Catholic Metanarrative

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Wednesday Liturgy: Chinese State-Sponsored Mass

ROME, APRIL 29, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q: I will be in Shanghai, China, for about a month. Does the Church allow me to go to the Chinese state-sponsored Mass and receive Communion? -- T.W., Athens, Georgia

A: Although the situation of the state-approved Church in China is very complex, a visiting Catholic could attend Mass and receive Communion there without implying any particular acceptance of the current unfortunate ecclesial situation.

The Ecumenical Directory permits Catholics to receive Communion at the liturgies of Orthodox and other Eastern Churches not in communion with the Holy See.

These Chinese "official" Catholic Churches, albeit in an irregular situation, almost invariably desire to be in full communion with the Holy Father. They usually pray for him at Mass. And in some cases these Churches have been recognized in some way or other by both the government and the Holy See. Hence, it is possible to receive Communion at Masses in these Churches.

As testified by the Holy Father's May 2007 letter to Chinese Catholics, the Holy See is actively attempting to bring about the reconciliation of the Church in China and to find a way come to an understanding with the government that will allow it to establish proper relations with all Chinese Catholics.

Catholics traveling in China should certainly try to attend a Mass in a community that is in full communion with the Holy See. Since this is not always possible or prudent, however, they may choose to attend an "official Church." But they would not be bound to do so in order to fulfill their Sunday obligation.

The Church's long history knows several situations in which pastors and faithful have been forced to choose between loyalty to the Church and to government policy. During the French Revolution, for example, all clergy were obliged by law to take the revolutionary oath of loyalty to the "Civil Constitution of the Clergy." That document undermined the Church's independence and connection to Rome.

A few accepted the oath from revolutionary conviction, many more out of fear, and others so as not to leave their faithful deprived of the sacraments in a moment of crisis and war. There was also confusion from Church authorities regarding the correct attitude to take, especially since the changes were primarily disciplinary and not dogmatic in character.

Those who courageously refused to take the oath accepted the increasing legal penalties imposed by the state. At first, there were fines and removal from their dioceses or parishes. As the revolution descended into terror, those who refused to swear had to increasingly face exile, imprisonment and death.

God repaid and vindicated the sacrifice of those who suffered. The Church in France rose from the ashes of the Revolution and enjoyed almost a century of growth characterized by the foundation of numerous new religious congregations, international charitable organizations, great missionary zeal, renewed devotion to the Eucharist and the Sacred Heart, and a wealth of saintly figures such as the John Vianney, Antoine-Frédéric Ozanam and Thérèse of Lisieux.

Only God can pronounce final judgment on those who were weaker. For many the oath was no protection from revolutionary harshness, and one can be sure that in many cases the martyrs also died for them and won for them the grace to repent and return to the path of fidelity.

While the Chinese experience is only partially similar and the suffering has been far more protracted, we can be certain that the salvific logic of the Cross will once more bear fruit and the sacrifice of those who remain faithful will not be in vain.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Padre Pio, Monsignor Escrivá and the Roman Missal

ROME, APRIL 29, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


After our mention of the feasts of Cosmas and Damian coinciding with that of St. Josemaría Escrivá (see April 15 column), a pediatrician from Louisiana wrote: "You said their feast is June 26; I believe you meant Sept. 26. Usually I take our group of pediatricians and their spouses out to dinner that evening to celebrate their feast and God's blessings to our practice."

Our reader, who is also a deacon, is quite correct. I mixed up my saintly pairs and should have said Sts. John and Paul, Roman martyrs in 362 under Julian the Apostate.

These two saints, who are specifically mentioned in the first list of saints in the Roman Canon, are actually not present in the universal calendar but only in that of the Diocese of Rome. The ancient Roman basilica that houses their tomb and site of martyrdom also contains a chapel with the relics of St. Paul of the Cross, founder of the Passionists.

Some readers pointed out that St. Padre Pio was an obligatory and not an optional memorial. This is true in Italy, the United States and many other countries. However, the Latin decree promulgating the feast did not specify it as an obligatory memorial, perhaps leaving some leeway for countries where devotion to this saint is less prevalent.

Some other readers asked for the general criteria to be observed in celebrating those who had been declared blessed but not yet canonized. We dealt with this topic in our columns of Dec. 21, 2004, and Jan. 18, 2005.

Sunday, April 27, 2008

Be a Paraclete for Others: Gospel Commentary for 6th Sunday of Easter

Father Raniero Cantalamessa is the Pontifical Household preacher. The readings for this Sunday are Acts 8:5-8:14-17; 1 Peter 3:15-18; John 14:5-21.

* * *

ROME, APRIL 25, 2008 (Zenit.org).- In the Gospel Jesus uses the term "paraclete" when speaking to the disciples about the Holy Spirit.

In some contexts this term means "consoler," in others "defender," and sometimes it means both. In the Old Testament God is the great consoler of his people. This "God of consolation" (Romans 15:4), became "incarnate" in Jesus Christ, who is named the first consoler or Paraclete (cf. John 14:15).

The Holy Spirit, being the one who continues Christ's work and brings the common work of the Trinity to completion, also had to be called "Consoler": "The Consoler who will remain with you forever," as Jesus says.

After Easter the whole Church had a living and powerful experience of the Spirit as consoler, defender, ally, in its internal and external difficulties, in the persecutions, in the trials, in everyday life. In the Acts of the Apostles we read: "The Church grew and walked in the fear of the Lord, full of the consolation ("paraclesis") of the Holy Spirit" (9:31).

We must now draw a practical conclusion for our lives from this. We ourselves must become paracletes! If it is true that the Christian must be "another Christ," it is just as true that he must be "another Paraclete."

The Holy Spirit not only consoles us, but he also makes us capable in turn of consoling others. True consolation comes from God who is the "Father of all consolation." This consolation comes to those who are suffering, but it does not stop with them; its final goal is reached when those who have experienced consolation in turn console their neighbors with the same consolation with which God has consoled them.

They must not be content to offer only platitudes ("Take heart, don't worry -- you will see that everything will turn out fine!"), but to bring the authentic "consolation that comes from the Scriptures," which is able to "keep hope alive" (cf. Romans 15:4). This is how we explain the miracles wrought by a simple word or gesture, offered in a climate of prayer, at the bedside of a sick person. It's God who is consoling that person through you!

In a certain sense, the Holy Spirit needs us in order to be the Paraclete. He wants to console, defend, exhort; but he does not have a mouth, hands, eyes to "give a body" to his consolation. Or better, he has our hands, our eyes, our mouth.

If we stick to the letter of what Paul tells the Thessalonians -- "console each other" (1 Thessalonians 5:11) -- we must take him to be saying: "Be paracletes to each other. If we want to selfishly keep to ourselves the consolation that we receive from the Spirit and it does not pass from us to others, it will quickly disappear." This is why a beautiful prayer, attributed to St. Francis, says: "Let me not so much seek to be consoled as to console; or to be understood as to understand, to be loved as to love."

In light of what I have said it is not hard today to see who the paracletes are around us. They are the ones who care for the terminally ill, who care for those sick with AIDS, those who seek to alleviate the solitude of the elderly, the volunteers who spend their time visiting hospitals. They are the ones who dedicate themselves to children who are victims of various types of abuse, inside and outside the home.

Let us conclude this reflection with the first verses of the Pentecost sequence, which invoke the Holy Spirit as the "best consoler":

"Holy Spirit, come and shine
On our souls with beams divine,
Issuing from Thy radiance bright.

Come, O Father of the poor,
Ever bounteous of Thy store,
Come, our heart's unfailing light.

Come, Consoler, kindest, best,
Come, our bosom's dearest guest,
Sweet refreshment, sweet repose.
Rest in labor, coolness sweet,
Tempering the burning heat,
Truest comfort of our woes."

[Translation by Joseph G. Trabbic]

Friday, April 25, 2008

Pope: Mission Leaves No Room for Laziness, Cowardice; Offers Example of President of Family Council

VATICAN CITY, APRIL 23, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI called on the example of Cardinal Alfonso López Trujillo to urge the faithful to never be lazy or cowardly in the mission.


In his homily today at the funeral liturgy for the Colombian cardinal who was the president of the Pontifical Council for the Family, the Pope spoke about the prelate's courage and dedication to the cause of life and the defense of marriage. Cardinal López Trujillo died Saturday at age 72.

The Holy Father traced the history of Cardinal López Trujillo's service to the Church, noting that he was the youngest cardinal when he was elevated in the 1983 consistory. He was named the president of the family council in 1990.

"How could we fail to note [] the zeal and the passion with which he worked during these almost 18 years, carrying forward tireless activity in protecting and promoting the family and Christian matrimony," the Pontiff said. "How could we fail to thank him for the courage with which he defended the non-negotiable values of human life. All of us have admired his tireless activity.

"We cannot fail to be thankful for the tenacious battle that he waged in defense of the 'truth' of family love and the spreading of the 'Gospel of the family.'"

A reflection

Benedict XVI affirmed that "the late cardinal drew his love for the truth about mankind and for the Gospel of the family from the belief that each human being and each family reflects the mystery of God who is love."

He mentioned the Synod of 1997 during which Cardinal López Trujillo gave an address that the Holy Father characterized as a "true hymn to life."

The cardinal there "proposed a highly effective form of spirituality for those committed to realizing the divine plan for the family; and he highlighted the fact that if science does not dedicate itself to understanding life and to educating for life, it will lose the most important battles in the fascinating and mysterious field of genetic engineering," the Bishop of Rome recalled.

The Pontiff noted the cardinal's motto, "Veritas in caritate," saying, "If Cardinal López Trujillo made of the defense and love of the family the characteristic commitment of his service in the pontifical council over which he presided, it is to the affirmation of the truth that he dedicated his entire existence."

Benedict XVI recalled one of Cardinal López Trujillo's writings in which he prayed, "I very much believe in the value of this decisive fight for the Church and for humanity and I ask the Lord to give me strength so that I am neither lazy nor cowardly."

"To fulfill the mission that Jesus has given us, we mustn't be either lazy or cowardly," the Pope continued. "May the generosity of the cardinal we mourn, multiplied in many works of charity especially benefiting children in various parts of the world, nourish us in spending all of our physical and spiritual resources for the cause of the Gospel; may it move us to act in defense of human life; may it help us to constantly keep our eyes fixed on the goal of our earthly pilgrimage."

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Wednesday Liturgy: Coffee and Food in the Sacristy

ROME, APRIL 22, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q: Is it permissible to have coffee, a coffee urn, and food in the sacristy of the church? These beverages and foods are made available for the sacristans and the priests. -- P.N., Venice, Florida

A: I do not believe that there are any specific norms regarding food in the sacristy. But there are some indications that refer to the overall atmosphere that should reign in this area. Thus the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, No. 45, says:

"Even before the celebration itself, it is commendable that silence [] be observed in the church, in the sacristy, in the vesting room, and in adjacent areas, so that all may dispose themselves to carry out the sacred action in a devout and fitting manner."

At the same time, while everybody is required to fast an hour before Communion, priests who celebrate more than one Mass may take something before the second or third Mass even if less than an hour elapses (Canon 919.2).

Taking both these norms into account, one could say that it is preferable that food and beverages not be offered in the sacristy itself as this could easily perturb the necessary ambience of silent recollection.

However, one could envision some pastoral situations in which lack of an alternative space could justify dedicating a small part of the sacristy for refreshment purposes. Apart from the case of a priest celebrating several Masses it could also happen that a priest may finish Mass, have a quick coffee (charitably followed by some breath freshener), and then either head off for the confessional or to take Communion to shut-ins.

If recourse to such a solution is inevitable, priests should usually try to take their meal as quietly and quickly as possible so as not to disturb the climate of prayerful silence.

Except for the abovementioned pastoral situations, I think that habitually having food and beverages available for priests and others in the sacristy is both unnecessary and probably distracting.

If necessary, victuals should preferably be offered in some other room, even adjacent to the sacristy, but separated from the area used for vesting and immediate preparation for Mass.

Most parishes have some other nearby space available where the material nourishment of a fraternal "agape" may follow the spiritual sustenance of holy Mass.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: The Double Alleluia

ROME, APRIL 22, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


After our column on the double Alleluia (see April 8) another question came to mind on the use of Alleluia during Lent.

A reader from the Philippines wrote: "On the feast of the Chair of St. Peter, the sister in charge of the liturgy led us in singing the Alleluia for the Gospel acclamation. She explained that the said feast was an exception to the rule of not singing the Alleluia during Lent. Is this correct? If there are indeed exceptions, what are these occasions?"

I fear that the good sister was misinformed. The Alleluia is never used during Lent, not even on solemnities such as the Annunciation and St. Joseph, which often fall during this season.

Perhaps she was confused with the practice of the Gloria which, unlike the Alleluia, is used on solemnities and feasts even during Lent.

The Alleluia (which means "Praise the Lord") also came to be understood as a foretaste of the elect's eternal joy and not just as an expression of God's praise.

This joy is above all a fruit of Christ's resurrection, and indeed there is some historical evidence that the Alleluia was originally an exclusively Easter piece which was sung from Easter to Pentecost.

Although it later came to be used in other periods of the year, its prominently Easter character led to its never being sung during the Lenten preparation for Easter.

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Man More Than Dust?: Gospel Commentary for 5th Sunday of Easter

Father Raniero Cantalamessa is the Pontifical Household preacher. The readings for this Sunday are Acts 6:1-7; 1 Peter 2:4-9; John 14:1-12.

* * *

ROME, APRIL 18, 2008 (Zenit.org).- In the Book of Genesis one reads that after man sinned God said to him: "By the sweat of your brow you shall get your bread to eat, until you return to the earth from which you were taken, for you are dust, and to dust you shall return" (Genesis 3:19).

Every year on Ash Wednesday the liturgy repeats these severe words to us: "Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return." If it were up to me, I would immediately remove this formula from the liturgy.

The Church now rightly allows it to be replaced with another formula: "Repent and believe in the Gospel." Taken literally, without the necessary explanations, the words of the other formula are the perfect expression of modern scientific atheism: Man is nothing else than a heap of atoms and, in the end, will return to being a heap of atoms.

The Book of Qoheleth (also known as Ecclesiastes), a book of the Bible that was written during a time of religious uncertainty in Israel, seems to confirm this atheistic interpretation when it says: "All go to the same place; everything was made from dust, and to the dust it shall return. Who knows if the life-breath of the children of men goes upward and the life-breath of beasts goes earthward?" (3:20-21).

At the end of the book, this last terrible doubt (Is there a difference between the end of man and beasts?) seems to be positively resolved, because the author says, "The body returns to dust but the spirit returns to God who gave it" (12:7).

In the last writings of the Old Testament there emerges the idea of a recompense for the just after death and even a resurrection of the body, but the content of this belief is still quite vague and is not shared by all. The Sadducees, for example, reject it.

We can evaluate the words that begin this Sunday's Gospel against this background: Jesus said to his disciples: "Do not let your hearts be troubled. You have faith in God; have faith also in me. In my Father's house there are many dwelling places. If there were not, would I have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back again and take you to myself, so that where I am you also may be."

These words are the Christian response to the most disturbing of human questions. Death is not -- as it was at the beginning of the Bible and among the pagans -- a descent into Sheol or Hades where one becomes a worm or shadow; it is not -- as it is for certain atheist biologists -- a restitution of one's organic material to nature for the subsequent use of other living things; nor is death -- as it is for certain contemporary forms of religiosity inspired by Eastern doctrines (often poorly understood) -- a dissolution of the person into the great ocean of universal consciousness, in the All or, according to some, the Nothing.

It is rather a going to be with Christ in the bosom of the Father, to be where he is.

The veil of mystery is not removed because it cannot be removed. Just as color cannot be described to a person born blind or sound to a person born deaf, so also one cannot explain what a life outside of time and space is like to those who are still in time and space. It is not God who wanted to keep us in darkness. He has however told us about the essentials: Eternal life will be a full communion, soul and body, with the risen Christ, a sharing of his glory and joy.

Benedict XVI, in his recent encyclical on hope, "Spe Salvi," reflects on the nature of eternal life from an existential point of view. He begins by acknowledging that there are people who do not in fact desire eternal life, indeed they are afraid of it. To what end, they ask, should a life that has shown itself to be full of problems and sufferings be prolonged?

The reason for this fear, the Pope explains, is that these people are only able to imagine life as it is here below; while it is instead a matter of a life that is free of all the limitations that we experience in the present. "Eternal life," the encyclical says, "would be like plunging into the ocean of infinite love, a moment in which time -- the before and after -- no longer exists" (No. 12).

Eternity, it adds, "is not an unending succession of days in the calendar, but something more like the supreme moment of satisfaction, in which totality embraces us and we embrace totality" (No. 12).

With these words perhaps the Pope is tacitly alluding to the work of his famous fellow countryman. The ideal of Goethe's "Faust" is in fact to achieve such a fullness of life and satisfaction that it brings him to exclaim: "Stay, you fleeting moment! You are too beautiful!"

I believe that this is the least inadequate idea that we can form of eternal life: a moment that we wish will never end and that -- unlike all the moments of happiness in this life -- will never end!

There come to my mind the words of one of the best loved songs among English-speaking Christians, "Amazing Grace": "When we've been there 10,000 years, / Bright shining as the sun, / We've no less days to sing God's praise / Than when we've first begun."

[Translation by Joseph G. Trabbic]

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Wednesday Liturgy: Padre Pio, Monsignor Escrivá and the Roman Missal

ROME, APRIL 15, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: Regarding the special Mass formulas, I was wondering why two of the greatest saints of the 20th century, Padre Pio and Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer, aren't included in the Roman Missal. There are lots of other saints which we have Masses for, and a lot of people don't know anything about them. But here we have two very close people and no special Mass for them. That is a shame. -- M.G., Limhamn, Sweden

A: Actually, St. Pio of Pietrelcina is included in the universal calendar on Sept. 23 as an optional memorial. However, because his canonization occurred after the publication of the third edition of the Latin Missal, he did not make it into that book. His was practically the last celebration added to the calendar by Pope John Paul II.

His feast day, along with the specific Mass formulas, will certainly be included in the translations of the missal under way and due for publication in English within the next couple of years. Some episcopal conferences have meanwhile published supplements with all the proper texts of new saints while awaiting the definitive translation of a new missal.

St. Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer, founder of Opus Dei, is certainly a major figure of 20th-century sainthood as witnessed by the multitude that attended his canonization and by the fact that his statue already graces one of the outer niches of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome.

I believe that the Personal Prelature of Opus Dei has proper Mass formulas, approved by the Holy See, for the celebration of his feast day on June 26. Even though these texts are not found in the Roman Missal they may be used by any priest who opts to celebrate the memorial of St. Josemaría on this day.

Because he is included in the Roman Martyrology his celebration is not impeded since the celebration of Sts. Cosmas and Damian, which falls on the same day, is an optional memorial.

St. Josemaría will probably eventually find a place in the universal calendar as the importance of his spiritual heritage continues to grow.

However, the general criteria applied in the last few years, and recently codified in specific norms, has been to limit the number of saints added to the universal calendar. The preference is that they first be added to the calendars of specific dioceses, countries, or other ecclesial organizations such as religious congregations where devotion to them is most present.

Those who have been admitted recently have reflected an explicit desire to give a more universal face to the array of saints celebrated by the whole Church. This includes saints from continents and countries of more recent evangelization or otherwise underrepresented sectors of the Church such as the Eastern Churches.

Another criterion, not so easy to calculate, is the devotion of the faithful to this saint on a fairly extended basis. Long before his beatification, popular devotion to the figure of Padre Pio was already widespread in many countries. Above all, he was deeply venerated by John Paul II who took the personal initiative of enrolling his name in the general calendar.

While St. Josemaría is equally esteemed throughout the world, devotion to him is practiced above all by those faithful who are in some way associated with the life and work of Opus Dei, and is less present in the general faithful. Since for the moment these faithful can easily fulfill this devotion with the aid of the priests of the prelature, there seems to be no urgency in including him among the saints of the calendar.

This inclusion will likely come about in time along with some other great saintly figures of our epoch such as Mother Teresa of Calcutta and, perhaps, the recently departed Chiara Lubich, founder of the Focolare movement.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Saints' Prayers for Souls in Purgatory

ROME, APRIL 15, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

In the wake of our theological musings on the saints' praying for souls in purgatory (see April 1), a couple of readers asked for further reflections.

One asked: "If a person on earth needs prayers, does he himself need to request these prayers from a soul in purgatory, or can a soul in purgatory pray for that person without the request?"

Usually we refer to purgatory as a passive state, and we pray for the souls in purgatory and usually never think of the souls in purgatory praying for us (see Catechism, Nos. 1030-1032).

However, while there is little or nothing in Church tradition regarding this point, I believe that it cannot be totally excluded. If someone requests the prayers of a deceased person who happens to be in purgatory, God might well make that person aware of this request.

Thus, in a way that is analogous to the spiritual good we inevitably do to ourselves whenever we pray for others here on earth, performing the act of love of praying for others could quite well form part of the process of purgation for our lack of perfect love during our lives.

It is harder to affirm with any certainty that these souls can do so out of their own initiative. However, if someone, while still alive, promises to pray for another after death it is likely that God, who inspired the original promise, will find a way to allow its fulfillment even if the person spends some time in purgatory.

A Toronto reader inquired: "Perhaps the pious tradition of patron saints indicates that the saints can take some initiative in intercession, at least in their 'patronages.'"

I would say that this could be true only in part because patronages do not stem from the initiative of the saints but from the initiative of those, whether individuals, groups or the universal Church, who invoke their patronage.

In this way a patronage is a kind of stable or permanent request for the saints' mediation in a particular field or for a specific category. Just as God makes saints aware of individual requests for their intercession, he will make them aware of these more general and stable invocations for their mediation.

Sunday, April 13, 2008

Sheep That Go Astray: Gospel Commentary for 4th Sunday of Easter

Father Raniero Cantalamessa is the Pontifical Household preacher. The readings for this Sunday are Acts 2:14a, 36-41; 1 Peter 2:20b-25; John 10:1-10.

* * *

ROME, APRIL 11, 2008 (Zenit.org).- This is Good Shepherd Sunday, but this time we are not going to focus our attention on the Good Shepherd, but on his antagonist.

Who is the person who is defined as the "thief," the "stranger"? Jesus is thinking in the first place of the false prophets and the pseudo-messiahs of his time who posed as emissaries of God and liberators of the people, but who in reality did nothing but send the people to die for them. Today these "strangers" who do not enter in through the gate, but who sneak into the sheepfold, who "steal" the sheep and "kill" them, are fanatic visionaries, or astute profiteers, who speculate on the good faith and naivety of the people. I am referring to the founders and leaders of the religious sects that are springing up around the world.

When we speak of sects, we must be careful not to put everything on the same level. Protestant evangelicals and Pentecostals, for example, apart from isolated groups, are not sects. For years the Catholic Church has maintained an official dialogue with them, something that it would never do with sects.

The true sects can be recognized by certain characteristics. First of all, in regard to their creed, they do not share essential points with the Christian faith, such as the divinity of Christ and the Trinity; or rather they mix foreign and incompatible elements with Christian doctrines -- re-incarnation, for example. In regard to methods, they are literally "sheep stealers" in the sense that they try to take the faithful away from their Church of origin, to make them followers of their sect.

They are also often aggressive and polemical. They invariably spend more time accusing and criticizing the Church, Mary and, in general, everything Catholic, rather than proposing their own positive ideas. They are the antipodes of the Gospel of Jesus, which is love, sweetness, respect for the freedom of others. Gospel love is absent from the sects.

Jesus has given us a sure criterion for recognizing them: "Beware," he said, "of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing, but who underneath are rapacious wolves. By their fruits you will know them" (Matthew 7:16). And the most common fruits of sects are divided families, fanaticism, and apocalyptic expectations of the end of the world, which are regularly contradicted by the facts.

There is another kind of religious sect, born outside the Christian world, generally imported from the East. Unlike those we have been talking about, they are not aggressive. Indeed, they present themselves "in the clothing of lambs," preaching love for all, for nature, the quest for the deep self. They are often syncretistic ensembles, that is, they weave together elements from various religions, as is the case with the New Age.

The great spiritual damage that is caused to those who allow themselves to be convinced by these new messiahs is that they lose Jesus Christ, and with him that "life in abundance" that he came to bring. Some of these sects are also dangerous for mental health and public order. Therecurrent cases of subjugation and group suicides show us where the fanaticism of some sect leaders can carry people.

When we speak about sects we must also say a "mea culpa." People often
end up in sects in search of the human warmth and support of a community that they did not find in their parish.

[Translation by Joseph G. Trabbic]

Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Wednesday Liturgy: The Double Alleluia

ROME, APRIL 8, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q: Please clarify whether the Mass dismissal should have the double Alleluia attached to it throughout the 50 days of the Easter season, e.g., "The Mass is ended. Go in peace. Alleluia! Alleluia!" -- or only during the Easter octave and the day of Pentecost. -- R.L., Cambridge, Massachusetts

A: According to the indications of the rubrics and good liturgical guidelines, the double Alleluia is used at every Mass during the Easter octave and on Pentecost Sunday, which concludes the Easter season.

The double Alleluia is also used for the dismissal or conclusion of the celebration of morning prayer and evening prayer, up to and including the vespers of Divine Mercy Sunday which concludes the Easter octave.

On all the other days of Easter season the Alleluia is not added to the dismissal of either Mass or Liturgy of the Hours.

In some countries, however, the missal contains optional formulas for the dismissal, according to the liturgical season. For example: "May the Risen Lord be our strength, go in peace."

Wherever permitted, such formulas may be used on any day of the Easter season. If used during the octave or Pentecost, the double Alleluia is always added.

The use of the double Alleluia, as well as the faculty of using the Easter sequence "Victimae Paschali" and the special formulas inserted into the Eucharistic Prayers during the days of the octave, are ways of emphasizing the importance of the feast and prolonging its celebration.

The use of this double Alleluia is very old, but during the Middle Ages it was dropped for a time from the liturgy in use by the Roman Curia. It returned through the influence of the Franciscan Friars Minor who restored the double Alleluia for their own liturgical books in 1243.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: On "Pontifical Masses"

ROME, APRIL 8, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Related to our piece on the "Pontifical Mass of the Chrism" (see March 18), a Dallas, Texas, reader asked: "I recently heard of a diocese with two co-cathedrals having two Chrism Masses each year. Is this proper, given the fact that it seems to take away from the sign of the oneness of the diocesan celebration? Are their any norms or standard practices for dioceses with two cathedrals in regards to Chrism Masses?"

The Holy See's Circular Letter on celebrating this feast says the following regarding the Chrism Mass:

"35. The Chrism Mass, which the bishop concelebrates with his presbyterium, and at which the Holy Chrism is consecrated and the oils blessed, manifests the communion of the priests with their bishop in the same priesthood and ministry of Christ. [38] The priests who concelebrate with the bishop should come to this Mass from different parts of the diocese, thus showing in the consecration of the Chrism to be his witnesses and cooperators, just as in their daily ministry, they are his helpers and counselors.

"The faithful are also to be encouraged to participate in this Mass and to receive the sacrament of the Eucharist.

"Traditionally, the Chrism Mass is celebrated on the Thursday of Holy Week. If, however, it should prove to be difficult for the clergy and people to gather with the bishop, this rite can be transferred to another day, but one always close to Easter. The Chrism and the oil of catechumens is to be used in the celebration of the sacraments of initiation on Easter night.

"36. There should be only one celebration of the Chrism Mass, given its significance in the life of the diocese, and it should take place in the cathedral or, for pastoral reasons, in another church that has a special significance.

"The Holy oils can be brought to the individual parishes before the celebration of the evening Mass of the Lord's Supper, or at some other suitable time. This can be a means of catechizing the faithful about the use and effects of the Holy oils and Chrism in Christian life."

Therefore it is clear that in principle there should be only one Chrism Mass per diocese, even if there is more than one cathedral.

Even if there are more churches with the title of "cathedral," each diocese, properly speaking, has only one.

The multiplication of cathedrals usually comes about due to some historic circumstances, such as when a new cathedral is built on a site different from the old, when dioceses are amalgamated, or when the bishop's principal residence is transferred to another town within the same diocese.

One case in which two Chrism Masses would be justified is when two dioceses are united in the person of the bishop without formally establishing a new unified diocese. In this situation the prelate is bishop of two dioceses, but the clergy are incardinated in only one of the two. A similar situation is when one bishop temporarily administrates another diocese during the vacancy of the episcopal see.

Sunday, April 06, 2008

Jesus Remains With Us in Scripture: Gospel Commentary for 3rd Sunday of Easter

Father Raniero Cantalamessa is the Pontifical Household preacher. The readings for this Sunday are Acts 2:14a, 22-28; 1 Peter 1:17-21; Luke 24:13-35.

* * *

ROME, APRIL 4, 2008 (Zenit.org).- "Were not our hearts burning within us while he spoke to us on the way and explained the Scriptures to us?" This line from the Gospel passage about the disciples of Emmaus brings us to reflect on the Scriptures.

There are two ways to approach the Bible. The first is that of considering it an old book, full of religious wisdom, of moral values, and of poetry too. From this point of view it is absolutely the most important book for understanding our Western culture and the Judeo-Christian religion. It is also the most printed and read book in the world.

But there is another, much more demanding way to approach the Bible, and it is that of believing that it contains the living word of God for us, that it is an "inspired" book, that is, written, indeed, by human authors, with all of their limitations, but with God's direct intervention. A very human book and, at the same time, divine, that speaks to men of all times and reveals to them the meaning of life and death.

Above all it reveals to them God's love. If all the Bibles in the world, St. Augustine said, on account of some disaster, would be destroyed and there remained only one copy and, of this copy, all of the pages were illegible save for one, and on this page only one line were legible; if this line were that of the first letter of John that reads "God is love," the whole Bible would be saved because it is summed up in this statement. This explains how it is that so many people approach the Bible without culture, without great education, with simplicity, believing that it is the Holy Spirit that speaks in it and find in it answers to their problems, light, encouragement, in a word, life.

The two ways of approaching the Bible -- the way of erudition and the way of faith -- do not exclude each other, on the contrary, they must be united. It is necessary to study the Bible, the way in which it should be interpreted (or to pay attention to the findings of those study it in this way), so as not to fall into fundamentalism.

Fundamentalism consists in taking a verse from the Bible, just as it sounds, and applying it to today's situations, without taking into account the difference of culture, of time, and of the different genres of the Bible.

It is believed, for example, that the universe is little more that 4,000 years old since this would seem to be what we can calculate from the information that the Bible provides, while we know that the universe is some billions of years old. The Bible was not written as a textbook of natural science, but for salvation. God, in the Bible, adapted himself to the way of speaking of the men of the time so that they could understand; he did not write only for the men of the age of technology.

On the other hand, to reduce the Bible to an object of study and erudition, remaining neutral to its message, is to kill it. It would be as if a man, receiving a letter from the woman he loves, were to examine it with a dictionary, from the point of view of grammar and syntax, and stops at these things, without grasping the love that is in it.

Reading the Bible without faith is like trying to read a book at night: nothing can be read, or at least one does not read what is essential. Reading Scripture with faith means reading it in reference to Christ, grasping what refers to him on every page, just as he did with the disciples of Emmaus.

Jesus remains with us in two ways: in the Eucharist and in his word. He is present in both: in the Eucharist under the form of food, in the Word under the form of light and truth. The word has a great advantage over the Eucharist. Only those who already believe and are in a state of grace can receive communion; but everyone, believers and nonbelievers, married people and divorced people, can approach the word of God. Indeed, to become a believer, the most normal route is that of listening to God's word.

[Translation by Joseph G. Trabbic]

Friday, April 04, 2008

Article: Vindicated

DONALD DE MARCO

The courageous man who saw how faith gave birth to science.

Pierre Maurice Marie Duhem
(1861-1916)

St. Augustine, St. Albert the Great, St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Thomas More are living testaments to the compatibility of scholarship and sanctity.

In the modern era, however, we witness a disjunction between the two.

There are great honors and material rewards for outstanding scholarship these days, and they can easily go to one’s head.

For this reason, Msgr. George Rutler has opined that it may be more difficult for a Ph.D. holder to get into heaven than a rich man.

Sanctity requires a great deal of humility. On the other hand, it is most tempting for the scholar to allow his works and prizes to lead him in the opposite direction of humility, toward pride.

William F. Buckley Jr., who came to know a wide variety of interesting people in his time, named Gerhart Niemeyer as the best example he had ever witnessed of a man who combined the virtues of scholarship with the virtues of sanctity.

The fact that Niemeyer is not exactly a household word is a good indication of the relative scarcity of holy scholars that populate the modern landscape.

In the interest of reminding (or introducing) the present world of a holy scholar who should not be forgotten, let me highlight the life and works of that most extraordinary example of scholarship wed to sanctity, Pierre Duhem.

Pierre Maurice Marie Duhem was born June 10, 1861, in Paris. He distinguished himself as one of the most brilliant students ever to attend the highly prestigious Ecole Normal Supérieure. Of the 800 or so graduates in France in 1882, he was and remained throughout his years at Ecole, first in his class in the science department. His doctoral thesis on thermodynamics, unfortunately, contradicted the position of the chemist Marcelin Berthelot, who was a powerful figure in the French academic establishment at the time.


The reason for the long delay in publishing the last five volumes of this masterpiece, which is without parallel in its field, was due to the strong opposition by influential academics who did not want to consider the demonstrable fact that modern science cannot be divorced from its religious foundations.


Though Duhem’s position was later vindicated, Bertholet ensured not only that the thesis would be rejected, but that Duhem would never teach in Paris. Duhem wrote another thesis, of a more mathematical nature, that three examiners accepted. But his career was permanently hampered as a result of his clash with Bertholet.

Duhem, ostracized by his own peers, never did teach in Paris. He spent the last 22 years of his life as a professor of theoretical physics at a provincial school, the University of Bordeaux. His magnum opus is his Le Système du monde: les doctrines cosmolologiques de Platon à Copernicus (The Structure of the World: Teachings on Cosmology from Plato to Copernicus).

The first five volumes — each more than 500 pages in length — were published in consecutive years, from 1913-1917. Although another five volumes were ready for publication when Duhem died in 1916, they were not published until four decades later (1954-59).

The reason for the long delay in publishing the last five volumes of this masterpiece, which is without parallel in its field, was due to the strong opposition by influential academics who did not want to consider the demonstrable fact that modern science cannot be divorced from its religious foundations.

In the intervening years between the publication of the first and second group of five volumes, many studies of medieval science were conducted — by Anneliese Maier, Marshall Clagett, E. Grant, Alistair Crombie and others. These studies served to extend and confirm Duhem’s work and add credibility to his central thesis concerning the continuity between Medieval and modern science.

As a result of Duhem’s pioneering research and the contribution by other historians of science, the value of studying medieval science is now well established and can no longer be dismissed by honest scholars.

Templeton Prize winner, Stanley Jaki, who holds doctorates in both physics as well as theology, has this to say about Duhem’s work: “What Duhem unearthed among other things from long-buried manuscripts was that supernatural revelation played a crucial liberating role in putting scientific speculation on the right track. … It is in this terrifying prospect for secular humanism, for which science is the redeemer of mankind, that lies the explanation of that grim and secretive censorship which has worked against Duhem.”

Peter Hodgson, who is university lecturer in nuclear physics at Oxford University, has this to say about Duhem’s scholarly accomplishment: “The work of Duhem is of great relevance today, for it shows clearly the Christian roots of modern science, thus decisively refuting the alleged incompatibility of science and Christianity still propagated by the secularist establishment. Science is an integral part of Christian culture, a lesson to be learned even within the Christian Church.”


“On a more personal level,” writes Hodgson, “Duhem is an example of Christian fortitude in the face of many setbacks and sorrows.”


Duhem’s study and documentation of the Christian origin of modern science has been deliberately neglected because it is unwelcome both to the disciples of the French Enlightenment and those of the Reformation. For different reasons, they would like to paint the Middle Ages as dark as possible.

Duhem’s work is all the more prodigious when one realizes that he had no research assistant at his disposal or dictaphones or even ball-point pens. Furthermore, he often had to use his left hand to hold firm his trembling right hand.

When he passed away at age 54, he had left to posterity 40 books, 400 articles, and 120 large-size notebooks, each 200 pages long, containing excerpts from medieval manuscripts.

“On a more personal level,” writes Hodgson, “Duhem is an example of Christian fortitude in the face of many setbacks and sorrows.”

He lost his wife and second daughter after less than two years of happy married life. Although his health was never strong and his workload was demanding, he nevertheless found time to visit and help the poor and the sick. He was popular with his students and the children of his friends. A throng of simple folk attended his funeral in his ancestral village of Cabrespine.

In a most unusual tribute to Pierre Duhem, Francis Kelly has produced a biography in verse form of this faithful Catholic, physicist, mathematician, philosopher and historian that ends with the following words:

“Though he has gone, we feel his wraith
Inspiring us to trust our faith
And, with his courage, life to face
Now in our time and in our place.
And now it’s time to say amen
And end this story of Duhem.”

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Donald DeMarco. "Vindicated." National Catholic Register. (March 30-April 5, 2008).

This article is reprinted with permission from National Catholic Register. To subscribe to the National Catholic Register call 1-800-421-3230.

THE AUTHOR

Donald DeMarco is adjunct professor at Holy Apostles College & Seminary in Cromwell, Connecticut and Professor Emeritus at St. Jerome's University in Waterloo Ontario. He also continues to work as a corresponding member of the Pontifical Acadmy for Life. Donald DeMarco has written hundreds of articles for various scholarly and popular journals, and is the author of twenty books, including The Heart of Virtue, The Many Faces of Virtue, Virtue's Alphabet: From Amiability to Zeal and Architects Of The Culture Of Death. Donald DeMarco is on the Advisory Board of The Catholic Education Resource Center.

Copyright © 2008 National Catholic Register

Article: As Though There Were No God

PROFESSOR THEOPHILUS

Professor Theophilus helps a college student understand the "Most Important Thing" — and why he doesn't believe in agnostics.

Class had been over for only 10 minutes when Nathan turned up at my office door saying, "I brought your coffee mug back."

"What? Good morning. Thank you. I didn't even know you had it."

"I didn't," he declared. "You left it behind in class again." He put it in my hand.

"Oh, no. Did you come all the way up here just to return it?"

"It's OK. I was coming anyway."

"Then sit," I said, gesturing.

He did, but tentatively, like a bird on the end of a twig. "I wasn't sure if my question is office hours material," he said. "It's about something you said in class."

"Why shouldn't that be office hours material?"

"Because actually my question is personal."

I spread my hands. "Ask."

"This morning someone asked a question about all the 'Creator' language in the Declaration of Independence."

"I remember."

"You said something about a French guy who influenced the thinking of the American Founders. Burlap or Burlah."

"Burlamaqui."

"That's him. You said he made a big deal about God. I wasn't too interested. I hadn't had my coffee yet, you know? Then you got my attention."

"How?"

"Well, you didn't say flat out whether you think there is a God. But you said you thought this Burlamaqui guy was right to make a big deal about the question. Here's what I want to know."

"I'm listening."

"What does it matter?"


I was a bit puzzled. "Nathan, it sounds like you're asking 'Why is it important to know about the Most Important Thing?'"


I was a bit puzzled. "Nathan, it sounds like you're asking 'Why is it important to know about the Most Important Thing?'"

"I think I'm asking why it is the Most Important Thing."

"Perhaps it would help you to think of the other questions you consider important."

"Like what?"

"Whether to live. How to live. Whether there is anything to live for. The God question makes a difference to all those questions."

"What do you mean when you say it 'makes a difference' to them?"

"If there is a God, the answers come out one way; if there isn't, they come out another."

"But we can't know whether God is real anyway."

I lifted a quizzical eyebrow. "How do you know that we can't know?"

He shrugged. "I take it back. I don't know that we can't know. But I know that I don't know."

"Have you tried to find out?"

"Uh huh. During my sophomore year."

"Tell me about that."

"I was sort of obsessed. I read so many books and talked with so many people about whether there's a God that I was losing sleep and making myself sick. So please don't tell me to read another book, and please don't ask me 'Have you considered this argument?'"

I laughed. "Whatever you say."

"So now I just say I'm agnostic."

"What do you mean by that?"

"I mean I don't say there is a God, and I don't say there isn't one," he answered. "I'm not committed either way."

I was still holding the mug Nathan had returned. "You said you hadn't had your coffee," I said, standing. "I'm going to make some; would you like a cup?" That would give me time to think.

"I'd love one," he answered, surprised. "But I didn't bring anything to drink from."

"Look on the bookshelf behind you." After Nathan had fetched one of the cups and seated himself again, he seemed more relaxed.

I measured out the water, counted out the scoops, and flipped the switch. Shortly the coffee maker was emitting little pops and chuckles. It always makes me think of a hen. When I had poured out two cups I turned back to Nathan."

"So you don't believe in God."

"I don't believe in Him and I don't disbelieve in Him. Like I said, I'm agnostic."

"What would you say if I told you that in a certain way, I don't believe in agnostics?"

Not sure whether I was joking, he made a little laugh. "But I exist," he said. "You see me. Here I am."

I smiled back and sipped my coffee. "I believe that you exist. And I believe that you don't know what to think. But you said an agnostic is 'not committed either way,' and I don't believe that there is such a thing as 'not committed either way.'"

He shook his head. "If I don't know the answer to the God question, then how could I be committed to an answer to the God question?"


"Of course they did. Nathan, there is no such thing as neutrality. Every way of life is some way of life. Inevitably, you live either as though there were a God, or as though there weren't. You stake your life on an answer that you say you don't have."


"Commitments are reflected in movements of the will."

"What does that mean?"

"They're reflected in how we live."

"So which answer to the God question am I committed to by how I live?"

"Oh, I haven't any idea."

"But I thought you meant — "

"Why, no. Answering that question would require me to have personal knowledge about you that I don't possess."

"You mean you'd have to ask questions about my life?"

I laughed again. "I'm not proposing to ask you questions about your life, Nathan. I'm just your teacher."

"That's OK. I came here with a personal question, not a course question. This is related."

"That's true," I conceded.

"So are you saying that if you did ask me questions about my life, then you could tell me what answer to the God question I'm committed to?"

"Possibly."

"Then do it. I want to know."

I hesitated. "All right. You asked for it. Do you pray?"

"I used to sometimes, but I stopped. Seemed kind of pointless, since I didn't know whether anyone was listening."

"Do you have plans for the future?"

"I'll probably go to law school. There's always work for lawyers. They make pretty good money, and I think I'd like the work OK."

"What do you aim for in life?"

"Not getting bored. Having enough money to buy the things that I want. Not working all the time. Having some fun on the side."

"Will you get married? Have kids?"

"I'm OK with my sex life as it is. If it gets 'old' some day, then maybe I'll settle down. Kids, I don't know. That seems like a pretty big interruption in my life. But hey," Nathan added, "this isn't bad. How am I doing?"

I smiled. "No more questions."

He smiled back lopsidedly. "Sorry my answers were so uninformative."

"What makes you think they were uninformative?"

"They didn't reveal a 'commitment' like you were expecting."

"On the contrary."

"You mean they did?"


"Or consider my questions about your future. You say you don't know whether God is real. But if you're really not sure, then in planning your future why not ask 'What use might a good God have for my gifts?' Instead you consult only your pleasure. That makes sense only if you can be sure that no such God does take an interest."


"Of course they did. Nathan, there is no such thing as neutrality. Every way of life is some way of life. Inevitably, you live either as though there were a God, or as though there weren't. You stake your life on an answer that you say you don't have."

"So which answer am I staking my life on?"

"Consider my question about whether you pray. You say you don't know whether anyone is at the other end listening. But if you're really not sure, then why not say 'I'll pray, because maybe there is'? Instead you say 'I won't, because maybe there isn't.' That makes sense only if it's really true that there isn't."

He paused. Light dawned. "Yeah, I see that."

"Or consider my questions about your future. You say you don't know whether God is real. But if you're really not sure, then in planning your future why not ask 'What use might a good God have for my gifts?' Instead you consult only your pleasure. That makes sense only if you can be sure that no such God does take an interest."

"I guess that's right too."

"Or take those questions about marriage. Marriage is either about the total gift of self, or about personal sexual convenience. The former way of viewing it makes sense if a self-giving God created it; the latter way makes sense if only He didn't. You didn't give the former way a single thought."

"That's true. I see where you're going."

"Where?"

"You're saying that I live — as though there were no God."

"Right. You say you're uncommitted, but in practice you're committed to atheism."

Nathan was unperturbed. "But Prof, since I don't know the answer to the God question, how else can I live?"

I answered, "Instead of living as though there were no God, you could try living as though there were."

That was when the other shoe dropped. His face turned ashen. "You mean — like pray?"

"That, and other things. Seek His will and follow it."

"How can I seek what might not be there?"

"If you did seek it, you might find out."

There was a long, long pause. I had spoken the Abominable Thought. A look of infinite dismay spread over Nathan's face. One could have read the signs from 10 feet away; as his mental censors crumbled, an awful question was welling slowly up from the base of his mind.

If only he did seek it, he might find out. He saw that now.

Did he really want to find out?

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Professor Theophilus (aka J. Budziszewski). "Office Hours: As Though There Were No God." TruU.org (November 10, 2005).

TrueU.org is a community for college students who want to know and confidently discuss the Christian worldview. It is an apostolate of Focus on the Family.

Reprinted with permission of J. Budziszewski.

THE AUTHOR

J. Budziszewski (Boojee-shefski) earned his doctorate from Yale University in 1981. He teaches at the University of Texas in Austin, in the Departments of Government and Philosophy where he specializes in the relations among ethical theory, political theory, and Christian theology. The focus of his current research is natural law and moral self deception. J. Budziszewski is a former atheist, former political radical, former shipyard welder, and former lots of other things, including former young and former thin. He's been married for more than thirty years to his high school sweetheart, Sandra, and has two daughters. He loves teaching. He says he also loves contemporary music, but it turns out that he means "the contemporaries of Johann Sebastian Bach." He deserted his faith during college but returned to Christ a dozen years later and entered the Catholic Church at Easter 2004. Among a number of other books, he is the author of Ask Me Anything: Provocative Answers for College Students, How to Stay Christian in College, What We Can't Not Know: A Guide, The Revenge of Conscience: Politics and the Fall of Man, and Written on the Heart: The Case for Natural Law. J. Budziszewski is on the advisory board of the Catholic Education Resource Center.

Copyright © 2008 J. Budziszewski

Article: Easter vs. Irony

GEORGE WEIGEL

At the beginning of Lent, I was sent a moving account of the recent funeral procession of a young American soldier, which took place near his hometown in the South.

The most striking section read as follows:

"[T]he most incredible thing happened following the service on the way to the cemetery. We went to our cars and drove to the cemetery escorted by at least ten police cars with lights flashing...Everyone on the road who was not in the procession pulled over, got out of their cars, and stood silently and respectfully, some with their hands over their hearts.

"When we turned off the highway, suddenly there were teenage boys along both sides of the street...all holding large American flags on long flag poles, and again with their hands on their hearts. We thought at first it was Boy Scouts on 4H Club or something, but it continued — for two and a half miles. Hundreds of young people, standing silently on the side of the road with flags. At one point we passed an elementary school and all the children were outside, shoulder to shoulder — kindergarteners, handicapped, teachers, staff, everyone. Some held signs of love and support...No one spoke, not even the very young children....The love and pride from this community [which] had lost one of their own was the most amazing thing I've ever been privileged to witness."

I forwarded the message and the accompanying photos to a friend, who responded in a most thoughtful way:

"There you see a culture untainted by irony. That is exactly the environment in which I was born and lived for my first eighteen years; imagine my surprise when I reached Princeton and discovered higher criticism, debonair nihilism, and the enervating paralysis of irony."

All of which, I suggest, is worth a Passiontide meditation.


Perhaps the trouble so many highly educated people have in accepting the gift of faith today is that their spiritual faculties have been dulled by the irony in which modern and post-modern high culture abounds.


The Jesus of the Gospels is a figure devoid of irony. Yes, he tells what scholars call "parables of inversion," in which the worldly pecking order is turned upside down and inside out; but there is no irony in his teaching — and certainly no cynicism about the rich and the powerful getting theirs at last. In his Passion, Jesus confronts a supreme ironist, Pilate, who imagines the question, "What is truth?" to be both clever and a rhetorical show-stopper. The sign Pilate has affixed to the cross — "The King of the Jews" — reeks of irony, as do the taunts of those who wanted a messiah who better fit their understanding of power.

Perhaps the trouble so many highly educated people have in accepting the gift of faith today is that their spiritual faculties have been dulled by the irony in which modern and post-modern high culture abounds. Very little today is what it once was thought to be: what we once regarded as good, we are now taught was base; what we once honored as noble, we are now informed was merely self-serving; what we once thought to be self-sacrifice, we are now told was just self-delusion. Innocence is ignorance; only the ironic sensibility befits a well-educated modern. Or so we are told.

The Danish philosopher Kierkegaard had a rather different view: "Irony," he wrote, "is an abnormal growth; like the abnormally enlarged liver of the Strasbourg goose, it ends by killing the individual." Kills, that is spiritually: for irony is no part of that child-like openness with which, Jesus tells us, the Gospel's invitation to faith must be received. If western culture is dying spiritually, perhaps the pathogen responsible is irony.

On the cross, Jesus is crushed by the weight of irony and cynicism. Easter, then, is God's answer to the ironic: the New Life first manifest in the Risen Lord is God's response to the ironic, God's definitive proclamation that the ironist will not have the last word. In the Church, the Body of Christ which is the Risen Lord's real presence extended in time and space, we encounter the truth and love that transcend the ironic and let us see things as they really are.

Irony no longer reigns. He is Risen!

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

George Weigel. "Easter vs. Irony." The Catholic Difference (March 19 , 2008).

Reprinted with permission of George Weigel.

George Weigel's column is distributed by the Denver Catholic Register, the official newspaper of the Archdiocese of Denver. Phone: 303-715-3123.

THE AUTHOR

George Weigel, a Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, is a Roman Catholic theologian and one of America's leading commentators on issues of religion and public life. Weigel is the author or editor of eighteen books, including Faith, Reason, and the War Against Jihadism: A Call to Action, God's Choice: Pope Benedict XVI and the Future of the Catholic Church (2005), The Cube and the Cathedral: Europe, America, and Politics Without God (2005), Letters to a Young Catholic: The Art of Mentoring (2004), The Courage to Be Catholic: Crisis, Reform, and the Future of the Church (2002), and The Truth of Catholicism: Ten Controversies Explored (2001).

George Weigel's major study of the life, thought, and action of Pope John Paul II, Witness to Hope: The Biography of Pope John Paul II (Harper Collins, 1999) was published to international acclaim in 1999, and translated into French, Italian, Spanish, Polish, Portuguese, Slovak, Czech, Slovenian, Russian, and German. The 2001 documentary film based on the book won numerous prizes. George Weigel is a consultant on Vatican affairs for NBC News, and his weekly column, "The Catholic Difference," is syndicated to more than fifty newspapers around the United States.

Copyright © 2008 George Weigel

Article: Did the Resurrection Actually Happen?

DINESH D'SOUZA

The historicity of Christ, including his death by crucifixion, is a fact as well attested as any in the ancient world.

The evidence for Christ's existence is much stronger than that for Socrates, Alexander the Great, and numerous figures of ancient times whose historicity no one doubts. Historians are unanimous that Christ was born, that he developed a following, that he antagonized the Jewish and Roman authorities, and that he was put to death. But what about the resurrection?

"If Christ had not been raised," Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15:17, "our preaching is useless and so is your faith." The resurrection is the most important event in Christianity. (For this reason, Easter is actually a more important holiday for Christians than Christmas.) Other religions such as Judaism and Islam may feature miracles but miracles are not central to their theology. Christianity, by contrast, is based on the miracle of the resurrection.

Since the nineteenth century, some biblical scholars have refused to accept the biblical account of the Resurrection because it was produced by people obviously biased in Christ's favor. Interestingly Christ's followers, by their own admission, did not expect the resurrection. Arriving three days after his death, the women brought spices to his tomb to anoint and preserve his body. Only then did they observe that the stone had been rolled away and the tomb was empty.

The fact of the empty tomb was admitted by the Roman guards and also by the Jewish magistrates, who told the Roman authorities that Christ's followers must have stolen the body. In Jewish polemic against Christianity, this has been the standard explanation for the empty tomb. Yet it is prima facie implausible, since how could a handful of female disciples have subdued Roman guards and moved the stone blocking access to the tomb?

The apostles were deeply skeptical about reports of a resurrection, and Christ had to appear to them several times before these doubts were dispelled. Paul writes that Christ "appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, although some have passed away." Paul here appeals to direct empirical evidence: the testimony of multiple witnesses who actually saw Jesus alive after his execution. Of this group, Paul says that many are still alive, which means they are in a position to refute him if what he is claiming is wrong. In the history of hallucinations, is there a single instance in which five hundred people all saw the same person — a figure known to them — and were all equally mistaken?


Imagine a disputed event in court where numerous eyewitnesses gave evidence of the same fact and stood by their testimony so firmly that they would be willing to endure life imprisonment or even the death penalty rather than say the contrary.


But is the testimony of the early Christians reliable? Well, let us see. The disciples became so convinced of what they had seen that their dirges of lamentation were replaced with cries of joy. Proclaiming Christ crucified and Christ risen, they launched the greatest wave of religious conversion in history. Historians tell us that the number of Christians increased from around 100 at the time of Christ's death to around 30 million by the early fourth century, when the Roman emperor himself converted to Christianity.

These conversions occurred in the teeth of fierce political opposition and the persecution of the greatest empire in the ancient world, the empire of Rome. The early Christians did not hesitate to identify themselves with a man who had been branded a traitor and a criminal. They endured imprisonment, torture, exile, and death rather than renounce their commitment to a resurrected Christ.

Imagine a disputed event in court where numerous eyewitnesses gave evidence of the same fact and stood by their testimony so firmly that they would be willing to endure life imprisonment or even the death penalty rather than say the contrary. Would any jury doubt that such people, who would have little to gain and everything to lose, were telling the truth?

"Yes," an atheist friend of mine conceded. "But aren't the radical Muslims also willing to die in order to get the virgins in heaven?" Perhaps so, but the two cases are not comparable. The radical Muslims are taking on faith that their actions will take them to an Elysian place where the virgins will be waiting. By contrast, the Christians who went to their deaths at the hands of the Romans did so because they refused to renounce an event in their own experience. Why would someone be willing to die for something that he knew to be a lie?

Even from a secular point of view, the evidence for Christ's resurrection is surprisingly strong. It might even be sufficient to convince an impartial jury in a court of law. The big question surrounding Good Friday and Easter is not: did all this happen? It did. The big question is whether we will let Christ into our hearts, so that he can raise us up on the day of judgment.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Dinesh D'Souza. "Did the Resurrection Actually Happen?" Dinesh D'Souza Blog (March 21, 2008).

This article reprinted with permission from Dinesh D'Souza.

This Easter reflection is adapted from the book What's So Great About Christianity.

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 What's So Great About Christianity. He is also the author of: The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11, 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 © 2008 Dinesh D'Souza

Wednesday, April 02, 2008

Wednesday Liturgy: Saints' Prayers for Souls in Purgatory

ROME, APRIL 1, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q: The Church is often called the communion of saints, the militant Church, the purgative Church and the Church triumphant. We living here on earth are urged to pray for the souls in purgatory to help them purify themselves from their sins in order to enjoy the beatific vision. My question is: Do also the saints in heaven pray for the souls in purgatory as we ourselves do? -- S.B., San Gwann, Malta

A: The question is more theological than liturgical and very speculative theology at that, but is also very intriguing. The crux of the question revolves around the way that the saints in heaven can know the realities that occur on earth and in purgatory.

In general most theologians hold that once a person enters into the realm of the beatific vision, they do not have universal access to our thoughts or to earthly reality.

Any knowledge they gain is received directly from God, and God most certainly makes them aware of requests for their intercession in a way that we can only imagine but never fully grasp while remaining here below.

Therefore I believe we can confidently affirm that the saints intercede for the souls in purgatory in those cases when someone on earth requests that saint's intercession for a particular soul.

The Church itself invokes the saints in this way, albeit in a universal manner, during the rite of final commendation at the graveside at the prayer of the faithful:

"V. Saints of God come to his/her aid! Come to meet him/her angels of the Lord!"
"R. Receive his/her soul and present him/her to God the Most High."

If the Church proposes a prayer to implore that the saints come to the aid of the dead, then it clearly believes this aid is possible.

From a theological standpoint it is very difficult to be able to affirm that saints intercede, on their own initiative, so to speak, for the souls in purgatory without some form of earthly intercession.

It does not mean it does not happen; it is just that we have no way of knowing.

It is also possible that in a general way the saint's participation in the heavenly liturgy continually glorifying God is also of benefit to the souls in purgatory, but once more we are ignorant of the precise manner in which this might come about.

As the poet Thomas Grey said: "Where ignorance is bliss, 'Tis folly to be wise."

If we were sure that the saints of heaven were independently praying for the souls in purgatory, perhaps many would defer the act of spiritual charity of praying for the deceased to the saint's powerful intercession.

The blessing of ignorance obliges us to continue exercising this intercession on our own, in the hope that others will do likewise for us when we are gone.