One of my favorite composers is Antonio Vivaldi (1678-1741). While I love his secular pieces (such as The Four Seasons), I am especially fond of his Church music. It is so light, bright, and tuneful! Vivaldi loved to go up and down the musical scale, varying the theme a half step at a time.
Ah, Vivaldi, he’s right up there with Handel, Bach, and Mozart! I consider him to be an especially Catholic treasure given his large body of sacred Latin liturgical music.
Here are just a few things I’d like to share about Vivaldi, things you may or may not know:
1. Vivaldi was a Catholic priest. He was ordained in Venice in 1703, at the age of 25. However, it would seem that the active priesthood did not suit him. Within a year, he asked to be excused from the daily celebration of Mass due to a “tightness of the chest,” which he complained of his entire life. Most scholars think that this is a reference to asthma, although there may have been other causes, including heart-related matters. But a deeper reason may lie in the fact the Vivaldi was pressured to become a priest. In those days, often the only way a poor family had to ensure the free schooling of a son was to send him to a seminary. Music seems to have been Vivaldi’s passion. Some biographies of him relate that he would sometimes leave the altar in mid-Mass to go into the sacristy to write down a musical idea that had just come to him!
2. Vivaldi spent most of his musical career working in an orphanage (mostly, though not exclusively, one for girls). While this may seem an odd and unfruitful place for a composer, it actually was not. The Ospedale della Pietà, where he worked for many years, was one of four well-endowed orphanages in Venice. Most of the children were the illegitimate offspring of Venetian noblemen who fathered them in the course of their (sadly common) dalliances. The noblemen funded orphanages to care for these children of theirs. In Venice, these homes developed a reputation for fine music, all performed by girls. The girls were trained in music from their earliest years and concerts were a way for the orphanages to raise money. At the Ospedale della Pietà, some of the girls remained well into adulthood, continuing to perform there. The video below depicts what such a setting was like, and shows how Vivaldi would give performances, secular and liturgical, with “his ladies.”
3. Not all found Vivaldi’s music as outstanding as many of us do today. Carlo Goldoni, an Italian playwright of the time, described Vivaldi as “… this priest, an excellent violinist but a mediocre composer …” But Vivaldi also had fans and patrons, and he earned a decent living selling copies of his many concertos, operas, and Church works.
4. In 1720 Vivaldi began living with a woman, Anna Giraud. To be fair, though, he always maintained that she was with him as a housekeeper and a friend. Furthermore, her sister also shared the house with them. Vivaldi trained Anna to sing and she had an excellent reputation as a singer. Vivaldi stayed with her until his death. Were they more than friends? It’s hard to say, but why not take Vivaldi at his word?
5. Vivaldi’s works all but disappeared after his death in 1741 and were not heard regularly or known widely again until the 1950s! In this sense he was an “opaque luminary.” (This expression refers to a person who shines brightly in his own time but is largely forgotten after death.) From his death until 1950, the name Antonio Vivaldi was largely unknown.
6. Vivaldi’s works began to come back to light beginning in 1926. It was at this time that the Salesian Fathers, wishing to sell a large number of old volumes in their archive, invited Dr. Alberto Gentili, professor of music history at the National Library of Turin, to assess their value. Many of the 97 volumes in the archive contained Vivaldi manuscripts. And thus Vivaldi music reappeared on the landscape. Although the Second World War slowed the process of compiling and collecting the full library of Vivaldi music from other sources, the hunt was on! In 1951, concertgoers in England were among the first to hear this newly rediscovered baroque master. Since then, Vivaldi has assumed his place alongside Bach and Handel, and is considered by most to be their equal. With them, he paved the way to Mozart.
7. Vivaldi died in 1741 at the age of 63. The cause was said to be “internal fire,” probably another reference to the asthma that plagued him all his life.
Yes, Vivaldi, the gift of his music is great!
The video below depicts the way in which Vivaldi’s Church music was likely performed. It shows how Vivaldi probably gave performances, secular and liturgical, with “his ladies.” Note that both the orchestra and the choir contain only women. This particular performance takes place in the Church of the Pietà in Venice, which was Vivaldi’s church and is attached to the Ospedale della Pietà. This is the movement from the now-famous Gloria in D. The text is Domine fili unigenite, Jesu Christe. Most of us who have sung this piece are used to it being in an SATB (soprano, alto, tenor, bass) arrangement, but for historical accuracy it is performed here exclusively by women. Notice the beautiful candles, too!
Over the years I have attempted to trace the philosophical disaster of our modern world. Certainly the fundamental roots can be traced back to the breakdown of the medieval synthesis, the rise of nominalism, and the doubts of Descartes. These introduced a disconnect from reality. Descartes introduced a radical doubt in anything seen or experienced, and this disconnects us from reality. If we pull up roots from reality and the revelation of creation, we live increasingly within our mind and out of touch with reality.
Welcome to the modern, post-Cartesian age, a strange landscape in which reality and stubborn facts aren’t considered too important. (N.B. To me, it is a strange paradox of modern times that we idolize the physical sciences; I have written more on that topic here: On the Cartesian Anxiety of our Times.)
Two of the most extreme examples of the disconnect from reality in our times are the celebration of homosexual activity and so-called transgenderism. If a “cultural Neanderthal” like me suggests that the design of the body speaks against homosexual acts by a simple consideration that the biology of sexuality is violated, I am greeted with responses ranging from blank stares to indignation (“What does the body have to do with it? It’s what I think and feel that matters!”) And thus the disconnect from reality and the retreat into the mind and psyche is complete.
How did we get here?
A few years ago, we priests of the Archdiocese of Washington attended our annual professional day. In reviewing my notes from that conference, I was once again inspired and instructed by the teaching of Msgr. Brian Bransfield, who was then the Associate General Secretary of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. He presented a brief, cogent description of the stages of our collective journey out of reality and into the self-defined world of personal opinion and the mind. It was really an aside within a much longer talk, but I am always appreciative of those who can see and describe the stages of our current malaise.
Allow me to quote from Msgr. Bransfield and then supply some commentary of my own. Please direct any criticism at me, not him, since I am merely excerpting from a larger talk (and context is important).
Here is the excerpt I’d like to discuss:
We can trace the fragmentation of the last four hundred years in steps:
To establish clear certainty in his search for knowledge, Descartes set up a dualism between the material and spiritual.
And in the dualism [he] introduced a separation in which he set man’s internal mind in opposition to external reality.
[Next, he] … elevated the mind (the thinking subject) and reduced the external, objective world of concrete reality.
Man’s understanding of himself and the world has been in a downward spiral ever since. Only the mind and what the mind says is reality, is real.
[And] thus there is … a collapse between the mind and reality. And in the collapse, reality loses.
[And so] reality becomes a mere label (nominalism). The child in the womb is not called a child; it is labeled something else. A refugee seeking asylum is not called a person, but is labeled undocumented.
[So] the mind now “creates” rather than conforms to reality.
Relativism is born; the thinking subject is … autonomous. Notice that word: “autonomous.”
And [thus] the ultimate absurdity is enthroned: nihilism, nothing—not as a privation but as a positive reality. There is nothing, no relation between reality (be it the child in the womb, the prisoner on death row, or the immigrant on the border) and our conscience. There is no communion between reality and the mind.
Let’s look at each point in detail. Msgr. Bransfield’s description is in bold, black italics while my meager commentary is in plain red text.
We can trace the fragmentation of the last four hundred years in steps:
Notice the use of the word fragmentation. If we live in our heads rather than in reality, then there is very little to unite us with one another. If what I think constitutes my reality, and if the same is true for you, then we are fragmented rather than united because there is nothing outside ourselves to unite us. Each of us is living in his own little world, not in a shared experience called reality.
To establish clear certainty in his search for knowledge, Descartes set up a dualism between the material and spiritual.
This began the disconnect between the actual world and what we think. Descartes entertained or struggled with radical doubt; he could not be sure that there was really anything “out there,” that is, outside his own mind. The only thing he knew for sure was that he existed, because he was a thinking agent. (This was the source of the memorable “Cogito ergo sum” (I think therefore I am)). That is all that was certain for Descartes; everything else might have been a dream or deception.
Thus the wall of separation between the thinking mind and reality was introduced.
By the way, radical doubt, though an intriguing theory and one we have all wrestled with a bit, is wholly useless at the end of the day. One cannot possibly live by it. Such folks sit on chairs that may or may not be there and avoid walking into walls that may or may not be there. But of course they are there. The doubters ignore the overwhelming evidence of reality in theory, but must navigate it in actuality. Their theory of radical doubt is useless and they violate it at every moment.
But useless though it is, the theory has proven quite intoxicating to the decaying West, which loves its dualisms and prefers conflict to synthesis.
And in the dualism [he] introduced a separation in which he set man’s internal mind in opposition to external reality
And thus begins the retreat out of reality and into our minds. We start to live up in our heads and think something is so just because we think it to be so.
[Next, he] … elevated the mind (the thinking subject) and reduced the external, objective world of concrete reality.
What we think becomes more important that what actually is. Thought, opinion, and feeling trump reality. Many people today do not even sense the need to check what they think against the facts. They don’t believe it’s necessary because thinking it makes it so.
Today we often hear phrases such as “That may true for you, but it’s not true for me.” Or (more humorously) “Don’t confuse me with the facts; my mind is made up!” And thus what we think trumps reality. We actually start to believe that statements like “Truth is relative” are real arguments (they are not). It’s really just lazy “living up in our head” and a stubborn refusal to engage reality.
Man’s understanding of himself and the world have been in a downward spiral ever since. Only the mind and what the mind says is reality, is real.
This partly explains the shredding of tradition and the iconoclastic tendencies of the modern age. Who cares what the ancients said or thought? If you and I (who are contemporaries) can’t even agree on what is real, and if all that matters is what I think, then why should what I care what you think, let alone what someone who lived centuries ago thought? If we all just live up in our heads rather than in reality, then what do I have in common with you let alone with The Founding Fathers, St. Thomas, or Jesus for that matter. All that matters is what I think; everything else goes in the shredder.
[And] thus there is … a collapse between the mind and reality. And in the collapse, reality loses. Exactly!
[And so] reality becomes a mere label (nominalism). The child in the womb is not called a child; it is labeled something else. A refugee seeking asylum is not called a person, but is labeled undocumented.
And thus the modern battle over terminology: pro-abortion or pro-choice, baby or fetus, fornication or cohabitation, homosexual or gay, redefining marriage or marriage freedom, refugee or “undocumented” (or even worse, “illegal alien”).
So much hinges on terminology, semantics, euphemisms, and redefinition; thought overrules reality. If we can influence thought, then reality doesn’t matter. Never mind that a baby has been dismembered alive, this is all about “choice” and “reproductive freedom.” And “sodomy” is such an unpleasant reality; let’s just call it “gay love.” And men can call themselves women and we are supposed to say, “Isn’t that nice.”
It’s as if we suppose that our terminology and thoughts can somehow change reality. They cannot. But in this post-Cartesian fog we’re in, that is exactly what we suppose. Away with reality; all that matters is what I think!
[So] the mind now “creates” rather than conforms to reality.
Yes, or so we think.
Relativism is born; the thinking subject is … autonomous. Notice that word: “autonomous.”
And here is where things begin to get scary. Reality is what I say it is. No one gets to tell me what to do or what to think; I should answer to no one.
As Pope Benedict warned, while this attitude marches under the banners of tolerance and freedom, the ultimate result is tyranny.
This is because if you and I cannot agree on something outside ourselves to which each of us is bound (e.g., reality) and to which we must answer, then we cannot appeal to that. Instead we must resort to the use of power to enact our view. Raw power—be it political, economic, or merely the power of popular opinion—is now used to impose agendas. Appeals to reason, common sense, justice, religious values, and even to constitutional parameters are becoming increasingly difficult.
In the video below, Fr. Robert Barron laments that we can’t even have a decent argument anymore since we seem to agree on so little; we just end up talking past one another. The final result is the use of raw power. Reality is what I think; I am autonomous. If you don’t agree with me, at first I will first ignore you. If that doesn’t work, I will work to marginalize you, to eliminate your influence. And if necessary, I will destroy you.
Welcome to the dark side of the Cartesian divide.
[And thus] the ultimate absurdity is enthroned: nihilism, nothing—not as a privation but as a positive reality. There is nothing, no relation between reality (be it the child in the womb, the prisoner on death row, or the immigrant on the border) and our conscience. There is no communion between reality and the mind.
Yes, today we witness the exaltation of nothing, the outright celebration that “nothing is true.” Indeed, we live in self-congratulatory times where many, if not most, applaud their nihilism as being “open-minded,” “tolerant,” “humanitarian,” and so forth.
But as Msgr. Bransfield points out, all this really does is to sever communion. There is nothing humanitarian about it because there is no real communion between human beings possible when I just live in my own head. Further, there is nothing to be tolerant of because there is nothing out there (outside what I think) to tolerate. And there is absolutely nothing open-minded in any of it, because it is the ultimate in close-mindedness to say, “Reality is what I think it is, and that settles it.” For the modern post-Cartesian, tolerance is “your right to agree with me.” Being open-minded means you agree with me. And humanitarianism is only what I say it is.
So here we are in a post-Cartesian malaise, with the vast majority of us living up inside our own heads. In this climate the Church must keep shouting reality.
It is dark now and it will likely get darker. But reality has a funny way of reasserting itself. Our little collective experiment in unreality will necessarily run its course. Let us pray that our reintroduction to reality will not be too harsh. But I am afraid that it will be.
At every funeral I celebrate, I spend a good portion of the sermon urging everyone, including myself, to be more intent on preparing for death and judgement. I remind the assembled of Jesus’ numerous parables on this theme. I remind them that no one loves them more than does Jesus, and yet no one issued more warnings of judgment and Hell than He did. I do this at funerals because the overwhelming majority of people I see there do not attend church at any other time. I feel that I have to take advantage of the opportunity to wrest them from the sin of presumption that is so prevalent today.
Indeed, the sin of presumption seems to be at an all-time high. This is due to many factors in the world where sin is minimized or declared of little import. Even within the Church, due to the error of “universalism” (the belief that most (if not all) people will go to Heaven), a view almost completely contradictory to Scripture, few people are earnest in preparing for death and judgment. This is tragic. While we shouldn’t run around in a panic, we ought to have a lot more urgency in working for salvation. We can do this through daily prayer, frequent Confession and Holy Communion, holy fellowship, and reading/studying Scripture and Church teaching. We must practice the virtues learned in these holy sources and consistently seek the Lord’s grace and mercy.
It is foolish to fail to do this, to put it off day after day. St. Alphonsus Liguori makes this point beautifully and powerfully in his classic work Preparation for Death. He writes,
What would you say of the man who put off his preparation for a trial on which his life depended, till the day of the trial arrived? Would you not stigmatize as a fool the general who should not begin to lay in a supply of provisions and arms, till the city is besieged? Would it not be folly in a pilot [of a ship] to neglect till the time of the tempest to provide the vessel with an anchor and a helm? Such is the folly of a Christian who neglects his conscience till death arrives …. The Lord called the virgins foolish who wished to prepare their lamps with the spouse came (Preparation for Death, 8th Ed., edited by Stephen Winchell, p. 91).
And yet this is precisely what most people do. Too many are busy pursuing lesser things such as career, money, and worldly possessions. Meanwhile, death and judgment, which are both more important and more certain, get little attention. Even comparatively frivolous things like sports, television, and gossip are often given more passion and priority than preparing to die well and in God’s favor. People tend to maximize the minimum and minimize the maximum.
According to the Lord, this is the very definition of foolishness. And yet most assume that either they will be able to repent in a flash as death approaches, or that God doesn’t really care about all the things He said He cares about.
There is no basis in Scripture for the idea that last minute repentance or pleas will win the day. In the “Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins” as well as in almost every similar parable, those excluded from the Kingdom (who hear the Lord say, “I know you not”) all protest and lament loudly. Some of the passages speak of wailing and grinding of teeth as the damned depart into outer darkness or into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Why is this so? Why does God disregard such pleas? Don’t those pleas represent proper repentance? If they do, then why does God seemingly ignore them?
St. Thomas Aquinas provides some insight:
A person may repent of his sin in two ways: in one way, directly, in another way indirectly. He repents of sin directly who hates sin as such; and repents indirectly who hates it on account of something connected with it, for instance punishment. Accordingly, the wicked will not repent of their sin directly, because consent in the malice of sin remains in them. But they will repent indirectly, inasmuch as they will suffer from the punishment inflicted on them for sin. The damned still will wickedness but shun punishment. And thus indirectly they repent of the wickedness committed (Summa Theologica, Sup. 98. Art. 2).
It would seem that their repentance is not a proper repentance from sin, but rather represents more of a regret at the consequences. It is impossible to enter Heaven while still loving sin. Their repentance is not sufficient to grant the healing necessary to enter Heaven.
St. Alphonsus gives us an insight as to why direct repentance (i.e., the repentance of one who hates sin as such) is unlikely to be found suddenly at the moment of death:
It is necessary at death to hate sin, and to love God above all things. But how can he, then, hate forbidden pleasures who has loved them to till that moment? … It is for this reason that God is deaf to their cry … (Preparation for Death, 8th Ed., edited by Stephen Winchell, p. 92).
This is perfectly sensible. Most are simply not able to shift their desires 180 degrees in a moment. The Lord warns that if our desires at the time of our death are not for God and the values of His kingdom, it is highly unlikely that we will have a sudden change of heart. Further, when we die, our disposition either for or against God is forever fixed. The wicked do not depart wailing and grinding their teeth because they suddenly hate sin and love God and holiness. No, they wail due to more selfish motives, such as the fear of punishment. They hate the consequences, but not the sin.
Consider well these admonitions from two great saints, which speak directly and clearly against the presumptiveness and foolishness of our age. Get to work while there is still time. Tell everyone you love to set his or her house in order before the day of reckoning. Do not delay your conversion to the Lord!
The Gospel for today has a number of “sayings” of the Lord Jesus, which all amount to a kind of litany of love. It is a setting forth of the gifts that He, by His grace, is accomplishing and will accomplish in us. Let’s get right to work and consider the wonderful gifts of grace.
I. Power – Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever loves me will keep my word”
Here is a fundamental theology of grace: keeping the commandments and mandates of the Lord’s Word is the fruit of His love, not the cause of it. “Yes,” says the Lord. “If you love me, the keeping of the commandments is sure to follow.” Note that we do not initiate this love, God does. Scripture says, We love because he first Loved us (1 John 4:19).
Pay attention. No one can give what he does not have, and no one can possess what he has not received. God is the author and initiator of love. Love always starts with Him. The Lord is not setting up some sort of loyalty test here, as if He were saying, “If you love me, prove it by keeping my commandments.” That is not the Gospel! The Gospel is that God loved us before we were ever born, before we could do anything to merit His love. He loved us when we were dead in our sins. And He took the initiative and loved us, even when we hated Him and crucified Him.
And if we will accept this love, it will enable us to love God with the same love with which He loves us. And with His love in us, we will begin to love what He loves and whom He loves. We will love holiness, forgiveness, mercy, justice, compassion, chastity, and generosity. We will love our brethren—even our enemies. Why? Because God loves them; when His love is in our heart, so is His love for them.
Do you understand this? Love enables us to keep His Word, to live it and to love it. When I was young, I dated a girl who liked square dancing. At the time, I thought square dancing was silly. But my love for her meant that I started to love what she loved; I came to love her family, too. Do you see it? If we let love have its way, it changes our heart and our desires.
So if you let love have its way you will keep the commandments. The keeping of the commandments is the fruit of love, not its cause. Love is the power of grace at work in us to love what and whom God loves. Jesus says, If you love me, you will keep my commandments (John 14:15).
II. Presence – [Jesus says,] and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him.
One of Jesus’ great desires was to restore us to unity with the Father. Jesus was crazy about His Father and earnestly desired to have us know Him and love Him more deeply.
If we will but accept the Father’s love and His shalom, offered through Jesus, we will have a tender and joyful relationship with our Abba, our Father. Jesus often described His Father almost as doting. He is like a shepherd who leaves the 99 in search of the one. He is like a woman who loses a coin, sweeps diligently to find it, and then celebrates by throwing a party more costly than the coin itself. He is like a father whose son effectively tells him to “drop dead,” but who, when the son finally returns, runs out to meet him and throws a party in celebration.
Do you grasp this? The Father loves you and Jesus has reconciled you to Him. Now run to Him; run to Abba, God. If you take one step, He’ll take two, and then He’ll start running to embrace you!
This is the Gospel: Jesus Christ has reconciled us to the Father, at the Father’s own request. He loves you. Now run to Him and watch Him run to you. He does not want distance; He wants intimate presence, love, and embrace.
III. Perfection– [Jesus says,] I have told you this while I am with you. The Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you.
We all know that the Christian journey is not accomplished in an instant. Rather, we make this journey with God, the Holy Spirit, who teaches us and makes us mindful of all that Jesus has done for us and taught us. Little by little, we are given a new mind, a new heart, a new walk, and a new and better life. May God who has begun a good work in bring it to perfection (cf Phil 1:6).
If we are open to Him, He is faithful and He will do it. The process may be slow, but that is only because we have foreheads of brass and necks of iron (cf Is 48:4). God is faithful and patient. I am a witness; if He can change me, He can change you, too. He has promised and He will do it.
We will be transformed by the renewal of our mind (cf Rom 12:2), for the Holy Spirit will bring to our mind all that the Lord is and all that He taught. Let the Lord change your mind and heart. If He does that, the rest will follow. Sow a thought, reap a deed; sow a deed, reap a habit; sow a habit, reap a character; sow a character, reap a destiny. And it all begins with the mind.
One of the gifts of grace is the renewing of our minds and it leads to total transformation.
IV. Peace – Jesus says, Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give it to you. Do not let your hearts be troubled or afraid. You heard me tell you, “I am going away and I will come back to you.” If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father; for the Father is greater than I. And now I have told you this before it happens, so that when it happens you may believe.
What is the gift of peace? Peace is shalom; it is more than the absence of conflict. It is the presence in the relationship of everything that should be there. Peace is the experience that everything is all right.
For us, peace is access once again to the Father. It is being able once again to walk with Him in love, in and through Jesus Christ. And we don’t just walk with Him in some earthly garden paradise, as Adam and Eve did. Rather, we walk with him in Heaven. In Jesus we are seated with the Father in honor at His right hand.
So what does it mean when the same Jesus who said, “The Father and I are One” (Jn 10:30), also says, “The Father is greater than I” (Jn 14:28)?
Theologically, it means that the Father is the source in the Trinity. All the members are co-eternal, co-equal, and equally divine, but the Father is the Principium Deitatis (the Principle of the Deity).
Jesus proceeds from the Father from all eternity. In effect, Jesus is saying, “I delight that the Father is the principle of my being, even though I have no origin.”
Devotionally, Jesus is saying that He always does what pleases His Father. Jesus loves His Father. He’s crazy about Him. He’s always talking about Him and pointing to Him. By calling the Father greater, He says (in effect), “I look to my Father for everything. I do what I see Him doing (Jn 5:19) and what I know pleases Him (Jn 5:30). His will and mine are one. What I will to do proceeds from Him. I do what I know accords with His will.”
Here then is the source of our peace. With Jesus, we love the Father and always do what pleases Him. Jesus “goes to the Father” but He takes us with Him, for we are members of His mystical Body. In Jesus, we enter the holy of holies and sit next to the Father in love and intimacy.
Here, then, are some important gifts of grace. It is up to us to lay hold of them and to live out of them. The Lord promises them to us, so they are ours. And if at times they seem distant, reach out and take back what the devil stole from you. These are gifts of the Lord’s resurrected grace.
Here’s a song that speaks of peace and presence, not to mention power.
The animated short video below is a humorous reminder that when technology changes so rapidly, some of us can easily get left behind.
In it, there is also something of an admonition to the Church, that we not act too much like the man in the video.
1. It would seem that the old man has been sheltered away in his apartment for too long while the world has passed him by. We in the Church also have been hunkered down for too long, afraid to engage the outside world.
For the last 50 years, we have been very inwardly focused, debating things like liturgy, who should have power and authority in the Church, how to structure this or that internal program, etc. And though these are all important, while we were focused inwardly, the culture headed away from us at warp speed.
Our primary job (“Go and make disciples”) was set aside and almost wholly eclipsed by lesser (though still important) matters. And thus we are much like the old man in his apartment, seemingly out of touch with what has happened on the outside.
2. The specific text of the letter he is typing is also telling for the Church. The letter (written in German) begins this way: Dear Friend, It is about time I write you again, not simply because I owe you some long lines, or my guilty conscience has gotten to me … Indeed, in many ways the Church has been too silent, at least collectively speaking. Many Catholics tell me that they never hear topics addressed from their pulpits that need addressing: abortion, divorce, homosexuality, same-sex “unions,” fornication, modesty, the obligation to attend Sunday Mass, death, judgment, Heaven, Hell, euthanasia, witness, courage, and so forth.
Yes, many Catholics would attest that Church leaders might well begin by saying, “It is about time that I write you, that I speak to you …”
And if Catholics in the pews feel that way, how much more so unbelievers in the street? A Church too silent, too inward in her preoccupation, needs to begin the conversation with many again: “It is long past time that I speak with you …”
3. The old man is still typing using an outdated method of communication: the manual typewriter. This is a problem for the Church, too. While it is true that we proclaim an ancient and unchanging wisdom, the challenge for us it that our proclamation of it must be non nova, sed novae (not a new thing, but in a new way).
Not only have we been slow to pick up on the “new media” but we also struggle to proclaim our magnificent faith in compelling ways. Collectively, we are doing much better, but we have a long way to go. Many parishes and priests still have little Internet presence. Too many homilies are filled with abstractions and generalities and do not apply the faith to modern issues frequently enough. Too many catechisms look like comic books from the 1970s.
And while some may wonder how it is possible to stay abreast of all the latest technology, it is too important to ignore. Parishes and dioceses must invest resources and enlist skilled staff to ensure that all forms of modern communication are being used and that the results are professional.
Please be assured, dear reader, that I do not mean that the Church’s job is merely to be “relevant” and to reflect the current age. That is not our job. Our job is to represent the teachings of our founder and head, Jesus Christ. But we cannot be content to use the equivalent of a manual typewriter in doing so.
We have to be as wise as serpents in the use of new technology, while being innocent as doves when it comes to embracing the false relevance insisted on by the worldly minded. The message cannot change but the means must progress and the results must be both professional and savvy.
4. At last the man journeys out into the world and finds out what has been going on.A crisis and the inability to continue on as usual has driven him to venture out into the world. Similarly, the Church, like a sleeping giant, is now waking up and going back out into the world. We cannot continue to do business as usual. The various crises within and outside of the Church have driven us forth. The Church’s presence in the new media is growing and is becoming more and more professional. EWTN, Catholic Answers, New Advent, and many other Catholic websites are now engaging the culture.
5. But then comes the twist at the end of the video.The man, while having made some progress, misses the boat. We discover that his use and understanding of the new technology is flawed at best.
Similarly, we in the Church must not simply think that having all the latest technology is enough. We have to know how best and most effectively to use it. Otherwise, we risk making silly mistakes like the one made by the man in the cartoon.
Enjoy this video and learn its lesson. Pray for the Church, that we learn to get it right and that we have the courage to journey outside the comfort of our own four walls to preach effectively the truth we have received.
Michelangelo was asked how he could make a beautiful sculpture like his “Moses” out of a block of marble. His famous response was that he simply chipped away everything that wasn’t “Moses.”
This is a paradigm for us in two senses.
First, the Lord must chip away everything within us that is not Jesus. Yes, everything that is not of the Lord must go. St. Paul said, “I live; no not I, Christ lives in me” (Gal 2:20). The Lord chips away all in us that is not of Him, so that we may become the image of God in Christ.
Second, there is also a very personal sense. Not only must we become Christ, but we must authentically become our very selves. We are called to reflect Christ, but the Lord has made each of us individually to reflect something particular about Him in a unique way. You and I therefore must become the man or woman that God made us to be.
Sometimes I lament the fact that I am not more like St. John Vianney, or St. Francis Xavier, etc. To that, the Lord might well respond that he already has a St. John Vianney and a St. Francis Xavier; what He needs is a you.
For me, the Lord must chip away everything that is not Charles Pope. He made me (and you) to be a particular reflection of His glory. Ultimately, we are each called to reflect Christ in the particular way that only we can. Part of our journey is to discover our true self, as God has made us to be, and to become that true self. We must allow the Lord to chip away everything that is not of Him, or of the person He made us to be.
This is not an invitation to strange idiosyncrasies or to a hyper-individualized version of the truth. No, God does not speak out of both sides of His mouth. The truth about us will ultimately always be subsumed into the fundamental truth of who Jesus is, in whose likeness God created the human person to be. And thus as the Lord sculpts He is not doing abstract art. Rather, He is working in the context of His revealed truth, while also realizing it in a very particular way in each one of us.
A few final thoughts about carving and chipping away:
First, it is slow and painstaking. Great care and thoughtfulness is required of the artist. And we, who are being sculpted by the Lord, must learn to be patient and allow Him to do His work carefully and creatively. Too often we are impatient. But true art requires that the artist step back and look, work, and then reflect. Give the Lord the time and authority He needs.
Second, there is some bewilderment as well as a kind of pain. Sculpting and chipping away is difficult—even painful—for the subject. As we are being sculpted, we may not know or appreciate what the Lord is doing. We may worry as to what our final appearance will be. But no more than the marble should claim greater wisdom than the sculptor, should we claim a greater wisdom than God, who sculpts us.
The Lord admonishes,
Woe to those who quarrel with their Maker, those who are nothing but potsherds among the potsherds on the ground. Does the clay say to the potter, “What are you making?” Does your work say, “The potter has no hands”? Woe to the one who says to a father, “What have you begotten?” or to a mother, “What have you brought to birth?” Thus says the Lord, the Holy One of Israel and its Maker: Concerning things to come, do you question me about my children, or give me orders about the work of my hands? It is I who made the earth and created mankind on it (Isaiah 45:9-12).
We must allow the Lord to do His work. Ultimately, everything that is not Jesus, and everything that is not the person God made us to be, must be chipped away.
In the end, God must be able to say to you, “I simply chipped away everything that was not of my Son, and everything that was not of you, as I made you to be from all eternity.”
The following post contains some adult content. There is nothing inappropriate, but it does speak frankly to an aspect of sexual desire. Exercise caution if reading it to younger children.
There is a secret, once known and widely shared among women, that the best way to get and hold a man’s attention is through modesty. Near nakedness can get a man’s attention, but it is modesty that will hold it.
Why is this so? It is because mystery is powerfully attractive. It entices; it draws and holds one in a kind of suspense. At its heart, modesty is a reverence for mystery. It uses mystery to build the very relationship that is meant to unlock its secrets: Holy Matrimony.
Relationships are not built by a mere glance. Modesty helps to hold the glance while the relationship has time to grow and be tested.
Modesty is not prudishness. The word modesty comes from the word mode, which refers to a central tendency of a group of numbers. As such, modesty is a kind of middle ground that does not seek to burden women with excessive coverings but that also considers the needs of others, so as not to inflame passions and lust. True modesty reveals beauty, but also reminds that much more remains hidden and must be reserved only for the deepest relationship of Holy Matrimony.
Sadly, many women today have not been taught this essential feminine virtue. Men are too often treated to a “full disclosure” or to disclosures that leave little to the imagination. This does excite a kind of “animal” attraction in a man, but it cannot usually hold that attention for very long. Why? Because mystery, once disclosed, is no longer mystery, and its attractive power vanishes quickly. Soon enough, a man who is not attached to a woman for deeper reasons loses interest and starts to be drawn to other women, whose mystery still attracts because it has not been uncovered.
Many men are not even consciously aware that this is why they have lost interest; they do not intend to be crass. But at the level of desire, mystery is important. Once the key has been turned and the mystery unlocked, a powerful card has been played.
Women used to instinctively and collectively know this. They used modesty to hold the man’s attention, build the relationship, summon his proposal of marriage, and then draw him to the marriage bed—not to the back seat of a car or an apartment couch. In the context of a more fully formed relationship the fuller mystery of her was finally revealed and shared. Children usually came quickly in those days and this, too, helped to hold the man fast. Though her mysteries had been revealed, there was now more to keep the man’s attention. For by now, after courtship and engagement, he now knew her more richly in the depth of her person. They had shared memories and become part of each other’s extended families. And even more, their own children were now here, or at least on the way.
The mystery kept secret by modesty was now revealed, but the ties that bind were now operative and filled the role that modesty had assisted in bringing about. And most women of previous generations also knew that even after marriage modesty still had some role, for her modest attire and demeanor still could draw his glance somehow.
Yes, modesty is a great feminine secret, once known by most women. Now, though, many have foolishly cast it aside.
I pray that many will once again discover modesty’s paradoxical draw. While immodesty may attract a man’s quick, animal attention, only modesty can really hold his attention and root it in something higher and better than animal desire. Believe it or not, men have rational souls too! Higher and better motives still work and attract men. Modesty is both powerful and attractive. Here’s to a great “secret weapon”!
The second reading from last Sunday’s Mass (5th Sunday of Easter) is very Catholic, and too informative to merely pass up. It presents the Church as rather highly organized and possessed of some of the structures we know today in full form. Granted, some of these structures are in seminal form, but they are there.
We will also notice qualities of the original kerygma that are at variance with what some modern thinkers declare should be the methodology of the Church. The soft Christianity of those who replace the cross with a pillow and who insist on solely inclusion and affirmation is strangely absent in this early setting.
Let’s look the first reading from the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 14:21-27) and see there the true path of priests, teachers, and leaders in the Church. Four steps are prescribed for our consideration, by noting that they went forth announcing, admonishing, appointing, and accounting.
I. Announcing – The text says, After Paul and Barnabas had proclaimed the good news to that city and made a considerable number of disciples …
Notice that the happiness is linked to the harvest. By proclaiming the Good News, they yield a great harvest. As Catholics, we are not sent out merely to proclaim a list of duties; we are sent to proclaim the Gospel. And the Gospel is this: God so loved the world that He sent his Son, who by dying and rising from the dead has purchased for us a whole new life, free from sin and the rebellious obsessions of this world. He is victorious over all the death-directed drives of this world. Simply put, he has triumphed over these forces and enabled us to walk in newness of life.
God save us from brands of the faith in which rules and obligations are all that is heard by sour-faced saints, dead disciples, fussy Pharisees, bored believers, and frozen chosen. Save us from Pharisaical philosophers who are obsessed with particulars not even commanded by God, who sneer at things they consider beneath than their preferences.
No, we are sent to announce a new life, a life free from the bondage of sin, rebellion, sensuality, greed, lust, domination, and revenge. We are sent to announce a life of joy, confidence, purity, chastity, generosity, and devotion to the truth rooted in Love.
Yes, here is a joyful announcement rooted in the cry Anastasis (Resurrection)! New Life! The old order of sin is gone and a new life of freedom from sin is here!
Did everyone accept this as good news? No. Some, indeed many, were offended and sought to convict Christians as “disturbers of the peace.” Some don’t like to have their sin and bondage called out as such. They prefer bondage, sin, and darkness to light, holiness, and freedom.
As Catholics, we announce what is intrinsically good news, and we ought to start sounding like it by proclaiming it with joy. We must proclaim it without the bitterness and anger that are indicative of those who are more interested in winning an argument than in joyfully announcing something wonderful, freeing, and true.
II. Admonishing – The text says, … they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch. They strengthened the spirits of the disciples and exhorted them to persevere in the faith, saying, “It is necessary for us to undergo many hardships to enter the kingdom of God.”
Preaching/teaching is a process. You don’t just preach or teach once and then move on; you return and reiterate. Paul and Barnabas are retracing their steps back through towns they have already evangelized. They do not just come, have a tent revival, and move on. They return and, as we shall see, they establish the Church.
Notice what they do:
1. Encourage – They strengthened the spirits of the disciples. 2. Exhort – They exhorted them to persevere in the faith. 3. Explain – They explained by saying, “It is necessary for us to undergo many hardships to enter the kingdom of God.”
Let’s focus especially on the last the point. Paul and Barnabas teach that if you’re not willing to endure the cross, no crown will come your way. If you can’t stand a little disappointment, if you can’t stand being talked about, if you think you should always be up and never down, then I’ve come to remind you: No cross, no crown.
Yes, beware of “cross-less” Christianity. We do have good news to proclaim but there is also the truth that we get to the resurrection and the glory through the cross. There is a test in every testimony, a trial in every triumph. There are demands of discipleship, requirements for renewal, laws of love, and sufferings set forth for Saints.
Good preaching combines the hardship and the happiness in one message. It is a joy to follow in the footsteps of our Lord, who endured hostility, hardship, and the horrors of the cross but still triumphed and showed that the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God. Yes, He caught the wise in their craftiness and showed that the thoughts of the wise in this word are futile (cf 1 Cor 3:20). He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them (paradoxically) by the cross (cf Col 2:15).
Thus, St. Paul and Barnabas announce the cross, a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Gentiles (cf 1 Cor 1:23). Many today insist that the Church soft-pedal the cross, that she use honey, not vinegar. No can do. We joyfully announce and uphold the paradox of the cross. We must be willing to be a sign of contradiction to this world, which sees only pleasure and the indulgence of sinful drives as the way forward, which exalts freedom without truth or obedience, and which calls good what God calls sinful.
Too many so-called Christian denominations have adopted the pillow as their image and have a “give the people what they want” mentality. That is 180 degrees out of phase with the cross.
The Catholic Church does not exist to reflect the views of its members, but to reflect the views of its founder and head, Jesus Christ. As He went out to die, Jesus announced the cross without ambiguity, saying, Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to me (John 12:31-32).
And so we announce the cross not merely as suffering, but as life, power, and love. By the power of the cross, it is possible to live without sin, to overcome rebellion, pride, lust, and greed; it is possible to learn to forgive and to live the truth in love.
The world will hate us for this. But such hardships, such crosses, are necessary preludes to the hallelujah of Heaven. The Church can do no less than to point to the cross. The center of our faith is a cross not a pillow. And the cross is our only hope (Ave Crux spes unica nostra (Hail, O Cross, our only hope).
Yes, the Church announces the cross and admonishes a world obsessed with pleasure and with passing, fake happiness.
III. Appointing– The text says, They appointed presbyters for them in each church and,with prayer and fasting, commended them to the Lord in whom they had put their faith. Then they traveled through Pisidia and reached Pamphylia. After proclaiming the word at Perga they went down to Attalia.
And thus we see the ordination of priest leaders in every place. “Priest” is just an English mispronunciation of the word “presbyter.” Paul and Barnabas did not simply go about vaguely preaching and then moving on. They established local churches with a structure of authority. The whole Pauline corpus of writings indicates a need to continue oversight of these local churches and to stay in touch with the priest leaders established to lead these local parishes.
Later, St. Paul spoke of the need for this structure in other places when he wrote (to Titus),
This is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint presbyters in every town as I directed you (Titus 1:5).
This appointment was done through the laying on of hands and is called ordination today. It was a way of establishing order and office in the Church to make sure that the work continued and that the Church was governed by order. This is why we call the sacrament involved here the “Sacrament of Holy Orders.”
Note, too, that a critical task for leaders in the Church is to develop and train new leaders. Too many parishes depend on individual charismatic and gifted leaders whose inevitable departure leaves a void, not an ongoing ministry or organization. This should not be so. Good leaders train new leaders.
IV. Accounting – The text says, From there they sailed to Antioch, where they had been commended to the grace of God for the work they had now accomplished. And when they arrived, they called the church together and reported what God had done with them and how he had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles.
Note that Paul and Barnabas are now returning to render an account for what they have done. Accountability is part of a healthy Church. Every priest should render an account to his bishop, every bishop to his metropolitan and to the Pope. Today’s ad limina visits of bishops to the Pope is the way this is done. Further, priests are accountable to their bishop through various mechanisms such as yearly reports and other meetings.
A further background to this text is that Paul and Barnabas are returning to Antioch because it was from there that they were sent forth by the local bishops and priests on this missionary task.
While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” Then after fasting and praying they laid their hands on them and sent them off (Acts 13:2).
Thus St. Paul was not the lone ranger that some think him to be. He was sent and was accountable.
But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia; and again I returned to Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days (Gal 1:15-18).
Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up by revelation; and I laid before them (but privately before those who were of repute) the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, lest somehow I should be running or had run in vain (Gal 2:1).
The preacher and teacher must be accountable: For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God; for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall give praise to God.” So each of us shall give account of himself to God (Rom 14:10-12).
And thus we see some paths for priests, preachers, teachers, and leaders. We must announce the Gospel as good news, with joy and confidence. We must admonish a world obsessed with pleasures to embrace the cross as our only hope. We must continue to develop, train, and appoint leaders to follow after us. And we must be accountable to one another.
A nice and quick portrait of some healthy traits for the Church!
One of my favorite composers is Antonio Vivaldi (1678-1741). While I love his secular pieces (such as The Four Seasons), I am especially fond of his Church music. It is so light, bright, and tuneful! Vivaldi loved to go up and down the musical scale, varying the theme a half step at a time.
