"Why Evolution and Creation Cannot Contradict Each Other"

That's the title of one of the headings in a smashingly good post by Mike Flynn entitled "The Evolution of Evolution".

Check thou it out.

Who's Afraid of Halloween?

In the original version of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (or rather, in the original version of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) the entry for Earth consisted of one word: "Harmless".

In the revised edition, it was amended to: "Mostly harmless".

Much the same could be said of the evolution of my attitude toward Halloween.

When I was a lad, I can't recall having any awareness that Halloween was about anything other than innocent fun.

Then, at some point in childhood, I remember hearing some news report around Halloween time about Devil's Night in Detroit. That's not good, I thought.

And now, for the past several years, I've grown increasingly aware of the impossible-to-miss anti-Halloween sentiment among many Christians, both Catholic and Protestant.

This astounds me.

To be sure, the rampant commercialization of Halloween is not exactly a crowning cultural achievement, and there are ample examples of costumes that one would be hard pressed to argue are not imprudent to wear (for one of various reasons).

But to argue that any sort of observance of Halloween per se is wrong is not a little ridiculous, especially considering that Halloween is, yea, a Christian holiday -- and, even more specifically, a Catholic holiday.

I'd be hard pressed to come up with any clearer thoughts on the day than those Sean Dailey articulates here:

Anyway, today is Halloween, a most glorious holiday. A good Catholic holiday, for this is the day that we honor the age-old truth that the devil, like all who are besotted with pride, cannot stand being mocked. So we mock him, with silly costumes and mischievous pranks and door-to-door begging, and have a wild old time doing so. Tomorrow we go to Mass to honor the saints in the Church Triumphant and ask their intercession for us in the Church Militant; and we will spend the rest of November offering up suffrages for the poor souls in Purgatory -- the Church Suffering. But tonight, we celebrate our mortality ... while not forgetting that even in death we retain hope in the Resurrection.

Today I also came across an eminently sensible article by Helen Hull Hitchcock that is well worth a read. Therein, she offers some historical background about Halloween customs and traditions, and thoughtfully addresses some of the common prudential concerns many Christian parents have regarding Halloween.

Perhaps needless to say, our kids will be going trick-or-treating tomorrow night, because, as Hitchcock rightly points out, it's simply "fun".

And I should also point out that they are also participating this year in what is commonly offered by many Catholic parents as an "alternative" to Halloween: to wit, a Saints Party.

I'm planning to post pictures of them in both sets of costumes next week.

[Cross-posted at Catholic Dads]

I.D. Theory

“Catholics agree about everything. It is only everything else they disagree about.” —G.K. Chesterton

Ever since Expelled came out, I've wanted to throw in my $.02 on evolution/intelligent design/creationism, but am only getting around to it now.

Family obligations being what they are, and given my reluctance to spend money if I Don't Absolutely Have To, I haven't yet seen the movie. I'm sure I'd like it, and I hope to see it at some point, as I'm told there are are some priceless exchanges between Ben Stein and the humorless Richard Dawkins.

Regardless, what intrigues me about Expelled — and about ID theory generally — is that for growing numbers of Christians (conservative Evangelical Protestants especially, and Catholics, to a somewhat lesser extent, I would say), ID theory seems to be on the Non-Negotiables List.

It ought not be.

I'm no scientist, but I find it regrettable when Christians (of any stripe) wail and gnash their teeth at the very mention of the word "evolution", as if the very notion of evolution per se is necessarily inimical to belief.

It's not. (Cf. Pope Pius XII's Humani Generis and Pope John Paul II's 1996 Message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences: on Evolution.)

What also intrigues me is that there are not a few orthodox Catholics who are very critical of intelligent design theory. Case in point, Gonzaga philosophy professor Michael Tkacz, a Thomist, who offers an instructive primer on Thomistic criticism of ID theory here [HT: Mark Shea].

Ultimately, as with most every issue on which Holy Mother Church allows her children a great degree of ideological latitude, I don't have a dog in this fight. But I continue to be fascinated by those much wiser than I who are duking it out on these most important questions.

Massive Creation

From The New Liturgical Movement, via Sean Dailey:

The music in New York and at Vespers in Washington at the Shrine is forward looking and impressive. It seems impossible that at the Pope's April 17th Mass in Wasington, D.C., that anyone could possibly schedule The Mass of Creation by Marty Haugen,: the Sanctus, the "Great Amen," and Agnus Dei. Composed in 1984 (I think), with obvious Broadway influence and overdone melodrama, it has been an unrelenting presence in parishes all over the country. In fact, it is legendarily over used, in every season, again and again and again, so much so that these parts of the Mass sometimes seems like the movie Groundhog Day.

In all honesty, I can't bring myself to get worked up about this.

Although it might scandalize some St. Blog's hangers-on, I actually don't mind some of Marty Haugen's music—including "Mass of Creation".

There. I said it.

One thing I will say, though, is that this reference prompted me to recall my favorite "Mass of Creation" anecdote:

My college choir director once told me about a wedding he attended, the music for which included "Mass of Creation" — only in the program it was rendered "Massive Creation by Marty Haugen".

Apparently they had only hitherto heard "Mass of Creation" spoken and never seen it in print.

Now, whenever I hear or see the words "Mass of Creation", I can't help but chuckle.

How to Address Our In-Laws

I just posted the following on Catholic Dads and figured I might as well post it here too:

A few weeks ago, the Dutchman posted an entry titled "My 'Mister' Problem" in which he opined that teaching our children and their peers to address adults by Mr. and Mrs. is "not a matter of preference, but an attempt to maintain the very fabric of society!"

I'm generally inclined to agree with him on this score, and posted a comment indicating as much.

The Dutchman's post touches closely on another matter that I hadn't thought at the time to mention in the comments section, and it seems to me it's worth its own post — to wit, how to address one's in-laws.

I address my wife's parents as Mom and Dad; ditto my wife for my parents.

I feel very strongly that one should address one's spouse's parents in this way. Yet I don't personally know anyone else who does so. (I should note that my mom and dad addressed each other's parents in this way, but my grandparents are all long since deceased.)

I also don't personally know of anyone who addresses his in-laws by Mr. and Mrs.

Instead, it seems to me that the default setting, if you will, for referring to one's in-laws is by their first names.

This I find loathsome. Presumably, the Dutchman would agree with me. Anyone else? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

I'm very curious to hear the thoughts of others out there in Catholic Dads-Land:

How do you address your in-laws?

Also, on a closely related matter:

How would you prefer (insist?) your future sons/daughters-in-law address you?

Mr. and Mrs.

Over at Catholic Dads, The Dutchman has a post with which I can readily relate. Titled "My 'Mister' Problem", it begins thusly:

I was raised to call adults “Mister —” and never to call them by their first names. (This rule was so strictly enforced that, even though I am 47 years old, I still call a man I met as a child “Mister Roeser” and probably always will!) I have maintained this practice, insisting that children address me as “Mister Schultz” and that my children address adults the same way. My wife claims that I am being “inconsistent.” She says that I must chose from between two “consistent” positions...

Read the rest here.

My $.02:

I too was raised to call adults Mr. and Mrs., and I am forever grateful to my parents for having done so.

However, this was a normative thing, as there were a (very) small number of adults—specifically, friends of the family—I knew who wanted to be called by their first names, in which case my parents didn't mind that I did so.

As for other children addressing me by my first name, I'm not a fan at all, but I'm not so sure there's a one-size-fits-all approach to, if you will, "enforcing" my preference.

In some cases, some friends of mine have referred to me as "John" in the presence of their (very young) child, and I've said to the child with a smile—and with what I hope is not the slightest bit of nose-in-the-air style sarcasm—"But you can call me Mr. Jansen". This, I've found, usually seems to get the point across to child and parent alike.

My wife and I both agree strongly that our children should not address adults by their first names only. Our kids call many of our friends Mr. and Mrs., but for those who really don't like to be called Mr. and Mrs., we ask them if it's OK to have our kids call them, say, Aunt or Uncle [First Name], or Mr. or Miss [First Name].

We've yet to meet an adult who has objected to this.

All Hallows Eve

There are some who argue that it's imprudent, perhaps even wrong, to celebrate Halloween.

To such as these I say: Pish posh.

I haven't the time to write an eloquent defense — or, for that matter, even an ineloquent defense — of the thoroughly Catholic celebration of Halloween, but I don't have to.

Sean Dailey, Mark Shea, and Rod Bennett already have.

What I will include, though, is a picture of our pamilya at a Halloween party on Saturday night, at which, I am proud to say, we won the prize for the "Best Group Costume":



All six of us were characters from the Hundred Acre Wood: Teresa was Rabbit, Cecilia was Winnie the Pooh, Lucy was Tigger, Jocelyn was Kanga, Joey was Roo (who, as a baby kangaroo, is a joey—how cool is it that his costume was his name?), and I was Christopher Robin.

The Trouble With Harry (Or Is It Much Ado About Nothing?)

Just about everybody has an opinion on Harry Potter. Except me, that is.

I've not read any of the Harry Potter books, mostly because literature of that genre just doesn't do anything for me.

That said, I don't -- nay, can't -- have an opinion of my own on the books.

Unless you've been living under a rock, you're well aware that there are not a few Christians (whether Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant) who don't like Harry Potter -- to say the least -- and who believe that the books are inherently anti-Christian. People like this lady.

However, considering the number of good Catholics I know who love the books -- including my co-worker Eric Scheidler, who is smarter than the average bear when it comes to matters literary -- it flummoxes me when folks work themselves into a lather arguing that HP is evil.

Methinks Mark Shea said it best:

Look. De gustibus, y'all. Nobody says you have to like the books. But the notion that those of us who do are agents of Satan is just stupid. Even stupider is to lie (as Lifesite News did) that Pope Benedict condemns the books or (acting on that lie) to imagine that stealing and lying for Christ is a brave act on behalf of Holy Church. Such behavior just disgraces the gospel.

Mark also offers a plug for Nancy Brown's new book, The Mystery of Harry Potter: A Catholic Family Guide.

Maureen Wittmann offers an eminently sane response here to some of the vicious personal attacks that have been brought against Nancy recently, and in a comment on the Mark Shea post I linked to above, she offers this equally sane comment:

One thing I find terribly disturbing is this new trend to compare HP readers to abortionists. I'm hearing and reading this in many different places.

Much like libs comparing Bush and everyone else they dislike to Hitler lessens the very real horror of the holocaust, this new tactic of making HP out to be as evil as abortion lessens the absolute evil of abortion.

If, as she claims to be noticing, there is an emerging trend among HP opponents to compare HP fans to abortionists...well, that's just flippin' weird, man.

When I See Press Releases with Titles Like This...

The Pope Should Take a Stand on Creation

...it reminds me why it's so absolutely important to have a Non-Negotiables List.

And why evolution doesn't belong on it.