Community in Mission

March 29, 2012June 10, 2015

There was something about the 20th Century, something awful. Did Pope Leo have the answer?

What are we to make of the 20th Century? Like any period it is marked with its glories and its horrors. In his now classic work Modern Times, historian Paul Johnson gives a sober assessment of the 20th century and estimates, many think conservatively, that 100 million died in war and for ideological reasons in that violent century. Perhaps no century can be said to have been bloodier.

It was a century of the imposition of every sort of collectivism from communism, fascism, tribalism, and socialism , all with catastrophic results. Whole populations were the subject of social experiments; and here too, with the predictable and horrific results as economic, political, and social, theories, population “control” and other hideous visions gave way to human suffering. Millions were sacrificed in the name of collectivism in places like the USSR, China, Germany, Cambodia, Turkey, and Africa.

It was a century of endless war and further untold bloodshed that extended even into the womb as abortion too ran rampant on the globe. Our capacity to kill ourselves in huge numbers and horrifying ways reached terrifying heights in arms races and the development of gruesome weapons of mass destruction, conventional, chemical, biological and nuclear.

Faith too suffered unimaginable setbacks as Europe all but lost its Christian and Jewish faith. In both Europe and the US, Churches and Synagogues emptied as atheistic Communism, secularism, and various forms of humanism (i.e. man at the center), moral relativism, and indifferentism swept the Western World.

Families and the family structure were devastated by war, dislocation, the sexual revolution, divorce, expansive and intrusive governments with oppressive population policies, and foolish social experimentation. There are few places left in the Western World today where the family, (nuclear or extended) can be said to be strong. And as the family, the fundamental unit of civilization, has unraveled, it seems increasingly uncertain that Western culture can survive such a mortal wound.

Paradoxically, amidst all this bloodshed, war, disorder and unraveling, technological progress has been nothing less than astonishing: Electricity, radio, television, computers, telephones, the Internet, faxes, cellular technology, air-conditioning, agricultural advances, amazing medical advances and breakthroughs, astonishing scientific discovery and progress, space travel, visits to the moon and back, global communication, global economies, and remarkable market efficiencies that provide huge numbers of products and services quickly and inexpensively.

Yes, amidst all the grave darkness and bloody death of the 20th Century, we have also come (at least in the Western World) to a place or remarkably good health, nutrition and life-span with endless numbers of creature comforts and pleasantries.

The 20th Century, the worst and the best, all at once, murder and medicine, war and wealth, sorrow and science, genocide and genome projects, monstrosities and moon shots.

I am of the mind that to understand the 20th Century and its colossal contours, that no simple or natural explanation is possible. While one may see its technologies as having emerged from an organic development, I cannot personally understand the global horrors, and the great and sudden falling away from the faith in purely natural terms. Something supernatural, I would say Satanic, has afflicted us and sent “ordinary” human wickedness over the top. The bloodshed is too global, too organized and sweeping to be merely of human origin. As St. Paul says, For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in high places (Ephesians 6:12).

October 13, 1884, Pope Leo XIII had just finished celebrating Mass in a chapel in the Vatican. At the Mass were a few Cardinals and members of the household staff. Suddenly the Pope stopped at the foot of the altar. He stood there for about 10 minutes, as if in a trance, his face ashen white. The going straightway from the Chapel to his office, he composed the prayer to St. Michael and later issued instructions that it be said after all Low Masses everywhere in the world. He explained that, as he was about to leave the foot of the altar, he had suddenly heard voices – two voices, one kind and gentle, the other guttural and harsh. There he heard the voice of Satan in his pride, boasting to Our Lord: “I can destroy your Church.” The gentle voice of Our Lord: “You can? Then go ahead and do so.” Satan replied, “To do so, I need more time and more power.” The Lord said, “How much time? How much power?” “75 to 100 years, and a greater power over those who will give themselves over to my service.” was Satan’s reply. Mysteriously our Lord said, “You have the time, you have the power. Do with them what you will.”

No Catholic is required to accept this event as an article of faith. But there is something about the 20th Century, something awful. As observed, the 20th century is not without its merits. But the degree and scope of wickedness, suffering and the widespread falling away from the faith in the West set apart the 20th Century and cause me to ponder if Leo’s “Job-like” vision is true.

Many questions rush through our mind in reference to this vision: Why would God permit this? Was it to test, prune and purify his Church? Why does God allow Satan any influence at all? Is this fair? When did the 100 years begin and end? Will spring come soon? Do God and Satan even talk in terms of “years” and if so, does the word correspond to our use of it? If this vision happened, why did the Lord let Leo XIII hear it?

I have no simple answers to questions like these. You are free to dismiss the notion and see the 20th century as wholly unremarkable in its wickedness and falling away from the faith. But there is something about the 20th Century, something awful. Did Pope Leo have the answer? Surely the Sovereign LORD does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets (Amos 3:7). Was Pope Leo that Prophet?

I am interested in your thoughts.

Here is a Ten Minute synopsis of the 20th Century:

March 28, 2012June 10, 2015

Kindness Can Kill if Love is Unwilling to Wound

We live in a reductionist culture that has tended to reduce love to kindness. The results are often quite problematic as we shall see.

Kindness is a very great thing and has an important place in our relationships. Kindness is evidenced by goodness and charitable behavior, a pleasantness, tenderness and concern for others.

According to Aristotle, kindness is an emotion manifesting itself by the desire to help somebody in need, without expecting anything in return. Peter Kreeft defines kindness as “sympathy, with the desire to relieve another’s suffering.” [Envoy Magazine, Vol 9.3, p. 20]

However, as Kreeft himself notes, it is a very great mistake to equate kindness with love. Kindness is an aspect of love, but it is necessarily distinct from love. For is sometimes happens that love, which wills what is best for the other, may deem it best not to remove all suffering. A father, in fact may impose punishment on a child out of love. Kindness generally seeks to alleviate suffering and negativity. Love understands that suffering often has a salvific role. My parents disciplined me out of love. Had they been merely kind to me, I would likely have been spoiled, undisciplined and ill-equipped for life.

Paradoxically the more we love the more we will often see mere kindness diminish. Consider how kind we can be to strangers. We may sometimes give money to strangers with little questions asked. But if a son or daughter asks for money we may often want to know why and, even if we give it, we will frequently lecture them about being more responsible with their money. The interaction may be less kind, but it may also be more loving for it seeks to end the problem, rather than merely relieve the symptom of the problem.

The good eclipses the best – And herein lies the danger of reducing love to kindness. In simply seeking to alleviate the suffering of the moment, or to give people what they want, many deeper issues go unresolved and worsen. Welfare has created a slavish dependence for many in our culture. And it is not just the poor in our cities. There is corporate welfare, and many other subsidies and entitlements, that too many can no longer go without. Rather than addressing the root causes of poverty, dependence or poor economic conditions and bad business models, kindness interrupts love’s deeper role and treats only the suffering of the moment. In this sense what is merely good (i.e. kindness) replaces what is truly best (Love). True love gives what is best, not merely what is immediately preferred.

Further, Many false expectations are centered in the exaltation of kindness over love. Generally this is manifest in the fact that suffering of any kind is seen as obnoxious, and even the cause for legal action. It has also led to our demands for comfort to become immoderate. Demands for euthanasia flow from this sort of thinking as well.

A final and very terrible effect often flows from mistaking mere kindness for love is that it disposes many towards atheism. Here I simply want to quote Peter Kreeft because he says it so well

It is painfully obvious that God is not mere kindness, for He does not remove all suffering, though He has the power to do so. Indeed, this very fact — that the God who is omnipotent and can, at any instant, miraculously erase all suffering from the world, deliberately chooses not to do so — is the commonest argument that unbelievers use against him. The number one argument for atheism stems from the confusion between love and kindness. [Peter Kreeft, Envoy Magazine, Vol 9.3, p. 20]

Kindness is a very great attribute and it surely has its place. But we must carefully distinguish it from love. Exalting kindness over love amounts to a denial of the wisdom of the Cross. Kindness focuses on comfort and alleviating suffering and this is a very great thing. But love is greater thing for it wills what is best, not what is merely desired.

Finally, just to reiterate. Kindness is not separate from love, but it must be subsumed to love which is wider and deeper. If kindness is in fact subsumed to love, it can be very beautiful and powerful. If it is detached from love or ignores love’s wider and deeper call, kindness can literally kill. Here is a video that beautifully illustrates kindness tied to sacrificial love.

March 27, 2012June 10, 2015

When Will Christ Come? Some Basics of Catholic Eschatology

In certain Protestant circles (not all), especially among the Evangelicals there is a strong and often vivid preoccupation with signs of the Second Coming of Christ. Many of the notions that get expressed are either erroneous, or extreme. Some of these erroneous notions are rooted in a misunderstanding of the various Scriptural genres. Some are rooted in reading certain Scriptures in isolation from the wider context of the whole of Scripture. And some are rooted in reading one text, and disregarding other texts that balance it.

The Catholic approach to the end times (aka Eschatology) is perhaps less thrilling and provocative. It does not generate “Left Behind” movie series or cause people to sell their houses and gather on hillsides waiting for the announced end. It is more methodical and seeks to balance a lot of notions that often hold certain truths in tension.

I thought it perhaps a worthy goal to set forth certain principles of Eschatology from a Catholic point of view, since this topic often comes up in discussions with Evangelicals and others. Most of these insights are drawn straight from the Catechism and the Scriptures. What I offer here I do not propose to call a complete eschatology, only a sketch of basic principles rooted right in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

While we cannot know the exact time of his Coming, nevertheless there are things that both remind us and signal us as to his approach, if we have eyes to see them. These signs give indications only. The presence of such texts cannot be seen to over-rule that He will come “on a sudden” and that many will be caught unawares.

Here are some notes from Catechism (The Blue and Red texts are my own). I have made the Scripture quotes live by way of hyper text so you can click right over and read them.

1. “Soon + Sudden” – Since the Ascension Christ’s coming in glory has been imminent (Rev 22:20), even though “it is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority.”(Acts 1:7) This eschatological coming could be accomplished at any moment, even if both it and the final trial that will precede it are “delayed” (Mat 24:44; 1 Thes 5:2; 2 Thes 2:3-12). (CCC # 673).

Of all the points the Catechism makes, this one sets the tone of balance that must, most surely, be maintained. So, on the one hand Christ says, “I am coming soon” and that his coming could be both sudden and without warning.

Yet this truth must be held in tension with other truths that set forth certain things and signs that must be accomplished first. And these things are not easily or quickly accomplished. And this point is developed in point # 2.

2. Suspended – The glorious Messiah’s coming is suspended at every moment of history until his recognition by “all Israel” (Romans 11:20-26; Mat 23:39), for “a hardening has come upon part of Israel” in their “unbelief” (Romans 11:20-26) toward Jesus. St. Peter says to the Jews of Jerusalem after Pentecost: “Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, whom heaven must receive until the time for establishing all that God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old. (Acts 3:19-21)” St. Paul echoes him: “For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead?” (Rom 11:15) The “full inclusion” of the Jews in the Messiah’s salvation, in the wake of “the full number of the Gentiles” (Rom 11:12), will enable the People of God to achieve “the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ”, in which “God may be all in all” (Eph 4:13; 1 Cor 15:27-28) (CCC # 674)

This going forth of the Gospel to all the nations and the acceptance of the Jews to Christ would seem to be matters that would take some time.

Has the Gospel really reached all the nations? Have the full number of Gentiles come in and are they serving God and repenting in sufficient numbers? Perhaps so, one may argue. And yet, on a planet of six billion, less than one third are Christian. And yet, there are very few places in the world where there is no Christian presence.

And what is meant by the “full number” of Gentiles? That number is hidden from us and surely is debated.

And has the “hardening” that has come upon the Israel been lifted? This too is debated and, despite certain movements of “Messianic Jews” it does not seem currently that the hardening that has come on Israel has been lifted in any wide sort of way or that he has been recognized by “all Israel.”

3. Suffering and Sedition– Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers (Luke 18:8; Mt 24:12). The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh. (2 Thess 2:4-12; 1 Thess 5:2-3; 1 Jn 2:18-22) (CCC # 675)

Clearly, many of these troubles have afflicted the Church in every age. There has always been persecution. Many have fallen away, sometimes in large numbers, most into schism, some into unbelief. There have been times too where it can be argued that the love of many has grown cold.

And yet, clearly too, in the times in which we live, these are very severe problems and they have grown to envelope most of the planet. But God only knows when these signs will be present in a definitive rather than merely present prefiguratively.

(The problem of pseudo-messianism is developed more in the next point).

4. Secular Utopianism Rejected – The Antichrist’s deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism, especially the “intrinsically perverse” political form of a secular messianism. (CCC # 676)

Yes, many in human history, but especially in modern times, have advanced the notion that a secular utopia could be ushered in by human effort, and by submitting oneself to a government or worldly power or charismatic figure to do so.

Many repressive regimes and movements (often typified by powerful or charismatic leaders) of the last Century claimed the power to usher in such a utopia. The sad legacy of the 20th Century shows how tragic, bloody and repressive such attempts have been.

The Church also rejects religious forms of this which hold that prior to the Second Coming of Christ a period of 1000 years is set aside in which Christ will reign on earth or in which the Church will somehow attain a total victory prior to Christ’s Second Coming. This will be developed more in the next point.

5. Second Coming follows a final unleashing of evil – The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection. (Rev 19:1-9) The kingdom will be fulfilled, then, not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God’s victory over the final unleashing of evil, which will cause his Bride to come down from heaven. (Rev 13:1ff; Rev 20:7-9; Rev 21:2-4) God’s triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of the Last Judgment after the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world. (CCC # 677)

Hence, a final and intense unleashing is envisaged by Scripture and the Church. And this final and cosmic conflict will usher in the great triumph and the Last Judgment. This unleashing of the full power of the Devil in the very end is mysterious and difficult to understand but it is clearly set forth in Scripture, perhaps as a final test for the Church, perhaps as a definitive demonstration of the power of God.

Balance! Now please note that while we may wish to focus on one or two points above, each of the five points must be held in balance. In one sense all these signs have been present in the Church’s history, yet not in the definitive and final sense.

Thus, while these are signs that do in fact signal and accompany and usher in the last things, exactly when and how they come together in a definitive sense cannot be known by us. Were that the case, Christ’s clear word that he will come at an hour we do not expect (cf Mat 24:44) and that no one knows the day or hour (cf Matt 24:36) would be violated.

The key point is hold all five principles about in balance, and to accept the tension of knowing signs, but not the definitive time or fulfillment of them.

Most errors in eschatology proceed from a lack of balance and a failure to appreciate that the final age in which we live is steeped in mysteries and meanings known fully only by God. Time itself is mysterious, as are the deeper meanings of events and human history. The Lord, while giving us a framework that reminds of us his coming, and signals us in a merciful way to remember, has insisted that it is not for us to know the times or the seasons fixed by the Father, let alone the day and hour.

Humility, prayerful vigilance, readiness through obedience and the gift of holiness, along with an eager longing heart for the Kingdom in all its glory are our best posture.

Avoid doing lots of mathematical calculations here. The Catholic approach may not be the stuff of movies and bestsellers, but it is the balanced and trusting faith to which we are summoned.

He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you all. Amen. (Rev 22:20-21)

Just for some fun and also for a creative reminder, here is a little video I put together over a year ago.

March 26, 2012June 10, 2015

Coming to a Truer Understanding of Tolerance

Last week on the blog we spoke briefly of tolerance in the discussion about Sloth. For it sometimes happens that what some call tolerance is more of a disinterestedness of discovering the truth and living by it. But there is such a thing as true tolerance and it has an important place in the human setting.

Permit then some further thoughts on the issue of tolerance, a frequently misunderstood concept. This post is not intended as a systematic treatise on tolerance. Rather just some thoughts on a what some have called the only “virtue” left in our increasingly secular society.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines Tolerance and toleration:

Toleration — from the Latin tolerare: to put up with, countenance or suffer — generally refers to the conditional acceptance of or non-interference with beliefs, actions or practices that one considers to be wrong but still “tolerable,” such that they should not be prohibited or constrained. [1]

It goes on to make a distinction that is often lost today:

[I]t is essential for the concept of toleration that the tolerated beliefs or practices are considered to be objectionable and in an important sense wrong or bad. If this objection component (cf. King 1976, 44-54) is missing, we do not speak of “toleration” but of “indifference” or “affirmation.” [2]

In effect tolerance involves putting up with something we consider wrong or displeasing but not so wrong that we must move to constrain it. Tolerance does NOT mean we approve of the tolerated thing as something that is good. This essential point is often glossed over by those who often demand that tolerance mean approval, and that to disapprove of something makes one “intolerant.”

Of itself, tolerance is a good and necessary thing. But, like most good things, it has its limits. As a good thing, tolerance is essential in an imperfect world. Without tolerance we might go to war over simple human imperfections. We all have friends and family members who are people we like but, as with every human person, they also have annoying or less desirable traits. Without tolerance we would be locked in a power struggle and a fruitless battle to make each person perfect to us. As it is, we tolerate less desirable aspects of people for higher goods such as harmony, friendship, respect, mercy, kindness and the like.

However, there are limits to tolerance. There are just some things in human relationships that are “deal breakers.” There are things that cannot be tolerated. For example serious and persistent lies breach the trust necessary for relationships and such behavior is not tolerated reasonably. Behavior that endangers one or both parties (either physically or spiritually) ought not be tolerated and often makes it necessary to end relationships or establish firm boundaries.

In wider society tolerance is also necessary and good but has limits. For example we appreciate the freedom to come and go as we please and it is good to tolerate the comings and goings of others. This is so even if some of the places they go, (e.g. a brothel), do not please us or win our approval. Without such a general tolerance of movement things would literally grind to a halt. But for the sake of the value of coming and going freely we put up with the less desirable aspects of it.

However this tolerance has its limits. We do not permit people to drive on sidewalks, run red lights or drive in the left lane of a two way street. Neither do we permit breaking and entering or the violation of legitimate property rights. We restrict unaccompanied minors from certain locales, etc. In effect, every just law enshrines some limit to tolerance. Conservative and Liberals debate what limits law should enshrine, but both sides want civil law to set some limits. Even Libertarians, while wanting less law, see a role for some law and limits, for they are not anarchists.

So, toleration is a good and necessary thing but it has its limits. Our modern struggle with the issue of tolerance seems to be twofold:

The definition of tolerance, as we have discussed, is flawed. Many people equate tolerance with approval, and many call disapproval, intolerance. But, as we have seen, this is flawed. Without some degree of disapproval, tolerance is not possible.
The second problem centers around the limits of tolerance. In our modern world we are being asked to tolerate increasingly troublesome behavior. A lot of this behavior centers around sexual matters. Proponents of sexual promiscuity demand increasing tolerance despite the fact that their behavior leads to diseases, abortion, teenage pregnancy, single parent families, sexual temptation, divorce, and all the ills that go with a declining family structure. Abortion proponents also demand tolerance of what they advocate, although this behavior results in the death of an innocent human being. Many people of faith think that the limits of tolerance have been transgressed in matters such as these.

Rapprochement? – The debate about toleration and its limits is not new, but it seems more intense today when a shared moral vision has largely departed. Perhaps we cannot as easily define the limits of tolerance today. But one way forward might be to return to a proper definition of tolerance. Perhaps if we stop (incorrectly) equating tolerance with approval, a greater respect will be instilled in these debates. To ask for tolerance is not always wrong, but to demand approval is.

Consider the debate over homosexual activity. Many people of faith, at least those who hold to a more strictly Biblical view, find homosexual behavior to be wrong. The same can be said for illicit heterosexual behavior such as fornication, polygamy, and incest. But on account of our disapproval of homosexual behavior we are often called “intolerant,” (and many other things as well such as homophobic, bigoted, hateful, etc).

But tolerance is really not the issue. Most Christians are willing to tolerate the fact the people “do things in their bedroom” of which we disapprove. As long as we are not directly confronted with private behavior and told to approve of it, we are generally willing to stay out of people’s private lives. But what has happened in modern times is that approval is demanded for behavior we find objectionable. When we cannot supply such approval, we are called intolerant. This is a misuse of the term.

And further, what if our objections do not simply emerge from bigotry as some claim but, rather, from a principled biblical stance? Our disapproval does not, ipso facto, make us bigots. Neither does it mean we are wholly intolerant and seek to force an end to behavior we do not consider good. Very few Christians I have ever heard from are asking for the police to patrol streets and enter bedrooms and make arrests.

We are not intolerant, we simply do not approve of homosexual activity. And, according to the proper definition of tolerance, it is the very fact of our disapproval, that permits us to show forth tolerance. Perhaps such a consideration might instill greater respect in these debates and less name-calling from our opponents.

An aside– Gay “marriage” is a more complicated matter since it involves existing law and a demanded change in that law by proponents of so-called “gay marriage.” Most traditional Christians see a limit to tolerance here since we consider that God defined and established marriage as described in Genesis 1 & 2. Hence we cannot favor attempts to substitute a human redefinition of something we believe instituted by God.

Finally a thought as to who really “owns” tolerance. Opponents of traditional Christians often claim the high ground of tolerance for themselves. But the paradoxical result of this is a “holier-than-thou” attitude is an increasing intolerance of Christian faith by the self-claimed tolerant ones. Legal restrictions of the proclamation of the Christian faith in the public square are increasing. Financial exclusion of Catholic Charities from Government money used in serving the poor are becoming more common as well. In other parts of the world where free speech is less enshrined, Catholic priests and bishops are being sued and even arrested for “hate speech” because they preach traditional biblical morality. None of this sounds very “tolerant.”

Our opponents need not approve of our beliefs but they ought to exhibit greater tolerance of us, the same tolerance they ask of us.

Please add to this discussion.

This video demonstrates comically and in extreme form how even those who demand tolerance often exhibit intolerance themselves.

March 26, 2012June 9, 2015

The Word Becomes Flesh

As we prepare to walk with Our Lord toward Calvary, this reflection from Saint Leo the Great for the Feast of the Annunciation helps us to understand what it means that God became man and willingly took on our sinfulness to offer us salvation.

He took on the nature of a servant without stain of sin, enlarging our humanity without diminishing his divinity. He emptied himself; though invisible he made himself visible, though Creator and Lord of all things he chose to be one of us mortal men. Yet this was the condescension of compassion, no the loss of omnipotence. So he who in the nature of God had created man, became in the nature of a servant, man himself….He who is true God is also true man. There is no falsehood in this unity as long as the lowliness of man and the preeminence of God coexist in mutual relationship. (Epistle 28 ad Flavianum).

March 25, 2012June 10, 2015

What’s a Woman to Do in a Culture Gone Mad? Perhaps "Good Girls DC" has an Idea

We have discussed at length on this blog the sad state of our culture, particularly when it comes to questions of dating, sexuality, faith and marriage.

For example, huge numbers of Americans, are postponing marriage, or never marrying at all. A recent article in Our Sunday Visitor presents stunning statistics about marriage:

The number of marriages celebrated in the Church has fallen from 415,487 in 1972 to 168,400 in 2010 — a decrease of nearly 60 percent — while the U.S. Catholic population has increased by almost 17 million. To put this another way, this is a shift from 8.6 marriages per 1,000 U.S. Catholics in 1972 to 2.6 marriages per 1,000 Catholics in 2010…

[In this Catholics reflect the general social trend]. In 2010, 53 percent of Catholics surveyed in the General Social Survey (GSS) indicated that they were currently married. By comparison, 51 percent of non-Catholics surveyed were married. [But this an astonishing drop from 1972 when 79% of Catholics were married. Among younger adults 18-40 the number is even more shocking: Only 38% are married]!

Some of [the low numbers] can be explained by Catholics waiting longer to marry, but the shift here has been slight. In 1972, the average age at first marriage reported in the GSS for Catholics ages 18 to 40 was 20.9. In 2006 (the last time this question was asked), it was 23.9.

Thus, the decline in Church marriages is more about not marrying at all than marrying older. [Our Sunday Visitor 6/26/2011]

Of course, despite this, most younger adults are quite sexually active. And the lack of marriage, and promiscuous sexual activity is a very poisonous environment for you people. There is no need to here recite all the terrible statistics of STDs, abortion, teenage pregnancy, single motherhood (absent fatherhood), cohabitation, poverty, broken hearts, broken homes, and children raised in less than ideal situations, with often terrible conflicts they have to grow up in.

And in these promiscuous conditions, and conditions of low marriage rates, women suffer a lot more than men, since (fair or not) the consequences of the sexual revolution have fallen much harder on them. Too often men “play the field” with few social consequences, while women end up used and abused, often pregnant and with little support. Many end up unmarried with children to raise or, tragically, haunted by the aftermath of abortions.

One may ask, “In this poisonous climate, what is a woman to do?” It is easy to say that women, who usually set the limits and boundaries in a relationship, should just be chaste. But the expectations on women to be unchaste are very strong. Further women are not a monolith and there are many different points of view among them as to questions of sexuality, family, priorities, careers, faith, and any number of other issues. Women who do seek to remain chaste and also to live an active Catholic life face many challenges in doing so.

So again the question, in a culture gone mad and dysfunctional, “What is a woman to do?”

One answer is given by a new group here in Washington DC called “Good Girls DC.” These women, most of them college graduates, most of them single, but some married, have gathered to support and encourage one another in living their Catholic faith in a world often poisonous to it. At their website, goodgirlsdc.com their vision is stated as follows:

We are a network of trendy young adult Catholic women who welcome all woman of faith. We seek to renew society through living out our dignity as daughters of God. We aim to create a place where like minded women can find fellowship, friends, and networking opportunities while encouraging each other to live up to their God-given potential.

The group sponsors luncheons, rosary and holy hours, book clubs, and other social functions in which women gather to give each other support in living their Catholic faith and to not give way to the often poisonous social culture of today. They also sponsor co-ed events that encourage Catholics and others of like mind to meet. Their website and Facebook page feature encouraging articles, of many topics focused on faith, uplifting stories, significant events, and helpful links. In the video box below is a Radio interview with Jessica Lanza, the founder of Good Girls DC that supplies a lot more information.

In effect, what are these women doing? They are, by God’s grace, forming a faithful remnant and seeking to become a leaven in society; or, if you will, a spark that will ignite a refining fire. This is, most often, how God reforms his Church and the world. It usually begins with small groups of the faithful, the spark God ignites. And fanned by the Spirit of God’s love, the spark becomes a fire, a refining fire that begins a purifying process in the Church and the world.

Something tells me that Good Girls DC is a spark of God and He wants to fan it into flame. Why not become part of it? While the group is for women only, Men to ought to form similar groups. (Here in DC I am aware of the St. Lawrence Society, a men’s group with a similar purpose). And men ought to support groups like Good Girls DC and encourage women to join. There is a hope that other chapters will begin soon in other cites.

We all need to be strong in a culture gone mad. To use a gloss on a scriptural text we might say Woe to the solitary woman! For if she should fall, she has no one to lift her up. (cf Ecclesiastes 4:10). The same scripture also says, Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken. (Ecc 4:12). Here are strong women, unwilling to compromise with the madness of modern times. Here are women who are standing together and insisting on what is right. Here are women who seek others of like mind. Here are women who seek their vocation, whether to marriage or religious life and want to seek it untainted by the often bitter waters of modern culture.

To remain chaste, faithful and focused, we need as Catholics to support and encourage one another. Thank God for Good Girls DC.

What is a woman to do? Find other women and stand together, grow in numbers and through this spark, let God send a purifying fire upon the Church and the whole earth.

Photo above: A recent gathering of some members of Good Girls DC.

Here’s an interview with founder Jessica Lanza on the Sonrise Morning Show:

March 24, 2012June 10, 2015

The Cross Wins, It Always Wins. A Meditation on the Gospel of the Fifth Sunday of Lent

The Gospel today is, to the world and to those who are perishing, utter madness, utter foolishness. For Christ, in effect, declares that dying (to this world) is the only way to true life. While the world’s so-called wisdom declares to us that the way to life is power, prestige, possessions and popularity, Jesus says, die to all that and you’ll find true life.

The word “paradox” refers to something that is contrary to the usual way of thinking. And the true gospel, (not the watered down, compromised one) is a real insult to the world.

Indeed, most of us struggle to understand and accept what the Lord is saying. But the Lord can give us a heart for what really matters, a heart for God, for love, and for the things waiting for us in heaven. But the way to this new life is through the Cross. Jesus had to go to the cross and die to give us this new life. And we too must go to his cross and die with him to this world’s agenda in order to rise to new life.

To those who would scoff at this way of the Cross there is only one thing to say, “The Cross wins, it Always wins.

Let’s examine the Lord’s Paradoxical Plan to save us and bring us to new life.

I. The Plan of Salvation that is Acclaimed: As the Gospel opens we find a rather strange incident. The text says, Some Greeks who had come to worship at the Passover Feast came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, and asked him, “Sir, we would like to see Jesus.” Philip went and told Andrew; then Andrew and Philip went and told Jesus. Jesus answered them, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified.

What is odd is the apparent “over-reaction” that Jesus has to the simple fact of some Greeks wishing to speak to him. From this seemingly simple and unremarkable (to us) fact, Jesus senses the stunning fact that his “hour” has now come. Yes, now the time for his glorification, that is, his suffering, death and resurrection, to take place. He goes on later to say, “I am troubled now. Yet what should I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? But it was for this purpose that I came to this hour. Now is the time of judgment on this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out. And when I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw everyone to myself.” He said this indicating the kind of death he would die.

Yes, all this from the simple fact that certain Greeks, i.e. certain Gentiles wish to speak to him.

Even more remarkable, is that nothing in the text indicates that Jesus in fact goes over to speak to them. Having given this stunning soliloquy and announced that the drama was to unfold, there is no evidence that he eagerly goes to the Greeks to evangelize them. We will see why this in a moment.

But first let us examine why this simple request throws the whole switch on for Holy Week to unfold. In effect, the arrival of the Gentiles fulfills a critical prophecy about the Messiah wherein He would gather the nations unto himself and make of fractured humanity one nation, one family. Consider two prophesies:

I come to gather nation of every language; they shall come and see my glory. just as the Israelites bring their offering to the house of the Lord in clean vessels. Some of these I will take as priests and Levites says the Lord….All mankind shall come to worship before me says the Lord. (Is 66:18, 23)
And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to him, to love the name of the LORD, and to be his servants, every one who keeps the Sabbath, and does not profane it, and holds fast my covenant– these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples. (Is 56:6-7)

Thus we see that one of the principle missions of the Messiah would be to save, not only the Jewish People, but all people and to draw them into right worship, and unity in the one Lord. Jesus explicitly states elsewhere his intention to gather the Gentiles:

I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd (John 10:14).

And so it is that this apparently simple request of the Greeks (Gentiles) to see Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, carries such significance for him (and us).

But why not run and greet them at once? Simply put, the call and salvation of the Gentiles must wait for the death and the resurrection of Jesus to be accomplished. It will be his atoning death that will reunite us with the Father and with one another. A simple sermon or slogan like “Can’t we all get along” isn’t going to accomplish the deeper unity necessary. Only the Blood of Jesus can bring true Shalom with the Father and wit one another, only the blood of Jesus can save us.

Consider this text from Ephesians:

But now in Christ Jesus you [Gentiles] who once were far off have been brought near in the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who has made us both {Jews and Gentiles] one, and has broken down the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby bringing the hostility to an end. And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; for through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. (Eph 2:13ff)

Thus, nothing but the Blood of Jesus can make us whole, can save us or make us one, either with the Father or each other. There is no true unity apart from Christ and he secures it by his blood and the power of his cross. Only by baptism into the paschal mystery do we become members of the Body of Christ and find true and lasting unity, salvation, and true peace.

So the door has opened from the Gentiles side, But Jesus knows the way through door goes by way the Cross. His apparent delay in rushing to greet the Gentiles makes sense in this light. Only after his resurrection he will say, Go therefore and make disciples of all nations.... (Matt 28:19) for now there is the power through baptism to make all one in Christ. The Price of our salvation, our new life, our peace with each other, and the Father, is the death and Resurrection of Jesus. And thank the Lord, Jesus paid that price. An old songs says Oh, the love that drew salvation’s plan! Oh, the grace that brought it down to man! Oh, the mighty gulf that God did span! At Calvary!

II. The Plan of Salvation Applied – Jesus goes on to say Amen, amen, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains just a grain of wheat; but if it dies, it produces much fruit. Whoever serves me must follow me, and where I am, there also will my servant be. The Father will honor whoever serves me.

Now while it is true that Jesus pays the price for our peace and unity, with the Father and which each other, it is also true that he sets forth and prescribes a pattern for us and applies it. Note that Jesus says, Amen, Amen I say to YOU….and again he says, Whoever serves me must follow me.

Thus the pattern of his dying and rising to new life must also be applied to the pattern of our life. And if we seek unity and peace and to enjoy this new life with the Father, we must die to rise again. We must follow in the footsteps of Jesus. If we want peace we have to be willing to accept the pattern of dying fro it and rising to it.

How must we die for this? Well we have to die to:

Our ego
Our desire for revenge
Our hurts from the past
Our desire to control everything
Our sinful and unbiblical agendas
Our irrational fears rooted in ego and exaggerated notions
Our hatreds
Our unrealistic expectations
Our stubbornness
Our inflexibility
Our impatience
Our unreasonable demands
Our greed
Our worldliness

Yes, we have to be willing to experience some sacrifices for unity and to obtain new life. We have to let the Lord put a lot of sinful and unhealthy drives to death in us. New life does not just occur, Peace and unity do not just happen. We have to journey to them through Calvary. We too must allow the Lord to crucify our sinful desires and thereby rise to new life.

But remember, the Cross wins. It always wins.

III. The Plan of Salvation At day’s end. – Jesus speaks of a great promise of new life but presents it in a very paradoxical way. He says: Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will preserve it for eternal life.

In other words, if we are not willing to follow the pattern he sets forth above of dying to ourselves and to this world, we cannot truly live. And if we go on clinging to our worldly notions of life and live only for ourselves, and for power, possessions, popularity, and prestige, we are already dead. For indeed, if we live only for the things of this world (and many do), ours is a cruel and laughable fate, for we die and lose all. Yes, total losers.

But if we allow the Lord to help us die to the this world’s agenda, to its pathetic charms, then, and only then do we pass increasingly to real life, to true unity with the Father and to deeper unity with one another in Christ.Only then does a newer, deeper life dawn upon us and do we see our lives dramatically transformed day to day.

Jesus had to die to give this to us. And in order to have it bestowed on us, and we must be configured to Christ’s death to this world in order to live in him and find this new life. We die to a sinful and overrated world, to live in a whole new way in a life open to something richer than we can ever imagine.

Note too, Jesus calls this new life, “eternal life.” But eternal life means far more than to live forever. Rather “eternal,” while not excluding the notion of endless length, more deeply means “to become fully alive.”

And for those who know Christ, this process has already begun. At age 50, my bodily life has suffered setbacks. But spiritually I am more alive than I ever was at 20, and wait till I’m 80! Our bodies may be declining, but our souls are growing younger and more vibrant, more fully alive, if we love and trust Christ. Yes, I am more joyful, more serene, more confident, less sinful, less angry, less anxious, more compassionate, more patient, more alive!

But all of this comes from dying to this world, little by little and thus having more room for the life Christ offers.

What is the price of our Peace and our new life? Everything! For we shall only attain to it by dying to this world. And while our final physical death will seal the deal, there are all the ten thousand little deaths that usher in this new life even now. Our physical death is but the final component of a lifelong journey in Christ. For those who know Christ, the promise then will be full. For those who rejected him, the loss will be total.

An old song says, Now I’ve given Jesus everything, Now I gladly own Him as my King, Now my raptured soul can only sing Of Calvary!

Yes, the promise is real, but it is paradoxically obtained. The world calls all this foolishness. But you decide. Choose either the “wisdom of this world” or the folly of Christ. As for me, call me a fool, but make sure you add I was a fool for Christ. I do not mind. The cross wins, it always wins.

This song says:

Years I spent in vanity and pride,
Caring not my Lord was crucified,
Knowing not it was for me He died
On Calvary.

Refrain:
Mercy there was great, and grace was free;
Pardon there was multiplied to me;
There my burdened soul found liberty
At Calvary.

By God’s Word at last my sin I learned;
Then I trembled at the law I’d spurned,
Till my guilty soul imploring turned
To Calvary.

Now I’ve given Jesus everything,
Now I gladly own Him as my King,
Now my raptured soul can only sing
Of Calvary!

Oh, the love that drew salvation’s plan!
Oh, the grace that brought it down to man!
Oh, the mighty gulf that God did span
At Calvary!

March 23, 2012June 10, 2015

100+ Charlie Chan Sayings and Proverbs. A surprisingly good selection of truisms and insights for your reading pleasure.

My Father was a great fan of Charlie Chan movies, a series of detective movies from the 1930s featuring a fictional Chinese-American detective. My father had every one on them on video tape. Not only did he watch them often, he also collected Charlie Chan sayings. For in every movie there would be dozens of wise, witty, and insightful sayings. He jotted them down as he watched and once presented me with a collection of the sayings.

On Friday’s I like to blog on lighter fare and this Friday evening is no exception. I simply want to present the list my father gave me with later additions by me. This list is long, but many of the sayings are well worth the read. Not all of them are of equal value, but there are some real keepers in the list. Many indeed are in deep conformity with the biblical tradition.

If you want to print a convenient list, I have put this in PDF version of them here: Charlie Chan Sayings

But for light reading and edification enjoy this list of Charlie Chan sayings:

Admitting failure like drinking bitter tea. (Charlie Chan in Egypt)
After dinner is over, who cares about spoon? (Docks of New Orleans)
Always happens – when conscience tries to speak, telephone out of order. (The Black Camel)
Ancient ancestor once say, “Even wise man cannot fathom depth of woman’s smile.” (The Shanghai Cobra)
Ancient ancestor once say, “Words cannot cook rice.” (Charlie Chan in Reno)
Ancient proverb say. “Never bait trap with wolf to catch wolf.” (Shadows Over Chinatown)
Ancient proverb say, “One small wind can raise much dust.” (Dark Alibi)
Anxious man hurries too fast and stubs big toe. (Charlie Chan’s Courage)
Bad alibi like dead fish – cannot stand test of time. (Charlie Chan in Panama)
Best to slip with foot, than with tongue. (Charlie Chan at the Circus)
Biggest mysteries are not always crimes. (1935 Pennsylvania Referendum Message)
Blind man feels ahead with cane before proceeding. (Charlie Chan’s Courage)
Boy Scout knife, like ladies’ hairpin, have many uses. (Charlie Chan’s Secret)
Can fallen fruit return to branch? (Docks of New Orleans)
Cat who tries to catch two mice at one time, goes without supper. (Charlie Chan’s Greatest Case)
Charming company turn lowly sandwich into rich banquet. (Charlie Chan in Reno)
Chinese funny people; when say “go,” mean “go.” (Docks of New Orleans)
Confucius has said, “A wise man question himself, a fool, others.” (Charlie Chan in City in Darkness)
Confucius say, “Sleep only escape from yesterday.” (Shadows Over Chinatown)
Cornered rat usually full of fight. (Shadows Over Chinatown)
Curiosity responsible for cat needing nine lives. (Charlie Chan at the Circus)
Deception is bad game for amateurs. (Shadows Over Chinatown)
Deer should not toy with tiger. (The Golden Eye)
Detective without curiosity is like glass eye at keyhole – no use. (Charlie Chan in the Secret Service)
Dreams, like good liars, distort facts. (Charlie Chan in Shanghai)
Drop of plain water on thirsty tongue more precious than gold in purse. (Charlie Chan in Egypt)
Easy to criticize, more difficult to be correct. (Charlie Chan at the Race Track)
Elaborate excuse seldom truth. (Castle in the Desert)
Even draperies may have ears. (Charlie Chan at Treasure Island)
Every fence have two sides. (Charlie Chan’s Greatest Case)
Every front has back. (Charlie Chan in London)
Every man must wear out at least one pair of fool shoes. (Charlie Chan Carries On)
Every maybe has a wife called Maybe-Not. (Charlie Chan Carries On)
Favorite pastime of man is fooling himself. (Charlie Chan at Treasure Island)
Fear is cruel padlock. (Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum)
Foolish rooster who stick head in lawn mower end in stew. (Charlie Chan at the Race Track)
Foolish to seek fortune when real treasure hiding under nose. (Charlie Chan at the Race Track)
Front seldom tell truth. To know occupants of house, always look in back yard. (Charlie Chan in London)
Good detective always look for something unusual. (The Red Dragon)
Good tools shorten labor. (Charlie Chan at the Circus)
Grain of sand in eye may hide mountain. (Charlie Chan in Paris)
“Great happiness follows great pain.” (Charlie Chan at Treasure Island)
Guilty conscience always first to speak up. (The Feathered Serpent)
Guilty conscience like dog in circus – many tricks. (Castle in the Desert)
Guilty conscience only enemy to peaceful rest. (Charlie Chan at the Circus)
Guilty mind sometimes pinch worse than ancient boot of torture. (Dangerous Money)
Hastily accuse – leisurely repent. (Charlie Chan’s Greatest Case)
Hasty conclusion easy to make, like hole in water. (Charlie Chan in Egypt)
Hasty deduction, like old egg, look good from outside. (Charlie Chan’s Secret)
Have two ears, but can only hear one thing at time. (The Shanghai Chest)
He who squanders today talking about yesterday’s triumphs, have nothing to boast of tomorrow. (Docks of New Orleans)
He who takes whatever gods send with smile, has learned life’s hardest lesson. (Docks of New Orleans)
Honorable father once say, “Politeness golden key that open many doors.” (Charlie Chan at the Opera)
Hours are happiest when hands are busiest. (Charlie Chan’s Murder Cruise)
Humbly suggest not to judge wine by barrel it is in. (Charlie Chan’s Greatest Case)
Humility only defense against rightful blame. (Charlie Chan at the Opera)
Ideas planted too soon, often like seeds on winter ground – quickly die. (The Sky Dragon)
If request music, must be willing to pay for fiddler. (Charlie Chan at Treasure Island)
If strength were all, tiger would not fear the scorpion. (Charlie Chan’s Secret)
Illustrious ancestor once say, “Destination never reached by turning back on same.” (Charlie Chan at Monte Carlo)
It is difficult to pick up needle with boxing glove. (Charlie Chan’s Chance)
It takes very rainy day to drown duck. (Charlie Chan’s Chance)
Kind thoughts add favorable weight, in balance of life and death. (Charlie Chan in Egypt)
Law is honest man’s eyeglass to see better. (Charlie Chan’s Greatest Case)
Long road, sometimes shortest way to end of journey. (Charlie Chan at the Race Track)
Man cannot drink from glass without touching. (Charlie Chan in Paris)
Man has learned much, who has learned how to die. (Dead Men Tell)
Man is not incurably drowned – if still knows he is all wet. (Charlie Chan’s Chance)
Man who fears death die thousand times. (Castle in the Desert)
Man who flirt with dynamite sometime fly with angels. (Charlie Chan at the Race Track)
Man who improve house before building foundation, apt to run into very much trouble. (The Feathered Serpent)
Man who ride tiger, cannot dismount. (The Chinese Ring)
Man who seek trouble never find it far off. (Charlie Chan at the Circus)
Man never born who can tell what woman will, or will not, do. (Charlie Chan in Reno)
Mind, like parachute, only function when open. (Charlie Chan at the Circus)
More fear, more talk. (Charlie Chan in London)
Most mysterious thing is what mankind does to itself for reasons difficult to understand. (1935 Pennsylvania Referendum Message)
Much evil can enter through very small space. (Charlie Chan at the Circus)
Must harvest rice before can boil it. (Docks of New Orleans)
Necessity mother of invention, but sometimes stepmother of deception. (Charlie Chan’s Secret)
No one knows less about servants than their master. (Charlie Chan in Shanghai)
Optimist only sees doughnut, pessimist sees hole. (Charlie Chan in Paris)
Owner of face cannot always see nose. (Charlie Chan in Shanghai)
Patience, big sister to wisdom. (City in Darkness City in Darkness)
Patience lead to knowledge. (Charlie Chan in Panama)
Sharp wit sometimes much better than deadly weapon. (Castle in the Desert)
Silence best answer when uncertain. (Charlie Chan in Shanghai)
Silence big sister to wisdom. (Charlie Chan in Paris)
Silent witness, sometime speak loudest. (Charlie Chan at the Circus)
Smart fly keep out of gravy. (Charlie Chan at the Race Track)
Smart rats know when to leave ship. (Charlie Chan in Shanghai)
Talk cannot cook rice. (Charlie Chan in Shanghai)
The ignorant always loud in argument. (Docks of New Orleans)
The impossible sometimes permits itself the luxury of occurring. (Charlie Chan’s Chance)
Theory like mist on eyeglasses – obscures facts. (Charlie Chan in Egypt)
Tongue often hang man quicker than rope. (Charlie Chan at Monte Carlo)
To speak without thinking is to shoot without aiming. (Charlie Chan’s Murder Cruise)
Trouble, like first love, teach many lessons. (Dead Men Tell)
Trouble with modern children, they do not smart in right place. (Charlie Chan in The Secret Service)
Truth, like football – receive many kicks before reaching goal. (Charlie Chan at the Olympics)
Truth sometimes like stab of cruel knife. (Charlie Chan at the Race Track)
Two ears for every tongue. (Charlie Chan in Shanghai)
Under strong general there are no weak soldiers. (Charlie Chan’s Chance)
Unhappy news sometimes correct self next day. (Charlie Chan at Treasure Island)
Useless as life preserver for fish. (Charlie Chan’s Chance)
Useless talk like boat without oar – get no place. (Charlie Chan at the Race Track)
Very difficult to believe ill of those we love. (Charlie Chan in Reno)
Very wise know way out before going in. (Charlie Chan at the Circus)
Waiting for tomorrow waste of today. (Charlie Chan in Egypt)
When money talk, few are deaf. (Charlie Chan in Honolulu)
When pilot unreliable, ship cannot keep true course. (Charlie Chan’s Secret)
When player cannot see man who deal cards, much wiser to stay out of game. (Charlie Chan at the Race Track)
Willingness to speak, not necessarily mean willingness to act. (The Golden Eye)
Woman’s tongue like sword that never gets rusty. (Charlie Chan’s Greatest Case)
Woman’s voice like monastery bell, when tolling, must attend. (Charlie Chan’s Greatest Case)