Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex

Most have probably read Bishop Tobin’s public rebuke of Representative Patrick Kennedy last week.  The public rebuke of wayward Catholic politicians is becoming a growing trend among our US shepherds.  For decades now, the dominant pastoral strategy among bishops who have taken seriously their responsibilities, has been to engage these politicians in private.  The thinking being that pastoral dialogue is only possible when done in private.  Once the matter becomes public the opportunity for personal dialog is generally lost.  Unfortunately, those politicians have come to recognize this and taken great advantage of it.

Kennedy, like others before him, thought himself free to publicly proclaim the meaning of being Catholic assuming that he was exempt from public rebuke.  I suspect that part of this comes from the predominant American heresy that says religion is a completely private, individualistic affair.  In other words, no one can tell me what “my faith” means.  Thus, wayward Catholic politicians regularly proclaim that they can do whatever they wish and still be “good” Catholics.  I would argue that this heresy has been unintentionally abetted by the previously dominant pastoral strategy of US bishops.

Bishop Tobin’s public action is the latest in a trend among US bishops that recognizes that this one-sided strategy has borne more ill fruit than good.  The relativist assumptions of politicians such as Kennedy, that because they claim the Catholic faith then it is whatever they define it to be, has had a corrosive affect on US Catholics by and large.  This last election I think has been a turning point.  Here we had a politician who publicly promised to do everything he could in order to put laws and policies in place which would bring about the greatest expansion in history of the killing of unborn innocents, who at the same time garnered a majority of “Catholic” votes.  The confusion among Catholic voters could not be more manifest.

This last election has made it clear that the private approach must have its limits.  Its affect has been to allow many Catholics to assume, as do the politicians, that faith is simply personal opinion.  The lack of sufficient public rebuke for obstinate politicians has led others to reach the conclusion, perhaps in an unarticulated way, that while perhaps not a good thing abortion is certainly not an evil on the level of murder. This confusion must be remedied.

Other than one grammatical error, I find Bishop Tobin’s missive to Rep. Kennedy to be a model for the right pastoral response.  Kennedy has rightly been silenced.  His complaints that the discussion about his faith is something that should remain in private (though he himself previously made it public) demonstrates his faulty expectations of free public reign on his part with silence on the part of his bishop.  Bishop Tobin’s approach will not only serve to help to correct Kennedy’s false public witness but it also will serve as a warning that politicians may not speak with impunity about what it means to be a Catholic when they contradict Church teaching.

It is true that wayward Catholic politicians have souls in need of salvation and that this is part of a bishop’s responsibilities.  However, many bishops are coming to recognize that there are many other souls being led astray with a one-sided strategy that looks only at the conversion of the politician.  It is still a matter of prudential judgment when it is time to go public.  Nevertheless, there is a growing realization that eventually taking the issue public is a necessary matter of public witness.

We finally closed on the house but every step of the way, it looked like it would not happen.  From a loan officer whom we could not get to talk to us to a loan assistant who seemed not to be matched to her particular skill set.  Half way into the process when this became apparent we should have probably cut our losses and went elsewhere.  Any way, unless some surprise pops up (a potential eventuality I am not yet discounting) we may now be officially off the homeless rolls thanks to Shelray’s assistance.

As is usual, I have been quite busy but still have had a chance now and then to keep up on the goings on.  I have been thinking about the unsurprising response of many commentators in the media about the responsibility of the pro-life movement for the killing of notorious abortionist George Tiller along with the broader implications of this response.

Beginning with Mike Hendricks’s illuminating (though not illuminated) blathering in the Kansas City Star and then the subsequent piling on of the likeminded (if I can use the term): see Colby Cosh’s tirade in the National Post, and Ellen Goodman’s tortuous logic in the Boston Globe. The expected theme is the same in all of these: those who call abortion murder are thereby also guilty of Tiller’s murder.  If one looks at the logic flowing from these representatives of the mass media, one finds ominous signs for religious freedom and any speech that does not comport with the ruling party line.

Like BO’s speech at Notre Dame implied, these writers begin with the premise that abortion is not murder.  For BO it may be a significant moral consideration but it is not the killing of an innocent human person.  For BO dispassionate dialog can only begin on this premise.  It is not clear that those represented by the above media representatives are even open to allowing the prolife community a platform.  However, if they are, prolifers must first disavow the equation of abortion with murder.  This is the trap that so-called pro-life/pro-Obama Catholics seem to fall into.  To be invited to the table, they must be willing to reject such inflammatory language as “murder.”

The tactic of censoring speech because it is said to incite violence is nothing new.  The abortion lobby has used it for years and the homosexualist activists have adopted it as well.  However, the circumstances have changed considerably. One who shares this view now has the nation’s bully pulpit and the party most sympathetic to this view now hold dominant majorities in both houses of congress.  This is not to mention that the courts have been increasingly populated with activists who are also more and more likely to abet such a view.

Moreover, abortion is only one plank in the aggressive social restructuring agenda that the current president seems poised to attempt to enact.  His proclamation of June as LGBT pride month was also telling. In making this proclamation, BO put the office of the President squarely against natural law and the Judeo-Christian tradition.  Same sex attraction and gender identity disorders are now protected, nay, preferred and promoted lifestyle choices (see this LifeSiteNews article for an example of the results of this distorted way of thinking).  However, there is a stumbling block in the way of such an ambitious project.  We are beginning to see the administration’s strategy for overcoming this “problem.”

The actions of the Obama administration in appointing radically pro-abortion and anti-family “Catholic” zealots to executive and judicial posts, and its promoting of relationships with “Catholic” notables and organizations that are attempting to attenuate the significance of Catholic cooperating with pro-abortion policies all seem aimed at developing a dissenting “anti-magisterium” that can offset the authority of the only authoritative and organized voice against abortion and for protecting the natural family.  The Catholic Church is in fact the biggest threat to this social restructuring agenda.  No opportunity will be passed up in the attempt to marginalize, discredit, counter, or silence the truth about the human person proclaimed by the Catholic Church in the US.  The media’s response to the Tiller murder illustrates this.

Cosh’s comments are the most illuminating.  He indicates that if abortion is murder, then Tiller’s murder is justified and the pro-life community has to embrace this.  The others writers implicitly accept this when they say that calling abortion murder makes violence the logical consequence.  Obama’s response to the murder seems to imply the same.  For all of their talk of peace and justice, this logic betrays an implied threat to both.

I believe these rumblings to be ominous because they share the thinking of Robespierre and the purveyors of the Reign of Terror.  Declaring themselves the guardians of liberty, they mean their own liberty to act as they wish with no limitations placed upon them.  They have an implicit distrust others because their own will is made the arbiter of truth and so there is no way of adjudicating between competing wills other than through means of force.  Those who do not readily accept their assertions cannot be reasoned with for there is no defensible use of reasoned arguments in their assertions.  Thus, violence on their part is an ever looming threat.  What we are now seeing appears to be the preparations for justifying such violence (intended or not).

By no means is the majority of the country yet with this agenda.  However, neither does it have the intellectual or moral formation to defeat it on its own.  To overcome the current threat, we require the clear and unwavering voice of the Catholic Church.  This is what we began to see from the bishops during the last election and what we saw with the Notre Dame scandal.  The bishops see the impending threat and many are beginning to respond.  I think that the majority within the country is still influenced by natural law and the Gospel.  However, they require our faithful and continuing witness if we are to overcome the deleterious effects of the mass media engine and the bully pulpit of the current administration.

Well, I have just completed my first full week of unemployment.  I think that I had more leisure time while employed.  Unemployment began by waking up to 8 inches of water in the basement Saturday morning before last.  The sumps had stopped running for some reason.  I was able to get them started before heading off to Mass. The water was pumped out by the time we returned.  Tricia spent the morning trying to dry out our files that had been inundated with water while also holding a garage sale.  I spent the morning cleaning up the basement.  We headed out to Chicago to visit some friends in the afternoon and made it back home by 11pm.  That has been one of our more leisurely days.

We are in Dayton for our goddaughter’s graduation, so that is the only reason I have a breather right now.  I thought I would take the time to comment on a topic I have seen in my inbox this  month.  Several articles by several different persons have been forwarded to me about Christopher West and the fallout from his Nightline interview.  He has been taking quite a bit of heat for it.  According to some (Alice von Hildebrand and David Schindler), it is not simply the case that West was taken out of context and misconstrued,  but rather that he has some underlying problems in his anthropology.

First for some caveats and disclosures: I cannot speak as an expert on Christopher West’s interpretation of John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, as I have read and/or heard relatvely little of his thought.  However, I have read and heard some and have found that I share some of the concerns being presented.  I know David Schindler.  I took a course from him at the John Paul II Institute which, by the way, served as the inspiration for the title of this blog.  He was also a reader for my dissertation.  I do not always agree with Schindler’s take on John Paul II. I think it is often too heavily read through his “Balthasarian lens.”  However, I do think that some of Schindler’s criticisms are well-founded, and these criticisms will be the focus of this post.  I don’t claim to be the world’s foremost expert on John Paul II or his theology of the body, but I do consider myself to have an above-average expertise, as this was the foundation of my dissertation, and I have taught undergraduate courses on the theology of the body for several years.

Schindler begins with some apparently rather questionable statements that Christopher West has made.  Oftentimes, these questionable statements can seem to be reconciled with orthodoxy when contextualized, but even in doing so, Schindler says that there is a residual problem.  Schindler lists four issues he sees with West’s approach, and also with the substance of his theology.  These Schindler sees as giving rise to what many find vulgar and prurient in West’s approach.

Schindler first lists West’s underestimation of the damage done to humanity by concupiscence.  Schindler refers to his having brought this up to West a number of years ago.  I recall Schindler’s having mentioned this discussion (back in 2003, I think it was).  He mentioned West’s problematic dismissal of the perduring effects of concupiscence and West’s response.  However, I also recall that I did not agree with the way the Schindler seemed to frame the meaning of concupiscence.  He seemed to reify it as some positive reality then, as something that resides in the body.  His statement in the above linked article also intimates this understanding.  Nevertheless, what I have heard from West seems to suggest to me that he does in fact underestimate the impact of concupiscence on the human person.  Redemptive grace in this dispensation does not remove concupiscence, and concupiscence in sexual attraction cannot be ignored.  West seems to forget this, though “Christopher” of this blog, who has recently taken a class from West, indicated that West is reconsidering his take on concupiscence.

I have the impression of West that he seems to consider puritanism as a greater threat than the sexual libertinism of the sexual revolution.  I seem to recall seeing this written by him, but if I am wrong about this, I apologize.  However, if it is true, it would explain many things about his overemphasis on sex which Schindler thinks arises from his lack of a proper sense of the analogia entis (the analogy of being), which takes its archetype in God but never forgets that the difference between God and His creation is greater than the similarity.  Puritanism is a distortion of chastity.  Libertinism is a rebellion against not only puritanism but also against chaste virtue.

West seems to think that concupiscence can and must be defeated.  This is impossible.  Temptation must be overcome and defeated but concupiscence remains for the entirety of this lifetime.  Concupiscence is not an object to be defeated.  Concupiscence is a privation of integrity between the affects (i.e. emotions and appetites) on the one hand and the intellect and will on the other.  The original state was one of integration among these faculties, which we had only because of original grace–but this is how we were created–we were created for grace.  This integrity can be provisionally restored to a greater or lesser extent by cooperating with sanctifying grace, but the proclivity to sin always remains, and so it must not be tempted.  West can seem to dismiss this.  In doing so, it seems that he is falling into the error of presuming upon God’s grace in order to reject the admonition to avoid the near temptation of sin.  God’s grace can transform us if we cooperate it, but in our fallen state this is not a straight path that one can achieve simply through the force of will or by a quietist presumption on grace.

Schindler criticizes West for a lack of Marian sensitivities in his theology of the body. The way Schindler describes this is pure Balthasar and so it is not fair, I think, to consider this a failure. John Paul’s theology is certainly sympathetic with Balthasar’s Mariology, and good arguments cans be made that he incorporated this to some degree in his own thinking.  At most this should be proposed as a corrective to West’s prurience but not a fault in West’s theology.  Hildebrand argued that West loses the mystery of the person by his lack of sensitivity to the dangers of concupiscence.  This I think I have seen.  It is, I think, the reason behind his inability to discern what is inappropriate or vulgar and what is not.

Puritanism and sexual libertinism are both threats.  The former because it set the stage for justification of the latter.  However, both reject the authentic meaning of the human person and the sacredness of the body.  The danger is (and I think that this is the trap that West falls into) that the response of one who suffers from puritanical thinking can look very much like the response of one who has an authentic anthropology and responds out of a desire for purity.  That is, when subjected to sights that might be a temptation both will turn away.  The puritan because he thinks that the naked body is dirty or evil and the wannabe saint because he realizes that the goodness of the naked body is sacred, and in his fallen state he can be tempted to reduce the other to his sexual value.  Furthermore, there is a stewardship for the weaknesses of others that must be observed in order to protect them from temptations.

When inadvertantly subjected to experiences that can lead to lust, one does indeed have the obligation through self-mastery to overcome the temptation.  However, one also has the obligation to avoid the near temptation of sin.  It is ill advised, indeed it can be sinful, to  subject oneself purposefully to anything with which Satan or our simple fallenness can use to draw us more easily into sin.  Everyone is different.  Men and women are tempted differently.  Men tend to reduce women to their sexual value for the sake of pleasure.  Women tend to reduce men to the latter’s ability to meet their need for complementary bonding and personal fulfillment.  Among men, however, temperament, experience, history of subjection to pornography, etc. all factor into what can lead to temptations and how difficult it is to master oneself in this regard.  One may not sin in a misguided attempt to attain self-mastery. Neither may I assume that what I can safely be subjected to is the standard for everyone.

West’s use of images that offend the sensibilities of many good Catholics seems to be motivated by the fact that he thinks that puritanism is the root cause for their offense.  He needs to be reminded that puritanism is a relatively recent phenomenon and that chastity and purity are age old virtues.  While it is true that some cultures are not offended by things sexual that do offend others (a point I recall West often making), one must not draw conclusions based upon superficial assessments.  Lack of offense does not imply purity in reception.  Cultures in which men and women are both publicly naked must not be assumed to show that public nakedness is a possibility for a society that wants to achieve purity.  In fact, these cultures rarely show a high regard for women and their sexuality.

Ok, enough blathering and back to the question: is Christopher West’s interpretation of theology of the body dangerous?  First, I will say that I wish that this discussion could go on in private because it serves to give comfort and aid to dissenters and can undermine a good apostolate that West has developed, albeit, one that is in need of some course corrections. However, with respect to the question,  I suspect that for some people it can be.   I do think that in many ways he has done very much good, and I have no way of knowing how much that his disregard for concupiscience may have caused damage to those misled by it.  I do hope that he will take the public criticism to heart and find someone who can help him to correct his misinterpretations.  Our culture needs it and so does the Church.

I saw that Tom Hoopes had a post today over at NCRegister that really is quite moving.  It is about a little, seven year old girl named Emma whose biological mother was an unwed 16 year old who had initially planned to abort Emma but had changed her mind.  Emma’s mother said about her change of heart:

Something told me not to go through with it because God has a special plan for this little girl…

Emma is by all accounts, a very spiritually mature 7 year old.  In her innocence she teaches her adoptive parents and she also teaches me:

The report says Emma was 3 the first time she mentioned the Pope. She saw him on TV in the hospital and sat up in bed. “That’s my new pope,” she told her mother. “That’s my new pope. Do you think I can ever meet him?”

Watson didn’t pay much attention to the request. But over time she saw how serious her daughter was.

The Make-a-Wish Foundation doubted a child would request to see the Pope, Watson said. So several people wrote letters on her behalf.

“Ever since Emma began talking, she has spoken about prayer and wanting to become a nun,” wrote Dr. Hrair Garabedian, a Spokane cardiologist. “Again, I am surprised by her complete devotion to God, but it does not surprise me at all she has requested a visit with the pope.”

“Emma is a very special child and in some spiritual way, old beyond her years,” said another letter to the Make-a-Wish Foundation.

Watson said Emma is joyful, never complains, and has a deep faith.

Mrs. Watson told the Associated Press:

“Some small part of us thought we were doing something good by saving this sick little girl, not realizing it was God’s plan all along to save us – from selfishness, from not getting caught up in the little things of life. One of the biggest things we’ve learned is to take things one day at a time and try not to worry about tomorrow.”

Reading a bit about this little girl and was something of an integrating experience for me.  In contemplating the teaching impact of a little one whose life was spared, a life the world demands never be allowed to leave the womb alive, one is drawn to return to the mystery of Providence. Providence is often a truth that we explore only when we are forced to decide for it or against it.  That is, we have no choice but to trust in God and that He has a plan for us or to despair.

This Lent was an unusually good spiritual experience for me in this regard. It began with a very humbling episode.  March 3rd was our 25th wedding anniversary and I had planned on giving my wife with a trip to Rome which we had more or less been saving for.  Instead, I had to cancel those plans and give her the news of my pink slip I had received the day before, on the first Monday of Lent.

Of course there was good that came out of this disappointment.  It caused me to contemplate how much of what I was doing was for God and how much was for me.  It allowed me to realize that I could not, of my own capacities, provide the security and protection for my family that most men feel the obligation to provide.  It shook me out of my spiritual comfort and complacency and challenged me to again surrender myself to God’s merciful Providence.

Lent this year was an experience of continual effort to trust when I could not see the pathway forward.  It was a continual effort to give myself to my students even though I would not be able to see them through to the end of their studies…and to give them even more since the time was now so short.  It was a continual challenge to continue to give myself totally to the apostolate about which I was continually tempted to separate from emotionally, the apostolate that had told me that I would no longer be able to serve with them.

This experience was in some small way, an experience of solidarity with Jesus.  Though, I did recognize that it was very small.  Previous to my own impending unemployment, I was continually drawn to thoughts and prayers for friends, like Hierothee, who have been much more affected by the lack of teaching jobs than I.  I recognized that there were many others who were coming to the end of their financial ropes and did not know where they would be living very soon.  So, it was not so much that I did not recognize or appreciate the relative magnitude of my experience, rather it was that I had not fully ascertained its personal importance for my spiritual life.

I still had not adequately recognized the increase in faith, minuscule as it might be, God had drawn from me in the experience and how he had used it to prune from me my unholy attachment to the trappings of the apostolate I was serving and the false sense of security I put in my own efforts rather than in Him.

It was the story of this little girl who wants to see “her Pope,” presumably because he manifests to her the God in whom she places all of her trust, which provided me the pure grist, separated from the chaff of the experience, I needed to see those aspects of my Lenten experience which I had permitted to purify me and those for which I still needed to permit purification.  This side of heaven there will continually be disordered attachments to the things of the world, even holy things that make use of the created order.  I can only believe that this little innocent girl will teach others even greater things about the joy and comfort that comes from putting our hope only in the Lord, but for me, one whom some call “professor”, she has taught alot.

You probably have noticed that posting has been more sparse than usual over the last week or so.  The tempo has picked up considerably at the Institute of Catholic Thought here in Champaign, but that has not been a good thing.  I was informed at the beginning of last week that due to the economic slowdown our funding stream could no longer support our school of theology so we will be closing it down at the end of the semester and I will get to experience solidarity with those human persons who make up the current 8.1% unemployed.

The task load has increased considerably in trying to place students, in finding a job, in continuing to teach classes, and in handling the unhappy tasks associated with shutting down a school.  This apostolate was growing with the intention of creating a compelling new venue for bringing the Catholic intellectual tradition into the public university environment.  This is an important enterprise which ought to be pursued at universities everywhere.

The thinking, or perhaps a not so close facsimile thereof, that goes on in a public university makes it very much a challenge to introduce Catholic thought.  However, that is in fact the reason for the need.  The challenges are manifold.

The first challenge is simply the name “Catholic.” The myth of a conflict between religion and science, fostered by John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White in the late 19^th century, still has plenty of traction among academics today.  While this reveals a tremendous ignorance of history, we still must contend with the perception that Catholic thought offers only obfuscation.

Many others believe there to be a more comprehensive contradiction between faith and authentic knowledge.  Many contemporary academics simply assume that anytime faith is asserted, reason necessarily has been excluded.  In fact, I have been told directly by one such academic that a person of faith (read Christian) teaching on his own faith tradition has no place in a “secular” university classroom.

Another challenge is what John Cardinal Henry Newman, in his The Idea of a University, referred to as an educational philosophy of utility. That is, little value is awarded to knowledge that does not appear, at least indirectly, to possess economic or technological utility. Given widespread biases against religion and modern philosophy’s supposed discrediting of speculative thought, contemporary academia presumes Catholic thought offers nothing of value. As a consequence wisdom has been traded for knowledge and today’s university concerns itself with only the latter.

Further difficulties arise from the manner in which the specialization has led to a fragmentation of knowledge and its evil twin, what I refer to as an “ontologizing of the method.”  The problem with this fragmentation of knowledge is that there is no longer recognition that all knowledge interrelates and so there is little appreciation for what Catholic thought might contribute to the way one thinks about his discipline.  What I mean by “ontologizing the method” is nothing more than the metaphysical and epistemological reductionism that arises when the scientific method becomes an idol.  Metaphysical reductionism results in materialism and for epistemology it is “scientism.”  Materialism, of course, further prejudices against any claims coming from one perceived as motivated by his religion.  Scientism is essentially positivism which cleaves knowledge into science and opinion; the latter is given little value.  Other challenges presenting include the assumption that education must be values neutral, a distorted view of academic freedom, and a revisionist understanding of the separation of church and state.  All of these hurdles must be taken into consideration if one is to develop an effective strategy for engaging contemporary academia.

These were hurdles that we were embarking upon clearing but the apostolate has now experienced a set back, possibly a lethal one.  Restoring the capacity to think to academics is critical because of the affect that they have on the students and so on the rest of society.  The US university has been a significant contributor to the secularization and the attending fall from virtue that we have seen in the US over the last 50 years or so. This in turn has been a large contributing factor to our nation’s current ills.

With all of the darkness coming out of anti-life federal legislation and policies, state attacks upon the Church, economic woes uncovering the vermin that have always lurked under the rocks, etc this is the worst time to be shuttering such a school.  This darkness points to a very serious spiritual crises that we have finally arrived at.  Such an enterprise as we are now shutting down is needed more than ever today.  The Institute itself will continue to exist but it will be a one man apostolate teaching two undergrad classes a semester.  Better than nothing but not what it was intended to be and certainly not what is needed.

I would very much appreciate prayers first for the students who are directly affected, for other students who will not now learn how to think clearly and be able to defend themselves against the secularizing horde which is academia, and for those of us who have been given the further challenge of finding work in these hard economic times.  Well, I suppose it is back to the unhappy chore of putting an end to a promising apostolate.

Most of us have heard by now the latest news about Legionaries of Christ founder, Fr. Marcial Maciel.  Last week we had the very sad confirmation of what I suppose most of us had already realized what likely the case since Benedict removed Fr. Maciel’s faculties to act as a priest in public in 2006.  However, for the many Legionaries of Christ and Regnum Christi members who had held out hope that none of the allegations against their founder were true, this last week was a devastating one.

The question in light of the revelation: now what?  I would have to admit that I have found what some have decided to be the correct response, well, disappointing.  Now, I am not talking about the anti-Catholic press, or erstwhile Catholics in the secular press that have abandoned the faith, or even the (not so) Catholic press.  I am talking about faithful Catholics who have decided to lecture the Legionaries about what they should now do.  The advice ranges from internal purging of what they assume to be knowing enablers to dissolution of the order.  I am much troubled by such open letters and blog posts.

There is certainly a need for the Order to reassess what this means for them and to discern what, if anything, these confirmations demand.  However, the Legionaries ought to be able to do that themselves, in obedience to the Holy Father, without outside interference.  They do not need our “piling on” when they are down.

This is a time, it seems to me, to recognize that our brothers and sisters in the Legionaries and Regnum Christi are shocked and suffering and they need us to join with them in solidarity and in prayer.  The Legionaries and Regnum Christi have done enormous good.  They have established important and successful, world-wide media, education, and evangelization apostolates that are helping to transform the world.  It is true that sometimes they have grown faster than they had the organizational maturity to handle perfectly, but everything that they have done has been in fidelity to and for the good of the Church.

So what now?  For those who are Legionaries and Regnum Christi, it should be discernment in obedience to the Holy Father.  For the rest of us, it should be a response of gratitude to God for his having blessed us with this Order and our offering of prayers and support to those who have given themselves to Him through it.  Finally, we must all pray for those who have suffered at the hands of an apparently very confused and deceitful man.

In reading Archbishop Robert Herman’s, the Administrator of the Archdiocese of St. Louis, recent column published in the St. Louis Review, I was reminded of G. K. Chesterton’s famous poem written in 1907, “The Secret People.”

In his article, Bishop Herman put things in the right perspective, showing that anger at BO and his administration is misplaced (do read the entire column linked to above).  Rather, our anger, or rather our focus, ought to be on the enabling of Catholics (or half of us) and of Catholic politicians who have allowed us to arrive at where we now stand.  BO did not hide what he had planned even if the MSM did its best to keep it out of public view.

It is a failure of Catholics to understand and live their faith that has allowed the country to drift into a post-Christian, post-God malaise.  Chesterton’s poem is written about events in English history that he sees as significant. Chesterton asserts that the average Englishman was/is more endowed with common sense than those leaders whose goal it was to labor for freedom from the Crown.  However, in each of these events he writes of he admonishes, it seems to me, the average Englishman for his silence being more interested in mundane niceties than fighting for what justice:

Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget;
For we are the people of England, that never have spoken yet.
There is many a fat farmer that drinks less cheerfully,
There is many a free French peasant who is richer and sadder than we.
There are no folk in the whole world so helpless or so wise.
There is hunger in our bellies, there is laughter in our eyes;
You laugh at us and love us, both mugs and eyes are wet:
Only you do not know us. For we have not spoken yet.

Chesterton writes of the suppression of Catholic monasteries in England while the common Englishman says nothing:

They burnt the homes of the shaven men, that had been quaint and kind,
Till there was no bed in a monk’s house, nor food that man could find.
The inns of God where no man paid, that were the wall of the weak.
The King’s Servants ate them all. And still we did not speak.

He writes about reign of Charles I in an indictment of the blindness, in fact, the tyranny of the democratic forces that opposed Charles.  Recall that Charles I was the last King of England who professed the divine right of kings and who was eventually executed for his various attempts to secure this right:

And the face of the King’s Servants grew greater than the King:
He tricked them, and they trapped him, and stood round him in a ring.
The new grave lords closed round him, that had eaten the abbey’s fruits,
And the men of the new religion, with their bibles in their boots,
We saw their shoulders moving, to menace or discuss,
And some were pure and some were vile; but none took heed of us.
We saw the King as they killed him, and his face was proud and pale;
And a few men talked of freedom, while England talked of ale.

He goes on to speak of Napoleon and others but ends with what he seems to find to be the sad state of political affairs of his time and the fact that the common Englishman has not spoken yet:

They have given us into the hand of new unhappy lords,
Lords without anger or honour, who dare not carry their swords.
They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes;
They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies.
And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs,
Their doors are shut in the evening; and they know no songs.

We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet,
Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street.
It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first,
Our wrath come after Russia’s wrath and our wrath be the worst.
It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest
God’s scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.
But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.

What is common to both Bishop Herman’s column and Chesterton’s poem is that we all know, or should know, what is right and what is wrong.  We have the responsibility for standing up for what is right.

In our present circumstances, we must stand for the right of the unborn to be born and for the right of society to be free from the tyranny of disordered social structures mascarading as protected alternative lifestyles.  We have to put truth and justice ahead of convenience and social acceptance.  We have to put down our ale and stand to protest against erroneous claims of promoting freedom that in fact, deprive us of authentic freedom.

Both, perhaps could  be summarized by the dictum attributed to that 18th century Irishman, Edmund Burke: “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.”  Let us not talk of ale while our blind politicians talk of freedom.

Have you heard of this relatively new apostolate? I had not, and but for an e-mail from one of the founders I might still be ignorant. After looking around a bit, this is what I found out. Catholic Radio International is a content provider for Catholic radio stations that started last May with an initial offering of three programs. They have now doubled this to six.  I do not know who if anyone is yet broadcasting these, but you can listen to their content online.

Here is more on CRI from Tim Drake’s column from the June 3-9 issue of NCR:

Jeff Gardner, formerly of Relevant Radio, and Catholic journalist Tom Szyszkiewicz have created Catholic Radio International as a way to provide content for Catholic stations.

“Historically, the Church has been at the forefront of communications,” said Gardner. “Whether the printing press or Vatican Radio, the Church has been about the business of spreading the Good News.”

Yet, says Gardner, when it comes to modern communications, the Church has had little if any involvement in television or motion pictures.

“Those have been the bulldozers for popular culture,” said Gardner. “The Internet, as a delivery platform for media, changes that. It’s a great social leveler and presents an opportunity to communicate with an audience at an economy never before seen.”

So, Catholic Radio International launched three programs in early May. The two commentary-style programs and one news program are available for download on the Internet.

“We’re trying to raise the quality of Catholic radio programming,” said Szyszkiewicz. “We need a Catholic response to National Public Radio.”

While their content is currently available online, the next step involves getting their programs aired on Catholic radio stations.

I listened to one of their program episodes on Ron Paul, from the program The Heart of the Matter. The programs are very professionally done and from a Catholic perspective they are clearly pretty solid.  However, in their treatment of Paul, I can’t help but offer some of my thoughts.  I would have liked to have heard a treatment not only of Paul’s not being in either the traditionally “left” or “right” camp but also I think necessary would be a treatment of shortcomings of libertarianism, which is essentially the same as one of the shortcoming of classical liberalism but on steroids. That is, libertarianism suffers from a lack of recognition of original sin and its effects.  Here is what I mean.

While modern liberalism generally suffers from an aversion to subsidiarity, libertarianism rejects subsidiarity in the other direction. In other words, while subsidiarity demands things be done at the lowest possible level, ultimately leaving to the individual and family that which they can effectively do on their own, it also recognizes that there is a necessary role for different levels of government and different degrees of governmental influence on daily life based upon the issues at hand. Libertarianism simply wants no interference on the individual in any manner.

Modern liberalism, if I might generalize, tends toward more and more control at higher and higher levels of government; except, that is, for issues related to sexual moral order and here they are very much in line with libertarianism.  Modern conservativism (which some suggest is the offspring of classical liberalism), is often characterized as being exactly the opposite of this.  On these issues, conservativism tends more toward libertarianism.  Again, libertarianism seems to presuppose that governments should have little to no role in almost every issue. In other words, it seems to see law as at best, a necessary evil rather than as an expression of wisdom.  Thus, laws should be kept to a minimum.  In our fallen world though, governmental instituted order, based upon natural law, subsidiarity, and solidarity, is a necessity. Ron Paul’s world view, as I understand it any way, is naive and simply a recipe for anarchy.

Any way, back to CRI.  Another critique that I have, and I suspect this primarily has to do with precision in wording, comes from a statement under the Masthead of their The Heart of the Matter program: “To omit information about an issue or an event is to lie.” Taken in an absolute sense, this certainly is not the case. However, from the context it is obvious that they are trying to say that the current culture of politics, media, etc. in which people intentionally mislead by omitting relevant facts that would change, or even contradict what is being asserted is in fact lying. That is true.

However, in itself, to omit information is not lying. The intent to mislead is lying (see CCC 2481). One always omits information in any assertion because he cannot possibly say everything about a matter that could be said.  One always must make judgments of relevance.  In addition, the difference between being wrong about one’s facts (which is in contradiction to the truth) and being a liar, is that one intends by his actions to mislead. In fact, one can omit even relevant information without the intent to mislead, without lying.

One could do this due to an error in judgment about the relevance of a fact or a lack of appreciation about how the missing information might lead to a misinterpretation. Moreover, there are times in which one is obligated to omit information about an issue. The sin of detraction is one in which one reveals true information about the faults or failings of one’s neighbor without an objectively valid reason (see CCC 2477).

Any way, I do not offer these as criticisms to CRI.  Rather arising from my temperament, I am wont to offer precisions and take opportunities to educate whenever they appear…which my wife hates by the way… Do check out CRI’s website and if you have a Catholic radio station you listen to, if you like what you hear with CRI why not suggest to your radio station that they pick up some of their content.

Monica mentioned to me yesterday that Bill Schneeberger would be on EWTN radio today with Teresa Tomeo (Shelray’s travel guide to the Holy Land). Well I missed it since she broadcasts at 8am central. Did anyone catch it?

Well who is Bill Schneeberger you might ask. He is the owner of BOGO wines, a winery that contributes from its proceeds to great Catholic, pro-life organizations:

Monica shared with me that he has developed a plan modeled after that of Susan Komen of the “pink ribbon” campaign. The focus of his plan is to generate awareness, interest, and funding for ethical stem cell research (adult, cord, autologous, etc). Monica writes:

He studied the Susan Komen plan to find out what made it so successful. You can barely buy a bag of chips now without inadvertently funding the the Komen foundation — it’s crazy – they are wildly successful at doing what they have done. I was at Target tonight w/ my husband and noticed they’ve got a whole “October is breast cancer awareness” promotion thing with all these pink products you can buy to help the Komen foundation. If Schneeberger’s initiative is only a fraction as successful as the Komen one, it will still do so much to help advance ethical research.

Schneeberger has obtained a patent trademark/logo for Adult Stem Cell Awareness. Yes, it is meant for car magnets – among other things, but please don’t think this is just about silly car magnets and even “Adult Stem Cell Awareness Month” . . . it’s about finding a way to get “adult stem cell awareness” into the world of the regular guy — and as small as it sounds, things like car magnets and awareness campaigns are incredibly effective. Well, just ask the Susan Komen foundation, right?

Now, it’s true, I’m hoping therapies such as autologous tissue engineering will help my child survive her heart defects, God-willing. But there are millions of people out here who stand to benefit from this kind of awareness campaign — not only because it is ethically sound, but because adult stem cells are really producing life-saving results. One of the orgs that this kind of campaign will help, certainly, is Dr. Moy’s John Paul II Stem Cell Research Institute. This is the kind of organization that we Catholics need to stand behind.

So, the goal is to try to get the info about the awareness campaign initiative in the hands of people who can really lobby for it. Politicians – for sure. I’ve already written my congressman. Unfortunately, it’s pretty slim pickings up here in terms of “pro-life” legislators. But can we be creative about who can help? Any ideas? What about professional societies who can lobby – how about Catholic hospitals? Catholic Universities?

In conjunction with Bill’s efforts, Monica has set up a blog which focuses on promoting Adult Stem Cell awareness. Go check out the blog, add it to your daily blog visits, and if you can get involved in some way, please contact Monica.

With school starting back up, for anyone who might be interested in a great resource for answering questions Catholic students on campus might have about the Catholic faith, here is what you are looking for: Questions College Students Ask

Last night we had a former student of mine over for dinner. Amanda is getting ready to go to Seton Hall University as a FOCUS missionary. I did a post on FOCUS last year telling a little bit about it and why I think it is an important apostolate. I never fail to be impressed and inspired by the faith of these young people who set aside their personal lives for at least two years to respond to what they discern God is calling them. They are great witnesses to the faith and help me to believe that the great springtime in the Church that John Paul the Great said was a possibility in the near future, may be coming upon us.

Amanda is one such young lady. She just finished an engineering degree (so she is up there in my book from the start I suppose) at the U of I and had accepted a job offer at a large defense contractor in Cincinnati last August, which included a program for getting an M.S. However, within a couple of months of graduating she attended a retreat and while in adoration became convinced that she was being called to share her faith with others through being a FOCUS missionary.

I have to tell you, at that time in my life being sensitive what God wanted for me was the furtherest thing from my mind. Put yourself in this situation. Here ere are the options you have to consider: a job doing what you have gone to school for 4 years to prepare for, making whatever starting engineers get paid these days with a Fortune 500 company, and built into the offer is a program to get you an M.S. degree and more money/upward mobility. Here is the other option to consider: a job sharing your faith with young people who are as yet oblivious to the importance of faith, making nothing, except…and here is the hard part… what you receive from asking friends, family, strangers, etc. for money to support you. This you get to do in addition to devoting your life to trying to help college students see how much they need God in the midst of a culture that says otherwise. This is made all the more difficult if you have a family that does not understand how, faced with these choices, one would choose the mendicant option that does not even come with a retirement plan.

Amanda has an infectiously positive personality and is deeply in love with the Lord. I am confident that God will work through her to bring countless young people to a deeper appreciation of their faith. Tricia and I chose to be one of her financial supporters. How could we not? She shared with us that one of the main methods of gaining adequate support is speaking at one’s parish during the weekend Masses. Her home parish pastor would not allow her this avenue. If we could, we would fund her entire needs…but the Church does not pay well enough to allow us to do that.

If you could meet Amanda you would be impressed. Tricia mentioned last night that she just makes it so easy to see Christ radiating through her. If any of you have a few extra dollars a month that you wouldn’t mind putting toward the mission of the New Evangelization, please prayerfully consider becoming one of Amanda’s supporters. You can do so here. I am sure she would be extremely pleased with any gifts offered but fyi, she needs about 100 supporters giving $50 – 100 per month.

(Note: the picture is of the entire FOCUS staff from this year’s summer training)

Evangelical and Pentecostal representatives will be joining the August 2007 Vatican/World Council of Churches study group where the issue of what a common code of conduct on religious conversion should look like from a Christian viewpoint. The council will pick up where last years group left off where it was decided there was a need of healing from an “obsession of converting others“. The three-year study group jointly undertaken by the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue and the WCC’s program on inter-religious dialogue in May 2006 with the hope of producing a code of conduct by 2010.

Although not quite Christian jihad or as big a problem as found in other parts of the world, one incident that sticks in my mind as an example of an obsession towards converting others, was a disguised trip for kids to a local water park actually being part of a planned evangelical baptismal altar call! Let’s get a head count on every soul who was saved today! It’s almost as though the idea of Christian conversions supposedly focused on the salvation of an individual soul has been hijacked by inflated soul number counts that go along with the hostile attitudes that live for proving, “why we’re right and you’re stupid” . I believe the root of the problem with the associated hostility and defensiveness during inter-religious discussion is that it often comes down to a personal goal of victory or “one more for our side“, like it’s somehow a validation of a superior faith or holiness. In reality, conversions are most likely to occur based on one’s openness, humility and most importantly – Grace.

Travis over at A Catholic Boudreaux blog has begun a Catholic “vlog” site called Catholic Tube.  Go over and take a look!

If you have not yet seen Champions of Faith: The Baseball Edition, you really must do so. It is a film detailing the witnesses of major league champions like Mike Piazza, David Eckstein, Jeff Suppan, Mike Sweeney, Jack McKeon and Rich Donnelly, and others.

I watched it this weekend and was very much impressed with the quality of the film and the sincerity of the players. It is fast moving, engaging and compelling. It provides the right balance of dramatized action and well chosen theme music with compelling, personal stories of these major league champions. Rich Donnelly’s story was especially moving. It sent chills up my spine. From the website above:

In his late 20s, [Donnelly] fell away from the faith but had a radical conversion experience after the death of his 17-year-old daughter Amy. Her amazing story and prophetic words, “The Chicken Runs at Midnight” became a family motto and came true in 1997 when the Marlins won the World Series at midnight. “The Chicken Runs at Midnight” story is featured in the Champions of Faith: Baseball Edition DVD.

I think that this film can be an effective tool for many reasons. Not the least of which is that sports has become for many men, a replacement for religion. It permits them to allow the ecstatic experience of competitive sports to masquerade for the authentic self-transcendence and the experience of God that they truly seek. Sports provides what they intuit to be a masculine alternative to the human feminine relationship to divinity which they can find uncomfortable, though in an unthematized way. In this well done film, men and boys can see their masculine sports heroes providing a manly witness to the necessity of a sincere commitment to one’s Catholic faith and to the love of God.

This is a perfect tool, it seems to me, to begin to draw men into a thirst to learn about the faith. Coupled with a well thought out catechetical/faith formation program, this pre-evangelization tool should be a part of every parishes arsenal. You can go to the website to see the trailer to get an idea of the quality. It really is a must see!

…. with the media right now. Well, o.k., they are not precisely nuns but the media does not recognize the distinction between religious sisters who are cloistered and those who are not.

Any way, there has been quite a bit of interest lately, about women devoting their lives to become brides of Christ as Catholic religious. It seems ever since Time ran a story a little while back…The coverage continued with Good Morning America and local television stations out at St. John’s Catholic Newman Center interviewing Sister Sarah Roy and Katharine Johnson.

Now, People Magazine has done a story on Andrea Jaeger, the 1980s women’s tennis star who has just completed her third month as a Dominican sister. She has gone from tennis imp to Sister Andrea. The story is an interesting read. While the order is part of the Anglican Communion, I would suspect that if her dream was an authentic vision, St. Catherine will be back to lead her the rest of the way home.

While we are on the topic of evangelization and catechesis…

I have been interested in the Alpha Course for some years now. I have heard a lot about it and many good Catholics have sung its praises as an effective evangelization tool. Many of these Catholic evangelists I know well and have much respect for. Interestingly enough, those who might be considered not so faithful Catholics join them in praising the course. However, there have been a lot of criticisms as well. Some criticisms come from Catholics who say that the course makes good Protestants out of Catholics and criticisms from Protestants argue that it is a tool for making Catholics. Well, recently, I finally the both the time and opportunity to view the videos that are used in the course itself and have formed some thoughts about them. I thought I would jot some of them down before I forget.

First of all, for those who are not familiar with the Alpha Course here is some background. It was begun in an Anglican parish in London back in the mid 1980s. This parish is a charismatic parish that was associated with the “Toronto Blessing” for those who are familiar Benny Hinn. Alpha is a 10 week course that begins the first session with a meal. After the meal is a lecture and then faith sharing. There are a total of 15 lessons that are given with five of them being delivered during a weekend retreat. After each lecture, the attendees break up into small groups led by a facilitator. The course is copyrighted and comes with the stipulation that must be given in its entirety with nothing added or removed if one is to use it. The presenter in the video is Nicky Gumbel, an English, Anglican “clergyman” as he calls himself. Gumbel has developed his course such that he believes that any Christian tradition can feel comfortable in using it.

Because it is therefore, essentially Protestant, a Catholic supplementary series is offered by ChristLife Catholic Evangelization Services in Baltimore. ChristLife has been promoting the course to Catholics in the United States for about a decade or so. They indicate that “hundreds of Catholic parishes” are now using it. ChristLife says that the course is completely compatible with Catholic teaching but does not present the entire Catholic faith so they offer three supplementary series that can be used to “supplement” the Alpha course.

The first is called Touching Jesus Through the Church, presented by Marcellino D’Ambrosio, with 8 lessons. D’Ambrosio by the way endorses Alpha. He is a solid Catholic and very effective evangelist and catechist. The second series is called Drink From the Wells of the Church, presented by Father Raniero Cantalamessa, OFM CAP, who was the preacher to the papal household for JP the Great. He also endorses Alpha for Catholics. Fr. Cantalamessa’s is a seven-talk series. Finally, they offer Catholics Listening to God, given by Bishop Mark Coleridge, an Australian Bible scholar. His is also a seven talk series.

O.k., so my thoughts. First, why is it so successful? I suspect that it has as much to do with environment and approach as it does with the way it proclaims the gospel message. I believe that the weekend retreats and the small groups are a significant part of this. The Cursillo movement, begun in the 1930s in Spain and now spread throughout the world, has had great success in employing these strategies as well. Nicky Gumbel is also a very good speaker. I know as an Irishman, I should not admit this but I find the British accent and phraseology charming and regardless of what is being presented, quite compelling for some reason. While that is not something US Catholics could adopt, I would say that his approach does provide several things that we could learn from.

One is just in style. I think one of the important things I find is that he does not overload the talk with information. He uses plenty of “white space” by using related anecdotes and illustrative personal experiences which I think are compelling for most people. He believes what he says and, while sensitive to his audience, is also firm about what he believes. He identifies his major points as he moves from one to the next and tells people how many he has to cover. Another very important strength is that after presenting a point, he continually invites his listeners to consider what this means to their own lives. In other words, he asks them to examine themselves and see how it might apply to them. There is a continual invitation to conversion. Alpha begins with Christ and helps the student to develop a personal knowledge of Him.

Now do I think that it is appropriate for Catholics, even as initial proclamation? I am sorry to say that I emphatically do not. Why not? I will start with its aim, which is to present the faith from the lowest common denominator as far as faith content is concerned. This by definition is Protestant and so it presents a truncated view of the faith as the essential Christianity. I also must disagree with ChristLife’s assessment that the way it is presented, the material is completely consistent with Catholic belief. It is not.

Here an initial concern is that the program of catechesis is clearly charismatic in focus. Charismatic spirituality is not bad in itself, but in a course like Alpha we are talking about providing the essential core of the Gospel message. While there are two lessons on Jesus, there are three on the Holy Spirit emphasizing the gifts and another session devoted to God’s healing of Christians. Because the weekend retreat is done something like a “life in the Spirit” seminar with the praying over people for the gift of tongues and for healing of any maladies, these become necessary for the Alpha program. However, it leaves the catechetical structure well out of balance and gives the impression that charismatic spirituality is the essence of Christianity.

A further problem is that it presents the faith from a Protestant Evangelical perspective with an emphasis on personal interpretation of the Bible and the suggestion that Scripture is the sole rule of faith. Although in places Gumble does seem to try to correct this impression, in the way he treats Scripture, the Church, becoming Christian, and obtaining forgiveness, he presents an unmistakable individualistic approach to Christianity and the false idea that there is no more to becoming a Christian than one’s personal proclamation of faith.

However, one might ask: can’t these shortcomings be overcome in a Catholic supplement? That is the claim. This is justified further in saying that the initial proclamation need not cover everything. To be fair, Catholics who claim this clearly do not think that there is anything problematic presented. I suggest they are simply not sensitive to the issues I present. However, even if this were the case, Alpha would still be problematic.

In general, the argument that Alpha, as initial proclamation and the call to conversion, is not required to give the entirety of the faith. While initial proclamation in itself need not, the Alpha course is certainly catechetical as well. The General Directory for Catechesis in fact indicates that evangelization/initial proclamation are distinct but not separate. It goes on to say that any initial catechesis must be complete. The problem that is posed by incomplete catechesis is that in doing something partial, it provides a mistaken understanding of the reality you are trying to convey. I think that Gosta Hallonsten, former Carl Peter Professor for Ecumenism at The Catholic University of America, put this concern into another context that I think applies here.

Hallonsten said that Protestantism views, at best, the Catholic faith as “Christianity plus.” In other words, they think that Catholics have added unnecessary teachings to Christianity. He should know. He was a Lutheran theologian appointed to the Lutheran World Federation’s Lutheran-Catholic dialogue prior to his conversion to Catholicism. Gumbel affirms this idea of “Christianity plus” in his Alpha presentation. In his talk on the Church, Gumbel indicates that while truth is important, unity is just as important. He then cites a medieval theologian (whose name I did not recognize but it was something like Bertus Maldivius) who says that in essentials unity, in non-essentials, liberty (this is actually from St. Augustine but he goes not to say but in all things charity). Gumbel goes on to interpret this to mean that we all ought to have the freedom to believe whatever else we wish as long as we agree on the essentials. In the context of what he is saying, the listener takes him to mean that that as long as every Christian accepts the essentials as he has presented them, then Christians ought to be free to add and believe whatever else they wish. Gumbel finishes by saying what joins us in infinitely greater than what divides us.

Hallonsten is emphatic that Catholics must engage in ecumenical dialogue with this understanding of the Protestant view. He, therefore, promotes a more integrated approach to dialogue rather than allowing it to be separated into compartments because compartmentalizing it and then concentrating on issues that Protestantism sees as the essentials (e.g. Sola Fide) abets the mistaken notion that Catholicism is Christianity plus. This same concern can be applied to the Alpha Course. What the Alpha graduate has been both implicitly and explicitly set up to believe, is that if they choose to take the Catholic supplements what they will next be receiving is the optional extras of Catholicism. Trying to deconstruct this view is somewhat problematic because in doing so, one is going to call into question why he was given Alpha in the first place. However, there is more deconstruction/reconstruction to be done.

The course provides both partial truths that distort the entire meaning and false statements about Christianity such as the one about being free to believe whatever one wants as long as they hold to the essentials (though who defines these is left unstated). The course discusses Sacraments but only as symbols with no efficacy and then of course, only two of them (Baptism and the Lord’s Supper). Gumbel presents the Evangelical notion that one is a saved Christian by simply proclaiming one’s faith. He also talks about sin and reconciliation. However, forgiveness is obtained from the moment of one’s repentance. Gumbel discusses the Church at the end of the course. It is presented as a three tiered structure with small cells (like Alpha small groups), mid size groups (about 35 people), and large gatherings for worship. He does say that the Church is necessary, but not for what. He gives only the reason that Christians are needed support each other in keeping up their enthusiasm.

In the end, the Alpha course presents a truncated view of Christ, the Church, the Sacraments, and grace. The Church is understood to be just a community of believers and not an essential mediator of salvation. John Paul the Great in Catechesi tradendae (paragraph 5) says that all authentic catechesis is Christo-centric. But in being Christo-centric we must present the truth about the whole Christ. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (795), drawing on St. Augustine from his Confessions, refers to the Christus totus, the Whole Christ. Christ together with His Church make up the Whole Christ. The Church is not an add on, nor is it just a group of Christians who come together to increase one another’s fervor. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ and is necessary for salvation. One can be saved only by incorporation into Christ’s Mystical Body through Baptism. The Whole Christ is necessary in order to receive the grace by which we are saved. Grace is a partaking in the divine nature (2 Pt 1:4) and it is only through this partaking of divinity that we can be transformed into Christ and so enter into eternal communion with the Blessed Trinity. However, it is not automatic. As Jesus continually warns, we must be fruitful. In other words, we have to cooperate with His grace in order to become like Him. This is what we call good works. Only Christ’s death and resurrection make any of this possible. Furthermore, the Church is visible (see Matt 18:17; 1 Tim 3:15) and it is hierarchical (see Matt 16:18; Acts 1:15-26). This is the essential Good News and it must be proclaimed in its integrity for an authentic understanding of Christianity and the requirements for a fruitful Christian life.

It is counterproductive to first advocate a presentation of the Good News, and then to essentially deconstruct the initial presentation in order to present the fullness of truth. The thought that Alpha is neutral suggests to me that those who support it unwittingly fall into the trap that Catholicism really is Christianity plus. At least this is the effect of the approach. The Alpha course may be successful, but its success is in creating a Protestant view of Christianity. We already have enough Protestant Catholics in the Church today. What we need for a new evangelization is not to borrow approaches from others when they teach error. We need to take what is helpful in method from them but spend the effort and apply these methods in developing a program with an authentic Catholic faith content.

A very good news story, for those who might not be aware of the apostolate, is the Fellowship of Catholic University Students (FOCUS). FOCUS was begun by Curtis Martin in 1998 at Benedictine College in Atchison, Kansas. It is an apostolate aimed at evangelizing university students on public and private university campuses. Martin followed the Campus Crusade for Christ model in developing his apostolate, with the difference that he has to his advantage the fullness of Catholic truth and the Sacraments. This is the amazing thing. FOCUS missionaries are college graduates, usually those who were served by missionaries while they were in school, who volunteer to give up at least two years to serving as missionaries. They are responsible for finding their own funding to support them during their time in the apostolate.

In less than a decade he has grown FOCUS to serving almost 20 universities. Martin does not intend to stop there. His goal is to reach every college campus and through reaching college students, to change the culture. A tall order.

I and my wife have personally met at least a dozen different missionaries. The first thing you notice is their maturity and their loving energy. They are also very selfless as a group. I met one young lady who gave up a slot in a very prestigious medical school to serve as a missionary. I have not yet met one of these young people with whom I was not impressed.

They have a very difficult task in trying to make in roads with the students but they do their job very well. I can tell you from first hand experience that this is a very effective apostolate in reaching and converting young students to a vibrant faith life. I can tell very quickly in my classes which students are involved with FOCUS. In fact, more and more Newman Centers and campus ministries across the US are starting to learn that the quickest and most effective way to get their ministries to take off is to invite FOCUS missionaries to come in.

The Diocese of Peoria in one that is sold on FOCUS. They now have four campuses with FOCUS missionaries and want more. Bishop Daniel Jenky is so impressed with them that last night he bestowed the Diocesan Spalding Award on Curtis Martin. At the Mass before the banquet, the Bishop mentioned that he would like four more FOCUS teams. FOCUS is also a very important tool in helping with religious and diocesan vocations.

College years are the time for discernment, and being involved with FOCUS gives students the opportunity that young women and men need. The only possibility of hearing a vocational prompting (I know, it’s redundant) is to understand it is something they need to be discerning and they need help in developing the spiritual maturity to overcome the noise of the secular world. FOCUS is very helpful in both matters.

Besides giving two years of their lives, as I mentioned, FOCUS missionaries have to find their own funds. Can you imagine such a proposition? Hi, what were you thinking of doing after you graduate? How about putting that on hold for a couple of years and trying to get college students out of the bars and into church? Oh yea, you will have to pay your own way for the privilege.

If you are interested in helping to change the culture, you ought to consider supporting FOCUS. You can even choose your own missionary to support. If you are interested (and able) in helping to make a difference, go here!

Tracy Samantha Schmidt, a graduate from Dominican University and the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, recently got a job with Time Magazine and decided to do some articles for the magazine based upon interviews she had done as a journalism student. The series of articles talks about how young women are changing the face of sisterhood in general, with other articles focused on St. John’s Catholic Newman Center and some women there. One of them is about a young lady at St. John’s, Katharine Johnson, who is now discerning between religious and married life. Another is about another young woman at the Center, Sr. Sarah, who has already made that choice. A third article is surprisingly about the resources available for discerning a vocation to the religious life.

The articles are very well done, and other than for the precision that she mistakenly equates the term nun with religious sister, it is surprising to see articles sympathetic to Catholic life in a magazine like Time. This is especially so for as aspect of Catholic life that is so antithetical to our modern wordly view. One might almost suspect that the author herself might be contemplating such a vocation. I plan to say an Ave for her any way.

If you have not seen the Mary, Queen of Angels 2006 issue of Dappled Things, it is worth taking a look. Here is a summary of the issue:

“Refiner’s Fire” by Shannon Berry is a wise, moving personal essay about the trials of prayer and discernment – one of the best I’ve read.

Poets Karen K. Adams ( “African Angelus,” “Little Hours”) and Sarah DeCorla-Souza (” Ordinary Time” ) both meditate on the quotidian miracle that is parenthood, while Amos Hunt, J.B. Toner, and Daniel Gibbons tackle terror in “Night Crossing,” despair in “To Whom Much Is Given,” and emptiness (“my winter’s silent utter zero”) in “Autumnal.”

Katy Carl recounts her meeting with a curious saint, “like something out of a Flannery O’Connor novel,” in “A Private Matter,” a personal essay in which she explores end-of-life issues and the possibility of wrongful behavior at a Catholic hospital.

In her story “Open Great Wide Doors,” Stephanie Mader sketches the lead-up to a brash and driven young man’s first encounter with God.

Matthew Alderman explains the artistic and historical inspirations behind his symbol-rich ink drawing, “St. Gregory the Great, Pope of Rome, Seated in State Upon the Throne of Peter.”

Our featured author this quarter is Arthur Powers, a relief and development director, lawyer, international businessman, and accomplished short story writer who has spent most of his adult life in Brazil. Dappled Things is pleased to premiere “A Hero for the People,” “Stone,” and “Carla,” a triptych of stories that form a portrait of modern Brazil: of the peasants, the priests, the landowners, the farmers, the students, and the educated elite who must confront the turmoil of twentieth-century change.

You can find all of these pieces and more from the Mary, Queen of Angels 2006 issue, as well as archived issues, submission instructions, and the Dappled Things forums, at www.dappledthings.org.

A few weeks ago I got a DVD in the mail and just now got a chance to see it. The DVD was of a talk entitled Truth, given by Fr. Larry Richards, a diocesan priest from the Diocese of Erie, PA. He has a regular show on Relevant Radio.

You can tell quickly that he is from Pittsburgh. He is a very compelling speaker and he has recently launched an interactive website: www.thereasonforourhope.org. The site is managed by The Reason for Our Hope Foundation which was founded by Fr. Larry.

Fr. Larry’s goal is to change the world by reaching 15 million people with the ultimate Reason for our Hope, Jesus Christ. The site allows visitors to send e-cards to family and friends, receive free MP3 downloads and screensavers, and more, all containing the message of hope. The only thing visitors need to do is register.

Check it and and see what you think.