Category: Church

Posted on

On Recovering a Wider Sense of Justice

There has been a tendency in the Church in recent decades to divide out the teachings of the Church into separate and often “competing”  realms. On the one hand there are said to be the basic moral teachings that include our duty to worship God, tell the truth, obey biblical sexual norms and the like. On the other hand there are said to be “social justice” teachings that include care for the poor, justice to the worker, the accused, the rightful distribution of resources, respect for racial equity and so forth. That social justice should have separated out into a category is problematic for at least two reasons.

  1.  All sin involves injustice for by it we fail to render to God, ourselves and/or others what is due. I will develop this in a moment.
  2.  The separation leads to entrenchment and isolation within the Church. Some who are more traditionally minded will tend to speak of those who emphasize the social doctrine of the Church as the “Peace and Justice Crowd” and are offended at their apparent “neglect” of pro-life issues or “fuzziness” on other doctrinal matters. Likewise, the recipients of that title can tend to see themselves as the last bastion of true prophecy and see traditional Catholics as selective in their faith.  So both sides have grievances and perceptions that also get mixed in with political viewpoints. The result is entrenched camps, rather  than the union which Christ seeks.

I want, then, to take a moment and address the first point particularly. At some level we have to see that all sin is injustice. For example, failing to care for the poor and fornication are both sins and both offend against justice. My ultimate hope is to chip away at the artificial wall separating so-called “justice” matters from other moral realms.

What is Justice?  Perhaps the most straight-forward definition of justice is to give to another what is due.  The Catechism elaborates this just a bit: Justice is the moral virtue that consists in the constant and firm will to give their due to God and neighbor. Justice toward God is called the “virtue of religion.” Justice toward men disposes one to respect the rights of each and to establish in human relationships the harmony that promotes equity with regard to persons and to the common good. The just man, often mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures, is distinguished by habitual right thinking and the uprightness of his conduct toward his neighbor. (CCC # 1807)

Hence it can be seen how every sin in some way offends against justice. To have idols, to use God’s name in vain or to swear falsely by it, to neglect to pray and worship God, especially on Sunday, is to fail to give God what is due. To refuse to give honor and respect to elders is to fail to give what is due. To refuse to obey lawful authority not only fails to give what is due to them but also offends against others, for it offends against good order. To kill or endanger the life of another is to fail to reverence their life as sacred, a debt which is due to everyone. To bear false witness or to lie is to fail in giving the truth which others are due and on which they depend. To steal is offend against justice by usurping for oneself what is NOT due and to fail to respect the lawful recognition of another’s rightful property. Many other sins and injustices stem from neglecting this command which are too numerous to detail here but on which I have written more here: The Forgotten Principle of Social Justice .  To covet or show forth greed is to hoard more than we rightfully need. To the poor and needy is due a care from our excess and to deprive them of this help so that we can hoard is to fail to give what is due.

Now, as a way of going into greater depth I would like to take the sixth commandment and sexual morality and look at how it relates to justice. I do this because I think, of all the sins, sexual morality is the most divorced from notions of justice when it is discussed. I want to explore for a moment how sexual immorality is a violation of justice as much, if not more, than any other sin.

Let’s take the fornicator for example. I am going to define fornicator here as one who willfully engages in pre-marital heterosexual activity. As we have discussed before “fornication” can mean other things but, for the sake of discussion, let’s limit it as I have suggested. How does the fornicator sin against justice?

  1. They sin against their own body which does not in fact belong to them. Hence a double injustice occurs. Scripture says, Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body (1 Cor 6:18). The Same passage also says of our bodies Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body (1 Cor 6:18). Hence the fornicator fails to give due reverence to their own body, and also fail to give due reverence to God whose temple the body is. Further to use something in a way that does not correspond to the wishes of the owner is a failure of justice. God has “purchased” our body and as owner is offended by fornication, to fail to respect his wishes is to fail to give him what is his due as the true owner of our body.
  2. The Fornicator is unjust to the married, and to all who depend on marriage by harming marriage. Sexual intercourse is a joy, a pleasure and a right given to married. In sharing a common pleasure accessible only by means of marriage the married couple is strengthened in mutual affection  and drawn to deeper unity. But when the unmarried start usurping the rights of the marriage bed they undermine an important motivator and unifying factor for marriage. Since this pleasure, meant to be restricted to the married state, is now commonly appropriated by the unmarried we see that marriage is in decline. High divorce rates are combined with declining marriage rates. When promiscuity is rampant marriage is harmed. Any study of current statistics on marriage will see how seriously marriage and family have been impacted by, among other things,  rampant promiscuity. Scripture speaks of promiscuity as a sin against justice due the institution of marriage: Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled; for God will judge fornicators and adulterers (Heb 13:4). Hence reverence is due to marriage and to fail to give due reverence is a sin against justice and against the married and all who depend on its strength as an institution.
  3. Fornicators are unjust to those with whom they fornicate. They do this by tempting another to sin and by thus taking advantage of the weakness of another. We have a duty to protect one another from unnecessary and avoidable temptation. Others have a right to expect us to act in uprightness and truth toward them. To lust after another and exploit their weakness is an injustice toward them no matter how consenting they may seem. There is also the difficult to measure pain caused by broken hearts: those who have been used as sexual objects then discarded, those who have been betrayed, those who have paid a heavy price for their own transgressions. Scripture says: It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong another or take advantage. The Lord will punish men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you(1 Thess 4:1-6). Hence notice that the passage says we should not wrong another person by taking advantage of them in this matter.
  4.  The Fornicator sins against the wider community by helping set loose many social factors that tax the community or nation. Promiscuity brings venereal diseases, AIDS, teenage pregnancy, abortion, unwed mothers left to raise their children alone. To contribute to these negative social factors is unjust to others who must pay for the fornicator’s irresponsibility.
  5. The fornicator is unjust to Children.  The biggest losers in the explosion of promiscuity is children. Fornicators first  put children potentially at greater risk of abortion. Most fornicators claim that such is not the case since they use contraceptives (a sin in itself). But contraceptives routinely fail and it is demonstrable that higher rates of promiscuity have corresponded to higher rates of abortion. Hence fornication endangers the life of children. We have a duty to respect their lives and not endanger them. Secondly the fornicator sins against children by potentially and likely subjecting them to an irregular family situation: absent and/or irresponsible fathers, children unjustly deprived of a complete family, mothers raising children alone, strange visitation rules, etc. It is reported that the leading cause of poverty in this nation is single motherhood. We have already seen above how fornication and promiscuity have affected the divorce rate and this too harms children. Children are due something better than the poisonous climate which most of them have to inherit today. It is an injustice that we subject them to this. It is interesting that right after teaching against divorce in Mark 10, Jesus taught the disciples to let the little children come unto him and not hinder them. (cf  Mk 10:1-16)

Well, other things could be mentioned, but allow these to demonstrate how sexual morality is in fact a matter of justice. It is linked to questions of giving what is due, to matters of poverty and distribution of resources, to care of children, education and so forth.

It is important for us to reconnect matters than have often been divided out. This will assist both sides of this artificial division to speak a common language again.

That said, it is a true fact that some matters of sin and injustice are clearer than others. Whether or not to fornicate or have an abortion are pretty cut and dry. Either you do it or not and it is clearly identified as wrong. But how to best care for the poor is a matter over which reasonable people differ. Likewise, determining exactly what is due to the poor or exactly what is most just is not always certain. But that we should care for the poor is a matter of justice, the same justice that demands we reverence God, honor elders and those authority, not kill or endanger others lives, refrain from illicit sexual union, speak the truth, and not succumb to greed.

To be just is to give to God and others what is due. This is so across the board and is not a truth of only some of the commandments. The Church speaks a common language of justice that does not simply appeal to one side of the political debate or exist in one sector of the Church. God’s law is the expression of his justice and we are called to that justice in every aspect of life: Justice enhanced by charity and mercy.

This video series looks interesting and that Fr. Corapi may be trying break  down the artificial barriers too. Looks like a big crowd at the event!

Posted on

The Perils of the Pious: How the Devil Can Hijack Holy Practices

Many years ago I heard a Protestant Minister say that Satan wasn’t all that concerned when a person went to church because he could drag a soul to Hell from a church pew just as soon as from a gutter or brothel. Now preachers are given to hyperbole and perhaps some distinctions are in order here, especially for a Catholic. We do in fact believe that the Sacraments, if received fruitfully, do strengthen us and provide a sure help against the incursions of the evil. That said, we ought to also acknowledge that there are certain temptations common to believers and church-goers. Perhaps we could refer to these as the “Perils of the Pious,” or the “Risks of the Religious.”  What are some of these?

1. The Risk of Ritualistic Reductionism – This temptation is to reduce holiness and righteousness to the following of a few simple rules. One becomes proud of the fact that they go to Mass on Sunday, put some money in the basket, say a few prayers, maybe even the rosary. Now these are all good things, but the danger becomes thinking this is all we must do. We can too easily tell ourselves how good we are and not look at the deeper drives of sin in us such as unrighteous anger, rash judgment, sensuality, greed, and injustice. We think, “I am basically a good person  because of my religious observances.” On account of this thinking, we are not prone to consider that there may be some pretty ugly things about us that need attention.

Many years ago there was a woman in my parish who came to daily Mass and stayed to pray the rosary as well. In many ways she was very holy, and certainly pious. But she had a deep wound in her heart she refused to see. At least once a week she would lament to me how the “neighborhood was changing.” This was basically code for the fact that it was becoming African American. Her laments about this were quite bitter and she thought she’d have to leave the neighborhood on account of it. I suggested to her that perhaps she could love her new neighbors, get to know them, and evangelize. She rebuffed this in strong terms and said, “We’re not going to have them come in here and change our church!”  In further discussions between us it was clear that she couldn’t see her racism for the sin it was and she often protested that she had been going to Church all her life. She had reduced holiness to the following of rituals, to saying a few prayers. These are good things,  but somehow she thought this exempted her from looking at other things, or perhaps it blinded her.

The Pharisees had reduced faith to the following of 613 rules. Now this may sound impressive at first, but many of the rules were about washing things, not eating certain things and so forth. They weren’t that hard to follow. In addition to reducing holiness in this way, they also interpreted the rules in a very minimalistic way. You may recall the rich young man in the Gospel who, when being reminded to love his neighbor asked Jesus, And who is my neighbor?  (Lk. 10:29). In effect what he is trying to do is minimize the concept of “neighbor.” It is as if to say, “If I have to love my neighbor, let’s define neighbor strictly and keep this whole thing manageable.” This is what the Pharisees did, they reduced holiness to a very narrow spectrum and thought they could buy God off by these observances.

There is more to holiness than ritual observance. To this peril of the pious the Lord says, For I desire mercy more than sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings (Hosea 6:6). Jesus reiterates: If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. (Matt. 12:7).

2. Crass Comparison – The religiously observant exhibit important virtues that are praiseworthy. Going to church and praying, reading Scripture, and financially supporting the Church are good things. The religiously observant also strive to avoid serious sins such as fornication, immodesty, drunkenness and the like. They may not live perfect lives,  and surely they admit that, but they do strive to heed God’s Law. However, this too can lead to the tendency to rashly judge others and to show a lack of humility. It becomes too easy to congratulate ourselves for being decent people. We can think, “At least I’m not like that prostitute or that corrupt city official!”  But in the process we can lack the humility to see our own sins as significant, or to see ourselves as in need of great mercy.

The fact is, being better than a prostitute or a corrupt city official is not the standard that’s going to get us heaven. The standard that we must meet is Jesus Christ. Now if we really grasp this and understand how far we are from meeting that standard, then we will humbly cry for mercy. But the peril of the pious is to compare ourselves to others, not to Jesus. Too easily we can become smug and superior, arrogant. We can become unaware that we too need boatloads of grace and mercy to even stand a chance of getting to heaven.

To address this peril of the pious Scripture also speaks: To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable: “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’ “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” (Luke 18:9-14)

3. Checking off the God-Box – There are some people who are religiously observant not so much because they Love God but more because they want to control Him or overcome their fear of Him. We can too easily reason that because we have said certain prayers, or followed certain rules we have “checked off the God box.” Once we’ve said our prayers we can feel safe and get on with our day.

Perhaps this attitude is rooted in fear, and so the thinking is that I have to placate God to get what I want from him. If I don’t pray, perhaps bad things will happen, or good things won’t happen. So I need to pray, but the motive, conscious or unconscious,  is more to advance my own agenda and self-interest than loving attentiveness to God.

Another more cynical form of this is to pray and fulfill religious duties more as a strange way of keeping God at a distance. The thinking here is that God has to be honored for my life to go well. Hence, I will do some quick devotions, (i.e., check off the God-box) and then I can feel free to get on with my day. St. John Vianney said of some who pray in this manner: And still worse, there are some who speak to the good God like this: “I will only say a couple of things to you, and then I will be rid of you.(Catechisme sur la priere: A. Monnin, Esprit du Cure d’Ars, Paris 1899, pp. 87-89).

God wants whole hearted devotion, not perfunctory practice. And we can too easily think that quick devotions, good though they are, will be sufficient. But love is extravagant and wants to do more, not less. God wants love, not lip service. Religious rituals and recited prayers are beautiful things, but they are not the end of our relationship with God they are the beginning. Yet there are some among the religiously observant who think that perfunctory observance will buy God off or permit them to run off in their own directions for the rest of the day. To them the Lord says, This people draw near with their words, and honor Me with their lip service, But they remove their hearts far from Me, And their reverence for Me consists [merely] of tradition learned by rote, (Isaiah 29:13).

You may wish to add to this list. The main point here is that our flesh and the devil can take beautiful things of the faith and twist them for other, less holy purposes. Beware these perils of the pious, these risks of religious.

This video is a rather “humorous” interview with the Devil and how he actually likes the Church because it provides him opportunities to take good things and twist them for bad outcomes. Not sure I agree with everything in the video (e.g. it seems to imply that being right is a form of arrogance) but it is fun and thought-provoking.

Posted on

On the Mend: The Church in the Early 21st Century

Back when I was in Seminary in the 1980s there was a “Revisionist Creed” that floated around. We never used it in any way in the Seminary and most of us thought of it as a joke that some one had ginned up. But it reflected the relativism of those times which most of us knew had deeply invaded even the Catholic Church and was disastrously affecting other seminaries, religious orders and universities. I found it flipping through my files the other day, a yellowed and wrinkled copy. Here it is:

I believe in the concept of deity,
Gentle and nurturing parent of all,
Womb of heaven and earth
And in Jesus Christ
its primary offspring
our counselor and brother
born of a Palestinian maiden
harshly treated by an intolerant Roman official
died and was buried
somewhere.

Sometime afterwards he/she “reappeared” in some form or memory
and ever since remains as a symbol of
moral a religious values.

I believe in the spirit of toleration,
the universal and essential goodness of all humankind
the primacy of fellowship,
the acceptance of diversity
the end of all suffering
and continuous human evolution.

Frankly the 1980s were difficult times in the Church and, in many ways dissent had reached its zenith. Many openly questioned the veracity of Scripture, and numerous of the fundamental moral and doctrinal teachings of the Church. I recall a steady diet of so-called Catholic theologians denying that Jesus ever knew he was God, claimed to be God or even was God. The historicity of the scriptures was openly questioned and many a simple believer, on recalling a passage of Scripture that upheld Catholic truth was scornfully told, “Jesus never said that!” Liturgical abuses were far more common and tolerated and moral theology, at least the Catholic version, was on holiday from most Catholic Universities. Yes, they were difficult times to be sure, at least here in America.

I think things have improved greatly in the Church since then. Most of the seminarians and young priests I have met are solid, orthodox men who love the Church and are eager to proclaim what she teaches. The laity too demonstrate a growing hunger for the unabridged version of Catholic Faith. Beginning in the late 1980s huge numbers of very solid magazines and publishing houses blossomed and began publishing and republishing wonderfully solid Catholic materials. This began to push back against the open dissent of the 1970s and 1980s. As the Internet dawned a whole host of great websites that are supportive of the faith have also burst forth. Many superb lay movements and new religious orders have also taken their place on the scene and are growing.

Yes, these are comparatively wonderful times. There are still troubles to be sure and the culture around us continues its alarming descent downward into confusion and darkness. But I am convinced that God is doing something powerful in the Church and that necessary reforms are well underway. I am no prophet but I do see that if American culture and civilization stand a chance it will be because of what the Lord is doing in and for the Church right now. Our on-going reforms will result in two things: we will be a light in the darkness and we will be increasingly persecuted. But praise God, I am convinced we are being purified and God is up to something good. Even the dreadful Sex abuse crisis has served to sober us up and call us to account for our laxity of the past. The days are difficult in our culture, all the more reason we should we clear and uncompromising in the glorious truth God has given us.

Unambiguous Creed – Back in those difficult days of the early 80s some of us seminarians came up with our own Creed to respond to the “revisionist creed.” We sort of stitched this thing together from various sources and each of its lines was carefully crafted to address errors that confronted us in those days. Frankly we kept this thing under wraps at that time since open asserting dogmatic truth was seen as “rigid” in the early 1980s. And to be labeled “rigid” was a death sentence to a seminarian. But looking through my files I found this and am pleased to say that it would no longer need to be kept under wraps today. Here’s what we compiled from various sources:

I, standing before almighty God and enlightened by his divine grace profess the faith which the Roman Catholic Church teaches. With firm faith I believe and profess each and all the articles that are contained in the Apostles’ Creed, that is:

I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven
and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, born of
the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was
crucified, died and was buried. He descended into hell;
the third day He arose from the dead; he ascended into heaven
sits at the right hand of God the Father almighty; from
thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the
communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection
of the body, and life everlasting.

  • I accept and embrace most firmly the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and all the other constitutions and prescriptions of the Church.
  • I accept the sacred Scriptures according to the sense which has been held and is still held by Holy Mother Church, whose duty it is to judge the true sense and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures, and I shall never knowingly accept or interpret them in any other way.
  • I profess that the sacraments of the New Law are seven in number, instituted by Christ for our salvation, though all are not necessary for each individual: baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony.
  • I profess that all confer grace and that, of these, baptism, confirmation, and holy orders cannot be repeated without sacrilege. I also accept and admit the ritual of the Catholic Church in the solemn administration of all the sacraments.
  • I accept and hold, in each and every part, all that has been defined and declared by the Sacred Councils concerning original sin and justification.
  • I profess that in the Mass is offered to God a true, real and perfect sacrifice for the living and the dead; that in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist is really, truly and substantially the Body and Blood, together with the Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ through the change of all of the substance of the bread into the Body, and all of the substance of the wine into the Blood. I confess also that in receiving under either of these species I receive Jesus Christ, whole and entire.
  • I firmly hold that purgatory exists and that the souls of the faithful departed who are there can be helped by the prayers of the faithful.
  • Likewise I hold that the saints, who reign with Jesus Christ should be venerated and may be invoked to offer prayers to God for us. I likewise assert that this veneration, far from diminishing God’s glory, rather, furthers it by acknowledging what the Love, Grace and Power of God can accomplish in weak human nature.
  • I profess firmly that the images of Jesus Christ and of the Mother of God, ever virgin, as well as of all the saints, should be given due honor and veneration on account of who they represent.
  • I recognize the holy, Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church as the mother and teacher for all and accept without hesitation and profess all that has been handed down, defined, declared and taught by the Church.
  • I likewise embrace the teaching concerning the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff in matters of faith and morals and, accepting his primacy, I promise and swear true obedience to the Holy Father who is the vicar of Jesus Christ and successor to Saint Peter the Prince of the Apostles.
  • This Catholic Faith, outside of which no one who knowingly rejects it can ever be saved, I now freely profess and I shall, with the help of God, maintain and profess this same faith entire and inviolate and with firm constancy until the last breath of my life.
  • I shall also strive to see that, as far possible, this same faith shall be held, taught and publicly professed by all those who depend on me and by those of who I shall have charge.
  • Amen.

A little different than the revisionist creed, don’t you think?

I am interested in what you think is happening in the Church, especially if you lived through 70s and 80s. As I have said, I think God is doing great things. More is surely needed. Our continuing drop in attendance must also be turned around. But in the end, I am once again assured of the Lord’s promise that the gates of hell, though they try, are not going to prevail against the Church founded by Jesus Christ.

Here is a silly video that depicts the dissent of 70s and 80s in a cartoonish way. It may be a bit unfair in it’s rather light-hearted approach. Not all dissent can be reduced to this ridiculous picture. But I have to say he reminds me perfectly of some of the religion teachers I had in middle school CCD back in the early 70s. The jeans, the sweater and and the smarmy conversation and the notion that there are no answers and the way that “tolerance” gives way to anger when the right buttons get pushed. So take this for what it’s worth. It’s a cartoon-like hyperbole of the laid back 70s.

Posted on

And Out You Go: Why Does Going to Church Make So Many Faint?

In my over 21 years as a priest and even longer in serving in some capacity at the Holy Liturgy I have seen more than a few people faint. Some just slump over, others go over with a real bang. Weddings are a big source of fainting spells but just about any long Mass can produce its share of a “lights out” experience. Last year I was serving as First Assistant Deacon for a Pontifical Solemn High Mass in the Basilica and prior to the Mass we predicted at least some one would pass out. It’s usually one of the torch bearers since they have to kneel on the marble for so long. Sure enough right at communion time, one of them went over, torch and all. It wouldn’t be a valid solemn  High Pontifical Mass if at least one didn’t pass out!

OK, so what’s going one here? Are people overwhelmed by the presence of God and then just “rest in the Spirit?”  Well, that’s a fine thought and I perhaps I should just stop the article here out piety. However, beyond the this holy thought there are probably other explanations.

  1. It could be the heat in some churches which causes dehydration. Dehydration then causes there to be a lower volume of blood which causes the pressure to drop and makes it harder to get the blood to the brain and out you go.
  2. Anemia – Some  women have borderline anemia especially at certain times of their cycle and this reduces the number of red blood and thus reduces the ability of the blood to deliver oxygen to the brain and, especially after standing a while or getting a little dehydrated,  out you go.
  3. Stress – In order to maintain proper blood pressure there must be a proper balance between two chemicals: adrenaline and acetylcholine. Adrenaline stimulates the body, including making the heart beat faster and blood vessels narrower, thereby increasing blood pressure. Acetylcholine does the opposite. Fainting can happen when something stimulates the vagus nerve and causes too much acetylcholine to be produced at the wrong time. Pain can do this, so can “situational stressors” such as something like  seeing blood or just prolonged stress that often happens at funerals or weddings. Such things cause too much acetylcholine to slow the heart, dilate the blood vessels, pressure drops more than it should, blood can’t reach the brain and out you go.
  4. Standing  for a length of time can also cause the blood to collect a bit in the lower legs. The movement of the blood back from the limbs is assisted by the movement of those limbs. I was always taught never to lock my knees when I was standing since this slowed blood flow and made blood accumulate in the legs. More blood in the legs means less blood that can go to the brain and out you go. It is important when standing to slightly bend the knees a bit and to allow for some movement of the legs by shifting your weight. This improves circulation and keeps the pressure at a proper level to get blood up to the brain. The same is true with kneeling.
  5. In some cases low blood sugar can cause one to faint. The brain requires blood flow to provide oxygen and glucose (sugar) to its cells to sustain life. Hence excessively low blood sugar can cause one to feel drowsy, weak and in some cases to  faint, especially if some of the other factors are present. Hence if one has been fasting (rare today!) before communion and also has a tendency to be hypoglycemic it is possible one can faint.

There are surely other causes, (some of them very serious but more rare) but let this suffice. It would seem that Masses and Church services are over-represented in the fainting department due to any combination of the above, especially: stress, dehydration, and standing or kneeling for long periods.

It is surely a weird experience to faint. I have done it a number of times related to an asthmatic cough I often get. When an extreme coughing episode ensues the rhythm of the heart is disturbed, blood pressure drops and out you go. It is a very strange experience to just see everything fade to black, the lights just go out and sometimes I can even feel myself falling but can do little about it. I just hope I fall gracefully 🙂  I usually come to a moment or so later but it is strange to say the least. Our brains go only go without blood (oxygen) for a few seconds before unconsciousness envelopes and out you go.

We are wonderfully, fearfully made to be sure. And yet we are earthen vessels, fragile and in need of delicate balance. We are contingent beings, depending on God for every beat of our heart, and His sustaining of every function of every cell of our body. Maybe fainting in Church isn’t so bad since it helps keep us humble and that is always a good “posture” before God. Maybe before the immensity of God it is good to be reminded of our fragility and dependence upon Him for all things, even the most hidden processes of our body.

Enjoy this video of Church faintings and consider well that “To be absent from the body is to be present to God.” (2 Cor 5:8)

Posted on

Wondering About the "Mosque" at Ground Zero and the Logic We Use.

I wonder if we have considered the wider implications of the controversy about a “mosque” near the World Trade Center Site? I put “mosque” in quotes since I am not sure that it actually is a mosque, formally speaking. Rather it seems to be more of an Islamic Center. I will admit to not knowing fully the distinction between a mosque and an Islamic Center though my premise is that such a center may have a wider purpose than just as a place of worship and would probably include places to gather to study or for social interaction such as receptions and the like. It would seem that there are already two mosques within a dozen blocks of the proposed site.

I suppose if you ask me, I don’t think building the center so near ground zero is a good idea. It has obviously proved incendiary and, if the original purpose was to promote mutual understanding the whole thing has back-fired. There are surely many reasons for this and plenty of blame to go around. There may have been some fear-mongering by those opposed. There were some problematic statements by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf . And when the politicians entered the picture, it was like gasoline being poured on the already smoldering topic.

But what I want to consider are the possible implications of this event beyond the Muslim Community to our own Catholic Church. The matter that most concerns me is that many who oppose this Mosque (though not all) seem to be asking that the Government prevent its construction. Perhaps this would be done by revoking construction permits or through zoning changes.

I’ll be honest, I don’t want the Government to have a thing to do with refusing permission for the mosque (or center). Because, truth be told, if they can intervene in a matter about a mosque they can just as easily make life difficult when it comes to building churches too.

There are many in this land who distrust Muslims and dislike many aspects of the Muslim Faith. As a Catholic I surely have many strong disagreements with what the Muslim Faith teaches.  Distrust is a more complicated question. Most Americans are willing to distinguish between extremist Islam and mainstream Islam. But here too the failure to hear of strong denunciation of violence from Muslim leaders makes Americans wonder. Further, the lack of religious tolerance in many Muslim Countries also causes consternation. To some extent this distrust makes it easier for some to demand the government step in and prevent the Mosque.

But let’s be honest and sober. We as Catholics are heading south in the popularity ratings too. There are increasing  numbers in this country who consider us hateful, backward, sexist, homophobic, judgmental, and so forth. They think this of us because we have not signed on 100% with the cultural, sexual and social revolution. Many also distrust us on account of our handling of the Clergy Sex Abuse Crisis. It is not that far of a stretch to consider that within the next decades we too will discover many obstacles toward building Churches in prominent or visible places. At first opposition to us will be rooted in complaints that we will cause traffic etc. But the next step will be to refuse us zoning easements because we are sexist (no women priests, opposition to abortion) or anti-homosexual (No Gay marriage), insensitive (e.g. no Euthanasia),  and thus our “values” do not comport well with the community in question or our presence causes some to experience outrage or hurt. Hence our prominent presence in a community could be denied simply because others experience hurt or rage. (I do not say that such feelings about us are fair or right, I simply note their current existence).

Now this may seem far-fetched, but is this not some of the logic being applied at the ground zero site? And those who think that the Government should intervene at the ground zero site should carefully think this through. It is a very poor basis on which to ask the government  to act. And we may be next in the cross hairs of this sort of logic.

We ought to be very sober about encouraging the Government to continue to expand its involvement in how private citizens use their land and resources. In the last 40 years the government has become increasingly intrusive when it comes to building anything. There are increasingly picky zoning requirements, declaration of historical districts, nature preserves, etc. And eminent domain (allowing  the government simply to take your land for its own purposes in exchange for a price it deems fair) which was once rather rare and for serious reasons  has now become shockingly common. There are certain western states that are almost wholly owned by the Federal Government and where private ownership of land has become rare. As one who has built a large building on Church property, I can personally attest to how frustrating it is to build. There are endless permits, delays, regulations, zoning waivers, delays, forms, and did I say, delays?

Now I realize that not every one who opposes the Mosque is asking the government to intervene. But for those who are, think very carefully. And even for those who are not asking the government intervention, be careful of the logic used. That a mosque causes grief and anger, fear or suspicion at ground zero may at some level be understandable but it is a poor basis on which to tell someone they cannot build a building. For I fear that same logic will be used against the Catholic Church sooner than we think in certain areas of this country. It is not a great leap of (tortured) logic to say that a mosque cannot be built because it evokes negative feelings to saying that a Catholic Church cannot be built for the same reasons. We ought to be very careful about the logic we use.

What do you think? I know that this article needs some distinctions, qualifications and factual additions. Remember this is a discussion I have started. I do not intend this blog  it as a pronouncement. I am grateful if, in addition to any comments about the issue in general, you might address the specific question of the logic of demanding the non-existence of a building on the basis that it will cause hurt or anger and how it might ultimately affect us as Catholics.

Here’s an interesting interview about the Mosque (Islamic Center) before it really heated up:

Posted on

Don’t Think…..Look! A Brief Meditation on the Sacred Liturgy

I want to give two thumbs up for good old fashioned experience, just experiencing life to its top…..just having an experience!  Too often in today’s hurried age, and also in this time of frantic 24 hour news cycles, we rush past experience to analysis. Too often we insist on knowing immediately what something “means”  and what to think about it. This rush to think and analyze often happens before the experience is even over. And, of course,  analyzing something before all the data is in leads to limited and poor analysis. Two old sayings come to mind:

  1. Don’t Think…Look! – We miss so much of life when we retreat into our brains for immediate analysis. I recently went to an art exhibit called the “Sacred Made Real” and as you walk in they hand you a thick pamphlet describing each work. This is fine I thought but before I read a word I wandered through and gazed upon each marvelous work first. Some of the works were mysterious to me, “Who was this?,” I thought. But the mystery was part of the experience. Later I went back and read on each work.  I also noticed many people buried in their little pamphlet barely looking at the actual artwork, beyond an occasional glance. Most of their time was spent reading. There were others who had headphones on which provide a better look but still fills your head with information too soon. Another variant on this saying is “Don’t Think….Listen!” So often when listening to others. They may get a few words or a sentence out and zap, our mind lights up as we think how to answer them and we miss most of the experience of what they are saying to us. 
  2. Do just do something, stand there. – In all of our activism we seldom savor life. Few people take a Sabbath rest anymore. Few eat dinner with their family. Few even know how to chill and just relax. Even many vacations are packed with activities and destinations which allow little real to actually experience what one is doing. I live near the U.S. Capitol and observe how some people are so busy taking pictures of the Capitol, I wonder if they ever really “see” or experience the Capitol.

I’d like to focus this insight of the importance of real experience on the Liturgy. And rather than give lots of discursive commentary I’d like to give some random “snapshots” and ponder our need to get back to experience more purely and simply.

  1. It’s First Communion, or perhaps a wedding. As children come down the aisle, or perhaps the bride, hundreds of cameras and cell phones are held aloft, annoying flashes go off creating a strobe effect. People scramble to get into better positions for a picture. In recent years I have had to forbid the use of cameras. The Bride and Groom  are permitted to hire a professional photographer, and we also permit one professional photographer to take pictures at First Holy Communion and Confirmation. But otherwise I instruct the assembled people that the point of the Liturgy is to worship God, to pray and to experience the Lord’s ministry to us. I insist that they put away their camera and and actually experience the Sacrament being celebrated and the mysteries unfolding before them.
  2. Some months ago I was privileged to be among the chief clergy for a Solemn High Pontifical Mass in the Old Latin Form at the Basilica here in DC. The liturgy was quite complicated to be sure. We rehearsed the day before and as the rehearsal drew to a close I said to whole crew of clergy and servers, “OK, Tomorrow during the Mass, Don’t forget to worship God!” We all laughed because it is possible to get so wrapped up in thinking what is next and what  I have to do, that we forget to pray! The next day I told God that no matter what, I was here to worship him. I am grateful that he gave me a true spirit of recollection in that Mass. I did mix up a minor detail, but in the end, I experienced God and did not forget to worship him. Success. Thank you Lord!
  3. The Mass is underway in a typical Catholic Parish. Something remarkable is about to happen, the Lord Jesus is going to speak through the Deacon who ascends the pulpit to proclaim the Gospel. Yes, that’s right, Jesus himself will announce the Gospel to us. As the Deacon introduces the Gospel all are standing out of respect. And 500 hundred pairs of eyes are riveted……on the Deacon? No! For many their eyes are riveted on a missalette. Half way through the  Gospel the Church swims with the sound of hundreds of people turning the page of their missalettes, one or two of them drop them in the process. Sadly, most lose the experience of the proclamation of God’s  Word with their heads buried in a missalette. They may as well have read it on their own. Some will argue that this helps them understand the reading better. But the Liturgy is meant to be experienced as a communal hearing of the Word proclaimed. And as for understanding, “Don’t think…..Listen!” Understanding and reflection comes later. In the homily the Lord will speak to us of something and give us what we need to hear and He will grant understanding. It’s all part of the “experience.”
  4. I celebrate a good number of Wedding Masses in the Old Latin Form. Some years ago a couple prepared a very elaborate booklet so that people could follow along and understand every detail of the Old Latin Mass. Of itself,  it was a valuable resource. They asked me, prior to the Mass to briefly describe the booklet and how to use it. I went ahead and did so but concluded my brief tour of the book by saying, “This is a very nice book and will surely make a great memento of today’s wedding. But if you want my advice, put it aside now and just experience a very beautiful Mass with all its mystery. If you have your head in a book you may miss it and forget to pray. Later on you can read it and study what you have experienced.”     In other words, “Don’t think….Look!”
  5. In the ancient Church the Catechumens were initiated into the “Mysteries,” (the Sacraments of Initiation) with very little prior instruction as to what would happen. They had surely been catechized in the fundamental teachings of the faith but the actual details of the celebration of the Sacraments were not disclosed. They were Sacred Mysteries and the disciplina arcanis (the discipline of the secret) was observed. Hence they simply experienced these things and where instructed as to their deeper meaning in the weeks that followed in a process known as mystagogia. Hence, experience preceded analysis, understanding and learning. And the very grace of the experience and the Sacraments provided the foundation for that understanding.

Well, I realize that this post will not be without some controversy. Let me be clear about one point, Catechesis is important but so is experience. And if we rush to analyze and decode everything we miss a lot. I have taught on the liturgy extensively in this blog (here: http://blog.adw.org/tag/mass-in-slow-motion/ ) and will continue to do so. There is a time to do so, but there is also a  time just to be still and experience what God is actually doing in every liturgy, indeed, in every moment of our life.

Two thumbs up and three cheers for experience.

I realize that some further distinctions out to be made but I want to leave that for you who comment. Have at it.

Posted on

Why Anne Rice is Wrong: The Intersection of the Church and Politics Cannot be Reduced to Simplistic Labels.

The recent and public proclamations of two prominent women, one Catholic the other Protestant, highlight the growing conflicts at the intersection of faith, politics and culture. Author, Anne Rice, who had returned to the Catholic Faith in 1998, recently “renounced” her Christian Faith. And Kirsten Powers, a Fox News analyst and former Clinton Administration official, has written in her defense. The comments of both women show how increasingly difficult it is for the Church to negotiate the delicate balance of proclaiming moral truth and yet not transgressing  political and cultural boundaries by “taking sides” or forging alliances with parties and movements.

Here are some quotes from these women:

  1. Anne Rice from her Facebook Page –   “I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being ‘Christian’ or to being part of Christianity. It’s simply impossible for me to ‘belong’ to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.”
  2. Kirsten Powers writing yesterday in The Daily Beast – I feel your pain, sister. Like Rice, I developed a deep faith later in life and, like her, I brought with me liberal views that aren’t normally associated with devout Christians….American Christianity is suffering from a hangover from decades of indoctrination by Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and a host of other religious leaders who falsely cloaked right-wing Republicanism in biblical principles. Worse, these leaders modeled the decidedly un-Christian behavior of treating certain groups with contempt. Even if Robertson et al. were actually justified in viewing liberals, gays, feminists, and Muslims as their enemy, their response is simply not rooted in Scripture. (See, for example, “love your enemies” and “bless those who persecute you.”) A popular bumper sticker—”I love Jesus but I hate his fan club”—reflects this growing frustration with the church among devout Christians. Something needs to change, or more Anne Rices are going to walk away. The full article by Ms. Powers is here: Kirsten Powers on Anne Rice’s Christianity Crisis

Now there are any number of things I personally object to in Ms. Rice’s comments. Referring to us as “infamous” borders on Religious bigotry. In her “anti”  list I particularly object to the anti-science, and anti-gay labels. The Church has a very nuanced and smart position viz. science wherein we respect science’s role and only object when certain scientists  transgress into philosophical and religious pronouncements. As for being “anti-Gay:”  It is difficult when an individual or group wants to insist that its entire identity be described by particular form sexual activity which the Scriptures we revere and must obey call sinful, it is unreasonable to expect approval from the Church. But disapproval does not equate to hate as many claim or simple and crude “anti-gay” agenda. The Catholic Church is not anti-gay, we simply cannot approve of any sexual activity outside of marriage and have a principled, Biblical understanding of marriage and sexuality. What is demanded of us is unreasonable. In fact her whole diatribe is simplistic in that it lacks any proper distinctions or respect for the nuances of Catholic and Christian views.

As for Ms. Powers’ comments she too uses words that are unnecessary. Why must she describe Christians as treating certain groups with “contempt?”  Is it now contempt to disagree or stand opposed to the seismic cultural shifts that have taken place in West?  And why the word “enemy?”  Is the fact that Christians oppose aspects of the gay agenda, for example,  mean that Christians necessarily see Gays as enemies? Why are such words used and do they not express the contempt for us that they criticize? Is it not possible for Christians to have principled differences with advocates of the new morality without being charged with contempt and being told we are treating people as enemies, that we are unloving and refusing to bless others?

But the deeper issue I want to explore is the implied critique that Catholics and Traditional Christians are wrong to build alliances in the political and secular realm. The simplistic form of the charge is that traditional Christians (to include Catholics) are just an arm of the Republican Party. I want to suggest that this is both simplistic and inaccurate. I also want to address the charge that it is wrong for the Church to develop alliances.  Let’s begin with a little history.

There is a long history of alliances – While the Church has never officially embraced a political party, political alliances have historically been evident. In the past, until the emergence of the Regan Democrats, Catholic voters were  a reliably  Democratic voting block. There were also many alliances forged between Church leaders and Democratic leaders. Issues such as labor, and labor unions, justice, minimum wage, and care for the poor forged deep alliances between Catholics and Democrats at all levels in the Church. In the years of the Civil Rights Movement the Christian Churches were the central pillar of that movement and a large number of Catholic Clergy, Sisters and lay leaders were active in the movement. The Civil rights movement forged important alliances with civic and political leaders to evoke lasting change. There were also countless alliances that developed between the Catholic Church, Protestant denominations and civic and political leaders to address a wide variety of local issues such as education, economic justice and development in poor neighborhoods, crime, traffic hazards and the like. So there is nothing new about the Church being out in the community and in the political realm forging alliances for matters deemed important.

Now in the first 70 years of the 20th Century the social and moral issues of abortion, euthanasia, homosexual activity, stem cell research and the like were not largely disputed and some didn’t even exist yet. Most Americans agreed essentially on such matters and that they were wrong. Generally then in these years the alliance was strong between the Democratic Party and Catholics due to the issues involved and the politics of the time.

After 1973 and the Roe v. Wade decision the alliance began to experience its first rifts. But not at first. In the initial years after Roe many prominent Democrats were against Abortion. For example Al Gore, Harry Reid, Jessie Jackson and others protested abortion. Abortion was not at first a strongly partisan issue. But in the decade following Roe, the pro-Choice position began to become Democratic orthodoxy. Pro-life democrats were increasingly hard to find and the party’s platform became officially pro-Choice. Little by little the Republican Party stood forth as increasingly pro-Life and this position was adopted as the official position of the GOP platform. One by one the other moral issues began to divide out along party lines as well.

And here we are today with a host of critical moral issues of which the Church cannot remain silent but in which political divisions are sharp. So sharp are these political divisions that when the Church speaks on what ARE plainly moral issues (eg. Abortion, Homosexual marriage, contraceptives and abortions to minors, stem cell research etc.) she is said to be getting too political, or to talking politics from the pulpit, or promoting a Republican Agenda. And yet these are clearly moral issues which fair minded individuals realize the Church cannot simply ignore.

And hence, new alliances are forming between the Church and the world of politics. Since most all these matters involve public policy, public funds, legislation and the like, the Church cannot be part of the discussion and seek to influence outcomes without bumping up against legislators who, by the way, also happen to be politicians. So the Church and other Christians do what we have always done, we form alliances to address these issues and influence their outcome. It is not just the Church that does this, everyone does this.

Now the point thus far is that political alliances are nothing new in Catholicism. While not being a partisan faith, it is just a fact that strong partnerships have been formed over the past 100 years between the Church and the Democrats in the past, increasingly the Republicans now. Seismic shifts in the culture have led to seismic shifts in the political landscape and led to shifting alliances.

Now that some of these alliances are seen as conservative or Republican some say, “tisk, tisk.”  But such scolding did not come from these same people or  secular media when the alliances were more left of center.

But what of the charge that the Catholic Church is merely an outpost of the Republican Party? It is true,  as has already been stated, there are more alliances withthe right of center and the Republican Party than in the past. This is for the reasons stated. But the fact is, the Catholic Church holds many positions that do not conform to “right-wing politics” and has alliances far broader than one party. The Church is generally pro-immigration, opposes the death penalty, and insists on proper care for the poor. The Pope and most of the Bishops opposed our initiation of the Iraq War. More locally my own parish and most other parishes in the City of Washington belong to a non-partisan group called the Washington Interfaith Network (WIN). Together with Protestant congregations, we number over fifty congregations who develop partnerships with City government and civic organizations to ensure the availability of affordable housing, redevelopment of blighted neighborhoods, restoration of public libraries and recreation centers. Most recently we gathered the Candidates for Mayor and City Council Chair and  secured their promise to work with us on a detailed and multi-faceted jobs initiative to get people back to work. Every month, I along withother clergy and Church leaders in WIN are down at the District Building holding their feet to fire and developing alliances to ensure that these promises are fulfilled.

It is also true outside the Interfaith Network that we Catholic Clergy, along with some Protestant Ministers worked hard to fight the Gay “Marriage” Bill. We have also fought hard for opportunity scholarships for inner city kids and opposed any expansion of Abortion funding.

So what are we? What is the Church? Is it really true to say that we are just shills for the Republican Party? That hardly seems fair. What if we are just Christians who fight for what we value? And the truth is, those values aren’t so easily categorized as Anne Rice and Kirsten Powers think.  We, like everyone else in this country form  alliances, to fight for what we value. But in the Catholic Church those alliances are not as monolithic as some of our critics claim.

Perhaps a personal litany to end: I am against abortion and they call me a Republican. I oppose Capital Punishment and they call me a Democrat. I am against Gay Marriage and many aspects of the Gay agenda and they say, “O see he’s a Republican!” I work for affordable housing and insist that jobs be the priority for the City agenda and they say, “See he’s a Democrat.” And all this time what I was trying to be is a Christian.

Posted on

More on”Spiritual Cross Training”

Getting into Spiritual Shape

About two months ago, I did a blog entry on “spiritual cross training.” I made an analogy between my goal of training for a 5K and training for spiritual fulfillment. I also mentioned that the friend I was training with rarely went to church and when I invited him to a Mass, he went once and commented that it did nothing for him. At that time, I told him, “Neither of us had run a yard in 10 years. What if we tried to run 3 miles in 24 minutes, failed miserably and then concluded ‘running does nothing for me?’” Really, if I haven’t run in years, how can I expect to be able to benefit from the sport in the first workout? Can I run around my neighborhood for five minutes and get on a scale and lament – “I haven’t lost any weight yet!”? I analogized that, “the practice of our faith is a spiritual workout. If you only go to church on Easter and Christmas, how could you possibly expect to be in good spiritual shape? If you don’t make prayer a habit, how can you expect to benefit from the exercise?”

3.1 miles in 36 minutes

Well, yesterday was the race for which we had been training and I am proud of this rather unflattering picture of me approaching the finish line. I am proud because four months ago, I was really out of shape. I was proud that my friend and I stuck to our training. But, I was most proud because one week prior, I had strained my back severely (I am not the twenty-something-blogger named Laura!). My physician said I would be in pain but running wouldn’t exasperate the injury. I was determined to do this race. My friend knew I was in pain as the race started but keep encouraging me to run through the pain.

So that his affliction may glorify God – John 9:1-41

We finished the race – I trailed him by a few minutes and we felt euphoric having finished with respectable times. Since the race was on a Saturday I asked him, “So, what are you doing tomorrow?” hoping the word “church” was somewhere in his answer. Glory to God, he said he was going to Mass adding, “You did not let a lower back strain get in your way, I shouldn’t let a boring homily get in mine.”

Staying motivated

Training for and running in a road race is not always fun. But the reward of crossing the finish line eclipses all of the pain and setbacks. The true reward comes in overcoming all of the obstacles that get in the way, including a lower back strain. Frankly, attending Mass regularly can have its setbacks as well, such as a boring homily or two. But, if you can see past the occasional disappointment, the reward that awaits, namely the worship of God in the form of the Eucharist, certainly eclipses all pain, suffering and sin.

Staying committed

We are now committed enough to running that we have already entered in a race scheduled for September. Next time, our goal is not to simply finish but to improve our time. Let’s pray that my friend finds that same commitment to God‘s command to keep holy the Sabbath. Also pray that he and others who have fallen away from the Church not only attend Mass regularly but that they integrate Christian spirituality into their entire lives, despite an occasional disappointment.