognized and dealt with error within the communion of believers. And what they meant when they wrote things down, such as the Apostle's Creed.
Curiously, my folk's friend didn't dwell long on Scripture. She sidestepped the fact that some of the examples of Jesus' "brothers" were elsewhere in Scripture referred to as children of different parents. She began using the extra biblical argument that as a good Jewish wife she would have been having lots of additional children with Joseph after Jesus' birth.
Since I didn't want to argue I didn't try to help her explore the inconsistancy with her tactic. As good Jews, why would Jesus and Mary and John have set up that unorthodox arangement for her care after Jesus' death? Where and when exactly did the duty of a wife in the covenant (old and new) get changed from being fruitful and open to life, to practicing artificial birth control to limit the size of a family? I'm glad she's open to viewing faith matters through the wide lense of cultural conditions, historical context, Scriptural exegisis, and doctrinal continuity. But there needs to be consistency in such things.
When a person looks back through history and researches the pedigree of certain doctrines and beliefs they begin to see just how "Catholic" the Church was since the beginning. And they see just how innovative recent Christian traditions are when they profess things such as Mary and Joseph having many other children.
Blessed Mary, ever virgin, pray for us and lead us to your Son our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Pyro
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
