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.
Do you believe the Catholic Church teaches doctrinal or dogmatic error?
The short answer is no.
The long answer is that I don’t think the Church has ever infallibly taught doctrinal or dogmatic error — in other words, I do not believe that an ecumenical council, the infallible and extraordinary magisterium of the pope, or the ordinary and universal magisterium of the bishops have ever taught any doctrinal or dogmatic error. I do believe that popes have taught doctrinal error in their ordinary papal magisterium, and I do believe that individual bishops have taught doctrinal error in their ordinary episcopal magisterium.
The problem that arises is that I do not believe that certain teachings are infallible and thus free of error, because these “certain teachings” have not been declared either by an ecumenical council, or by extraordinary papal magisterium, or by the ordinary and universal magisterium of the bishops. Infallible authority is relegated to some of these teachings by Catholic conservatives, but I have never seen any basis for relegating such authority to these teachings and I trust that history will prove me right when the teachings are ultimately corrected.
We sang the same tune at Mass today (I’m in the choir), but it had different lyrics. I was disappointed.
And I agree — that verse is important and ought to be included.
Did you know there’s another verse in the original that’s almost never included in hymnals? It would be the third verse, preceding the one you highlighted. The last half of this verse is probably why we don’t sing it:
“The Church shall never perish!
Her dear Lord to defend,
To guide, sustain, and cherish,
Is with her to the end:
Though there be those who hate her,
And false sons in her pale,
Against or foe or traitor
She ever shall prevail.”
http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/c/h/chofound.htm
It’s a good thing I haven’t forgotten my Latin! You might want to check out an article by Thos. Droleskey I have posted at http://jovan66102.blogspot.com on why the date of the Feast of the Kingship of Christ was changed. It might lead you even more in a Traditional direction. The title of the post is Vivat Rex! Vive le Christ-roi!
Jovan
PS I’m putting your link on my blog.
If this is a dupe, I apologise!
It’s a good thing I haven’t forgotten my Latin! You might want to check out an article by Thos. Droleskey I have posted at http://jovan66102.blogspot.com on why the date of the Feast of the Kingship of Christ was changed. It might lead you even more in a Traditional direction. The title of the post is Vivat Rex! Vive le Christ-roi!
Jovan
PS I’m putting your link on my blog.
Naturally, I think the Reformation brought some good to both sides of the line. Might it not be that different groups of Christians magnify different aspects of God’s character? For instance, it has always struck me that the Roman Catholic Church magnifies His Glory and Majesty, Reformed Presbyterians, His Justice, Pentecostals His Power, and Baptists His Grace. That’s a sample of what I mean, but I’d understand if you wouldn’t agree.
I think your characterization of the Reformation is completely uncalled for. The Second Vatican Council calls other Christians our separated brothers, and you refer to them as heretics.
Heresy means error. They, as you say, separated brethren. What separates them is error. We’ll get no closer to reunification by pretending we don’t each believe we are wrong on some important points.
“Naturally, I think the Reformation brought some good to both sides of the line.”
If the Reformation brought about good, it was in spite of it rather than because of it. Much-needed reforms did take place in the Church during the Counter-reformation. However, the world would have been much better off if those changes had been made without the help of period that brought about division, hatred, and split blood among Christians. I do believe that though Protestants lack a fully sacramental faith that the Holy Spirit is active, to varying degrees, amongst them. I also believe that Protestants have some things to teach the Church. However, I mourn the fact that the Church has lost generations of great minds and souls that could have taught her so much. As an ecumenically minded person, I give a fair amount of slack to modern Protestants. I do not give that same slack to their intellectual ancestors. I have no qualms calling the Reformers heretics. Whatever other great things they said or did, they are responsible for fracturing the Mystical Body of Christ into uncountably many pieces.
the verse isn’t in your hymnal I hope because the editors realise that the Church is one and is not rent by schisms etc! “You know what I mean” you say; I do, but the point is lost on most folk, so it’s as well the verse isnae there.
Actually, I think the real reason it was dropped was because it didn’t fit well with the warm and fuzzy “I’m OK and you’re OK” brand of ecumenism.
So was it by your influence that the highlighted verse was sung yesterday at Mass???
Thanks for the link, Jovan. 🙂
Eric — I know what heresy means, but you know as well as I do what kinds of feelings the word conjures up. It was a completely unnecessary word choice, a word choice that always rekindles that old “us vs. them” mentality that has long since been repudiated. We both know the precise definition of the word, but we also know the definition that the word brings forth — and the two are quite different.
I would also point out that it was our error that initially brought about the schism, our sale of indulgences that initially led to Martin Luther’s Reformation Movement. We are no more free of error in this schism than are our separated brothers and sisters. We are all guilty of dividing Christ’s Church, and we only divide it further by using words like heretic, words that have a clearly pejorative subtext.
There are other ways of expressing disagreement with each other than use of these terms, other much more constructive ways.
“I would also point out that it was our error that initially brought
about the schism, our sale of indulgences that initially led to
Martin Luther’s Reformation Movement. We are no more free of error
in this schism than are our separated brothers and sisters.”
1) Two wrongs don’t make a right.
2) Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
Sorry to resort to cliches, but they’re sometimes useful.
The errors of the Church in the 16th century do not justify the continued separation of Christians from the Church. A great deal of what Protestants believe is error. Pretending otherwise helps nobody.
Personally, I like the ‘new’ placement of Christ the King at the last Sunday of the Year–
A mnemonic of Alpha/Omega–
A reminder that His Kingdom is the ‘end’ of the Church—
And smacking Martin Luther’s revolution anniversary is a VERY faded memory for most RC’s.
1) Two wrongs don’t make a right.
2) Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
1) I agree, but without the first wrong there may never have been a second wrong. And the first wrong was ours.
2) Again, I agree with this. But that doesn’t change the fact that our error was the first contributing factor to the schism.
The errors of the Church in the 16th century do not justify the continued separation of Christians from the Church. A great deal of what Protestants believe is error. Pretending otherwise helps nobody.
I agree that pretending we have no differences with one another is useless, and I also agree that pretending that there is not error on both sides — both sides — is ridiculous. But I don’t think the use of the term heretic is at all helpful. I think I’ve expressed my point in this regard rather well, and I see no point in beating a dead horse.
Do you believe the Catholic Church teaches doctrinal or dogmatic error?
Nathan,
The Church has never approved the sale of indulgences. Anyone who did this was doing so without the blessing of Rome and would himself have been a heretic. See http://ramblinggopsoccermom.blogspot.com/2005/10/get-out-of-hell-free-cards.html for some information, as well as a few links to an authoritative source with imprimatur. Lots of Catholics are mistaken about indulgences, due (at least in my own case) to how the Reformation was portrayed in history text books. In high school, I learned how evil the Catholic Church was during that time and how Luther was such a good man to abandon his vows and cause a schism in the Church that Jesus founded. (No, the books did not say Jesus founded the Church, but He did.)
Anyway, read up on indulgences. They are very misunderstood.
Oh, and at our parish, we did some feel-good song about seeing everyone we know in heaven when we die. And no litany of the saints, either. 😛
I miss singing the really traditional hymns sometimes, ya’ know?
if you read nathan’s blog, you will see that he does indeed believe that the church has promulgated errors in matters of discipline and doctrine. I continue to pray for him, I love him as a brother in Christ, and I hope that he will eventually find the fullness of truth. as a convert myself, the hardest vestige of protestantism to shed is the private interpretation of doctrine, and the most difficult discipline is obedience. been there. wish that I hadn’t been detoured for so long.
Christine — I understand the correct doctrine of indulgences and agree with it. And I do know the difference between actual Catholic doctrine regarding indulgences and how secular history tends to portray them. There’s nothing wrong, in my opinion, with the doctrine of indulgence itself.
With that said, the sale of indulgences was indeed prevalent during Luther’s time. Whether or not it was sanctioned by ecclesiastical authorities, including the pope, is indeed debatable. What can be said with certainty is that even if this behavior was not sanctioned by ecclesiastical authorities, those authorities did turn a blind eye to the sale of indulgences. Indeed, it was the financial corruption of the Church at the time that significantly contributed to the construction of St. Peter’s Basilica.
That the Church’s highest authorities were corrupt during the time of Luther is not a subject that can be debated. Like it or not, we did indeed contribute to the schism.