Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog

Fifty Years Later–Vatican II’s Unfinished Business

Fifty Years Later–Vatican II’s Unfinished Business | Fr. Regis Scanlon, O.F.M. Cap. | Homiletic & Pastoral Review

Today, 50 years after the opening of Vatican II, the misinterpretation of one of its most salient documents, Lumen Gentium, continues to drive a number of Catholics in the United States into one of two camps, the “right” or the “left.”

Fifty years after the opening of the Second Vatican Council, the Church in the United States is in the throes of a struggle. Loyal Catholics are showing renewed vigor and vitality, and are helping the Church to move forward in unity. At the same time, the Church is also being exhausted and drained from within by a vocal movement of other Catholics who continue to dissent from Church teachings, particularly the teachings of the Second Vatican Council.

Dissent is entrenched in the Church in the U.S.
For most American Catholics over 50, it is an accepted fact that dissent from the magisterium of the Church is widespread, tolerated, and, in some quarters, even welcomed. The breaking point, of course, was Paul VI’s 1968 prophetic encyclical, Humanae Vitae, which condemned contraception as “intrinsically disordered.”  The encyclical became one of the most controversial documents of the century, if not many centuries. The widespread dissent by Catholics was led with enthusiasm by huge numbers of Catholic theologians, professors and intellectuals. The onslaught of bright, articulate academics turning on the Pope encouraged many Catholics in the pews to do the same.

Why would so many educated Catholics—who should have been ready and able to defend the teaching authority of the Church—turn against the Pope with such force? How could they justify it?

The most popular argument was that permission to dissent had been given by none other than the Second Vatican Council. The dissenters claimed that “the spirit of Vatican II,” along with theological perspectives of the Council, supported their argument that individual Catholics have a right to dissent from “non-infallible” Church teachings—even authoritative encyclicals like Paul VI’s “Humanae Vitae”—if they felt they had a good enough reason.

Unfortunately, this false notion was unwittingly given a boost by none other than the bishops of the United States. On November 15, 1968, a few months after the promulgation of Humanae Vitae, the bishops issued their pastoral letter, “Human Life in Our Day,” to help Catholics interpret the Pope’s encyclical.  The bishops said in no. 51 of that document that in some cases, a Catholic could dissent from “non-infallible authentic doctrine” of the magisterium. They explained: “The expression of theological dissent from the magisterium is in order only if the reasons are serious and well-founded, if the manner of the dissent does not question or impugn the teaching authority of the Church, and is such as not to give scandal.”

Continue reading at HPRweb.com.

Ignatius Press releases first Pope biography today as e-book, April 10th in stores

Tornielli book on Pope Francis publishes first in the world, ahead of schedule

ATLANTA, March 27, 2013 – The much-anticipated first biography on the new Pope is here, one month ahead of schedule, and the author is Vatican insider, Andrea Tornielli, who as Nicole Winfield of the Associated Press describes, is “one of the best, if not the best, Vatican reporter out there. Period. He is  the best-sourced, most accurate and one of the most knowledgeable reporters among the unique band of ‘Vaticanisti’ who travel with the pope, digest theological treatises as bedtime reading and count cardinals and monsignors as friends.”

Available today in English, first as an e-book and in hardcover April 10, “Francis, Pope of a New World” (Ignatius Press, $19.95), is a fascinating, definitive and complete biography on Pope Francis. It provides the keys to understanding the man who was a surprise choice, even a revolutionary choice, for pope. It is the story of why the cardinal electors of the Catholic Church set aside political and diplomatic calculations to elect a pope to lead the renewal and purification of the worldwide Church of our time.

There will be other biographies on the Pope, but none will provide the kind of insight into the new leader of over one billion Catholics as this one.

• What led to the election of the first Latin American, first Jesuit pope?
• What is the background against which his first papal acts find their context?
• What was his family life like and how did his family view his decision to become a priest?
• How did Jorge Bergoglio minister as a Jesuit priest and as an archbishop in violent, horrible times?

These questions and more are addressed in the book. In addition, there is invaluable background on Pope Benedict’s resignation and the process of electing Pope Francis.

Tornielli has set the bar high with this biography on Pope Francis.  More than a journalist covering a beat, he lives and breathes his subject. “He has been fascinated by the church since he was 14, and it shows. Yes, he has a degree in classic Greek. But more importantly, he knows the Vatican and the people who inhabit it, and uses that knowledge to inform the world about what goes on in the frescoed halls of the Apostolic Palace. If anyone needed evidence, take his reporting of the conclave that elected Pope Francis the 265th Successor of Peter: His reports about the behind-the-scenes negotiations before the conclave were cited by cardinals as the reason for imposing a media blackout on the process. It didn't work. Tornielli kept on reporting, providing a modicum of transparency on the most secretive of processes,” says Winfield.

For an interview with Tornielli, contact Lisa Wheeler (770-591-0045) or LWheeler@CarmelCommunications.com) or Kevin Wandra (404-788-1276 or KWandra@CarmelCommunications.com) of Carmel Communications.

Conclave Bingo!

From CatholicMemes.com:

Ecumenical Humor Break: "Choose Your Pope!"

Sometimes a short and very funny animated sketch by hilarious Lutherans is worth a thousand (or more) words:

Sometimes you simply have to laugh...

... otherwise you might be forced to take seriously the foolishness that seems to dominate the internet, the airwaves, and the supposedly serious, important newspapers of note. So, as something of a humor break (and, no, I'm not going to reference the Grammys or the State of the Union Address, despite the ripe material), here are three stories that had me chuckling recently.

• On the day the news broke in Rome, Cliff Kinkaid of the conservative group, Accuracy in Media, penned a rather breathless piece titled, "Pope’s Possible Successor Promotes Marxist for Sainthood". When I first saw the headline, I thought it must be refering to some Italian or French Cardinal. Nope, not at all:

American Catholic Cardinal Timothy Dolan, reported to be in the running to replace Pope Benedict XVI as the head of the Roman Catholic Church, is usually described as a “conservative” because he has strongly criticized President Obama’s attacks on religious liberty and federal intrusions into church affairs. But Dolan is also the leader of the campaign to promote Marxist Dorothy Day for Sainthood.

One report asks, “Could Timothy Dolan Become The First American Pope?” Dolan, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB,) is considered the voice of U.S. Catholicism.

But Carol Byrne, author of The Catholic Worker Movement (1933-1980): A Critical Analysis, says Dolan manipulated a vote by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops last November to move forward with the canonization of Dorothy Day, even though The New York Times itself noted that some of the Bishops said “she had an abortion as a young woman and at one point flirted with joining the Communist Party.”

In other news, it was recently revealed that one of the Church's greatest Doctors was a New Age-y gnostic who had a longtime mistress. But, hey, who cares about St. Augustine's life prior to conversion when we have Dorothy Day's life prior to conversion? The funny thing, however, was that Pope Benedict XVI, in his February 14th Ash Wednesday general audience, said the following:

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

Lent: Why the Christian Must Deny Himself

 

Lent: Why the Christian Must Deny Himself | Brother Austin G. Murphy, O.S.B.

We still ask ourselves as Ash Wednesday approaches, "What am I doing for Lent? What am I giving up for Lent?" We can be grateful that the customs of giving up something for Lent and abstaining from meat on Fridays during Lent have survived in our secular society. But, unfortunately, it is doubtful that many practice them with understanding. Many perform them in good faith and with a vague sense of their value, and this is commendable. But if these acts of self-denial were better understood, they could be practiced with greater profit. Otherwise, they run the risk of falling out of use. 

A greater understanding of the practice of self-denial would naturally benefit those who customarily exercise it during Lent. Better comprehension of self-denial would also positively affect the way Christians live throughout the year. The importance of self-denial can be seen if we look specifically at fasting and use it as an example of self-denial in general. Indeed, fasting, for those who can practice it, is a crucial part of voluntary self-denial. 

But since we live in a consumerist society, where self-indulgence rather than self-denial is the rule, any suggestion to fast will sound strange to many ears. It is bound to arouse the questions: Why is fasting important? Why must a Christian practice it? Using these questions as a framework, we can construct one explanation, among many possible ones, of the importance of self-denial.

To answer the question "Why must the Christian fast?" we should first note that fasting, in itself, is neither good nor bad, but is morally neutral. But fasting is good insofar as it achieves a good end. Its value lies in it being an effective means for attaining greater virtue. And because it is a means for gaining virtue– and every Christian ought to be striving to grow in virtue–there is good reason to fast. 

Some people point out that fasting is not the most important thing and, therefore, they do not need to worry about it. Such reasoning displays a misunderstanding of our situation. But, since the excuse is common enough, some comments to refute it are worthwhile. 

Doing Small Things Well 

First, while it is true that fasting is not the most important thing in the world, this does not make fasting irrelevant or unimportant. There are, certainly, more urgent things to abstain from than food or drink, such as maliciousness, backbiting, grumbling, etc. But a person is mistaken to conclude that he therefore does not need to fast. He should not believe that he can ignore fasting and instead abstain in more important matters. Rather, fasting and avoiding those other vices go hand in hand. Fasting must accompany efforts to abstain in greater matters. For one thing, fasting teaches a person how to abstain in the first place. 

Moreover, it is presumptuous for a person to try to practice the greater virtues without first paying attention to the smaller ones. As Our Lord says, "He who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much" [1] and so can be trusted with greater things. Therefore, if a person wants to be able to abstain in greater matters he must not neglect to abstain in smaller matters, such as through fasting. 

Finally, there is a subtle form of pride present in the person who says that because something is not very important, he does not need to do it. Whoever makes such a claim implies that he does only important things. But the average person is rarely called to do very important things. Accordingly, each person is more likely to be judged on how he did the little, everyday things. Even when, rarely, a person is called to do a great work, how often does he fall short? All the more reason, then, for a person to make sure that he at least does the small things well. Furthermore, if he truly loves the Lord, he will gladly do anything–big or small–for him. So, in the end, saying that fasting is not the most important thing is not a good excuse for avoiding it. 

What, then, is the reason for fasting?

Monday Morning Catholic Quarterback

by Carl E. Olson | Catholic World Report blog

Some insist football is like a religion, but that is surely nonsensical. If it really were so, football fans would dress up in special clothing, travel to large and ornate buildings, join together in feasting and chanting, express praise for past heroes, scream and shout and cry like fanatics, and set aside one day a year for a great feast commemorating the biggest and best the sport has to offer. 

What's that you say? Oh. Right.

Of course, there are obvious differences. One is that many Americans are apparently willing to go to the rack (either this kind or that kind) for their team, make fools of themselves for their team, get into heated arguments in defense of their team—all of which would be considered narrow-minded, negative, triumphalistic, and fanatical if done for one's faith and church.  

Don't misunderstand: I have nothing against the Sacred High Day Super Bowl Sunday. I readily confess that I watched the commercials and I even caught some of the game, although I went to get some coffee during the second, unplanned halftime show. Personally, I thought the lights should have gone out during the first halftime show, which appears to have been inspired by a, well, nevermind.  

There have been a number of intriguing story lines over the past two weeks that have caught my attention, despite a schedule filled with time in Hawaii, golfing jaunts, and interviews with Vogue.. A couple of them even have something to with football. Here are a few short routes and a couple of runs between the tackles

• "Hey, God is on his side!" | Am I the only one who has wondered why ESPN and other entertainment networks have spent weeks giggling and snorting over a college football player's imaginary girlfriend but have a self-imposed gag order when it comes to a law-challenged pro player who has fathered six kids by four different women—and talks endlessly about "God"? Manti T’eo may have made some big and silly mistakes, but his sin was having all of this go viral before being a Super Bowl MVP, which is the ultimate "Ticket to Puff Questions Tossed by Adoring Media Types". 

• The Two Brothers | How about the Harbaugh brothers. Neat story in many ways. Did you know that Jim and John are Catholic? Speaking of Catholic brothers, how about the recent back and forth betweenCardinal Roger Mahony and Archbishop Jose Gomez?

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

The Glory Days of “Guy Nation”

The Glory Days of “Guy Nation” | Mark McCormick | Catholic World Report

Don’t look now, ladies, but the Guys have you right where they want you

We are truly living in unprecedented times. These are the glory days of Guy Nation. In the words of one charming member, “Mmm, mmm, mmm. Mmm, mmm!”

What is Guy Nation? To be clear, Guy Nation does not necessarily subscribe to any political affiliation, nor is it contained within any particular socio-economic boundary. It includes guys of all ages, races, incomes, creeds, and pick-up lines.

Guy Nation rests on the firm foundation of three all-important precepts:

1) Guys should stay as immature as possible for as long as possible (also known as the Peter Pan Precept).

2) Guys must avoid responsibility wherever and whenever possible.

3) Pleasure is the greatest of all “goods”, being more important than security, emotional attachments, truth, love, and similar silly stuff.

All of these precepts have been in play ever since guys ventured out of their caves to kill animals with sticks and called it dinner. Yet widespread acceptance has been hard to come by. Until recently, that is. Finally, after centuries—even millennia—of dreams and struggles, Guy Nation began to become a reality in the 1950s. Guy Reality!

Through effective advertising, legal precedents, and the sheer, pajama-powered force of Hugh Hefner's aloof coolness, guys convinced women that becoming primarily sexual objects was a good and healthy thing. Mr. Hefner (“May his name be praised!” exclaims Guy Nation) had women lining up for the privilege of being viewed as bodies detached from personality, intellect, and soul—all for the pleasure of guys! (And for the aggrandizement of his personal fortune, but far be it for Guys to hold it against him.)

But all of this lusting after carefully produced and airbrushed images was just the first step toward Guy Nation. The girlie magazine dream needed to somehow become reality. Fortunately for the budding Guy Nation, there was a crack team of Guy Scientists working on the solution during the 1950s, including Drs. Gregory Pincus, Min Chueh Chang, John Rock, and Carl Djerassi (“May their collective names be praised!” shouts Guy Nation). Through their diligence and persistence—even in the face of strong evidence that the chemicals they used might be harmful to women—they gave the world The Pill, the first oral contraceptive. At last, at last, guys could have all the sexual carousing and pleasure they wanted without having to be bothered with stuff like marriage, commitment, relationships, pregnancies, and pesky little ones.

It was, however, going to be a tough sell in some quarters.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

Atheist A.C. Grayling is a meretricious thinker, but a marvelous comedian

by Carl E. Olson | Catholic World Report blog

Here is the deep, philosophical question of the week: What is more annoying, insufferable, and unintentionally hilarious than the pontifications of atheist, "humanist", and "free thinker" A. C. Grayling?

Yes, I know, it's a tough one. I won't keep you in suspense.

Answer: The fawning, embarrassing adoration of an eighteen-year-old English student who interviews Grayling and acts as if the impressively maned Englishman's empty pontifications are rhetorical gold nuggets. That the interview is published in The Humanist is cause for the stones to cry out: "Oh, the inhumanity! Stop! Cease!"

But, to be honest, we can at least admit how fun it is to read this sort of nonsense and think, "And atheists think Christians are stupid? Goodness. I weep for them." No need to waste time with the entire train wreck of an interview, but a few pieces of broken thinking and confused stereotypes are worth kicking about for a moment. First, from the opening:

Philosophy is a rather strange business in the modern world of consumerism and commerce, I suppose. We’re so used to being force-fed ideas these days that we rarely, if ever, stop and think for ourselves.

Uh, speak for yourself, young man, speak for yourself.

And that’s where Grayling bucks the trend.

I think a gallon of coffee just shot out my nose. That is one of the funniest things I've read in a long time. Mind you, I've crossed cyber swords with Dr. Grayling in the past, over the matter of his ridiculous—nay, farcical—take on Christianity and the "Dark Ages". How shall I put this? Grayling isn't about bucking trends, but making bucks out of trends—in this case, the whole "new atheists" vehicle, to which he has hitched his modest bag of philosophical agitprop and public relations handles. A few years ago, an acquaintance who earned his doctorate in London and is now an atheist (we attended Bible college together 20 years ago as young Evangelicals), smirked at the mention of Grayling, saying, "He's all about fame and money." True enough.

But there is also the fact that Grayling acts as if his thinking is fresh and his perspective is daring, when both are actually decades out of dates. As I wrote six years ago: "He is an heir to the Enlightenment and thrives on the sort of anti-Christian polemics and dubious historical assertions that became the rage among many intellectuals during the Enlightenment era, so much so that he seems to be nearly entombed in a dusty (dare I say 'old-fashioned') form of simplistic skepticism that was in style many decades ago." Carry on.

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

In the Habit: A History of Catholicism and Tobacco

In the Habit: A History of Catholicism and Tobacco | John B. Buescher | Catholic World Report

Saints who smoked, popes who puffed, and others who snuffed.

Ad Maioram Dei Gloriam Sold to American

In 1873, impoverished Confederate veteran Chiswell Langhorne (left) moved his family from Lynchburg to Danville, Virginia and began looking for work. The owner of a Danville tobacco warehouse had recently developed a new system of selling tobacco by auction: Instead of having farmers’ tobacco hogsheads sampled for interested buyers, the warehouse owner had all the tobacco laid out in long rows for auction. Langhorne, a lively character with a taste for showing off, got the idea that he would make his mark somehow in the newly flourishing Danville tobacco trade.

He was an Episcopalian, but while visiting a Catholic friend in Richmond around this time, he attended Mass with him one Sunday morning and heard the priest’s Gregorian chant. Langhorne “reasoned that maybe he could supply the entertainment needs of warehousemen back home by emulating the priest’s stimulating chant, along with what he later coined, a ‘pitter-patter’ and ‘gobble gook’ that would stimulate the buyers and be pleasing to the gathering public.”

He added his own rhythmic body language and thereby created a fast-paced and entertaining auctioneering chant that allowed buyers moving along the rows of tobacco to track the rapid progress of the sales.

It served Langhorne well, as it has the generations of tobacco auctioneers that came after him, each one adding his own style. After his auctioneering success brought Langhorne some money, he began investing in the railroads that transported the tobacco from Danville, left the auctioneering business, and eventually made a fortune, allowing his family to move to an estate near Charlottesville and work itself back into the Virginia aristocracy. His daughter Irene married illustrator Charles Dana Gibson and became the model for his Gibson girl drawings, and his daughter Nancy married Waldorf Astor in England, was elected to Parliament, converted from the Episcopal Church to Christian Science, and became virulently anti-Catholic, despite the fact that, as we may say, her family’s success wound back, like a twist of tobacco, to her father’s having heard Gregorian chant one Sunday at high Mass. (Right: Danville auction warehouse postcard, 1946)

Ex Fumo Dare Lucem

At the time just after Spanish explorers were introduced to tobacco by way of Columbus’ voyages, smoking or snuffing it—as the New World natives did—carried with it something of an air of deviltry because natives saw in it a connection to invisible spirits. To some of the most earnest missionary clergy, the wreaths of its smoke and its action upon the spirits of those who imbibed it were a kind of sacramental parody of the Church’s sacraments, established in the New World beforehand by the Devil in order to hinder its evangelization. 

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

Dozens injured, thousands confused by riots over "Gospel of Jesus' Wife"

By Nick Bottom of Audacious Scoffing Services:

DEVIL'S ELBOW, Missouri (ASS)— Theocratic, mean-spirited violence has erupted throughout the deep South, the "Bible Belt", the Midwest, and a smattering of towns in the Rocky Mountains as thousands of Christians have taken to the streets, wielding swords, Bibles, and plowshares, to protest the recent revelation that Jesus had at least one wife. Other protests, less violent but also widespread, took place over reports that some scholars and pulp novelists believe Jesus merely dated, but never married.

In Devil's Elbow, Missouri, a group of about two hundred men, women, and children, all blood relatives of one sort or another, dressed in their Sunday best and carrying large Bibles, stormed through the downtown, chanting, "Those who mock the Lord, will surely taste the sword; Liars say he had a wife, liars deserve to taste the knife." At least eighteen were injured from blows and bursts of righteous indignation, and two men were slain in the Spirit, although they were apparently not harmed physically.

Eyewitnesses report that the riotous Christians were singing a popular, militantly theistic song with the lyrics, "It only takes a spark, to get a fire going/and soon all those around, are warmed up by its glowing..." One bystander, Joe "Buck" Bob, said the singing was "unusually good; they have really purty voices."

Similar riots have broken out in numerous small towns. But they are also taking place in cities and other important places. Demonstrations near Harvard University, where professor Karen L. King teaches, were especially intense, in part because Christians had not been on the Harvard campus for nearly five decades, and faculty and staff were deeply confused by their clean-cut appearance and efficient methods of quoting Scripture while seeking to force victims to "do some serious soul searching". Numerous faculty members and students were shocked and traumatized by what one history professor called "the sort of theocratic-inspired violence that hasn't been witnessed since Galileo was torn to shreds by Roman Catholic popes and their mistresses in the Vatican gardens in the thirteenth century."

King, the Harvard Divinity School professor who had brought the stunning text, "The Gospel of Jesus' Wife" to public attention last week, denounced the actions as those of "crazy, right-wing, woman-hating, religious zealots who want to impose their fundamentalist, sharia law upon people of good will and Ivy League professors." Speaking from a tightly guarded ivory tower, she told some six dozen reporters that the potentially bloody demonstrations were not surprising considering the violence that had followed the publication of The Da Vinci Code, which had first brought the issue of Jesus' marital status to the attention of people who were not aware of who Jesus was or why an ordinary Jewish lad would eschew marriage in the first place.

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

Doctrine, Dissent, and the Eucharist

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for August 26, 2012, the Twenty-first Sunday in Ordinary Time | Carl E. Olson

Readings:
Jos 24:1-2a, 15-17, 18b

Ps 34:2-3, 16-17, 18-19, 20-21

Eph 5:21-32 or 5:2a, 25-32

Jn 6:60-69

“Through the centuries,” notes Fr. James T. O’Connor in The Hidden Manna: A Theology of the Eucharist (Ignatius Press, 2005, 2nd ed.), “the Church has consistently refused to mitigate the shock contained in the words of the Lord at Capernaum.” He explains that “dissent to the Church’s teaching is not only a phenomenon of the twentieth century; it has always existed.” 

Today’s Gospel reading, from the conclusion of John 6, records how dissent from the teachings of Jesus took place in the very first century. This,
revealingly, is the only instance in the Gospels of disciples leaving Jesus over a matter of doctrine.

There is little doubt that St. John, in describing that tense scene, also had in mind Christians of the mid and late first century who struggled to accept the shocking words of the Lord. It is sometimes tempting to think of the early Christians as a homogenous group of loyal heroes and willing martyrs. But they, like those of us living in the twenty-first century, struggled with doubts, fears, and temptations. We all know that polls indicate many Catholics today either doubt or even reject the Church’s teaching that “under the consecrated species of bread and wine Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: his Body and his Blood, with his soul and his divinity” (CCC 1413).

Jesus’ teaching that his followers must eat his flesh and drink his blood is indeed a hard saying. Who can accept it? The answer to this vital question is, simply, every man who accepts God’s gift of faith. Just as baptism and entrance into the kingdom of God comes by being “born of water and the Spirit” (Jn. 3:5), so faith in the mystery of the Eucharist comes from the Spirit and the Father. The Father sent the Son and testified on his behalf (cf. Jn. 5:31-32); the Son sent the Holy Spirit, who also testified on his behalf (cf. Jn. 15:26).

Jesus posed two questions to those struggling with doubts: “Does this shock you?” and “What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?” The first question, I think, is somewhat rhetorical in nature. Jesus knew his words were shocking, but he wanted the disciples to know that he meant them to be shocking. He had not misspoken, nor had he resorted to hyperbole.

The second question harkens back to when Jesus first met Nathanael and promised him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man” (Jn. 1:51). The Ascension helped the disciples comprehend both the Incarnation and the Eucharist, in part because it showed that Jesus’ glorified body is not constrained by normal physical limits. Yes, it is flesh and blood, but it is also glorified and transformed; it is, in short, beyond our comprehension, and we must not force God into a box of materialist assumptions.

There are two other important questions in this reading. After some of the disciples had left, Jesus asked the Apostles: “Do you also want to leave?” Just as Joshua, many centuries before, had asked the people of Israel to renew their covenantal vows and swear allegiance to the Lord, Jesus asked the future leaders of the New Israel, the Church, to show their loyalty and commitment to the Kingdom. It was, without question, a great test of faith. Peter, as he had at Caesarea Philippi (cf. Matt. 16:16-20), spoke for all of them, answering with his own rhetorical question: “Master, to whom shall we go?”

Indeed, to whom? What are the options? The novelist Walker Percy once wrote that when he was ever asked why he became Catholic, “I usually reply, ‘What else is there?’” Who else has the words of eternal life? Who else can give the Spirit and life? Who else has descended from heaven, died on the Cross, rose from the dead, and ascended back to heaven?

(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the August 23, 2009, edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)

Related IgnatiusInsight.com Articles and Book Excerpts:

• The Eucharist and the Rule of Christ | Fr. James T O'Connor
• The Eucharist: Source and Summit of Christian Spirituality | Mark Brumley
• The Spirit of the Liturgy page
• For "Many" or For "All"? | From God Is Near Us: The Eucharist, the Heart of Life | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
• Foreword to U.M. Lang's Turning Towards the Lord: Orientation in Liturgical Prayer | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
• Music and Liturgy | From The Spirit of the Liturgy | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
• The Altar and the Direction of Liturgical Prayer | From The Spirit of the Liturgy | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
• Benedict and the Eucharist: On the Apostolic Exhortation, Sacramentum Caritatis | Carl E. Olson
• Abbot Vonier and the Christian Sacrifice | Aidan Nichols, O.P.
• The Meaning and Purpose of the Year of the Eucharist | Carl E. Olson
• The Doctrine (and the Defense) of the Eucharist | Carl E. Olson
• Walking To Heaven Backward | Interview with Father Jonathan Robinson of the Oratory
• Rite and Liturgy | Denis Crouan, STD
• The Liturgy Lived: The Divinization of Man | Jean Corbon, OP
• The Mass of Vatican II | Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J.

Just when you think the misandrous Maureen Dowd cannot go any lower...

... she writes this sort of stuff, from her most recent, uh, screed, "Father Doesn't Know Best":

The bishops and the Vatican care passionately about putting women in chastity belts. Yet they let unchaste priests run wild for decades, unconcerned about the generations of children who were violated and raped and passed around like communion wine.

When hell freezes over, Dowd will write the following:

The public school administrators and educators care passionately about talking of "tolerance" and "respect". Yet they still allow preying teachers to run wild, unconcerned about the tens of thousands of children who are harrassed, molested, violated, and raped, and passed around like hall passes.

Rather than bother with another fisking (we've already done that and been there recently), let's go with a simple clerihew:

The mocking, misandrous Maureen Dowd,
Preaches her Time-ly religion, loud and proud:
Men are evil and hell will forever persist,
While chastity, clergy, and Church exist. 

We now return to our regularly scheduled blog posts.

New books and books to read in an "Orwellian dystopia"

Part two of my interview with Brandon Vogt is now up on Brandon's Thin Veil site.

The two topics of discussion are new Ignatius Press releases that have caught my attention and this fun question (as long as it remains theoretical): "Imagine the world has collapsed into an Orwellian dystopia replete with book burnings. You can only save five titles to pass on to your children—what do you select and why?"

Here are my answers. And here is Part One of the interview.

The profound, unapologetic and timely reflections of Archbishop Chaput

The profound, unapologetic and timely reflections of Archbishop Chaput | Michael J. Miller | Catholic World Report

Almost fifty years ago, the writings on religious pluralism of an American Jesuit, John Courtney Murray, helped the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council to draft a Declaration on Religious Liberty in a world where millions of Christians were being ruled by officially atheistic regimes.

On March 23, 2012, hundreds of citizens gathered in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia to participate in a Rally for Religious Freedom, in protest of the U.S. Government’s Health and Human Services Department mandate that compels institutions and individuals to pay for insurance coverage of contraception and abortion despite their conscientious objections.

The United States used to be such a staunch defender and beacon of religious freedom. What happened?!

Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., who now serves as Archbishop of Philadelphia, incisively explains many of the reasons for this paradox in a new e-book entitled A Heart on Fire: Catholic Witness and the Next America, published by Image Books (a division of Random House, Inc.).

The author neatly captures the fundamental tension in the American religious scene by contrasting the courage and pioneering spirit of the Christians who first came to these shores and the skepticism of their materialistic descendants just a few generations later (symbolized respectively by Bunyan’s perennial classic, The Pilgrim’s Progress, and satirical portrayals of Protestantism in short stories by Nathaniel Hawthorne).

Read the entire review at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

Jesuit priest ascribes miraculous powers to President Obama

Aren't you getting tired of this sort of nonsense? Haven't you had enough of Catholics—even priests!—ascribing supernatural powers to a mere mortal? First, some context, from the San Jose Mercury Times:

A religious freedom rally in San Francisco on Friday attracted nearly 500 people from throughout the Bay Area vehemently opposed to a new federal requirement that insurers provide free contraception to workers.

Some waved flags. Others waved rosary beads. Many shouted "unbelievable" as speakers outlined the controversial policy in the national health reform law.

"This affects all of us as Americans, because our first freedom is freedom of religion," said Salvatore Cordileone, Bishop of Oakland.

"How dare the government define for us our religious mission?" he said. "Yes, get the government out of our church."

Initially, the regulation required employers to cover birth control and other preventive services for women without a co-pay or deductible beginning in August.

Now, brace yourself:

At the rally, Father Joseph Fessio of Ignatius Press told the crowd that when Obama was elected, "some people thought they were voting for a Messiah."

"Last month, he performed a true miracle," Fessio said. "He united all of the Catholic bishops in the U.S."

Gotcha.

The AP reports on converting from Catholicism to ...

... "Southern Baptism". Which is rather funny. Especially at 3:00 am.

Other conversions that might be interesting to witness, even if from a safe and wary distance:

• From Methodism to Scientologistism
• From Buddhism to Agnosticalism
• From Mormonism to Hinduitism
• From Presbyterianism to Palestinianism
• From Lutheranism to Easternism Orthoproxy
• From Atheism to Satanalyticalism
• From Free Jazz to Neo-Prog Rocketism

I could do this all night. But, instead, I'm converting to Fallasleepism....zzzzz...

And I, for the record, am a practicing CatholicBuddhistHinduScientologistLesbianMarxistRapper

Something is in the water, while a little less is between the ears:

Looking for a wild-and-crazy time at college? Don’t sign up for Justin McDaniel’s religious studies class.

The associate professor’s course on monastic life and asceticism gives students at the University of Pennsylvania a firsthand experience of what it’s like to be a monk. ...

The course, which focuses primarily on Catholic and Buddhist monastic traditions, stems in part from McDaniel’s own history. An expert on Asian religions, he spent a portion of his post-undergraduate life nearly 20 years ago as a Buddhist monk in Thailand and Laos; he says he’s both a practicing Buddhist and a practicing Catholic.

Oh, c'mon, Mr. McDaniel! Set your sights higher, as did Sean Stone, the son of film-maker and conspiracy promoter Oliver Stone, and practice three religions at once:

US filmmaker Sean Stone, son of Oscar-winning director Oliver Stone, converted to Islam on Tuesday in Iran, where he is making a documentary, he told AFP.

"The conversion to Islam is not abandoning Christianity or Judaism, which I was born with. It means I have accepted Mohammad and other prophets," he said in a brief telephone call from the central Iranian city of Isfahan, where he underwent the ceremony.

The first story—which has no mention of God, Jesus Christ, or distinctively Christian beliefs and practices—concludes with this Really, Really Deep Thought about learning about the monastic way of life:

“It’s not about individual restrictions,” said McDaniel. “It’s about building hyperawareness of yourself and others.”

Nifty. But how about also building some awareness of the specific beliefs of Christianity and Buddhism that indicate they cannot, ultimately, be reconciled with one another? As for the second story, one doesn't have to be an expert in Islam to suspect that becoming Muslim does, in fact, involve a certain and obvious rejection of Christianity and Judaism. But, hey, that is just the hyperaware opinion of one CatholicBuddhistHinduScientologistLesbianMarxistRapper.

"If you wish, you can make me clean."

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for Sunday, February 12, 2012, the Sixth Sunday of Ordinary Time | Carl E. Olson

Readings:

• Lv 13:1-2, 44-46
• Ps 32:1-2, 5, 11
• 1 Cor 10:31-11:1
• Mk 1:40-45

Imagine having an illness so disfiguring, contagious, and deadly that you cannot have any contact with other humans—except for those suffering from the same disease. Cut off from family and friends, shunned by everyone, you must cry out, “Unclean, unclean!” anytime you might be close to someone healthy, warning of your disturbing presence.

It might be difficult to fathom such a stark situation, especially since modern medical treatment provides cures for so many diseases that once ravaged humanity, as well as the means to be close to those who may, in fact, suffer from a contagious illness. Those living in the ancient world, not possessing those options, were often forced to use extreme but necessary measures. Today’s reading from Leviticus 13 is a sober reminder of the anguished separation experienced by those stricken by a variety of skin diseases, often classified under the general name of “leprosy.”

In some cases the unclean person would recover; taken to one of the priests, he would be examined, and, if truly healed, allowed to return to the community. The suffering of those who never recovered was intensified by the loss of familial relations and friendships. In addition, those with leprosy could not partake in the Jewish worship and liturgy. They would have to “dwell apart “ outside the camp, cut off from the social, cultural, and religious life they had once enjoyed. They, in essence, became a sort of walking dead.

These grim facts render the encounter described in today’s Gospel all of the more surprising and poignant. The first surprise is the raw faith of the leper, who did not ask if Jesus was able to heal, but simply declared: “If you wish, you can make me clean.” The second surprise is Jesus’ immediate reaction, which surely shocked those who witnessed it: he touched the leper. Not only was it seemingly irrational, it was a direct violation of the Law, for Jews were to have no contact with anything unclean.

The third surprise is that the unclean man did not infect the clean man; rather, the Lord purifies the leper. Some of the Church fathers connected it to this sentence in Paul’s letter to Titus: “To the clean all things are clean, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is clean; in fact, both their minds and their consciences are tainted” (Tit. 1:15). They recognized that the physical healing imparted by Jesus, while undoubtedly significant, was also meant to signify: it pointed to the spiritual healing offered and communicated by the Savior.

“Let us consider here, beloved, if there be anyone here that has the taint of leprosy in his soul, or the contamination of guilt in his heart?” wrote Origen, “If he has, instantly adoring God, let him say: ‘Lord, if you will, you can make me clean.’” John Chrysostom wrote that Jesus demonstrated, in this miracle, “that he is not under the hand of the law, but the law is in his hands. … He touched the leper to signify that he heals not as servant but as Lord.” The One who had in the beginning made everything good, came into time and space to make good what had been corrupted by sin and crippled by the Fall.

“Jesus has the power not only to heal,” states the Catechism, “but also to forgive sins” (par 1503). All of us are born lepers, disfigured and wounded by sin. Healed by the waters of baptism, we can, sadly, choose to return to a leprous, sinful state. Thankfully, in the sacrament of Confession we have recourse to the healing hands of the High Priest. Recognizing that we have cut ourselves off from the life of the Church, which is the household of God, we are able to kneel before Christ and say, “If you wish, you can make me clean.”

Moved with pity, Jesus stretches out his hand. He touches us. “I will do it. Be made clean.”

(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the February 15, 2009, edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)

A "Jesus rocks, Church stinks; 'spiritual' is awesome, religion is rotten!" Lexicon

Below is a rather, um, caustic piece that I wrote in early 2004 in response to the "un-church" rage (what? you missed that rage? you're so uncool!). The "un-church" movement was/is essentially a riff on the old-but-ever-new silly spouting about Jesus being wonderful and relevant, while religion, Church, and wearing ties are oppressive, dull, and anti-"spiritual". Some of this is a bit dated and I would change a few things if I re-wrote it. Still, perhaps of moderate interest.

The Un-Church Phenomenon: Some Observations and a Lexicon | Carl E. Olson

When my final Protestant pastor (a good man and dear friend) saw that I was becoming deadly serious about entering the Catholic Church, he made one last, desperate pitch. "Why don't you found your own church?" he asked. "Wouldn't that be better?"

Um, no. I certainly didn't think so. Still don't. But it is very appealing to many, many people. The result? Some 35,000 or so Christian denominations in the world, a large number of them in North America.

A January 2004 article, "The Un-churches," [no longer online] in the Denver Post, provides a revealing excursion into the world of small groups that are springing up in the Denver area and, more importantly, into the thinking and beliefs of the twenty and thirty year olds who are founding them.

The names of these "churches" offer some clues as to the general approach: The Journey, Pathways, The Next Level, Connected Life Church, The Crossing, New Life Church, Pierced Chapel, and (I'm not making this up) Scum of the Earth Church.

My thought, upon reading this article, is that those who don't know the past are doomed to repeat it. There is much that is good about the intentions of these groups and there is much that is near-sighted and theologically-skewed. Not surprisingly, there is a strong emphasis on the individual, rejection of structure, love for "freedom," and "expression." That's not too original, as anyone who's older than, say, twenty-eight can tell you. On the other hand, there is some talk of connecting with the past and of knowing history. But it seems that this "connecting" takes on rather shallow and pretentious forms: lots of candles, Celtic crosses, and some neo-Gregorian chanting. As though wrapping yourself in the flag of the past makes you wise to the reality of the past.

Just this last week I had a lengthy conversation with Mike, a 22-year old who attends a "Christian Center" (which is Assemblies of God) and who has been "saved for two years and five months" (he mentioned this fact at least four times). We spoke of many things, but the comment that stood out the most was one that I've heard so many times, albeit in slightly different forms: "I'm all about loving Jesus. I'm not into theology or religion." As in: Jesus is good, dogma is bad. Jesus is great, Church is stuffy. Jesus rocks, ritual blows.