Baptism

So, I begin to suspect that part of the problem between Catholicism and Orthodoxy on original sin involves baptism. Bear with me, because this is a thought I just had, so it may or may not be coherent to people who are not me at this stage. :)

I've heard baptism described (in Catholicism for Dummies) as a vaccination - but I don't know that that analogy really works. When you get vaccinated, you don't get the disease that you're vaccinated against. Yes, the Flu Shot seems to wreck my issues with this, until you recall that they're about a billion strains of flu, and the Flu Shot only vaccinates against the ones that are felt to be the most prevalent that year. Think more like polio, etc. People don't get those anymore, in places where we vaccinate for them.

So, baptism as vaccination, if we carried that analogy, once baptised, people wouldn't 'get' sin. Clearly, that's not what happens. Though I suppose, now that I've typed it out, the Flu Shot analogy *does* work a little better - baptism only vaccinates against a particular 'strain' of sin - original sin. *However*, as I have been assured by other Catholics, and the Catechism, the Catholic Church teaches that we don't actually inherit the original sin. (I have a bit of news for them, in that apparently most people -including many Catholics- think that the Catholic Church *does* teach that...) In that case, the vaccination analogy *still* doesn't work, because you're vaccinating for a disease that doesn't exist anymore - it's impossible to catch it.

And it's also not like some giant 'reset' button, because if we don't inherit original sin it doesn't wash it away, and it certainly doesn't undo the inherited consequences of original sin... so what, exactly, does baptism do?

I still think baptism makes the most sense as 'circumcision of the soul' - the sign of the new covenant, bringing us in. Baby Jews are circumcised, and also adult converts (which, ouch, you know?) and, in the case of the babies, there's not this 'believe first' element, or they'd wait until the children were older to do it. Instead, they're circumcised, which brings them into the covenant, and then expected to live by it their entire life. They're brought up observing the Law. So, you know, that makes sense to me.

The End of Advent and the Catechism

Advent, sadly, has ended. I say sadly because this is the first Advent that I have known what I am doing, felt the pull of faith in ways I haven't since I was a kid. I really set aside this time to focus on my faith, on God, and on what I am doing here.

I fasted, which as an aside, the Orthodox Church apparently also does during Advent. The fasting...I kept it a secret, except for here on the blog. The point of fasting is not so that everyone can see how holy you are (and if anyone who read this knew me in real life, they'd be on the floor herniating something at the thought of me being 'holy' like that). The point is to sacrifice to God, even if it's just a little something. To focus less on your body, and more on the spirit, which is the whole point of everything, isn't it. I believe this is a personal tradition that I will keep up.

I read religious, faith-filled books. I made my way through Catholicism for Dummies, the Shorter Summa, Rome Sweet Home, Hail, Holy Queen, Interview with an Exorcist (okay, that one not so lofty as the others, but it was interesting!), and the Compendium. I did not, as I suspected I wouldn't, finish the Catechism itself. That's all in four weeks. Plus, it goes without saying, the daily Bible readings.

CFD Sidebar - Satan's Jealousy

This sidebar says that the Catholic belief is that angels have a will, but it is unlike human free will. We can change our minds, back and forth, again and again. Angels, apparently, once they choose, cannot change their minds.

And this makes no sense. They're using it to, apparently, explain how an angel could disobey God. Not just one angel, but thousands (millions?) of them.

I was always raised to believe that angels have no will, they have no choice but to obey God, which is why the rebellion of Satan never made any sense to me. It's always made more sense in the (and this is just my understanding of it) Jewish stance on it, which is that "Satan" is just an angel fulfilling a purpose. A guy doing his job.

After all, if there was no evil, what good would free will do us? We'd have no options? Obey God or obey God? With Satan tempting us, we can exercise the free will that God made a point of creating us with.

And even this explanation makes little sense to me. If an angel can never change his mind, then the original decision to obey God should still hold. None of the angels should have been able to make another choice.

Maybe I'm missing something, but it just doesn't make sense to me.