Two new blog posts.

blog/posts/2020-11-20-christ-was-not-a-revolutionary.cfg

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+filename = 2020-11-20-christ-was-not-a-revolutionary.html
+title = Christ Was Not a Revolutionary
+description = A common phrase that we hear time and time again about Jesus Christ is that He was a revolutionary. However, this is not only erroneous, but can lead to some rather problematic errors.
+created = 2020-11-20
+updated = 2020-11-05

blog/posts/2020-11-20-christ-was-not-a-revolutionary.html

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+<p>"Jesus was a revolutionary", "Jesus Christ's revolutionary message",
+"the Christian revolution." These are phrases we've probably all heard
+before in reference to Jesus Christ and His teachings. Most notably,
+the equivocation of Jesus Christ with any kind of revolutionary spirit
+tends to come from those who wish to change some fundamental Church
+Teaching, and by framing our Lord as a revolutionary, it makes it appear
+that such changes are "what Christ would've done", or indeed possible in
+the first place. Yet, this makes little to no sense, neither biblically
+nor philosophically.</p>
+
+<p>To start, what is a <i>revolution</i>? Well, as the Oxford Dictionary
+would define it, a revolution is: "A forcible overthrow of a government
+or social order, in favour of a new system." In this case, we know
+certainly that our Lord was not trying to overthrow any government. In
+fact, He purposefully avoided titles that would associate Him with the
+political liberation from foreign powers that the people of Israel had
+been hoping for, preferring instead to use the title "Son of Man."
+Therefore, it is clear that if one wishes to imply that Jesus caused
+some kind of revolution, it would be to the social order and not the
+government. But even this is unfounded in any real biblical evidence. In
+fact, it's quite the opposite. Jesus makes clear that His mission is not
+to change or abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them:</p>
+
+<blockquote>
+	"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I
+	have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until
+	heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a
+	letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished."<br />
+	- Matthew 5:17-18 (NRSVCE)
+</blockquote>
+
+<p>However, we do know that Jesus does continuously make efforts to
+correct the Pharisees on their interpretation of the Law. So what does
+this mean? Did Christ lie when He said He had come to fulfill the Law?
+No, it means that, much like many Christians of today, the Pharisees
+held to their own traditions rather than those of God. In their pride,
+they held their own customs to the same standard as the Law given by
+God (or perhaps even higher).</p>
+
+<blockquote>
+	"'You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition.'
+	Then he said to them, 'You have a fine way of rejecting the
+	commandment of God in order to keep your tradition!'"<br />
+	- Mark 7:8-9 (NRSVCE)
+</blockquote>
+
+<p>Therefore, it becomes clear that it was not Jesus Christ who was the
+revolutionary, but the Pharisees. Our Lord came to fulfill the Law which
+the Pharisees had manipulated.</p>
+
+<p>However, even from reason alone we can see how calling Jesus Christ a
+revolutionary is illogical. Jesus Christ is God the Son, who has existed
+since the beginning, eternally with the God the Father. He is also the
+Truth and the Word through which all was made. As God, He is also all
+good, and perfect, and <i>ordered</i>. God cannot contradict Himself,
+otherwise there would be disorder and falsehood. What Christ teaches is
+the same Law with which God created the Universe: Divine &amp; Natural
+Law. These have existed since always, and are prior to any Man-made
+conceptions of law. As such, since Divine &amp; Natural Law precede
+the laws of Men, it would be the laws of Men that are revolutionary, and
+Jesus Christ, who upholds Divine &amp; Natural Law a reactionary or
+counter-revolutionary.</p>
+
+<p>Now, of course, usually the retort is that although all this is
+true, the we say something is revolutionary or not in contrast to the
+anthropological social order, not the metaphysical. But even if we
+accept such an excuse - which I do not - it encourages certain very
+false ideas as to what can and cannot change with regards to Church
+Teaching. Namely that fundamental Church Dogmas &amp; Doctrines can be
+changed, which they cannot. The idea is that if Jesus came and
+<i>revolutionized</i> all that God had revealed to the people of Israel
+prior, then who is to say that teachings cannot be revolutionized again?
+It calls into question the Dogma of the Church that the fullness of
+Divine Public Revelation was received with Jesus Christ, and all we need
+to know for our Salvation is present in Sacred Scripture and Sacred
+Tradition, which are interpreted by the Magisterium of the Church (see
+CCC § 74-87)<sup><a href="#r1" >[1]</a></sup>. As such, even if it is
+just for the sake of avoiding scandal, we must refrain from calling
+Jesus Christ a <i>revolutionary</i>.</p>
+
+<label id="r1" >[1]</label>
+<a
+	   href="https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm"
+	   target="_blank" >
+	   https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm
+</a>

blog/posts/2020-11-26-reverence-for-authority.cfg

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+filename = 2020-11-26-reverence-for-authority.html
+title = Reverence for Authority
+description = Although we still see it as normal and important to show many feelings, such as love, in a physical way, reverence is one that we've depreciated. Yet, perhaps now more than ever, it is absolutely important.
+created = 2020-11-26
+updated = 2020-11-26

blog/posts/2020-11-26-reverence-for-authority.html

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+<p>Some time ago I was at the bar with some of my friends, and the topic
+came up about signs of reverence during the Mass, in particular kneeling
+in order to receive Communion, and the importance of receiving Communion
+on the tongue (as opposed to on the hand). It was at this point that I
+explained my usual bit about both the facilitation of sacrilege to the
+Holiest of Sacraments when Communion in the hand is made common-place,
+but also the possible scandal that can occur for an observer who may be
+doubting the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist. I suspect,
+however, that my explanations did little good and were not too
+convincing. Not because there was any flaw in my reasoning, nor because
+my friend was incapable of understanding it, but because I had
+completely missed what he was truly asking: why is reverence to
+authority - in particular the highest authority which is Jesus Christ -
+so important? In particular, he had asked about <i>physical</i>
+reverence. I will go over this here, although I hope to have the chance
+to bring it up to him as well sometime in the near future.</p>
+
+<p>To start, I would like to make some semantic clarifications with
+regards to the term "reverence". Reverence is always something that is
+demonstrated outwardly, because on its own it is not a feeling as
+respect is, but rather it is the outward demonstration of respect. Hence
+I do not enjoy referring to <i>physical</i> reverence, since reverence
+is in itself <i>physical</i> in the sense that it is always demonstrated
+outwardly. This is true not only in English (the language in which I am
+writing this article), but also in Spanish (the language in which I was
+speaking with this friend). Therefore, reverence is always a display of
+respect, but not the respect itself.</p>
+
+<p>So why then must we demonstrate respect outwardly? Why must we
+<i>revere</i> our authorities, and most importantly the highest of all
+authorities, Jesus Christ? Especially in the case of Jesus, does He not
+know of our respect for Him that we hold in our hearts? Why does He need
+us to show Him reverence?</p>
+
+<p>To answer this, I'd say it's important to ask why we outwardly
+demonstrate any kind of emotion. For it is not only respect that we
+should demonstrate outwardly. Take love as an example. When we truly
+love someone - parents, siblings, children, one's spouse, friends, etc.
+- it is of no doubt to anyone that we should show our love in a physical
+manner; we embrace them, we kiss them, we hold their hands through tough
+times, and we throw our arms around their shoulder, we give them kind
+words of encouragement or words of correction when they make mistakes.
+Why? Does a mother not know that her child loves her? Do children not
+know they are loved by their parents? It is because our feelings are
+worth nothing if not expressed in our words and our actions. And even
+the tiniest of gestures of affection can make the biggest
+difference.</p>
+
+<p>So returning to the topic of reverence, we must show reverence for
+our Lord because, just like love, our respect for Him is worth nothing
+if we keep it to ourselves. He knows what we hold in our hearts, but if
+that is truly what we hold for Him, then we should be looking for every
+excuse to show Him those feelings, whether in private or in public, in
+small or big ways.</p>
+
+<p>Therefore, every time you go to a church, or pray a Rosary, or the
+Liturgy of the Hours, or in any way address our Lord, take a bow, take a
+kneel. Show Him and all those around you that Christ is the Lord and
+deserving of the highest reverence, above that of any king, for He is
+King of kings. All nations, all creatures, all authorities shall bow
+down before Him. And perhaps most importantly, when during the Mass you
+go up to receive the Holiest of Sacraments, the Corpus Christi, if there
+is nothing impeding you, kneel to receive our Lord. Whether or not you
+receive Communion on the tongue, you can always receive Him
+kneeling.</p>