Tag: diagnostic manual

The Feast of St. Mark that we celebrated today is a reminder that the Gospel occurs in the human setting and condition. Somehow I thought of this on this feast for Mark, also known as “John Mark” was at the center of tension between Paul and Barnabas and the differences were so severe that it led to a parting of way for the two.

And yet, St. Mark despite his less than stellar beginning in Church Leadership came to prove his worth and was reconciled to St. Paul.

Perhaps to work the back story a bit we should start by focusing on St. Barnabas for a moment, and then turn our Attention to St. Paul.

St. Barnabas was a Jew, a native of Cyprus, and was of the tribe of Levi. As such he likely served in the Temple as a priest, depending on his age at his conversion to Christianity. His given name was Joseph, but the Apostles called him Barnabas, which means “Son of Encouragement” (cf Acts 4:36).

Likewise he was probably a wealthy man, for St. Luke presents him early in the book of Acts as a generous man who sold land to support the growing Church.

Most critically, it was he who vouched for the new convert Saul of Tarsus later known as Paul. For Paul was viewed with suspicion by those in Jerusalem, including the Apostles, who only been recently targets of his persecutions (cf Acts 9:26).

Talk about one of the most pivotal introductions in history! Indeed it may be argued that this introduction changed the course of Western History and surely that of the Church. Barnabas smoothed the way for the Church’s most zealous missionary and her greatest Biblical Theologian, St. Paul. After Barnabas’ introduction, Paul was able to move freely about the disciples.

Some time after this, the apostles in Jerusalem sent Barnabas to Antioch which was now growing and thriving congregation of both Jews and Gentiles. It seems clear he was not considered yet to be of the rank of apostle or bishop, (for Acts 13:1 calls him a teacher), it appears he went more to observe and be of help. Under his leadership and the leadership of others, the Church there thrived and grew quite quickly.

So Barnabas sent for Paul to come and join him. They work together for the period of at least a year, and it was at Antioch the disciples were called Christians for the first time (Acts 11:26). In so doing he continues to advance and build up Paul’s ministry in the Church. Frankly this too is a stunning moment in Church history, given us by Barnabas. It is not wrong to call St. Paul the protege of Barnabas.

At a certain critical moment leaders at Antioch laid hands on Barnabas and Saul. And while it is debated by some, this is the clearest moment when we can now say they are ordained, and given the rank of Bishop and the title “Apostle.”

Missionaries – Having done this, the Church leaders at Antioch, directed by the Holy Spirit, send them forth on missionary work. This journey is what is now come to be known as Paul’s first missionary journey. It is interesting to note, that early in the missionary journey, Barnabas is always listed first, and then Paul. But rather quickly, in Acts 13:43, the order changes, and Paul is always listed first. This suggests a change in leadership.

They took with them on this first journey the cousin of Barnabas, John, who was called Mark. Somewhat early on this missionary journey, Mark decides he can no longer go on and turns away from the missionary trip. This will prove significant later on.

The last major role for Barnabas was in Acts, in the 15th chapter, at the Council of Jerusalem which was called to decide whether Gentile converts could become full members of the church without converting to Judaism. Barnabas, along with Paul, provided important evidence as to the zeal and conversion of the Gentiles.

A Sad moment – After the Council in Jerusalem Paul and Barnabas returned to Antioch in triumph, their ministry vindicated. They planned another missionary journey together. But here comes the critical and sad moment, that sets forth our teaching:

Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, “Let us go back and visit the believers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing.” Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and left….(Acts 15:36-40)

A sad moment, but illustrating the human situation. Here are two men who have been like brothers. Paul owes his inclusion in leadership largely to Barnabas, and together they had taught together, and journeyed hundreds of miles by ship and then by foot into the northern mountains making converts in effective ministry together. And, more recently they have just returned from Jerusalem, their vision and ministry approved and vindicated against nay-sayers among the brethren. And yet, at this magnificent moment Paul and Barnabas argue and part company over Mark, the cousin of Barnabas.

One of the things I admire most about the Biblical text is that it does not “clean up” stuff like this. Our heroes are not perfect men, they are flawed, and emblematic of the human condition: gifted and strong, but struggling too with the same issues and demons that haunt us all.

The lesson? God uses us even in our weakness. Who was right and who was wrong here? It is difficult to say. Two gifted men unable to overcome an impasse, alas, the fallen human condition. But God will continue to work. He can make a way out of no way and write straight with crooked lines.

Even more sad, this is the last we hear of Barnabas in any substantial way. He who had been so instrumental in the life of his protege Paul, and in the early Church, now exits the stage in the heat of an argument. The text says he and Mark sailed for Cyprus, then silence……

There is mention of him in Galatians but, given the vague timeline it is difficult to assume it takes place after the disagreement. It likely took place earlier and may illustrate that there were already tensions between Paul and Barnabas before the “Mark incident.” For it would seem that Barnabas was following Peter’s weak example of not eating with Gentiles, and this clearly upset Paul (cf Gal 2:13).

Healing? Yet, It would also seem that Barnabas continued to labor as a missionary for Paul makes mention of him to the Corinthians (cf 1 Cor 9:6). And although his reference is passing, it is not unrespectful. This suggests some healing of the rift, even if it does not mean they labored together again.

More healing? And even for John, called Mark (likely the same Mark who became secretary to Peter and authored the Gospel of Mark), it would seem Paul and he overcame their difficulties. For St Paul wrote to Timothy, likely about the same Mark: Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry (2 Tim 4:11). Something of a redemption here for Mark and a healing for Paul. The “useless” deserter Mark, now one who is helpful to Paul.

Perhaps, though the loss and seeming disappearance of St. Barnabas is sad, there is still the Story of St. Mark’s growth to greater maturity and to leadership. Though less than reliable at first, he later proves hsi worth. It would seem we have St. Peter to thank for that, taking Mark as his secretary and age. We also have St. Barnabas to thank who did not give up on Mark. But at the end of the John Mark proves himself helpful in the ministry and St. Peter could call him “My son.”  (1 Peter 5:14)

God can make a way out of no way. Even in our weakness, (and often only because our weakness keeps us humble), God can do great things.

 

Some years ago I worked in a parish with Religious Sister from radicalized and dying order. And she had all the usual aliments of radicalized women religious which, for brevity I will not recite here. But Among her ailments was the denial of the doctrine of Original Sin.

She had read a book published in those years by a radicalized priest, named Matthew Fox, who has since left the Catholic Priesthood. And in his book, Original Blessing, he denied Original Sin an proposed that we were all basically good, and that the concept of a cosmic fall, was negative not only to Man but also to creation. Frankly it is hard to distinguish Fox’s overall views from simple Pantheism. This is no place or time to recite his manifold errors here.

But poor Sister X (we’ll call her) she sat in a gathering of parishioners and outright denied Original Sin and declared that we are all basically good. As a young priest, though resistant to correcting an elderly person in public,  I rushed to defend Church teaching and correct her erroneous teaching in that meeting.

Later I took her aside and questioned her: “You cannot possibly be serious about this are you?” With wild gesticulations of dismissiveness, she declared, “Oh you young priests are all so negative! I grew up in the bad old Church and you’re trying to bring all that back….All you think about is sin. Do you really think some apple in a tree caused some terrible fall?”

Hmm…, I said, “I don’t think it was so much the apple in the tree as it was the pair on the ground. I think that’s where the sin was. But seriously Sister, sin is a pretty significant problem, yet it does supply a kind of necessary premise to grace and mercy, don’t you think? I mean, if were all so good, and basically in good shape, who needs Jesus and what was he doing on that Cross? It is also clear to me Sister that you have never raised children!”

What I meant by this was that even the youngest “innocent” children, show forth the deep wounds left by Original Sin that the Church calls “concupiscence.” I find it remarkable, having observed my youngest brother (who was ten years younger than I) as he emerged from infancy, and other children as well, that there are enormous issues with selfishness, temper, anger and rebellion right from the start. The “terrible twos” are called that for a reason. Meltdowns are common in young children, temper tantrums, clenched fists,  and red faces are not rare.

Yes, there are very deep wounds in the human heart, and they are not merely acquired by bad experiences, they seem present right from the start. Baptism takes away the source of the problem, but the many wounds need life long healing, especially since we “pick at the scabs” through life.

So I was on an errand with Sister. Every day for several weeks I brought her the Newspaper filled with stories of treachery, crime, corruption, sex scandals, murder, gang violence, you name it. And I said, “Sister, if it isn’t Original Sin, what is it?! Come on, you have to admit that there is something basically wrong with us as a human family!”

“Oh,” she said, “They are not depraved, they are just deprived.” Lovely, I thought, so now we’re quoting musicals (West Side Story) for our authority, instead of Scripture or the Church. It is true that Catholicism does not teach the “utter depravity” of the human person as do some Protestant sects, but that does not mean all is well either.

As we saw in yesterday’s Boston bombings, the cause of which is still largely unknown as I write, there is a great tendency toward evil in the human family, a tendency to which people are drawn to grater or lesser degrees, but a tendency that afflicts us all at some level. This concupiscence is a wound that needs healing.

At present there is the outworking of something Scripture calls “the mystery of iniquity” (2 Thess 2:7). There is evil in this world, and we are strangely drawn to it. Indeed, in these dark times we often celebrate it by calling “good” was God calls sin. We also turn it into a form of entertainment through pornography and violent movies and games. We glamorize gangsters, and “bad boys” in the hood. Illicit sexual union receives sympathetic treatment even outright exultation.

Yes, there is evil, sin and darkness in this world we are strangely attracted to it. We live in a fallen world, governed by a fallen angel, with our own fallen natures. As Boston reminds us, we need to be sober about the reality of sin and about our need for grace and mercy. Without grace and mercy, Hell begins now, and gets only worse. Only grace and mercy can really heal us.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has some important things to say about Original Sin that may be helpful in the wake of yesterday’s explosion of evil. Since this may be a sort of teachable moment about the “Mystery of Iniquity” let us listen to some excerpts from the wisdom and heart of Mother Church:

Sin is present in human history; any attempt to ignore it or to give this dark reality other names would be futile….Only the light of divine Revelation clarifies the reality of sin and particularly of the sin committed at mankind’s origins. Without the knowledge Revelation gives of God we cannot recognize sin clearly and are tempted to explain it as merely a developmental flaw, a psychological weakness, a mistake, or the necessary consequence of an inadequate social structure, etc…

The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.  Behind the disobedient choice of our first parents lurks a seductive voice, opposed to God,…Scripture witnesses to the disastrous influence of the one Jesus calls “a murderer from the beginning.”…Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command. This is what man’s first sin consisted of. All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness. (#s 386-398 selected)

Scripture portrays the tragic consequences of this first disobedience. Adam and Eve immediately lose the grace of original holiness. They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image – that of a God jealous of his prerogatives. …The harmony in which they had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now destroyed: the control of the soul’s spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination.

Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man. Because of man, creation is now subject “to its bondage to decay”. Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will “return to the ground”, for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history. (# 400)

After that first sin, the world is virtually inundated by sin There is Cain’s murder of his brother Abel and the universal corruption which follows in the wake of sin. Likewise, sin frequently manifests itself in the history of Israel, especially as infidelity to the God of the Covenant and as transgression of the Law of Moses. And even after Christ’s atonement, sin raises its head in countless ways among Christians.

Scripture and the Church’s Tradition continually recall the presence and universality of sin in man’s history: What Revelation makes known to us is confirmed by our own experience. For when man looks into his own heart he finds that he is drawn towards what is wrong and sunk in many evils which cannot come from his good creator.

Often refusing to acknowledge God as his source, man has also upset the relationship which should link him to his last end, and at the same time he has broken the right order that should reign within himself as well as between himself and other men and all creatures. (#s 400-401)

Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam’s sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the “death of the soul”. Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin. (# 403)

Original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin – an inclination to evil that is called “concupiscence”.

Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.  The whole of man’s history has been the story of dour combat with the powers of evil, stretching, so our Lord tells us, from the very dawn of history until the last day. Finding himself in the midst of the battlefield man has to struggle to do what is right, and it is at great cost to himself, and aided by God’s grace, that he succeeds in achieving his own inner integrity. (#s 405, 409).

The doctrine of original sin is, so to speak, the “reverse side” of the Good News that Jesus is the Savior of all men, that all need salvation and that salvation is offered to all through Christ. The Church, which has the mind of Christ, knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ. (# 389)

So there it is. The clear water of faith. Whatever the details we learn about the Boston Bombings in the days ahead, this is the back-story. A story of a terrible fall, a grave wound in the human heart that leads to an obtuse spirit and inclination to evil. Jesus alone can heal and save us from this present evil age (Gal 1:4).

Lord, Jesus: For the sake of thy sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world!

The Eighth Commandment, You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor, proclaims the splendor and the beauty of the truth. It is not often that we hear of the truth described in this way but consider how precious and essential a foundation the truth is for our lives. One of the dangers, when it comes to commandments is that we see them merely as prohibitions. So for example here, we might think, “OK, I’m not supposed to lie.” Well, yes, but the Commandment is more than that! It is an exhortation for us to love the truth, live the truth, and proclaim the truth. Let’s look at some of the implications and distinctions regarding this Commandment.

I. The first implication of the Eighth Commandment is that we should love the truth, for it is of God and that we should seek to live the truth in our lives. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says,

Christians must be dedicated to the truth and live according to it. The Old Testament attests that God is the source of all truth. His Word is truth. His Law is truth. His “faithfulness endures to all generations.”[Ps 119:90; Prov 8:7; 2 Sam 7:28; Ps 119:142] Since God is “true,” the members of his people are called to live in the truth. To follow Jesus is to live in “the Spirit of truth,” whom the Father sends in his name and who leads “into all the truth.”[Jn 16:13] To his disciples Jesus teaches the unconditional love of truth: “Let what you say be simply ‘Yes or No.'”[Mt 5:37] (Catechism 2465, 2466).

So, we are to witness to it by word and deed. This is particularly the case with the truth of our faith, the truth which has set us free.

This witness is a transmission of the faith in words and deeds. Witness is an act of justice that establishes the truth or makes it known. All Christians by the example of their lives and the witness of their word, wherever they live, have an obligation to manifest the new man which they have put on in Baptism and to reveal the power of the Holy Spirit by whom they were strengthened at Confirmation. (Catechism 2472)

II. Put away falsehood – Scripture bids us, Therefore, putting away falsehood, let every one speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another. (Eph 4:22-25) So the Eighth Commandment upholds the goodness and beauty of the truth, exhorts us to celebrate it and instructs that we must avoid all sins against the truth. There are numerous ways that the we can sin against the truth. It will be fruitful for us to consider them each in turn, along with some distinctions.

III. False Witness – Nothing can be so injurious to individuals as to harm their good name or reputation. Without a good reputation it becomes difficult for an individual to successfully relate to and interact with others whether it be for business or merely at a personal level. Clearly, to bear false witness against someone is to harm their reputation and we are forbidden to do so.

In the technical sense, false witness is something which takes place in a court of law and since it is under oath it is also called perjury.

But it is also often the case that false witness is given in daily matters through lies, half truths, exaggeration, and the like. Clearly our call to love the truth and to respect the reputation of others forbids us engaging in such activities.

Respect for the reputation of others also forbids us from:

• A. Rash judgement – assuming without sufficient foundation the moral fault of a neighbor
• B. Detraction – disclosing an other’s faults and failings without a valid reason to others who did not know them
• C. Calumny – imputing false defects to another with the knowledge that they are false.

Yet it is also possible to offend the truth by

• D. Inappropriately praising others
• E. By refusing to correct them when it is proper to do so.
• F. Flattery distorts the truth when it falsely attributes certain good qualities or talents to another. This is usually done to ingratiate oneself to individuals or for some other ulterior motive(s).

Such behavior becomes particularly sinful when it confirms another in malicious acts or sinful conduct.

IV. Lying – A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving…Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead into error someone who has the right to know the truth.

By injuring man’s relation to truth and to his neighbor, a lie offends against the fundamental relation of man and of his word to the Lord…The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil: “You are of your father the devil, . . . there is no truth in him….he is a liar and the father of lies.” [Jn 8:44]….

By its very nature, lying is to be condemned. It is a profanation of speech, whereas the purpose of speech is to communicate known truth to others. The deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error by saying things contrary to the truth constitutes a failure in justice and charity…

A lie does real violence to another. It affects his ability to know, which is a condition of every judgment and decision…Lying is destructive of society; it undermines trust…and tears apart the fabric of social relationships. (Catechism 2482-2485)

Acts of lying are sins from which we must repent. Lying is also a sin that demands reparation. That is to say, since lying causes actual harm and real damage. These damages must be repaired. The actual truth must be made known to those who deserve to know it. The reputations of others which have been harmed by the lie must also be restored.

V. Is lying always so evil? The gravity of a lie is measured against the nature of the truth it deforms, the circumstances, the intentions of the one who lies, and the harm suffered by its victims. (Catechism 2484). Thus there are big lies and smaller ones. Nevertheless, it is always wrong to intentionally lie.

This includes so called “polite lies.” For example suppose a phone call comes in for someone in the household who has indicated a preference not to be disturbed just now. It is a lie to say, “She is not here.” Yet you could say, “She is not available now.” Other social situations are less simple! For example, if Mrs. Smith asks you, “Do you like my new hairstyle?” Suppose you do not. It is in fact wrong to say, “Yes, I like it.” Granted, we all feel a bit stuck in such situations! Perhaps we could answer truthfully but discreetly and say, “You look alright.” (Presuming that we do think so).

But wouldn’t it be nice if we actually felt secure enough either to indicate, charitably, our true feelings or to indicate our preference not to answer the question? Wouldn’t it be even nicer if our relationships with others were so based in sincerity and truth, that people both gave and expected honest answers? It is to this blessed state that the Lord points when he says, Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ (Mt 5:37).

VI. What about secrets? – This reflection has thus far emphasized the goodness and the splendor of the truth as well as the importance of communicating that truth to others who need it. However, as the Catechism states:

The right to the communication of the truth is not unconditional..Fraternal love…requires us in concrete situations to judge whether or not it is appropriate to reveal the truth to someone who asks for it. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet language.

The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion. No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it…Everyone should observe an appropriate reserve concerning persons’ private lives.

Those in charge of communications should maintain a fair balance between the requirements of the common good and respect for individual rights.

Interference by the media in the private lives of persons engaged in political or public activity is to be condemned to the extent that it infringes upon their privacy and freedom. (Catechism 2488, 2489, 2492)

However, the fact that we are permitted, even obliged, to keep certain secrets and maintain discretion, does not mean that we are free simply to lie. For example we cannot say, “I don’t know anything about that” if we do. Neither can we make up false answers to requested information. When we must decline to give information that is properly to be kept secret, we must still remain truthful. We might say instead, “I am not free to discuss this matter with you now.” Or, “It would be inappropriate for me to comment on that.” Or, “Why don’t you ask him yourself?” Occasionally we may need to be more direct and say, “This is a private matter and not for you to know.”

VII. Are all secrets sacred? – Thus secrecy and discretion are often proper. Here too however, absolutes must be avoided. Sometimes we are asked to keep secrets that we should not keep. For example, suppose someone confides in you that they intend to commit a serious crime, or bring harm to another? It would be wrong to keep such a secret.

Other things being equal secrets ought to be kept, save in exceptional cases where keeping the secret is bound to cause very grave harm to the one who confided it, to the one who received it, or to a third party, and where the very grave harm can be avoided only by divulging the truth. (Catechism 2491).

An exception to this is the seal of confession which may never be violated for any reason whatsoever: The sacramental seal is inviolable; therefore, it is a crime for a confessor in any way to betray a penitent by word or in any other manner or for any reason. (Catechism 2490).

VIII. On the Manner of speaking the truth – That the truth should be celebrated and declared is surely an essential truth. However, one must not sever the declaration of truth from charity. An old Latin Motto says, veritatem in caritate (the truth, in charity). For the truth without love can bludgeon, or it can be something we use only to win an argument. Further, love without truth, is mere affirmation of others in often destructive tendencies, and really not love at all.

Yes, the truth should be spoken, but always in love. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect (1 Peter 3:15). An older priest once told me, “If your people really know you love them, you can tell them almost anything, even the hardest truths, and they will accept it.

Further truth often has a time it is best revealed. Jesus said, I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. (John 16:12-13) Where there is time, we often do well to lead people patiently, to the deeper truths in stages.

IX. Final thought – Jesus has taught us that the truth will set us free (Jn 8:32). If this be the case then anything which distorts the truth leads to bondage. Thus the eighth commandment calls upon us to love the truth and to love one another by proclaiming the truth and witnessing to it in sincerity with mutual respect and love.

Here is an amazing illusion, a kind of visual “lie.” It is not a lie per se, since the illusionist makes it clear he is creating an illusion, and invites, dares, us to discover how he misleads our eyes. I must say this is a VERY good illusion.

The video at the bottom of this post is of Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen. It is a fascinating excerpt from a longer video he did, where he analyzes the diabolical (anything of or relating to the Devil), from several different perspectives. In the excerpt I present, he identifies three characteristics of the diabolical by examining the story of the Gerasene demoniac, depicted in the synoptic gospels. Here is the story as Luke presents it:

They sailed to the region of the Gerasenes, which is across the lake from Galilee. When Jesus stepped ashore, he was met by a demon-possessed man from the town. For a long time this man had not worn clothes or lived in a house, but had lived in the tombs. When he saw Jesus, he cried out and fell at his feet, shouting at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, don’t torture me!” For Jesus had commanded the evil spirit to come out of the man. Many times it had seized him, and though he was chained hand and foot and kept under guard, he had broken his chains and had been driven by the demon into solitary places. Jesus asked him, “What is your name?” “Legion,” he replied, because many demons had gone into him.. (Luke 8: 26-30)

You will then recall how Jesus drove the demon(s) out and into the herd of swine.

From this story and also based on an insight from a psychiatrist of his time (the talk was given in the mid 1970s), Bishop Sheen sets forth characteristics of the diabolical:

1. Love of Nudity – For the text says: For a long time this man had not worn clothes.
   
2. Violence – For the text says: though he was chained hand and foot and kept under guard, he had broken his chains. Mark 5:4 more vividly adds: For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him.
3. Division (Split Personality and divided from others) – for the text says, many demons had gone into him. Mark’s version has the demoniac reply My name is Legion, for we are many. (Mk 5:9). Further all the texts say the demoniac lived apart from others, in solitary places.

So here are three characteristics of the diabolic.

It does not take much analysis to see how these three characteristics of the diabolic are alive and flourishing in the modern world, at least the Western branch of it. Let’s consider them

1. Love of Nudity – This is clearly manifest at several levels. First there is the widespread tendency of immodest dress. We have discussed modesty here before and ought to note that modesty comes from the word “mode” referring to the middle or to moderation. Hence, while we want to avoid oppressively puritanical notions about dress that impose heavy burdens (especially on women) and regard the body as somewhat evil, we must also critique many modern forms of dress at the other extreme. These “fashions” reveal more than is reasonable and generally have, as their intent to draw attention to aspects of the body that are private and reserved for sexual union in marriage. Too many in our culture see little problem parading about in various stages of undress, wearing clothing that are more intended to disclose and call attention to, than to conceal the private areas of the body. This love of disclosure and titillation is surely an aspect of the Evil One’s love of nudity, and he has surely spread his obsession to many in the modern West.

Pornography, though nothing new in this fallen world, has surely reached epidemic proportions via the Internet. Any psychotherapist, counselor or priest will tell you that addiction to pornography is a huge problem among people today. Pornographic sites on the Internet outpace all others tenfold. Multimillion Americans are viewing enormous amounts of pornography and the “industry” is growing exponentially. What was once hidden away in adult bookstores is now one click away on the Internet. And the thought that browsing habits are easily discoverable matters little to the addicts of this latest form of slavery. Many are on a steep slope downward into ever more deviant forms of porn. Many end up at illegal sites before they even know what has happened to them, and the FBI is knocking on their door. Satan’s love of nudity has possessed many!

The overall sexualization of culture also ties in to Satan’s love of nudity. We sexualize women to sell products. We even sexualize children. Our sitcoms chatter endlessly about sex in a very teenage and immature sort of way. We are, collectively, goofy and immature about sex, and our culture giggles like horny teenagers obsessed with something we don’t really understand. Yes, Satan loves nudity, and everything that goes with it.

And then of course there is the utter confusion, that celebrates homosexual activity. What Scripture calls gravely sinful, disordered, and contrary to nature (= παρὰ φύσιν – para physin – Rom 1:26) many in our culture now openly celebrate. And those afflicted as such, openly identify themselves with what tempts them. Rather than lament the difficulty and trial of such affliction and offer love, support and truth that they, may live celibately, (as all the unmarried are called to do), our sex saturated culture, blinded and darkened by its own wild lust, affirms and encourages them to indulge what can only bring further harm to them, and others, for it is of the darkness and contrary to nature. They have exchanged the truth of God for a lie… (Romans 1:25)

And thus, the love of the nudity and the related obsession with and confusion about sex is well manifest in our culture. It is a sign of the diabolical.

2. Violence – We have discussed here before how we, collectively, have turned violence into a form of entertainment. Our adventure movies and video games turn violent retribution into gleeful entertainment and death into a “solution.” Recent Popes have warned us of the culture of death, where death is increasingly proposed as the “solution” to problems. In our culture violence begins in the womb, as the innocent are attacked and it is called “choice” and “rights.” The violence and embrace of death continues to ripple through culture through contraception, violent gang activity, easy recourse to war and capital punishment. The past Century was perhaps the bloodiest ever known on this planet and untold people in the hundreds of millions died in two world wars, hundreds of regional wars and conflicts, horrific starvation campaigns in the Ukraine, in China and elsewhere, genocides in Central Europe, in Africa and Southeast Asia. Paul Johnson, in his book Modern Times estimates that over 100,000,000 died in war and violent ways in the just the first 50 years of the 20th Century. And with every death, Satan did his “snoopy dance.” Satan love violence. He loves to set fires, and watch us blame each other as we burn.

3. Division – Satan loves to divide. Archbishop Sheen says that the word “diabolical” comes from two Greek words dia+ballein, meaning “to tear apart.” My own study of Greek, poor that it is, does not yield this result. Rather dia means “through” or “between” and ballein means “to throw or to cast.” Nevertheless, the Good Archbishop was a learned man and I ask you Greek Scholars to set me straight and defend Bishop Sheen.

But, even still, it is clear that the devil wants to divide us, within our very own psyche and among each other. Surely he rejoices at every division he causes. He “casts things between us” (dia+ballein)! Diabolical indeed. And thus, we see our families divided, the Church divided, our culture and Country divided. We are now divided at almost every level: racial, religious, political, economic. We divide over age, race, region, blue and red states, liturgy, music, language, and endless minutia.

Our families are broken, our marriages are broken. Divorce is rampant and commitments of any sort are rejected and deemed impossible. The Church is broken and divided into factions, so too the State, all the way down to the level of school boards. Though once we agreed on essentials, now even appeals to shared truth are called intolerant.

And within too, we struggle with many divisive drives and forms of figurative and literal schizophrenia. We are drawn to what is good, true and beautiful and yet what is base, false and evil also summons us. We know what is good, but desire what is evil, we seek love, but indulge hate and revenge. We admire innocence but often revel in destroying it or at least replacing it with cynicism.

And Satan dances his “snoopy dance.”

Three characteristics of the diabolic: love of nudity, violence, and division. What do you think? Is the prince of this world working his agenda? Even more important: are we conniving? The first step in over-coming the enemy’s agenda is to know his moves, to name them and then rebuke them in the Name of Jesus.

Thank you Archbishop Sheen. Your wisdom, God’s Wisdom, has never aged.

I beg your patience for this reprint of this article I wrote two years ago. Though I updated it a bit, my schedule today did not permit me to write a post this evening.

Pay attention to What the Good Archbishop has to say:

There is an important “logion” (utterance) of Jesus on his way to the cross that speaks powerfully to this modern age of ours, and is fulfilled in a gruesome manner in our times.

It is the word of Jesus to the women who lamented him as he made his way to Crucifixion:

A large crowd of people followed Jesus, including many women who mourned and lamented him. Jesus turned to them and said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep instead for yourselves and for your children for indeed, the days are coming when people will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed.’ At that time people will say to the mountains, ‘Fall upon us!’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us!’ for if these things are done when the wood is green what will happen when it is dry?”

In this text is a likely historical context rooted in the First Century. But Scripture, as I pray you know, was not written merely for First Century Christians. It also speaks to our times. In fact it may speak more ghoulishly to our times than to the First Century, as we shall see. Lets take a look at the First Century context, only briefly, and then turn attention to our owns times.

The First Century context of Jesus’ words is surely rooted in 70 AD and the terrible culmination of a 3 1/2 Year war of the Jewish people with the Romans, (66-70 AD – The War actually culminated with the fall of Masada in 73AD). Jesus had spoken of this terrible war extensively in i the the Mount Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24:1 – 25:46; Mark 13:1-37; Luke 21:5-36), and He even wept as he looked upon Jerusalem just before his Palm Sunday entrance:

As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.” (Luke 19:41-44)

And now, as these woman weep for him, we weeps for them and their children. For indeed, the says are coming, in forty short (biblical) years when they will see a destruction so overwhelming that, as Josephus records, 1.2 million Jews will die. And the terrible and suicidal phrase of asking the mountains to fall on them etc. are a Jewish way of lamenting that death is preferable to the calamity that is upon us!

And so we see the First Century fulfillment of the passage. Indeed, those women who lamented him had little idea about how awful it would get for them and their children, for sin and rebellion, hatred and revenge, would have their way, and boil over like a cauldron. 70 AD would bring a bloodbath like the world had never seen until that time.

But what of us? How, does this text speak to us? It a word or three: Horribly, poignantly and prophetically.

It does not take a genius to see that the Lord’s words are true for us in ugly and sickening ways. Our bloodbath is far worse that 70 AD. 55 million are dead from abortion in America alone since 1973. And add to that the 100 Million + who were killed in the last century alone for ideological purposes in two world wars, a cold war, and the pogroms and systematic starvation of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and their successors.

Though we like to think ourselves civilized in comparison to previous centuries, our blood bath is far deeper than any age before. True, we murder our millions in less publicly brutal ways. We do not experience hoards of warriors descending from day to day on unsuspecting cities. Our brutality takes place in more hidden ways, out of sight if you will, in concentration camps, abortion “clinics”, killing fields, and remote locations away from cameras.

Yes, our murder seems more abstract, but it is not. The death toll is almost unimaginable. And meanwhile we go on considering ourselves civilized.

And the Lord Jesus, looking beyond 70 AD must have seen our times and had them in mind when he said to those women of old that they would see an enemy (Satan): dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls.

Yes, Satan has deceived us with deceptions of power, distortions of freedom, and crushing lies of “choice.” 55 million dead in American alone since 1973, our children dashed to the ground.

The Lord goes on to say, the days are coming when people will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed.’  Yes, and those days are here, days when people celebrate barrenness, have themselves surgically sterilized, and celebrate contraception. The days are here when the greatest danger seems to be the “terrible and fearsome proposition” of getting pregnant, of having “too many children.”

Yes, the days are here when most people cry out: blessed is barrenness, blessed are small families. Life it would seem, is a terrible burden to be contracepted and aborted away and some awful threat. It is an age that cries out “Blessed the career women who has not stymied her life and progress by the terrible and terrifying prospect of children.”

Yes, said the Lord to those ancient women, in effect, “You think this is bad? The days are actually coming when things will be so bad and so dark that people will celebrate NOT having children, will celebrate barrenness.”

But the Lord does not stop there. He goes on to describe quite well the culture of death so literally lived out in our times: people will say to the mountains, ‘Fall upon us!’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us!’ 

One may argue that this is just a Jewish way of speaking that indicates despair. Perhaps. But we live it out quite literally in our times, for it is the refrain of the culture of death. And what is the culture of death? It is the mentality that increasingly sees the death or non-existence of human beings as the “solution” to problems. In our times there has arisen a group of radicals who see human beings as a hindrance to their ecological goals, and they seek population reductions and even dream of a pristine earth without humanity. They peddle History Channel programs such as “Life after People” as a kind of fantasy of their vision and advocate contraceptive and abortive policies that see mankind as the problem that must be eliminated. In effect they cry to the mountains “fall on us” and dream of a world that is “post-human.” They even peddle disaster movies as though they were longing for it all.

You may say, I exaggerate. Fine. But would you ever dream we would be were we are today in fifty short years of social engineering, and anti-life policies?

Jesus spoke to the women that day of their own time, but surely his words describe our own times in sickening detail, times where barrenness is exalted and the fertility of large families treated with shock and even contempt, times where extremists have infected the modern psyche with notions that human beings are worse than roaches on this planet and that things will be better without us, or with dramatically fewer of us.

Of times like 70AD and times like these Jesus says, “Weep.”

Yes, Blessed are those who mourn for they shall be comforted. (Matt 5:4). And who are those who mourn? They are those who see the awful state of God’s people, that God is not know to them, that they do not glorify God or even know why they were made, they are confused, deceived, and misled. And some, seeing this are mourning and weeping, they are led to prayer and action, to speaking out, and pointing once again to the light, from the dark places of times like these.

Mourn with Jesus, and pray for a miraculous conversion for times like these, times which seem eerily consistent with the dreadful things Jesus prophesied.