Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog

Chopra's Christ: A Review of "The Third Christ"

Chopra's Christ: The Mythical Creation of a New Age Panthevangelist | Carl E. Olson | A review of The Third Jesus: The Christ We Cannot Ignore, by Deepak Chopra | May 5, 2008

I'll begin with a positive note: Deepak Chopra's new book, The Third Jesus, has a well-designed, eye-catching dust jacket.

Now the negative: the rest of the book is not nearly so attractive. Not even close.

In fact, it is often downright ugly, in a New Age fundamentalist, Christian bashing, intellectually vapid, historically dismissive sort of way.

Chopra, a one-time medical doctor who was described in 1999 by TIME magazine as "the poet-prophet of alternative medicine," subtitled his book, "The Christ We Cannot Ignore." Would that we could ignore this book and the false Christ it presents. But Chopra, who has authored some fifty books and has earned millions of dollars from his particular brand of neo-Hindu monism for the masses (he studied under Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, founder of Transcendental Meditation), is quite popular. And it appears that The Third Jesus, published in February 2008, has sold well, having spent several weeks on The New York Times top ten bestsellers list for "Hardcover Advice" books. [1]

Worse, The Third Jesus has been praised by a number of Christians, some of them well known "progressives" such as John Shelby Spong and former Catholic priest Matthew Fox. A few of them are Catholic. For example, Father Paul Keenan, the host of "As You Think," a program on The Catholic Channel/Sirius 159, says, "In The Third Jesus Deepak Chopraunfolds for us the spirit of Jesus and with a reverence that is at once simple and profound makes his spirit accessible to us in our everyday lives." Perhaps Fr. Keenan didn't actually read the book. I hope that is the case, for if he thinks the Jesus conjured up by Chopra has anything to do with the historical, biblical Jesus worshiped by orthodox Christians, he needs to find a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and shore up his knowledge of Christology 101.

Read the entire review...

Schall on the 100th anniversary of "Orthodoxy"

From InsideCatholic.com, thoughts from Fr. James Schall, S.J., on G.K. Chesterton's Orthodoxy, published in 1908:

But Orthodoxy is an intellectual autobiography, an intellectual treat. It is not, as Chesterton says, about whether the faith is true or not, but about how he came to believe that it is. In coming to believe in Christianity, Chesterton, as he tells us, did not read a single Christian book in the process. Rather, he read book after book of those who maintained that Christianity could not possibly be true. After he had read many of these tractates, he suddenly realized that the intellectual opponents of Christianity were constantly contradicting themselves about what they were opposing. Chesterton, the most logical of men, figured that anything so odd as to be opposed for the exact opposite reasons must either be quite strange or, in fact, rather normal and true.

I do not recall now how many times I have read this little book. It is always a delight. It is 160 pages long. It takes both no time and forever to read it. It is almost impossible to put down once you begin it.

Read the entire column.

Related IgnatiusInsight.com Articles and Book Excerpts:

• Ignatius Insight Author Page for G.K. Chesterton
• The Attraction of Orthodoxy | Joseph Pearce
• Chesterton and the "Paradoxy" of Orthodoxy | Carl E. Olson
• The Emancipation of Domesticity | G.K. Chesterton
• The God in the Cave | G.K. Chesterton
• What Is America? | G.K. Chesterton
• Mary and the Convert | G.K. Chesterton
• Seeing With the Eyes of G.K. Chesterton | Dale Ahlquist
• Recovering The Lost Art of Common Sense | Dale Ahlquist
• Common Sense Apostle & Cigar Smoking Mystic | Dale Ahlquist
• Chesterton and Saint Francis | Joseph Pearce
• Chesterton and the Delight of Truth | James V. Schall, S.J.
• The Life and Theme of G.K. Chesterton | Randall Paine | An Introduction to The Autobiography of G.K. Chesterton
• Hot Water and Fresh Air: On Chesterton and His Foes | Janet E. Smith
• ChesterBelloc | Ralph McInerny

Pastor John Hagee: "Thank you, Pope Benedict"

Perhaps you've already seen this column in The Washington Times, written by John Hagee, pastor of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio and author of several "end times" books based in premillennial dispensationalism. Hagee has been accused of being anti-Catholic, but he takes pains to counter those accusations:

During his recent visit to the United States, Pope Benedict XVI not only conducted mass and met with the Catholic faithful, but he made a series of public statements about the role that our Judeo-Christian faith can play during these challenging times. As an evangelical Protestant I happen to disagree with Pope Benedict on many issues of Christian doctrine and ritual. But when it comes to his moral vision for America and the world I have one thing to say in response to the Pope's visit: Amen. <snip>

My reaction to Pope Benedict"s visit may surprise some who have come to accept certain caricatures of my views of the Catholic Church. But as I have noted from the start, my critics have ignored the real point and strong emphasis of my words. I have indeed been quite zealous about condemning the past anti-Semitism of the Catholic Church. But I have been equally zealous in condemning Protestant anti-Semitism. Furthermore, as I noted in my 2006 book "Jerusalem Countdown," I have long viewed Pope John Paul II and now Pope Benedict XVI as partners in this "righteous work" of overcoming our shared legacy of Christian anti-Semitism.

For decades I have taught that we Christians need to recognize that our roots are Jewish. As Christians we can only understand ourselves if we understand the Judaism from which we sprang. Pope Benedict made this very important point when he visited the Park East Synagogue in New York and shared that: "I find it moving to recall that Jesus, as a young boy, heard the words of Scripture and prayed in a place such as this." With visits and words such as these, Pope Benedict is continuing the important work of recognizing our enormous Christian debt of gratitude to the Jewish people.

Fair enough. I have no interest in questioning Hagee's sincerity, and his ecumenical attitude here is a pleasant surprise; after all, it's not something you'll likely find in the writings of, say, Tim LaHaye or Hal Lindsey. But a couple of things should be kept in mind:

• Hagee's beliefs, which flow from what might be called a "traditional" form of premillennial dispensationalism (as opposed to "progressive dispensationalism"), lead to the conclusion that the Jewish people have no need of the New Covenant because they already have a sufficient and equally valid covenant. Which means, strangely enough, that Hagee has more in common with Abraham Foxman than he does with many or most Evangelicals when it comes to the issue of evangelization and Jews. But Hagee's position is rooted in a rather logical take on John Nelson Darby's teachings, which were based on a heavenly-earthly dualism that insisted on a radical distinction between Christians (the heavenly people, according to Darby) and the Jews (who he called the earthly people of God). (See this June 2003 ZENIT interview for more.)

• Hagee has stated that Jesus was not the Messiah. This is apparently one of the key positions he defends in his recent book, In Defense of Israel. I've not read that book, but I suspect that his argument is simply a continuation of the first point: namely, (according to Hagee) since Christians and Jews have radically different covenants with God, it is wrong to say that Jesus is the Messiah of the Jews—that is, until they accept Him as such after the Rapture, the Tribulation, and the Second Coming. Other dispensationalists have adopted similar views. For example, Charles Ryrie, author of the very influential work, Dispensationalism Today (first ed., 1965), wrote this in his 1986 book, Basic Theology:

“Gabriel announced to Mary that her Baby would have the throne of David and reign over the house of Jacob (Luke 1:32-33). Throughout his earthly ministry Jesus’ Davidic kingship was offered to Israel (Matt. 2:2; 27:11; John 12:13), but He was rejected. . . . Because the King was rejected, the messianic, Davidic kingdom was (from a human viewpoint) postponed. Though He never ceases to be King and, of course, is King today as always, Christ is never designated as King of the Church . . . Though Christ is a King today, He does not rule as King. This awaits His second coming. Then the Davidic kingdom will be realized (Matt. 25:31; Rev 19:15; 20)” [Basic Theology, 259].

Ryrie's position is both confusing and untenable, but it is made necessary by the presuppositions of the dispensationalist system, at least in its older forms.

• Finally, the dispensationalist system is not only contrary to many key Catholic doctrines, it has often understood the Catholic Church as either being a system of antiChrist, or at least being the sort of global institution/religion that will facilitate the rule of antiChrist and a false, "one world religion." This perspective is not understood by those who hold it—as I once did—as being "anti-Catholic," but as simply being realistic about "Bible prophecy" and the world we live in. For Hagee and like-minded folks, salvation is about having a "personal relationship with Christ," which they believe has little or nothing to do with being a visible member of this or that church.

There is another, closely related radical dichotomy at work here, which is that between the spiritual and the material realms—itself based on the heavenly-earthly distinction noted above (I examine this at length and in detail in my book, Will Catholics Be "Left Behind"?). For the typical dispensationalist (and most fundamentalists), the "Church" consists of all those who are spiritually united in saving faith in Jesus Christ (here's a good example of what I'm referring to). The church you attend is a secondary issue. And so there exists the notion that one can be perfectly saved and yet belong to an imperfect, local church. Thus, from this perspective, a Catholic can be "saved," (by the skin of his teeth!) even if the Catholic Church is not just flawed, but even apostate and blasphemous.

Hagree is absolutely right to denounce anti-Semitism. But there are some serious problems with his theological ideas, especially how he understands the relationship between the Old and the New Covenants, the person of Jesus Christ, and the nature of the Church. For me, frankly, the key issue is not if John Hagee is anti-Catholic. Rather, it's whether or not some of his core beliefs are actually Christian, even in the most general, "mere Christianity" sense of the word.

• Eschatological Fact and Fiction: Catholicism and Dispensationalism Compared | Carl E. Olson
• The Jews and the Second Coming | Roy H. Schoeman
• The End Times: The Secret Hidden From the Universe | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J.

The Inquisitions of History: The Mythology and the Reality

The Inquisitions of History: The Mythology and the Reality | Reverend Brian Van Hove, S.J. | Ignatius Insight

An ecclesiastical inquisition in Europe was a court system adapted from Roman law. It was an institutional tribunal charged with protecting orthodox religious doctrine and church discipline. From 1414-1418 (Constance) and 1438 (Basle), the church was shaped by lawyers who were consulted for the councils. Canonists were needed for church order and to make crucial distinctions.

Jurists keep good records, clean records and abundant records. Curialists write neatly. Scribes are taught to be legible. Because of this legal infrastructure, we can today study the inquisitions, unlike some other institutions which are lost to us due to a lack of quality documentation. Fortuitously, inquisition material survived European wars. We should also use the plural and speak of "inquisitions" since there were a number of them in different times and places. We now use the capital letter "I" to refer to a specific historical inquisition, such as the Venetian or Spanish, or even the earliest one during the Albigensian era in southern France. For the Inquisition and its procedures in Italy during Galileo's time, we have John Tedeschi's The Prosecution of Heresy: Collected Studies on the Inquisition in Early Modern Italy (1991).

Due to the work of newer historians, such as Edward Peters in his Inquisition (1988), we use The Inquisition to speak of the mythology surrounding these institutions. Such mythology passed down to us as folklore, the result largely of successful Protestant anti-Roman propaganda, particularly coming from the Spanish Netherlands.

Read the entire article...

"Are the Gospels Myth?"

My article for This Rock magazine bearing that title is now available online; it appeared in the March 2008 edition of TR:

January 11, 49 B.C. is one of the most famous dates in the history of ancient Rome, even of the ancient world. On that date Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon River, committing himself and his followers to civil war. Few, if any, historians doubt that the event happened. On the other hand, numerous skeptics claim that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are myth and have no basis in historical fact. Yet, as historian Paul Merkley pointed out two decades ago in his article, "The Gospels as Historical Testimony," far less historical evidence exists for the crossing of the Rubicon than does for the events depicted in the Gospels:

There are no firsthand testimonies to Caesar's having crossed the Rubicon (wherever it was). Caesar himself makes no mention in his memoirs of crossing any river. Four historians belonging to the next two or three generations do mention a Rubicon River, and claim that Caesar crossed it. They are: Velleius Paterculus (c.19 B.C. – c.A.D. 30); Plutarch (c.A.D. 46-120); Suetonius (75-160); and Appian (second century). All of these evidently depended on the one published eyewitness account, that of Asinius Pollio (76 B.C.-c. A.D. 4) which account has disappeared without a trace. No manuscript copies for any of these secondary sources is to be found earlier than several hundred years after their composition. (The Evangelical Quarterly 58, 319-336)

Merkley observed that those skeptics who either scoff at the historical reliability of the Gospels or reject them outright as "myth" do so without much, if any, regard for the nature of history in general and the contents of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in particular.

The Distinctive Sign

So, are the four Gospels "myth"? Can they be trusted as historical records? If Christianity is about "having faith," do such questions really matter? The latter question is, I hope, easy to answer: Yes, it obviously matters very much if the narratives and discourses recorded by the four evangelists are about real people and historical events.

Read the entire article...

Ehrman and Wright debate suffering and evil

Bart Ehrman, former Evangelical and current agnostic Scripture scholar, and N.T. Wright, Anglican bishop and non-agnostic Scripture scholar, debate suffering and evil over on the Beliefnet blog. Dr. Scott Carson, a Catholic philosopher who runs the "An Examined Life" blog, offers some commentary. 

James Carroll's "documentary" indulges in one-sided, pseudo-scholarly sloppiness

A big surprise? Hardly. Steven D. Greydanus has written a detailed, thoughtful review of Carroll's film Constantine's Sword, which is based on the book of the same name (also by Carroll), which in turn relied heavily on "John Cornwell’s now–substantially discredited Hitler’s Pope, another anti-Catholic exposé–cum–critique of Church policy." Read the entire review on DecentFilms.com.

NBC producing Catholic-bashing mini-series, "The Last Templar"

Variety reports that NBC is producing a four-hour mini-series based on the novel, The Last Templar, by Raymond Khoury, which was one of about five billion Da Vinci Code clones released since Dan Brown's novel sold ten billion copies:

Oscar-winning thesp Mira Sorvino has signed on to star in "The Last Templar," an NBC miniseries based on the bestselling novel from Raymond Khoury.

Sorvino joins a cast that also includes Victor Garber. Shooting begins next month in both Montreal and Morocco for an airdate later in the year.

Romantic adventure-themed mini stars Sorvino as Tess Chaykin, a Manhattan archaeologist searching for the medieval Knights Templar. Garber plays Monsignor De Angelis, who helps find the artifact.

My first thought? "Here we go again..." And as if to confirm my semi-cynical, world-weary perspective, a post on the Blend Television blog offers this breathless, confused commentary:

What I love about the story of the Knight’s Templar is that, whether it is based in truth or not, it is still interesting. It has captured imaginations for eons, and will continue to because it can’t be proven or disproven. This miniseries will hopefully be a nice taste of the story that won’t cause too much outrage amongst Christians who can’t comprehend that fiction can be fun, and that it sometimes it is just fiction, not anything else.

[Commence sarcasm] Yeah, those stupid Christians. Sheez. You write a novel claiming to be based in fact and full of damning evidence showing that Christianity and the Catholic Church are based on nothing but lies, big lies, and more bloody lies, and what do they do? They get upset. Can you believe that? What gives? Morons. Ungrateful, prudish, backwards thinking lowlifes. Don't they know it's just a story? Well, hey, let's check out what the author's website says about The Last Templar:

On one level, The Last Templar is a fast paced contemporary adventure/thriller set in New York and in various settings around the Mediterranean, intercut by five epic chapters set during the closing years of the Crusades in which the last Templar of the title, entrusted with the Order's secret, escapes from the burning city of Acre and struggles to make it back to France. On another level, The Last Templar works as a thought-provoking exploration of religion in today's world, and of historic fact versus faith, particularly regarding the origins of the Catholic Church. Through the investigation into the Templars' history and their mysterious discovery, and though the interplay between Tess - the agnostic, scientific skeptic - and Reilly, who turned to the Church after his father shot himself when Reilly was just a boy, the book presents a spirited look at the early days of the Church and invites the reader to question matters which most of us take at face value.

See, you silly, overreacting Christians? It's just a novel that tells the truth about your outrageous, infantile beliefs? Don't you get it? [Cease sarcasm. Wipe brown with damp towel.]

Robert P. Lockwood, in this May 2006 article for The Catholic Catalyst, took a long look at some of the Coded Clones, including The Last Templar:

Because of the movie connection Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code has received most of the attention. But the proliferation of these additional anti-Catholic novels proves an ancient adage: there is money to be made in appealing to visceral anti-Catholicism.

The plots in The Third Secret and The Last Templar center on intrepid couples running around the globe tracking down hidden historical truths that will prove the Catholic faith to be fake.

In The Last Templar, our intrepid couple track down the diaries of Jesus, which had been discovered in the Holy Land during the Crusades by the Knights Templar. The diaries reveal that all that stuff about miracles, salvation and the Resurrection was a fabrication of the Church to consolidate its power. <snip>

  These books in one way or another sell three anti-Catholic stereotypes that are as old as the Reformation. The first anti-Catholic legend is that the Catholic Church forcibly repressed a true Christianity that had existed since the days of the Apostles. It was a common post-Reformation propaganda point that there was a pure Christianity subversively maintained over the centuries that served as a counterpoint to the apostolic claims of the Church. The real Church was this "invisible Church."

Khoury's book takes that anti-Catholic tenet and gives it a New Age twist. He describes the alleged purity of the original teachings of a thoroughly human Jesus mouthing pious platitudes. Berry puts in the mouth of the Blessed Mother a laundry list of contemporary secular grudges against the Church that can be found in any news story: abortion, contraception, homosexual marriage, celibacy and a male-only priesthood. <snip>

Khoury portrays a Church that first paid extortion, then viciously suppressed the Knights of Templar so that their secret would be maintained and the Church could still exercise power.<snip>

Khoury has his Church leadership arguing that it knows the Scripture to be false, but that it maintains its beliefs solely because people can find some glimmer of hope in an otherwise senseless world. <snip>

Khoury's book is the least offensive of the two, if only because of a plot twist at the end and at least a vague acknowledgment that faith accomplishes some good in the world. (Although he is at pains to point out that it is a faith not grounded in reality.)

Say, here's an idea: a mini-series about how the major networks and MSM, while accomplishing some good in the world, are really about making money, gaining power, sensationalism, distorting what is true, praising what is false, saying there is no "true" or "false", and suppressing stories that contradict their view of the world. What's that you say? Too grounded in reality? Yeah, you're probably right...

Those interested in the true story of the Templars, see pages 194-222 of The Da Vinci Hoax. Also recommended is The Templars (Cambridge, 1999), by Piers Paul Read.

• "It's "a thought-provoking exploration of religion in today's world, and of historic fact versus faith..." (Dec. 31, 2005. An Insight Scoop post about The Last Templar.)

Cardinal Avery Dulles, S.J., says farewell to teaching, Fordham

Catholic News Service reports on the farewell address given on April 1st at Fordham University by Cardinal Dulles, one of the finest American theologians of the past fifty years:

In the presentation Cardinal Dulles reconfirmed his faith, his orthodoxy, his spirituality and his commitment to the Society of Jesus. He also offered a final word against the materialism, relativism, subjectivism, hedonism, scientism and superficial anti-intellectualism he said is found in modern society.

"Western thought," he said, "followed in the path of cognitive realism for many centuries before the revival of agnosticism in the Renaissance." The cardinal repeated Pope John Paul II's admonition that philosophy should seek to "resume its original quest for eternal truth and wisdom."

"Science, we all know, does not rest on a treasury of revealed knowledge handed down in authoritative tradition," the cardinal said. "Science has wonderfully increased our powers to make and to destroy, but it does not tell us what we ought to do and why.

"It does not tell us where the universe came from, or why we exist, or what our final destination is. And yet some scientists speak as though their discipline were the only kind of valid knowledge," he said.

Even as an undergraduate student 70 years ago, he felt the "oppressive nature of a culture that had no place for objective moral norms and meaning." It was this desperation for enlightenment, the cardinal admitted, that set him "on the path that led through ancient Greek philosophy to Catholic faith."

"Christian revelation brought a tremendous increase of light. God alone, I learned from the New Testament, was good and true in an unqualified sense," he said. "And the same God in all his beauty and majesty became one of our human family in Jesus Christ, the truth, the way, and the life."

"The most important thing about my career, and many of yours, I feel sure, is the discovery of the pearl of great price, the treasure hidden in the field -- the Lord Jesus himself," he said.

Read the entire report.

• A magisterial book about the Magisterium (March 18, 2008. About Cardinal Dulles' new book, Magisterium)
• The History and Purpose of Apologetics | An Interview with Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J., author of A History of Apologetics (July 2005)
•  Foreword to Yves Congar's The Meaning of Tradition | Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J. (Dec. 2004)
 

Fr. Stanley Jaki on The Catholic Intellectual

The Catholic Intellectual | Fr. Stanley L. Jaki | Ignatius Insight

The expression, "Catholic Intellectual," may seem to involve a twofold superfluity, suggestive of some contradiction. Is it not superfluous to write the word "catholic" as "Catholic" if "catholic" truly stands for an appreciation of the whole range of reality and values? And can such an appreciation be truly at work if it is not also the work of the intellect?

The apparent conflict between "catholic" and "Catholic" will especially bother intellectuals who take ideas and not facts for their starting point. Consideration of facts certainly must come first as long as one wants to come up with something tangible about the predicaments, duties, and prospects of Catholic intellectuals. A most relevant fact in this respect can be noticed by the Catholic intellectual if he considers the beginning of the wide usage of the word "catholic," a Greek word by origin.

Surprising as it may seem, the word "catholic" occurs only here and there in the writings of ancient Greek philosophers. While Aristotle, for instance, often uses the adverb kath'olou (on the whole or in general), he never uses its adjectival form catholikos or its feminine and neutral variants. The reason for this may lie in the Greeks' contempt for all others, whom they gladly lumped under the term barbaroi. Greek philosophers did not even draw in full the logic of the idea, widely entertained by them, that the individual mind was but a bit from the universal mind into which the former was reabsorbed following the bodily death. For if such was the case, the mind of each individual must have had a truly catholic or universal character, even if in its bodily framework the mind was not Greek but barbarian.

The failure of the Greeks to see this was, of course, rooted in their inability to look beyond the mind to the personhood of each individual. That personhood revealed its infinite value only within Christianity. In the measure in which Christians surrendered to the incomparable fact of Jesus Christ, as the Incarnate Son of God, they were able to perceive in full what it meant for man to have been "made in the image of God."

Read the entire article...