Posts

Posted on

Seeing is NOT Believing. It is Only Seeing

Some people say that if they could see they would believe. But seeing is not believing, seeing is only seeing. Scripture says Faith is the realization of what is hoped for and evidence of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1). It also says Although you have not seen him you love him; even though you do not see him now yet believe in him  (1 Peter 1:8). It is true that Jesus says to Thomas, You believe in me Thomas becuase you have seen me, but blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed. Yet as both St. Gregory (Homilia26) and St. Thomas Aquinas (II, IIae 1.4) point out, Thomas saw one thing and believed another. He saw the man which required no faith, but confessed Jesus to be Lord and God which required faith and cannot be “seen.” So again, as Scripture says, We walk by faith and not by sight (2 Cor 5:7)

And yet  many people often say, if only I could have been alive and have seen Jesus workmiracles, I would believe more. Maybe, maybe not, because seeing is only seeing. Seeing even impossible things doesn’t necessarily make a person believe. Consider the video just below. What you will see in it will look impossible. And yet it is happening before your very eyes. I have been to live magic shows and seen the same thing. People seem to vanish into thin air or instantly change appearance. Is it a miracle or just some fancy illusion? Most people, even upon seeing what looks like it can only be a miracle, usually conclude that it is a trick or that there is “some way they do that.”

Now remove these magicians in the video and go with me back in time as Jesus works a miracle. Presume for a moment that you’ve never met Jesus or heard of him. Yet watch him cast out blindness or enable a paralyzed man to walk. Is it a miracle, or is it a clever trick? Should you really believe his claims to be from God and to be God based on these wonderful works? Has Jesus staged this well or is he really the Son of God? You see? It still takes faith doesn’t it? Simply seeing miracles isn’t enough. You just can’t substitute for faith, it is an absolute requirement to accept who Jesus is. Miracles can help but seeing is not believing, it’s only seeing. In the end you have to decide: fancy trick or real miracle? Son of God or just a skilled illusionist?

Remember too, Jesus did not work miracles to “cause” faith but to confirm it. When faith was lacking Jesus did not work miracles. For example it is said of him when he was in Nazareth, He could work no miracles there except to cure a few sick, so much did their lack of faith disturb him. (Mk 6:5). Further, Jesus would often inquire of a person’s faith or draw it out before working a miracle (eg. Mat 9:28; Jn 11:26; Mat 15:27; Matt 8:10; inter al.) In the end miracles are not the cause of faith, they are the result of it. Likewise, seeing is not the cause of faith but does result from it to some extent. We see many things by faith.

Watch this video and see what look like realmiracles before your very eyes. But pay attention to what your mind does and how quickly you can dismiss the visual evidence. You do not conclude that these people are gods because of what they do. Seeing even fantastic things just isn’t enough. In this case they likely are not miracles, just very well done illusions. But many saw  Jesus work wonders which really were miracles and it was not enough. In the end you have to have faith. In other words, some people think if only God would work miracles in their life, they could believe. But miracles alone cannot bring faith because seeing is not believing it is only seeing.

Cumulative evidence can bring us to accept God’s existence as a reasonable proposition but only faith can really lead us to believe all that God has said. Pray for the gift of faith and you will see miracles, and more!

Posted on

On Fixing a Dreadful Error And Taking a Graceful Bow

We are in the heart of Lent but for one day we step back into the Christmas cycle. It is nine months before Christmas and today we celebrate the true feast of the Incarnation. December 25 is the Lord’s birth but today is His incarnation as he is conceived in his Mother’s womb. TODAY the Word becomes flesh.

This needs to be emphasized in an age of abortion where some in our culture deny explicitly or implicitly that human life begins at conception. You are aware that a new translation of the Mass will soon come to us in the English speaking world. It is long needed and treasures of the faith kept hidden for long decades (except for those know Latin) will become visible again.

Among the most egregious errors of the current English version is in the Creed which erroneously indicates that Jesus became man at his birth, rather than his conception. Here is what the current version says:

For us men and our salvation He came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary , and became man.

Notice that the text says he became man when he was born. As a poor translation of the Latin text it is irritating enough but to have this mistranslation exist when abortion is thought a legal right is a complete disaster. The Latin text does not say that Jesus became man at his birth (celebrated December 25), but rather at His incarnation (celebrated March 25). Here is what the the Latin text says:

Qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de caelis. Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine, et homo factus est.

The New Translation which will be implemented in a little over a year renders it correctly in the following way:

For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man.

I for one am grateful for the accuracy. The whole translation is going to take some getting used to but it will be of great benefit to see our Holy Faith, so beautifully articulated in the Latin text, properly translated and conveyed at last. Since 1970 the text has been really little better than a paraphrase and so much is lost. This mistranslation of the Creed is but one of ten thousand examples where the current translation is woefully inaccurate and/or incomplete. But surely the mistranslated Creed  is most egregious for the reasons stated.

A final thought on this section of the Creed – The Bow. The Congregation is instructed to bow at the words: and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man.  This is in recognition of the great mystery that the incarnation is. How can God, whom the very heavens cannot contain dwell in the womb of the Virgin Mary? How can the infinite become an infant? It is a mystery too great and so we bow in reverence. In the Traditional Latin Mass the practice is to kneel at these words. Such was the practice until about 1970 when it was replaced by a bow. Personally I think we Americans are terrible at bows and would be happy if the genuflection returned. In other cultures bowing is graceful and natural. For most of us here it is awkward and usually lacks proportional and graceful movement. But bow we are told and bow we should. One ought to fold the hands and bow at the waist. Think of your waist as the hinge, not the neck and shoulders which should not move in proportion to the shoulders. The bow is a reverent acknowledgment of the mystery of the Incarnation we celebrate today. Interestingly enough there are still two days  in the year when we still kneel at the words of the incarnation. We kneel and pause at these words on Christmas and today, March 25, The Feast of the Annunciation. Otherwise we bow, as gracefully as possible 🙂

I am curious if you bow at these words in the Creed and if it is common in your parish. Does your clergy bow, do they teach others to do so? Just asking!

Happy Feast Day!

Posted on

“There was no one to help me.”

Yesterday, I attended a book signing for the publication of When they Come Home. Written by Melanie Rigney and Anna Lanave, the book has terrific how-to advice for parishes interested in being intentional about welcoming back inactive Catholics.

Starting and Stopping

One of the authors shared her own experience. Though having received the sacraments as a child her family did not regularly attend Mass or participate in parish life. As she grew up there was not much encouragement or reason to go to church herself. A marriage to man who was not Catholic was the final step away from the church. Or so she thought. Over the years she felt drawn back to Mass and she would go and it would be fine except that no one ever greeted her or drew her into conversation. She said she had questions, she wanted to talk, and yet, there did not seem to be a place or people for the conversation. She tried other denominations, she made some terrific friends and she had some serious conversations about God and faith and she continued to give the Catholic Church another try.

Not a Unique Experience

I do not think this experience is unique to this author. I do think our churches over the next ten days will be filled with just such people. People who are responding to the Spirit at work in them, people who just can’t seem to stay away from church but who sure don’t feel like they really belong and wonder if they really are still part of the family. What struck me in yesterday’s presentation and in conversations I have had with other Catholics returning to the church is that all they really need–at first– is to be greeted and welcomed! They do not expect the experience to be perfect or to discover that everything that didn’t like about the church has changed. They want to feel welcomed and to be invited to come again.

Say Hello

I decided driving home last night that I will do two things over the course of Holy Week. Today, I invited two friends who are inactive and not quite ready to come to Mass to a Tenebrae Service at the Dominican House of Studies. It is a beautiful evening of chant and music and prayer which sets the right tone for Holy Week. Next week, when I see an unfamiliar face at one of the services I am going to say hello and whatever else may seem appropriate. In some cases the person I greet may end up being a fellow parishioner who goes to a different Mass but odds suggest that if I do this a couple of times, I will encounter a less regular church-goer.  Really, how difficult can this be!

Perhaps why I am so taken with these authors’ experience is because I spend a lot of my day thinking about evangelization on the grand scale of Archdiocesan initiatives and emerging trends and new programs and yet at the core of evangelization is a friendly encounter of two people who both feel drawn to Jesus. It can be the start of a great relationship.

Posted on

Reducing Faith to a Flu Shot?

It is tragic to me as a Catholic priest that many parents bring their children to baptism but nothing else and think all the while that they have done all that they should. Almost as though baptism was no more than a flu shot: Take it and forget it. As you might imagine I am very firm in my pre-baptismal catechesis to rebuke such a notion.

Baptism is the beginning, not the end: Let me ask you, is it enough to give birth to a child and think your work is over?  Hah!…It has just begun!  We cannot simply bring children to birth, we have to feed, cloth, teach and care for them for years. It is the same with baptism, we cannot simply think that bringing  them to new life in baptism is all that is required. These children need to be taught about God and prayer, nourished on the Eucharist, bathed in confession, strengthened in confirmation, fed every Sunday at God’s altar, brought to maturity in Christ. Real faith is  not about a half-hour ritual many years ago. It begins there but it does not end there. The work for a Catholic parent has just begun. It is a work that is costly and cannot simply be reduced to a half-hour baptismal ceremony.

And if you’re a baptized Catholic don’t tell me that just getting baptized is all it took. If you get born and never eat your life is doomed. If you get born and never grow, learn to walk and talk, never reach maturity, something is terribly wrong.  Likewise, if you get baptized and never grow, never feed on the Eucharist, never learn of Jesus Christ and begin to speak of him, something is seriously wrong. You can’t reduce your faith to a simple half-hour ceremony, as though it were simply a flu shot. Real faith costs something, it demands change and effort from us. We have to die, so that Christ can live in us. This is costly.

The Protestant Version- Once Saved Always Saved: Some of the Protestants (but not all!) have a strange and quite unbiblical notion called “Once saved, always saved.” That is, once you get saved, you can never lose that salvation no matter what. Well, I don’t have time to tell you all the biblical texts that such a notion violates but really, tell me if that makes any sense at all. We all know that we can make commitments and sadly walk away from them. But here too, on display is the nation that faith costs nothing more than walking up in a service and saying the “sinners prayer” or some little ritual. No indeed, faith is more costly than that, we are called to give our life to Jesus.

We do not get our faith “on sale.” The kind of work Jesus has to do in our life is not inexpensive or minor. It cost Jesus his life, and, I’ve got news for you, it will cost you your life too. It’s not some simple ritual, not like a simple flu shot. The Catholic Theology of baptism is that we die with Christ and rise with him to new life. Did you hear that? We die. Truth be told, we all have a lot of things to die to: sin, ego, possessions, popularity, greed, resentments, hatred, sensuality and on and on. Give your heart to Jesus but realize, it’s not just some sort of inexpensive, harmless ritual. To embrace our baptism is to die to this world and all its pomp and glory, to die to our ego and all its exaggerated needs.

Watch this video, if you dare, it’s not for the lukewarm. The speaker is a Southern Baptist, Paul Washer. He is rebuking his fellow Baptists some of whom think God’s grace is cheap and can be reduced to a simple altar call or to a “Once saved always saved” notion. But we Catholics do it too. Some of us think all we need are a few rituals and an occasional prayer. But the sacraments are more than this, they are not mere rituals, they are meant to be transformative realities. Sacraments cost Jesus everything, and, if you are serious about them, they will cost you too, and effect a radical transformation that isn’t always easy and costs us something. Faith and the sacraments  are more than a flu shot.

Posted on

Todah: Learn Somethin’New Every Day!

Have you ever heard of the todah? No? Neither had I until last night! I was reading “Graced and Gifted: Biblical Wisdom for the Homemakers Heart” by Kimberly Hahn, and while discussing the importance and significance of the Eucharist in family life, she explained the todah.

I did a little more research on the internet today and…check this out!

“A todah sacrifice would be offered by someone whose life had been delivered from great peril, such as disease or the sword. The redeemed person would show his gratitude to God by gathering his closest friends and family for a todah sacrificial meal. The lamb would be sacrificed in the Temple and the bread for the meal would be consecrated the moment the lamb was sacrificed. The bread and meat, along with wine, would constitute the elements of the sacred todah meal, which would be accompanied by prayers and songs of thanksgiving, such as Psalm 116.”
(from Catholic Education Resource Center)

Does that sound like the Eucharist or what?! The article goes on to explain the todah, the Eucharist, and The Last Supper Passover meal, and is definitely worth a read.

So this Holy Thursday or Easter Sunday when your non-Catholic friends or Catholic friends who haven’t been to church in a while ask, “Why do you do all that stuff? What does it mean?” teach them about the todah!

Posted on

The Anatomy of a Sin

The first reading from today’s Mass is an extraordinary moral tale from the  Book of Daniel. It is the story of Susanna. The full passage (which is quite lengthy) can be found here: Daniel 13:1-62. Interestingly it is missing from Protestant Bibles which use a truncated version of the Book of Daniel.

It features the story of a beautiful young woman, Susanna, married to a man named Joakim. One day as she is bathing in a private garden two older men who have hidden themselves there out of lust try to seduce Susanna who rebuffs their brazen overture. They threaten to falsely accuse her of having committed adultery with a young man in garden if she does not give way to their desires. She still refuses and they follow through on their threatened lie. They further demand that she should be stoned. Things look bleak for Susanna until Daniel comes to the rescue and, through crafty interrogation, exposes their lie for what it is. The story is a small masterpiece. If you have never read it,  you should. In the course of its engaging tale it gives us a kind of anatomy lesson of sin. It is good to consider the teachings here

Anatomy Lesson One: The Cardinal or Deadly Sins lead to other sins–  The story powerfully shows how lust, one of the seven cardinal, (a.k.a.  capital, or deadly) sins leads to numerous other sins. This is the nature of the seven deadly sins and explains why they are often called Cardinal Sins. In Latin “cardines” means “hinge”.  Hence, the seven deadly sins are like hinges on which many other sins “swing.” In this story the deadly sin of  lust leads to immodest inquiry, violation of privacy, attempted seduction, unjust accusation, exploitation, lies, oppression, and even to attempted murder. King David too had given way to lust and it led to lies, and ultimately to the murder of Uriah the Hittite by David in which David involved not only himself but his generals. This is what the seven deadly sins do, they lead inexorably to other sins.

Anatomy Lesson Two: The Sequential Sources of Sin. In a remarkable description the story describes a threefold source from which their sins spring forth. The text says: They suppressed their consciences; they would not allow their eyes to look to heaven, and did not keep in mind just judgments. (Daniel 13:9). I’d like to take a look at each of these three sources from which sin springs.

  1. They suppressed their consciences–  What is the conscience? The Catechism defines it thus: For Man has in his heart a law inscribed by God, This is his conscience, there he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths… (Catechism of the Catholic Church(CCC) # 1776). So in effect the conscience is the voice of God within us. God has written his Law in the hearts of every human person. Thus, in terms of basic right and wrong, we know what we are doing. There may be certain higher matters of the Law that the conscience must be taught (eg. the following of certain rituals or feasts days etc.). But in terms of fundamental moral norms, we have a basic and innate grasp of what is right and wrong. Deep down inside we know what we are doing. We see and salute virtues like bravery, self-control, and generosity. We also know that things like murder of the innocent, promiscuity, theft, destruction of reputations etc are wrong. For all the excuses we like to make, deep down inside we know what we are doing, and we know that we know.   I have written substantially about conscience elsewhere (HERE). But notice that it says that they suppressed their consciences. Even though we know something is wrong we often want to do it anyway. One of the first things our wily minds will do is to try and suppress our conscience. To suppress something is to put it down by force, to inhibit or to try and exclude something from awareness or consciousness. The usual way of doing this is through rationalizations and sophistry. We invent any number of thoughts, lies and distortions to try and reassure us that something is really OK that deep down inside we know isn’t OK. We accumulate false teachers and teachings to assist in this suppression of the truth that our conscience witnesses to. St. Paul wrote to Timothy: For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. (2 Tim 4:1-3). It is quite and effort to suppress one’s own conscience and I would argue that we cannot ever do it completely. In fact the whole attempt to suppress the conscience is quite an effort and it is very fragile. This helps explain the anger and hostility of many in the world toward the Church. Deep down they know we are right and often, just the slightest appeal to the conscience to awaken its voice, causes quite an eruption of fear and anger. So here is the first stage in the anatomy of a sin: the suppression of the conscience. In order to act wickedly and not face deep psychological pain of significant guilt these men in the story first  suppress their conscience in order to shut off the source of that pain. Step one is underway.
  2. they would not allow their eyes to look to heaven– In order to sustain the fictions, stinking thinking, rationalizations, and sophistry necessary to suppress the conscience it is necessary for one to distance himself  from the very source of conscience, God himself. One way to do this is to drift away from God though neglect of prayer, worship, study of the Word of God and association with the Church which speaks for God. Drifting away may become more severe as times goes on and the refusal to repent becomes deeper. Drifting soon becomes absence and absence often becomes outright hostility to anything religious or biblical. Another way that some avert their eyes from heaven is to redefine God. The revealed God of Scripture is replaced by a designer God who does not care about this thing or that. “God doesn’t care if I go to church, or shack up with my girlfriend etc.” On being shown scripture quite contrary to their distorted notions of God they simply respond that Paul had hangups, or that the Bible was written in primitive times. But the cumulative effect is that they are no longer looking to heaven or to God, but rather to a fake God, a false kingdom, an idol. Either way, the purpose is for the individual to isolate and insulate themselves  from God and what he reveals. This makes it easier to maintain the rather exhausting effort of suppressing their conscience. So for these men step two in engaged and it further supports the suppression of conscience necessary to commit sin without the pain of guilt.
  3. and did not keep in mind just judgments– Finally lets throw in a little presumption which dismisses any consequences for evil acts. This of course is one of  THE sins of our current age. This final stage is meant to eliminate  the salutary fear that should accompany evil acts. The sinner at this stage has had some success in alleviating the psychic pain of guilt and even a lot of the fear that used to accompany sin when the voice of conscience was less layered over and muted. But still some fear remains so now an attack is made on any notion of consequences. Perhaps the sinner exaggerates the mercy and patience of God to the exclusion of God’s holiness which sin cannot endure. Perhaps he denies the reality of hell which God clearly teaches. Perhaps he denies that God exists at all and holds that there is no judgment to be faced. However he does it, he must push back the fear the punishment and/or judgment.

Then, having suppressed the voice of God to the extent he can and having removed himself from heaven’s influence, and denied that anything of negative consequence will come, he is free to sin gravely. It is as though he has taken a number of stiff drinks and anesthetized himself sufficiently to proceed without pain.

But guess what, it’s still there deep down inside. The voice of conscience remains. Under all the layers of stinking thinking and attempts to insulate oneself from the true God, deep down the sinner still knows what he is doing is wrong. Even the slightest thing to prick his conscience causes increasing unease. Anger, projection, name-calling, ridiculing of anyone or anything awaken his conscience will increasing be resorted to. Sin is in full bloom now and repentance seems increasingly difficult or unlikely. Only great prayers and fasting by others for him will likely spring him loose from the deep moral sleep he is currently in. Pray for the conversion of sinners.

Well, since this post has been a little heavy it might be good to end on a lighter note:

Posted on

A Life Like Yours

There are many ways to describe my teen-age niece, Anna. She is a cell phone carrying, iPod wearing, High School Musical -crazed girl who loves going to the movies. In her more serious moments she’s a hard-working student who speaks two languages, likes photography and serves as an altar server at her parish. To those who first meet Anna, she is described as a person with Down Syndrome. Her sister describes her as the only person she knows who does not know the meaning of jealousy and who is an experience of pure love.

Unbelievably, 9 out of 10 ten  times women and men make the choice to abort a life that could one day, look a lot like Anna’s. In fact, the conversation with the doctor when my sister received the diagnosis of Downs went something like this:

The doctor: “The test results have a strong indication that the child will be born with Down Syndrome, when would you like to schedule an appointment to terminate the pregnancy.”

My sister:  “There will be no termination of the pregnancy.”

The doctor: “I don’t think you understand, the test indicates that there is a high probability that the child will be mentally retarded.”

My sister: “I understand that, but I would like to know what we can do to make sure the baby is born safe and healthy.”

The doctor: “I don’t’ think you understand fully what I am saying; you need to go home and think this over.”

My sister went on to say that the doctor also shared that he had never had parents, when faced with this diagnosis, choose to keep the baby. At the time she shared this it did not surprise me because my sister lives in Stockholm, Sweden and Sweden is one of the most secular countries with very liberal abortion laws. What does surprise me are the statistics here in the U.S. Not only because of the high rate of active practice of religion as compared to other countries, but also because in the course of our daily lives we see adults with Down Syndrome working in retail stores, attending classes at vocational schools and colleges, serving as liturgical ministers and active in lots of community activities. For example meet Maddie. www.adw.org and click on news and events.

Sunday was World Down Syndrome Day and there was an ad in the Washington Post that seeks to educate people that “Babies with Down’s grow and develop just like other children…perhaps more slowly, but just as surely.”

My sister often shares that what was most critical for her and my brother-in-law was the support they received from family and friends as they worried through so much of the unknown during the pregnancy and the support they receive from other families raising special needs kids.

The Archdiocese through its Department for Ministry to People with Special Needs and its Department for Life Issues is working in a number of different areas to educate, provide support, and build environments to help children and families thrive. On Saturday, March 27 there will be a workshop at Blessed Sacrament parish to explore all this and more. If you are interested click here

Posted on

Are Congressman Stupak’s Assurances are Without Merit?

I have commented little on the healthcare debate in DC since the focus of this blog is meant to be Church life and culture not partisan politics. And yet, the USCCB had asked us to stand against the bill due to its legal wording that permitted the Federal funding of abortion. Abortion is a moral issue, not political one and I feel free to comment on that.

A man who hours ago had my admiration for his principled stance against the funding of abortion was Congressman Bart Stupak. He and the a number of other pro-life Democrats stood courageously against the bill on the grounds that it funded abortion.

 Today Mr. Stupak and the  principled stance of other pro-life democrats gave way to political pressure. Mr Stupak et al. were given a political fig leaf and they took it. Mr Stupak has to know that the executive order of the President carries no weight because it cannot over-rule the Law that is going into effect upon the President’s signature. Both Democrat and Republican leaders I saw interviewed fully admit this. The Healthcare Bill, when signed into law permits Federal funding of Abortion. Anyone denied such funding on the the basis of an executive order can sue and will win because the law is clear and an executive order cannot set aside the law.

The reassurances that Mr. Stupak declares the executive order gives are without merit. He must know better than this. A fig leaf could not take away Adam and Eve’s shame. And the same remains true here as well: no fig leaf of some executive order can take away the shame of voting to fund abortion. It is shameful.

You can read the statement by the National Right to Life Committee here: http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/Release032110.html

I am interested in your understanding of this deal and if you think that the reassurances of Mr. Stupak are with or without merit. Since this is not a political blog I am grateful if you can avoid partisan jabs and comments that are more political than focused on the issue of abortion and how it relates to this bill.

In this video Congressman Stupak defends his decision

 

Update: Statement by Richard Doerflingerof the USCCB:


We’ve consulted with legal experts on the specific idea of resolving the abortion funding problems in the Senate bill through executive order. We know Members have been looking into this in good faith, in the hope of limiting the damage done by abortion provisions in the bill. We believe, however, that it would not be fair to withhold what our conclusion was, as it may help members in assessing the options before them:

“One proposal to address the serious problem in the Senate health care bill on abortion funding, specifically the direct appropriating of new funds that bypass the Hyde amendment, is to have the President issue an executive order against using these funds for abortion. Unfortunately, this proposal does not begin to address the problem, which arises from decades of federal appellate rulings that apply the principles of Roe v. Wade to federal health legislation. According to these rulings, such health legislation creates a statutory requirement for abortion funding, unless Congress clearly forbids such funding. That is why the Hyde amendment was needed in 1976, to stop Medicaid from funding 300,000 abortions a year. The statutory mandate construed by the courts would override any executive order or regulation. This is the unanimous view of our legal advisors and of the experts we have consulted on abortion jurisprudence. Only a change in the law enacted by Congress, not an executive order, can begin to address this very serious problem in the legislation.”

Richard Doerflinger
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops