Wednesday Liturgy: Invoking Old Testament Figures

ROME, OCT. 30, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: Why is it that we never invoke or ask intercession of any of the "holy ones" from the Old Testament in the prayers of the Mass, nor do we have feast days to honor them? I am thinking of those such as Elijah, Hannah, Samuel, Ruth, King David, or Isaiah, to name a few. Though we may refer to them, no feast day appears on the Roman calendar, nor any mention when praying in the Eucharistic prayers to be united with the saints in heaven. -- J.K., Portland, Oregon

A: The reason that there are no feast days to Old Testament saints in the Church's universal calendar is probably due to the historical process in which the calendar was formed. At first, only martyrs for Christ were remembered on their anniversaries, and shortly afterward the Blessed Virgin was also honored with feast days.

St. Martin of Tours (died 397) was probably the first non-martyr remembered with a feast. But the tradition has generally been that the saints in the calendar have been heroic examples of the life in Christ.

This does not mean that Old Testament saints were not recognized or that their intercession could not be sought.

The Roman Martyrology, a liturgical book first published in the 1600, collects all of the saints and blessed officially recognized by the Church and organized according to their feast day. Those classified as saints in this book may be celebrated on their feast days, provided that the day is free of any other obligatory celebration.

Most of these saints, who far outnumber those of the general calendar, have no specific Mass formulas. Whenever they are celebrated, the most appropriate formulas are chosen from the common of saints.

Among the great saints of the Old Testament traditionally remembered in the Martyrology are the Prophet Habakkuk, celebrated on Jan. 15; Isaiah, July 6; Daniel and Elias, July 20 and 21; the Seven Maccabees and their mother, Aug. 17; Abraham, Oct. 9; and King David, Dec. 29.

There are also other occasions when the intercession of Old Testament saints is invoked in some way or another, for example:

-- Every time the litanies of the saints are prayed they are invoked in generic terms: "All holy Patriarchs and Prophets, pray for us."

-- Abel, Abraham and Melchizedek are referred to in the Roman Canon as examples of true devotion to God.

-- Abel and Abraham used also to be specifically invoked in the brief litany in the rite recommending a departing soul, but this has now been replaced with a generic form.

-- In the Libera (Deliver, etc.), which follows shortly after, many Old Testament names still appear, for example: "Free your servant, Lord, as you freed Daniel from the den of the lions."

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: When an Orthodox Joins the Catholic Church

ROME, OCT. 30, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Two readers, both expert canonists, sent in some clarifications that expand on my earlier answer (Oct. 16) regarding how an Orthodox Christian may enter the Catholic Church. I am very grateful and happily share their wisdom with our readers.

I had suggested that the Orthodox Christian seek out the nearest Eastern eparchy in order to make the profession of faith. A canonist informed me that when this is not feasible, "The simplest thing to do, in the likelihood that the proper Eastern Catholic Church 'sui iuris' is not readily accessible, is for an Eastern Christian to make a profession of faith before the local (usually Latin) Catholic pastor.

"The Eastern Christian recites the Nicene Creed and adds: 'I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God' (RCIA, Appendix, 2, 15; USA, 474, 491).

"Ascription to the proper ritual Church 'sui iuris' is automatic but needs to be recorded. Mentioning this in your column will be helpful in reminding Latin priests (and priests of other Churches 'sui iuris') to note it properly in the remarks of the baptismal registry (which usually serves as the 'special book' referred to in RCIA, Appendix, 13; USA, 486)."

Regarding my statement that an Orthodox would need a dispensation in order to enter into marriage, another reader clarified the terminology and the ensuing legal consequences.

She wrote: "Please permit me to point out that it is incorrect to state that an Orthodox requires a dispensation in order to marry in the Catholic Church. Canon 1124 notes that marriage between a Catholic and a baptized non-Catholic is 'prohibited' ('prohibitum est') without 'permission' ('licentia') of competent authority. Absent such permission, the marriage is held to be illicit, rather than invalid. This required permission is different from a dispensation, as a dispensation is required to overcome an impediment which would affect validity.

"The above pertains to all non-Catholic Christians, but current marriage law is especially lenient, if you will, toward intermarriage with Orthodox, with regard to canonical form. Ordinarily, all marriages are required to follow the form delineated in Canon 1108.1, and a dispensation is thus required if the couple wish to marry in the church of the non-Catholic. Without this dispensation, the marriage would be invalid due to lack of form. But the particular case of an Orthodox Christian marrying a Catholic is specifically addressed further in Canon 1127.1: If the two were to marry in an Orthodox wedding ceremony, i.e., without following canonical form, the Church regards the marriage as valid, although illicit."

Once more I express my gratitude for these observations which I am sure will be as helpful to our readers as they have been to me.

Wednesday Liturgy: Arriving After the Gospel: No Communion

ROME, OCT. 23, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: My parish priest made a regulation that anyone who arrives in Mass after the Gospel is not allowed to take Communion. According to him, the reason is that Jesus is "the Word made flesh." Therefore we must recognize Jesus in the Word before we recognize him in holy Communion. Another priest, who is a professor of liturgy, has another opinion. He said that people who arrive late in Mass with a valid reason (for example, an unusual traffic jam, attending sick children, etc.) should not be denied Communion. Could you please give a clarification on this matter? -- B.E., Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

A: We dealt with the question of late arrivals at Mass in one of our first columns, on Nov. 4 and Nov. 18, in 2003.

Then as now, I would agree more with the second priest: that someone who arrives late out of no fault of their own should not be denied Communion.

I also consider it unwise to set any barrier point; I continue to insist that the faithful should assist at the whole Mass.

It is quite possible that some members of the faithful could begin to see the Gospel as the cutoff moment and feel comfortable in habitually arriving for the second reading, thus assuring that the Mass is "valid."

It is true that the Mass is a whole and that we must first recognize Jesus in the Word before we recognize him in the Eucharist. But this would include the entire Liturgy of the Word and not just the Gospel.

Also, while there is some certain logic in choosing the Gospel as such a moment, the reasons given are not sufficiently well grounded from the theological, canonical and moral standpoints to support such a blanket impediment to receiving Communion.

The pastor has a duty to direct and inform the consciences of the faithful entrusted to him. And while I disagree with his suggesting the Gospel as a demarcation point for receiving Communion, it is at least clear that he his trying to perform his sacred duty.

Therefore, the onus of the decision whether or not to receive Communion, in this particular case of a late arrival, falls primarily upon the individual Catholic rather than upon the pastor who can hardly be expected to be attentive to every late arrival.

It is therefore incumbent on those arriving late to examine their conscience as to the reason behind their tardiness. If the reason is neglect or laziness, then they would do better attending another full Mass if this is possible. Even those who blamelessly arrive late should prefer to assist at a full Mass although they would be less bound to do so in conscience.

At the same time, there are some objective elements to be taken into account besides the reason for lateness. Someone who arrives after the consecration has not attended Mass, no matter what the reason for his belatedness. Such a person should not receive Communion, and if it is a Sunday, has the obligation to attend another Mass.

It is true that Communion may be received outside of Mass, so Mass is not an essential prerequisite for receiving Communion. This would not, however, justify arriving just in time for Communion at a weekday Mass, as all of the rites for receiving Communion outside of Mass include a Liturgy of the Word and one should attend the entire rite.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Mentioning the Mass Intention

ROME, OCT. 23, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

After our commentaries on reading out Mass intentions (Oct. 9) a priest observed: "At a concelebrated Mass, each concelebrant conceivably has a separate Mass intention. At my monastery, we have daily concelebration, and we have a policy of never mentioning any Mass intention at Mass. Otherwise, it could happen that if one Mass intention is mentioned by the presiding celebrant, someone may be present who has requested a different intention from one of the concelebrants, and would have the impression that the requested intention was not fulfilled."

This is certainly a legitimate policy given the circumstances. There might be particular occasions, however, when the fact that several priests are concelebrating specifically allows for more than one intention to be mentioned, provided that the faithful know that each intention will be entrusted to a different priest.

Even though only one Mass is celebrated at a concelebration, each priest legitimately celebrates a Mass and may receive a stipend for the corresponding intention.

There is, however, a strict norm that a priest may never receive a stipend for a concelebrated Mass if he celebrates, or more rarely concelebrates, another Mass on the same day.

For example, if our correspondent, besides concelebrating at the community Mass in the monastery, were to also celebrate for the people at some other time, he could only accept a stipend for the second Mass.

He could have any number of personal intentions to offer at the community Mass, but none associated with a stipend.

Christ's Parable About the Need to Pray Always: Gospel Commentary for the 29th Sunday in Ordinary Time

By Father Raniero Cantalamessa, OFM Cap

ROME, OCT. 19, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Sunday's Gospel begins thus: "Jesus told them a parable about the need to pray always and not to lose heart." The parable is the one about the troublesome widow. In answer to the question "How often must we pray?" Jesus answers, "Always!"

Prayer, like love, does not put up with calculation. Does a mother ask how often she should love her child, or a friend how often he should love a friend? There can be different levels of deliberateness in regard to love, but there are no more or less regular intervals in loving. It is the same way with prayer.

This ideal of constant prayer is realized in different forms in the East and West. Eastern Christianity practiced it with the "Jesus Prayer": "Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me!"

The West formulated the principle of constant prayer in a more flexible way so that it could also be proposed to those who do not lead a monastic life. St. Augustine teaches that the essence of prayer is desire. If the desire for God is constant, so also is prayer, but if there is no interior desire, then you can howl as much as you want -- to God you are mute.

Now, this secret desire for God, a work of memory, of need for the infinite, of nostalgia for God, can remain alive, even when one has other things to do: "Praying for a long time is not the same thing as kneeling or folding your hands for a long time. In consists rather in awakening a constant and devout impulse of the heart toward him whom we invoke."

Jesus himself gave us the example of unceasing prayer. Of him, it is said that he prayed during the day, in the evening, early in the morning, and sometimes he passed the whole night in prayer. Prayer was the connecting thread of his whole life.

But Christ's example tells us something else important. We are deceiving ourselves if we think that we can pray always, make prayer a kind of respiration of the soul in the midst of daily activity, if we do not set aside fixed times for prayer, when we are free from every other preoccupation.

The same Jesus who we see praying always, is also the one who, like every other Jew of his period, stopped and turned toward the temple in Jerusalem three times a day, at dawn, in the afternoon during the temple sacrifices, and at sundown, and recited ritual prayers, among which was the "Shema Yisrael!" -- "Hear, O Israel!" On the Sabbath he also participated, with his disciples, in the worship at the synagogue; different scenes in the Gospels take place precisely in this context.

The Church -- we can say, from its first moment of life -- has also set aside a special day dedicated to worship and prayer: Sunday. We all know what, unfortunately, has happened to Sunday in our society: Sports, from being something for diversion and relaxation, have often become something that poisons Sunday ... We must do whatever we can so that this day can return to being, as God intended it in commanding festive repose, a day of serene joy that strengthens our communion with God and with each other, in the family and in society.

We modern Christians should take our inspiration from the words that, in 305, St. Saturnius and his fellow martyrs addressed to the Roman judge who had them arrested for participating in the Sunday rite: "The Christian cannot live without the Sunday Eucharist. Do you not know that the Christian exists for the Eucharist and the Eucharist for the Christian?"

Wednesday Liturgy: When an Orthodox Joins the Catholic Church

ROME, OCT. 16, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: What is the procedure for a person who was baptized Macedonian Orthodox and who now wants to be received into the Roman Catholic Church? -- F.F., Toronto

A: In the vast majority of cases Orthodox Christians have been validly baptized, confirmed and received the Eucharist from infancy, and thus do not have to receive any of these sacraments.

Likewise, Catholic canon law allows a Catholic priest to administer the sacraments of Eucharist, reconciliation and anointing to Orthodox Christians if their own minister is unavailable or for other just causes. (Most Orthodox Churches, however, do not approve of their faithful availing of this possibility.)

For this reason Orthodox Christians intending to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church would usually be able to participate in the Church's sacramental life even before their formal incorporation, either in the Latin rite or in an Eastern Catholic rite.

Prior to formal incorporation, they would still require a dispensation from the bishop before entering into marriage and a man could not enter into seminary formation. Nor could they receive any formal ministry.

The specific process for incorporating a baptized Eastern Christian is covered above all in the Code of Canon Law of the Eastern Churches, canons 35 and 896-901.

Canon 896 specifies that for those adult Christians (beyond 14 years) "who ask of their own accord to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church, whether as individuals or as groups, no burden is to be imposed beyond what is necessary."

Canon 897 indicates that the Christian may be received "With only the profession of faith after a doctrinal and spiritual preparation that is suited to the person's condition."

With respect to individual laypersons the right to receive usually pertains to the pastor although in some cases particular law might reserve this admission to a higher authority (cf. Canon 898.3).

Canon 35, however, is important because it specifies that baptized non-Catholics entering into full communion "should retain their own rite and should observe it everywhere in the world as far as humanly possible. Thus they are to be ascribed to the Church 'sui iuris' of the same rite."

When the person wishes not only to become Catholic but to change to the Latin rite, the same canon recognizes the right to approach the Holy See (the Congregation for Eastern Churches) in special cases.

Therefore, in the case at hand, the simplest thing to do is to approach the Eastern eparchy most closely resembling his original rite in order to be admitted into the Catholic Church in accordance with the dispositions of the pastor.

Once admitted, he should continue to practice the faith in the corresponding Eastern rite. But he may also freely practice in the Latin rite for a just cause, for example, if there were no churches of his own rite within a reasonable distance.

In order to formally switch rites, he would need to recur to the Holy See as mentioned above.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: What a Deacon Can Do

ROME, OCT. 16, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Two readers offered friendly criticism of an expression used in my Oct. 2 column on what a deacon can and cannot do.

One wrote: "Father McNamara says that the deacon is of a 'lower grade' of order than a priest. While such a designation might be accurate in terms of reflecting the liturgical faculties associated with the diaconate, it seems to suggest that a deacon is in some way subservient to a priest, which I believe is a trivialization of the ordained ministry of service. Rather than a strict hierarchical construct in which the line might be a straight one from bishop to priest to deacon, my understanding of the diaconate, traditionally and in our contemporary context, is that the ordained deacon is directly accountable to the bishop. That is, of a class of order unique to itself."

Another added: "You state that the deacon is a lower grade than a priest. 'Lumen Gentium,' No. 29, does indeed say 'at a lower level of hierarchy are deacons,' but it does go on to say 'in communion with the Bishop and the presbyterate.' So though there is a hierarchical difference between deacon and priest, and of course bishop and priest, there is also a fundamental unity and communion. Talk of lower grades by itself does not seem to me to do justice to this understanding of Vatican II.

"I do not think priests would welcome being told they are a lower grade than bishops, full stop. That would again not do justice to a proper understanding of priesthood and their share in the high priesthood of Christ to which a bishop is ordained." The writer went on to say that a deacon is an ordained minister, who, like a priest, shares in the apostolic ministry of the Church "but with a distinct, different and differentiated but not lesser ministry than the priest."

While I appreciate both the interest and the sincere friendliness of these observations, I believe that the term is technically accurate from the point of view of the sacrament of orders. Bishop, priest and deacon are not three separate sacraments but different levels (or grades or degrees) of the one sacrament of holy orders.

Each level has its own value and its proper sphere of ministry and specific liturgical functions. Yet, they are not simply three distinct modes of orders but are indeed hierarchically structured. The deacon has many particular functions, but insofar as he is at the service of the Eucharistic mystery his ministry necessarily depends upon and is related to the priestly ministry, not as subservience but as service.

Given that the Eucharist is the center and lifeblood of the Church, all other possible diaconal ministries such as celebrating baptism and matrimony ultimately flow from the priest's Eucharistic ministry.

However, the priest's Eucharistic ministry, and hence the deacon's relatedness to him, in turn depends on the bishop and finally upon Christ himself as the foundation of all the sacraments.

In this sense of sacramental and hierarchical communion and interdependence, it is no slight to a deacon to state the fact that his is a lower grade of the sacrament of orders, just as the priest's dignity is in no way demeaned by saying that he is at a lower grade of orders compared to the bishop. This is implied in the Latin text of the prayer of priestly ordination which asks that the candidate receive the second grade or degree of priestly ministry.

For this reason I believe that our first correspondent's affirmation regarding the deacon and priest's direct accountability to the bishop confuses two distinct spheres. One thing is that all clerics depend directly upon the bishop with regard to assignments and ministries; another is the specific liturgical functions, which depend on the nature of the sacrament itself.

As stated in the previous article, among the practical consequences of this sacramental reality is that the deacon should not ordinarily preside over the assembly whenever a priest is present and available, just as a priest should not normally preside over the assembly in the presence of a bishop.

There may be some legitimate exceptions to this general rule, but I believe that it is important to recognize that this rule is grounded in the nature of the sacrament and is not a mere question of protocol and human criteria.

What Use Are Miracles?

Commentary for the 28th Sunday in Ordinary Time

By Father Raniero Cantalamessa, OFM Cap


ROME, OCT. 12, 2007 (Zenit.org).- While Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem, 10 lepers met him at the entrance to a village. Staying at a distance they call out to him, "Jesus, Master, have pity on us!" Jesus has pity on them and says to them: "Go and show yourselves to the priests."

Along the way the 10 lepers discover themselves to be miraculously cured. The first reading also tells of a miraculous healing of a leper: that of Naaman the Syrian by the prophet Elisha. The liturgy's intention is clearly to invite us to reflect on the meaning of miracles and in particular of miracles that bring about the cure of a sickness.

Let us say that prerogative to do miracles is one of the most attested in Jesus' life. Perhaps the most dominant idea that the people had of Jesus during his life, more dominant than that of a prophet, was that of a miracle worker. Jesus himself presents this fact as proof of the Messianic authenticity of his mission: "The blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are healed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised" (cf. Matthew 11:5). Miracles cannot be eliminated from Jesus' life without destroying the plot of the whole Gospel.

Together with accounts of the miracles, Scripture offers us criteria for judging their authenticity and purpose. In the Bible, miracles are never ends in themselves; much less are they supposed to elevate the person who does them and show off his extraordinary powers, as is almost always the case with healers and wonder workers who advertise themselves. Miracles are rather an incentive for and a reward of faith. It is a sign and it must serve to draw attention to what it signifies. This is why Jesus is saddened when, after having multiplied the loaves of bread, he sees that they did not understand what this was a sign of (cf. Mark 6:51).

In the Gospel itself, miracles are ambiguous. Sometimes they are regarded positively and sometimes negatively -- positively, when they are welcomed with gratitude and joy, when they awaken faith in Christ and hope in a future world without sickness and death; negatively, when they are asked for or demanded for faith. "What sign do you do that we might believe in you?" (John 6:30). This ambiguity continues in a different form in today's world. On the one hand, there are those who seek out miracles at all costs; it is always a hunt for the extraordinary, and people stop at their immediate utility. On the other hand, their are those who deny miracles altogether; indeed they look upon miracles with a certain irritation, as if it were a manifestation of degenerate religiosity, without recognizing that in doing so they are pretending to teach God himself what is true religiosity and what isn't.

Some recent debates that have arisen around the Padre Pio phenomenon have shown how much confusion is still around today about miracles. It is not true, for example, that the Church considers every unexplainable event a miracle (we know that even the medical world is full of this!). It considers as miracles only those unexplainable facts that, because of the circumstances in which they take place (which are rigorously ascertained), have the character of a divine sign, that is, they give confirmation to someone or an answer to a prayer. If a woman, who is without pupils from birth begins to see at a certain point while still being without pupils, this can be cataloged as an unexplainable fact. But if this happens while she is confessing to Padre Pio, as did in fact happen, then it is no longer possible to speak simply of an unexplainable fact.

Our atheist friends with their critical attitude in regard to miracles make a contribution to faith itself because they make us attentive to easy falsifications in this area. But they too must guard against an uncritical attitude. It is just as mistaken always to believe whatever is claimed as a miracle as it is always to refuse to believe without looking at the evidence. It is possible to be credulous but it is also possible to be ... incredulous, which is not very different.

Wednesday Liturgy: Mentioning the Mass Intention

ROME, OCT. 9, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: Unlike our present pastor, our former priest always would mention the intention for the Mass. Is this up to the individual priest? It gets printed in our bulletin, but I would hope the priest would mention who the Mass is for at some point, even though I know God knows who it is for. -- L.S., St. Louis, Missouri

A: While there are no universal laws regarding this topic, some dioceses have published norms with common-sense indications that all priests may take into account.

My reply is inspired by the norms issued by the Diocese of Rome.

There is no requirement to mention the priest's intention at the Mass. Thus, a mention in the bulletin or some other public notification is a legitimate option, especially when the pastor is aware that the person who requested the Mass will not be present at the celebration.

If the person or family who requested the intention wishes to be present, then it is good that the celebrant mention the name of the person for whom the Mass is being offered.

This may best be done either after the greeting at the beginning of Mass or as an intention of the prayer of the faithful.

The name should not normally be mentioned during the Eucharistic prayer. This naming is best left for funeral Masses, Masses at the notification of death, and significant anniversaries. The special formulas for funerals, especially in Eucharistic Prayers 2 and 3, were specifically composed with such occasions in mind and were not conceived for daily recitation.

It should be remembered that the Mass intention refers above all to the intention of the celebrating priest who took upon himself the commitment to celebrate for a specific intention when he accepted a stipend.

Since the Mass is infinite the priest may also have other personal intentions that may or may not be reflected in the Mass formula used.

For example, a priest may offer the Mass for a deceased soul while at the same time using the Mass formula "For Vocations," with the personal intention of asking God to bless the Church with abundant vocations.

Likewise, while any person assisting at Mass is free to associate his prayer with the intention of the priest celebrant, he or she is also free to offer up participation at the Mass for any number of personal intentions.

We also have dealt amply with the topic of intentions and stipends in our columns of Feb. 22 and March 8 in 2005.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Using Multiple Ciboria and Chalices

ROME, OCT. 9, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

In the wake of our comments on multiple vessels (Sept. 25) a reader asked: "When several chalices are prepared for a concelebrated Mass, my understanding is that it is correct to add water to the wine only in the 'main' chalice, and that it is not necessary to add water to the wine in all the chalices. Is there any official document in which this is specified?"

This point has been discussed by liturgists, but no consensus has been found. Nor am I aware of any official norms on this particular subject.

Some liturgists hold the position that it is sufficient to add water to the chalice of the principal chalice, which thus forms a moral unity with the other chalices for the purpose of consecration.

This argument is fairly solid from the theological standpoint, and there would certainly be no doubt that the consecration would be valid and licit.

It also solves the problem of the rather ungainly sight of a deacon or priest pouring a drop of water into several chalices already arrayed upon the altar.

It is not, however, universal liturgical practice. Many celebrants prefer to place water in all chalices, along with wine, so that all communicants can receive from wine that has been mixed with water according to ancient Church tradition.

This may be done in two ways. If there are only a couple of extra chalices, then wine and water, or just water (if the extra chalices are already prepared) may be placed in all of them during the preparation of the gifts.

If there are many chalices, then water and wine may be placed in all but the principal chalice when the chalices are prepared before Mass begins.

This latter solution is generally practiced by the Vatican sacristans for large concelebrations at St. Peter's.

Article: Confession Comeback: Efforts to Stimulate Interest in Reconciliation

By Father John Flynn, L.C.

ROME, OCT. 8, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Confession is undergoing a revival of sorts after a long period of neglect. There has been a spate of recent press articles on the sacrament of confession, or reconciliation, as it is often termed.

On Sept. 21 the Wall Street Journal reported that more than 5,000 people turned up at a Reconciliation Weekend held in March in the Diocese of Orlando, Florida.

A column dated March this year by Bishop Thomas Wenski, posted on the Orlando Diocese's Web page, spoke about the need for confession. The loss of the sense of sin was termed "the spiritual crisis of our age," he said.

Last year, the bishop noted, he wrote to the priests of his diocese, asking them to make more time to hear confessions. This year he explained that a number of parishes were going to organize a special Reconciliation Weekend, just prior to Holy Week.

Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal article explained that interest in confession is rising among some Protestant denominations. This summer, a North American branch of the Lutherans passed a resolution at a meeting supporting the rite of confession, after more than a century of neglect.

Online disclosure

Some of the Protestant versions of confession being popularized are, however, notably different from the Catholic sacrament. The Wall Street Journal mentioned practices such as individuals coming clean in videos that are even posted on sites such as YouTube, for all to see.

Other initiatives include a confession Web site, set up by an evangelical congregation in Cooper City, Florida, which according to the Wall Street Journal has postings from 7,700 people who list their faults.

The rising interest in confession marks a turnaround, the article observed. A 2005 survey reported that only 26% of Catholics in the United States went to confession at least once a year, down from 74% in the early '80s.

The revival in confession, particularly of the public kind, can take all sorts of forms, as is evidenced in a Reuters article from Sept. 27. The agency reported on a new Web site set up by a major publisher of romantic fiction, Harlequin Enterprises. People will be able to confess, anonymously, their sins online, with others being able to read their postings.

More news on varieties of confession came in a major feature article, published Aug. 31 by the Los Angeles Times. The paper gave details about a number of Web sites where confessions can be made. One of the sites even allows other persons to comment on and give advice to those who confess.

Turning on the light

The Catholic Church is also trying to promote interest in confession. This year some dioceses launched campaigns to encourage use of the sacrament in the period prior to Easter. In Washington, D.C., for example, all the 140 churches of the archdiocese opened for confession every Wednesday evening.

The effort was part of a campaign titled "The Light Is On for You." Included in the campaign were radio and billboard ads, and a Web page set up with a variety of material encouraging participation in the sacrament. In addition, 100,000 printed guides in Spanish and English were distributed.

Washington Archbishop Donald Wuerl also penned a pastoral letter, "God's Mercy and the Sacrament of Penance," as part of the campaign.

"Despite our best intentions, each of us has experienced personal failure," he noted in the introduction to the letter. We are aware, explained Archbishop Wuerl, "that a part of us is determined to do good while at the same time an element within us continually turns away from the good we know we can do."

God does not leave us alone in this situation of our human weakness and the ever-present reality of sin, the letter added. "Jesus gives us newness of life in grace that begins to restore our relationship with God which will lead to full communion with God in glory."

This power to forgive sins was extended by Jesus to the Church and is administered through the sacrament of confession.

God's forgiveness

"It remains one of the great marvels of God's love that God would make forgiveness so readily available to each of us," Archbishop Wuerl commented.

"The sacrament of reconciliation is the story of God's love that never turns away from us," he said. "Like the father in the parable of the prodigal son, God waits, watches and hopes for our return every time we walk away."

Not all are convinced, however, that these efforts to stimulate confession will succeed. Time magazine, which gained notoriety for its Sept. 3 cover issue that sought to cast doubts on Mother Teresa of Calcutta's faith, posted an article dated Sept. 27 on its Time.com Web page titled "The Unrepentant."

Noting the decades-long decline in us by Catholics of the sacrament, the article attempted to argue that reaction against the encyclical "Humanae Vitae" has "led to a wider re-evaluation of what constitutes sin -- and whether confession is really necessary."

The article also doubted that recent efforts in the American dioceses to promote confession had obtained any real success and concluded that future efforts are similarly doomed.

A gift

Another recent initiative to revive interest in confession comes in the form of a book titled "The Gift of Confession, (Connor Court Publishing). Father Michael de Stoop, a priest in the Archdiocese of Sydney, Australia, aimed to portray confession in a positive way, emphasizing the many benefits the sacrament offers believers.

Many people, he noted in the book's introduction, are unaware of the theological background that can help us to understand and appreciate confession. In addition to freeing us from sin, the sacrament also restores and increases our opportunities to share in God's divine life, Father de Stoop explained.

Thus, confession frees us from sin, and also restores our freedom to live a life of virtue by restoring within us the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The grace we receive strengthens our will to resist sin, thereby enabling us to progress in holiness.

By making us more aware of the evil of sin and the need to avoid it, regular participation in confession, the book observes, also helps us to build our character and develop good habits. Coming closer to God by means of the sacrament of reconciliation will also make it easier for us to pray.

Benedict XVI reflected on the importance of confession, in words directed to the youth of Rome, gathered March 29 in St Peter's Basilica to prepare for the local diocesan celebration of World Youth Day on April 1.

God's love for us, expressed by the death of Christ on the cross, has obtained for us the gift of the Holy Spirit through which our sins are forgiven and peace granted, the Pope commented.

"Christ draws us to him to unite himself with each one of us so that, in our turn, we may learn to love our brothers and sisters with this same love, as he has loved us," the Pontiff added.

Once we are filled with this love, Benedict XVI recommended to the young people, we are called upon to make an impact in the world by means of an authentic Christian witness. Valuable words of encouragement to encourage participation in a sacrament neglected for too long.

Article: Catholic Schools in the Spotlight: Role of Faith and Education Debated

By Father John Flynn, L.C.

ROME, OCT. 7, 2007 (Zenit.org).- State funding of Catholic schools has been a hotly debated topic in the lead-up to Oct. 10 legislative elections in the Canadian province of Ontario.

John Tory, leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party, raised the issue when during the campaign he questioned why Catholic schools in the province are state-funded while other faith-based schools are not, reported the National Post newspaper Aug. 25.

Tory, who is hoping to unseat the ruling Liberal Party Ontario premier, Dalton McGuinty, proposed extending public funding to other faiths, at an estimated cost of 400 million Canadian dollars (US $407).

The newspaper article explained that the decision to fund provincial Catholic schools dates back to the 1867 Constitution Act, which established in Canada two systems of publicly funded education: government and Catholic. Other provinces have since changed their education funding, but this has not been the case in Ontario.

In reply to Tory's proposal some critics proposed simply eliminating any public funds for all faith schools. "The best course of action would be to simply eliminate public funding for Ontario's Catholic schools," opined an editorial in the Globe and Mail newspaper on Sept. 6.

The editorial echoed a censure heard with frequency in some quarters, saying: "As we struggle to avoid the polarization of ethnic and religious minorities, governments should not be contributing to it by encouraging kids to interact only with members of their own faith."

An opinion supported by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, in an open letter dated Sept. 21 written to Ontario Education Minister Kathleen Wynne, said: "Public funding of religious schools will drain resources from the public system and promote private schools at the expense of public schools."

Parental rights

The province's Catholic bishops had their say in the altercation, reported the Ottawa Citizen newspaper on Sept. 10. "The public funding of Catholic schools recognizes that parents have the right to make educational choices for their children, and that the state should assist them," said a statement issued by Bishop James Wingle, head of the Diocese of St. Catharines and president of the Ontario conference of bishops.

"The primacy of parental rights in education is a value which should be realized not only by Catholic parents, but also by others," the prelates' continued.

The bishops also stated that they "respect and support the wishes of parents in other faith communities for religion education in the public school system or for alternative schools which reflect their beliefs and values."

Faith-based education was also criticized in England recently, by columnist Zoe Williams, in a commentary written Sept. 19 for the Guardian. Her article came after the decision of Catholic schools in Northern Ireland to disband their support groups for Amnesty International, owing to its adoption of a pro-abortion stance.

Williams accused Christians of "prosecuting an agenda that is repugnant," through their schools and argued that they should not receive any public funds.

Times opinion columnist Alice Miles previously expressed similar sentiments. In a May 23 article, she accused the middle classes of using the faith schools "as a barely covert form of social and academic selection."

Selecting on belief

Schools run by Anglicans or the Catholic Church, Miles argued, should not be allowed to select pupils on the basis of belief, but should simply accept anyone who applies to enter.

The question of using religious criteria to select pupils also came up recently in Ireland, reported the Irish Times newspaper on Sept. 15.

Replying to criticisms of Catholic schools, Bishop Leo O'Reilly, chairman of the Irish bishops' education commission, said that the schools were founded by the Church to provide a Catholic education for its members.

Parents have a right to have their children educated in Catholic schools, and having contributed through taxes to fund public education, it is not unfair that the faith schools receive government funds, argued Bishop O'Reilly.

The right of parents to choose what sort of education they wish for their children, he added, is supported by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as the European Convention on Human Rights.

Shortly afterward, Archbishop Sean Brady of Armagh spoke about the topic of faith schools in a speech given Sept. 21 for the launch in Belfast of a Web site for the Consultative Group on Catholic Education.

At a time of moral confusion, he argued, Catholic education defends the dignity of the human person and offers a set of values based on the Gospel.

Labeling such an education as divisive is simply not the truth, Archbishop Brady maintained. "Reconciliation, love of neighbor, respect for difference: These values are intrinsic to Catholic education because they are intrinsic to the message of Jesus," he said.

"We do not abandon children to the 'whatever you think yourself' approach to morality so often associated with a purely secular or state-based education often found in other countries," the archbishop added.

Catholic values

The advantages of a Catholic education were enough to persuade even an atheist to make a large donation, as an article posted May 23 on Bloomberg.com explained. Retired hedge-fund manager Robert W. Wilson announced he was giving $22.5 million to the Archdiocese of New York to fund a scholarship program for needy inner city students attending Catholic schools.

"Let's face it, without the Roman Catholic Church, there would be no Western civilization," Wilson said.

Nevertheless, Catholic schools face trials in some areas. In Washington, D.C., Archbishop Donald Wuerl is proposing to convert eight out of the 28 Catholic schools into charter schools, due to financial pressures, reported the Washington Post on Sept. 8.

The plan means the schools lose their religious identity, as they would be run by a secular body. Archbishop Wuerl said this was the only way to continue providing education for many low-income families.

Chicago is also facing a time of transition, as an article published Sept. 11 in the Chicago Tribune newspaper reported. Chicago's Catholic schools educate 98,000 students, but responsibility for this task now depends on laypeople instead of members of religious orders.

Citing data from the National Catholic Education Association, the article noted that while in the 1950s about 90% of the Catholic teaching staff was made up of religious brothers and sisters. Today, there are only 206 religious teaching in Chicago's Catholic schools, or 4% of the staff.

Numbers up

Meanwhile, Catholic schools in Australia face a different kind of situation. Private schools, many of them Catholic, are flourishing. An article published Feb. 27 by the Australian Associated Press reported that the number of students at independent and Catholic schools had risen by 21.5% since 1996.

Over the same period, numbers in government schools increased by just 1.2%. By the end of last year, 66.8% of Australia's 3.36 million full-time school students went to government schools, down from 70.7% in 1996.

In spite of the numerical success there are concerns over the Catholic identity of the Church schools. On Aug. 8 the bishops of New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory issued a statement titled "Catholic Schools at a Crossroads."

In it, they observed that over the past two decades the proportion of children in their schools from non-practicing Catholic families has risen considerably. As well, enrollments from non-Catholics have more than doubled to 20% from 9%.

The bishops urged school leaders to study how to maximize enrollment of Catholic students and also to work in order to maintain the religious identity of their institutions. The document recommended a greater space for prayer and liturgy, along with sound religious education. Maintaining the Catholic identity of schools in clearly no easy task in today's world.

Father Cantalamessa on the Leap of Faith

ROME, OCT. 5, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of a commentary by the Pontifical Household preacher, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, on the readings from this Sunday's liturgy.


* * *

Increase Our Faith
27th Sunday in Ordinary Time
Habakkuk 1:2-3; 2:2-4; 2 Timothy 1:6-8, 13-14; Luke 17:5-10

This Sunday's Gospel begins with the apostles asking Jesus: "Increase our faith!"

Instead of satisfying their desire, Jesus seems to want to make it grow further. He says: "If you had faith the size of a mustard seed ..."

Without a doubt, faith is the dominant theme this Sunday. We hear about it also in the first reading, in the celebrated line of Habakkuk, taken up again by St. Paul in his Letter to the Romans: "The just shall live by faith" (1:17).

Faith has a few different meanings. This time I would like to reflect on the more common and elementary understanding of faith: believing or not believing in God.

This is not the faith by which one decides whether one is Catholic or Protestant, Christian or Muslim, but the faith by which one decides whether one is a believer or a nonbeliever, believer or atheist. A Scripture text says: "Those who come to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him" (Hebrews 11:6). This is the first step of faith, without it, we cannot take the other steps.

To speak of faith in such a general way we cannot base ourselves only on the Bible since it only has validity for Christians and, in part, for Jews, but not for anyone else. It is fortunate for us that God wrote two "books": One is the Bible, the other is creation. The one is composed of letters and words, the other of things.

Not everyone knows or is able to read the book of Scripture; but everyone, from every place and culture, can read the book of creation. "The heavens tell of the glory of God and the firmament declares the work of his hands" (Psalm 19:2). Paul writes: "Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made" (Romans 1:20).

It is urgent that we show how unfounded the opinion is that says that science has already liquidated the problem and exhaustively explained the world without any need to invoke the idea of a reality beyond it called God. In a certain sense, today science brings us closer to faith in a creator than in the past.

Let us consider the famous theory that explains the origin of the universe with the "big bang," the great explosion at the beginning. In a billionth of a billionth of a second, we go from one situation in which there is not yet anything, neither space nor time, to a situation in which time has begun, space exists, and, in an infinitesimal particle of matter, there is already, in potency, the whole subsequent universe of billions of galaxies, as we know it today.

One could say: "There is no sense in asking about what there was before that instant, because there is no 'before,' when time does not exist."

But I say: "How can we not ask that question!"

"Trying to go back behind the history of the cosmos," it will be said, "is like going through the pages of a large book starting at the end. Once we arrive at the beginning we see that the first page is missing."

I believe biblical revelation has something to tell us precisely about this first page. Science cannot be asked to declare on this "first page," which is outside time, but neither must science close the circle, making everyone think that everything is resolved.

There is no pretense of "demonstrating" God's existence, in the common understanding of this term. Here below we see as through a mirror, says St. Paul.

When a ray of light enters into a room, it is not the ray of light itself that is seen, but the dance of the dust that receives and reveals the light. It is the same with God: We do not see him directly, but as in a reflection, in the dance of things. This explains why God is not reached without the "leap" of faith.

Article: A Beloved Professor Delivers The Lecture of a Lifetime

A Beloved Professor Delivers
The Lecture of a Lifetime

Randy Pausch, a Carnegie Mellon University computer-science professor, was about to give a lecture Tuesday afternoon, but before he said a word, he received a standing ovation from 400 students and colleagues.

He motioned to them to sit down. "Make me earn it," he said.

What wisdom would we impart to the world if we knew it was our last chance? For Carnegie Mellon professor Randy Pausch, the question isn't rhetorical -- he's dying of cancer. Jeff Zaslow narrates a video on Prof. Pausch's final lecture.

They had come to see him give what was billed as his "last lecture." This is a common title for talks on college campuses today. Schools such as Stanford and the University of Alabama have mounted "Last Lecture Series," in which top professors are asked to think deeply about what matters to them and to give hypothetical final talks. For the audience, the question to be mulled is this: What wisdom would we impart to the world if we knew it was our last chance?

It can be an intriguing hour, watching healthy professors consider their demise and ruminate over subjects dear to them. At the University of Northern Iowa, instructor Penny O'Connor recently titled her lecture "Get Over Yourself." At Cornell, Ellis Hanson, who teaches a course titled "Desire," spoke about sex and technology.

At Carnegie Mellon, however, Dr. Pausch's speech was more than just an academic exercise. The 46-year-old father of three has pancreatic cancer and expects to live for just a few months. His lecture, using images on a giant screen, turned out to be a rollicking and riveting journey through the lessons of his life.

He began by showing his CT scans, revealing 10 tumors on his liver. But after that, he talked about living. If anyone expected him to be morose, he said, "I'm sorry to disappoint you." He then dropped to the floor and did one-handed pushups.

Randy Pausch and his three children, ages 5, 2 and 1.

Clicking through photos of himself as a boy, he talked about his childhood dreams: to win giant stuffed animals at carnivals, to walk in zero gravity, to design Disney rides, to write a World Book entry. By adulthood, he had achieved each goal. As proof, he had students carry out all the huge stuffed animals he'd won in his life, which he gave to audience members. After all, he doesn't need them anymore.

He paid tribute to his techie background. "I've experienced a deathbed conversion," he said, smiling. "I just bought a Macintosh." Flashing his rejection letters on the screen, he talked about setbacks in his career, repeating: "Brick walls are there for a reason. They let us prove how badly we want things." He encouraged us to be patient with others. "Wait long enough, and people will surprise and impress you." After showing photos of his childhood bedroom, decorated with mathematical notations he'd drawn on the walls, he said: "If your kids want to paint their bedrooms, as a favor to me, let 'em do it."

While displaying photos of his bosses and students over the years, he said that helping others fulfill their dreams is even more fun than achieving your own. He talked of requiring his students to create videogames without sex and violence. "You'd be surprised how many 19-year-old boys run out of ideas when you take those possibilities away," he said, but they all rose to the challenge.

He also saluted his parents, who let him make his childhood bedroom his domain, even if his wall etchings hurt the home's resale value. He knew his mom was proud of him when he got his Ph.D, he said, despite how she'd introduce him: "This is my son. He's a doctor, but not the kind who helps people."

He then spoke about his legacy. Considered one of the nation's foremost teachers of videogame and virtual-reality technology, he helped develop "Alice," a Carnegie Mellon software project that allows people to easily create 3-D animations. It had one million downloads in the past year, and usage is expected to soar.

"Like Moses, I get to see the Promised Land, but I don't get to step foot in it," Dr. Pausch said. "That's OK. I will live on in Alice."

DISCUSS

Readers, if you were giving your last public address, what advice would you share, who would you thank, what stories would you tell and who would be on your mind? Share your thoughts.

Plus, watch Dr. Pausch's full lecture at Carnegie Mellon's Web site.

Many people have given last speeches without realizing it. The day before he was killed, Martin Luther King Jr. spoke prophetically: "Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place." He talked of how he had seen the Promised Land, even though "I may not get there with you."

Dr. Pausch's lecture, in the same way, became a call to his colleagues and students to go on without him and do great things. But he was also addressing those closer to his heart.

Near the end of his talk, he had a cake brought out for his wife, whose birthday was the day before. As she cried and they embraced on stage, the audience sang "Happy Birthday," many wiping away their own tears.

Dr. Pausch's speech was taped so his children, ages 5, 2 and 1, can watch it when they're older. His last words in his last lecture were simple: "This was for my kids." Then those of us in the audience rose for one last standing ovation.

Article: Confession Makes a Comeback

Confession Makes a Comeback

Churches are encouraging sinners to repent by modernizing an ancient rite. Alexandra Alter reports.

By ALEXANDRA ALTER
September 21, 2007; Page W1

Sin never goes out of style, but confession is undergoing a revival.

This February at the Vatican, Pope Benedict XVI instructed priests to make confession a top priority. U.S. bishops have begun promoting it in diocesan newspapers, mass mailings and even billboard ads. And in a dramatic turnaround, some Protestant churches are following suit. This summer, the second-largest North American branch of the Lutheran Church passed a resolution supporting the rite, which it had all but ignored for more than 100 years.

To make confession less intimidating, Protestant churches have urged believers to shred their sins in paper shredders or write them on rocks and cast them into a "desert" symbolized by a giant sand pile in the sanctuary. Three Catholic priests from the Capuchin order now hear confessions at a mall in Colorado Springs., Colo.

Earvin "Magic" Johnson used the press conference platform to announce to the world on Nov. 7, 1991, that he was HIV positive. See a slideshow of celebrity revelations and confessions.

Worshippers are answering the call. During a "Reconciliation Weekend" at churches in the diocese of Orlando, Fla., this March, more than 5,000 people turned out to confess. When five parishes in Chicago joined forces last year for "24 Hours of Grace," where priests welcomed penitents from 9 a.m. on a Friday to 9 a.m. the next morning, about 2,500 people showed up.

Several factors are feeding the resurgence. Aggressive marketing by churches has helped reinvent confession as a form of self-improvement rather than a punitive rite. Technology is also creating new avenues for redemption. Some Protestants now air their sins on videos that are shared on YouTube and iTunes or are played to entire congregations. And the appetite for introspection has been buoyed by the broad acceptance of psychotherapy and the emphasis on self-analysis typified by daytime talk television.

"Every day on Jerry Springer we see people confessing their sins in public, and certainly the confessional is a lot healthier than Jerry Springer," says Orlando Bishop Thomas Wenski, who last March sent out 190,000 pamphlets calling on Catholics to confess.

Scholars also say the return to confession is part of a larger theological shift in which some Catholics, mainline Protestants and evangelicals are returning to a traditional view of churches as moral enforcers. Catholic leaders have sought to make the tradition less onerous to keep it from dying, while Protestants are embracing it as a way to offer discipline to their flocks. Several Protestant pastors said they felt their churches had become too soft on sinners, citing the rise of suburban megachurches that seek converts with feel-good sermons, Starbucks coffee and rock-concert-like services, but rarely issue calls to repent.

"I never want to be accused of the namby-pamby, milquetoast, 'Jesus is my boyfriend' kind of worship," says John Voelz, a pastor at Westwinds Community Church in Jackson, Mich. "People want to come face to face with what's going on inside them."

Redemption Online

Confession is no longer strictly a private matter between a sinner, a priest and God. More than 7,700 people have posted their sins on ivescrewedup.com, a confession Web site launched by Flamingo Road Church, an evangelical congregation in Cooper City, Fla. Last year, several members of Life Church in Edmond, Okla., appeared in a video sermon titled "My Secret," in which they spoke openly about having an abortion or taking methamphetamine. The video was shown to about 21,000 people. The XXX Church, a Christian antipornography ministry, has videotaped people confessing their addictions to X-rated material and posted the video on YouTube, where it has been viewed nearly 15,000 times. "There's a reason why they talk about confession in the Bible -- you're not supposed to keep it inside you," says Jordy Acklin, 21, an Oklahoma college student who appeared in the video. "The weight just goes off your shoulders."

Father Matthew Gross hears confession at an office at Citadel mall in Colorado Springs, Colo.

Confession has been in steep decline for several decades. In 2005, just 26% of American Catholics said they went to confession at least once a year, down from 74% in the early 1980s, according to researchers at two Catholic universities. After the Vatican softened some of its doctrine on sin in the 1960s, the rite "went into a tailspin," says Prof. William D'Antonio, a sociologist at Catholic University in Washington, D.C.

There is only so far the Vatican will go to revive confession -- the church has taken a hard stance against technology, declaring in 2002 that "there are no sacraments on the Internet." Some conservative Protestants have also criticized public forms of atonement, arguing they owe more to exhibitionism than contrition.

Confession hasn't always been a forgiving ritual. In Christianity's early centuries, worshippers confessed publicly before the priest and the entire congregation. Penalties were severe. Sinners had to prostrate themselves, fast and wear sackcloths and ashes. Adulterers were sentenced to a lifetime of celibacy and thieves were ordered to give their belongings to the poor. Repeat offenders were banished, says Notre Dame theology professor Randall Zachman.

Private confession, which arose in monasteries in the seventh century, became mandatory for Christians in 1215. Centuries later during the Reformation, theologian Martin Luther took issue with the "acts of satisfaction" that priests required of sinners, arguing that faith alone absolved them. Luther was especially critical of the practice of selling indulgences, which allowed people to pay to limit their time in purgatory. Following the split, most Protestant churches instructed followers to confess to God directly or simply to each other.

In their attempt to revive the rite, Catholic leaders have portrayed it as a healing sacrament. In February, the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., bought ads on radio stations, buses, subway cars and a billboard inviting Catholics to come to confession during Lent. The response was strong enough that 10 parishes decided to extend the hours for confession.

Amanda Fangmeyer, 39, a stay-at-home mother, attends St. Patrick's in Rockville, Md., one of the parishes that took part in the campaign. She says she was stunned to see more than 100 people lined up for confession two weeks before Easter. "Sometimes when you go for penance the church is just dark and quiet," she says.

Father Matthew Gross walks through the Citadel mall in Colorado Springs, Colo.

Kathleen Taylor, 43, a substitute teacher in Daytona Beach, Fla., hadn't been to confession in some time when she received a mailer from her bishop this March urging Catholics to atone for their sins. She packed her husband and two sons, then 9 and 16, into the car and drove to a nearby church where a priest was waiting in the confessional booth.

"Bless me, Father, for I have sinned. It's been two years since my last confession," she said. Mrs. Taylor confessed to impatience and anger with her sons. She talked about her marriage. She expressed feelings of guilt over fighting with her first husband, who died two years ago of a failed organ transplant. "It was hard at first. It was scary, the room gets kind of hot. But once you open up it's better."

People are confessing in unlikely places. On a recent Saturday morning in Colorado Springs, seven people lined up outside an office next to a Burlington Coat Factory at the Citadel mall. At the appointed hour, Father Matthew Gross, 72, strode up wearing his brown friar's habit. "Three minutes each, that's all you get," he joked to two women waiting in line.

Since 2001, the Rev. Gross and two other Capuchin friars have come to the mall to hear confessions 11 hours a day, six days a week in a small office with a box of Kleenex and a laminated copy of the Ten Commandments. They now hear about 8,000 confessions a year.

Christians gather for group confession in California.

Protestant theologians are also rethinking the rite. This past summer, the Lutheran Church -- Missouri Synod, a 2.5 million-member branch whose members are spread across North America, voted to revive private confession with a priest. Some theologians have pointed to the writings of Martin Luther and argued that the Protestant reformer, while criticizing the way the rite was administered, never advocated abolishing it. "Some of us were saying, 'Why in the world did we let that die out?'" says the Rev. Bruce Keseman, a Lutheran pastor in Freeburg, Ill.

The Rev. Keseman has sought to revive confession in his congregation by bringing it into pastoral counseling, giving demonstrations to youth groups and preaching about its benefits. Leslie Sramek, 48, a lifelong Lutheran and financial manager who lives near St. Louis, says she never heard about private confession and absolution in church when she was growing up. But two years ago, when the Rev. Keseman announced he would be taking confession privately, she decided to give it a try. At these sessions, the pastor wears vestments and stands near the altar while she kneels and recounts her sins. "I won't say that looking at my sins is pleasant, but they have to be dealt with," says Mrs. Sramek.

Peace Is Restored

Some evangelicals don't need any prompting. Joshua Wilshusen, 29, a respiratory care student from Lomita, Calif., started meeting two other Christian men for a weekly group confession two years ago. They gather at a park or coffee shop to ask questions such as "Have you coveted this week?" "Have you been sexually pure?" "Have you just lied to me?" Confessing helps him resist temptations. "There've been times when a sin has hurt me all week, when I've lusted after a woman or lost my temper at work, and then I confess it and the peace is restored."

Restoring confession to its heyday won't be easy. Most Catholic parishes set aside one hour or less on Saturdays for the rite. And while the U.S. Catholic population has grown by 20 million in the last 40 years, the number of priests has fallen to 41,000, a 29% decline over the same period. Group absolution, while allowed in some circumstances, is discouraged, and bishops have banned Internet and text-message confessions, which had been popular in the Philippines. Says Monsignor Kevin Irwin, dean of the school of theology at Catholic University, "We don't do drive-by confessions."

Write to Alexandra Alter at alexandra.alter@wsj.com

Article: How to Explain the Importance of Praying Before the Blessed Sacrament

How to Explain the Importance of Praying Before the Blessed Sacrament

DOUGLAS MCMANAMAN

I’ve been teaching high school for 20 years now, and reflecting back on those years, I can say that the easiest moments in teaching, the times when students were the most quiet and well behaved, were those times when I was teaching on the Eucharist.

“If you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. He who feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood real drink.” Jn 6, 53-55

I’ve been teaching high school for 20 years now, and reflecting back on those years, I can say that the easiest moments in teaching, the times when students were the most quiet and well behaved, were those times when I was teaching on the Eucharist. I recall the day I became aware of that rather strange phenomenon, and needless to say, I’d always look forward to the two or three days I’d spend on the Eucharist with my grade nines or tens.

Generally speaking, young Catholics are under the impression that the Eucharist is merely a symbol of Christ’s body and blood. This of course is false. Church teaching has always been that the Eucharist is really and truly the substance of Christ’s body and blood, that when we receive the Eucharist we actually receive, down our throats, the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. Perhaps that is what my students found most fascinating, the idea that thinking Catholics actually believe this.

A priest friend of mine was once asked by a group of his classmates—who were all from various denominations, from Baptist, Lutheran, to Anglican, etc,—whether they could all celebrate the end of the semester with a Mass and social. He, of course, had to explain that Catholics are not permitted to engage in interdenominational communion, but they continued to pressure him nonetheless, arguing that they are all pursuing the same end, the building up of the kingdom of God, Christ, etc.,.. And so my friend consented, saying that he’d do it, but on one condition, that “when I raise up the host and say ‘this is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world’, and when I genuflect on one knee, you too will genuflect and adore the Eucharist with me.”

Of course, they could not agree to the condition, because, as they said, they don’t believe that what he holds in his hands is actually the Lamb of God. Rather, they believe it is merely a symbol of Christ.

But not Catholics. We believe that to be ordained a priest is to be given the power to change ordinary bread and wine into the very substance of Christ’s body and blood. We believe that after consecration, the substance is no longer bread, but the substance of Christ, although the attributes of the bread and the wine, their affective qualities, i.e., color, taste, texture, etc., remain the same. And that is why we genuflect before it, for if it were only a piece of bread, we’d be committing idolatry every time we genuflect before the tabernacle.

...it is through the Mass that the sacrifice of Calvary is made present throughout history. And these students, each one of whom had a relatively short attention span and were not the most self-disciplined, would be as quiet as Rhodes Scholars when hearing this for the first time.

But it was the second day of teaching that would be especially characterized by an eerie silence; for it was on the second day that I’d talk about the Sacrifice of the Mass. What happens on the altar is the very same thing that happened two thousand years ago on Calvary: “Take this all of you and eat it, this is my body which will be given up for you.” We receive, in communion, the body that Christ gave up for us. We receive his sacrifice, the sacrifice of the cross, into our bodies. In other words, to be present at an ordinary Mass is to be just as present at the foot of the cross as Mary and John were, two thousand years ago. In other words, Calvary is not something that has disappeared into the past; rather, it is through the Mass that the sacrifice of Calvary is made present throughout history. And these students, each one of whom had a relatively short attention span and were not the most self-disciplined, would be as quiet as Rhodes Scholars when hearing this for the first time.

Consider the implications of the Catholic doctrine of the real, physical, substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Years ago I overheard a student in my class say to his friends: “If only Jesus would just come down once in a while and just, you know, chill with us.” That comment became our class discussion for the day. Because the fact is, he does come down to us and actually waits for us to chill with him, in the school chapel, which has a tabernacle that contains the Eucharist.

Christ is present in a chapel containing the Eucharist in a way that he is not present anywhere else. Indeed, God is present everywhere, but he’s present everywhere naturally, as the First Existential cause of whatever has being. But in a chapel or Church containing the Eucharist, He is present supernaturally and sacramentally, in his physical substance, under the ordinary and unexciting appearance of bread.

Consider how vulnerable Christ makes himself in choosing to make himself present in the Eucharist. Very recently, I received the name of a young person in the adolescent mental health unit of the hospital in which I minister. I’m always thrilled to get the opportunity to visit a teenager, especially one suffering from some sort of psychiatric problem; for it is rare for anyone on the child and adolescent mental health unit to request a visit from a chaplain. I went there immediately and spoke to the nurse, who was surprised that this young person would request a visit from a chaplain. I then knew that it was probably the parent who'd added the name to our list. The nurse said to me that the patient was asleep, but that when she wakes up, she’d ask her whether or not she'd like to visit with me.

I remember not wanting to go back there, to stand at the door and press the buzzer, only to have a nurse walk down the long corridor, open the door and tell me that the patient had no interest in visiting with me.

It turned out the patient was dismissed the day before, so it was all for nothing. But it was that fear of rejection that came over me that I find instructive. Christ makes himself present sacramentally in the Eucharist, and because of that, it is possible that he be ignored. It is possible that not one teacher or one student at our school will have stopped by the chapel to visit the Blessed Sacrament during the day, or worse, during the week. That’s the love that we can contemplate in the Eucharistic presence, a love so powerful it is willing to make itself vulnerable to insult, all for the sake of being present among us, for our sake.

Dan Rather once interviewed Mother Theresa. It was always a delight to watch cynical journalists interview Mother Theresa, because she would invariably make them look like fools. He asked Mother Theresa about prayer:

"What do you say to God when you pray," he inquired.
"Nothing," replied Mother Theresa. "I just listen."
"What does God say to you?" he responded, rather derisively.
"Nothing," replied Mother Theresa. "He just listens."

That's what prayer before the Blessed Sacrament can become. We are still, silent, and we listen to God listening to us. And the more time we spend before the Blessed Sacrament in silence, the more we will begin to hear God listen, the more aware we will become of his presence in our lives.

Ever since I spent a week in the hospital back in the fall of 2003, I’ve been fascinated with the idea of ‘presence’. I became acutely aware of the silent presence of the nurses as they walked in at night to check the IV, and I was always disappointed that they’d immediately leave after checking it. I know that nurses do not have the time to stay, because they have so many other duties, but I experienced what a difference a simple presence makes. The nights were difficult, and the mornings were a relief, because in the morning there would be greater personal presence: nurses would arrive and stay longer, family would arrive, etc.

Spending time under the Sun of Justice will heat us up and without our being aware of it, we will bring the warmth of the Holy Spirit into the cold and suffering lives of others. And so it is the Holy Hour that is going to heal the world. It is the Holy Hour that is going to heal families and marriages.

I recall the time when I taught in the Jane and Finch area; a priest friend of mine was the chaplain. Teachers would often ask him: “What do you do here anyways?” And he’d always say: “I just hang out”. And I remember how good it felt knowing that he was there, in the building, just hanging out. The very fact that he was present made such a difference in my day-to-day life as a teacher, and it made a difference to many students who knew he was there. This is an example of the power of being present.

And Christ has remained present to us. He’s present, not merely spiritually, but tangibly, visibly, sacramentally, in the real food of the Eucharist, and He is there for us to receive as food, and to visit and keep company with.

Now it might feel that there is no point to just sitting down in front of the Blessed Sacrament, doing apparently nothing, but doing so is really the most fruitful of actions. Consider how many people love to sit in the sun. What possible effect can sitting in the sun have on a person? But if a person sits in the sun for a time, it will soon be obvious just by looking at him. He or she will have acquired a healthy and beautiful countenance.

By sitting in front of the Blessed Sacrament, the Sun of Justice, the Son of God, the soul becomes more beautiful, and because the human person is a unity of spirit and matter, a beautiful spirit will manifest in the body and in the countenance.

People who sit in the sun will, after a time, feel more rested, and that too will become obvious just by looking at them. Similarly, spending time in front of the Blessed Sacrament brings rest to the soul: “Come, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest”.

Consider what happens when things are left in the sun, such as cassettes, CDs, chocolate, or crayons, etc. The sun disposes their matter, making them more malleable. Cassettes will warp, and crayons will melt. So too, spending time before the Blessed Sacrament disposes us and makes us more malleable towards the will of God, the more easily are we moulded to the shape that God intends for us.

Objects that are exposed to the sun become very warm, and they retain their warmth for a while. So too, when we are exposed to the Blessed Sacrament, we bring the warmth of the divine love that is here right into the heart of our families and into the workplace. Consider what people mean when they refer to a nurse, or a doctor, or a teacher, as cold and distant, and consider all the good that a warm gesture can do for a person, as well as the feeling of alienation and emptiness that a cold gesture leaves in others.

Spending time under the Sun of Justice will heat us up and without our being aware of it, we will bring the warmth of the Holy Spirit into the cold and suffering lives of others. And so it is the Holy Hour that is going to heal the world. It is the Holy Hour that is going to heal families and marriages.

Consider too the link between vitamin D and the sun, as well as the link between depression and the lack of sunlight. It is prayer before the Blessed Sacrament that is going to heal our own lives, filling our lives with the joy and peace that Christ said the world cannot give. It will heal our addictions, it will heal us of loneliness, and it will bring us the light that we need to make the decisions that God calls us to make every day. Being filled with the light of the Son will enable us to readily discern God’s will for us. Amen.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Douglas McManaman. "How to Explain the Importance of Praying Before the Blessed Sacrament." (September 2007).

Reprinted with permission of Douglas McManaman.

THE AUTHOR

Douglas McManaman is a high school religion teacher with the York Catholic District School Board in Ontario. He is currently teaching at Father Michael McGivney Catholic Academy in Markham, Ontario and maintains a web site, A Catholic Philosophy and Theology Resource Page, in support of his students. He studied Philosophy at St. Jerome's College in Waterloo, and Theology at the University of Montreal. Mr. McManaman is the past President of the Canadian Chapter of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars. He is on the advisory board of the Catholic Education Resource Center.

Copyright © 2007 Douglas McManaman

Article: What's So Great about Christianity?

What's So Great about Christianity

DINESH D'SOUZA

“Infinitely more sophisticated than the rants produced by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, What’s So Great About Christianity leaves those atheist books in the dust.” - Stanley Fish, author of How Milton Works

For the past few years I have been "moonlighting" for tothesource, writing about some hot-button issues affecting Christianity and the culture. In general, however, I have been a secular writer. Moral issues and "values" issues have always been prominent in my books, but religious issues have never been more than an undercurrent.

This will change in early October with the publication of my new book What's So Great About Christianity. The book began modestly enough, as a kind of follow-up to my 2002 book What's So Great About America. I wanted to show the role of Christianity in forming America and the West. I sought to document how even values cherished by secular people are the product of Christianity.

Then a series of atheist books appeared in almost conspiratorial sequence: first Sam Harris' The End of Faith, then Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, and most recently Christopher Hitchens' God is Not Great. There have also been other anti-Christian tracts by Daniel Dennett, Steven Pinker, Victor Stenger, and others. These anti-God polemics were enthusiastically promoted in the national media, and several of the atheist books have become bestsellers.

So I broadened the scope of my book to make it a full-blown defense of theism in general and Christianity in particular. The book is the first comprehensive answer to the atheist literature that has so aggressively seized the public square. Here I reproduce a section of the book's brief Preface, which suggests my main themes. Alongside you can read the comments of leading figures: not only Christian leaders and scholars but also my old debating rival Stanley Fish and even a prominent atheist!

In the next several months, I intend to engage the argument with the atheists in the media. I also intend to debate the atheists on university campuses and in civic venues. I also want to take my message directly to Christians. I hope pastors will read this book and discuss its themes with their church members. I would like to see church groups reflect and pray about the issues raised in the book. I have spoken in several large churches and would welcome the opportunity to speak in more of them. So far the atheists have had the field to themselves. Now the argument will be joined. TotheSource will give you a front-row seat in this debate but I'd like you to do more than sit passively and watch. It's time for our side to get into the arena.

PREFACE

A Challenge to Believers—and Unbelievers

“Rather than engaging in the usual defensive ploys, D’Souza meets every anti-God argument head on and defeats it on its own terms. He subjects atheism and scientific materialism to sustained rigorous interrogation, and shows that their claims are empty and incoherent. Infinitely more sophisticated than the rants produced by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, What’s So Great About Christianity leaves those atheist books in the dust.” - Stanley Fish, author of How Milton Works “Responding to the current epidemic of atheist manifestos, Dinesh D’Souza applies just the right balm for the troubled soul. Assembling arguments from history, philosophy, theology, and science—yes, science!—he builds a modern and compelling case for faith in a loving God. If you’re seeking the truth about God, the universe, and the meaning of life, this is a great place to look.” - Francis Collins, director of The Human Genome Institute

Christians are called upon to be "contenders" for their faith. This term suggests that they should be ready to stand up for their beliefs, and that they will face opposition. The Christian is told in 1 Peter 3:15, "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reasons for the hope that is within you." But in order to give reasons, you must first know what you believe. You must also know why you believe it. And you must be able to communicate these reasons to those who don't share your beliefs. In short, you must know what's so great about Christianity.

This is the arena in which many Christians have fallen short. Today's Christians know that they do not, as their ancestors did, live in a society where God's presence was unavoidable. No longer does Christianity form the moral basis of society. Many of us now reside in secular communities, where arguments drawn from the Bible or Christian revelation carry no weight, and where we hear different language from that spoken in church.

Instead of engaging this secular world, most Christians have taken the easy way out. They have retreated into a Christian subculture where they engage Christian concerns. Then they step back into secular society, where their Christianity is kept out of sight until the next church service. Without realizing it Christians have become postmodernists of a sort: they live by the gospel of the two truths. There is religious truth, reserved for Sundays and days of worship, and there is secular truth, which applies the rest of the time.

This divided lifestyle is opposed to what the Bible teaches. The Bible tells Christians not to be of the world, sharing its distorted priorities, but it does call upon believers to be in the world, fully engaged. Many Christians have abdicated this mission. They have instead sought a workable, comfortable modus vivendi in which they agree to leave the secular world alone if the secular world agrees to leave them alone. Biologist Stephen Jay Gould proposed the terms for the treaty when he said that secular society relies on reason and decides matters of fact, while religious people rely on faith and decide questions about values. Many Christians seized upon this distinction with relief. This way they could stay in their subculture and be nice to everyone.

But a group of prominent atheists—many of them evolutionary biologists—has launched a powerful public attack on religion in general and Christianity in particular; they have no interest in being nice. A new set of antireligious books—The God Delusion, The End of Faith, God Is Not Great, and so on—now shapes public debate. These atheists reject the Gould solution. They say that a religious outlook makes specific claims about reality: there is a God, there is life after death, miracles do happen, and so on. If you are agnostic or atheist, you have a very different understanding of reality, one that is formed perhaps by a scientific or rationalist outlook. The argument of the atheists is that both views of reality cannot be simultaneously correct. If one is true, then the other is false.

The atheists have a point: there are not two truths or multiple truths; there is one truth. Either the universe is a completely closed system and miracles are impossible, or the universe is not a closed system and there is the possibility of divine intervention in it. Either the Big Bang was the product of supernatural creation or it had a purely natural cause. In a larger sense, either the secular view of reality is correct or the religious view is correct. (Or both are wrong.) So far the atheists have been hammering the Christians and the Christians have been running for cover. It's like one hand clapping. A few pastors have stood up to the atheists' challenge, but they have not, in general, fared well. Pastors are used to administering to congregations that accept Christian premises. They are not accustomed to dealing with skilled spear-chuckers who call the Christian God a murderer and a tyrant, and who reject the authority of the Bible to adjudicate anything.

This is not a time for Christians to turn the other cheek. Rather, it is a time to drive the money-changers out of the temple. The atheists no longer want to be tolerated. They want to monopolize the public square and to expel Christians from it. They want political questions like abortion to be divorced from religious and moral claims. They want to control the school curricula, so that they can promote a secular ideology and undermine Christianity. They want to discredit the factual claims of religion, and they want to convince the rest of society that Christianity is not only mistaken but also evil. They blame religion for the crimes of history and for the ongoing conflicts in the world today. In short, they want to make religion—and especially the Christian religion—disappear from the face of the earth.

The Bible in Matthew 5:13-14 calls Christians to be the "salt of the earth" and the "light of the world." Christians are called to make the world a better place. Today that means confronting the challenge of modern atheism and secularism. This book provides a kind of tool kit for Christians to meet this challenge. The Christianity that is defended here is not "fundamentalism" but rather traditional Christianity, what C.S. Lewis called "mere Christianity," the common ground of beliefs between Protestants and Catholics. This Christianity is the real target of the secular assault.

I have written this book not only for believers but also for unbelievers. Many people are genuine seekers. They sense there is something out there that provides a grounding and an ultimate explanation for their deepest questions, yet that something eludes them. They feel the need for a higher sense of purpose in their lives, but they are unsure where to find it. Even though they have heard about God and Christianity, they cannot reconcile religious belief with reason and science: faith seems unreasonable and therefore untenable. Moreover, they worry that religion has been and can be an unhealthy source of intolerance and fanaticism, as evidenced by the motives of the September 11 terrorists. These are all reasonable concerns, and I address them head-on in this book.

This is also a book for atheists, or at least for those atheists who welcome a challenge. Precisely because the Christians usually duck and run, the atheists have had it too easy. Their arguments have gone largely unanswered. They have been flogging the carcass of "fundamentalism" without having to encounter the horse-kick of a vigorous traditional Christianity. I think that if atheists are genuine rationalists they should welcome this book. It is an effort to meet the atheist argument on its own terms. Nowhere in this book do I take Christianity for granted. My modus operandi is one of skepticism, to view the claims of religion in the same open-minded way that we view claims of any other sort. The difference between me and my atheist opponents is that I am skeptical not only of the irrational claims made in the name of religion but also of the irrational claims made in the name of science and of skepticism itself.

Taking as my foil the anti-religious arguments of prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and the others, this book will show the following—1) Christianity is the main foundation of Western civilization, the root of our most cherished values. 2) The latest discoveries of modern science support the Christian claim that there is a divine being who created the universe. 3) Darwin's theory of evolution, far from undermining the evidence for supernatural design, actually strengthens it. 4) There is nothing in science that makes miracles impossible. 5) It is reasonable to have faith. 6) Atheism, not religion, is responsible for the mass murders of history. 7) Atheism is often motivated not by reason but by a kind of cowardly moral escapism. I end this book by showing what is unique about Christianity and how our lives change if we become Christians.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Dinesh D'Souza. "What's So Great about Christianity." tothesource (September 25, 2007).

This article reprinted with permission from tothesource.

Tothesource is a forum for integrating thinking and action within a moral framework that takes into account our contemporary situation. We will report the insights of cultural experts to the specific issues we face believing these sources will embolden people to greater faith and action.

THE AUTHOR

Dinesh D'Souza is the Robert and Karen Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. D'Souza has been called one of the "top young public-policy makers in the country" by Investor’s Business Daily. His areas of research include the economy and society, civil rights and affirmative action, cultural issues and politics, and higher education. Dinesh D'Souza's latest book is The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11. He is also the author of: Letters to a Young Conservative, What's So Great about America, Illiberal Education: The Politics of Race and Sex on Campus; The End of Racism; Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader; and The Virtue of Prosperity: Finding Values in an Age of Techno-Affluence. Dinesh D'Souza is on the Advisory Board of the Catholic Education Resource Center. Visit his website here. Copyright © 2007 tothesource