Within The Garden

An Introduction to the Question of Women's Ordination

2010-11-11T09:44:00.001-08:00

Often students will come to me or others here at St. John’s desiring quick answers to questions that demand a more prolonged reflection than expected. The question of women and ordination is one such occasion. As we now live in a world of instant gratification, our inclination is to insist that our needs and concerns be addressed as swiftly as possible, and we miss sight of the fact that speed almost always reduces quality. St. Francis de Sales wrote in his Introduction to the Devout Life, “the slow cure is the sure cure.” A quick treatment of what ails us (be it for the body, the mind, or the soul) is frequently an incomplete treatment and seldom a lasting remedy. If we sincerely desire truth, we should yearn for the fullness of its meaning and invest in a deep exploration of it, and we should never permit the transmission of truth to be agitated and compromised by the impatience of others.

That being said, every exploration requires a beginning, so when it comes to the question of why priestly ordination cannot be imparted on women, I offer the following as a humble introduction, with all the brevity I can muster:

I. From the Testimony of Revelation

It is clear from the biblical testimony that Jesus willed that only men be among the body of his apostles. The early church continues this practice and asserts it as a matter faith and respect for Christ’s will. If Christ instituted his priesthood, willing that it be reserved for men alone, the will of the Divine Savior must be echoed in the will of the Church in full purity. In other words, “the Church ‘does not consider herself authorized to admit women to priestly ordination’” as a matter of simple obedience to Christ’s will and authority. These words, expressed by Pope Paul VI and reiterated in John Paul II’s apostolic letter, ordinatio sacerdotalis, express the fact that the Church’s authority is derived from and depends on unity with Christ’s sovereign authority. As such, the Church simply has no power to autonomously alter what Christ authoritatively institutes. Just as the Church has no authority, right, or power to change the sacramental sign chosen by Christ for baptism from water to rose petals or that of the Eucharist from bread to corn chips, so also the Church enjoys no authority, right, or power to change the sacramental sign chosen by Christ in Holy Orders, that being a human male.

II. From the Humanity of Jesus

This brings us to another level in the Church’s response – the priesthood as a particular “sign” of Christ, liturgically. When God the Son came into the world and assumed a humanity as his own, there were two possible expressions of this humanity – masculinity or femininity. “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (john 1:14) and took on our common humanity but as bearing the character of the masculine. On multiple occasions, Jesus then refers to himself as the “bridegroom” (Mark 2:19-20; Luke 5:34-35; John 3:29) and offers a parable about himself using a bridegroom as the allegorical representation of himself (Matt 25:1-10). In doing so, he reveals that his fundamental disposition toward the Church is that of a husband toward a bride. Indeed, St. Paul adds in his discourse to the Church in Corinth, “I betrothed you to Christ to present you as a pure bride to her one husband” (2 Cor. 11:2) and St. John also continues the image of Jesus as “husband” to the Church and the Church as “the Bride, the wife of the Lamb” (Rev 21:2, 9; 19:6-8).

The Catholic belief of the priesthood is not that it is a mere occupation but that the grace of ordination imparts a reconfiguration of one’s being, so that “the priest truly acts in the person of Christ (in persona Christi)” as St. Cyprian attested in the 3rd century. The priest then functions as both the “sign” and medium of Jesus’ ministry to the Church as Bridegroom. Just as Christ’ humanity was the “image” of his divinity (Col 1:15), so also the humanity of the priest is the “very image” of Christ’s humanity when Christ exercises his ministry within the sacraments (inter insigniores, n.5). “He [the priest] represents Christ, who acts through him.” As signs must have a natural resemblance to what they are signifying, the masculinity of Christ’s ministry must be represented through a corresponding masculinity, so that the liturgical gestures of the Heavenly Bridegroom become actively represented in the sign of the priestly groom and the Eucharistic sacrifice of the New Adam (1 Cor 15:45-49) are exercised through the sign of another “Adam.” This was not only the intention of Christ but a beautiful drama of salvation, and we are obliged by fidelity to abide by it and preserve it.

III. In Respect to Rights and Salvation

In her book, The Catholic Priesthood and Women, Sr. Sarah Butler points out that excluding women from the priesthood cannot be seen to be an injustice in a true sense. Her reasoning is this: exclusion from the priesthood would only be an injustice if the priesthood substantially contributed to the salvation of the one ordained. However, it does not. Whereas baptism is that sacrament that imparts the graces of salvation, with confirmation, eucharast, confession, and anointing as those sacraments oriented toward increasing holiness within the recipient, Holy Orders is not imparted for the salvation or holiness of the priest but for his service toward the salvation and holiness of others. Because the graces of holiness and salvation are available to all through the other sacraments, irrespective of Holy Orders, exclusion from the priesthood cannot be said to be a true injustice on the part of the Church. As she states in her book, “Notwithstanding the fact that baptized members of the Church legitimately claim to participate in her life, no one among them, according to Catholic teaching, has the right to be ordained: ‘to consider the ministerial priesthood as a human right would be to misjudge its nature completely.’” (p.43)

IV. In Respect to Dignity and Worthiness

In their explanations, both Sr. Sarah Butler and John Paul II rely on the testimony of the early Church in relating the question of ordination to the person of Mary. St. Epiphanius asserted in the 4th century, “if women had been directed by God to offer sacrifice or to perform some ecclesiastical office, it would have been more proper to Mary than to anyone else in the New Testament to exercise a priestly role.” Yet, our Lord did no such thing, despite the fact that Mary had the deepest union with our Lord and the most steadfast dedication to him. John Paul II then concludes, “the fact that the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God and Mother of the Church, received neither the mission proper to the Apostles nor the ministerial priesthood clearly shows that the non-ordination of women to priestly ordination cannot mean that women are of lesser dignity, nor can it be construed as discrimination against them.” (ordinatio sacerdotalis, n.3) If Christ’s restriction of the priesthood from Mary was neither an injustice nor an insult to the dignity of his mother, neither should it be taken as such by his daughters in grace.

“The greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven are not the ministers but the saints” (inter insigniores, n.6).

Along with the above, I invite you to read Sr. Sarah Butler’s book, The Catholic Priesthood and Women, as well as the Declaration on the Admission of Women to the Priesthood (by the Sacred Congregation for the Defense of the Faith) and John Paul II’s Apostolic Letter on Reserving Priestly Ordination to men Alone.

Reawakening Morality

2010-10-18T09:13:00.001-07:00

Morality. It is a word that has been dirtied by our society and has suffered a manipulation that has left its meaning disfigured and ugly; for, this one word that should speak peace and hope to the human heart has been left abused and distorted so that seldom does contemporary mankind see this word for what it is but only for what it is misunderstood to be. More often than not, our culture has incited in the souls of our civilization a visceral contempt for this word, “morality,” founded upon the misguided teaching that what this word represents is nothing other than arbitrary restrictions, suppression of freedom, and reduction of the human experience.

In reality, however, “morality” represents something far more profound and elevating to human life, which makes our culture’s belittling of this realm of human activity all the more tragic. Universally, the experience of being the agent of an act one internally deems inappropriate, unloving, destructive – in other words, “immoral” – is that sensation of having done something in which we find ourselves divided against ourselves, by our own hand. We have placed ourselves in opposition to what is true and good and what causes us to genuinely flourish. We have either distorted a good, a quality of life and decency, or deprived ourselves of it. We are torn internally; we feel alienated and even betrayed by our very selves; and our hearts become the battleground of confliction, anxiety, and inner division. This kind of life can never be a satisfying human life, but often it is the life we find ourselves in by abandoning morality and permitting unfettered license to our whims and passions, which eventually lead us to where we would otherwise prefer not to go and to do what we would otherwise prefer to have not done. This is not freedom; it is instead a kind of slavery.

The amnesia of modern culture is that the state of fleeing morality never leads to a more fulfilling human life – it only provides an explosion of pleasure and elation for the present moment which soon dissipates and leaves nothing but a new sensation of absence and discontent. This is because only moral acts cultivate a lasting good in our lives. As John Paul II writes of the rich man who comes to Jesus asking for guidance on eternal life (Mark 10:17-22), “the commandments of which Jesus reminds the young man are meant to safeguard the good of the person, the image of God, by protecting his goods.” (Veritatis Splendor, 13). Whereas most see morality as merely an arbitrary obstruction to our good, morality is an authentic path to the maintenance and defense of human goods. Insomuch as one may only hear in the “thou shalt not” of the moral code the declaration, “Stop, you are not permitted,” one has become deaf to the much louder proclamation, “Go, do and uphold what is good instead.” What appears as a limitation in the restrictions of morality is simply the divine imperative to genuinely preserve the good, threatened by an act that promises a good it can never provide. For such is the nature of sin. As John Paul II also states,

“thou shalt not…are moral rules formulated in terms of prohibitions. These negative precepts express with particular force the ever urgent need to protect life, the communion of persons in marriage, private property, truthfulness and people’s good name…thus the commandment ‘you shall not murder’ becomes a call to an attentive love which protects and promotes the life of one’s neighbor. The precept prohibiting adultery becomes an invitation to a pure way of looking at others, capable of respecting the spousal meaning of the body…the commandments thus represent the basic condition for love of neighbor; at the same time they are proof of that love. They are the first necessary step on the journey toward freedom, its starting point.” (Veritatis Splendor, 13)

Human freedom is not a haphazard attribute of the human person; rather, it is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness (CCC 1731)*. This is why the more one does what is good the more one experiences true freedom (CCC 1733). Morality, therefore, enhances our freedom, rather than diminishing it, because the concentration of morality is fixed upon the preservation of what is good in human life by a self mastery that avoids what endangers the truly good. In the life of one who practices morality, the good is safeguarded, human freedom flourishes, and the human experience is elevated and secured in goodness and excellence. “Man as an individual and as a member of society craves a life that is full, autonomous, and worthy of his nature as a human being”** But this will always remain elusive and incomplete apart from morality.

* CCC stands for “Catechism of the Catholic Church”
** Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, n.9

Who's More Like God - Angels or Humans

2010-09-22T12:07:00.000-07:00

Recently, a group of students asked me about the "image of God" in angels and humans. Since both have a will and an intellect, are they equally the image of God or is one higher? Additionally, they inquired as to which of the two resembles God more and which is closer to God. Below is a synopsis of my response:

Philosophically, the more complex a being the less perfect while the simpler, the more perfect. This is because simpler beings (pure spirits) have less capacity for alteration/change, while complex beings (bodily beings) have a proclivity to change and impermanence. So in this regard, angels are higher in nature than humanity, because they have no natural vulnerability to corruption of their nature and less inclined to change, while human nature (body and soul) is in constant phases of change and can suffer the corruption of decay, giving it the character of limited permanence. This is why the author to the Hebrews states that "we see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels." (2:9) By taking a humanity, he bound himself to a nature that was inferior to the nature of the angels, in terms of degrees of perfection.

Nevertheless, Thomas Aquinas points out that while the angels are higher than humans in their nature (in regards to their essence more precisely resembling the permanence and immaterial qualities of God), humans are higher than the angels in respect to reflecting God's relational behavior. Angels cannot in their nature emulate the fruitfulness of the inner-Trinitarian life of God. Whereas human nature is oriented toward an interpersonal communion that utilizes the whole being (body and soul) in sexuality, producing the "fruit" of a new person, angels are incapable of this. Because human nature is inclined toward persons "proceeding" from persons, much like the spiration of the Holy Spirit from the interpersonal communion of the Father and the Son, Aquinas concludes that humans reflect God's relational qualities more deeply than the angels, even though the angels reflect God's immaterial essence more intensely.

Christ, then, brings this human dignity to a higher level in that now that God the Son has become man, human nature has the capacity to participate in the divine nature bodily (2 Pet 1:4). Unlike the angels who experience the glory of God in their nature solely as their nature being an exemplary participation in God's immutability, incorruptibility, as well as perfection of Goodness by grace, Human nature can now participate in God's divinity bodily, through an infusion of God's Spirit. Because God never became an angel, the angelic nature doesn't "partake" of the divine nature in the same manner that humanity does, whereby one joined to Christ can become "divinized" and commune with the Son through a common nature sacramentally. This is why St. Peter writes that the gospel announces "things into which angels long to look." (1 Pet 1:12) Angels can never experience being "clothed with Christ" in baptism (Gal 3:27) or "bear[ing] the image of the man of heaven" (1 Cor 15:49), being a member of Christ bodily (1 Cor 6:15), or being the "temple of God/Holy Spirit" within one's nature (1 Cor 3:16, 6:19). The word became flesh, not angelic, and because of this humanity is offered a deeper communion with God's nature than even the angels. This is why the Church professes that "Mary has by grace been exalted above all angels and men to a place second only to her Son." (Vatican II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, n.66)

So then, do both humans and angels have an intellect and will? Yes, and so both are a kind of "image" of God in that regard. However, angelic intellect and will are more acutely reflections of God's intellect and will in that the intellect and will of the angels more perfectly resemble God's will and intellect by remaining unhindered by emotions and not limited by the body. The intellect of the angels enjoy a deeper freedom and fluidity, and thus "image God" more perfectly than ours. Nevertheless, as mentioned above, angels are by nature incapable of "imaging" the relational qualities of Trinitarian life to the degree that human nature is able, making humanity a higher "image" in terms of divine relationship.

Freedom from Want?

2010-09-17T08:00:00.000-07:00

When we visit my wife’s family, reproductions of Norman Rockwell’s “Four Freedoms” hang above the bed in the room in which we stay. I have always admired these images, but I have been as equally perplexed by the assumption of one of them. Freedom of Speech, Freedom from Tyranny, Freedom of Religion, and Freedom from Want. Freedom from Want? Can such a thing even be attained in this life? Furthermore, should we necessarily flee from want? Is “want” exclusively an evil with no shadow of merit? I would argue to the contrary.

“Want” is what secures in us a temperate understanding of ourselves. In want we understand that we are creatures with needs that we cannot always provide ourselves. In want we perceive our nature as fragile and limited, in need of a Guardian. In want we conceive that we are not the crafters of our own destiny, autonomous and complete on our own. And often, in want, we discover the desire for prayer, which we perhaps have allowed the demands of the world to muffle and silence. Whether in want of material necessities or in want of a more intimate unity with the All Glorious Lord, our want is often what presses us to prayer, reflecting on the truth of ourselves and hoping in the Truth of God. This is why Benedict XVI calls prayer “the school of Hope” (Spe Salvi, n.32). In this life, when we want we are compelled interiorly to reflect not only upon our predicament but upon our very selves – our nature, our being, our personhood – and by this we more firmly understand ourselves and our place in the cosmos with humility.

This is not to say that the state of want is the ideal – far from it. We want because we find ourselves in a state of imperfection, of incompletion. But neither do we merely endure want as just a burden of human life, because want can possess a meaning and purpose of its own, a catalyst that directs us toward some good, a glimmer of light within a dark cloud like a flash of lightning in a storm. Someday want will be no more, for “He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away." (Rev 21:4) But this we still hope for and in the life that is to come. For now, we still want. But let us approach want in patience and temperance, permitting it to be the instrument it can be, so that good may flow forth even from where there seems an absence.

Discovering Others

2010-09-10T07:18:00.000-07:00

Last year,I gave a presentation to our student SJCNC leaders on holistic spiritual development, and due to time restraints was forced to truncate a concept that I ended up reducing to mumblings of something of little consequence. What makes this so unfortunate is the reality that the subject is at the heart of our understanding of ourselves and our relationship with others. What I had intended to communicate and managed to do quite poorly was a reflection on the human person as a kind of mystery. Certainly, if the human person is the image of God, who is in His very being the definition of mystery, then the human person is a reflection of that Supreme mystery and a kind of mystery in miniature. As St, Basil Stated in the 4th century, “do not despise the wonder that is in you. For you are small in your own reckoning, but the Word will disclose that you are great…from this small work of construction, I understand the great Fashioner.” (Discourse 1 on the Origin of Humanity, n.2)

Nevertheless, we do not act as if we were aware of this. Others are seldom perceived as unique mysteries to be discovered, when in reality each individual possesses a depth of meaning that could not be plumbed in ten lifetimes. Every other should be seen as a tiny mystery of their own, a small glimpse into God’s own mystery, and a unique treasury of unexplored purpose and life. We should be fascinated with every other person we meet, for every other person is a trove of discovery and significance. There is a profundity to every person that ought to captivate us in awe and invigorate us to delve into a passionate investigation of the mystery of the other. However, what is more common to the human experience is to arbitrarily draw lines of completion, barriers of which we have superficially determined we need not tread beyond in the search of the mystery of the other. Often these are drawn to defend ourselves from hurt and misunderstanding, drawn after retreating from such an incident to the mystery of one person with which we feel most comfortable – ourselves.

Our mystery becomes the most real and the most significant, and we slowly lose sight of the mystery of the other vanishing in the distance we have created. An even deeper travesty, and probably a more widespread one, is when the “other” whose mystery we hold aloof is God. Almost more easily than forgetting the immensity of the mystery of every human person do we forget the magnitude of the mystery of God, arbitrarily determining we have completed our journey into the deep canons of Divine mystery when we have barely stepped into the mouth of the cave. In both occasions what eludes us in the understanding that there will always be more to discover in relation to another person, for persons are vast, mysterious, and irreducible. I have known four sets of twins in my lifetime, and despite their similarities it is their distinctions with which I marvel, for each does not stand as a replica of the other but as a unique mystery of their own. May we never lose sight of the marvelousness of the mystery of every person and never tire of investing ourselves in a fuller discovery of that mystery, whether human or Divine.

Love and Sacrifice

2010-09-03T07:16:00.000-07:00

When my son was much younger, he loved for me to be his “horsey.” The majority of early every night was spent with me on my hands and knees while he rode about, entertained and content. At the time we lived an apartment with hardwood floors, and I felt like an 80 year old man with arthritis after every episode of “daddy-back” riding. In fact, I could almost feel my knees wince as my little boy toddled up to me on my arrival home, sure to request a horsy ride. Still, I did it nonetheless, for he is dear to me. I accepted the pain upon my knees and repressed my desire to indulge in more entertaining things for myself because his needs were paramount to me. Indeed, in love his needs became my needs, and it became a particular opportunity for me to show Christ to my son and carry a cross of love as did our savior. John Paul II reminds us of this aspect of suffering in his apostolic letter salvifici doloris that suffering has the potential of becoming a vehicle of love. In other words, often we find “the truth of love through the truth of suffering.” (salvifici doloris, n.18) I have the blessing of exercising this with three families – my family by birth, my family by marriage, and the family of students and staff at SJCNC. I must admit that over the years there have been times when a student has dropped into my office at just the time that I had designated to catch up on some urgent matters and I hesitated in being welcoming. But then, through them, I recalled the face of my little boy just wanting quality time with his daddy, and I eagerly took up that familiar cross again. Yet it was not for a son I now found myself doing this but for my spiritual siblings, my little brothers and sisters in Christ which all our students are to me. I sacrificed the time that I had intended to use otherwise and made their needs my needs. Despite the pain of my knees as my son rode on my back all those years ago, every one of those moments was a moment of sheer joy. So also it was that every time a student needed to talk at a time I was not entirely prepared for, it was an occasion of unexpected joy and fraternity. For every true sacrifice of self is but a prelude to joy, and every cross the path to resurrected life.

What Does It Mean to Be Redeemed?

2010-09-01T09:36:00.001-07:00

Last night we held our first night of Truth and Lies, a weekly occasion to delve more deeply into the mystery of Christ and his Church through discussion of aspects of the faith that often provoke questions and need for clarification. As is always the case when I speak, I had far less time to express all that my heart longed to proclaim, and so I find it bursting with joy, spilling over into this blog. During our discussion, I asked the question, “what does to mean to be redeemed?” Christians often speak of being redeemed, but I find that few can explain what this really means. Obviously it indicates a difference, a change in the person, but what kind of change?

Quite literally, redemption means a “reclaiming.” Something has been lost or captured, and when it is redeemed it has been restored, recovered, reclaimed. Our redemption, then, is a restoration, a reclaiming of some spiritual good – namely, the full expression of our humanity as the image of God. When Christians use the word “redemption” we are principally speaking of something that has to do with sin, because sin, in its very nature, is a corruption of human dignity and a diminishing of the image of God within us. When God created mankind, he created us to have life and to have our humanity a living reflection of His divine goodness, glory, and holiness. The sin of Adam and Eve (and all our subsequent sins) mutilated that image leaving it weakened and broken. But Christ proclaims, “I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly” (John 10:10). Because Christ is “the Word Made flesh,” God made man, in whom “the fullness of deity dwells bodily,” Christ redeems our humanity. In joining His divinity to our humanity by making it His own as well, he restores that image of God in its most pristine of expressions – His humanity, united permanently to His divinity, becomes the paradigm restoration of that likeness of God which was disfigured since the first sin. He has reclaimed it from corruption and redeemed it by taking it as His own, culminating this in offering it to the Father as a saving instrument of love on the cross. Our humanity, in Christ, was given to the Father in a genuinely human manner as the medium of devotion and sincere fidelity – the zenith of reclaiming our humanity from sin and reestablishing it as the image of God, giving that image a completeness as the expression of Love, the very essence of the one being imaged.

It is for this reason that the Church insists that the Divine Son took our humanity in order to accomplish our salvation within it. This is why it is possible for St. Paul to write such thing as “you have put off the old man with its practices and have put on the new man, who is being renewed in knowledge after the image of his creator” (Col 3:9-10) and “be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and put on the new man, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness” (Eph 4:23-24) Because Christ’s humanity was the restoration and redemption of the image of God within our human nature, being joined to Christ is the application of this in ourselves. The humanity we possess is renewed into a more complete image of God because it becomes bound to Christ’s humanity, which was made for us the perfect “image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15).

But there is one more aspect to redemption, one linked to this notion of the image of God but infinitely more profound. Because Christ shared in our humanity, he made available to us a sharing in his divinity. Indeed, St. Peter insists that union with Christ permits us to “become partakers in the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4) and St. Peter announces that the Christian is “God’s temple” (1 Cor 3:16-17). Because the humanity that Son of the Father took as His own became the perfect temple of His divinity, our humanity united to Christ is made a suitable “temple” of God’s life and Spirit, an extension and reflection of the temple of Christ.

And so it is that perhaps the most succinct way of summarizing what it means to be redeemed can be achieved in two words – New Creation. As St. Paul declared, “if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold the new has come” (2 Cor 5:17). By becoming man, God has united our very humanity to Himself, elevated it to the dignity of an instrument of divine love on the cross, restored the full image of God within it, and by the association of His own humanity with His divinity He has invited our humanity into a sharing in His own divine life. This is redemption. This is new creation. This is the delight of the soul, and the promise that Jesus alone can satisfy.

Spiritual but Not Religious?

2010-08-24T09:25:00.000-07:00

Our bodies do not always do what we prefer. They succumb to illness. They smell bad when not bathed. They grow old and begin to weaken and deteriorate. Yet amid all this, we still cherish our bodies. We treasure them so much that the very thought of being divorced from them leaves us uneasy. The reason death terrorizes us so much is that the idea of being severed from our bodies seems to mutilate our very being and identity. We do not experience our bodies as something foreign to us, something apart from our personhood. Rather, we experience our bodies as an intrinsic and unique expression of our souls, the forum of our humanity in relation to others. Our bodies inherently bespeak of us and manifest our souls to the world. We cannot be divided from them without losing something of what we are and muting part of our soul.

In the 5th century, St. Augustine used the experience of body-soul unity as an analogy for the relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Church, stating, “what the soul is in our body, that is the Holy Spirit in Christ’s Body, the Church.” In light of contemporary cultural climate, I think it reasonable to expand St. Augustine’s notion more broadly. In the Marist poll done by the Knights of Columbus earlier this year, 41% of the current college aged generation polled identified themselves as “spiritual, but not religious.” Of those Catholic millennials polled, 50% answered in like manner. Sadly, those who harbor such a belief seemingly are unaware that living spirituality without religion is akin to living as a soul bereft of a body. Just as a body gives expression to the human soul, so religion offers a “voice” to spirituality.

As the human spirit remains intangible and disconnected from the world without a body, so also is spirituality apart from religion. Religion is the body of spirituality. When we think of a human spirit that is no longer associated with a body, what do we call it? A person who has died. A ghost. Just as it is with the human person, so also it is with religion and spirituality. You take the body away, and spirituality becomes a specter, a disembodied soul adrift in the world. Ghost movies always seem to be tantalizing and intriguing precisely because we look upon the image of ghost, a human spirit detached from its body, and we perceive it as something eerie, bizarre, and distorted. We see it as an aberration of our humanity, a state that does violence to the full expression of what it means to be human, a circumstance that should not be. We see a spirit that ought to possess a body but finds itself peculiarly severed from one. We see the face of the unnatural. And this is what we do to our spirituality when we detach it from religion – we steal away its body and restrict its full expression. We divide it from the tangible, the palpable, and set it adrift with no direction, no destination, no lungs with which to breathe and no arms with which to embrace – only a spirit - solitary, vague, and reduced.

Religion may not always do what we prefer, just like our bodies. But this makes religion no less valuable to our spirituality than the body is to the soul. We would never willingly cast off our bodies in some misguided illusion of freedom of the soul. Let us treat religion with the same attitude and respect and permit our spirituality to experience a full life and satisfaction. Do not settle for a ghostly spirituality – unite the soul to the body and discover a more complete spiritual experience, one alive with the fullness of our humanity.

The Precious Hands of Christ

2010-08-18T13:46:00.000-07:00

We Catholics will look upon the crucifix tens of thousands of times in a lifetime, and even more so for those more pious than I. And with every gaze, we are given volumes of revelation, yet as is the case with many things immense, we tend to overlook some of the finer details, while marveling at others. Other times we see what we missed before with such an intensity that it overshadows what we had previously focused on. And still other times, we see what had always impressed us in a far more miraculous and glorious light than ever before. Such was the case with the Passionists, an order founded by St. Paul of the Cross which is devoted to meditation on the Passion of our Lord. They have a Chaplet they regularly pray and various other prayers that focus on the wounds of Christ. On such prayer reads, "Eternal Father, I offer Thee the Wounds of our Lord Jesus Christ to heal those of our souls." It is a subject that seemed odd to me at first, but over time I began to see what beauty they saw in those horribly ugly wounds. It is the same beauty that brought flocks to St. Pio’s Masses for a glimpse of his stigmata, a glimpse at what grand insight into Christ’s wounds might be seen in that pious Capuchin.

Much of human life revolves around what we do with our hands. Music, art, sports, and various works of labor are made possible only through the manipulation of hands. Much of what makes us human is expressed within their activity. So too, much of who Christ is was expressed in the activity of his own hands. The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes) declares that Jesus Christ’s “labor with his hands at Nazareth greatly ennobled the dignity of work.”(n.67) Jesus Christ’s hands served him in many of the ways ours serve us: eating, clothing, bathing, and working. Christ’s use of his hands in human labor increased by his human nature the meaning, purpose, and dignity of our labor, our use of our own hands. Just as we express much of our humanity through our hand’s activity, so too was his wondrous humanity expressed in his. And yet, as the incarnate Word of God, so also was the revelation of his divinity expressed through the labor of his hands. It was through his hands that he cured the leper (Luke 5:12-16). It was by his hands that he healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Mark 1:29-31). And it was in using his hands that he professed, “Ephphatha!” and opened the deaf man’s ears (Mark 7:31-37). He ministered to our humanity through his own humanity, and in doing so proclaimed his divinity.

It is no mystery then why his hands were what Satan chose to attack. Along with his feet and side, it was his hands that the Devil desired to mutilate, those instruments of revelation that expressed together in every action his perfect humanity and his perfect divinity. In the crucifixion, those precious hands were marred, brutalized, and made immobile. They, for a moment, were no longer beautiful, no longer miraculous devices, no longer what they were meant to be. Instead they were stripped of their use, their glory, and their encounter with humanity. Satan had succeeded in unleashing his wrath on those blessed tools of grace.

Yet what appeared to be defeat was success. What looked detestable was glorious. What seemed crushed and useless worked the for the salvation of the world. There is that mystery that the Passionists so fervently meditate on. Those bloody and beaten hands, so treacherous and hideous to our sight, continued to be that revelation of Christ’s intertwined humanity and dignity even on the cross and persevered in being those facets of grace to us. What Satan tried to destroy in order to separate Jesus from humanity expressed ever more Christ’s devotion to solidarity with us, as he bled and suffered just as we do. What Satan hated and sought to blot out in ugliness continued to express the beauty of Christ’s love and fidelity to us. What Satan desired to be made to never encounter and intimately serve humanity again worked to serve it in the most transcendent fashion.

Though Thomas was the only Apostle to express interest in seeing them, I do not think the sight of Christ’s resurrected wounds benefited him alone. Rather, in showing his hands to all the Apostles he declared definitively the permanence of his works and activity in the world, a permanence that neither crucifixion nor the activity of the Devil can overcome. His hands would again touch and affect humanity, now in an even more profound way than before. Perhaps, through his doubt Thomas stumbled upon a beautiful revelation of Jesus Christ he might not otherwise have known. As he gazed upon those wounded hands now made clean and glorious, perhaps he found a greater devotion to what those hands had done for the world. For in his life and miracles, in his suffering and crucifixion, and in that upper room there is shown to us the Precious Hands of Christ.

(This reflection originally appeared in a 2004 issue of the Catholic Post)

The Joy of Devotion to the Lord

2010-08-05T13:52:00.000-07:00

A friend of mine has been reading this summer the classic work of St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life. Though I've read this years ago during my graduate studies in Theology, the influence of this friend has inspired me to "rediscover" this phenomenal spiritual tome. Right from the beginning, the "gem of savoy" (as he was known in his time) masterfully captivates me with that deft ability of his to express profound spiritual notions within the context of describing the ordinary world. And in it, I find this Saint invigorating me once more toward a certitude that devotion (piety) is the true means to joy and not what it is commonly misunderstood to be, namely a repression of human satisfaction. the Saint writes:

"It is in this manner, my dear Philothea, that the world vilifies holy devotion as much as it can. It pictures devout persons as having discontented, gloomy, sullen faces and claims that devotion brings on depression and unbearable moods. But just as Joshua and Caleb held both that the Promised Land was good and beautiful and that its possession would be sweet and agreeable so too the Holy Spirit by the mouths of all the saints and our Lord by his own mouth assure us that a devout life is a life that is sweet, happy, and lovable.

The world sees people as they pray, fast, endure injuries, take care of the sick, give alms to the poor, keep vigils, restrain anger, suppress their passions, give up sensual pleasures, and perform other actions painful and rigorous in themselves and by their very nature. But the world does not see the heartfelt inner devotion that renders all such actions pleasant, sweet, and easy.

Look at the bees amid the banks of Thyme. They find there a very bitter juice but when they suck it out they change it into honey because they have the ability to do so. O worldly men! It is true that devout souls encounter great bitterness in their works of mortification but by performing them they change them into something sweet and delicious."

My wife will be the first to confirm that the quickest way to quell my own crabbiness and quiet my foul moods is to enter into silence and open my soul to Christ's Spirit in prayer and devotion. Indeed, those times that grant me the greatest peace and offer me the greatest sensation of being "whole" are the moments of devotion to the Lord in prayer and the sacraments and the exercise of virtue. When I do what the world suggests as a path to satisfaction, I invariably find that it is neither lasting nor complete in its promise of happiness - devotion and virtue alone have given a "sweetness" to my life that is lasting and relentlessly captivating. Beyond all other good pleasures, this alone is my delight of delights.

Did Jesus Deny Being Divine?

2010-07-19T09:11:00.000-07:00

Earlier in the semester, some students had asked me about the apparent discrepancy between the synoptic gospel (Matthew, Mark, Luke) accounts of Jesus’ trial before the Jewish officials. The question arose from the fact that in each gospel account of the Jewish Council asking Jesus, “are you the Son of God,” a different answer is recorded. Mark records Jesus simply responding with the affirmative “I am” (Mark 14:62). Matthew and Luke, however, record a seemingly ambiguous response by Jesus. Matthew’s account has Jesus replying, “you have said so” (26:64) while Luke has Jesus simply state, “you say that I am” (24:70). So the question of whether Jesus resisted identifying himself as divine in two accounts while boldly proclaiming an affirmation in another account was presented.

We hear the words, “you have said so” as a statement that at least dodges the question at hand and at most presents a puzzling detachment from committing to assenting. Nevertheless, this term was an idiom of the time that effectively meant “the answer should not need to be given except that it had been asked.” In other words, the answer is so obvious that question need not even be presented. It is by no means a denial of an affirmation, nor is it a calculated ambiguity. It is a round-about way of essential stating, “I am.” Elsewhere in Matthew’s gospel, Jesus previously uses this same term when Judas Iscariot asks, “is it I, Master?” in response to Jesus’ revelation that a traitor was amongst them who would betray the Son of Man. At Judas’ inquiry, “is it I, Master,” Jesus responds with the same phrase - “you have said so.” (26:25) In this entire episode, Jesus presents himself as very aware that Judas (specifically) would betray him, and when pressed by the betrayer himself to identify him as such, he replies in a manner that is even more condemning than merely stating, “yes, Judas, it is you.” Instead, he states, “you have said so” – the answer is so obvious that the question does not even need to be asked. Jesus, then, uses this phrase in a like manner when before the Jewish Council in this same chapter.

So, then, there is no true discrepancy between these gospel accounts. Matthew’s “you have said so” is effectively the “I am” in Mark, presented in a different way. Luke’s “you say that I am” corresponds to this same idiom, especially since it is at this very declaration that the Council declares that they need no further testimony against him, for “we have heard it ourselves from his own lips.” (22:70-71) By their reaction, the Council had certainly heard an assertion of divinity in those words, rather than a baulk. So, “did Jesus affirm his divine identity in all three gospel accounts?” you ask. You have said so.

Jesus and the Questions of the Heart

2010-07-16T07:04:00.000-07:00

In an article that appeared in the June 9 issue of L'Osservatore Romano, Julain Carron expounds upon the priest expressing his authentic humanity. However, within the article he elicits a broader reflection of Christ's message to our humanity, enlisting a statement by the Communion and Liberation founder, Fr. Luigi Giussani:

“Christ proposes himself as the answer to what ‘I’ am and only an attentive, tender and impassioned awareness of my own self can make me open and lead me to acknowledge, admire, thank, and live Christ. Without this awareness, even Jesus Christ becomes just a name” (At the Origin of the Christian Claim, McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal 1998, p. 6)

The importance of such a recognition is profound because is this not the central question that burdens the heart of modern man - "what am I?" In our times, humanity suffers from a radical alienation of the self. We no longer know what we are; we no longer perceive the inherent meaning of human life; and we find ourselves perpetually uncomfortable with ourselves. The questioning of our humanity becomes more and more palpable with every passing year and the answers of our culture become less and less satisfying. Yet the answer has been with us for quite some time. As the Second Vatican Council declared, “it is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of man truly becomes clear.” The Creator instructs the creature of its meaning by joining with it and living its life to perfection. Mankind cries out “what am I?” and God replies by being born into our flesh and declares, “this – this is what you are! Rejoice.” Christ proposes the answer to the riddle of human life, an answer to what “I” am. His earthly life was (among other things) a rehabilitation of a genuine awareness of our nature and what it was created for. His heavenly life is a perpetual invitation to receive this remedy and experience a fuller human life, a life imbued with grace and mystery. Do we have the courage to accept this invitation?

The Kingdom and the Ordinary

2010-07-16T07:03:00.000-07:00

We often permit ourselves to live within what is only immediately obvious to us, what only lies upon the surface of things. We walk about this world and nature becomes an ordinary background rather than a marvel of life, people become mere objects with which we interact rather than wonders to be discovered, the human experience becomes banal and uninspiring rather than a mystery. Too often we resist looking into the depth of something, delving into its magnificence beyond the immediate, the exterior. Yet, it is there, nonetheless, if only we would accept the invitation to examine it, to experience it. Christ has offered us such an invitation with that proclamation, “the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” It is a welcoming to explore divine mystery amid the seemingly ordinary.

We Catholics, though, seem to lose sight of this from time to time, for we are enveloped in this kingdom regularly, often forgetting to marvel in it. Whenever we attend mass and receive the mystery of Christ’s Body and Blood in the Eucharist, the kingdom is at hand. Whenever our souls are regenerating by grace in Confession, the kingdom is at hand. Whenever we are present at the pouring out of Christ’s Spirit in Confirmation, the kingdom is at hand. Whenever we witness the transformation of the soul in Baptism, the kingdom is at hand. Let us never take for granted all the ways that we are party to the divine penetrating the human and raising it into life, freedom, grace, and concord. In these moments of sacrament and prayer let us always peer into this glory vigorously and cherish its magnificence and mystery, whispering to our souls this joyful reminder, “the Kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

The Best Kind of Freedom

2010-07-01T07:51:00.000-07:00

As we approach the 4th of July, we Americans turn our hearts and minds again to the notion of freedom. Perhaps, more than any other day in the calendar does American culture reflect on this topic, revel in it, and cherish it. Yet, as mentioned in a previous post, freedom from political and material tyranny is not the most complete freedom we can imagine. Certainly, for any nation that was once the colony or conquered district of another, this freedom that we rightfully celebrate this weekend, this freedom that has been allotted by the noble sacrifice of so many is a good freedom to rejoice in, a good freedom to recognize. Nevertheless, it is not the only freedom of human life. There is still yet a deeper freedom, and the absence of this freedom is perhaps even more treacherous than the absence of the former, for this freedom is the fundamental catalyst for any true political or material freedom, and the tyranny that confronts this deeper freedom is ultimately the foundational tyranny that foments the oppression of civil freedom. And this freedom is nothing other than what the Church calls “a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness” (catechism of the catholic church, n.1731).

It has been said that there is no “neutral” in the gears of human development, particularly the development of the human soul. We are either progressing or regressing. We are either becoming more or we are reducing ourselves to less. There is no pause. True freedom, then, subsists in enjoying a constant motion of “becoming,” a constant progression of being more “in truth and goodness” than we were before. But contrary to the thoughts of some, we cannot achieve this on our own. If we could, the human race would have perfected itself long ago. We are imperfect and limited. For us, the good is easily misunderstood and our freedom easily abused. Only one who is infinitely good, devoid of any flaw or imperfection, can provide the assistance we need, assistance that is wholly reliable and perfectly ordered toward the good. Only a God who supremely possesses the freedom to “be good” (because goodness is the essence of his nature) can direct us and avail to us the aids in the expansion of our freedom to mature in goodness and fully “be” human. It is for this reason that the Church insists that human freedom “attains its perfection when directed toward God.” (catechism, n. 1731) As He who alone knows perfectly the genuine freedom of abiding in goodness and truth, by His grace “the Holy Spirit educates us in spiritual freedom” (catechism, n.1742).

Humanity is oriented toward being fulfilled in what is good. We sense it with all of our being – we were made to “dwell” within goodness. When we experience the good, we are satisfied. When we experience an absence of good, we feel as if violence has been done to the welfare of our very essence. We long for the good, and once we find it, we experience it as a liberty of the soul. This is especially the case when the good (or evil) is done by us. “The more one does what is good, the freer one becomes” (catechism, n.1733). More than any other freedom, this is the freedom we long for the most – the freedom to grow and be perfected in goodness and truth, which is nothing other than the freedom to experience our humanity at its fullest. Go to the Lord, receive His Spirit in the sacraments, and enroll in the school of true freedom.

Freedom

2010-06-30T09:03:00.001-07:00

Freedom is the hope and desire of every human heart. The heart longs for it, and the soul thrives upon it. Yet, the freedom the soul seeks is not the freedom that is popularly thought of, that license to do whatever we please. No, that is not true freedom but merely the absence of restriction upon our whims. We know this is not yet full freedom, because even when it is allotted (even if for but a moment) we still yearn for something beyond it. We yearn for a freedom to experience more deeply, to exist more boldly, to “be” more completely. We desire for a freedom of utter consolation of the soul, a freedom that quells that “inner battle” within the self, a freedom to possess ourselves more securely and without the fragmentation that we so often experience within ourselves. True freedom, complete freedom, is not merely the deliverance from an external oppression or constraint. No, true freedom, lasting freedom, is an internal liberty.

And so it is that the scriptures from this past Sunday proclaim, “for freedom Christ set us free.” (Gal 5:1). This statement seems odd at first – of course Christ set us free for freedom; what else does one intend in liberating another? But St. Paul’s point is this: Christ set us free so that we might remain free, that we may lastingly reside within freedom. But, again, it is not the freedom from an external oppressor that St. Paul speaks of. Such freedom is ephemeral – it comes and it goes. Rather, St. Paul speaks of a more enduring freedom, a freedom that strikes at the heart more powerfully and consoles the soul more fully. It is, as St. Paul goes on to say, the freedom to “live by the Spirit.” (Gal 5:13,25) This is what some call “the freedom of excellence.” It is that freedom whereby God apportions a share in His own life so that He becomes for us a more intimate guide to our soul, taking residence within it, and empowering it to be more fully alive than before. Rather than a liberty “from” something, it is a liberty “to” something, a liberty to grow, a liberty to become, a liberty to experience a fuller human life.

The incarnation, death, and resurrection of the Son of the Father opened for us the possibility that our lives, still amid the trials and imperfections of this world, might be more vibrantly exposed and unified with God’s life from within and that all Christ enjoyed in his own holy humanity, we too might share. The Saints of the Church are not those who distanced themselves from their humanity and relinquished their freedom in the name of God – they are those who experienced their humanity more fully than before because they continuously accepted God’s offer to mature in goodness and divine life. This is the highest freedom, for this is the freedom to be near God and like God. This is the freedom that every heart desires. This is the freedom that alone will satisfy us. And we will search for it wherever we go until we find it. The Saints are those who found it and lived the freest human lives, because once they discovered that freedom they clung to it without reserve.

Wisdom

2010-06-29T08:55:00.001-07:00

Since man is the image of God, if man loses his connection with God he will ultimately lose his connection with himself and drift in aimless confusion about life. Such is the case because God is the source of all Wisdom, and as God’s image (imago dei) mankind was created to be a recipient and cooperator with divine Wisdom. Divine Wisdom is that which orders and directs all things, informing them of their purpose and enriching their being. Though often overlooked today, the biblical books of Wisdom and Sirach were two of the most widely quoted books of the Old Testament by the Church Fathers, particularly the Cappadocian Fathers, Ambrose, and Augustine. Too often, though, Wisdom is believed to be solely the possession of the consecrated religious or the tremendously pious. “Wisdom was created before all things and prudent understanding from eternity…the Lord himself created wisdom in the holy spirit; he saw her and apportioned her, he poured her out upon all his works.” (Sirach 1:4,9) Wisdom is the gentle kiss of the divine upon the mind and will. It is the caress of God and the apportioning of His own Divine thoughts. It is nothing less than a supernatural harbor of consolation. May we join in Solomon’s praise: “I called upon God and the spirit of wisdom came to me. I preferred her to scepters and thrones, and I accounted wealth as nothing in comparison with her…I learned both what is secret and what is manifest for wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me…for she is a breath of the power of God, and a pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty.” (Wisdom 7:7-8, 21, 25)

Love, Truth, and Tolerance

2010-06-22T09:00:00.000-07:00

I get the impression that people sometimes get the notion that there can be a dichotomy between Love and Truth. Occasionally, individuals will act in a certain way or say things that imply that they believe that Love and Truth can be at odds with one another, that one can impede the promotion of the other in some way. And usually, this is posited in circumstances in which another is acting in an improper manner and one hesitates to correct the other in Truth under the presumed guise of Love.

In modern society, somehow Love and Tolerance have become synonymous, but this is a mutilation of the meanings of these words. Tolerance is the patient endurance of something, a bearing with something that is not the ideal. If it were what we perceive as the ideal, we would not say of ourselves that we tolerate it but that we adopt it and agree with it. As it is, though, Tolerance is experienced as a condition of bearing with something in an effort of understanding without protest. In this way, Tolerance can be an expression of Love; however, while Tolerance can be loving, not all Love is tolerant. In some occasions, what is best for the other is that they do not remain within a certain habit but that they be urged, in Love, to dispense of it. Parents do this all the time. In Love, they may tolerate certain behaviors of their children that they find unappealing but not harmful while not tolerating other behaviors of their children that may be detrimental to their welfare. Love is a seeking of the good of the other for the sake of the other, a promotion and effort toward their true welfare. For a parent to tolerate children listening to music that is not bad in nature but just unattractive to the parent is to be both tolerant and loving. For a parent to tolerate their children exercising immoral behavior, dabbling in drugs, or the like is tolerant but not genuinely loving, because the parent’s tolerance is nothing other than a lenience toward behaviors that do not promote the child’s authentic welfare. Though it is tolerant, t is not Love because it lacks a communication of Truth.

“Truth and Love are wings that cannot be separated, for Truth cannot fly without Love, nor can Love soar aloft without Truth; their yoke is one of amity.” (St Ephrem) An exercise of genuine Love must include a sincere respect and communication of Truth. Why? Because Love is the seeking of the true welfare of the other, and all have a diminishing of their welfare in the absence of Truth. Love then includes aiding others toward Truth. However, we often convince ourselves that we must dispense of Truth in relationships with others under the pretense that it is the more tolerant thing to do and, therefore, the more loving. However, if we truly understand love, such a claim can never be the case. Every human life is enhanced by understanding of Truth – to deliver Truth to those who lack it is an act of Love; to withhold Truth is an attack on Love. Now, obviously this must be done with tact, and if that Truth is rejected at least it has been proposed, and the relationship can carry on. Choosing the right time and the appropriate tone and words to communicate Truth in Love is prudent. What we must avoid is cowering in a resistance to offering Truth under the illusion that this is a more loving direction. We believe “the Truth will make you free” (John 8:32). What would Love be to another without an invitation to greater freedom through Truth? True Love will always include that invitation.

The Early Church Reflects on the Eucharist

2010-06-08T08:24:00.000-07:00

Sunday was the Solemnity of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ, also commonly known as "Corpus Christi."

As further reflection on this gift of our Lord Jesus, here are the words of a few of the early Christians that exemplify their devotion to the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

"At these meetings you should heed the Bishop and presbytery attentively and break one loaf, which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote which wards off death but yeilds continous life in union with Jesus Christ." (St. Ignatius of Antioch, early 2nd century)

"So we have been taught that the food consecrated by the word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus."
(St. Justin Martyr, mid 2nd century)

"He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of his creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies." (St Irenaeus, late 2nd century)

"If we approach with faith, we too will see Jesus...for the Eucharistic table takes the place of the crib. Here the Body of the Lord is present, wrapped not in swaddling clothes but un the rays of the Holy Spirit."
(St. John Chrysostom, 4th century)

"Our participation in the Body and Blood of Christ do not lead to anything other than changing us into what we eat." (St Leo the Great, 5th century)

A Conscience and No God?

2010-06-02T09:04:00.000-07:00

Despite atheistic theories about the evolutionary purpose of the conscience as a mere means to ensure the continual propagation of human society, we, as individuals, do not experience the conscience in this manner. When our conscience presses upon us, it is not the loss of our material survival that haunts us. It is not a threat to society that we fear. No, what strikes us and cuts us to the heart is something far more profound, far more personal, and far more reaching than this life alone. Rather, we experience our conscience as something within us that perceives something from without. It “hears” an immediate demand from the “outside” which foments an interior urging to not tread where we are contemplating bringing ourselves. It is a sensation that something we are about to do imperils our own integrity – not the integrity of a generic society, but our own integrity –us, ourselves, our very being and personhood. We feel as if our very dignity is compromised if we continue to pursue the act before us. Our conscience insists that one action robs us of a quality of genuine human life while another action promotes it. It is only those who have muted their conscience by conditioning themselves that there is no right or wrong that do not sense this. All other humans know this to be the case – it is the very reason why we hesitate when we are about to do certain things. We harbor reservations, doubts, inhibitions about the proposed action because we suspect that, though the act seems to promise temporary satisfaction, in the end it will prove to reduce us, to make us less than our dignity offers. And we will have cooperated with this demise. This is what the experience of the conscience is, regardless of any evolutionary theory posited.
It is for this reason that Bl. John Henry Cardinal Newman wrote in his Grammar of Assent, “let us then thus consider the conscience, not as a rule of right conduct, but as a sanction of right conduct.” Whereas a rule is merely a demand imposed by a ruler, a sanction is an official invitation, an endorsement. Whereas the first is a decree of authority placed upon another as a limit, the latter is the decree of an authority as an approval, an issue of consent. In other words, the conscience does not principally hear “do not” but “do” – it does not predominantly perceive “do not lie” so much as “do preserve truth,” a command that presumes avoiding a proposed act of deceit. Behind each of the “Thou Shalt Not’s” of the Ten Commandments, there is the hidden whisper of a “Thou Shalt” which precipitates each commandment. But what our conscience suggests to us we sense is not something we simply created of ourselves. Rather, we perceive that our conscience has been informed by something beyond us, something that we feel the conscience urging us to follow – a person, for one can really only follow another.

So, then, we find that our ordinary experience of conscience subtly communicates to us the realization of Another who intimately guides us in the details of life, prompting us to preserve our integrity and seek what is authentically fulfilling when we think to stray from it. The “moral law” that our conscience senses and passes to our heart is perceived within us as a proposal that holds a respectable authority and a quality that implies we have no license to alter this law, but ought to abide by it as a greater guide to human happiness than our own contrived devices. We experience what our conscience listens to and presses upon us as a standard “from above,” because we feel we ought to abide by it as something supremely compelling, as a dictate of One supremely wise with greater insight into our circumstances than ourselves. The experience of conscience insinuates the presence of God as the origin of this communication and Guardian of our welfare. To deny this and still experience a conscience that speaks forcefully to one’s whims is a very bizarre condition. And I have yet to meet anyone who truly dismisses their conscience as an intimate authority.

New Joy in Pentecost

2010-05-19T11:10:00.000-07:00

This Sunday the Church celebrates the Solemnity of Pentecost, a day which holds a significance perhaps not always fully appreciated. Originally, Pentecost was a Jewish Holiday, known in Hebrew as “Shavout.” It was a celebration of God’s providence over the Hebrew people. It is referred to as the “Feast of Weeks” in Exodus 34:22 because it was a festival of sacrifices to God over the span of several weeks and the “Day of First Fruits” in Numbers 28:26 because the sacrifices of thanksgiving were offerings of the first of the Spring crops. Eventually, it also became a particular celebration of God giving the Mosaic Law to guide the Hebrew people.

The Church, however, celebrates Pentecost because of the events of one particular Pentecost celebration noted in the Acts of the Apostles. Though the Apostles were followers of Jesus Christ, they did not see this as a break from Judaism but a completion and fulfillment of the Jewish faith. For them, continuing to celebrate the Jewish festival of “Shavout,” Pentecost, was not inconsistent with their faith in Christ. In fact, on that one particular Pentecost they would come to marvel at a divine infusion of new meaning to that holiday – a providence not of crops or livestock or material goods, but a providence of the pouring forth of God’s very own Life, the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Before ascending into heaven, the Lord instructed the remaining eleven, “behold, I send the promise of the Father upon you; but, stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.” (Luke 24:39) To the Jewish ear, this was a poignant reference to the many times God had promised through His prophets to pour forth upon His people a sharing, an indwelling, of His own Holy Spirit. (Isaiah 44:3; Ezekiel 36:26-27, 37:14; Joel 2:28-32; Zechariah 12:10) Jesus himself reaffirms the imminent fulfillment of this promise, saying such things as “these things I have spoken to you while I am still with you. But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” (John 14:25-26).

And so it is that before returning to the Father, Jesus reaffirms the coming of this gift once more, declaring, “wait for the promise of the Father…before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 1:4-5) On that Pentecost, as the Apostles prayed in the upper room, God showered upon them a gift and blessing that outweighed all others before it. As that final motion that completed the graces flowing from Christ’s redemptive death and resurrection, the early Church received the fulfillment of a long awaited promise, a promise hoped for by their parents, their grandparents, and many generation before them, now completed and made available. It was a moment of delight, a moment of joy and satisfaction, a moment which fomented celebration that surpassed even the celebration of Moses’ descent from Sinai. For just as the Hebrew community had been given by God the Law of the Commandments, He now blesses the Church with “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus.” (Rom 8:2) Just as the Hebrew people of long ago were given the precepts of God by his divine intervention through Moses, now the Church enjoys the precepts of God “written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.” (2 Cor. 3:3) Just as the Hebrew community commemorated in Shavout the coming of God’s gift of the Mosaic Law, now the Church commemorates the coming of the Holy Spirit in Pentecost, for that first Pentecost in the life of the Church stands forever as the paradigm event, a living proclamation of what blessings God desires to pour forth into His Church – a new interior companionship and intimacy, a sharing in His own Life through His Spirit, a participation in His own divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). For no gift in this life is greater than “the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.” (Eph 1:13-14)

Rejoice in the gift of the Holy Spirit in your life this Pentecost Sunday.

Simon, Son of John, Do You Love Me?

2010-05-05T08:04:00.000-07:00

(originally written April 22)

This past Sunday’s gospel reading was John 21:1-19, a passage that includes the famed dialogue between Jesus and St. Peter, whereby Jesus offers St. Peter the threefold question, “do you love me?” Though some biblical scholars see no significance in this peculiarity, in the original greek in which he wrote, St. John chose to use two differing terms for the word “love,” two different terms for “sheep,” and two different terms for the commands to “feed/tend” and “shepherd” the sheep.

“Do you Love Me?” – Jesus asks St. Peter this question three times. While each question “do you love me” looks identical in the English translation, they appear very different in the original greek in which St. John wrote his gospel. The first two times Jesus asks the question of St. Peter, he uses the term agapao, a particular kind of love that harbors the character of a complete and unabashed donation of self - a love of total entrusting of one’s will toward the other. St. Peter, however, responds with a different verb: “yes, lord, you know that I love (philo) you. “Phileo” is a love of brotherly affection. While it is a true love, it does not carry the profundity of “agapao” nor the same depth of intimacy. Jesus asks the question again “do you love (agapas) me?”And, again, Peter responds, “yes, I love (philo) you.” Finally, Jesus adopts the verb that St. Peter has been using all this time, asking, “Simon, son of John, do you love (philein) me?” As some scripture scholars assert, St. Peter either could not yet grasp the extent of the love Jesus was asking of him or was not yet (prior to Pentecost) fortified enough to commit to this degree of love. As St. Bede suggests, “Peter also restrained himself in this inquiry of our Lord’s by answering cautiously, for he remembered earlier on, when Christ’s passion was drawing near, he had attributed greater constancy to himself than he possessed.”

Regardless, Jesus, in His own loving patience, accepts in the end the brotherly love that St. Peter does have to offer at that moment as the foundation for the full love of agapao that the Lord would grow in St. Peter through His grace and that would be ultimately expressed in the martyrdom of St. Peter that Christ alludes to in the final verse of this passage. At any rate, what all biblical scholars agree upon is that this threefold sequence of inquiries on St. Peter’s commitment to Jesus and his subsequent responses is meant to be a kind of redemption of St. Peter’s threefold denial of Jesus during our Lord’s passion. Within it, Christ reconfirms St. Peter’s status as Apostle, and St. Peter, in turn, rededicates himself to Christ. As St. Ambrose states, “he is asked three times whether he loves the Lord in order that he may confess him three times whom he had denied three times.”

However, there is also another nuance in this exchange that has implications toward a particularly Catholic understanding of this passage, and this has to do with the terms Jesus uses for “sheep” and the actions required of St. Peter toward these sheep.

Along with the three questions of “do you love me” are the three commands “feed/tend my lambs,” “shepherd my sheep,” and “feed/tend my sheep.” Again, St. John records Jesus using different words in each question, denoting differing connotations.

“Feed/tend my lambs” – (boske ta arnia mou) in the greek: literally “feed/tend/promote the welfare of my little lambs,” a phrase that carries a meaning of tending to the spiritual needs of the very young in faith and the weak.

“Shepherd my sheep” – (poimaine ta probata mou) in the greek: literally “govern/keep/guide my flock/sheepfold,” a phrase that expresses an imperative to direct and oversee the entire community of believers. In other words, to spiritually manage the welfare of the Church.

“Feed/tend my sheep” – (boske ta probata mou) in the greek. Here Jesus applies the first, more intensely nurturing verb with the general noun probata, “sheepfold” or “flock,” completing the command upon St. Peter to be among the whole body of Apostles a particular emulation of Christ as Supreme Shepherd.

So then, the First Vatican Council says of this discourse between Jesus and St. Peter, “according to the gospel evidence, a primacy of jurisdiction over the whole church of God was immediately and directly promised to the blessed apostle Peter and conferred on him by Christ the lord…and it was to Peter alone that Jesus, after his resurrection, confided the jurisdiction of supreme pastor and ruler of his whole fold, saying: Feed my lambs, feed my sheep.”

All this being said, at the very end of this episode, Jesus leaves St. Peter with two words to summarize the entire account – “follow me.” St. Peter has already followed Christ, but now he must follow Him anew. He must pledge his allegiance not merely to the earthly Jesus he knew before but to Jesus as He is now in His resurrected glory. And St. Peter is commissioned by our Lord to follow Him by no other means than through the service of Shepherding the Church in an exercise of love, a love that offers everything to the Lord, even his life itself.

Human Freedom Without Evil?

2010-05-03T08:02:00.000-07:00

Q. Could God have created a world in which there was real freedom but no ability to commit evil?

Before we leap into this question, we should first clarify by a prior question – could God have created a world in which there was no evil? The answer is yes – because he did. Both the angelic realm and the material universe were created in goodness, devoid of any evil. So, how did evil get there?

To answer this, we must recognize evil for what it truly is – a void. St. Thomas Aquinas offers the analogy that just as “darkness” is known and identified only through the absence of light, so also “evil” is recognized only through the absence of good. So then, evil is not a tangible reality of its own that can be placed here or there but is, instead, the privation and corruption of goodness. What we identify as “evil” is nothing other than a void of some goodness that ought to be there – an absence of good.

So, then, how did evil come about? Through created persons (angels and humans) freely relinquishing and dismantling the good. Evil, then, is the result of free choices that remove and dissolve goodness, rather than an item dropped into our reality. Evil did not “get there” so much as it came about as a diminishing of something previously there, like the creation of a vacuum by the act of removing air. The vacuum is not really anything of its own – it is simply the absence of something which used to be there.

Now we can step into the original question at hand – could God have created a world in which there was real freedom but no ability to commit evil? And to this we must say that such a thing is, in itself, an impossibility, regardless of God’s might. Why is this so? Because freedom is nothing other than the power to choose, “the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC], n.1731) Freedom is that power through which the human will volunteers to direct itself toward one action or another. As such, any authentic personal freedom must include the capacity to use this power appropriately or inappropriately, to choose wisely or to choose poorly. Appropriate use of freedom – exercising the choice toward the good. Inappropriate use of freedom – exercising the choice away from the good (evil). So, then, “the choice to disobey and do evil is an abuse of freedom.” (CCC 1733, 387) And this ability to abuse or misuse our freedom is, in itself, a part of authentic freedom. Since freedom is a power to choose, there must always be the capacity for a bad choice for freedom to genuinely be available. Therefore, a world with genuine freedom but no ability to choose evil is simply an impossibility, for there cannot be said to be real freedom at all.

Could God have created a world that was without freedom but still good? Sure, he did that in the rest of the material universe – the elements, the stars, the plants, the animals. None of these have freedom, and yet God created them good. He could have made us in the same way, but He choose to impart upon us wills that are free so that He could create something in the physical realm capable of loving and reflecting His own supreme love, for love can only be enacted in freedom.

The Discomfort of Doing the Wrong Thing (Part II)

2010-05-01T07:59:00.000-07:00

No one truly desires evil. And this is so because evil does not have a substance of its own that one can grasp hold of; rather, evil is simply the absence of something supremely substantial, namely “the good.” It is an emptiness, a void of life and goodness. And this is why no one truly desires evil, because evil is not something one can acquire and possess – it is instead a quality upon a choice or a life that designates a loss, a diminishing, a mutilation of what makes us fully alive. It is the absence of the true, the good, and the beautiful that ought to be there. And so even when Christians speak of Satan and demons as “evil,” it is not in the sense that they have been taken over by some phenomenon we call “evil” but that they have permanently and radically expelled the good, the true, and the beautiful from their lives, lives that now (in the utter absence of the good of God's life) possess a character that can only be described as the emptiness of “evil.”
And so it is that when we are presented with choice to do the good and avoid the wrong, the allure of the wrong is not there because we want evil but because we erroneously perceive good where there is none – or, in the very least, where there is an incompletion of the good. In ancient Rome, the Roman aristocracy began to suffer madness and other mental ailments. Contemporary research has concluded that this was due to their practice of drinking wine in lead goblets. When the wine mixed with the lead, it formed a kind of sludge at the bottom of the goblet that tasted incredibly sweet. It became a favorite “treat” after one had finished his or her wine. Nevertheless, while the tongue delighted in the flavor, the body was slowly poisoned. What appeared good, delightful, and beneficial toward happiness was, in the end, a source of illness and disorder in their lives, unbeknownst to them. We often experience something very similar when given moral choices.

One of the Church Fathers of the 5th century stated that when we choose the wrong (sin) we do not genuinely desire the evil but are pursuing a presumed good in a perverse manner. If we lie to a friend, why do we do this? Because we presume the lie will preserve the good of human solidarity that we think will be lost through exposure of the truth. If we steal, why do we do this? Because we presume the theft will provide a happiness in our lives that we lack without the item we wish to steal. If we misuse our sexuality (with ourselves or with others), why do we do it? Because we presume that it will provide to us a physical and relational satisfaction that we don’t already possess. In each occasion, the choice comes out of a desire for the good through means that are not upright. And like the Roman eating his sweet, poisonous wine syrup, the means through which the good is pursued harbors dangers upon our welfare that may not be discovered until long after the act is completed. For in each of these occasions, we diminish the good in our lives and erode our freedom to fully flourish as human persons.

The Discomfort of Doing the Wrong Thing (Part I)

2010-04-30T07:57:00.000-07:00

We are there in the moment, enticed by something, lured by it, desiring it. And then, almost simultaneously, we are drawn by another sensation - a sensation to flee from what we are tempted to do. There, in the midst of the moment of choice between two actions, there is a little voice which gnaws at the heart and suggests that what we are about to do is not genuinely good and beautiful. Though some may have silenced this voice over time, there is still the memory of an event in the distant past of a choice to do some action or refrain from it and the experience of something that warned from within, "be careful! what you seek to do will not lead to your good, even though you think it will." There is that sensation that what we are about to do will not give us true freedom. It is nothing other than the sensation of having a conscience.
Often, when the word "morality" arises, we immediately recoil and imagine an angry God who never had a day of fun in his life, demanding everyone else to be as miserable as he is. And we assume the only possible motivation for forfeiting so much fun and pleasure in order to adopt a moral code is fear of punishment by the same one who has uttered the celestial "because I said so." However, from the Catholic perspective authentic human freedom is precisely the point of maintaining certain behaviors and dispensing of others. From our point of view, true human freedom is what the conscience pursues, for every immoral action (sin) ultimately wounds us and turns us away from what brings true human flourishing. Our conscience is nothing other than an interior rebellion against inviting such a calamity.

We all have experienced a point in which something internal repels us from a choice or action that we had wanted to do. And, most likely, we all can recall a similar moment in which something within us groans in disgust as we decide to do it anyway. We have "sensed" something to be wrong, inappropriate; yet, we have given ourselves into it anyway. We have heard the voice of conscience and chosen to disregard it. In these experiences, we can find the wisdom in Bl. John Henry Cardinal Newman's assertion that "let us then thus consider conscience, not as a rule of right conduct, but as a sanction of right conduct," in other words, not as a mere dictate against the bad but as an interior proposition to pursue the genuinely good. It is that interior alert that what appears to be good, what appears to be satisfying, will in the end endanger our welfare, not promote it. If this were not the case, we would never experience the conscience at all, and all actions would create equal sentiments within us. But, as it is, the conscience remains in us like a gauge that measures the true worth of an action, for good or ill, and challenges our hearts abide by this measurement for its own good. And I imagine the truly satisfied hearts are the ones who regularly do just that.

Temperance, Balance, and Karate in the Spiritual Life

2010-04-29T07:56:00.000-07:00

When we think of the concept of “balance” in life, the modern mind instinctively turns to Eastern Spirituality. From the Yin-Yang of Taoism to the Karma of Buddhism and Hinduism, balance appears as an exclusive trademark of Eastern faiths. However, it is often overlooked that balance in life is a particularly Judeo-Christian trait, as well. In its declaration on relations with non Christian religions, the Church conceded that “other religions which are found throughout the world attempt in their own ways to calm the hearts of men by outlining a program of life covering doctrine, moral precepts and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions.” Indeed, the Church accepts that these religions “often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men.” And so, one of these common beliefs that we acknowledge is that of cherishing balance in life, finding it to be not the sole property of Eastern religions but a shared appreciation among Catholics, as well. Catholics, though, award another particular name to this balance – Temperance.

When a metal is “tempered,” it is repeatedly cooled and reheated in order that it may become a stronger instrument. Temperance is that virtue that balances the whole Christian life. It is the exercise of the soul choosing to “temper” itself between two extremes so that it may enjoy a greater spiritual strength through the journey of the “middle road” of temperate balance. It provides an inner order, moderating what our passions and appetites persuade us to indulge in excess. Temperance permits the soul to find a new power and beauty in a life that possesses and commands one’s own impulses and urges, rather than the impulses commanding the person.

Though the word “sober” has come to almost exclusively be used in relation to alcoholic beverages, “sobriety” literally means “clear-minded,” “level-headed,” “sensible” – in other words, balanced. And so most biblical translations utilize the term “sober” when scripture speaks of Temperance. Certainly, St. Peter reminds us on multiple occasions to “keep sober of spirit” (1 Peter 1:13; 4:7) at one point even linking spiritual sobriety (temperance) to a defense against the devil “who prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.” (1 Peter 5:8) Indeed, the Christian is to “be sober [temperate] in all things.” (2 Tim 4:5)

In the immortal words of Karate Kid’s Mr. Miyagi, “Better learn balance. Balance is key. Balance good, karate good. Everything good. Balance bad, better pack up, go home.” The Catechism of Catholic Church informs us that Temperance is 1) a moral virtue 2) “provides balance in the use of created goods” 3) “moderates the attraction of pleasures” 4) “ensures the will’s mastery over instincts” and 5) “keeps desires within the limits of what is honorable.” (n.1809)

When God asks us to resist overindulgence in pleasures through gluttony, drunkenness, or too many hours on the playstation – this is temperance, balance. When God asks us to use our sexual powers with honor through chastity – this is temperance, balance. When God asks us to present our bodies modestly in dress – this is temperance, balance. When God asks us to pray instead of watching that last episode of CSI – this is temperance, balance. When God asks us to restrain our emotions – this is temperance, balance. When God asks us to be humble, not imagining ourselves greater then we are nor demanding in pride more than is allotted by our Creator – this, too, is temperance, balance. In all these, we hear the Holy Spirit shout to us, “Balance, Daniel-San! Be Temperate, Moderate, Sober,” for in these are true liberty, purity, and beauty. And if you master this, perhaps one day you will master karate, too…just don’t start referring to Jesus as your “Heavenly Sensei.”

Only so much I can do...

2010-04-29T07:53:00.000-07:00

I have quickly realized that I have not the time to manage two blogs along with all my other work and family obligations. For the time being, Withinthegarden is going to be relegated to a kind of mirror of the Catholic Illini blog. Select posts I've written for that blog will also appear here (and will subesquently be imported into my Facebook notes.

Temporary Silence

2010-03-02T13:28:00.000-08:00

So, this blog has been pretty quiet lately, which is mostly due to planning and organization of a new blog to be launched by St. John's Catholic Newman Center later this week, called Catholic Illini. As I am one of the main architects of this blog as well as one of the main contributors, I have not been dedicating much time to my own blog lately. Once the Catholic Illini blog is up and running, posts here should be more regular, as well.

Lent - Back For a Limited Time!

2010-03-02T13:25:00.000-08:00

Having not grown up Catholic, I often reflect on my life as a Catholic now in comparison to my life before, and I am often amazed by the power and grandeur of the Catholic faith. Yet few things cause me to marvel at the potency of Catholicism as much as the impact of Lent upon American culture. Though I am always in awe of the power of the grace of the Church's sacraments, one of the truly remarkable powers of the Church is that once every year, around late February to early March, the Catholic Church holds the amazing ability to compel billion dollar corporations like McDonalds to create commercials with bizarre singing fish.

And so it is that we say "farewell" to the Alleluia during Mass, ashen crosses are found on foreheads, the vestments of the clergy turn to purple, and the McDonald's fish proclaims to Catholics around the world, "Gimme back that Fillet-O-Fish, 'cause Lent is here again, bub."

Lent is a particular time to reflect on one's own life and recollect in the truest sense of the word. So much pulls us away from ourselves throughout life. So much fragments our minds, hearts, and souls. We have the noise of daily distractions, obligations, and trials that capture pieces of us and carry them away. Prayer and recollection is a time to reclaim those "pieces" of ourselves. In a real way, when we quietly reflect we "re-collect" those fragments of ourselves into a new whole. Prayer is a restoration of ourselves, an enterprise in which we submit to God's power to reforge the shattered bits of our hearts, minds, and souls. Whether you are Catholic or not, do not miss this opportunity this Lent to investigate more deeply God's healing upon your life and the potency of quiet reflection to reclaim a possession of wholeness in your life.

Food For Good Thought

2010-02-03T12:00:00.000-08:00

Did you ever read those “choose your own adventure” books as a kid? Though others I know didn’t enjoy them, they always made me feel in command of the characters, master of the story. So, as it is the case that this post is a bit longer than my usual post length, I’ve opted to invite you to choose your own adventure in this post – just follow the directions within the [brackets] when they appear, and enjoy my gift of power over the fate of this post!

I have eclectic musical tastes. I can in one moment listen to such classical masters as Vivaldi or the polyphony of Palestrina and the next I am drinking in the excellence of Coldplay. I delight in the bands of my youth – U2, Tears for Fears, Police, .38 Special, and more; but I also dig the old crooner standards of the 40’s-60’s – Dean Martin, Frank Sinatra, Bing Crosby. Still, my ears turn as well to many of the unique, insightful, and musically pleasing tunes of today – Five for Fighting, Sara Bareilles, Kings of Leon, even a little Lily Allen (within limits). And when I’m feeling a little more spiritually oriented, I may throw in a bit of Plumb, Kutless, or Caedmon’s Call. Hey, I’ve even been known to listen to a little country every now and then (yes, even I’m shocked at that one). Music is a part of the human genius. More than any other physical creature, we humans long for it and delight immensely in it. However, as persons, music affects more than just our emotional state – it is a medium that also assists in the formation of our minds and souls, for good or ill. Yet, too often we are reluctant to measure music beyond the dimension of emotional satiation, instead passively drinking it in with the only condition that it make us feel good. And so we throw on Katy Perry or Lady Gaga because (let’s face it) they are both very skilled at creating incredibly catchy and satisfying tunes, despite the fact that their music communicates profoundly unhealthy attitudes.

[“Seriously? Five Paragraphs of This?”: Go to Last Paragraph -OR- “What You Talkin’ ‘Bout?”: Continue to Next Paragraph]

In fact, our culture constantly breathes in all kinds of forms of entertainment passively and on the sole grounds of emotional elation. It feeds on tunes, lyrics, images, and films with minimal examination of what is being consumed and its degree of health for the heart and mind. I find this an odd way to treat our minds and souls considering that it is not the way we treat our bodies. Everyone knows that certain foods are bad for our health, and other foods are good insofar as they are eaten in temperance. From nutritional information on packaging to a plethora of diet plans, we are acutely aware that what we place within our bodies has ramifications, and that “what makes us feel good” is not the only criterion with which to judge the worthiness of consuming something. If it were, I would live off nothing but Coke, Kung Pao Chicken, Twix, and Twinkies. We are constantly assessing, moderating, and dispensing of foods based on more than just the emotional outcome – we judge our body’s general wellbeing and the long term effects on it, as well. We do not passively eat anything in sight simply because we are hungry and it tastes good. Our nourishment for the body is selected by more criteria than mere emotional satisfaction. However, this does not seem to be our general disposition toward art and entertainment. Though emotional results are not a bad measure (who wants to watch a movie that just depresses you?), if it is not the only measure we use for the health of our bodies, why has it seemingly become so for the health of our minds and souls? If we are protective of our bodies in such a way as to analyze how a food it receives might adversely affect it (even if the food is incredibly tasty and emotionally satisfying), should we not preserve the health of the mind and the soul in the same manner, assessing what might be the lasting effects of what they receive through entertainment, regardless of emotional satisfaction?

[“Ok, You’ve Convinced Me – Get On With It, Already”: Go to Last Paragraph -OR- “But It’s Just a Song, Dude”: Continue to Next Paragraph]

I tend to not admire a great deal of Oscar Wilde’s assertions, but his famous line, "Life imitates art far more than art imitates Life" smacks of keen insight. Art, be it printed art, music, or cinema, fashions our minds because all art communicates something, whether we are fully aware of it or not. Music is not just a collection of attractive notes – if it has lyrics, it is equally a communication of ideas, words that melodically say something to the heart and mind of a listener. Movies, likewise, are not random images flashing before the eyes – it is a sequence of images that communicate a tale, a worldview, a set of values. In fact the visual arts seem to have a tremendous long term mark on the soul, whether we intend it or not. More than anyone, advertisers know this to be true. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t go to the effort of painstakingly crafting just the right images to elicit an enduring impact. There is no such thing as “just entertainment,” “just a song,” “just a movie.” There is always something more our minds and hearts receive through entertainment than just a nice melody or an enticing story. And if we are not careful guardians of ourselves, the music we listen to and the movies we watch may just feed our minds and souls unhealthy declarations about sexuality and relationships or images of bodily mutilation, extreme nudity, deprived depictions of masculinity and femininity, and a myriad of other vices that do not promote our spiritual and mental wellbeing, whether we intend it or not. Many counselors of young men with pornography addictions have attested that once these images of nudity and perverse sexuality are in the mind, it is often a permanent fixture that can be suppressed through mental exercise but never totally undone. The images and messages we take in through entertainment have a lasting effect whether we intend it or not. I’ve even had that blasted “Tik Tok” song by Kesha unexpectedly pop into my head from time to time. I let my mind consume it, and now it’s there to stay, whether I like it or not.

[“Ok, But It’s Just a Song, Dude”: Go Back to First Paragraph -OR- “Ok, I See Your Point, But What Do I Do About It?”: Continue to Last Paragraph]

Now, I am not suggesting that a regular dosage of Beyonce videos and Saw III showings is going to make you sex-addict who goes around killing people. However, much of our entertainment is not as innocent as nursery rhymes and Care Bears. Some entertainment exposes our hearts and minds to images or values that can quietly damage their health, like a trickle of water that slowly erodes the limestone. We need to be honest about this and critically assess how a given piece of entertainment will affect our minds and souls, for good or ill, as well as our emotions. It seems the healthiest course of action is to analyze our entertainment with the same scrutiny with which we analyze our diet, assessing the quality of the “food” for our minds and souls with the same responsibility as we assess the quality of the food for our bodies. So, perhaps the next time we flip on the radio or go out to see a movie, the following suggestions may be prudent:

1) Listen closely to the lyrics of the song. Ask yourself whether these words obscure the Good, the True, and the Beautiful or hamper their promotion. Would you have reservations about singing these same words before the throne of God?
2) Watch music videos closely. Can you spot any images that do not portray authentic femininity/masculinity in an uplifting manner? Ask yourself whether or not those images obstruct the promotion of your spiritual wellbeing.
3) When watching movies, read a thorough, Christian review of the movie first. If there is a moderate to high degree of profanity, nudity, sexual innuendo, bodily mutilation, etc. ask yourself whether or not you have noticed a proclivity to thoughts about these things after watching similar movies in the past? Have unwanted violent or sexually disturbing images from similar films been hard to shake from your mind? Do you think this film will not deepen your appreciation of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful? Most importantly, would you feel embarrassed to watch this movie with Christ sitting next to you?

If you have answered “yes” to any of the above, good chances are that the given song, video, or film is not “good food” for your mind and soul. A different diet of entertainment may be in order for their health. And while you’re at it, you may want to lay off the Twinkies, too.

What Does It Mean To Be A Friend? (Part I)

2010-02-01T12:23:00.000-08:00

After conversations with some individuals about the topic of Friendship, I’ve decided to dedicate several posts this semester to reflection on this very subject. I must admit, though, that my decision is not entirely altruistic, for I, too, am still journeying through life’s discoveries and could benefit from growth in understanding in the gift of calling another “friend.” And so, we shall reflect and learn about friendship together.

Mankind is a wondrous innovation of God’s creativity. One the one hand it is like the animals and belongs to the world of the bodily, the material. On the other, it is like the angels, possessing a spiritual dimension that is eternally lasting and substantially reflective of God Himself. We are a creation that belong to both the realm of the angels and the realm of the beasts, and yet we are identical to neither, but instead, serve as the meeting place of the two. As such, each human person is a marvel to be cherished. Friendship, it would seem, is the nursery of this cherishing, the ground upon which appreciation of these other “images of God” around us flourishes.

Luigi Giussani, founder of the Communion and Liberation movement, regards the nature of friendship as a gentleness or tenderness toward one another’s ultimate destiny as they do their own. It is a kind of mutual treasuring of the other for the sake of the other. St. Francis de Sales puts it more simply as “mutual love” saying, “all love is not friendship, first because we can love without being loved. In such cases there is love but not friendship since friendship is mutual love, and if it is not mutual it is not friendship.” St. Francis de Sales goes on in his Introduction to the Devout Life to add two other key characteristics to authentic friendship: first, not only is it mutual love, but there must be a mutual knowledge of this love. Second, at the heart of the friendship there must exist some kind of mutual communication of who they are beyond the superficial. It is not enough to have mutual appreciation of the appearance of the other, the artistic or intellectual talents of the other, the abilities of the other. These are fine things to appreciate, but these still remain as fascinations with the “surface” of the individual.

True friendship delves into the marrow of the individual, appreciating all the complexities and qualities of their heart, mind, and soul. Each human individual is a person crafted in the image of God, and each carries a certain personal experience as that image that is altogether incommunicable to another. I will always experience reality as Shawn. None shall ever truly know that experience, nor shall I ever truly know what it means to exist as Tracy, or David, or Steve . I may investigate who they are and what their experience of life is only insofar as they invite me into it and reveal it to me. So it is then that each person exists as a kind of world unto themselves, and Friendship is that gift through which we may explore and charter each of these worlds. Too often we forget this, and those around us look to us as ordinary pebbles rather than undiscovered countries. May our friendships always be nothing less than a union of hearts and a cartography of other souls.

Joyful Mysteries for Advent 6

2009-12-14T09:14:00.000-08:00

Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary for Advent

Visitation Meditation 3:

As Mary goes to visit Elizabeth in the second mystery of the rosary, the message of the gospel progresses, and the anticipation of the coming of the Lord increases. And here we witness the profound faith of these, who along with Joseph, were the first recipients of the joyful gospel. “Blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord,” declares Elizabeth as she embraces her cousin, Mary (Luke 1:45). Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Elizabeth was informed that this encounter with her beloved cousin was to be unlike any other visitation she had received, for this was the visitation of a divine mystery, which Mary kept by faith in the treasury of her heart. By the inspiration of the Spirit, Elizabeth was made aware that “Mary…conforms herself to God’s inscrutable ways in the dim light of faith, accepting fully and with a ready heart everything that is decreed in the divine plan,” and she is made to rejoice in the wondrous faith and humility of the Virgin (John Paul II). “When Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary…Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit” (Luke 1:41), and at this moment she recognized that this joyful visitation would be forever stamped in time as the archetype of those words St. Paul would later confess of Christian life: “we walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Corinthians 5:7). In the mystery of the visitation, Mary “walks” her faith to Elizabeth, so that the hidden mystery of her womb’s fruit may be gazed upon by the eyes of faith and by the vision of another’s soul.

And so it is that the faith of one woman expands into the hearts of two others. As the blessed child grows in the womb of his mother, so does the gospel gestate and impress its glory upon two others – Elizabeth, and the unborn Baptist. Elizabeth’s belief is spurred by the promptings of the Spirit, who sails the vessel of His grace upon the current of the Virgin’s speech (Luke 1:41, 44). But so profound is the touch of the Holy Spirit, that the faith of Elizabeth spills over and pours into the soul of her unborn child who “leaped for joy” in the womb of his mother (Luke 1:41, 44). Within this mystery, John’s faith also begins, and he who could not yet speak with his prophet’s tongue, “told of the coming of the Lord by the only signs he was capable of giving,” as St. Bede writes – “a leap that showed his understanding.” So then, in the first inklings of John’s faith, Origen tells us, “at that moment Jesus made his forerunner a prophet for the first time.” In the simplicity of a child not yet born, his innocent heart delights in the presence of his Lord and his unborn body quakes with the joy of a saint. We, too, as we continue to prepare for the coming of the Lord in Christmas, should join our faith to the faith of Mary, Elizabeth, and John, and ask the Spirit to make our souls follow the example of the Baptist and “leap” within us in faith and joy.

Next Reflection (Nativity Meditation 1) Coming Soon

Joyful Mysteries For Advent 5

2009-12-11T09:46:00.000-08:00

Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary for Advent

Visitation Meditation 2:

“The Virgin Mary…at the message of an angel received the Word of God in her heart and in her body” (Lumen Gentium, n.53). Now, in the mystery of the Visitation, she carries that Word to her cousin Elizabeth who asks, “and why is it granted me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:43-44) She does not ask, “how is it that my Lord is now here?” Rather, she inquires about the Lord through a reflection on her Lord’s mother. Indeed, it would seem that because Mary bears the Word of God within her womb, she has become for Elizabeth a living sign of the gospel. She, in her virginal maternity, becomes a window into the mystery of the incarnation, a breathing testament that the Word has become flesh. For in taking flesh, the Son has willed to accomplish this by no other means than through union with a mother.

As St. Augustine remarks, “the Truth which abides in the bosom of the Father is sprung out of the earth to dwell also in the bosom of a mother.” Whenever before in human history could one ask “and why is it granted me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” It is a profound mystery that Elizabeth is given opportunity to even utter such words. The divine Son takes a mother as His own and places His heavenly Truth within her, making Himself also a son in a genuinely human manner. And, so, we must admit with St. Ephrem, “a wonder is thy mother,” for in submitting her body as the mother of the Word made flesh, she stands not only as the royal garment of the Divine King but as the living prologue of the entire gospel. As she visits her cousin Elizabeth, she is seen to be the whisper before the Word, the flicker before the Light. The motherhood of Mary is that portal through which Elizabeth peers into the mystery of God’s incarnation and delights in it. The Divine Lord is found to have a mother, and that mother is a living testimony that God has certainly taken as His own the flesh of mankind, for to have a true mother is to be undeniably man. It is, then, not surprising that upon being filled with the Holy Spirit, Elizabeth declares, “blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!” (Luke 1:41-42). The mother of the Lord stands for Elizabeth as a profound witness to the glory of the incarnation and an invitation to worship the mysterious fruit of her motherly womb, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Next Advent Reflection: Visitation Meditation 3

Joyful Mysteries For Advent 4

2009-12-06T09:00:00.001-08:00

Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary for Advent

Visitation Meditation 1:

As Advent progresses, we move to that next mystery of anticipation, the Visitation. In the Annunciation is that first glimpse into the joy of the gospel, and here, in the Visitation, we witness that hope beginning to spread throughout the world, as the Virgin Mary “arose and went with hast into the hill country,” passing the gospel to her cousin. To be certain, Mary can be said to be the foundational Christian evangelist, for long before John the Baptist points to the Savior, Mary whispers the message of this joy into the heart of his mother, Elizabeth. The Visitation of Mary to Elizabeth is nothing less than the most primitive of missionary journeys, as the joy of the gospel overflows from the heart of Mary and spills forth into the world, for upon receiving it she cannot help but to share its wonders with another. As Pope Benedict XVI writes, “when you hastened with holy joy across the mountains of Judea to see your cousin Elizabeth, you became the image of the Church to come, which carries the hope of the world in her womb across the mountains of history.” (Spe Salvi, n.50)

In the Annunciation, Mary commits herself without reserve to the service of the divine Word, and now, in the Visitation, she carries the message of the coming of that Word to her cousin, Elizabeth. “The Word entered her and became silent within her,” St. Ephrem declares, “Blessed be the babe who made His Mother a harp for His words.” Though He, in His humanity, was not yet able to proclaim His divine gospel Himself, she transmits the mystery of its message to Elizabeth in union with Him. As heaven passed the message of the gospel to Mary through an angel, so now does Mary become as an angel to Elizabeth, relaying to her the glorious message of the Word. So, then, in the beginning of this next mystery we witness the expansion of the gospel and an increase in anticipation of its glory. Mary collects the joyful proclamation of the angel and bestows it upon Elizabeth, and the two wait, united in the hope of the full revelation of the Son of God. Let us rest there with them and savor the moment of their joyful expectation.

Next Advent Reflection: Visitation Meditation 2

Joyful Mysteries For Advent 3

2009-12-05T16:55:00.000-08:00

Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary for Advent

Annunciation Meditation 3:

“Hail, full of grace,” declares the angel Gabriel, as he presents himself to that chosen maiden (Luke 1:28). As we meditate on the mystery of the Annunciation, we witness the pure Virgin Mary as she “considered in her mind what sort of greeting this might be.” (Luke 1:29) We, too, must consider why it is that an angel would salute Mary in such a manner of honor. It is for no other reason than the angel’s recognition of that singular grace of God upon her that made her the pure and spotless vessel of the Incarnate Word, so that within the body of Mary a mystery of God takes place. “The Virgin Mary…at the message of an angel received the Word of God in her heart and in her body” (Lumen Gentium, n.53). Indeed, St. Basil calls the body of the Virgin Mary the “workshop” of the incarnation, the hidden domain where the Holy Spirit crafts the humanity of our Lord and the Son blesses our flesh by making it the instrument of his divinity.

Here, within Mary at the Annunciation the divine Son lovingly embraces our flesh and our soul, caressing them with His own divinity and claiming them as His own. In this mystery we see how greatly God treasures the creation of humanity, as he reaches down to us from heaven and binds our nature to Himself. In the Incarnation God and man are intertwined and woven together in Jesus Christ. In the womb of Mary the Word becomes flesh and irrevocably binds it to His own divinity for all times, raising our nature to a dignity beyond compare (Gaudium et Spes, n.22).It is nothing less than a wedding of the heavenly and the earthly, a sacred bond of the human and the divine, a drama of God’s wondrous love that he has chosen to perform upon the stage of the holy Virgin’s body. And so it is that we, too, must join in choir with the angel and declare, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you.” As St. Augustine writes, “Him whom the heavens cannot contain, the womb of one woman bore.” “With her ‘yes,’” writes Benedict XVI, “she opened the door of our world to God himself; she became the living Ark of the Covenant, in whom God took flesh, became on of us, and pitched his tent among us” (Spe Salvi, n.49) In becoming the dwelling place of our Incarnate God she has been made by Him to be nothing other than the palace of the King (St. Ephrem).

Next Advent Reflection: Visitation Meditation 1

Joyful Mysteries For Advent 2

2009-12-05T16:47:00.000-08:00

Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary for Advent

Annunciation Meditation 2:

“For with God nothing will be impossible.” These are the words uttered by that angelic messenger to the Mother of our Lord in the mystery of the Annunciation (Luke 1:37). Though they are words to convict Mary that neither virginity nor barrenness need impede God’s power, they are perhaps for us words to compel our hearts more deeply toward the entire enterprise of God’s Incarnation, a claim seemingly absurd and a feat seemingly impossible. For the Annunciation is that wondrous event that culminates in the mystery of Christ, in whom “the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Col 2:9). Certainly, it is a mystery both profound and unexpected – God dwelling bodily, taking upon Himself our flesh and our nature. Indeed, at the moment of Mary’s “fiat” before the angel Gabriel, the Divine Son draws our nature to Himself and takes it for His own. The Word becomes flesh and dwells among us as one of us, a mystery beyond compare. As St. Ephrem writes, “Blessed He who sealed our soul and adorned it and espoused it to Himself. Blessed He who made our body a tabernacle for His unseen Nature.”

Here is the dawn of man remade and forged anew, for in the man Jesus Christ, truly God and truly man, the lowly nature of humanity is caught up into an intimate union with the nature of God. “He caused man (human nature) to cleave to and to become one with God,” writes St. Irenaeus. As the scriptures profess, “the first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven” (1 Cor 15: 47). And so it is that in Christ we find heaven poured forth into man and the mystery of God’s association with the flesh of mankind. And there in the Annunciation is the birth of this hope and the inkling of that holy child who became for us the meeting point of divinity and humanity, the sublime convergence of all that is man and all that is God. “The child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35)

“And how will this be?” we ponder with Mary. “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you,” is the angel’s answer (Luke 1:35). Just as the Spirit hovered over the waters before the creation of the world, so did He hover over the pool of Mary’s womb (Gen 1:1-2). And just as the He dove into the void and darkness and created life within it, so also did the Spirit overshadow the empty womb of Mary and filled it with the presence of He who is Life and Light. So, then, we hold fast to those angelic words, “with God nothing will be impossible,” and within them we anticipate that wondrous mystery of the Word made flesh, awaiting the hour when we shall behold his glory (John 1:14).

Next Advent Reflection: Annunciation Medidation 3

A Hopeful Gift

2009-12-03T07:03:00.000-08:00

This blog, for the most part has had a faceless audience - a reality that makes it difficult to gauge what positive effect is gleaned from its content. Though I think every "blogger" must suffer from the temptation of narcissism at some point, the intent of this blog has always been an attempt at a humble contribution to the human lives of others, both spiritual and intellectual - a gift of self of sorts, an offering of what little thoughts and insights in my life that may aid others in some way and a venue of mutual discovery of the glory of God and the meaning of human life. However, it is very difficult to ascertain the impact of a gift when the giver has nearly no direct contact with the recipient of the gift. For this reason, I am particularly dedicating this blog to the spiritual welfare of the students of UIUC and St. John's Catholic Newman Center. Though I hope many others outside the scope of that particular ministry also enjoy this blog, my life in service to the Lord is committed to serving these students second only to service to my family, and so it is fitting that my future posts be particularly oriented toward their welfare (though, again, I hope those others who already read this blog continue to enjoy it, as well). For my first installment of posts particularly written for the welfare of the students, I will be posting a series of short reflections on the Joyful Mysteries in relation to Advent. The first is here. Each week of Advent, I will post several short meditations on one of the Joyful Mysteries for Advent, moving from the first to last, as a progression of Advent meditation toward Christmas. My hope is that this may be a helpful offering to the prayer lives of our students (and others) as they struggle to enter into this season of anticipation of Christmas, despite the trials that come with the end of a semester. I hope you all enjoy them!

Joyful Mysteries for Advent 1

2009-12-03T06:56:00.000-08:00

Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary for Advent

Annunciation Meditation 1:

Advent is the hour in which we anticipate the celebration of the most sublime moment in human history, which offers such joy that Easter alone can rival. Indeed, it is the hour in which we delve into the anticipation of all of creation as it awaits the coming of its Lord, prayerfully making that same anticipation our own. It is within this time that we contemplate the beginning of “God’s mystery, of Christ” (Col. 2:2) and prayerfully enter into those same moments that surrounded the Advent of Christ all those years ago. And it is particularly within the Joyful Mysteries of the rosary that we find a window into that anticipation and mystery. Here, in that first Joyful Mystery, the Annunciation, we witness anew the beginning of the final moments of mankind’s anticipation of its Emmanuel. Here we find that angelic message that the Word shall become flesh, and a divine invitation is given to a young, simple woman.

Yet, it is not a demand that the angel brings, nor does God compel His maiden against her will to bear His divine Son. Rather, “the Father of mercies willed that the Incarnation should be preceded by assent on the part of the predestined mother, so that just as a woman had a share in bringing about death, so also a woman should contribute to life.” (Lumen Gentium, n.56) By God’s design, grace is poured forth and her freedom is preserved. The angel does not declare that the Spirit has come upon her and that she has conceived, as if to merely inform her of what God has already done apart from her consent. Instead, Gabriel tells her of what shall be should she welcome God’s invitation and, in an act of reciprocal love toward her Lord, avail her body to the service of His divine will. And after the moment that the angel Gabriel informs her that she has been selected to conceive the Son of the Most High (Luke 1:31-32) and that the Holy Spirit shall come upon her and the power of the Most High shall overshadow her (Luke 1:35), the angel does not fly back to heaven, as if his mission were complete, but remains at his station and pauses for her answer. Only after she commits her will and body to God’s own will does the angel depart (Luke 1:38). But in those moments between the angel’s message and Mary’s profession of her consent, St. Bernard of Clairvaux tells us, “all of creation held its breath and waited for her reply.” And so it is that we meditate on this first mystery and kneel in restless anticipation within that same moment, as it were. Here we, too, hold our breath and join in union with Gabriel and all of creation, awaiting those blessed and humble words, “Behold, I am the handmaiden of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” (Luke 1:38)

Next Advent Reflection: Annunciation Meditation 2

Dare We Hope

2009-08-26T07:22:00.000-07:00

Tonight, I had the pleasure of listening to Fr. Anthony Co speak on faith and belief in God, and as I listened to his gifted words an unexpected insight came to mind that I felt compelled to share in the discussion. Perhaps it was the prompting of the Holy Spirit, for even after leaving, this idea developed in my mind and monopolized my thoughts to the point that I find myself now recording them at 1am. In hopes that they may bear some fruit in your life, I now share these ideas with you:

I adore philosophical “proofs” of God’s existence, because I believe they express that it is ultimately irrational to be an atheist or agnostic. However, there is another avenue to faith, as well, an often overlooked one – that of human experience. We all assume the “ideal” ought to be – we all conceive of a reality of perfect peace, perfect justice, perfect joy, perfect love. There is no one alive who does not compare the current struggles of this world with this presumed reality of perfection. Indeed, a cynic is not one who scoffs at the notion of the ideal; a cynic is an idealist who gravely laments the absence of perfection around him. But dare we hope that such a reality exists? Dare we hope that there is One who is perfectly just, perfect in granting joy, perfectly loving? Do we settle for a god that is merely the product of the imagination, or do we dare to venture hope of a God who is Absolute, Perfect, and All Love? If given the choice, would we prefer a world in which we are alone or a world in which there exists a God who passionately loves us? If given the choice, would we prefer a world in which morality is merely an arbitrary means to preserve some semblance of civilization or a world in which the True, the Good, and the Beautiful are truly presence and nourish our lives. Would we prefer a world in which all that we can discover is what our senses perceive or a world in which the supernatural guides us and is perpetually available to us? Would we prefer a world in which we may touch something beyond ourselves and discover our meaning more completely or a world in which our lives remain a riddle and a coincidence of chemistry and physics? Would we prefer a world that, in the end, promises us decay or a world in which decay is ultimately overcome by the regeneration of divine life and eternity? I imagine most would choose the more optimistic of each of these if given the choice. If we would choose them theoretically, though, dare we hope that they are more than theory, more than conjecture, more than fantasy? Dare we hope that they are true and available to us? Dare we accept invitation into them?

Often we live our lives expecting that we possess meaning, purpose, and significance but without any understanding of the origins of this purpose. We cannot simply create a human dignity out of sheer will – either it exists or it does not, regardless of our preferences. If it is not truly present but only a manifestation of human desires, then human dignity and significance remains an illusion, a deception of the self. Yet, none are content to be insignificant, without purpose, devoid of dignity. Rather, we all assume the contrary, for life is not satisfying and happiness remains elusive if we are merely an accident, a coincidence of nature. But if we do possess a dignity that is truly there, how can we be gifted with it by anything other than a Creator? If we are an accident of the cosmos, then we have no dignity, no meaning. But if it is so that we do have meaning, dignity, and purpose then it must be bestowed by another who designs meaning, dignity, and purpose into reality and provides it from a superabundance of His own Absolute Meaning, Dignity, and Purpose. To assume an inherent dignity to human life without a belief in a Divine Creator is to live a thoroughly inconsistent human life. But what is more, to live this way is to ultimately live an unfulfilling human life, a life that does not know why it “is” nor where it is going. A life without God is intrinsically a life whose meaning is depreciated and unexplainable, a life that cannot satisfy the yearning to understand the point of one’s own existence nor the heart’s longing for more than the imperfections of this life.

Many times we may hear the term “leap of faith.” However, faith is no more a “leap” than eating is a discipline. Just as it is not unnatural to provide the body with what it desires, so it is not unnatural to provide the heart with its secret longings. Faith always begins with a question of the desires of the human heart – dare we investigate the answer to our hearts in God?

Another Babylonian Captivity

2009-08-24T06:48:00.000-07:00

Martin Luther is most commonly known in the Protestant world as a champion of the scriptures, defending them and preserving their content from danger. And so I find it sad and more than a little ironic that his spiritual descendants have seemingly abandoned scriptural integrity for "the traditions of men." Evidently, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America now concedes extra-marital sexuality as a spiritually benign practice and openly supports homosexual unions, according to a Catholic News Agency report. Now, as a convert from Evangelicalism to Catholicism I both sympathize with some of Luther's legitimate concerns while condemning the methodology by which he sought to reform them, as well as rejecting his many theologically and biblically unsound beliefs. Nevertheless, perhaps Luther's most promising legacy was an unabashed passion for the written Word of God that the vast majority of his spiritual lineage adopted, cherished, and passed along to the next generation. I had always thought that, in the very least, love of the Scriptures and the work of preserving its truths would always be a key domain for the maturation of Ecumenical activity. Apparently, not anymore. Though, it's not like St. Paul never warned us: "for the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths." (2 Timothy 4:3-4)

Time to Memorize a New Creed

2009-08-23T20:37:00.000-07:00

Ok, well maybe not a new creed so much as a new translation of the creed. The USCCB is poised to introduce the newly updated English translation of the Roman Missal in 2010. In preparation for this, they have launched a website explaining the major changes from the current translation. A few of my favorite points:

1) "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you,but only say the word and I shall be healed" will be changed to "Lord, I am not worthythat you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed," which harbors a much greater audible allusion to the biblical account of Christ healing the centurion's servant.

2)"The Lord be with you. And also with you" will be changed to "The Lord be with you.
And with your spirit."

3) "through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault" will be added after "in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done and in what I have failed to do" in the confiteor, after the original latin formula, "mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa."

4) Eucharistic Prayer I will be changed to read (alterations in bold):

On the day before he was to suffer he took bread in his holy and venerable hands, and with eyes raised to heaven to you, O God, his almighty Father, giving you thanks he said the blessing, broke the bread and gave it to his disciples, saying:

TAKE THIS, ALL OF YOU, AND EAT OF IT: FOR THIS IS MY BODY WHICH WILL BE GIVEN UP FOR YOU.

In a similar way, when supper was ended, he took this precious chalice into his holy and venerable hands, and once more giving you thanks, he said the blessing and gave the chalice to his disciples, saying:

TAKE THIS, ALL OF YOU, AND DRINK FROM IT: FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, THE BLOOD OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL COVENANT; WHICH WILL BE POURED OUT FOR YOU AND FOR MANY FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS. DO THIS IN MEMORY OF ME.

5) The epiclesis of Eucharistic Prayer II will become: "Make holy, therefore, these gifts, we pray, by sending down your Spirit upon them like the dewfall, so that they may become for us the Body and Blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ." That is just priceless beauty.

That being said, now I have to memorize an entirely new translation of the Gloria and both creeds! I've only been Catholic 10 years, people - I just got used to the ones we already have! I think this was contrived by the USCCB just to keep converts on their toes.

I also think the current "eternally begotten of the Father" in the Nicene creed reflects the co-eternity of the Son with the Father better than the planned "born of the Father before all ages," but I obediently submit to the wisdom of the Church.

Gluttons and Louts, All of 'Em!

2009-08-15T13:00:00.000-07:00

Every year we collect monarch eggs from the milkweed vine in our backyard and raise little, striped monarch caterpillars. Earlier in the summer, we had five of them. In order to preserve their lives while I took the family to a conference I was speaking at, I transplanted them back on the leaves of the milkweed plant outside and bid them farewell, assuming we would just retrieve them upon our return. Apparently, all that served to do was gift wrap a tiny, colorful buffet for some birds or predatory insects, because none of the five caterpillars were anywhere to be found on the plant when we arrived home. (Milkweed is the ONLY plant this species eats, so they could not have moved to another plant) So, Bosco Conference participants, I hope the spiritual fruits you received from the conference outweigh the lives of those five, precious creations of God! May they rest in peace (moment of silence). On a lighter note, we discovered another egg shortly thereafter, and it will soon be large enough to form its chrysalis.

Watching the little guy grow has caused me to reflect on the spiritual. I know what you’re thinking – you think I’m going to spout some cliché reflection on “spiritual transformation” or the Pauline notion of “putting on the new man” or some melodramatic drivel about “emerging” from the bad times of life into new hope. Not at all. What this caterpillar has taught me the most about is nothing other than gluttony. That’s right – gluttony. Seriously, if my son ate as much as this thing does relative to its size I’d need three jobs just to feed him alone! The thing has more than quadrupled in size in a week and a half. I once saw a presentation dispelling the notion of global overpopulation which cited some statistic that we presently do indeed produce enough food globally to feed everyone in the world and have a small enough population to comfortably house every family with a home and yard all within the area of land the size of Texas. Not if we were all giant monarch caterpillars…I’d give us a total of three hours before worldwide starvation. The intemperance of the thing is astounding. I mean, does it realize how many crunches it’s going to have to do to work all that off? It just has absolutely no concept of moderation… it’s just eat, eat, eat, eat, eat.

But gluttony is not the only cardinal sin of the monarch caterpillar; they excel in wastefulness, as well. As if it weren’t bad enough that they consume more food than a stoned rock star, they eat only enough of each leaf for it to get dried out and then meander and pout until I bring them a fresh, new one. Do you remember how charming that “hungry little caterpillar” was when your mom read the book to you as a child? I never stopped to think about it, but that has got to be the most unvirtuous insect known to man. Not only does it daily increase its fruit intake without any regard for personal restraint before going on a complete sugar binge, but the thing only eats one hole’s worth of every item…one…tiny…hole…in everything. Didn’t its mom ever tell it about all the starving children in China who would love to eat what it refuses to, or was that just my mom? What a wasteful little larva! If ever there were a poster-bug for the “Most Intemperate Eater Award,” the hungry little caterpillar would be it.

Finally, they’re just plain lazy. After cramming as much food in as they can, they just sit there, motionless…for hours. Are they in a food coma? Are they trying to remember where they left their keys? Who knows! So instead of eating a good meal and then doing something productive with their lives, they indulge in complete food avarice and then wallow in sloth. “The Seven Deadly Sins” aren’t a heavy metal band, people. These caterpillars' souls are in serious jeopardy!

So there you have it – the caterpillar, model of gluttony, wastefulness, and sloth. What a curious thing it is that God would create something so beautiful and elegant as a Monarch Butterfly from something as smug and intemperate as the caterpillar. And I bet you after it has eaten me out of house and home, it’ll form its little chrysalis, hatch 2 weeks later, hang out for a bit, and fly away without even a “thank you.” Figures.

(Note to any PETA readers: No caterpillars were harmed in the writing of this post. This post was only a satire in nature. I adore caterpillars. They are a beautiful natural expression of “spiritual transformation” and “emergence” from bad times. I hope the world begins to appreciate caterpillars as much as I do. In fact, hopefully some fine day we’ll have the first caterpillar president. Maybe in the future the Catholic Church will finally recognize the caterpillar’s equal right to the priesthood, as well. A person’s a person, no matter how small. That’s what I always say!)

(Note to everyone else: In all seriousness, I really do enjoy raising the caterpillars, mostly because they remind me of the creativity and beauty of God and because they bring a smile to my little boy’s face.)

Well Said, Fr. Euteneuer

2009-08-07T07:29:00.000-07:00

This week's been pretty hectic, so not much blogging for me till after the weekend. In the meantime, I thought many would enjoy reading Fr. Euteneuer's latest Spirit and Life newletter on our inept politicians. If you want to suscribe, you can do so on the Human Life International website - www.hli.org.

Spirit & Life®
"The words I spoke to you are spirit and life." (Jn 6:63)Human Life International e-NewsletterVolume 04, Number 24 Friday, August 7, 2009
..................................................................................

Cash for Clunkers

I have a modest proposal for getting rid of wasteful spending, irresponsible government and even out-of-sight deficits: let's demand cash for trading in congressional clunkers. The idea occurred to me when I recently found out that our esteemed House of Representatives just authorized $200 million for three new luxury jets to take them on the "necessary" trips that they have to go on in order to do the business of government that we have not asked them to do. Since "we the people" are their bosses, we technically "own" their services, and therefore, if we just told them that their services were no longer needed and traded them in for cash, we may finally be able to get some value out of them or get new ones that actually function properly. It works for deadbeat and inefficient cars, why not for congressmen - and congresswomen of course?

Clunkers are defined as old vehicles that do not meet minimum standards of fuel efficiency or road performance. In other words, they spew too much exhaust and give their owners a shaky sense of security. Well, this certainly defines the vast majority of congress-persons that govern us in Washington, right? - not to mention many in our state legislatures, too, I would imagine. We have to admit that exhaust just bellows out of Washington, DC these days. In fact, most days it seems like nothing but hot air is generated in the hallowed halls of Congress. I can't recall the last time I applauded a congressional decision or even felt remotely satisfied with congressional performance!

Less hot and dirty air from our nation's center would do us all a lot of good. If we could remove the sources of pollution - our congressmen - then we could also eliminate the thousand-page documents they incessantly generate and call legislation, as well as all second-hand pollution and retardants known as bureaucrats, special interest groups and the rest of the congressional pencil-pushers hanging around in Washington.

Our elected officials do not give us a strong sense of security on the road either. Why should "we the people" be confident about our congress-persons who have voted to enslave several generations of future Americans with a national debt that dwarfs the cumulative total of all government spending in its entire history? Silly me, but I thought our representatives were supposed to serve the common good of the people of this nation. Here they have sold more than a trillion dollars of our national debt to China, taken over large corporations like they were playing a large game of Monopoly® and are presently taxing the middle class out of existence. Now they want to nationalize our private health care decisions, make us pay for other people's abortions and pretend that they really care about the 80 million baby boomers who will soon be marched into the "end-of-life" re-education camps to complete their "duty" to the country. The nation's confidence in our elected leaders is at an all-time low. Tell me again why we need them?We now have a summer recess in which our congressional clunkers are supposed to consult with their constituents in their districts and states. Here's a thought: instead of tea parties, rallies or town hall meetings this summer let's demand hard cash for these clunkers and begin the monumental task of eradicating our national debt, restoring respect for human life, returning to the vision of a representative republic that our Founding Fathers gave to this great nation and placing our country, once again, "under God" where it belongs.There, I feel better now...

Sincerely,Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer,President, Human Life International

Minute Meditations #3

2009-07-30T18:00:00.000-07:00

The more man reflects on the creations of men, the more he is impressed with man; the more man reflects on the creations of God, the more he is devoted to His Lord. As the image of God, our creations are, in a sense, representations of our person and reflections of our glory. Certainly, God designed us with creative wills to be a genuine and profound representation of Him and reflection of His glory, and so it is that creativity is an inherent good and a value to human life. However, if we live a life detached from the creations of God and surrounded by only the creations of man, we become more accustomed to marveling in the image of man rather than the image of God. What man designs seems supremely fascinating and what God designs becomes forgotten. We even slowly numb to the realization that we, ourselves, are a creation. A life that enjoys and reflects too much on the products of man’s industry and too little on the products of God’s is a life that gravely misunderstands itself and deprives itself of true joy. Television, internet, cell phones, video games, muscle cars, etc. – these all can be goods and models of the goodness of mankind’s ingenuity, but if used intemperately (as they mostly are) they negate an investigation into God’s creation and slowly foster an ignorance of the stark disparity between the wonder of God’s visible creation and man’s. The technological creations man has contrived for himself and takes pleasure in are not necessarily bad within themselves, but if they in our daily lives eclipse nature and religion we will one day find suddenly that they have, in truth, altogether eclipsed the human soul.

A Noble Cause

2009-07-29T09:09:00.000-07:00

Pete Tigue, one of our student office workers at Newman Hall, is organizing an all staff Wii Mariokart tournament here at St. John's Catholic Newman Center and asked me to send out an e-mail to encourage more staff to sign up. Another co-worker of mine was amused enough by my approach that he thought I should throw the aforementioned e-mail on my blog for grins - here it is, enjoy!

"Hello Everyone,

Sometimes priests have emergency situations in which they need to get someplace FAST – viaticum, exorcisms, two hour 70% off vestments sales. And while they travel, there’s a lot they need to be thinking about and preparing for and far too many obstacles in the way. In truth, every priest secretly wants a skilled driver behind the wheel for them in these situations. And there is no better way to prepare for such a calling and service to the Church than Wii Mariokart. This state of the art priest transportation simulator will give you the best experience in dodging cows, gumba’s and other impediments to your priest delivering God’s grace while increasing your ability to get your priest from point A to B in a few minutes or less, guaranteed. For a limited time, SJCNC staff will be able to sample this new and innovated approach to training for serving the needs of your hurried priest in a staff Wii Mariokart tournament. 8 people are already signed up – YOU be the next! The safety of your priest may depend on it.

Priest, viaticum, exorcism, vestments, and grace are trademarks
of the Roman Catholic Church. License and restrictions may apply.
Limit 4 persons per game. No purchase necessary. Offer not valid in
Sri Lanka."

Please Remain Seated Until the Ride Comes to a Full Stop

2009-07-27T22:21:00.000-07:00

I can now say I have officially survived the annual trip to Indiana Beach with my son and nieces. I say “survive” because I am certain that amusement parks were originally created by masochists who desired to explore new and exiting ways to vomit. In fact, I am now under the impression that we need not burden the minds of our nation with philosophical debate over whether or not to water-board captured terrorists – strap them into the Falling Star for a few hours and they’ll spill the secrets of the Taliban like a teenage girl on a cell phone. I did like the bumper cars, though. I think all cars should be bumper cars. Just think of how exciting the commute to work would be. In fact, if we instituted an all bumper car society, I bet we could reduce nationwide insurance claims by 96%. “Road rage” would no longer be a dangerous and criminal offense but a friendly gesture of encouragement to lessen the monotony of that 45 minute drive to the office. And parents would actually look forward to entering a vehicle with a child possessing a learner’s permit – “Johnny, the right side of the road, the RIGHT side of the road!!!” would be replaced with “ten points for the Honda, kiddo.” The trick would be installing thousands of miles of that electrically charged metal mesh above all the roads. I mean that would cost something like…I don’t know…700 billion dollars or something. (you believe me because it’s not a round number, don’t you) But not to worry, I think the cost for that was actually written into the latest stimulus package at just shy of three quadrillion dollars. In fact, I think BMW is soon to release an energy efficient prototype of an on-road compact bumper car that runs on 85% wind generated electric power and 15% cotton candy. GM is contesting BMW’s claim to the model and insisting that GM developed the idea first. The CEO’s of BMW and GM are scheduled to discuss the issue over a beer at the White House in November.

Minute Meditations #2

2009-07-23T18:00:00.000-07:00

The foolishness of jealousy among friends is that love is not a competition. A multiplication of friends and an expansion of relationships is a certain good, but often friends feel threatened by friends acquiring new friends and spending time with new acquaintances. This is because a gain to another is often perceived as a loss to self. The same is true of scenarios in which a friend acquires some material good that we find outside our grasp. Again, we find disturbing others receiving accolades while our efforts go unrecognized. Yet in all these occasions jealousy is counterproductive to an authentic relationship rooted in genuine love, for one cannot truly love another and at the same time lament their gain of a good, nor is our love for others somehow in battle with another’s love for them. Love is not a competition; it increases as the pursuit of self decreases. Perhaps the greatest example of this is John the Baptist, who in the height of his prophetic career sees Jesus and proclaims, “you yourselves bear me witness that I said I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him. He who has the bride is the bridegroom; the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly at the bridegroom’s voice; therefore this joy of mine in now full. He must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:28-20)

Honey, I smooshed the kids

2009-07-18T19:54:00.000-07:00

It is again that time of the year when the monarchs begin to lay eggs on the undersides of the milkweed vine leaves and the volume of Reeves family pets increases exponentially. However, this morning I inadvertently turned my son's "Insect Catholic Worker House" into the "Caterpillar Orphanage of Death" as I picked up the bowl containing our new guests and accidentally crushed one renegade caterpillar that was crawling on the outside of the bowl. Luckily the young lad brushed it off as an acceptable casualty in the difficult occupation of raising ridiculously tiny pets. My inner Franciscan still thinks I deserve to wear a hair shirt or something.

Sunday Snippets - A Catholic Carnival July 18

2009-07-18T19:47:00.000-07:00

For this week's Sunday Snippets I'm submitting a reflection on trusting in the Eucharist that touches on my own experience of moving from rejection of the Eucharist as an Evangelical to unabashedly embracing it as a Catholic, as well as the first in a series of post I'm calling "Minute Meditations" - this week's focuses on the creative power of forgiveness.

Sunday Snippets--A Catholic Carnival is a group of bloggers who gather once each week to share our best posts. We are all Catholic and blog at least somewhat about Catholic things. All are welcome to participate here. To join Sunday Snippets--A Catholic Carnival or peruse the other listings, please visit the host's site here.

Can You Trust in the Eucharist?

2009-07-18T10:00:00.000-07:00

I am generally not a person who trusts others easily. Perhaps, I have been overly burdened by the numerous accounts of others issuing deception toward me in my youthful naiveté. Perhaps I am just a man who has far to grow in the virtue of Charity and care too much for my emotional self-preservation. Perhaps I credit concupiscence with more sway than I should. Whatever the case, I am one who delights in making friends quickly but eases into deeper relationships gradually and with caution, awarding trust to others only after a great deal of experience with them. For the most part, trust and faith can be used fairly synonymously in interpersonal relations. Indeed, faith in God is ultimately a trusting in Him and an entrusting of self to Him. Certainly, as the Church states, “by faith man freely commits his entire self to God.” (Dei Verbum, n.5)

And so given that it is that I tend to trust slowly, it suddenly struck me earlier this week, as I watched the priest elevate the host at mass, how much trust it requires of the soul to believe in the Eucharist. And I suddenly rediscovered a great deal of trust in my life that I had forgotten was there. Having been raised Evangelical and very aloof from the Catholic notion of the Eucharist, I resisted with every fiber of my being an attachment, a trust, in the Catholic Church’s idea of the Eucharist. For me it was heresy, idolatry, and a concept completely bereft of trustworthiness. Though Biblical and Historical evidences had already proven to me that the Catholic Church was the Church most identical to the Church of Christianity’s inception, the Eucharist remained, for me, a stumbling block. What followed was a sheer leap of faith that if the Catholic Church is the true Church established by Christ and “built upon the foundation of the apostles” (eph 2:20), then its teaching on the Eucharist must be trustworthy.

However, in truth, this was not the only trust required of me. I had to trust Christ when he said, “he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.” (John 6:56) I had to trust St. Paul when he wrote that “the cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor 10:16) I had to trust St. Justin Martyr who died in the 2nd century for the conviction that “we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our savior being incarnate by God’s word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh of that incarnate Jesus.” (first apology, n.66). I had to trust St. Ignatius of Antioch, who wrote earlier in the 2nd century and proclaimed the Eucharist to be a “medicine of immortality, the antidote for death, and the food that makes us live forever in Jesus Christ.” (Letter to the Ephesians, n.20,2) I had to trust St. Cyril of Jerusalem who wrote in the mid-fourth century, “The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ” (catechetical lectures, n.19), as well as the countless others who universally defended this belief in the first few hundred years of the Church. So it is that in finally trusting the Catholic Church when it declared that the Eucharist is the “Body, and Blood, together with the Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ” (CCC 1374; cf Council of Trent) this trust demanded a simultaneous trust in the words of Christ, St. John, St. Paul, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Justin Martyr, St. Irenaeus, Tertullian, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. John Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Ephrem, St. Augustine, St. Leo, and all the innumerable examples of devotion to the Eucharist in the first five centuries of the Church and beyond.

Perhaps it is that those who do not subscribe to the belief that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Christ do so because trust is not a cheap commodity. Trust requires an investment of the whole self and a submission to profound vulnerability. To trust that God took flesh and insisted “my flesh is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed…he who eats me will live because of me” (John 6:55,57) demands a great deal of one’s very self. To trust that those leaders of the early Church were not madmen but preserving the Eucharistic faith of the apostles weighs upon the emotions, for neither allegiance to lunatics nor rebellion towards God’s Truth are savory experiences. And, yet, there is a myriad of things that we trust of others daily without any calculations, measurements, tests, or examinations of our own – we simply believe the other because the other is understood to be trustworthy to us. In other words, we have faith in them. As John Paul II wrote, the human being is “the one who lives by belief.” (Fides et Ratio, 31) All this flooded upon my mind as I gazed upon that simple elevation of the Body of Christ, and I suddenly realized that with every reception of the Eucharist we renew our trust in Christ and His Church and rededicate our souls to faith. A devoted reception of the Eucharist involves a total submission of self to the trustworthiness of God and Church; indeed, it is nothing less than a gesture of fidelity and a yielding to a “sacrament of devotion… [and] bond of charity.” (St. Augustine, on the Gospel of John, ch.6, n.13)

Minute Meditations #1

2009-07-16T18:00:00.000-07:00

Forgiveness is a dynamic creative power that heals the demolition of sin and reconstitutes what has been dissolved by malice and selfishness. It is an act of true freedom, whereby the one offended unshackles himself from the enslavement of the emotions and finds himself the certain master over them, undeterred by their call to retribution. In complete possession of oneself, we take hold of our whole self and offer it to the other in order that love may fill the void before us produced by sin. Whereby sin and human weakness, be it anger, malice, misunderstanding, treachery, or any other discord, corrode and decay the good, the true, and the beautiful, forgiveness is one of the truly human powers God bestows upon His image, permitting it to partake in the restoration of what has been lost. Of all God’s visible creation, man alone can forgive, for man alone has a will with which to determine himself in one direction or another – either toward resentment and the continuation of the destruction of life and goodness or toward forgiveness and the regeneration of peace and beauty. As creatures with a will, we have the power destroy or to create, and as the image of God we discover the greatest authentic freedom not in destruction or coercion but in creation and preservation. Indeed, it would seem that there are fewer human endeavors in which we truly reflect the Almighty and His creative potency than in the simple gesture of forgiveness, for there is the repression of revenge, the gift of self, and the altruism of authentic love.

Stalin or Obama

2009-07-10T09:00:00.000-07:00

One of the following quotations is from Barack Obama; the rest are from Joseph Stalin.
Which quotation is from Obama?

A: "My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks."

B: "I believe in one thing only, the power of human will."

C:"You cannot make a revolution with silk gloves."

D: "Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas."

answer - A
All quotations taken from www.brainyquote.com

Jesus or Obama

2009-07-06T08:00:00.000-07:00

Three of the below quotations are from Barack Obama; one is from Jesus.
Which is the quotation from Jesus?

A: "Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek."

B: "This is the moment when we must come together to save this planet. Let us resolve that we will not leave our children a world where the oceans rise and famine spreads and terrible storms devastate our lands."

C: "My faith is one that admits some doubt. "

D: "I am the light of the world; he who follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

answer - D (John 8:12)
All quotations (except answer D) taken from www.brainyquote.com

John Adams or Obama

2009-07-04T09:00:00.000-07:00

Independence Day Bonus!
The following quotations contain 5 from John Adams and 2 from Barack Obama.
Which 2 are from Obama?

A: "In politics the middle way is none at all."

B: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

C: "Because power corrupts, society's demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases."

D: "The Hebrews have done more to civilize men than any other nation. If I were an atheist, and believed blind eternal fate, I should still believe that fate had ordained the Jews to be the most essential instrument for civilizing the nations."

E: "If the people cannot trust their government to do the job for which it exists - to protect them and to promote their common welfare - all else is lost. "

F: "What Washington needs is adult supervision."

G: "Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak."

answer - E, F
All quotations taken from www.brainyquote.com.

Cicero or Obama

2009-06-30T08:00:00.000-07:00

One of these quotations is from Barack Obama; the rest are from Cicero.
Which one is the Obama quotation?

A: "I never admire another's fortune so much that I became dissatisfied with my own."

B: "In a republic this rule ought to be observed: that the majority should not have the predominant power."

C: "The more laws, the less justice."

D: "When you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody."

answer - D
All quotations taken from www.brainyquote.com

Sunday Snippets - A Catholic Carnival June 27

2009-06-28T04:22:00.000-07:00

Only one submission for this week's Sunday Snippets - No One Lives as a True Atheist, a reflection on whether universal human behavior betrays atheism, supplemented with some Vulcan wisdom from Mr. Spock.

"Sunday Snippets--A Catholic Carnival" is our opportunity as Catholic bloggers to share our best posts with other Catholic bloggers. To join in or peruse the carnival, visit the host page. Have a great week!

Vacation

2009-06-27T19:16:00.000-07:00

We'll be on vacation the next two weeks, so other than a few posts I've scheduled ahead, the blog will be pretty sparse until I get back. Be sure to get some holy leisure of your own.

Machiavelli or Obama

2009-06-27T08:00:00.000-07:00

One of the below quotations is from Barack Obama, the rest are from Niccolo Machiavelli.
Which is Obama's quotation?

A: "There is no avoiding war; it can only be postponed to the advantage of others."

B: "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

C: "The new ruler must determine all the injuries that he will need to inflict. He must inflict them once and for all."

D: "There is no surer sign of decay in a country than to see the rites of religion held in contempt."

answer - B
All quotations taken from www.brainyquote.com

No One Lives as a True Atheist

2009-06-25T07:00:00.000-07:00

My home is a home steeped in Star Trek lore. Before my son could add, he understood the basic principle of a “hull breach” and spontaneously utilized the “Borg” as a paradigm for the unity of mind and will of the Trinity. In a fit of frustration after an already long car trip, he once shouted in desperation, “ahhh, two to beam up!” We just recently began watching the original series, under the auspices of our public library, and one particular evening after watching an episode, our son turned to us and innocently asked, “what’s logic?”

For those unfamiliar with Star Trek, one of the central figures of the original series is a character named Spock who is a Vulcan, a race of beings who have systematically suppressed all emotion and function exclusively on the plane of logic (with the exception of mating season…but I digress) As such, he is constantly pointing out to the other characters what actions and ideas are logical or not. Gene Roddenberry, creator of Star Trek and self-acclaimed Atheist, seems to have created this character as the cool and rigid rejection of the “irrationality” of the supernatural, (though his writers, from time to time, are a little inconsistent with that theme). And I imagine that Spock stands as the embodiment of how most Atheists, Agnostics, and Skeptics view themselves – collected, rational, and unyielding to anything that cannot be measured and quantified by logic and scientific method. Nevertheless, the life of the Atheist betrays such a proclaimed fidelity to logic and “freethinking.”

Indeed, for the Atheistic worldview to be deemed correct and consistent, there are several norms of human life that must logically be disposed of. Why is this the case? Simply put, a world that is not the result of a Divine Creator but merely the ramification of chance, randomness, and happy coincidence cannot, logically, at the same time be a world that possesses purpose, meaning, and significance. Nevertheless, there is not a human soul that does not insist on purpose and meaning in life, an assertion that is most commonly expressed in the demand for a moral order. Morality is, after all, a systematic preservation of what possesses meaning and dignity. It may not be that every person insists that there ought to be a universal moral order, but everyone believes there is one, nonetheless. As John Paul II wrote in his encyclical Fides et Ratio (Faith and Reason), “all men and women, as I have noted, are in some sense philosophers and have their own philosophical conceptions with which they direct their lives. In one way or another, they shape a comprehensive vision and an answer to the question of life’s meaning, and in light of this they interpret their own life’s course and regulate their behavior.” (n.30) Even if one’s morality is merely reduced to “thou shalt not infringe upon my own self preservation,” it is a statement that assumes that all should universally obey, and everyone carries this imperative within them, even the Atheist. All find another’s behavior of deception, betrayal, infidelity, injustice, and malice toward them as the collapsing of a universal significance and purpose and an aberration of human life. As St. Augustine states, “I have met many who wanted to deceive but none who wanted to be deceived.” (Confessions)

However, how can this possibly be a logical expectation of the Atheist? If there is no Divine Creator, there can be no such thing as human dignity, for we would merely be the result of randomness and coincidence, a cosmic accident or peculiarity. Accidents and coincidences do not possess dignity – they are, by nature, without meaning and demand no respect. Fidelity, honesty, bodily integrity, justice, civilization – these all are illusions and mere fantasies of the emotions if there is no God. As meaning cannot flow forth from non-meaning, and dignity cannot be born out of an absence of dignity, the only way to logically demand another honor one’s human dignity is if that person comes from the creative action of He who is supremely dignified and not from chance. In other words, if human life is not designed by a Supreme Maker but is instead accidental, from whence does human dignity arise? If there is no God, there is no logical argument as to why all are universally obligated to protect any of the aforementioned goods. Indeed, there would be no rational argument for human dignity at all, for an objective value cannot simply spring out of nothingness. Without a God who is Creator and Supreme Lawgiver, there is nothing that impels me to work toward the good of society and the human person, for neither possess a dignity of their own but are the mere result of coincidence. In the end, the morality of an Atheist is reduced to mere personal preference and not the authentic defense of what is inherently “good.” At best, I could argue, as a hypothetical Atheist, that it is in my best interest to preserve these goods. However, such a suggestion still cannot answer why “my best interest” has any merit of its own nor why I would have such an innate personal dignity as to warrant its health. I concur that selfishness does seem a more logical Atheistic morality than an altruistic one, but the only consistent morality for an Atheist is sheer indifference to everything (including one’s self), which is no morality at all.

Though one blog post is far too short to fully give light to the often overlooked implications of an Atheistic worldview, I submit these brief reasons as to why I attest that no one lives a truly Atheistic life, at least not an honestly consistent one. Indeed, it seems an impossible endeavor, for no human soul can master being indifferent to its own welfare, but this is precisely what it must do to honestly live a life without belief in a Creator. This being said, I know several Atheists and Agnostics who are fine individuals who subscribe to an ardent morality. I commend them in this and hope that they continue in this pursuit. But to this I can only say in all the Vulcan candidness I can muster, “Illogical, Captain.”

Thanks a lot, Adam

2009-06-24T19:36:00.000-07:00

St. Francis de Sales was known for his keen analogies of the spiritual life that he found in God's creation. One such analogy was that of the garden and the spiritual life. Weeds were, for St. Francis de Sales, a principal metaphor for sin in the garden of the spiritual life. I have three real gardens on my property - they are all very sinful! St. Francis de Sales goes on to say, "We must be prepared to see weeds growing in our garden and also have the courage to pull them out." I would go out and weed my gardens, but it is so hot this week that I'm pretty sure that Beelzebul has called a two week truce with the Church in order to retreat to hell and cool off for a bit. After the Fall, God rebukes the serpent, then Eve, and then finally Adam. But before condemning Adam to mortality and a return to dust, he informs Adam that the ground is cursed because of him, "thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you." (Gen 3:18) So, as I peruse my once beautiful gardens in shambles, all I can say is, "Thanks a lot, Adam!"

Sunday Snippets - A Catholic Carnival June 21

2009-06-22T19:39:00.000-07:00

For my debut Sunday Snippets, I have a whimsical Catholic analogy for a newly discovered great beer - my new, frothy love, as well as a reflection on the true answer to our nation's woes, with a little help from Pope John XXIII.

Be sure to check out the rest of the Sunday Snippets Catholic Carnival at the host site. Have a great week!

The Salvation of America

2009-06-20T18:00:00.000-07:00

I must admit, I am perplexed by our society, and I am at a loss as to how we have become the nation we are today. Indeed, though I am proud of what America has been, I weep over what it has become. There are, to be sure, complex reasons as to how we have gone from a nation that set out to "promote the general Welfare" to a society that aims principally at personal pleasures and from a people who assented to the mantra "give me liberty or give me death" to a community that relinquishes its liberties in exchange for the vague promise of comfort. Yet, I imagine our nation's current crisis is mostly due to the fact that we have forgotten our origins as a confederation of individuals under "Nature's God," "endowed by their Creator," and "appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world." (cf. Declaration of Independence)

Though I deeply admire the courage and tenacity of such individuals as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, I have yet to hear either of them address the real solution to our nation's woes. Despite the fact that they (particularly Hannity) point out the need for a resurgence of "principles" and men and women who will steadfastly defend them, the term "principles" is still too soft, too generic, too ubiquitous to truly identify what needs to be revitalized. Indeed, what America needs is a return to Virtue. America will not be saved by an economic stimulus package; it will not drink in new life from a universal health care plan; it will not be reborn from the font of man's ingenuity. We cannot create a Utopia by any means within the powers of mankind. America must look again to her God and reconsecrate her soul to a life of virtue. Prudence, Temperance, Justice, Fortitude - to much of our nation they are like characters in long forgotten fables, shadows of a bygone era and emblems of antiquity. Throughout the history of mankind, every nation that has forgotten them has dissolved into a mere echo of a civilization, and every state that has cherished them and coupled them with Faith, Hope, and Charity has prospered. It is a simple formula that God has written into our very nature and of which modern man has little memory.

Pope John XXIII eloquently expressed in his in encyclical letter, Pacem in Terris (Peace on Earth), another notion that America's Founding Fathers knew well, yet her current children have forgotten. And this is that all rights have corresponding duties. "Because he is a person," John XXIII writes of Man, "he has rights and obligations flowing directly and simultaneously from his very nature." (n.9) He adds that natural rights are "inseparably connected...with just as many respective duties" (n.28) He goes on to remark further that "those, therefore, who claim their own rights, yet altogether forget or neglect to carry out their respective duties, are a people who build with one hand and destroy with the other." (n.30) In my opinion, this is a most apt description of what much of the culture of America has become. Much of America has become a people who demand the preservation of certain natural rights and the creation of several phantom rights yet expect to be held accountable to no virtuous exercise of either. They simply must exist and damn the man who proposes they be executed in a virtuous and upright fashion.

Elsewhere, John XXIII comments that "any human society that is established on relations of force must be regarded as inhuman." (n.34) Though many suppose the salvation of our nation rests in some imposed "change" carried upon the waves of a new and dynamic series of government programs, the government cannot force us into an authentic national renewal, lest America lose its very humanity, for beneath the felled tree of freedom is the corpse of the human soul. No, "inasmuch as God is the first Truth and the Highest Good, He alone is the deepest source from which human society can draw its vitality." (PeT, n.38) America must rediscover its original dedication to God, written in the very fabric of the spirit of its Founders. And it must awaken again to the prosperity of Virtue. To be certain, as John XXIII exclaims in his same encyclical, "a civic society is to be considered well ordered, beneficial and in keeping with human dignity if it is grounded on truth." (n.35) Much of the heart of America slumbers in indifference to Truth. However, our Nation has twice recovered from this before, in what came to be known as the "Great Awakenings." The first began in the 1730's and served as a key element to the founding of the nation - the second, in the middle of the 19th century, led to the strengthening of the Union and the Emancipation of those unjustly held as slaves. Let us pray for a third.

My New, Frothy Love

2009-06-19T23:04:00.000-07:00

As many know, beer is, indeed, the holy sacrament of hops. Like my acceptance of the Catholic faith, my full immersion into devotion to this blessed gift from the heavens was a slow process, mostly because of my uncle's delight in cajoling me into sampling such swill as "Miller" and "Pabst Blue Ribbon" at a young and impressionable age. Nevertheless, I recovered several years ago to find that one must not uproot the wheat with the weeds. Though I have come to discover that Guinness is the "source and summit" of all beerdom, I have recently discovered the magnificent beer, Smithwick's. Amber, bold, and refreshing, it is the proper companion to a solid diet of Guinness. Certainly, if Guinness is the Priest, Smithwick's is the Deacon. (Sorry, Heineken, you've just been demoted to Acolyte...Miller, you'd be lucky to kiss the foot of the Porter...Bud Light, you are to beer as baptism is without a Trinitarian formula - just lukewarm water)

The Mystery of Human Life

2009-05-21T08:32:00.000-07:00

Since I am now working for the pope, I imagine I should begin to post more often and place more effort in providing commentary that complements an invitation to the gospel. So I imagine I shall begin where there is a glaring overlap between the hearts of John Paul II and Benedict XVI – the topic of human life. By this I do not mean the pro-life movement; rather, I mean more generally the meaning and purpose of human life. Certainly there are many parallels one may draw between these two popes (an immense passion for the Eucharist and devotion to Our Lady are just two), but a misunderstanding human life, I imagine, is for these two popes the most critical human ailment of our times, and its implications can be seen everywhere.

George Wiegel mused that the central modern crisis in the mind of John Paul II was a stark confusion over what it means to be a truly human person. One can see in the late pope’s writing what vigor and concern he utilized to show to the world Christ’s revelation of mankind’s purpose. Certainly, the words that echo foremost in his writing on this subject were those of the Second Vatican Council: “it is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of man truly becomes clear.” (GS, 22) To be certain, the Church sees the incarnation of the Son as not only the most profound revelation of God but, simultaneously, a deep revelation of who man is to be before God. As St. Cyril of Alexandria states in the 5th century, “this is how he was revealed to those on earth, not as laying aside what he was, but as coming in the assumption of our manhood, and possessing it perfect in its own rationale.” (Scholia on the Incarnation, n.4)

Pope Benedict XVI shares this sentiment and builds upon the words of his predecessor. For Benedict, the root of confusion over the meaning of human life is nothing other than the expulsion of God from the human heart. In many of his audiences, the pope has commented on the minds and will of mankind becoming “disengaged from God” resulting in “a world without God.” He laments so bitterly over this because he understands that mankind, as the image of God, cannot discover itself apart from God – humanity cannot discern its purpose, value, and meaning in adoration of itself, for without God man is a riddle unto himself, and the fullness of human dignity and purpose remains a vague shadow on the wall. As Bishop Alvaro del Portillo comments, “you have witnessed the incredible fact that many people began by putting God in parentheses…they end up throwing him out – like an intruder.” He goes on to state that, as a result, humanity “has been reduced – it is no exaggeration, one can see it everywhere – to a stomach, sex, and money.” (pastoral letter, Dec 25, 1984, 4) As humanity looks upon itself without reflection on God, it truncates the purpose of human life to only what avails it temporary happiness. It sees what provides pleasure and restricts human dignity, human meaning, to that alone. When one does not understand the value and meaning of something, one will invariably neglect and abuse it. (no matter how many times one’s father has warned him that the pet guinea pigs will curl up and cease to exist without a regular regimen of water! But I digress) And this is precisely what humanity has done to itself. One need only observe society marveling at the activities of Britney Spears, Lady Gaga, Ron Howard, Richard Dawkins, and certain government leaders to ascertain that humanity has, in general, lost an understanding of itself and settled upon a life that does not fully appreciate the dignity and meaning of “the mystery of man.”

As the image of God, “man was created for greatness – for God himself; he was created to be filled with God.” (Spe Salvi, 33) Since man is the image of God, if man loses his connection with God, he will ultimately lose his connection with himself and drift in aimless confusion about life. Every human life possesses great value – each human mind, human will, human body is infused with purpose and meaning, and the activities of each of these exercise a reflection of divine mystery. Human life is a rich mystery precisely because it is the image of He who is Ultimate mystery. In reflection on God alone can mankind fully reflect upon itself. Only in the human soul’s study of God can it truly investigate itself. And solely in a spiritual penetration of divine life does the mystery of human life become illumined. And therein, I expect, is more glory and joy than mankind presently assumes.

This Blog Commissioned by the Pope

2009-05-20T11:27:00.000-07:00

...ok, so not really. But Catholic News Agency reports that Pope Benedict XVI has called for an increase in internet evangelization.

"the Holy Father launched an appeal asking that cyberspace be a place that promotes a 'culture of respect, dialogue and authentic friendship where the
values of truth, harmony and understanding can flourish,'" states CNA.
Furthermore, reports CNA, the pope urged,
"I am inviting all those who make use of the new technologies of communication, especially the young, to utilize them in a positive way and to realize the great potential of these means to build up bonds of friendship and solidarity that can contribute to a better world...Young people in particular, I appeal to you: bear witness to your faith through the digital world!"
Though 32 increasingly feels "old" compared to those I encounter at the Newman Center, I'm pretty certain that I still fall within the boundaries of the "young." So there you have it - this blog is now under the auspices of the pope himself! So all of you who regularly read this blog (you both know who you are), proudly make known that you were there when Within the Garden acquired the direct patronage of Pope Benedict XVI, and spread the word - the pope says so.

Pick Your Jesus

2009-05-20T10:44:00.000-07:00

I am a person who constantly ponders. And, working at a Newman Center, the three things that occupy most of the revolutions of my mental cogs are God, the spiritual welfare of my family, and the spiritual welfare of our students. After having served 8 years as a member of the pastoral staff on this campus (and an additional 3 as a student participant/volunteer in this campus ministry), I am aware of several things that may be true of many campus ministries and, perhaps, Catholic ministry as a whole. First, culture is perpetually in flux, and, as such, produces generations of youth whose needs and spiritual ailments are equally in a constant state of evanescence. Second, relationships are ultimately vastly more important in forming souls than programs, though relationships need programs no less than matter needs form. Third, ministry that is not unified risks presenting the gospel as an array of spiritual “flavors” in which one may select the aspect of Jesus that is most attractive to him or her and dispense of the rest. It is a temptation that I imagine many servants of the Church fall into, sometimes unwittingly, out of a sincere desire to “meet people where they are” and “become all things to all men.” (1 Cor 9:22) Nevertheless, by way of this gesture that genuinely seeks to cherish every dimension of Christ uniquely, ministry often simultaneously presents Christ as ubiquitous, fragmented, and incoherent.

There is a well-known analogy that many in ministry use to express the goodness of diversity in pursuit of God. It is the Analogy of the Elephant, in which four blind men approach an elephant, each embracing one aspect of the elephant, and each adamantly certain that their perceived facet of the elephant adequately defines what an elephant is, due to their experience of the elephant in that manner. The man who grabs the trunk states that the elephant is like a snake; the one who embraces the leg views the elephant being like a tree; the man who feels the ear sees the elephant as being like a fan; finally, he who grasps the tail sees the elephant as something akin to a rope. The conclusion is that each of them is correct, in their own way, and so the elephant is like a snake and like a tree and like a fan and like a rope all at once – these are merely complimentary aspects that together fully express what it means to be “elephant.”

In full disclosure, I loathe this analogy, especially when it is applied to approaches to ministry. One of my dear friends is wont to often say, “all analogies limp,” and where this analogy limps, trips, falls down the stairs, and breaks its neck is in the simple fact that none of these men truly know what “elephant” means; rather, they are all perpetually trapped in a caricature of “elephant,” a mere aspect tragically divided from everything else the elephant is, for at no point does one seek out to discover the truth that the others have found. Instead, each is content to remain in his portion of the truth alone, simply because it is what he first experienced and what he is most comfortable with.

Nevertheless, this is often what we in ministry are tempted to do – grant those whom we minister to dimensions of Christ while leaving them bereft of a full knowledge of Christ the person. As Aristotle stated in his Metaphysica, “the whole is more than the sum of its parts.” And so, my second qualm with the elephant analogy is that ministry is not, in fact, a guide to discovering an elephant but to discovering a person (or rather a communion of persons, Trinity), and in no situation are we ever satisfied with others approaching our personal identity in the manner in which these blind men approach the elephant. None would appreciate another ignoring our imagination and interests because they do not excite him as much as our sense of humor. None would be satisfied with another neglecting our endeavors of expression (arts, sports, etc.) because they are not as enticing as having casual time together. And a person would be thoroughly discontented with a spouse who only delights in physical affection to the exclusion of meaningful communication. We cannot sequester some aspects of a person from the rest and claim to know and engage the whole person.

Nevertheless, this is often how we present Christ in ministry. We, in essence, tell the masses to “pick your Jesus.” We subtly permit them to select either the Jesus who teaches or the Jesus who feeds the poor or the Jesus who meets us in prayer or the Jesus who builds up the Body in fellowship. But Christ is not a snake or a tree or a fan or a rope – he is a person. Jesus Christ cannot be reduced to a mere summation of pastoral functions. We must never complacently leave others (or ourselves) within one aspect of Christ, detached from the rest of him. Those who discover Jesus as the Divine Word must also be shown Jesus the Compassionate Healer. Those who discover Jesus the Compassionate Healer must also be shown Jesus the Divine Word. For they are not two Christs but one, unified Christ. We cannot be content with catechesis, social justice, fellowship, and liturgy as dimensions of encountering Christ that exist independent of one another. Ministry that insulates any of these aspects from the others and presents it as the supreme or solitary expression of Christ (either overtly or unintentionally) is a ministry that works to dismantle the whole Christ into a selection of pieces. Any of these without the others lacks the whole Christ, lacks the whole person of Jesus. He is not He who does this or that; He is the savior that teaches, feeds the poor, meets us in prayer, and builds up the Body in fellowship. The whole Christ must be presented so that the whole Christ can be received and loved. We do not divide persons into portions to pick and choose – we love and embrace the whole. A gospel that expresses and reposes within only one dimension of Christ is a woefully incomplete gospel, indeed.

The Demise of Evangelicalism?

2009-04-15T18:00:00.000-07:00

Doug over at Room With a View posted back in March a link to a very insightful article on the question of the demise of the evangelical community. As I am just now getting back to catching up on my favorite blogs, I have only now read the article. Nevertheless, it is a worth while read. It is written by Michael Spencer, who presents himself as "a postevangelical reformation Christian" and begins his article with the audacious claim that "we are on the verge – within 10 years – of a major collapse of evangelical Christianity." Though seemingly alarmist, Mr. Spencer does lay a very compelling argument. Having been raised evangelical prior to my full initiation into the Catholic faith in college, I have noted through the years how very different the evangelical community looked to me in college in comparison to the ecclesial communities of my youth and how the evangelical communities of today reflect almost nothing of what I remember them to be in my experiences of yesteryear. I will often listen to Evangelical pastors on the radio or watch the megachurch pastors on Sunday mornings, partially in a spirit of ecumenism and partially in a spirit of curiosity, and time and again I am disheartened by how little scripture is reflected upon and how intensely these communities seem to suffer from a "cult of personality" pastorship whose sermons seem to be dominated by a kind of "spiritual self help," which can be reduced to nothing more than emotion driven pep talks. Though I in no way imply a complete absence of biblical preaching, the most common sermons of today's evangelical communities only marginally resemble the sermons I recall from my youth, sermons that were more concerned with doctrine than diction and more oriented toward formation than feelings. I am deeply disturbed by the number of young evangelicals that I meet whose biblical knowledge is cursory at best, a phenomenon that was nearly unheard of in the evangelical world I knew 20 years ago. And so I must concur with Mr. Spencer that

"Evangelicals have failed to pass on to our young people an orthodox form of faith that can take root and survive the secular onslaught. Ironically, the billions of dollars we've spent on youth ministers, Christian music, publishing, and media has produced a culture of young Christians who know next to nothing about their own faith except how they feel about it. Our young people have deep beliefs about the culture war, but do not know why they should obey scripture, the essentials of theology, or the experience of spiritual discipline and community. Coming generations of Christians are going to be monumentally ignorant and unprepared for culture-wide pressures."

Mr. Spencer also asserts that

"Despite some very successful developments in the past 25 years, Christian education has not produced a product that can withstand the rising tide of secularism. Evangelicalism has used its educational system primarily to staff its own needs and talk to itself."

and

"Look for ministries to take on a less and less distinctively Christian face in order to survive."

What is the end result of all this, in Mr. Spencer's opinion? "Denominations will shrink, even vanish, while fewer and fewer evangelical churches will survive and thrive." Interestingly enough, Mr. Spencer sees the principal havens that Evangelical will fly to from the ashes of Evangelicalism as the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches. Spencer concedes that over the past few decades droves of Evangelicals have entered these Churches, and he expects the trend will persist. I concur again, though I would add that the reasons for this phenomenon go beyond the reasons he references and includes, among other things, a surge of evangelical desire to "reconnect" with the origins, a renewed discovery of the Catholicity of the Church Fathers, and the nagging yearning of the human spirit to pass from the mundane to the mystical, a movement that is difficult to do within the liturgical, theological, and architectural minimalism of the Evangelical community.

Mr. Spencer concludes his article stating, "I'm not a prophet. My view of evangelicalism is not authoritative or infallible." Nevertheless, I must confess that I, too, see what he sees, and I suffer from a torn spirit that laments for the plight of my evangelical brethren while, all at once, rejoicing in hope that these circumstances might lead them to more deeply discern the allure of Christ within His Catholic Church.

Living Within the Garden Part II - Triduum

2009-04-12T22:29:00.000-07:00

As the Sacred Triduum draws to a close and we reflect on those three Sacred days, I am reminded once more of their connection to those three Sacred gardens is our salvation history and their impact on human destiny. Continuing the reflection in my last post, I once again meditate on those three biblical gardens: Eden, Gethsemane, and the Garden in which the body of our Lord was entombed and glorified (John 19:41-42), for they are all interwoven in God’s mystical plan of salvation, and within these gardens we discover the saving drama of the ages, a drama whose central figure is Christ, the New Adam, prefigured and foretold in that first and original Adam (Rom 5:14).

There in that first garden, Eden, was the beginning of life, wherein God breathed forth His life-spirit, His neshemah, into the clay of the earth and caused man to be. And there, within the prayers of Christ in Gethsemane, the New Adam, the Son in flesh caused man to “be” once more. Certainly, there are seemingly inexhaustible parallels between these two gardens, and at the center of both are a man who paves the destiny of mankind and institutes an entire epoch of human history, the first bringing an era of sin and death, the latter an era of grace and life. (Rom 5:17) Such graces flowed from Eden, for there man found harmony with his Maker, and, as John Paul II explains, discovers also the nuptial meaning of his body and its expression as the Image of God. Yet, it was also within the garden of Eden that Adam committed his most heinous act, that of turning away from God, and strove “be like God” but “without God, before God, and not in accordance to God.” (CCC 398) And, as a result, Adam forfeited his participation in divine holiness and found his body destined to return to the ground as dust, corrupt and decayed.

Nevertheless, in the events of the Sacred Triduum we see the events of Eden once more, remade and regenerated by divine life. On Holy Thursday, as Jesus begins His passion in the Garden of Gethsemane, Eden reverberates within the prayers of Our Lord. As one under the shadow of the error of that first Adam, Christ the New Adam fills Gethsemane with the holiness abandoned in that first garden. Whereas the first Adam declared to God, as it were, “I shall do as I choose and as my will demands,” Christ, the New Adam announces to the Father, “not my will but yours be done.” As the first Adam fled from God, Christ chases Him in prayer, and as the first garden marked mankind’s separation from God, this second garden draws them together in union. As the first Adam doubted God in Eden and foolishly took command of his own destiny, so the Divine Son in Gethsemane trusts the Father with a truly human heart and commends his entire life to the Father through a truly human will. And, whereas Eden found mankind becoming fragmented and distant from one another, so Gethsemane finds our savior praying for mankind’s unity in God (John 17).

Finally, within Good Friday and Easter we find the completion of Eden’s restoration. In that garden tomb, He who did not deserve death carried the death of Adam. Yet the curse uttered within that first garden was found destroyed in the garden of the tomb, for in that mysterious tomb man’s body did not return to the ground nor did his flesh return to dust (Gen 3:19); rather, for the first time since the tragedy of Eden the flesh of man ceased to see corruption in the resurrected body of Christ (Acts 2:31). There in that third garden, the curse of the first garden is crushed – the flesh previously destined for decay tastes none and partakes in the glory of its divine owner, and the graces of Eden are restored and infused with a newness even unknown to that first garden. For here in this last garden, Christ’s glorified flesh proclaims that “Christ’s inexpressible grace gave us blessings better than those the demon’s envy had taken away.” (St. Leo the Great). While in that original garden “the first Adam became a living soul,” in this last garden “the last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” (1 Cor 15:45) And as the events of the garden of Eden destined us to bear “the image of the man of dust” so the events in the garden of His resurrection announce that we are now destined to “bear the image of the man of heaven.” (1 Cor 15:49)

The garden is a place of growth and life, a natural symbol of renewal, rebirth, and regeneration. It is no wonder, then, that these most poignant events in salvation history take place within gardens, from Eden to Gethsemane, to the garden of the resurrection. When the world blooms again and announced the radiance of Christ’s resurrected glory, let us “live” within the memory of these gardens, and rejoice in God’s mercy and grace.

Catholic Carnival 218

2009-04-01T19:45:00.000-07:00

The most recent Catholic Carnival is up - check it out here

Living Within the Garden Part I

2009-03-24T09:53:00.001-07:00

It is these times of the year that I am most poignantly reminded of God’s mysterious plan to create a world that breathes forth a living image of his mercy and glory, for it is this time of the year that life is born anew. Hyacinths, Crocuses, and Tulips slowly buckle the earth and break through their winter tomb and begin to emerge reborn and remade. The trees begin to bud and the birds return from their wintry absence, like the ghosts relatives of long ago, spoken of only in legend and myth, now come again alive and in renewed flesh. In Winter, death seems to cover the land in a reign of stubborn tyranny, but now its grip is loosened and it can do nothing but wait in fearful anticipation of that which shall soon usurp its throne – the Life of Spring. Truly, the movement from Winter to Spring is nothing less then a natural drama of Lent and Easter by divine design.

Vegetation and the cycle of seasons have always held spiritual significance in mankind’s religious experiences. In Norse mythology, the heavens, earth, and the underworld are all united by a common “world tree,” Yggdrasil, which connects all the worlds and enables them to communicate. It was St. Boniface’s felling of the “Tree of Thor” that the Germanic people of Geismar considered evidence that the Christian God was mightier than theirs, all requesting immediate baptism. And it was the tamarisk tree that contained the slain body of Osiris prior to his resuscitation. To be sure, all religions seem to have witnessed a message of the divine in vegetation and its natural rhythms. Certainly, the vegetative cycles of the seasons denounce the permanence of death. It is God’s natural symbol of his mercy. It is God’s natural declaration to mankind that death is not irrevocable, neither natural nor spiritual. The movement from Winter to Spring is the medium through which God’s divine plan of salvation is emulated before the senses, the immaterial reflected in the material, and the purpose of invisible mystery tangible to the common eye.

As so, as gardens begin to spring again, and winter’s treachery becomes more of an echo of the past than the oppression of the present, I am reminded that this moment is God’s natural meditation on the drama of his life with man, the living story of salvation. For all of man’s most significant moments, all of his truly transforming moments, all those occasions that are most joyful and most dire in the whole of human history occur within a garden, amidst that vegetation whose primordial memory never ceases to remind man of them. It was in a garden that mankind was created, and it was within a garden that Mary Magdalene witnesses mankind’s recreation in the resurrected flesh of Christ. (John 20:15) It was within the Garden of Eden that mankind betrayed its Maker, and it was within the garden of Gethsemene that God Made Man pledges His complete fidelity to the Father. It was within the garden of Eden that man doubted God’s goodness; it was within the garden of Gethsemene that Christ, the God-Man, spoke “not my will but yours be done.” It was within the garden of Eden that man and woman veiled themselves from one another and from God; it was within the garden of Gethsemene that Christ prayed for the unity of His Church. And immediately after their sin, it was still within the garden that God declared to them that first foretelling of the gospel, that first message of hope to man and condemnation to the serpent – “I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heal.” (Gen 3:15) Though it was from the garden that man was cast out, it is because of Christ that St. John’s vision of heaven is also a spiritual garden paradise, a renewal of Eden. (Rev 22:2) By Christ’s sacrifice, the life and joy of Eden is offered to mankind again, and the tree of life made available. It is this hope that Spring announces every year – the annihilation of death in Christ and the restoration of Paradise, the undoing of the tragedy of that first garden with the glory of the second, the regeneration of the first Adam in the mystery of the heavenly second Adam. (1 Cor 15:45-47) It is nature joining in the mystery of Lent and whispering a hope of Easter. In Christ, death decays and life takes its place. And so our mediation should always go to the garden and our souls perceive the memory of those moments in the reemergence of natural life. It is within the garden that we become aware again of our sinful heritage; it is within the garden that we reflect on the righteousness of Christ; and it is within the garden that we await the new destiny of mankind in the Paradise of Heaven. Now is the time that mystery bursts alive anew.

Part II to be published next week

America's Lent

2009-03-02T19:56:00.000-08:00

Today I learned that our failing national economy has directly and negatively impacted a dear friend of mine, and I was almost moved to tears with sorrow when he shared his news with me. With a daily worsening economic climate, businesses are failing, jobs are being terminated, and families are being uprooted and flung into an abyss of confusion and uncertainty. It would seem that few eras in our young nation's history rival the present occasion as a truly national entrance into the sorrowful spirit of Lent.

A mere 144 years ago, the United States found itself in a similarly dismal period, still battling through an already 4 year long civil war. As Abraham Lincoln began his second term, through what would come to be the last year of this war, he boldly and audaciously made the following statement amid his famed Second Inaugural Address:

Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."

Contemporary historians often dismiss Lincoln's Second Address as inferior to the first on the grounds that it is too "biblical" and "judgmental." Nonetheless, Lincoln was fervently convicted that his beloved nation was paying blood for blood in reparation for the crimes of its people toward those who would be fellow children of this mother country. For Abraham Lincoln, the wealth reaped through this sin was then coming to ruins and the blood taken from the backs of slaves was being atoned for by the blood taken from the burden of war. And it would seem that if President Lincoln was correct in such an assessment he would certainly find a parallel in the modern predicament of this same nation. Yet, whereas the first crisis arose from the sin of slavery, our present crisis springs forth from the sins of material gluttony, avarice, and unabashed selfishness. Indeed, this past Friday Pope Benedict XVI pointed to nothing other than selfishness and an "idolatry of money" as the source of current economic crisis. Like the Hebrews of old, we now find that our substitute god cares little for its subjects and is utterly impotent to procure true and lasting fulfillment. Sin, whether private or corporate, will always lead to suffering, for sin is the diminishing of true human flourishing and the relinquishing of the authentically valuable.

And so America finds itself entering into this Lent as seldom it has done in recent history. Amid crisis we are forced as a nation to face the repugnance of our sins and the reality of our fallen weakness. We are pressed against our limitations and weep in the nature that is found wanting without grace. We look to the heavens and know we, indeed, are not the masters of our own destiny. Like the apostles fearing the imminent death of their Lord, sorrow and confusion fill the soul of our nation. Like St. Peter we cry "God forbid Lord! No such thing shall ever happen to you." (Matt 16: 22) Yet, we know that the glorification of the flesh of Christ was achieved only through suffering of His body. The atonement of our sins was acquired solely through the complete offering of himself. (Heb 9:14) And so it is that the Body of Christ, the Church, once more radically unites with the suffering of that first Body of Christ. So it is that the sins of individuals and society are mounted upon Christ's Body, and the disciple cries out with Timothy, "let us also go to die with him." (John 11:16) For this Lent is surely America's Lent. Nay, the World's Lent.

A Theology of Coldplay

2009-02-01T21:16:00.000-08:00

Upon hearing the latest single of Coldplay, Viva La Vida, for the first time, I was instantly captivated by the lyrics. Rarely these days do pop songs engage the mind with lyrics beyond mundane references to sexual practices, rebellious escapades, or generally childish behavior. And so, though the song’s lyrics in no way rival such precision as that of a poem by John Donne or the insight of Shakespeare, I found myself refreshingly impressed with the lyrics of Viva La Vida. Nevertheless, I never could quite identify just what quality it was about the words of this song that so entranced me until recent reflection.

Having been trained through my undergraduate and graduate education in the meaning and methodology of poetry and theology, I am well aware that I see the world around me principally through the eyes of a poet and a theologian, which, I suppose, is in a sense nothing less than saying that I see the world through the eyes of a humanity. And so, it would seem that something of this song has stimulated my poetic and theological sensibilities, my authentically human sensibilities, and after much reflection, I began to realize what it was.

Though a quick search on the internet will unearth heated debate over just what the meaning of this song is, the fact that the single cover features a famous painting of the French Revolution and that the song references “revolutionaries” and the sudden rise and fall of an unnamed “king” all leads toward the logical conclusion that the song is, indeed, about the life of Napoleon Bonaparte, whose relatively short lived rule emerged from the fires of the French Revolution of 1789. Nevertheless, the song, for me, conjured a reflection of a previous, much more ancient rule than that of Napoleon – the rule of Adam.

Every man bears the echo of Adam stamped upon his soul. Adam, that first monarch amongst men, was bequeathed by divine decree to “have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that move on the earth.” (Gen 1:28) Upon creating Adam, God so willed to rule his creation through him. But that rule would be a swiftly fleeting grace and an evanescent blessing, for soon after receiving the crown bestowed upon him by God Himself, Adam casts it into the ravine of sin and forges for himself a suffering crown of his own making.

Every man senses he was destined to be a king, a reflection of the Divine King and a member of a Brotherhood of Kings. Yet, he finds himself displaced from his throne by the treachery of Adam’s fall. This is what was conjured within my mind by the words of this song. Just as Napoleon “used to rule the world” only later to “sleep alone” and “sweep the streets [he] used to own,” so also Adam destroyed his rule of God’s creation and fell upon the curse of the loss his kingdom which now attacks him with thorns and thistles (Gen 3:18) and suffered the cold chill of a sudden loneliness before God. Just as Napoleon “once held the key” only to find “next the walls were closed on me,” so too Adam once held the keys to paradise only to find himself evicted from its graces by the fiery sword of the Cherubim. (Gen 3:24) And just as Napoleon has none to blame for his downfall but his own impudence and cruelty, so Adam can look nowhere else but his own will to discern the source of his misery. The story of Adam is that cosmic tragedy, the implications of which have so marked man’s history, indeed his very nature, that it seems to singe it anew in every era, standing as a primordial memory of man within the epochs of time.

Furthermore, one might even find tinges of Christ, the new Adam and King of Kings, in this song as lines such as “revolutionaries wait for my head on a silver plate” might remind us of the revolutionary zealot, Judas Iscariot, summoning his deadly betrayal of the Lord or the line “for some reason I can’t explain, I know St. Peter won’t call my name” as a mirroring of Christ’s foreknowledge of St. Peter’s threefold denial of him in the hour of his sacred passion.

In no way can I argue that these theological parallels and those concerned with Adam were consciously asserted by Coldplay, yet they seem a valid reflection to their melodic words. Truth is one of the most dynamically powerful forces known to man and goes where it is void without the permission of men. Every man senses in his soul the royalty he has been created for and laments that it is not lived out as it should be, that his castles seem built on “pillars of salt and pillars of sand,” those elements easily swept away in but a moment by the destructive forces of water and wind. Only in Christ is the Kingdom of Adam reanimated and God’s rule in men reconstructed in glory. As this gospel is the supreme truth and conclusion to the drama of Adam, its full potency is not sensed without the acknowledgment of the fall of Adams castle and the ruins of his kingdom. For Christ did not raise and renew a phantom kingdom, but the kingdom that the Father truly established in Adam and restores to glory in Christ, our Lord. And every man who touches Christ finds Adam’s crown polished anew and, in a way, discovers himself Adam reborn.

Truth and Beauty

2008-12-17T12:06:00.000-08:00

We seem to live in an era where Truth is not appreciated to the degree that it ought to be. Yet, the pursuit of Truth is at the core of our being. St. Augustine once wrote, "I have met many who wish to deceive; I have met none who wish to be deceived." The human heart strives toward Truth, even when this pursuit is not articulated or even fully realized in the person. No one wishes to be deceived because no one wishes to be disconnected from Truth by the delivery of a falsehood. No one truly desires to be without Truth or to have it stolen from them through a lie. We all invest ourselves in Truth and feel fragmented and empty when we discover that we have invested ourselves in something other than truth. Without Truth the human soul is an aimless wanderer, ever uncertain of what is real and what is illusion, of what is concrete and what is merely apparent. The very core of humanity rebels against the absence of Truth and is repulsed by it.

In reality, even the Radical Skeptic, who (in theory) denies the notion of Truth or, in the very least, the human capacity to know Truth, assumes certain Truths exist and are knowable. Even he strives toward the discovery and preservation of Truth. Indeed, his own behavior betrays his claim against Truth, for he assumes the truth that it is immoral to cause violence upon another or he would see no moral offense in another harming him. He believes it true that the body needs nourishment and that it is good to provide this, else he would be flippant about consuming meals. Likewise, the skeptic sees a truth that life as a good that ought to be preserved or else he would be reckless with his own life. Instead, he carefully sustains his own life in various ways and does not flirt with suicide. Finally, by the very fact the he reflects upon himself and his circumstances, the skeptic still believes that man can know truths about himself and direct his own life accordingly. We all strive upon Truth; we all desire to know it and participate in it, for without it human life is a painful riddle and a curse without meaning. Indeed, Fr. Thomas Dubay asserts in his book, Faith and Certitude, "the human heart is made to rest finally in truth, beauty, and love. Doubt brings rest to no one. The person who knows not from whence he came or whither he goes in this perishable, threatening, painful life is not characterized by joyous, deep, abiding peace." (p.26)

Fr. Dubay subtly points here to another reason why we are so driven toward Truth, and this reason is Beauty. I was once asked by my spiritual director whether I relate to God more through Truth or through Beauty. I did not know how to answer, for to me it was a false dichotomy. All that is true is also beautiful because of its truth, and all that is authentically beautiful speaks some message of truth. Certainly, this is one reason why I am Catholic today. I often marvel at the Truth Christ bestows upon His Church, for therein is a glimpse into divine beauty. Truth is beautiful to me; I see it as nothing less than the experience of the beauty and perfection of God, and, as such, an experience of what is the most real and permanent. God weaves an echo of his own Beauty in the declarations of His Word. The Truth He continues to proclaim through His Church causes us to engage His Divine Beauty, and the Beauty He places in His creation cause the soul to yearn toward His Divine Truth. Certainly, the Gospel of Christ is the cosmic concentration of Truth and the masterpiece of transcendent Beauty. And the soul invested in God's glorious Truth, be it in personal prayer, the sacraments, or in study of the Church's teachings, is slowly overcome with awe in such majestic beauty too great for words to express well. The grandeur of God's Truth is captivating and overpowering at times and contains a Beauty which alone fulfills the longings of mankind. The Truths of Christ's Church and the Beauty He places within them are a delight of the soul, enlivening it, refreshing it, and drawing it into the life of the Trinity. No painting of a sunset can compare to the wonder of the true thing, and no story can express the depth of the glorious drama of the saving acts of Christ and the sounding forth of God's Word in His Church. In this is true joy.

Twilight of Spirituality

2008-12-05T19:55:00.000-08:00

I am both intrigued and a bit uneasy about the sudden hysteria surrounding the "Twilight" phenomenon. That being said, in a certain way this rampant fascination with the teenage undead reveals an element of mankind's innermost being. Not so long ago, it was the discovery of the Harry Potter series that captivated America's (and, I suppose, the Western World's) supernatural fancy. Before this, it was the Anne Rice vampire series, along with such television shows as Charmed and Sabrina the teenage witch. When I was growing up, it was the blockbuster film Ghostbusters (and its thoroughly disappointing sequel). There are certainly many more examples, and while none of these have so riveted society as the recent Harry Potter and Twilight sagas, all of the above hold one single attribute in common: namely, that they excite within the heart of man a fascination with the supernatural.

Vampires, ghosts, angels, demons, hauntings, poltergeists, witchcraft - they all keep springing up in popular fiction. Even daytime television has dipped into the supernatural with John Edward, psychic medium to the afterlife. And with every passing year, it seems we become increasingly more intrigued by such subjects. While I do believe that there are other, less pleasant reasons for the heightening degree of fascination with those darker expressions of the supernatural, it seems apparent that the fact that the supernatural constantly reappears in our most attractive modern stories points to something within us that will not be left unheard. Though as time goes on our society grows more deeply entrenched in a rejection of traditional religious beliefs and, to an extent, a rejection of God, the souls of humanity long for the supernatural. It is within our nature, ingrained into the substance of our interior selves, and it propels us toward what is beyond the senses. This desire for the supernatural is an impulse at the core of our being that drives us to seek that beyond ourselves and that which transcends the material world. What is really at heart in the reoccurring of the supernatural in the stories that excite us is the human soul's attraction to what lies beyond the senses and a spiritual expectation of an invisible realm that communes with and engages the visible. Granted, not all of these venues are the most spiritually healthy avenues to investigating the supernatural, but they all remain portals of hope in an unseen world beyond this world, nonetheless.

St. Augustine once wrote, "our hearts are restless, Lord, until they rest in thee." Certainly, the majority of modern mankind find their hearts left starved and malnourished of real spirituality, left in isolation from the truly supernatural, and so we witness the quick frenzy with which these supernatural dramas are adopted by the hearts of the masses. In truth, it is the secret pursuit of what St. Teresa of Avila calls "the invasion of the soul by the supernatural," the height of prayerful union with the Lord. Having been made in the image of God, the souls of men and women are inherently spiritual and stamped by He who is the source of the domain of the supernatural. The souls of men and women welcome a path to the supernatural wherever it may present itself, for they are driven by a supernaturally designed urge toward supernatural fulfillment. Indeed "our hearts are restless," and those restless hearts seek the supernatural wherever they may find it until they forever rest in the Supremely Supernatural, the Lord and Creator of all.

Donkey Kicks Elephant; Donkey Sprains Ankle

2008-10-23T09:04:00.000-07:00

The last of the three presidential debates was a disappointing thing. Though I was only able to catch the last half hour of the debate after returning home from work that evening, McCain's disposition was jaded and uninspiring, and Obama, while captivatingly charismatic, was thoroughly incoherent in his arguments. I would like to point out just one occasion of his illogical rhetoric, that being his position on abortion. To summarize his stance, Senator Obama made four distinct points. They are as follows: First, abortion is a moral question. Second, it should be a woman's choice. Third, abortions should be reduced in America. Fourth, Sex is sacred. While there is some truth in some of these statements, those elements of truth, in the end, endanger the integrity of his entire position on abortion.

1)Abortion is a Moral Question.

Indeed, Senator Obama is correct. However, he seems to be implying here that, given that it is a moral question, the government has no right to dictate what is appropriate and lawful behavior concerning this topic. He utilizes this truth as a tool to assert that the question is, in the end, unanswerable by society and by the civil structure of society. Yet, this is thoroughly inconsistent with how our nation has governed herself to date. Theft, perjury, treason, destruction of property, assault, and murder (to name a few), are all questions of what is morally upright and what is morally reprehensible, and our society has had no qualms for over 200 years in empowering the government to regulate these moral questions. It is an echo of the same logical flaw in a bit of propaganda that I received in the mail from Lori DeYoung stating, "women have abortions for many reasons. Whether we agree or even if we disagree, it is better that each woman be able to make her own decision rather than have politicians make the decision." Whether we are willing to admit it or not, all governments regulate a determined morality to some degree, for civilization ceases to exist in a moral vacuum. Were this not the case, government would have no such thing as a "justice system," which is nothing less than a societal mechanism for determining and enforcing consequences for what a society has deemed immoral and destructive to the common good. And in neither theft, nor arson, nor treason, nor perjury, nor terrorism, nor extortion, nor embezzlement, nor racial slander, nor sale of narcotics, nor abuse and bodily injury, nor murder do we assert as a society, "whether you agree or even if you disagree, it is better for a person to be able to make his or her decision rather than have politicians make the decision." In none of the above occasions do we state that individuals do these activities "for many different reasons" and then permit them to make the choice about whether or not they are going to engage in these activities without any legal ramification. Every society determines answers to moral questions and creates laws accordingly, for every moral question affects the common good, of which the government holds guardianship over.

The above also addresses point 2) Abortion should be a woman's choice.

3) Abortions should be reduced in America.

My question is "why?" Clearly I, as one who opposes abortion, believe this to be the case, but I don't see how an abortion advocate can make this statement without seriously wounding the entire defense of abortion. It is against both reason and human nature to advocate reducing instances of something that is inherently good, inherently improving the human experience, which is precisely how abortion supporters view said activity. It is equally problematic to advocate that an activity that is inherently destructive to the common good be permitted to thrive. Those who support abortion cannot advocate a reduction of abortions as a societal good without disrupting the integrity of their entire argument in support of abortion. If they believe it to be an inherently good and upright activity then they betray themselves by even suggesting that abortions should be reduced, for good should never be repressed or impeded in any manner. On the other hand, if they are true believers in the reduction of abortions, then they must concede that abortion is not always and everywhere a moral good, an enhancing of the common good, but is, in fact, in at least some situations contrary to human flourishing, for we only prevent what is perceived as unfavorable and harmful. In short, they must admit that in the very least abortion "can" be an evil. And once this is admitted, the entire defence of abortion logically collapses in ruins.

4) Sex is Sacred

("We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier activity, and providing options for adoption, and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby." - taken directly from debate transcripts)

Again, I would be a fool to not agree with this statement, and, to be honest, I was quite shocked that Senator Obama asserted this in the debate. I was surprised not only because I was surprised that he believed this but also because his position on contraception, sex education, and abortion works to dismantle a perception of sex as sacred rather than uphold it. Abortions and contraceptives and government instituted educational programs that promote these do not promote the idea that sex is sacred. Rather, they exacerbate youthful flippancy about sex. Instead of promoting the notion that sex is a sacred act, impregnated with meaning, purpose, and dignity, abortions, contraceptives, and education programs that encourage them only serve to promote the idea that sex is a mere biological function oriented toward meaningless pleasure. Sex will never be sacred to those individuals who are challenged with no reflection upon the nature of sex beyond the questions "how can I prevent a pregnancy?" or "what are my options to end a pregnancy?" Though Senator Obama asserts the need for a reduction in abortions, a reduction in the so-called "need" for abortions will come about only through a revitalization of the sacredness of sex in the eyes of Americans, and this is an outright impossibility so long as we continue down the same path of what is labelled "safe sex," a sex education that is neither safe nor promotes the true goodness of sex but, instead, thwarts any notion of the sacredness of human intercourse.

Given the above, I can only assume either Senator Obama is hoping that most Americans do not reflect enough to be aware of these logical inconsistencies or Senator Obama himself cannot see them. Either way, his position on abortion is essentially logically unsound and incoherent even within the belief system of those who support abortion. Were I an advocate of abortion, I would be ashamed to have him represent my cause, for a more than superficial look at his position leads to a dissolution of the argument for abortion rather than a reinforcement of it. That being said, I doubt many will notice the donkey's sprained ankle for the force of his kick.

The Glory of Woman

2008-09-19T17:02:00.000-07:00

It is a peculiar thing that a celibate man would be the origin of some of the most beautiful expressions of marriage, sexuality, and femininity in the entire history of mankind. The heritage of John Paul II is vast, indeed. Not only was he an intellectual giant in terms of theology but also in relation to the human experience. One would be hard pressed to find in either modern or classical texts keener insights into the nature and meaning of man's experiences than in the extensive works of John Paul II. And one key contribution to mankind's development in understanding itself is that of the late pope's commentary on Woman.

I am not a woman, and so perhaps that gives me common ground with JP II's perspective on woman from the "outside." While this might seem a hindrance to some in gaining any real depth in understanding woman for who she truly is, the advantage is that we often find ourselves more in awe of what is unattainable than what we experience as "common." Perhaps then this is the source of John Paul II's depth of reflection on Woman. While he and I will never "experience" womanhood, and therefore can never perfectly explain the "sensation" of being woman, this is precisely the reason why he and I can stand before Woman in sheer wonderment and amazement, meditating on her in all her glory.

There is something mysterious and fascinating about Woman. There is a depth to femininity that is altogether different, mysterious, and alluring in comparison to masculinity. Though both masculinity and femininity are aspects of mankind as "imago dei," the feminine embodiment of Woman carries within it a kind of marvelousness that is not equally said of the masculine embodiment of Man. As Man and Woman are equally authentic participants in the image of God, both are fantastic expressions of the divine, yet Woman possesses a divine expression altogether different and unique amongst all of creation. It is nothing less that what John Paul II describes as the "genius of woman." In his Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem (On the Dignity and Vocation of Women), John Paul II likens Woman's nature to a human expression of God being "like a mother" (n.8), as a living icon of the nature of the Church (n.23-24), and a particular instrument of God's revelation of himself as love within mankind as his image. For John Paul II, "in God's eternal plan, woman is the one in whom the order of love in the created world of persons takes first root" (n. 29), and her "'feminine' element becomes a symbol of all that is 'human'" in mankind's ecclesial relation with God. (n.25)

Noted Scholar and Theologian, Alice von Hildebrand, takes up these notions from a woman's perspective and, in sense, in her own feminine genius adds those fine details to the portrait of Woman that John Paul II began. Both comment on the unique nature of Woman as bearer of life. Woman stands before Man as that sacred temple within which God's divine activity of causing a soul to come into being transpires, as Alice von Hildrebrand comments, "God creates the soul of the new child in her body...this contact gives to the female body a note of sacredness...this divine "touch" is once again a special female privilege." (PBW, p.86) Woman's body is that domain of the fecundity of love and the vessel of human life. For this reason, she continues stating that the very nature of Woman's body "refers to something mysterious," for the fact that her reproductive organs are "hidden" or "veiled" (unlike those of Man) suggests a certain sacredness about them, for that which is veiled is that which is set apart as mysterious and utterly precious. (PBW, p.82-83)

Likewise, both note Mary as the Exemplar of Womanhood, the perfect human expression of the feminine. Indeed, it would seem that every woman carries a shadow of Mary and that, while all humans are called by virtue of the incarnation to be "little Christs," women, it would seem, are in a particular way called to be "little Marys," by virtue of the role of the feminine in God's incarnational work. This is, as it were, is the truest feminine power and the truest expression of feminine beauty and goodness. Certainly, both John Paul II and Alice von Hildebrand see Woman as particularly blessed not only in her nature as life bearing but, in respect to this, by every woman's particular feminine association with Mary, the Theotokos and bearer of Divine Life. For them, every woman has a kind of "connection" through her womanhood with the unique blessings upon Mary, so that through Mary God has blessed the whole of Woman. "Woman is to be found at the center of this salvific event," says John Paul II, "...thus the 'fullness of time' manifests the extraordinary dignity of 'woman.'" (MD, n.3-4) Alice von Hildebrand adds that Mary is she "in which the female organ par excellence - the womb - is exalted: 'blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.'" (PBW, 108) In this way, both are actually echoing the 5th century proclamation of St. Augustine, “Christ was born Man; He was born of Woman. Both sexes have been honored.”(St. Augustine, sermon 184, n.2) As John Paul II states it, "God, in the sublime event of the Incarnation of his Son, entrusted himself to the ministry, the free and active ministry of a woman," an action that he clearly sees as a particular "ordaining" of the nature of Woman with a special dignity. (Redemptoris Mater, n.46)

Radical Feminism, however, has responded to the mystery of Woman with either a kind of feminine superiority complex or a perverse self-hatred of the feminine (neither of which are authentic expressions of the feminine). The result is a trend of women and young girls who have lost an awe and sense of cherishing what they are as Woman and who habitually act in ways contrary to their feminine glory. Just as one would be repulsed by a men who are either cowards or tyrants (for both are antithetical to authentic expressions of the masculine), it is deeply saddening and frustrating to see women who habitually act selfishly or abuse their beauty with immodesty and promiscuity, for both are particularly contrary to the feminine genius. They, in a way, reduce the glory of Woman that ought to be awe-inspiring. Such women are like ones who unwittingly paint graffiti upon the walls of the Sistine Chapel. Certainly, it is heartbreaking to see a woman unaware of her own feminine mystery, and it is even more painful to see her efface it. Though I can never fully express in the same manner Alice von Hildebrand's closing proclamation that "indeed, it is a privilege to be a woman," for I never shall be a woman, I must certainly agree with her statement. While the marvel of Woman and femininity have been abused in various places and times, she will remain for all time a Glorious creation of God, and a source of awe before Man.

Gandhi the Christian Evangelist

2008-08-26T19:42:00.000-07:00

I often come across some misguided soul who uses a well-known quotation from Mahatma Gandhi as the definitive "proof" against the validity of Christianity. It is a quote that most likely you have heard before, as well: "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." While taken superficially this saying appears to be a well-put declaration to the ridiculousness of Christianity. However, the true nature of the statement issues no such evidence, and its logical conclusion is actually an affirmation of the uprightness of becoming a follower of Jesus Christ.

As (soon to be) Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman said, "ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt." (CCC 157) Though this declaration is properly attributed to difficulties of belief in doctrinal mysteries, it would seem that it could also be applied to Gandhi's logical error, as well. In other words, ten thousand improper actions of individual Christians do not, logically, condemn the actions of Christ himself as unworthy of devotion. Indeed, in no other area of life do we act so ridiculously. Were an individual American to do something tremendously heinous to an object of national devotion of a foreign nation and do it "in the name of America," we would find it quite unjust for that nation to report that, based on this individual's misguided American zeal, all Americans, therefore, are hateful vandals sprung from a patrimony of America itself as a breeding ground for hateful vandalism. Equally so, if one member of a person's family were legitimately a slothful lout, that person would find it highly offensive and unfair for another to conclude that, therefore, all members of that particular family are slothful louts descended from the father of slothful louts. Just as it does not follow that the individual bad actions of an American leads to the conclusion that the the nature of America itself is heinous, it certainly does not follow that the poor actions of individual Christians leads to the conclusion that the whole of Christianity is false. Gandhi dismisses the entire system of belief not on the grounds of whether it has merit or truth but on how well some of its members adhere to it daily. It simply makes no sense to conclude such a thing, but this is, in fact, the logic of Mahatma Gandhi's claim. Only when it comes to religious assertion do we permit such faulty logic as valid. But even then, I doubt many would assent that the bad actions of a group of Buddhists affirms that the entire concept of Buddhism is bereft of value. Besides this, no matter how unrighteous the activity of professed Christians in Colonial India, I highly doubt Gandhi had interviewed every Christian worldwide or merely in India alone so as to verify such a blanket endorsement. And this error, too, is carried on by those who adopt this message of Gandhi against Christianity.

Regardless, the statement as a whole is, when taken for what it says, actually is an endorsement of Christianity, not evidence against it, for Gandhi says, "I like your Christ." If Gandhi truly meant this, then logically he should be an adherent to Christianity rather than an opponent. Nevertheless, I imagine that Gandhi, like so many other non-Christians, did not really understand what Christ did or said but merely understood an idea of Christ. Many people see Christ merely as a moral teacher, and so they remain attracted to Jesus Christ without a compulsion to become Christian because, for them, Christ's moral imperatives are all they know of him and this alone attracts them to his teachings. They either forget or are ignorant of the fact that Christ said such things as, "that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins...I say to you rise take up your pallet and go home" (Mark 2:9) or "whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven"(Matthew 10:33) or "no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone whom the Son chooses to reveal him" or "thus it is written that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations." (Luke 24:46-47) Given that Jesus Christ is so bold as to claim that "no one comes to the Father but by me...he who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:6, 9), either Gandhi's statement about "liking" Christ is insincere or he was gravely misinformed about Christ. If he (or anyone) truly "liked" Christ then he should, logically, become Christian, for "liking" a man who claims to be divine and the source of forgiveness of sins, without devoting oneself entirely to that man, is logically bizarre at best, if not morally reprehensible altogether.

Obviously, Mahatma Gandhi was one of the most admirable figures of our time in terms of social justice and the pursuit of freedom and equality. Nevertheless, his maxim about Christianity is logically about as airtight as the titanic scraping an iceberg. Time to break out the intellectual life-jackets!

Amid the Thorns

2008-05-26T22:38:00.000-07:00

How easy it is to allow the trials of the world to steal away our joy. How quickly earthly struggles cause us to forget that the daily trials of this life are trivial compared to the calamity of the soul without divine life. God's grace is our greatest treasury, all else is a chase after wind.

As we remember this Memorial Day those who have sacrificed for American Freedom, let us also remember He who sacrificed for the greatest freedom of all.

The Family Heritage of the Fathers

2008-05-26T21:56:00.000-07:00

I have always been enamored with the writings of the Church Fathers. Of all the writings in the world, the Word of God alone is more cherished by my heart than those works of the Fathers of the Church. Indeed, it was in large part through studying these great tomes of Catholic faith that I found my spiritual home in the Catholic Church during my college years. Over the years, they have become for me nothing less than a family heritage, an heirloom of the spiritual family of Christ, remaining always as a testimony to the grandeur and truth of the Catholic faith. Certainly, it is with great pride and ardor that I read their works and marvel in Christ and His Church professed so many hundreds of years ago.

Having been raised in the Evangelical brand of Christianity, I was trained in my spiritual formation with an unfortunate complete ignorance of the Church Fathers. The early Church was presented to me as a community devoid of hierarchy, unconcerned with sacraments, and relying on scripture alone for divine truth. My studies of the the Church Fathers, however, would present an altogether different community. Indeed, I could find no more Catholic works in my initial investigation of the Catholic Church than the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch (2nd century), St. Ireneaus of Lyons (second century), St. Cyprian of Carthage (third century), and the saint who would become my confirmation patron, St. Jerome (4th century), among many others. In their writings I would read such things as,
"as the Lord did nothing without the Father (either on his own or by the apostles), so you
must not do anything without the bishop and the presbyters…only what you do together is
right." (Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians, n.7)
and
“the true knowledge is the doctrine of the Apostles and the ancient organization of the Church
throughout the whole world, and the manifestation of the body of Christ according to the
succession of bishops, by succession the bishops have handed down the Church which is found
everywhere.”(Ireneaus of Lyons, Against Heresies, IV n.33:8)
And later St. Jerome adds,
“For there is no such thing as a Church without bishops.” (Dialogue Against the Luciferians, n.21)

These remain as but a fraction writings that affirm that the early Church was a Church thoroughly impressed upon by a Catholic faith, and it is because of this that I delight so much in reading their works and marveling through them in the Catholic faith established by Christ our Savior. As the Vicar of Christ brings the whole Church into meditation on the writings of these great leaders of the early Church in his audiences, let us together with him remember their legacy and cherish it dearly.

The Truth Is Out There

2008-05-15T20:15:00.000-07:00

For those who spent hours on end following the mysterious investigations of agents Fox Moulder and Dana Scully, the phrase, "the truth is out there" strikes a cord of nostalgia and an imaginative intrigue into the unknown. Few television dramas captured this element as keenly as X-files, though the Star Trek franchise and the more recent Stargate series have proven just as adventuresome. Many may know well from previous posts that I am both an avid fan and an ardent critic of science fiction. It is a realm that often awards a unique exploration into philosophical questions and the nature of the human person, though the conclusions of many of these series are at best misguided and at worst destructive to human understanding of self. But every now and then there is a real gem of insight.

Perhaps another aspect of my fascination with science fiction is that I have, since boyhood, been enamored with the mysterious, the supernatural, and the unexplainable. Aliens, as is the case with many young boys, were a subject of extreme intrigue in my youth, and often my games of imagination with friends centered around pretending that we had discovered a crashed space craft and met beings from another world. Nevertheless, despite my youthful intrigue into the extra-terrestrial, I was quite disturbed by the recent comments of Fr. Jose Funes S.J., head of the Vatican Observatory.

According to the Catholic News Agency, Fr. Funes provided the following comments in an interview with L'Osservatore Romano in respect to extraterrestrials:

"Asked if he sees a contradiction between the Catholic faith and believing in aliens, he said, 'I think there isn't (a contradiction). Just as there is a multiplicity of creatures over the earth, so there could be other beings, even intelligent (beings), created by God. This is not in contradiction with our faith, because we cannot establish limits to God's creative freedom.'"

"Fr. Funes says that taking the image of the lost sheep in the Gospel, 'we could think that in this universe there can be 100 sheep, equivalent to different kinds of creatures. We, belonging to human kind could be precisely the lost sheep, the sinners that need the shepherd. God became man in Jesus to save us. In that way, assuming that there would be other intelligent beings, we could not say that they need redemption . They could have remained in full friendship with the Creator.'
'But if they were sinners?' L'Osservatore's journalist asks.
'Jesus became man once and for all. The Incarnation is a single and unique event. So I am sure that also they, in some way, would have the chance to enjoy God's mercy, just as it has happened with us human beings.'"

While I will not argue the possibility of subpersonal aliens, his commentary on intelligent, personal life on other planets is alarming to me. Though Fr. Funes is presented as a "Vatican Official," even Vatican Officials, so long as they do not sit on the Chair of St. Peter, do not proclaim statements infallibly on an individual basis. That being said, neither do I, so I concede that I might be in error, but I submit, in as much humility as grace has allotted me, the following arguments as to why I cannot see Fr. Funes' statements as consistent with revealed truth.

To the contrary that there may be other personal, bodily beings who have fallen by sin I posit this. While Fr. Funes seems to imply that these beings, after sinning, "in some way would have the chance to enjoy God's mercy," I cannot see this as a true salvation of such fallen aliens given that to rescue man God necessarily "assumed a human nature in order to accomplish our salvation in it." (CCC 461) God did not become man in order to simply be a scapegoat for humanity. Rather, by becoming man and suffering on the cross as man he both safeguarded cosmic justice and lifted the whole human nature into divinity - this together is salvation. Salvation would be impossible if not for the whole human nature being assumed by the Son, for as St. Gregory of Nazianzus states, "what has not been assumed has not been healed." Certainly, it is only because he has become incarnate that he has united himself to every man and associated them with his saving work. (CCC 618; GS 22) However, if there are aliens who have fallen, they can never experience this salvation, for the Word cannot assume a bodily human nature and at the same time assume a bodily alien nature any more than I can have both a human body and at the same time a frog's body. As the soul is the form of the body and is expressed through the body, one cannot possess both a human soul and an alien soul without depriving one of these souls of bodily expression. They cannot both be expressed bodily simultaneously; one soul would necessarily be repressed. And just as to "be" human would be to have both a human soul and a human body, to "be" alien would be to have both an alien soul and an alien body, which would be an impossibility for the Incarnate Word who, as Fr. Funes admits, has assumed a bodily human nature once and for all, never to relinquish it, and therefore cannot also assume a bodily alien nature. So, to contradict Fr. Funes, the position that dismisses intelligent, personal (fallen) alien life as a possibility is not to "establish limits to God's creative freedom." On the contrary, it is simply stating a metaphysical impossibility.

But then, Fr. Funes also posits that "they could have remained in full friendship with the creator." To this, I have at present no logical argument as to why this would be inconsistent with divine revelation. However, this theory also carries a few potential problems. First, while not altogether impossible, the fact that both humans and angels fell from grace make the probability of aliens retaining original holiness very unlikely. Second, the Tradition of the Church seems to insist a cosmic focus on humanity. "Man is the summit of the Creator's work" (CCC 343) "God created everything for man" (CCC 358) "It is man...more precious in the eyes of God than all other creatures! For him the heavens and the earth, the sea and all the rest of creation exist." (CCC 358;cf St. John Chrysostom) Within this framework, it would be odd for God to have created other lesser personal beings in the material realm that have, to date, no contact with man. Third, revelation attests that "the whole creation has been groaning in travail" awaiting the transformation and recreation of the material universe. (Rom 8:19-23; CCC 1060) However, if there are unfallen aliens, how could they be part of a "groaning creation" destined for recreation? Finally, the very first line of John Paul II's encyclical, Redemptor Hominis, reads, "THE REDEEMER OF MAN, Jesus Christ, is the centre of the universe and of history." Christ, God made man (human), is the center of the universe, and either fallen or not, intelligent, personal aliens would share with us a God who has assumed a created nature altogether differing from their own.

The above may not be the most eloquent or powerful arguments, but these are my initial thoughts for now. Then again, I may be inundated tomorrow with valid arguments to the contrary of my position. We shall see.

On nearly every episode of X-files, a poster could be seen in Fox Moulder's office that read "I want to believe" below the fuzzy image of a UFO. Does the boy in me still look to the stars with Fr. Funes and imagine a world of alien life? Perhaps. Does he read those words on agent Moulder's walls and wonder what the human experience would be were it to be true? Does he whisper to himself when none are watching, "I want to believe."?At times. But then he is reminded that the truth is out there. And, unfortunately, it does not bode well for our little grey friends.

You Ain't Nothin' But A Liturgical Hound Dog

2007-08-17T20:18:00.000-07:00

Oh My! I stumbled upon an old post of Fr. Nicholas at Roman Miscellany that includes a video clip of a rendition of Mass in an old Elvis flick called, Change of Habit, complete with Elvis performance. Maybe since the priest is ad orientem he didn't notice Elvis shaking his hips behind him. Check out the "king" praising the King.

And if that weren't enough for all you Elvis fans, here are Fr. Nicholas' Five Catholic Facts About Elvis. Enjoy!

2007-08-15T21:26:00.000-07:00

August 15

Solemnity of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Tonight our pastor relayed to us in his homily the very beautiful account of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary as depicted in the Medieval text known as "The Golden Legend." Though legend, many of the elements are in keeping with much earlier accounts of the Assumption, such as that of St. Gregory of Tours (6th cen.), and so, it will remain for me a profoundly merciful and hopeful reflection on this great Dogma of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin.

Immaculate Mary, thy praises we sing,

Who reignest in splendor with Jesus, Our King.

Ave, ave, ave Maria! Ave, ave Maria!

In heaven the blessed thy glory proclaim;

On earth, we, thy children, invoke thy sweet name!

Ave, ave, ave Maria! Ave, ave Maria!

We pray for our mother, the Church upon earth;

And bless, dearest Lady, the land of our birth.

Ave, ave, ave Maria! Ave, ave Maria!

Catholic Carnival 132

2007-08-15T19:24:00.000-07:00

The 132 Catholic Carnival is up. Check it out here!

Happy (Early) Feast Day, St. Maximilian Kolbe

2007-08-13T00:27:00.000-07:00

August 14 - Feast of St. Maximilian Kolbe

Few spiritual writers of modern times have been as graced as the great St. Maximillian Kolbe. Even amid the strife of World War II, the remnants of his sketches and speeches reveal a deeply mystical heart and one completely devoted to the grace of the Holy Spirit and the patronage of Our Lady. Unbeknownst to me at the time, my beloved bride and I were wed on his feast day, and this year as we remember this great Saint we also celebrate our 8th anniversary as a married couple. As a man who sacrificed his own life for the life of a family man captive with him in Auschwitz, St. Kolbe is an annual reminder to me of the sacrificial servanthood to which all husbands are called to by Christ. And, as a man who wrote with deep docility and love for the Holy Spirit as well as a heartfelt devotion to the Blessed Mother Mary, his writings have impacted my own spiritual reflections as well. To be certain, I would recommend the compilation of his writings as a must for any personal Catholic library.

Deja Vu

2007-08-12T21:41:00.000-07:00

I've spotted my first Halloween decorations for the year at our local mall, and it's only mid-August. It's official - the seasonal madness has begun. All I have to say is this.

Movies Shmoovies

2007-08-02T21:00:00.000-07:00

I'm not certain what the founder of Family Video understands the meaning of "Family Video" to be, but I am continuously dismayed at the discrepancy between what I would consider the title to imply and what is actually provided by this establishment. The dictionary defines "family" as a group related by blood or marriage or sharing a common attribute. Yes, I have opted for the sophomoric approach of citing the dictionary at the beginning of my assertion. If I had a dime for every essay I've graded that began with this technique I'd be rich. Ok, that's probably not true...maybe I'd have enough to order a medium pizza. Nevertheless, it may very well be that when he was thinking of a name that would express well what clientele he was desiring, the Family Video founder pulled open the dictionary and said, "that's it - groups of people united by blood or common attributes! That word perfectly expresses my target audience!" Thus my imposition of the term "family" reflecting a set of values conducive to the rearing of children was an unfair and foreign infringement on the vision of the founder of Family Video. To be fair, the soft porn that lines the tops of every shelf is strategically placed to optimize deterrence of young eyes looking upon images of maidens in various degrees of undress as it requires our youth to tilt their heads up 45 degrees. These morally questionable flicks are placed exactly in this spot since some studies have shown that before the age of 15, bending the head upward at 45 degrees pinches blood vessels in the neck that feed the optic nerves, thus causing momentary blindness until the neck returns to its normal angle. (disclaimer: not an actual study) Still, I cannot shake the feeling that free kids videos does not equate, in itself, to "Family Video." So then, the remainder of this post will be my reflection on 45 minutes of searching for a movie at my last Family Video visit and all the movies that caused me to visibly tremble in disgust as I passed through the isles. I note these particular movies as each carried the attribute of being either morally offensive or an instrument of a clear agenda against the Church.

1) Anything with the words "play" or "boy" in the title - which as previously mentioned are catalogued on the top shelf of every isle.

2)King Arthur (2004) - One of the key villains is a callous Bishop who cares much for wealth and little for the welfare of others, and Pelagius is the heroic mentor of King Arthur. Need I say more?

3)Kingdom of Heaven (2005) - Though a movie I joyfully anticipated, it proved to be a dismally inaccurate portrayal of the events between the second and third crusades that demonized the Catholic Church, mocked Christianity in general, and represented a very confused morality. As the plot seemed to imply that the crusades were about greedy Christian invaders encroaching on Muslim lands, I can only assume that the writers were completely ignorant of the historical fact that those lands were primarily inhabited by Christians for several hundred years before Muhammad was even born!

4)Election (1999) - Despite the seemingly humorous and quirky trailer, this movie is the most sexually disturbing movie I've ever seen.

5)Training Day (2001) - All I can say is I needed to take a shower after watching this one.

6)Constantine (2005) - Ok, I haven't actually seen this one, but I'm pretty sure I heard the voice of the Dark Lord Sauron penetrating my soul as I reached out to touch the dvd case.

But to end with a positive note, there was one happy (re)discovery that we brought home to watch - Joe Versus the Volcano. It's rated PG, and other than Meg Ryan's poor acting and a brief dialogue concerning sexual intercourse, we enjoyed it and did not feel we needed to guard Samuel's eyes or ears from anything else. Positively, there was the reoccurring theme of life having purpose and even a scene in which Joe Banks (Tom Hanks) shouts out in gratitude to God for his life and apologizes to Him for forgetting "how big!" (a refreshing scene after Meg Ryan's character all but admits to being an atheist)

So, as a good friend of mine says, "there it is!" Move over Bob Waliszewski - there's a new sheriff in town!

Do Or Do Not - There Is No Try

2007-08-01T20:30:00.000-07:00

In the interim since my last blog I have finally completed my Master's Degree in Theology. Completing a graduate degree in two to three years is for the weak. Real men take no less than six! Yes, after six years of balancing a full time job, a family, and academic endeavors my efforts have come to their culmination, and I will soon be hanging that glorious badge of redemptive suffering in my office for all to look upon in awe and wonder. And, lo, songs will be sung and legends shall be told of that brave man who traversed countless texts and plunged into the depths of untold numbers of 3rd, 4th, and even 5th drafts of 20 page essays to one day emerge victoriously with the wisdom of all the ages past. And his name shall be great among the nations!

It occurred to me shortly after completing the grueling task known as the comprehensive exam, that not counting the year and a half between my undergraduate and graduate studies I have been in school for 24 of my 30 years of life. That's right, 80% of my life has been dedicated to formal studies. So, needless to say, this past month of transitioning out of a life oriented toward a future academic goal has been challenging to me. Being content in the present moment has never been easy for me, especially in light of the aforementioned 4/5 of my life being dedicated toward a degree of some variety. Many a moment of prayer in pursuit of peace has been disrupted by the words of that green cosmic Buddha of Dagoba chiding me: "All his life has he looked away... to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was. Hmm? What he was doing. Hmph! Adventure. Heh! Excitement. Heh! A Jedi craves not these things. You are reckless!" I can only assume that my guardian angel has seen The Empire Strikes Back. Whether or not this is true, I know young Luke Skywalker and I share this vice. Granted, I don't whine about not being able to pick up power converters at Toschi station, but I too must learn to be content in the present moment.

The great French mystic Jean-Pierre de Caussade speaks of "the sacrament of the present moment." In this one, small phrase he encapsulates the disposition so many of us lack due to the burden of living our lives as if we are not truly alive presently. So often we exist either in the past or in the future, fragmenting ourselves outside of the present. We brood over the past or impatiently beckon the future. We dwell on past mistakes or wade in the anxieties of the future. We treasure past accomplishments long forgotten by others or expectantly yearn for the glory of future feats. There is a reason that the term we often use to describe meditation or reflection (aka "recollection") denotes a "recollecting" of the self from all the areas of life that we deposit ourselves outside the present moment. The theologian and philosopher Joseph Pieper in his book Leisure: The Basis of Culture regards prayer as the highest form of leisure, the highest form of recollecting the self. And certainly this is most profoundly true in that highest prayer of the Church, the Mass. Here past, present, and future come together in harmony, gracefully lifting us into eternal mystery. In no other human experience is the present moment to be so affectionately cherished. At not other point in time does the present make us so whole, complete, recollected. For the Master of time comes to us transcendentally above time and yet amid it all at once. It is no wonder that the Church calls the Eucharist the "source and summit" of Christian Life. It is the sacrament that perfects the sacrament of the present moment, for no other present moment catches up the whole human person into fuller being, save, maybe, the last moments of life after viaticum. Perhaps someday the Lord may awaken me to the glorious mystery that impregnates every present moment...someday...in the future.

Things That Grow

2007-06-03T07:34:00.000-07:00

At the beginning of the extended version of Fellowship of the Ring, Bilbo recounts the nature of a hobbit, and amid the pleasures of brewed drink and pipeweed what is central to the heart of a hobbit is the appreciation of "things that grow." Upon watching this for the first time, I realized how very hobbit-like I truly am. Pipe tobacco is one of the most olfactorally pleasing scents I have known, though the taste is not what one would expect. In fact, I felt rather put off and cheated upon my first puff of pipe tobacco. Brewed drink, on the other hand - rarely can one go wrong there. Still, I must say that I know my tolerance level and practice a bit more prudence and temperance than the average hobbit in relation to my brewed drink of choice. And then there are the things that grow...

These early days of summer are some of my favorite days of the year. They are the days when the leaves start to multiply, the blossoms push their heads out from the wombs of the stalks, and inklings of fruit preach of new life. Yes, God was wise indeed when he placed man in charge of Eden, for the hobbit has no monopoly on love of God's grand creation.

It is often said among the Church Fathers that Christ came not merely to offer reconciliation between man and God but to, as the God-man and New Adam, restore and renew the role that Adam failed to keep intact. In the material world, God created man to be that link between the material and immaterial, between the created order of matter and the heavenly order of the transcendent. Where Adam failed, Christ triumphed. And we, through Christ, are empowered once again to take up this task, to delight in and foster God's creation, to join together and participate in Christ's mediation of heaven and earth. And for me, this is keenly seen in the care of that new, green life of summer. Here is natural revelation of resurrection, divine life, and the transcendence of God plunging into the material. Here is the reminder that nothing comes from itself but is reliant on what is external to survive. The child needs the mother; the plant needs its mother earth; and all find their being in God. Here we find the thriving of created life amid the torrents of winds and storms, a beacon of hope in divine providence and the reality that the Lord does bring good from suffering. And here we discover that man has been skilfully and irrevocably created in a kinship to the created world and at once a member of the spiritual world. We are part of this creation, and so we are enhanced when it is enhanced; we grow while it grows; and we rejoice when it rejoices. Yet, at the same time we are created beyond it as well, and so its joy points, for us, toward a transcendent joy; its messages proclaim a higher gospel; its created life exalts in our hearts the divine life, of which we are the image and the material world its messenger. There we find the glory of the Lord hidden in the glory of nature, and Adam knows his place once more.

On Notice June 2007

2007-06-03T07:26:00.000-07:00

Many of the Desert Fathers would preach to complain about nothing, so I suppose I should rethink this recurring feature of my blog. But until I take up my cell in the deserts of Egypt...to all of the above, this June you're on notice.

Evolution Confusion

2007-05-07T10:38:00.000-07:00

In the late 80's, Matthew Broderick did his best to save the lives of chimps held captive by NASA for experimentation in Project X. Though the Franciscan in me can appreciate the aspect of the film that promoted care for sub-personal creation, even as a child I got the feeling that poor Matthew really thought those little primates were just like everyone else. Then again, in light of the old saying about monkeys and typewriters, I guess if he saved enough of those little guys he'd have royalties from a best seller to look forward to, so capitalist ambition might have played a part in his heroism, as well. Romancatholicblog recently posted on the pope's commentary on evolution. Back in 2005, a comment of his concerning evolution launched a frenzy of media caricatures of Benedict XVI and John Paul II at odds with one another pertaining to the question of evolution. (here and here) Bob Sungenis, whom I rarely agree with, also offered a compelling argument of the intended "play on words" in Benedict XVI's 2005 comment that seemingly expressed the pope's disbelief in the legitimacy of the notion of evolution.

Though I at one time joined the crowd of Catholics who conceded to the possibility of human evolution's compatibility with the faith, so long as the infusion of the soul were one of divine orchestration rather than blind chance, I can no longer subscribe to such a belief. Deeper prayer and reflection on the subject led me to one final conclusion - such a notion has irreconcilable theological and philosophical problems. Classical Philosophy would insists that persons are above non-personal beings in terms of dignity and that personhood is never something that a being can "graduate" into nor regress out of. From the moment of its existence, a being is either a person or it is not. If this is the case, the notion of human evolution has some drastic theological problems, as well, and these all focus around the reality of interpersonal relation.

If original man and woman were the result of some divinely maneuvered evolution from a sub-personal creature, then the original family was an altogether dysfunctional one. Filial relation requires interpersonal relation, yet if original man's parent's were not persons, then he was completely unable to relate to his own parents on a personal, human level. His parents would have been, in the end, no more than his pets. While original man would have acted through will and intellect, his parents would have been left to mere instinct. While original man (created in original harmony) would have pursued God, his parents would have been bereft of all capacity to do so. Furthermore, if the decalogue is no more than a codification of the natural law (CCC 2070-2071), then original man would have been incapable of fulfilling the entire law, for how can one honor and obey a mother and father who have no personal dignity? Indeed, it would have been perverse to do so, for man had been commissioned to take dominion of all the beasts of the earth (Gen 1:28), and so it would be disordered for man to submit to a beast in which he was charged to guide and order, biological parent or not. The Catechism names the obligation to honor, obey, and respect parents (under the 4th commandment) as a ramification of the authority that God vested in each parent for the good of the child (CCC 2187), yet original man's parents would have no more authority over him than my guinea pigs have over me because they would have had an inferior dignity due to their lack of personhood. Original man and woman would have been the masters of their own parents, and the original family would have been the very antithesis of the biblical image of family, an image predominantly used by God to express his own relationship with mankind.

Gaudium et Spes calls the family the "school for human enrichment," (GS 52) yet a family with sub-personal parents would do quite the opposite. Original man's parents would have been incapable of modeling personal communion with God, nor would they be any kind of source of education in human flourishing. They would speak nothing of fostering human enrichment, for they would be, by nature, completely outside its scope. Certainly, original man's parents would have, in truth, been an impediment to his full human development and self-identity as a person, raising him as a child to be the only thing they knew to be - a beast. It is the belief of the Church that the family is the "original cell of society," meant to foster authority, stability, and fraternity. (CCC 2207) Yet, if man sprang forth from beast in some evolutionary event, then the original family was a diseased and cancerous cell incapable of ensuring any of these. Personally, buying mom and dad a flea collar and making sure they don't stray into the neighbor's yard and bite anyone is not my idea of a stable, functional family. The image of the family is one of interpersonal intimacy. God declares himself not merely our Creator but our Father. Perhaps I'll have to eat a slice of humble pie (as one of my friends put it) if I am wrong, but something is lost of the grandeur of our filial relationship with God if he created its image in a dysfunctional manner. What a curse to, by God's design, never see the love of the Father in one's own father because he is, by nature, incapable of expressing personal love. No, I think the Majesty of the Lord is a bit more skillful than that. Then again, if you've got that pie, my fork and knife are waiting. I'll even let Adam and Eve's parents lick the plate.

A Primer On Cultural Relativism

2007-05-04T07:09:00.000-07:00

Three posts in two days after a 7 month absence? What madness!!

Well, it occurred to me that after my last post, one of my three readers might ask, "Cultural Relativism - what is this guy talking about? Maybe it's a good thing that he hasn't blogged in seven months." (yes, you know who you are, but I forgive you) That being said (and subsequently thought) I decided that it might be a good idea to express exactly why I think cultural relativism is a blight on critical thinking.

Cultural Relativism's basic premise is something like this: "no person has the right or capacity to render judgement on any culture." Like the self-contradicting notion of relativism in general ("everything is relative"), this assertion of cultural relativism not only refutes itself but fails to critically look at the whole of reality. The core assumption is that every culture is equally valid, yet cultures are a compilation of the collective art, habits, and beliefs of a given people, realities that are never neutral. These all are utilized by cultures to either authentically buildup the wellbeing of mankind or deconstruct it. For example, habits are tendencies toward particular actions, and every culture has habits. Every action pertains to an object and an intent, both of which are oriented toward an end that either aims at human flourishing or human depravity - no act is neutral (objectively). So when the habits of a culture are to commit ritual murder (such as the Aztec and ancient Canaanite cultures) or ritual cannibalism (such as the Fore tribe), one cannot honestly expect another to accept the notion of cultural neutrality. Likewise, it is easy to see the flaws of other more developed cultures that often excel in selfishness on both the individual and national levels (china and the US are the first that come to mind). Furthermore, no system of belief is neutral either. They all reflect reality accurately to a lesser or greater degree. In other words, all belief systems promote truth to great or lesser degrees, and therefore enhance the human experience of reality to greater or lesser degrees. They are not neutral. So then, the culture on one people, rooted in one set of beliefs, may represent the nature of man and the cosmos to a lesser degree than the culture of another, and therefore is not as beneficial to mankind as the other cultural system of beliefs.

Nevertheless, cultural relativism would not permit such judgements, irrationally continuing to assert that cultures can be neutral, and none ought to cast judgment on any. Yet, if this is so, the second error of such and assertion is the fact that to be consistent none can equally pass judgement on any culture positively, as well. One cannot claim cultural neutrality and the incapacity of a people to condemn the culture of another people and at the same time permit the praise of one culture by another - it is altogether inconsistent and one sided. If a culture cannot be scrutinized for its harmful and improper elements, then neither can it be awarded honor for its glorious elements. Great works of cultural architecture and those aspects of other cultural belief systems would be deemed aesthetically and intellectually neutral, and the consistent cultural relativism could do nothing but stand by mute in praise.

All this being said, the supreme danger of cultural relativism is that it ceases to accept and recognize the cultural stains of evil and insist on laying down an authentic pursuit of cultural good. It is a truncation of the human experience and a sad devaluing of the exploration of truth. It is, in short, a barrier to the exercise of the discovery of true human fulfillment, and that is a somber ailment of any culture that adopts cultural relativism.

A Trek Into Bad Philosophy

2007-05-03T20:41:00.000-07:00

I have always had a fondness for the fantastical, and ever since watching the first episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation at the ripe age of eleven, I knew I was destined to join the ranks of those incessantly quote those sages of the stars. Picard, Data, LaForge, Worf, Sisko, O'Brien, Bashir - the children of the 24th century should count their blessings to have such bold and glorious role models. You can imagine my surprise when my wife and I began to watch Next Generation and Deep Space Nine on DVD from episode one to the end, only to find a well woven tapestry of bad philosophy. My inner eleven year old's little eyes began to well up as it whimpered, "say it aint so, Captain...say it aint so." Though my youthful ears were neither educated in philosophy nor trained to spot philosophical nonsense, my now 30 year old ears tingled in irritation as those heroes of my youth sputtered out the most incohesive and culturally debilitating jargon starfleet has ever heard. Yes, Gene Roddenberry and his writers pull no punches in pressing upon their audience the mantra of cultural relativism and the assertion that religion is an archaic practice of the uneducated. Though, at times, these notions seem contradicted when the plot devices necessitate such a straying from the agenda, these and other demeaning and self-contradictory philosophies permeate the majority of the episodes. Mind you, I still am as delighted as a Klingon in wartime to watch such entertainment, but it is at times saddening to imagine the influence that Gene Roddenberry's immense empire has had on the capacity of the individuals of society to think critically about reality.

Alice Von Hildebrand (theologian, philosopher, and wife to the famed Dietrich Von Hildebrand) once referenced the popular philosophical arguments for relativism, praxism, utilitarianism, and other flawed philosophies as "pseudo-intellectual." They are sayings that defend these notions appearing incredibly "deep" and insightful on the surface yet are altogether devoid of substance once critically investigated. Yet it seems that modern man is fascinated by such sayings and far more impressed with them than with the time honored assertions of classical philosophy. Certainly, who would question the Emissary's culturally relativistic acceptance of all cultural practices and beliefs as equally valid? He spoke to the Prophets for goodness sake! (Though we will have to overlook the inconsistency of his distaste for Ferengi Misogyny) And when Picard goes on a rant about how man has evolved beyond the need for silly gods, surely none can question his clear thinking - the man fought a Nausican in hand to hand combat. Have you?

Nevertheless, Alice Von Hildebrand is correct, and the sad reality is that those who watch these imaginative pieces of entertainment uncritically will fall into the same philosophy they promote, which brings not just confusion concerning the reality around them but confusion of the very identity of themselves. For, in the end, what is really wounded by such erroneous assertions is knowledge of the self as a creature before God, and without clarity concerning this, there can be no true peace. Ironically, the brand of Utopia that Star Trek portrays (lack of poverty, lack of illness, no discord among men, complete tranquility) is nothing less than a hope for what heaven alone can award. However, it is presented as attainable through human effort alone. And Pelagianism is reborn. So long as we try to explain away reality by attempting to convince it to be what it is not and aspire to achieve heaven on our own, we will persist as a depressed and jaded people, for we will remain a people who know neither ourselves nor our Creator, and so we will remain perpetually unfulfilled. Gene Roddenberry is perhaps one of the most creative figures of modern times. Picard and Sisko will still hold a special place in my imagination. But there is still one frontier they have yet to penetrate, one more glorious than anything in the cosmos. There alone rests the hope for man. There alone is found his Supreme Good.

Anastasis

2007-05-03T20:07:00.000-07:00

After a 7 month hiatus, several promptings from well-meaning friends, and the stigma of a friend's blog listing my own as "inactive" on his blogroll, I've decided to resurrect my little blog (which, no doubt, has regressed to an insignificant microbe in a coma on the blogosphere ecosystem).

Now before you say, "oh good! I shall once again be entertained by that master of wit and piety," be warned that my blog had previously been secretly written by a troupe of Capuchin Friars who worked in my basement surviving only on bread, water, prayer, and extreme devotion to my blog. Unfortunately, they left my service. So my posts will not be incredibly frequent (though not 7 months apart), the wit will mostly come from jokes I'll steal from my 6 year old son (he'll never know), and the pious rhetoric I'll borrow from some obscure 5th century Saint. And soon, dear reader, it will be as if those beloved Friars never left, you'll see.

88th Catholic Carnival

2006-10-05T04:45:00.000-07:00

The 88th Catholic Carnival is up. Be sure to check it out and read some good posts from a lot of other Catholic blogs.

Happy (belated) Feast Day, St. Jerome

2006-10-01T20:07:00.000-07:00

September 30 - Feast of St. Jerome

I was out of town this weekend, and not only could I not post on the actual feast day but there was no Church in the entire area that held a mass on that day. Who doesn't have mass on Saturday? I was as mad as St. Jerome arguing against Arians! Yes, I share the same temper as my patron.

Speaking of which, I'm going to have to differ with Butler on his assessment of this great man. Butler's Lives of the Saints passage on St. Jerome includes the following excerpt:

"Jerome is distinctive among the Saints.
While he lived a simple life

and was devoted to the Church,
his behavior and speech are not becoming.

His temper, hatred, and anger were ferocious.
His careful and invaluable

scholarship makes him a saint,
not his self-discipline."

I have to say, I too have read the words of St. Jerome's letters and thought, "that's SOME hutspah!" However, I cannot see the Lord receiving good Jerome in heaven and commenting, "dude, you've got problems. But you write a good book, so...yeah, I guess I'll let you in."

Though those who knew St. Jerome focused primarily on his intellectual prowess, saying such things of him as "If Jerome doesn't know it, no-one does," (St. Augustine) it seems that this is not the only valuable attribute his companions found in him. Indeed, I would paint St. Jerome's spirituality in no different manner than the above image, for he ever stripped himself of all that was not God so that he may tighten his gaze upon the cross of Christ and with St. Paul declare to know nothing but Christ and him crucified.

On Notice October 2006

2006-10-01T19:57:00.000-07:00

I had so much fun with this last month, that I thought I'd give it another go. So, those of you listed above, this October, you're on notice!

Labor Pains!

2006-09-26T21:07:00.000-07:00

My wife and I are nearing the completion of a building project in our basement. When we bought our house 4 years ago, the basement was partitioned into several rooms by wooden studs. A year later, I put up drywall and mudded. Two years after that, I broke the procrastination and sanded the walls. Then, several weeks ago, we dove headfirst into completing the project by painting the walls and cement floors, as well as hanging some new lighting. All that is left now is to touch up a few spots and bring in some furnature, as we intend to make the large room our primary family room. And so, today I looked upon our work, quite pleased.

However, the entire process proved to be a tumultuous ordeal. Indeed, from this experience I have discovered the primary difference between human creativity and divine creativity. It is as follows:
Divine Creativity - The Spirit hovers, and a great voice proclaims, "it is good!"
Human Creativity - Perspiration hovers, and a voice proclaims, "Shoot! If I can just...why won't this...oh, for heaven's SAKE! Honey, can you come here for a minute?" And, lo, the humidity hath softened the paint, causingeth it to tear and peel so that it needeth to be reapplied. And how the people raised their voices to the Lord in despair such that there was great gnashing of teeth.

Yes, human endeavors rarely are excuted smoothly and usually carry an occasion of the sins of impatience and wrath (particularly oriented toward any object that rhymes with "aintbrush" or "rewdriver"). And still, there is a peace that comes over one who has accomplished a work and is found gazing over his creation. And it is at these times in the joy of finishing a labor that the encyclical of John Paul II, entitled Laborem Exercens (On Human Work) seems most poignant.

Growing up, whenever the toils of labor irritated me, the response to my expression of this was always, "that's why they call it work." This (as well as many other well meaning but ill-conceived notions) never satisfied me as an adequate explanation. Certainly, it was not until reading the aforementioned encyclical that I found that searched for satisfaction, because it was not until then that I was presented a distinction between work and the toil of work. It was there that I learned that it was not work itself which resulted by the Fall but, rather, the unfortunate toil that man now finds in work. Indeed, John Paul II insisted, "the Church finds in the very first pages of the book of Genesis the source of her conviction that work is a fundamental dimension of human existence on earth...man is the image of God partly through the mandate received from his Creator to subdue, to dominate, the earth. In carrying out this mandate, man, every human being, reflects the very action of the Creator of the universe." (n.4) John Paul II adds later in the text, "he who proclaimed [the gospel] was Himself a man of work, a craftsman like Joseph of Nazareth...the eloquence of the life of Christ is unequivocal: He belongs to the 'working world,' He has appreciation and respect for human work. It can indeed be said that He looks with love upon human work." (n.26)

This representation of work is surprising to those who are entrenched in a culture that refuses to give leave of a love-hate relationship with human labor. On the one hand, we are one of the most industrious nations in the world such that, statistically, a shocking number of individuals neglect to take their alloted vacation days and opt to continue working, instead. Yet at the same time, we live in a culture that often has disdain for what work demands. The toils of labor bind us and beat us, and so we carry a distaste for work while at the same time diving unhealthily toward it because of the rewards that lie on the other side of those toils. Yet, for the Christian most of all, the reality of toil should not cause the soul to see work itself as the burden. Indeed, we seem to expect Christ, after seeing Peter and the others return from their labors with no fish, to say to them, "boy, that really stinks, doesn't it? But what did you expect - that's why they call it work!" Instead, he calls them back to their work with new hope. He doesn't cast the net for them or cause fish to miraculously appear on the shore, wholly apart from any effort of theirs. No, he invites them back to labor saying, "cast the net on the right side of the boat and you will find a catch." (John 21:6) In this manner, he insured that they found meaning in thier work. More precisely, in this manner he blessed their work and touched it with the grace of divinity. This, I too, often forget - that every endeavor I undertake is touched by Christ, even united with him. In taking on flesh, the Son of God assumed all of what it meant to be human, including the state of laboring as a carpenter's son. In his complete solidarity with man, he united with all of what man is meant to be, including the state of a laborer.

A priest once instructed me to make a small sign of the cross on every work I wrote, not only to remind myself of its dependance on Christ but also of his union with that work. I have also found it wise to begin every activity of labor with a short prayer acknowledging this reality, though I do sometimes jump into the work forgetting to do this. Despite this, will work still have toil? Definitely. Will every woodworking project remain an excercise in resisting shouts of profanity and opting for the more virtuous track instead? Probably. Will my basement be shielded by grace such that I will never have to touch up the paint? Unfortunately, barring a miraculous apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe on the floor, I assume this will not be the case. Nevertheless, I have been taught anew the joy of human labor, and I have found it very good.

Lessons From Narnia

2006-09-20T18:43:00.000-07:00

Recently, I picked up a copy of the 2-disk special edition of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. I had a a Best Buy gift card that was old enough to necessitate carbon dating to identify the period in which it was given to me, and Samuel has spoken of nothing but Narnia characters since we had rented the flick a week prior. After watching the film for the FIFTH TIME (no joke), Tracy and I decided to check out the extras on disk two. It proved to be a treasury of wisdom from which I learned the following lessons:

Lesson #1: It is always laughable when non-christian directors and actors attempt to analyze the imagery of Christian literature without taking the most remedial study of the actual beliefs of Christianity. Clearly, the fact that the lion is one of the most traditional images of Christ eluded director Andrew Adamson as he struggled to explain Lewis' use of Aslan the Lion outside of any notion of Christian symbolism.

Lesson #2: 10 tubs of Turkish Delight is not as appealing as it looks. An easter egg on disk two taught me that even young Skandar Keynes (Edmund) turns green after multiple takes of a scene requiring him to stuff his face full of this sticky treat.

Lesson #3: One must walk on the tips of his toes to cause his torso to look as if it is attached to goat legs.

Lesson #4: The use of a minotaur mask not only inflicts complete blindness but the pain of an incessant squealing from numerous servos constantly moving the mask about.

However, it was this next feature that provoked the most reflection. In order to film a sincere reaction of actress Georgie Henley (Lucy) in the scene where Lucy first enters Narnia, she was never permitted to see the set until filming and was blindfolded and put in place before the camera rolled. What fascinated me was that at that very moment she was not either Georgie or Lucy; rather, she was both. As an actress, she was Lucy Pevensie, stumbling upon an extraordinary world. But just the same, she was the young girl, Georgie Henley, stumbling upon that same fascinating world. She stood in awe as both Lucy and Georgie, one and the same, experiencing that one moment together in amazement - falling into a grand world beyond the working of their own imaginations. As an actress, she knew the story and expected the plot to unfold as such, but suspended in mystery as a little girl, the wonder of an unexpected world was discovered. In a way, this seems the state of the Christian life. We too know the story and receive guidance from the Director, but still mystery veils the magnitude of how the story will unfold. We too are both actor and audience in the great Christian drama, receiving our direction from the Lord in the role we shall play and at the same time waiting in anticipation of the discovery of the unexpected. It is a delicate balance to have complete confidence in God's revelation and at the same time resist isolating the unfolding of that revelation to our own determined methods but to, instead, marvel at the Lord's superior knowledge and power and abandon ourselves to the mystery of his ways.

The next lesson I learned also deals with the unexpected -
Lesson #6: Never purchase a 2 disk special edition in September without first checking online as to whether or not a 4 disk set will be released in December.

One final lesson: 80% of this blog's readers have certainly attempted to walk on their tiptoes after reading lesson #3, in the very least, entertained the thought.

Golden Tongue - Not a James Bond Character

2006-09-13T17:57:00.000-07:00

September 13, Memorial of St. John Chrysostom

Known as the "Golden Tongue" for his eloquent preaching, St. John Chrysostom is one of the most celebrated Church Fathers in both the East and the West. I , too, share a love of Chrysostom. In fact, he was the runner up in my selection of a Patron for Confirmation. It is often said that one does not select a Patron so much as the Patron selects you. This being said, I can only assume that at some point St. Jerome and St. John Chrysostom had a holy arm wrestle in heaven over me. (I did go back and forth for quite some time between selecting one over the other.)

I highly recommend his commentary on the scriptures and other works. St. Vladimir Seminary Press has a fine volume of selected works focusing on marriage and also

his six books on the priesthood.

85th Catholic Carnival

2006-09-12T16:33:00.000-07:00

Catch the 85th Catholic Carnival here!

September 8: The Birth of Mary

2006-09-08T21:37:00.000-07:00

The Feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, Mary

We fly to your patronage, O Holy Mother of God
despise not our petitions in our necessities
but deliver us from all danger
O Glorious and Blessed Virgin. Amen.

(Sub Tuum Praesidium, 250 A.D.)