Every once in a while I am reminded that I (occasionally?) have non-Catholic people reading my posts. I expect there to be anti-Catholic homosexualists scanning the internet as they wage their war against all things Catholic to end up at theologyofdad. They are militant fanatics, thus you expect it. I flip through blogs on 'Blogger,' Google's blog system that links to 'like' blogs when I click 'next' on this blog. Invariably I end up coasting through the often wonderful blogs of my separated brethren. They inspire me, especially to be more 'missionary' in my faith, as so many of them seem to be. Non-Christian blogs are not of much interest to me. Of course, I enjoy all things philosophical, so if an atheist wants to keep up an interesting blog on Nietzsche, or whatever, I'll definitely read that. On the other hand, a blog telling me about the importance of recycling, global awareness, racism, the evils of the G8 or even how great the new iphone is... pass.
But I am writing reflecting on how non-Catholics would take a blog like this. Not that I would change things to accommodate them, but mainly out of interest. Additionally, I want it to be intelligible, thought-provoking and not esoteric. Why? Because I'd like to think that my understanding of the Faith is intelligible, interesting and reasonable.
I'm not the most apostolic kind of guy. This blog is as apostolic as I get. Invite me to give a talk somewhere and I'll go, but I won't propose venues myself. I want to have a good word for the 'outsider,' but I won't go out of my way to speak it. Partially I'm too convinced that we are all outsiders, and so the insider to me (including me) is so pagan and unbelieving that I cannot get too worried about the 'outsider-outsider'; I am preoccupied with the 'insider-outsider.'
I believe the Faith, it seems necessary to add. I believe it is the same thing as the truth. As such, I must conform my life to it. Isn't that important? Isn't it kind of, if not the most important thing, at least the necessary preamble for anything important? If I have understood the Faith wrongly or poorly I am not in an okay state; I am in a bad state, a lamentable state, especially in that there seems to be something I can do about it. I have been given the gift of faith, and it is always for a reason. It seems in every case the gift of faith would presume that God gave it to be rightly understood, and, after that, rightly conveyed.
If I were to follow this logic one step further I'd have to say that the truth itself is made attractive when all these other things are in place. This will sound a little predestinarian, but can it not be reasoned that if this blog is attractive to the outsider that it is on account of the fact that my faith is genuine, well-comprehended and articulated?
Why? Because the outsider has his own problems, like his own lack of desire for the good, his own inability to see the good.
But anyway, you throw the party in hopes that people will come and enjoy themselves. Maybe a name change, then, to: thetheologicalpartyofdad?