About Funky Dung
Who is Funky Dung?
29-year-old grad student in Intelligent Systems (A.I.) at the University of Pittsburgh. I consider myself to be politically moderate and independent and somewhere between a traditional and neo-traditional Catholic.
I was raised Lutheran, spent a number of years as an agnostic, and joined the Catholic Church at the 2000 Easter Vigil.
Why Funky Dung?
I haven't been asked this question nearly as many times as you or I might expect. Funky Dung is a reference to an obscure Pink Floyd song. On the album Atom Heart Mother, there is a track called Atom Heart Mother Suite. It's broken up into movements, like a symphony, and one of the movements is called Funky Dung. I picked that nickname a long time ago (while I was still in high school I think), shortly after getting an internet connection for the first time. To me it means "cool/neat/groovy/spiffy stuff/crap/shiznit", as in "That's some cool stuff, dude!"
Whence Ales Rarus?
I used to enjoy making people guess what this means, but I've decided to relent and make it known to all. Ales Rarus is a Latin play on words. "Avis rarus" means "a rare bird" and carries similar meaning to "an odd fellow". "Ales" is another Latin word for bird that carries connotations of omens, signs of the times, and/or augery. If you want to get technical, both "avis" and "ales" are feminine (requiring "rara", but they can be made masculine in poetry (which tends to breaks lots of rules). I decided I'd rather have a masculine name in Latin. ;) Yeah, I'm a nerd. So what? :-P
Wherefore blog?
It is my intention to "teach in order to lead others to faith" by being always "on the lookout for occasions of announcing Christ by word, either to unbelievers . . . or to the faithful" through the "use of the communications media". I also act knowing that I "have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors [my] opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and [I] have a right to make [my] opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward [my and their] pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons." (adapted from CCC 904-907)
Statement of Faith
I have been baptized and confirmed in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I, therefore, renounce Satan; I renounce all his works; I renounce all his allurements.
I hold and profess all that is contained in the Apostles' Creed, the Niceno- Constantinopolitan Creed, and the Athanasian Creed.
Having been buried with Christ unto death and raised up with him unto a new life, I promise to live no longer for myself or for that world which is the enemy of God but for him who died for me and rose again, serving God, my heavenly Father, faithfully and unto death in the holy Catholic Church.
I am obedient to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. That is, I promote and defend authentic Catholic Teaching and Faith in union with Christ and His Church and in union with the Holy Father, the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of St. Peter.
Thanks be unto Thee, O my God, for all Thy infinite goodness, and, especially, for the love Thou hast shown unto me at my Confirmation. I Give Thee thanks that Thou didst then send down Thy Holy Spirit unto my soul with all His gifts and graces.
May He take full possession of me for ever.
May His divine unction cause my face to shine.
May His heavenly wisdom reign in my heart.
May His understanding enlighten my darkness.
May His counsel guide me.
May His knowledge instruct me.
May His piety make me fervent.
May His divine fear keep me from all evil.
Drive from my soul, O Lord, all that may defile it.
Give me grace to be Thy faithful soldier, that having fought the good fight of faith, I may be brought to the crown of everlasting life, through the merits of Thy dearly beloved Son, our Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen.
Behind the Curtain: an Interview With Funky Dung (Thursday, March 03, 2005)
I try to avoid most memes that make their way 'round the blogosphere (We really do need a better name, don't
we?), but some are worth participating in. Take for instance the "interview game" that's the talk o'
the 'sphere. I think it's a great way to get to know the people in neighborhood. Who are the people in your
neighborhood? In your neighborhod? In your neigh-bor-hoo-ood...*smack* Sorry, Sesame Street flashback.
Anyhow, I saw Jeff "Curt Jester"
Miller's answers and figured since he's a regular reader of mine he'd be a good interviewer. Without
further ado, here are my answers to his questions.
1. Being that your pseudonym Funky Dung was chosen from a Pink Floyd track on Atom Heart Mother, what is you
favorite Pink Floyd song and why?
Wow. That's a tuffy. It's hard to pick out a single favorite. Pink Floyd isn't really a band known for
singles. They mostly did album rock and my appreciation of them is mostly of a gestalt nature. If I had to
pick one, though, it'd be "Comfortably Numb". I get chills up my spine every time I hear it and if
it's been long enough since the last time, I get midty-eyed. I really don't know why. That's a rather
unsatisfying answer for an interview, so here are the lyrics to a Rush song. It's not their best piece of music,
but the lyrics describe me pretty well.
New World Man
He's a rebel and a runner
He's a signal turning green
He's a restless young romantic
Wants to run the big machine
He's got a problem with his poisons
But you know he'll find a cure
He's cleaning up his systems
To keep his nature pure
Learning to match the beat of the old world man
Learning to catch the heat of the third world man
He's got to make his own mistakes
And learn to mend the mess he makes
He's old enough to know what's right
But young enough not to choose it
He's noble enough to win the world
But weak enough to lose it ---
He's a new world man...
He's a radio receiver
Tuned to factories and farms
He's a writer and arranger
And a young boy bearing arms
He's got a problem with his power
With weapons on patrol
He's got to walk a fine line
And keep his self-control
Trying to save the day for the old world man
Trying to pave the way for the third world man
He's not concerned with yesterday
He knows constant change is here today
He's noble enough to know what's right
But weak enough not to choose it
He's wise enough to win the world
But fool enough to lose it ---
He's a new world man...
2. What do you consider your most important turning point from agnosticism to the Catholic Church.
At some point in '99, I started attending RCIA at the Pittsburgh Oratory. I mostly went to ask a lot of
obnoxious Protestant questions. Or at least that's what I told myself. I think deep down I wanted desperately
to have faith again. At that point I think I'd decided that if any variety of Christianity had the Truth, the
Catholic Church did. Protestantism's wholesale rejection of 1500 years of tradition didn't sit well with me,
even as a former Lutheran.
During class one week, Sister Bernadette Young (who runs the program) passed out thin booklet called "
Handbook for Today's Catholic". One paragraph
in that book spoke to me and I nearly cried as I read it.
"A person who is seeking deeper insight into reality may sometimes have doubts, even about God himself.
Such doubts do not necessarily indicate lack of faith. They may be just the opposite - a sign of growing faith.
Faith is alive and dynamic. It seeks, through grace, to penetrate into the very mystery of God. If a
particular doctrine of faith no longer 'makes sense' to a person, the person should go right on seeking. To
know what a doctrine says is one thing. To gain insight into its meaning through the gift of understanding is
something else. When in doubt, 'Seek and you will find.' The person who seeks y reading, discussing,
thinking, or praying eventually sees the light. The person who talks to God even when God is 'not there' is
alive with faith."
At the end of class I told Sr. Bernadette that I wanted to enter the Church at the next Easter vigil.
3. If you were a tree what kind of, oh sorry about that .. what is the PODest thing you have ever
done?
I set up
WikiIndex, a clearinghouse for reviews
of theological books, good, bad, and ugly. It has a long way to go, but it'll be cool when it's finished. :)
4. What is your favorite quote from Venerable John Henry Newman?
"Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt."
5. If you could ban one hymn from existence, what would it be?
That's a tough one. As a member of
the Society for a Moratorium on the Music of
Marty Haugen and David Haas, there are obviously a lot of songs that grate on my nerves. If I had to pick
one, though, I'd probably pick
"Sing
of the Lord's Goodness" by Ernie Sands.
Firstly, I don’t really buy that argument. My sense is that parents fawn over their children far more than they have in the past. My parents were raised by their surroundign communities to a far greater degree than my friends and I were.
Also, the factory reproducing would resolve the issue of faltering population in the industrialized words.
Fawning over your child is not the same thing as abdicating the duty of raising your child and handing him or her over to the state at the age of five to be brainwashed. I know plenty of parents who fawn over their children obscenely, but clearly because they have given up the responsibility of actually raising their children, so showering them with affection is all they have left.
Children are not human beings in our society. They are potential workers to the government, they are objects of pride and adoration to their parents, and they are infantilized by both; the government keeps them dull and docile with standardized, regulated “education” while parents keep them emotionally immature with all their fawning.
But nowhere nowhere in the mainstream media, in cafe chatter, in the highways and byways of ordinary life do you see Americans suggesting that the problem with our educational system is that it exists at all, or that the reason why their children aren’t moving out until they’re 35 is because they’ve made them into emotional retards. Why not? Because Americans have bought — hook, line, and sinker — into the idea that state-funded, centralized, standardized education can only be good (science and technology; foreign competition; a hundred other vague factors, you know) and that there could never be anything wrong with fawning over your child.
Yes, parents fawn over their children too much. And then when their little angel gets into trouble at school or with the law, they deny that it could have happened. How many times have I read the idiotic ranting of some deluded, fool mother declaring that her little angel could not possibly have knocked off that liquor store and shot that cop? (Or hit that other little boy, or talked back to that teacher, or forgotten to do his homework . . . )
I, for one, am tired of schools blaming parents, parents blaming schools, and everybody blaming the government. There is only one problem in this country and it boils down to this:
People no longer believe they should be responsible for the consequences of their actions.
Also, now that I have a little more time to comment further, I would resist the unqualified appellation of “pro-family.” Where most people who take up that standard are unabashed, uncritical receivers of what they take to be a dying tradition, I see the family in its “traditional” mode to be plenty dysfunctional in its own right and am not willing simply to give it free reign as the solution to anyone’s problems.
The idea of the sanctity of the family, especially as espoused (pun intended?) by many of the religious “pro-family” ranks, is just as dangerous as the idea of unmitigated individualism that always wins out over self-sacrifice to loved ones. The unbreakable shell of the family and parental authority have been invoked by many people, particularly religious ones, again and again to allow their use and abuse of children.
Ultimately, I think my position is much better characterized by the last sentence of my previous comment than by the claim that I am somehow “pro-family.” People no longer believe they should be responsible for the consequences of their actions even when those consequences are positive responsibilities like loving and caring for other people, be they children or spouses.
Peter, you usually make sense, but it is not terribly common that I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with you. But this:
Children are not human beings in our society. They are potential workers to the government, they are objects of pride and adoration to their parents, and they are infantilized by both; the government keeps them dull and docile with standardized, regulated “education†while parents keep them emotionally immature with all their fawning.
… is sheer poetry. I think Katrina, of recent memory, is another example demonstrating just how infantile and dependent folks in the Decadent West have become: the Federal Gov’t should have been there for us… and now we need the Federal Gov’t to investigate and figure out why the Federal Gov’t wasn’t there to help us. I cannot help but wonder (i’m no expert) whether there wasn’t an eerily similar moral and social “softening” among the Romans in their last days.