Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog

Christ the King deserves our praise, obedience, and adoration

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for Sunday, November 25, 2012, The Solemnity of Christ the King | Carl E. Olson

Readings:
• Dan 7:13-14
• Ps 93:1, 1-2, 5
• Rev 1:5-8
• Jn 18:33b-37

“Would Jesus feel at home among the opulence of The Vatican?” The question was put to me recently after I’d written defending the Church’s ownership of cathedrals, churches, and artwork.

My article, in turn, was in response to remarks made by a professional baseball player—a fallen away Catholic, it turns out—who had visited the Sistine Chapel and later remarked to a reporter: “They could sell all those things, auction them off and probably feed half that world's starving population. There is that much wealth stored in the Sistine Chapel. For it just to be sitting there I think is a crime.”

There are numerous flaws with such myopic thinking, including the athlete failing to recognize that no other Christian group in the world operates as many charitable organizations, orphanages, schools, hospitals, hospices, and shelters as does the Catholic Church. And what about his multi-million dollar contract, paid for by fans coming to watch grown men throw and hit baseballs in huge, expensive stadiums?

Yet, if the stadiums and the teams were sold, what then? Are sporting events evil? Is it wrong to make a good living being an athlete? Of course not.

Which brings up a point directly related to this great feast day: cathedrals, churches, and works of art were created over the course of many centuries as essential features of the Church's worship of Jesus Christ, who is the King of kings. Today’s reading from the opening chapter of The Apocalypse describes Jesus as “the firstborn of the dead and ruler of the kings of the earth.” If Jesus really is God, he deserves our praise; if he is King of all, he deserves our obedience; if he is the Alpha and Omega, he deserves our adoration.

Sacrosanctum concilium, Vatican II’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, observed that “the fine arts are considered to rank among the noblest activities of man's genius … These arts, by their very nature, are oriented toward the infinite beauty of God which they attempt in some way to portray by the work of human hands; they achieve their purpose of redounding to God's praise and glory in proportion as they are directed the more exclusively to the single aim of turning men's minds devoutly toward God.” (par 122). Man was created out of God’s overflowing love, and man returns that love by expressing his love for the Lord, who is king and “robed in majesty,” through prayers, words, songs, art, and architecture.

Ultimately, the cathedrals and statues and artwork belong to the King. This is all the more meaningful when considering that the Eucharist—the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ—is kept in the houses of God. Sure, the Eucharist could be kept in a closet or a gymnasium, but is that any way to show respect and love for the King? 

Jesus told Pilate, “My kingdom does not belong to this world.” Some Christians have mistakenly thought this means they should have no part of churches, vestments and artwork. But it should be understood in light of the Incarnation, which Jesus referred to a moment later, saying, “You say I am a king. For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth.”

The Son was not of this world, yet he came into the world. He had no beginning, but was born a babe in a manger. He was all-powerful, yet suffered and died. And when he rose from the dead and ascended to the Father, he did not shed his humanity. He is standing in heaven—the Lamb, human and divine, “as though it had been slain” (Rev. 5:6)—surrounded by cherubim and elders singing ceaseless praise.

In other words, Christ’s Kingdom does not belong to the world, but his Church—the “seed and beginning of this kingdom” (CCC 567)—is in the world. And it is growing, mysteriously, not through bloodshed, tyranny, or coercion but through the body and blood of the King, through truth, and through conversion.

(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the November 22, 2009, edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)

Christopher Kaczor on myths about the Church, Galileo, the abuse scandals, contraception, more

Kathryn Jean Lopez, editor of National Review Online, has a lengthy and wide-ranging interview with Dr. Christopher Kaczor, author of The Seven Big Myths about the Catholic Church: Distinguishing Fact from Fiction about Catholicism, recently published by Ignatius Press. Some excerpts:

KJL: In your new book, you explain that “Catholics aren’t anti science, anti-woman, the Aryan nation.” Defensive much?

KACZOR: I think a good defense and a good offense are necessary to make progress towards the truth. Unfortunately, there are many people who believe that the Church is against women or against science. In The Seven Big Myths about the Catholic Church, I challenge the most common myths, the ones that many secular people and inactive Catholics, among others, believe. If many people thought that Catholics were members of the Aryan nation, I would have included a treatment of this as well. Relatively few people believe Catholicism is racist, if only because the majority of Catholics in the world are people of color.

KJL: “Christianity is properly measured not by its great sinners but by its great saints” you write, “for it is the saints who have lived out the Gospel message, not the great sinners.” Isn’t that conveniently counting people there?

KACZOR: Not really. How would you evaluate the effectiveness of a medication in clinical trial? Would you look at how the medication worked for those who took it as directed or would you look at how it worked for people who skipped doses or didn’t take the medication at all? G. K. Chesterton was onto something, “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.”

KJL: Do you actually defend the Catholic Church’s treatment of Galileo?

KACZOR: No and yes. No, I don’t defend the Catholic Church’s treatment of Galileo insofar as the ecclesial judicial authorities in the trial of Galileo made serious mistakes. The authorities wrongly condemned heliocentricism which was, at that time, a proposed but as yet unproven view. However, this error — and other errors of a disciplinary and judicial nature — were not a formal part of Catholic teaching. Then, as now, Church officials can and do make errors, unfortunately sometimes serious errors, in terms of discipline and order within the Church community. But yes, I do defend the Church insofar as the Galileo case was only partially based on scientific disputes but had much to do with conflicts of personality, politics, and theology of the time. In many people’s minds, the condemnation of Galileo has become a Catholic condemnation of science. In fact, at issue was not chiefly the scientific views of Galileo (which were held by many Catholics of the time, including the Catholic cleric Copernicus and Jesuit priests in good standing), but more centrally whether Galileo broke agreements he had made about in what manner to teach his views and that Galileo insisted on changing the dominant interpretations of scripture at the time. Both Galileo himself (who remained a faithful Catholic his whole life) and those involved in his trial such as St. Robert Bellarmine agreed that there can never be a true conflict between science and faith. Apparent but not real conflicts can arise through a mistaken interpretation of faith (as was made by those who condemned Galileo), a misunderstanding of science (e.g. that science requires atheism), or both. It is a myth — albeit a persistent myth — that the Church opposes science. ...

KJL: Why do you end with the abuse scandals?

KACZOR: The abuse scandals are extremely important and often misunderstood, so I wanted to end the book on the topic. Many people mistakenly believe that celibacy causes pedophilia or that Catholic priests are more likely to sexually abuse children than other kinds of people. In The Seven Big Myths about the Catholic Church, I provide a great deal of evidence that these beliefs are false. ....

KJL: “The point of contraception is to make sure that there is not a complete union between the two.” Aren’t you making a bigger deal of this than it is?

KACZOR: Erotic love — by its very nature — is a drive towards deeper unity with the beloved, and children are a wonderful manifestation of the unity between husband and wife. Each child unifies the husband and wife with each other in a physical sense. Every one of us is a living manifestation of the union of our mother and father, half of our DNA from each. This unity, like erotic love itself, is exclusively bringing together one man and one woman. No other woman is the mother of his child; no other man is the father of her child. As long as the child lives, they are unified in their offspring. This unity is characteristically not limited to the physical. Normally, a unity of will and affection also arises between the mother and father. They both love their child, both want what’s best for that child, both delight in the child’s good fortune, and mourn the child’s misfortunes. Even in the case of divorce, very often the parents still share a united will to help their child and will put away their differences and become united again at important events in the child’s life, like graduations and weddings.

Ideally, the unity of the parents includes running a household and raising the child together. They work together, as mother and father, to provide for the child’s many needs. Their unity which began as a unified sexual act continues over the years as a unity of shared activity ordered to the education and raising of the child.

Children therefore help parents realize the goals of erotic love — to be together, unified physically, psychologically, socially, and emotionally. Each child unifies these two people together, and no one else, in a unity that is lasting and exclusive. Children are a good of marriage that unites the husband and wife in a way that realizes the aspirations of erotic love.

The use of contraception acts against the unity sought by erotic love. A couple only uses contraception when one does not want to a child to unite them. Although their bodies are partially unified, the point of contraception is to make sure that there is not a complete unity between husband and wife. Contraception, through various means, seeks to make sure that part of him (sperm) does not unite with part of her (egg). Contraception also involves, against the goals of erotic love, the acceptance of the whole person. Part of the person, the potential to become a father or a mother, the fertility of one or both parties, is intentionally rejected, at least for the time being. If this analysis is correct, then contraception does not serve the same goals as erotic love.

Read the entire interview on Lopez's blog at Patheos.com. • For more about The Seven Big Myths about the Catholic Church, visit the book's website.

The Uniqueness of Christianity: 12 Objections Answered

The Uniqueness of Christianity | Peter Kreeft | From Fundamentals of the Faith

Ronald Knox once quipped that “the study of comparative religions is the best way to become comparatively religious.” The reason, as G. K. Chesterton says, is that, according to most “scholars” of comparative religion, “Christianity and Buddhism are very much alike, especially Buddhism.”

But any Christian who does apologetics must think about comparative religions because the most popular of all objections against the claims of Christianity today comes from this field. The objection is not that Christianity is not true but that it is not
the truth; not that it is a false religion but that it is only a religion. The world is a big place, the objector reasons; “different strokes for different folks”. How insufferably narrow-minded to claim that Christianity is the one true religion! God just has to be more open-minded than that.

This is the single most common objection to the Faith today, for “today” worships not God but equality. It fears being right where others are wrong more than it fears being wrong. It worships democracy and resents the fact that God is an absolute monarch. It has changed the meaning of the word honor from being respected because you are superior in some way to being accepted because you are not superior in any way but just like us. The one unanswerable insult, the absolutely worst name you can possibly call a person in today’s society, is “fanatic”, especially “religious fanatic”. If you confess at a fashionable cocktail party that you are plotting to overthrow the government, or that you are a PLO terrorist or a KGB spy, or that you molest porcupines or bite bats’ heads off, you will soon attract a buzzing, fascinated, sympathetic circle of listeners. But if you confess that you believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, you will find yourself suddenly alone, with a distinct chill in the air.

Here are twelve of the commonest forms of this objection, the odium of elitism, with answers to each.

1. “All religions are the same, deep down.”

That is simply factually untrue. No one ever makes this claim unless he is (1) abysmally ignorant of what the different religions of the world actually teach or (2) intellectually irresponsible in understanding these teachings in the vaguest and woolliest way or (3) morally irresponsible in being indifferent to them. The objector’s implicit assumption is that the distinctive teachings of the world’s religions are unimportant, that the essential business of religion is not truth but something else: transformation of consciousness or sharing and caring or culture and comfort or something of that sort—not conversion but conversation. Christianity teaches many things no other religion teaches, and some of them directly contradict those others. If Christianity isn’t true, why be a Christian?

By Catholic standards, the religions of the world can be ranked by how much truth they teach.

• Catholicism is first, with Orthodoxy equal except for the one issue of papal authority.
• Then comes Protestantism and any “separated brethren” who keep the Christian essentials as found in Scripture.
• Third comes traditional Judaism, which worships the same God but not via Christ.
• Fourth is Islam, greatest of the theistic heresies.
• Fifth, Hinduism, a mystical pantheism;
• Sixth, Buddhism, a pantheism without a theos;
• Seventh, modern Judaism, Unitarianism, Confucianism, Modernism, and secular humanism, none of which have either mysticism or supernatural religion but only ethics;
• Eighth, idolarity; and
• Ninth, Satanism.

To collapse these nine levels is like thinking the earth is flat.

2. “But the essence of religion is the same at any rate: all religions agree at least in being religious.

To Trace All Souls Day

To Trace All Souls Day | Fr. Brian Van Hove, S.J. | Ignatius Insight

As Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger once said so well, one major difference between Protestants and Catholics is that Catholics pray for the dead:

"My view is that if Purgatory did not exist, we should have to invent it." Why?

"Because few things are as immediate, as human and as widespread—at all times and in all cultures—as prayer for one"s own departed dear ones." Calvin, the Reformer of Geneva, had a woman whipped because she was discovered praying at the grave of herson and hence was guilty, according to Calvin, of superstition". "In theory, the Reformation refuses to accept Purgatory, and consequently it also rejects prayer for the departed. In fact German Lutherans at least have returned to it in practice and have found considerable theological justification for it. Praying for one's departed loved ones is a far too immediate urge to be suppressed; it is a most beautiful manifestation of solidarity, love and assistance, reaching beyond the barrier of death. The happiness or unhappiness of a person dear to me, who has now crossed to the other shore, depends in part on whether I remember or forget him; he does not stop needing my love." [1]

Catholics are not the only ones who pray for the dead. The custom is also a Jewish one, and Catholics traditionally drew upon the following text from the Jewish Scriptures, in addition to some New Testament passages, to justify their belief:

Then Judas assembled his army and went to the city of Adulam. As the seventh day was coming on, they purified themselves according to the custom, and they kept the sabbath there. On the next day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kinsmen in the sepulchres of their fathers. Then under the tunic of every one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was why these men had fallen. So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honourably, taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin. [2]

Besides the Jews, many ancient peoples also prayed for the deceased. Some societies, such as that of ancient Egypt, were actually "funereal" and built around the practice. [3] The urge to do so is deep in the human spirit which rebels against the concept of annihilation after death. Although there is some evidence for a Christian liturgical feast akin to our All Souls Day as early as the fourth century, the Church was slow to introduce such a festival because of the persistence, in Europe, of more ancient pagan rituals for the dead. In fact, the Protestant reaction to praying for the dead may be based more on these survivals and a deformed piety from pre-Christian times than on the true Catholic doctrine as expressed by either the Western or the Eastern Church. The doctrine of purgatory, rightly understood as praying for the dead, should never give offense to anyone who professes faith in Christ.

G. K. Chesterton, a model for joyful evangelization

From a recent Catholic News Agency piece about Dale Ahlquist's new book, The Complete Thinker: The Marvelous Mind of G.K. Chesterton:

The author of a new book on G.K. Chesterton says the 20th-century author and Catholic convert is a model for joyful evangelization who can help unify the fractured modern worldview.

“Chesterton is the model evangelist,” American Chesterton Society President Dale Ahlquist told CNA Oct. 18. He had a way to connect with “virtually any kind of audience.”

“He never lets his charity contradict his truth. He always puts them together,” Ahlquist said.

“That’s one of the great weaknesses of our world: you have some people who care only about truth and doctrine, others who care only about charity and pity, and they don’t let the two combine with each other. Chesterton always combines the two.”

Ahlquist’s new book, “The Complete Thinker: The Marvelous Mind of G.K. Chesterton,” was released this October (Ignatius Press, $17.95).

Chesterton lived from 1874 to 1936. Under the influence of his wife Frances, he became a devout Anglican Christian. He converted to Catholicism in 1922.

He wrote literary essays, novels, poetry, plays, philosophical works and Christian apologetics. His short stories include the Father Brown mystery series. He enjoys a reputation as a witty writer with a love of finding truth in apparent paradox. He influenced the thinking of many converts and writers.

“He wrote about everything,” Ahlquist said. “He has this amazing, wide reach.”

Ahlquist said his new book is intended to help get the reader “inside of Chesterton’s head.” He aims to help people “think in a consistent way” across disciplines and modes of life.

“The modern world, Chesterton points out, has become one wild divorce court where everything has been separated from everything else,” he explained.

“We have separated the arts from the sciences and the humanities from the sciences. We have separated religion from politics and religion from economics. We expect all these things to operate in their own watertight compartments, and yet we don’t see how anything fits together anymore.”

Read the entire piece. Also see the recent CWR interview with Ahlquist: "G. K. Chesterton, the Complete Thinker". Also see, on Ignatius Insight:

G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936) Author Page | Ignatius Insight

• Articles By and About G. K. Chesterton
• Ignatius Press Books about G. K. Chesterton
• Books by G. K. Chesterton

G.K. Chesterton, the Complete Thinker

G.K. Chesterton, the Complete Thinker | An Interview with Dale Ahlquist | Catholic World Report

The author of The Complete Thinker: The Marvelous Mind of G.K. Chesterton discusses relativism, good thinking, bad thinking, global economics, and more.

Dale Ahlquist is president of the American Chesterton Society. Through his popular television series, The Apostle of Common Sense, as well as his many books and lectures, he has helped foster a renewed interest in the works of G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936), the prolific English essayist, novelist, poet, apologist, pundit, critic, and commentator. Ahlquist has authored and contributed to several books on Chesterton, including Common Sense 101: Lessons from G.K. Chesterton, G.K. Chesterton: The Apostle of Common Sense, and In Defense of Sanity: The Best Essays of G.K. Chesterton. He recently spoke with Catholic World Report about his new book, released today by Ignatius Press, The Complete Thinker: The Marvelous Mind of G. K. Chesterton.

CWR: In the introduction to your latest book, you write of Chesterton: “In an age of relativism, he speaks in absolutes.” Although relativism has made its reputation in the late 20th century, isn’t it true that Chesterton dealt with many forms of it in his own time?

Dale Ahlquist: In Chesterton’s third novel, The Ball and the Cross, published in 1909, he stages a debate between a monk named Michael and a professor named Lucifer. Even the symbolically challenged should figure out who they represent. At one point in the debate, Lucifer attempts to parry one of Michael’s points with the comment, “Of course, everything is relative…” So you see how long ago Chesterton is already aware of this argument forming, and he puts the argument into the mouth of the devil. Just as Chesterton warned that the popularization of Darwin would lead to a belief in mindless progressivism in politics, he warned early on that the popularization of Einstein would lead to an acceptance of relativism in philosophy.

CWR: You state, “Chesterton’s great accomplishment is that in addition to writing about everything, he puts it all together. He is a complete thinker.” How, in light of Chesterton’s writings, does one go about being a complete thinker?

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

Why Believe? An Apologetic of Faith

Why Believe? An Apologetic of Faith | Carl E. Olson

"Faith is always at a disadvantage; it is a perpetually defeated thing which survives all of its conquerors," wrote G. K. Chesterton.

Faith is the Christian word. Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J., in his masterful theology of faith, The Assurance of Things Hoped For, writes, "More than any other religion, Christianity deserves to be called a faith" (3). He points out that in the New Testament the Greek words for "faith" and "belief" occur nearly 500 times, compared to less than 100 for "hope" and about 250 for "charity" or "love." Which is not to say, of course, that faith is more important than love, since Paul makes it clear that love is the greatest of the three theological virtues: "So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love" (1 Cor. 13:13).

But there is no doubt—pun intended—that faith is essential to being a Christian and to having a right relationship with God, as the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews states, emphatically and succinctly: "And without faith it is impossible to please him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him" (Heb. 11:6).

The daunting work of defining and analyzing faith has been described, with perhaps a dose of knowing humor, as the "cross of theologians." As with hope and love, the virtue of faith can appear initially rather simple to define, often as "belief in God." But some digging beneath the surface suggests a far more complicated task, as some basic questions suggest: What is belief? How is faith obtained? Is it human or divine in origin? How should man demonstrate his faith? What is the relationship of faith to the will, to the intellect, and to the emotions?

The apologist, meanwhile, must respond to charges against faith: that it is "irrational" or that it is the cause of conflict and violence. In recent years a number of popular, best-selling books written by atheists have called into question not only tenets of Christianity—the historical reliability of the Bible, the divinity of Jesus, the Resurrection, and so forth—but the viability and rational soundness of faith itself.

One such book is The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason by Sam Harris, which repeatedly—mantra-like—uses words such as "ignorant" and "irrational" in making the case that religious faith is not only outdated, but overtly evil. Every religion, Harris muses, "preaches the truth of propositions for which no evidence is even conceivable. This puts the ‘leap’ in Kierkegaard’s leap of faith" (Harris, The End of Faith, 23). He adds: "Religious faith represents so uncompromising a misuse of the power of our minds that it forms a kind of perverse, cultural singularity—a vanishing point beyond which rational discourse proves impossible" (Harris, The End of Faith, 25).

Calling Christians and other religious believers stupid and unreasonable is often the default argument for Harris; it is also an approach, crude yet often effective, embraced by many who believe that religious faith is an offense to enlightened, modern man. With that basic opposition in mind, let us take up two basic tasks: defining what faith is and answering some of the charges against belief.

Do I Trust the Chair?

A witticism goes: "Everybody should believe in something; I believe I’ll have another drink." It is more accurate to say that everybody does believe in something, even if it is belief in the ability to live without belief. Of course, even the skeptic understands that life in the material world requires certain types of belief or faith, using those terms broadly and non-theologically: the belief that stop lights will work correctly, faith that I will be given a paycheck at the end of the month, the trust that my g.asp of basic math will keep me on the good side of the IRS.

One argument posits that sitting upon a chair is an act of faith, so even atheists have faith when they sit on a chair in, say, a home they are visiting for the first time. If for some reason I doubted the chair in question would hold my weight, I could ascertain its load-bearing capabilities by asking my host to sit in it first, thereby ridding myself of concern (and likely puzzling or offending my host). The argument only goes so far when it comes to faith in what cannot be seen, touched, or proven by scientific means. It does, however, suggest what many people are reluctant to admit: that all of us have beliefs and we live our lives based on those beliefs, even if we never articulate or define them. As Joseph Ratzinger observes in Introduction to Christianity, "Every man must adopt some kind of attitude to the basic questions, and no man can do this in any other way but that of entertaining belief." (Introduction to Christianity [2nd ed.], 71)

We, as creatures, have limited, finite knowledge, and so must make decisions—practical, relational, philosophical—without the luxury of proof. We use common sense and rely on our experience and, significantly, on the experience and testimony of others. I may not know for certain that the chair will hold me, but I conclude it is rational to think it will, based on certain observations: The chair looks well-constructed; it appears to be used on a regular basis; and it is in the home of someone who isn’t the sort of person to ask guests to sit on a chair that might fall apart upon human contact. Sitting on the chair is a reasonable thing to do. Implicit here is the matter of trust. Do I trust the chair? Do I trust my host? And, more importantly, do I trust my perception and assessment of the chair?

"The Crisis of Faith" by Fr. John Hardon, S.J.

The Crisis of Faith | By Father John Hardon, S.J.

Every rational human being believes. When we believe we accept the word of another person. Someone knows that something is true, either from experience or reason, and we accept what he tells us because we trust that he knows what he is talking about and is not deceiving us.

On this basis the only unbeliever would be a person who is completely out of his mind. We believe that the persons whom we call our father and mother are our parents. We believe that what we are buying is what the store tells us is worth paying for. We believe that the lessons we learned in childhood are true. Who would even enter marriage unless both partners believed in the spouse with whom they were entering matrimony?

In a word, faith is part of our very nature as rational human beings. However, it is one thing to believe in other people and something else to believe in God. To believe in what people tell us is called human faith. To believe in what God has revealed is called Divine faith. To be still more clear, Divine faith properly so called is the assent of our intellect to what God has revealed, not because we comprehend what God tells us it true, but only because we accept a truth on His authority who can neither deceive, or be deceived.

God cannot deceive because He is all good and therefore cannot tell a lie. He cannot be deceived because He knows all things and therefore can never be wrong.

St. John the Evangelist raises one of the most embarrassing questions in the Bible. How is it, he asked, that we who are so ready to believe in men are so slow to believe in God? The answer is painfully obvious. We are so slow to believe in God because what He demands of us is nothing less than to accept incomprehensible mysteries which are beyond our human capacity even to conceive before they are revealed, and beyond our grasp to fully penetrate even after they are revealed.

We see that faith and revelation are related as cause and effect. God reveals Himself, who He is and what He wants; if we respond we believe.

All of this has been a prelude to the real message of this article, for the present crisis in the Catholic Church is really a crisis of faith.

What is the Crisis?

2012 Napa Institute Conference presentations to air on EWTN

From an e-letter sent by Luke Nicholas Miller, the Conference Director for The Napa Institute:

Dear Friends of the Napa Institute,
 
Beginning tomorrow, Saturday, October 6, excerpts from our 2012 Napa Institute Conference will be broadcast as part of the "EWTN On Location" series shown in the US and Canada on Saturdays at 2:00 p.m. Eastern/11 a.m. Pacific time! Tomorrow's broadcast will feature a keynote on Catholic Education by Fr. Robert Spitzer, S.J.
 
To find out how to access EWTN in your local area, simply click on http://www.ewtn.com/channelfinder/ and enter your zip code. The schedule for future broadcasts of the Napa Institute are as follows:
 
October 13, 2012:  Archbishop Charles Chaput, O.F.M. Cap. and Hugh Hewitt

October 27, 2012:  Frank J. Hanna, III
 
November 3, 2012:  Fr. Robert Barron (Catholic Education)
 
November 10, 2012:  Bishop Robert C. Morlino
 
November 17, 2012:  Peter Kreeft
 
November 24, 2012:  Fr. Robert Spitzer, S.J.  (Reason & Faith)
 
December 1, 2012:  Fr. Robert Barron (Reason & Faith)
 
Napa Institute DVDs
 
DVDs from our Second Annual Napa Institute Conference are now available on the EWTN Religious Catalogue Website! On this 12-disc set you can watch keynotes, breakouts, and highlights from Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., Bishop Robert C. Morlino, Fr. Robert Barron, Fr. Robert J. Spitzer, S.J., Peter Kreeft, Tim Gray, Frank J. Hanna III, Hugh Hewitt, and more!
 
Other News
 
The Napa Institute staff has been working with a website developer on revamping and relaunching of our website. The new website is slated to be relaunched by the end of next week!
 
Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone
 
On Thursday, October 4th, on the Feast of St. Francis, His Grace, the Most Rev. Salvatore J. Cordileone was installed as the ninth Archbishop of San Francisco. Archbishop Cordileone attended our first two Napa Institute conferences and celebrated the Solemn Pontifical High Mass in the Extraordinary Form each year. We prayerfully congratulate Archbishop Cordileone on his installation and look forward to his participation at our 2013 Conference!

The 2013 Napa Institute Conference will take place on August 1-4, 2013, at The Meritage Resort and Spa in Napa, California.

Dr. Christopher Kaczor on myths, media, and misinformation

Dr. Christopher Kaczor is a professor of philosophy at Loyola Marymount University and the author of several books, including The Ethics of Abortion: Women's Rights, Human Life, and the Question of Justice; Thomas Aquinas on the Cardinal Virtues; Life Issues - Medical Choices; and How to Stay Catholic in College. His most recent book is The Seven Big Myths about the Catholic Church: Distinguishing Fact from Fiction about Catholicism (Ignatius Press). He spoke recently with Catholic World Report about his reasons for writing the book, the challenge of communicating what the Catholic Church really teaches, and which myths about the Church are most difficult to address and dispel.

CWR: What is the primary audience for your book? Both Catholics and non-Catholics?

Dr. Christopher Kaczor: It is for both Catholics and non-Catholics, ideally. But, more realistically, active Catholics would get and read the book in order to have better conversations and discussions with non-Catholics, especially people who are very secular. There are many myths about the Catholic Church that come from Protestant-Catholic debates, but my book is focused on secularists and non-Catholics who do not hold religious views, but who do, for example, adhere to myths about the Catholic Church that come from the media and Hollywood, among other sources.

CWR: What are some of the key reasons people are so misinformed about the Catholic Church?

Dr. Kaczor: One of the main reasons is that the mainstream media—through television, radio, movies, the internet—misrepresents the Church on the key issues. Take movies, for instance: priests are constantly presented and portrayed in a stereotypical way, especially as drunks or molesters or hypocrites. This informs the imagination and views of people. Another huge factor is that Catholic generally do a poor job of explaining the the history, beliefs, and practices of the Catholic Church. Catholics are apologetic in the wrong way, sometimes even saying, "Yeah, we're behind the times, but we'll eventually catch up!" So Catholics contribute to the malaise and misinformation when hey do not stand up for the Faith and state the truth. They need to be firm in what they believe, but they first need to know what they believe, and why.

CWR: How did you select these seven myths?

Dr. Kaczor: My process of selection was not necessarily scientific, but neither was it random. I've been teaching since 1997, and have often asked myself, "What are the issues that my students are struggling with and wrestling with the most?" It also comes from my experiences of talking with many other people over the past twenty years. All of these myths involved key issues that people really wrestle with; I chose the ones that think are the most malicious and the most widespread when it comes to the Catholic Church.

CWR: What myth is most deeply ingrained in the dominant culture?

Dr. Kaczor: That's hard to say. Myth #7 might be one ["Priestly Celibacy Caused the Crisis of Sexual Abuse of Minors: The Myth of Priestly Pedophilia"]. Lots of people hold that view, and it is very damaging. People rightly expect priests to be holy and upright, and so when a priest is found to have committed abuse, it discredits the priesthood for many people. But what most of these people don't realize is that children are more likely to be molested by a school teacher or a coach than a priest. That's the reality. But people won't stop sending their kids to school or having them in sports programs. However, they will stop going to Church and they will reject Catholicism because a bad priest committed a malicious act. This is particularly bad because it removes them from the life of the Church and undermines, or ends, their participation in the Church.

Part of the issue here is that teachers and coaches are so deeply trusted that many people cannot face up to the evidence, and so we don't see a movement to reform the teaching profession or the football coaching profession. Yet, again, teachers and coaches are more likely to abuse kids than a priest, as studies show and my book demonstrates. And when we look at the horrible situation with [former Penn State coach] Jerry Sandusky, we see that being married does not magically cure the problem.

CWR: Which of these myths is most difficult to address? Does that depend on the situation and people involved?

Dr. Kaczor: I think it does depend on the situation. Perhaps # 4 ["Indifferent to Love, the Church Banned Contraception: The Myth of Opposition between Love and Procreation"] because addressing contraception requires knowing that procreation is a good thing, but that takes a lot of time and background information about sexuality, marriage, and so forth. The same is true when it comes to defending marriage and addressing "same-sex marriage": a quick sound bit doesn't work easily. It really does require time and effort. 

• For more about The Seven Big Myths about the Catholic Church, visit the book's website.

Canada: Ignored, Mysterious, and Very Confused

Canada: Ignored, Mysterious, and Very Confused | Michael Coren | Catholic World Report

The first installment of a new column, “Controversies with Coren”

It’s always a challenge to write a first column, to introduce oneself to a new audience. My brief is to cover pretty much anything I want, but to write about Canada and Britain in particular. The reason is that I spent the first half of my life in London, the second in Toronto. I married a Canadian. We met at a G.K. Chesterton conference in 1986, where I delivered a startlingly boring lecture entitled “Chesterton, Belloc, the Marconi Scandal, and Edwardian Anti-Semitism.” Not a usual subject for future wife attraction, but even so this highly intelligent, extraordinarily beautiful woman approached me at a cocktail party at the end of the conference and exclaimed, “You’re amazing.” She was doubtless drunk.

Thinking this would never happen again, I married her. And I was right: it hasn’t happened again, and as far as I can recall she hasn’t said it again either.

Thus Canada, which is one of those geopolitical mysteries. Like Costa Rica’s peacefulness or the beauty of Bruges. People just don’t usually know. Thirty million inhabitants, incredibly wealthy, absurdly large, enormously successful, culturally and artistically fertile, and often a predictor of what the USA will become 10 years later. But because it’s a former British colony and on top of the world’s only superpower it’s often forgotten, ignored. Frankly, it rather likes it that way. Similarly with the Canadian Church. There are more than 13 million Catholics in Canada, 44 percent of the population. There are eight million Protestants of various denominations, the largest claiming to be the United Church, at around half-a-million members.

It’s the most liberal of the churches and is hemorrhaging adherents. As are the Anglicans and the Presbyterians. Unlike in the US, Evangelicals at around 11 percent are not a major force. Immigration has, of course, enormously increased the Hindu, Sikh, and, in particular, Muslim communities.

There is an extensive and publicly funded Catholic education system in the country, a tiny but still permitted Catholic television station, and in the past two generations it’s been unusual to have a prime minister who is not Catholic. Of a sort.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

The Gnostic Christ fails, the True Christ heals

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for Sunday, September 9, 2012, Twenty-third Sunday in Ordinary Time | Carl E. Olson

Readings:
Is 35:4-7a

Ps 146:7, 8-9, 9-10

Jas 2:1-5
Mk 7:31-37

How do you know the gnostic writings provide us with a less historically accurate depiction of Jesus than the Gospels?”



That question was put to me a few years ago after I had given a talk about The Da Vinci Code at a Catholic parish. The man who asked it was apparently upset I doubted Dan Brown’s claim that the so-called “Gnostic gospels” described a believable, human Jesus, while the four canonical Gospels had created a deity who had little or nothing to do with the real world. 



My answer was simple: “I read them.” No need to take my word for it when the evidence is readily found on the printed page. The Gnostic “gospels” aren’t gospels in the sense Christians use the word. They lack historical narrative, concrete details, historical figures, believable people, and details about social and religious life. The Jesus they describe has hardly any interest in the material realm. After all, the primary goal of Gnosticism, which came to maturation in the second century, was to escape the physical world. The Gnostic Jesus talked endlessly (and often nonsensically), but wouldn’t get his hands dirty.

Compare that with today’s Gospel reading, the story of Jesus healing the deaf mute, which is unique to the Gospel of Mark. It is a masterful and pithy account, filled with theological and spiritual riches. Jesus and the disciples were spending time in Gentile territory, circling north and then east before traveling south to the district of Decapolis, which is east of the Jordan River and south of the Sea of Galilee. During his previous visit to the region, Jesus had freed a man from demonic possession by sending the unclean spirits into a herd of swine (Mk. 5:1-20). Word of his return had apparently spread, and he was asked to heal a man who was both deaf and mute.

The primary source for Mark’s Gospel was Peter, and the detailed description of the healing indicates the head apostle was profoundly moved by what he witnessed. There are seven specific actions described by Jesus: he took the man away from the crowd, touched his finger to the man’s ears, spit, touched the man’s tongue, looked to heaven, groaned, and said, “Be opened!”

In many ancient cultures, saliva was believed to possess healing properties. What is perhaps more striking for the modern reader is the intimate physicality of the action, as when a mother uses her saliva to rub dirt from her child’s cheek. The healing was not the work of a dispassionate doctor, but of the Lover of Mankind, the healer of body and soul. The Son, in becoming man, did not reluctantly put on flesh and blood, but was truly Incarnate, embracing humanity fully, completely, wholly. “That power which may not be handled came down and clothed itself in members that may be touched,” wrote Ephrem the Syrian, the great fourth-century theologian, “that the desperate may draw near to him, that in touching his humanity they may discern his divinity.”

Whereas the Gnostic Christ fled the material realm and ultimately failed to meet man where he lives, the real Christ—the Creator of all things seen and unseen—entered into time and history, experiencing the heat, the hunger, the sorrow, the weariness, and the pain.

But this miracle, like all of Jesus’ healings, was about far more than relief from physical ailments and illness. It was a sign that the Kingdom was established, that streams of living water had been loosed in the desert, and that the poor were being offered the riches of faith and everlasting life. Jesus embraced all of humanity—Jew and Gentile, healthy and ill, hearing and deaf, speaking and mute—because each of us needs to be touched and transformed by his hands and his word.

So, one reason (out of many) the Gospels are far more believable than the Gnostic writings is they describe real people in the real world meeting a Man who really heals both body and soul.


(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the September 6, 2009, issue of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)

Sister Helena Burns' review of "Cosmic Origins"

From Sister Burns, who writes reviews and much more on her blog, Hell Burns:

Got atheists? Atheist friends or family, that is? The “stellar” new DVD “Cosmic Origins” might help! Today’s top scientists (many award-winning) weigh in on the mysterious origins of our universe (and a possible beyond). Old and new cosmological theories are presented, leading up to the possibility of an “intelligent Designer.” But the film—being mostly a scientific exploration/explanation--doesn’t harp on “intelligent design,” which, as Cardinal George tells us, belongs more to the realm of philosophy rather than either science or religion. Physics is juxtaposed with a brief consideration of metaphysics. One does not feel bamboozled or railroaded by a sudden “attack” of “religious thought” at the end, where Jesuit priest Robert Spitzer (Magis Institute for Faith & Reason) introduces the concept of a harmonious relationship between science and belief.

The tone is one of informative scientific updating (for the layperson, but without talking down to us). Definitely not an “apologetics” tone.

The format is diverse: footage of the universe, graphics, interviews, more than one live host, “man-in-the-street” opinions, etc. “Cosmic Origins” never lags. There is a conspicuous presence of young adults, especially in the personalized but contrived-looking “man-in-the-street” scenes. Atheism  and “unaffiliated” are the fastest growing “religions” among young adults, and the “New Atheism” movement is eagerly proselytizing these young minds and hearts.

Carl Sagan wanted the average person to be informed about science and was frustrated by what he deemed Americans’ “celebration of ignorance.” Famous “new atheist,” Richard Dawkins, held the position of Oxford’s “Professor of Public Understanding of Science” from 1995 to 2008. However, scientists need to understand that not everyone is interested in understanding how things work or even the scientific explanation of the origins of the universe. And it can be argued that the average person does not even need to know these things to flourish. Also, we all have our own specialties. Does Dawkins know what a mechanic knows? Can he fix his own car? Sometimes, scientists have a kind of hubris, demanding that everyone bow down to their discipline/field as the most important thing on earth.

The universal longing for love, meaning, fulfillment, self-understanding, connection with others, etc., trumps the desire for and acquisition of practical/functional knowledge every time. But this is still not an excuse to be a willful ignoramus. At least be curious about God’s astounding Creation, OK, believers? This might be the first bridge towards reaching atheistic scientists and their followers who only have science (many eschew philosophy along with theology).

Sister Burns is writing a longer review of the Cosmic Origins film, and will be posting it on the Hell Burns site. For more information about Cosmic Origins, visit www.CosmicOriginsFilm.com.

Lessons from Catholic Evangelists

Lessons from Catholic Evangelists | Jim Graves | Catholic World Report

Five prominent Catholic apologists share their methods of spreading the Good News and defending the Faith.

In a meeting last year with Church leaders involved in the New Evangelization, Pope Benedict XVI said, “Today’s world needs people who proclaim and testify that it is Christ who teaches the art of living, the way of true happiness, because he himself is the path of life.”

“Dear friends, being evangelizers is not a privilege but a commitment that comes from faith,” the Holy Father continued. “To the question the Lord addresses to Christians: ‘Whom shall I send and who will go for us?’, answer with the same courage and the same trust as the Prophet: ‘Here am I! Send me’ (Isaiah 6:8).”

While some are called to be missionaries in foreign lands, for most of us, evangelization of inactive or non-Catholics begins in our own homes and communities. CWR recently spoke with five prominent Catholic evangelists, who offered suggestions to Catholics on ways they can evangelize those they encounter day-to-day.

Austen Ivereigh lives outside of London, England, and is coordinator of the apologetics/evangelism apostolate Catholic Voices. Catholic Voices began in 2010, coinciding with Pope Benedict XVI’s visit to the UK. It now operates in six countries, including the United States. Its initial purpose was to assemble a speakers’ bureau of articulate young Catholics who could effectively present Catholic teaching in the media on contentious issues. Due to its success, the initiative has continued, training additional speakers, giving workshops, and publishing two books.

“In Catholic Voices, we have developed a method of ‘reframing’ contentious issues so that people don’t shut down,” Ivereigh said.

One must first understand the “frame” that secular society has on Catholic teaching, “which usually involves the Church seeking to ‘impose’ its view,” he said. One should recognize if there is any positive value behind the criticism of the Church that may have been exaggerated at the expense of other equally important values.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

You are Who you eat: "Let Christ be eaten..."

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for August 19, 2012, the Twentieth Sunday in Ordinary Time | Carl E. Olson

Readings:
• Prv 9:1-6
• Ps 34:2-3, 4-5, 6-7
• Eph 5:15-20
• Jn 6:51-58

“You are,” my mother—like most other mothers—used to tell me, “what you eat,”

“You are Who you eat,” says my Mother, the Church, as she has for two thousand years. The Eucharist, wrote Ignatius of Antioch on his way to martyrdom, “is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death …” The person “who receives the flesh of our Savior Christ and drinks his precious blood,” wrote Cyril of Alexandria, “shall be one with him.” Augustine put it boldly and simply: “Let Christ be eaten; when eaten he lives because when slain he rose again.”

“Let Christ be eaten”—that is the essence of today’s Gospel reading. It contains the fourth and final “Amen, Amen” statement from Jesus in his Bread of Life discourse. With each statement (Jn. 6:26, 32, 47), Jesus took his listeners deeper in the mystery of his person, mission, and gift of salvation—a mystery rooted in the Incarnation, pointing to his death and resurrection, and given to the Church in the Eucharist.

As Jesus revealed more, he met more resistance. At first his listeners asked questions (v. 30), then made demands (v. 34), then murmured openly (v. 41), and then began to quarrel over his words. Jesus’ claim that the bread of life he offered was somehow closely linked with his actual flesh was deeply offensive. It smacked of cannibalism, which was an offense providing evidence God had cursed his covenantal people (cf. Lev. 26:27-29). So if Jesus, in saying that “the bread that I will give is my flesh”, was using metaphorical or poetic language, surely he would have cleared up any misconceptions created by his startling language.

Jesus did clear up misconceptions, but not as many of his listeners probably hoped or expected. He clarified his remarks by emphasizing that, yes, he was speaking of his actual flesh and of real eating: “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do have life within you.”

These words, more than any other in Scripture, stopped me cold in my tracks many years ago. As a Fundamentalist and, later, as an Evangelical Protestant, I had never heard a sermon or attended a Bible study that grappled with these words. The various books and commentaries I studied did not address satisfactorily the meaning and purpose of Jesus’ declaration, “For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.” I asked the same question as those listening to Jesus in person: Whatever did he mean?

Part of the answer is found in how Jesus described himself as the “living bread that came down from heaven.” G. K. Chesterton, in The Thing: Why I Am a Catholic, expressed it well, “Heaven has descended into the world of matter; the supreme spiritual power is now operating by the machinery of matter, dealing miraculously with the bodies and souls of men.” Put simply, the Eucharist is a continuation of the Incarnation. By becoming man, the Son of God took on flesh—not in appearance only and not for just a few years, but in actuality and for all of eternity.

The Creator, having taken on flesh, now brings about a new creation by inviting man to receive his flesh and blood in the Most Holy Eucharist. Having become man, the Son gives himself to us so that we, made sons of God through baptism, might continue growing in truth and grace and divine life, feeding on his life-giving flesh and blood. The Eucharist does not just sustain us, but transforms us; it does not just fill us, but completes us.

John Paul II, in his encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia, wrote, “The Church draws her life from the Eucharist”, and explained that those who receive the Eucharist become “the Body of Christ—not many bodies but one body.”

How do we remain in Christ and become more Christ-like? By eating his flesh and blood. You are Who you eat.

(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the August 16, 2009, issue of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)

Coren on Conversion, Canada, and Lies About Christianity

Coren on Conversion, Canada, and Lies About Christianity | Catholic World Report

The veteran journalist and commentator Michael Coren reflects on his past, the present state of the West, and the future of the Church

Michael Coren is a television host, radio personality, syndicated columnist, author, and speaker based in Canada. He is the best-selling author of fourteen books, including biographies of G.K. Chesterton, H.G. Wells, Arthur Conan Doyle, J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. His book, Why Catholics Are Right, was on the Canadian best-seller list for three months. His latest book is Heresy: Ten Lies They Spread About Christianity.

Michael has received several honorary doctorates and awards for his writing and broadcasting. In 2005 he won The Ed Murrow Award for Radio Broadcasting, in 2006 The RTNDA Radio Broadcasting Award, in 2007 the Communicator Award in Hollywood and in 2008 the Omni Award for his television show. He has received several honorary doctorates and awards for his writing and broadcasting. In 2005 he won The Ed Murrow Award for Radio Broadcasting, in 2006 The RTNDA Radio Broadcasting Award, in 2007 the Communicator Award in Hollywood and in 2008 the Omni Award for his television show. In 2012 The Catholic Civil Rights League gave Coren the Archbishop Adam Exner Award for Catholic Excellence in Public Life.

He recently spoke with Catholic World Report about his journey into the Catholic Church, the state of Christianity in Canada and the West at large, and his most recent books.

Catholic World Report: You converted to Catholicism as a young man, then spent some time in Evangelical circles. What brought you back to the Catholic Church? How has that influenced your recent books, which are apologetic and controversial (in the old-school sense) in nature?

Michael Coren: I was asked to speak at a G.K. Chesterton conference in Toronto back in 1986, met a wonderful Canadian woman, fell in love, married her, and left Britain to Canada. I’d come into the church a year earlier. The Canadian Church was in a poor state, and at the height – depth – of its liberalism.

After a few years I felt so distant, so rejected. It was my fault, and better people than me stayed and continued the fight, but I think I was still vulnerable in my faith and simply drifted away into Evangelical worship. But as so many others have written and explained, it was never the full truth, never the entire picture. I longed for Christ, for His body, for the Church He left us, and that twitch upon the thread drew me back. That journey, than struggle, certainly influenced my writing, and turned me into an apologist really. I’d had to do the work, years of it, and wanted to convey all of that effort to other people, to give them what I had been given.

Catholic World Report: You've written several biographies, including of G.K. Chesterton and C.S. Lewis, two of the finest defenders of Christian orthodoxy of the past century. What are some of the best insights and strengths of those two men when it comes to explaining and defending Christian doctrine and practice? What are your favorite works by Chesterton and Lewis?

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

Napa Institute conference emphasized formation, freedom, faith

From the National Catholic Register's recent article about the 2012 Napa Institute Conference:

Individual formation as a Catholic is integral to making the collective Church stronger and better able to engage the increasingly secular culture.

Several speakers stressed this important factor at the Napa Institute’s second annual prayer-and-apologetics conference.

The theme was “Equipping Catholics in the Next America” — an emerging secular America that is much more hostile to Christian faith and witness than it has been in the past.

Held July 26-29 at Catholic entrepreneur Tim Busch’s elegant Meritage Resort and Spa in Napa, Calif.’s wine country, the conference’s mission was to equip lay and religious leaders to defend and advance the faith in today’s increasingly secular society.

Consecrated to Our Lady of Guadalupe, the conference drew more than 300 Catholic religious and lay leaders, including priests, nuns, monks, entrepreneurs, educators, lawyers and media from throughout the United States and five foreign countries.

The piece, written by Sue Ellen Browder, provides a synopsis of each of the major addresses given by speakers including Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput, Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Wis., Magis Institute President Father Robert Spitzer, Augustine Institute President Tim Gray, entrepreneur and philanthropist Frank Hanna III, Boston College philosopher Peter Kreeft, radio talk-show host Hugh Hewitt and Father Robert Barron.

Browder reports, "EWTN videotaped the conference, and many of the talks will be available on DVD in mid- or late-September. Beginning Oct. 6 on Saturdays at 2pm, selected talks from the Napa Institute conference will also air on EWTN."

Archbishop Chaput's talk is available in full on the Register's site. Here are a couple of excerpts:

Critics of the Church have attacked America’s bishops so bitterly, for so long, over so many different issues — including the abuse scandal, but by no means limited to it — for very practical reasons. If a wedge can be driven between the pastors of the Church and her people, then a strong Catholic witness on controversial issues breaks down into much weaker groups of discordant voices. ...

We also need to change the way we act. We need to understand that we can’t “quick fix” our way out of problems we behaved ourselves into. Catholics have done very well in the United States. As I said earlier, most of us have a deep love for our country, its freedoms and its best ideals. But this is not our final home. There is no automatic harmony between Christian faith and American democracy. The eagerness of Catholics to push their way into our country’s mainstream over the past half century, to climb the ladder of social and economic success, has done very little to Christianize American culture. But it’s done a great deal to weaken the power of our Catholic witness. ...

Critics often accuse faithful Christians of pursuing a “culture war” on issues like abortion, sexuality, marriage and the family and religious liberty. And, in a sense, they’re right. We are fighting for what we believe. But, of course, so are advocates on the other side of all these issues — and neither they nor we should feel uneasy about it. Democracy thrives on the struggle of competing ideas. We steal from ourselves and from everyone else if we try to avoid that struggle. In fact, two of the worst qualities in any human being are cowardice and acedia —and by acedia I mean the kind of moral sloth that masquerades as “tolerance” and leaves a human soul so empty of courage and character that even the devil Screwtape would spit it out.

Read the entire address.

The Shock of the Blessed Sacrament

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for Sunday, July 29, 2012 | Seventeenth Sunday in Ordinary Time | Carl E. Olson

Readings:
• 2 Kgs 4:42-44
• Ps 145:10-11, 15-16, 17-18
• Eph 4:1-6
• Jn 6:1-15

When, as an Evangelical Protestant, I began working my way through the many Catholic beliefs that both puzzled and attracted me, one really stood out: the Eucharist.

And of all the various Scripture passages I read, re-read, and studied, there was one that especially shook me to the core: the sixth chapter of John. As I read what is among the most astounding and brilliantly realized passages of the Bible, the tension would build to the moment when Jesus, with serene firmness, asked of his murmuring disciples, “Does this shock you?”

Yes, I thought to myself, it does shock me. What to think? What to do?

The center of the shock is located in John 6:51-59, where Jesus stated emphatically, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you” (Jn. 6:53). But to appreciate more profoundly the mystery of the great Bread of Life discourse, we need to start at the beginning of the chapter and slowly work through the various stages of explosive revelation found in what is an argument, a teaching, a prophetic utterance, and, ultimately, a direct encounter with the heart of Jesus Christ.

Today’s Gospel reading is the first of five successive weeks of readings from John 6. These opening fifteen verses establish both the physical and theological context of what follows. Jesus had crossed the Sea of Galilee with a large crowd following on land; the people were curious about the miracles and signs performed by the Nazarene.

St. John notes, quite purposefully, that Jesus “went up on the mountain,” which indicates that God was about to work in a miraculous and startling way. The Evangelist also indicates the feast of Passover was near; this was the second Passover during Jesus’ public ministry. During the first Passover, Jesus had cleared the Temple and then prophesied rather cryptically his death and resurrection (Jn. 2:19-22). Later in John 6, Jesus spoke again about his death and resurrection (6:51). And the third Passover, of course, was when Jesus was arrested, tried and crucified (Jn. 19:14).

The Passover context is significant for this central Jewish feast was a solemn ceremony in remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt, a pivotal and defining moment in Jewish history. At that first Passover (Ex. 12) the people were commanded to take an unblemished lamb, kill it, and spread the blood over the doorposts. They were then commanded to eat the lamb completely, along with unleavened bread. Down through time the Jews celebrated the Passover with a feast involving bread and wine and the singing of Psalms, followed by the sacrificing of lambs in the Temple.

Jesus is described as the Lamb of God “who takes away the sin of the world” in the opening chapter of John’s Gospel (Jn. 1:29). In the sixth chapter, then, the essential themes are sustenance, sacrifice, and salvation. The sustenance was, first of all, physical in nature. Jesus was quite aware of the basic needs of those following him. But the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves and fishes was not simply about physical satisfaction, but was the start of spiritual challenge and illumination.

In a pattern described several times in the Fourth Gospel—think of Nicodemus (Jn. 3) or the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn. 4)—Jesus began with a physical object or event, such as birth or water, and used it as a springboard into deep spiritual waters. Those waters, in turn, are shown to be sacramental in nature. As we will see over the next few weeks, the physical sign of multiplying bread—itself a symbol pointing to the reality of the Eucharist—led to the declaration of a spiritual truth, “I am the bread of life” (Jn. 6:35).

That, in turn, will bring us face to face with the sacramental reality—“For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed” (Jn. 6:55)—and the question: “Does this shock you?”

(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the July 26, 2009, edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)

Enter the Digital Continent of Preaching

Fr. Fred Gaglia, Ph.D. | Homiletic & Pastoral Review

Our preachers must lead people to align themselves with the Church, filling the chasm of the past two or more generations of those not in touch with this treasury of truth. The goal is eternal salvation, the growth of the Church is in the balance.

Enter the “digital continent.” This term was coined by Pope Benedict XVI in 2009 to define the world of social media that has transformed patterns of communication and human relationships. It seems a new light is dawning on this “continent” for preaching as well, according to his letters to the Pontifical Council on Communications over the last two years.  His May 16, 2010, message for the 44th World Communications Day, entitled, “The Priest and Pastoral Ministry in a Digital World: New Media at the Service of the Word,” reveals the Holy Father’s vision for our age: using new media as a tool for preaching. The following excerpt speaks especially to young men preparing for priestly ministry:

Responding adequately to this challenge amid today’s cultural shifts, to which young people are especially sensitive, necessarily involves using new communications technologies. The world of digital communication, with its almost limitless expressive capacity, makes us appreciate all the more St. Paul’s exclamation: “Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel” (1 Cor 9:16). The increased availability of the new technologies demands greater responsibility on the part of those called to proclaim the Word, but it also requires them to become more focused, efficient and compelling in their efforts. Priests stand at the threshold of a new era: as new technologies create deeper forms of relationship across greater distances, they are called to respond pastorally by putting the media ever more effectively at the service   of the Word. 1

Clearly, the Holy Father is talking about the responsible use of social media (the Internet, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter), by those called to proclaim the Word. This amounts to acquiring better focus in our pastoral response.

On February 7, 2011, the Holy Father took up this topic again in his most recent address to the plenary assembly of the Congregation for Catholic Education:

In these days you also studied the draft of the document on the Internet and formation in the seminaries. Because of its capacity to surmount distances and put people in mutual contact, the Internet presents great possibilities also for the Church and her mission. With the necessary discernment for its intelligent and prudent use, it is an instrument that can serve not only for studies, but also for the pastoral action of future presbyters in different ecclesial fields, such as evangelization, missionary action, catechesis, educational projects, and the management of institutes. Also of extreme importance in this field is to be able to count on adequately prepared formators who will be faithful guides and always up-to-date, in order to support the candidates to the priesthood in the correct and positive use of the media. 2

His insights set the stage for updating seminary homiletics courses to include chapters on how to enhance preaching through the use of digital media. There is no avoiding it. Now is the time for us to consider how to eliminate the word “boring” from the feedback of the people regarding preaching in most Catholic parishes. You know the statistics concerning Mass attendance. Preaching using the new media may improve those statistics by keeping more in tune with people on the digital continent.

Continue reading at www.HPRweb.com.

The 2012 Napa Institute Conference

The Napa Institute’s 2nd Annual Conference, “Catholics In the Next America”, will be held from Thursday, July 26^th to Sunday, July 29^th. The event will feature an impressive array of speakers and participants, including Archbishiop Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., Bishop Robert C. Morlino, Bishop Robert F. Vasa,  Bishop Salvatore J. Cordileone, Rev. Robert Barron, Rev. Joseph D. Fessio, S.J., Rev. Norbert Wood, O.Praem., Peter Kreeft, Hugh Hewitt, Frank J. Hanna, III, Dr. Tim Gray, Dr. Elizabeth F. Yore, and Leonard A. Leo.

The event is hosted by Rev. Robert Spitzer, S.J., the President of Napa Institute, and Timothy R. Busch, Esq., who is CEO of the Institute; Fr. Spitzer will also be a featured speaker at the conference.

The three intertwining themes of the 2012 conference, says Busch, are faith and reason, Catholic education and religious freedom. “In the wake of HHS mandate”, Busch notes, “religious freedom is certainly the topic of the day. However, it’s not the only pressing issue of the day. The Church is facing the departure of our young adults from not only from the Catholic faith, but from belief in God in general. So Fr. Spitzer will lead the charge on reason and faith at the conference.” Busch also points out that Catholic education is “under siege at the parochial level particularly in urban centers”, with numerous schools closing each year. In light of that challenging fact, he says, “we need to address new school models that will work.”

The pressing topic of religious liberty will be addressed in Thursday’s presentations, including those by Archbishop Chaput and Bishop Morlino. Catholic education will the focus of Friday’s events, including a talk by Fr. Barron (who was recently appointed rector and president of the University of St. Mary of the Lake and Mundelein Seminary by Francis Cardinal George), Fr. Spitzer, and Frank Hanna III. Saturday’s schedule includes presentations by Fr. Spitzer, Fr. Barron, and Dr. Kreeft on faith and reason, a topic all three men have spoken and written about extensively for both academic and popular audiences. Breakout sessions on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday will include a variety of topics and presenters.

Challenges and Encouragement

The varied and difficult challenges posed by secularism must be addressed directly, says Fr. Spitzer, which is a primary reason for the formation and work of the Napa Institute. “Challenges to religion and the Catholic Church surround us”, he says. “Stephen Hawking, Richard Dawkins, and many other atheists are undermining the faith of our youth and adults; the President of the United States insists on forcing our religious institutions to administer artificial contraception against Church teaching; our young people, though optimistic and concerned for others, are becoming increasingly morally relativistic; the media almost luxuriates in scandals which give only a slice of the immensely good reality accomplished by our Church.”

A driving idea behind the conference is that Catholic leaders—whether clergy or laity—need to learn more about these pressing issues from leading thinkers, authors, theologians, and philosophers. “If we are to stand up for our faith in the public square,” Busch states, “we must be educated. The Institute focuses on substance of our Faith by bringing together theologians, philosophers and the shepherds of our church for instruction, discussion, and mutual encouragement.” 

The Napa Institute was founded as a response to the call for a New Evangelization, intended to help Catholics address the challenged posed by the “next America”—one that is increasingly secular and even anti-religious. A key component of the New Evangelization, as articulated by Blessed John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, explains Fr. Spitzer, “is the active participation by our lay leaders. We expect our priests, religious, and catechists to respond to the challenges put to faith and morals in our day, but we minimize our effectiveness when we do not prepare our lay leaders to do this for the organizations, educational boards, governmental agencies and political arenas over which they have considerable influence.”

Worship and Spiritual Edification

To that end, the Napa Institute Conference focuses not only on reason and teaching, but also on the spiritual life and worship. Participants will be able to spend time in Eucharistic adoration, available around the clock in the Chapel of Our Lady of the Grapes, and to participate in prayer and worship each day. On Saturday evening there will be Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, followed by Solemn Vespers and a Sacred Music Concert, featuring St. Dominic’s Choir. And the conference will conclude on Sunday morning with four liturgies: a Solemn Pontifical Celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of Mass in the Extraordinary Form celebrated by His Excellency, Most Reverend Salvatore J. Cordileone; Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (Novus Ordo); Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom  (Byzantine Rite); and Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (Novus Ordo, Latin). The music at the High Mass will sung by the Pacific Collegium choir.

Those who are unable to attend, says conference director Luke Miller, will be able to take advantage of the presentations via television, radio, and internet. A crew from Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN) will be at the conference to film keynote sessions, selected breakout sessions, and some of the liturgical services. “Following the conference”, says Miller, “highlights from the Napa Institute will be broadcasted on the EWTN Global Catholic Network. We are truly blessed to be working with the leader in Catholic media as we equip Catholics ‘in the next America.’” Parts of those broadcasts will also be made available on YouTube. In addition, broadcaster Al Kresta will be on site, hosting his Ave Maria Radio program, “Kresta in the Afternoon”, live from the conference.

Last year’s conference, Miller says, was a great success, and he expects close to three hundred participants at this year’s event. For more information or to register, visit the Napa Institute website (www.napa-institute.org) or call 949-474-7368 (ext. 216).