Catholic Metanarrative

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Wednesday Liturgy: Extra Kneeling; Monstrance on Holy Thursday

ROME, MARCH 30, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q1: Is it permissible to kneel (priest, deacon and people) during the penitential rite of the Mass during Lent? It seems to me to be adding a rubric that is not there. -- J.T., Lancaster, Pennsylvania

Q2: I've been told by priests who studied in Rome and observed this in Rome that on Holy Thursday to transfer the Blessed Sacrament to the altar of repose one may use the monstrance and have exposition until midnight. Is this permitted? The sense I've gotten from reading the rubrics is that the Blessed Sacrament is transferred in a ciborium and then placed inside the tabernacle and the door closed. If that is correct, though, what does the rubric mean that there is to be no solemn adoration after midnight? If the Eucharist, for adoration on Holy Thursday, is kept inside the tabernacle, what makes it solemn and what therefore must change after midnight? -- J.S., Mobile, Alabama

A: With reference to the first question, I would say that kneeling during the penitential rite is adding an unnecessary rubric to the prescribed rites and should not be done.

If the Church is satisfied with leaving the penitential rubrics unchanged during Lent, pastors should follow suit and not add novelties.

This is especially true for Sundays in which penitential or impetrative kneeling, unlike kneeling as an act of adoration, has not been in use since being banned by the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325. For this reason, when celebrations in which the litany of saints is sung on a Sunday (for example, during ordinations), the congregation remains standing.

On the other hand, the whole congregation may optionally kneel during the great general intercessions on Good Friday. This may be for the entire general intercessions or, if so decreed by the bishops' conference, the deacon can direct the people to kneel and rise for the common period of silent prayer between the introduction to each intercession and the priest's solemn prayer.

Regarding the second question, I have lived in Rome for more than 20 years and have never seen the monstrance used on Holy Thursday. Rome being Rome, it is always possible that some church or religious order has some immemorial privilege to practice this usage. It could also be -- since living in Rome does not per se concede infused knowledge and wisdom -- old-fashioned ignorance of liturgical law.

In this respect the law is very clear. The Congregation for Divine Worship's circular letter on the Easter celebrations says in No. 55: "The Blessed Sacrament should be reserved in a closed tabernacle or pyx. Under no circumstances may it be exposed in a monstrance."

The prohibition of solemn adoration after midnight when Good Friday begins is because the liturgy's focus moves away from the altar of repose and turns toward the Cross. Therefore, all community activities before the altar of reposition such as holy hours, the Liturgy of the Hours, community devotions and the like should cease after midnight.

The faithful may continue to privately venerate the tabernacle after this hour and until before the celebration of the Passion on Good Friday, but community activities should be held elsewhere.

This is one reason why the place of reposition should not be situated in the sanctuary area. It may be the usual tabernacle if the church has a special Blessed Sacrament chapel, a side altar, or a place set up especially for the occasion.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Why Only One Chrism Mass

ROME, MARCH 30, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Somewhat related to the question regarding two Chrism Masses (see March 16) is one from a Brighton, England, reader regarding how to store the holy oils. The reader asked: "I want to display the three oils. I have been told one should be elevated. If this is true, which one should be elevated (of the three)?"

We dealt in part with this question on Oct. 4, 2005. Since the practice of visibly displaying the holy oils is of very recent coinage, there are practically no official norms describing the manner of their reservation.

The U.S. bishops in their document "Built of Living Stones" do establish some parameters:

"The Place for the Sacred Oils

"§ 117 § The consecrated oil of chrism for initiation, ordination, and the dedication of churches, as well as the blessed oils of the sick and of catechumens, are traditionally housed in a special place called an ambry or repository. These oils consecrated or blessed by the bishop at the Mass of Chrism deserve the special care of the community to which they have been entrusted. The style of the ambry may take different forms. A parish church might choose a simple, dignified, and secure niche in the baptistry or in the wall of the sanctuary or a small case for the oils. Cathedrals responsible for the care of a larger supply of the oils need a larger ambry. Since bright light or high temperatures can hasten spoilage, parishes will want to choose a location that helps to preserve the freshness of the oil."

Thus, no official document requires elevating one of the oils. Should a parish for aesthetic or pastoral reasons desire to elevate one of them in the ambry, the obvious candidate is the sacred chrism. This is because of its important part in baptism and ordination and its essential role in confirmation.

It is also the only oil that must be blessed by the bishop in both Eastern and Western liturgical traditions. The other oils are either habitually blessed by the priest, as in most Eastern Churches, or at least may be blessed by a priest in emergencies, as is the case for the oil for anointing the sick in the Roman rite.

The Spirit of the Liturgy: The Priest and the Paschal Triduum

ROME, MARCH 26, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Given the proximity of Holy Week, Father Nicola Bux, professor of Eastern Liturgy and Consultor of several Holy See dicasteries, proposes a substantial liturgical meditation on the key moments and symbols of the celebrations proper to Palm Sunday and the Holy Triduum.

Father Bux's reflections are a valid aid -- offered both to priests as well as the rest of the faithful -- to bring us closer to the divine mysteries that will be celebrated in the forthcoming days, with a spirit of contemplative faith and prayer of adoration, and not of mere organizational pragmatism.

We take advantage of the occasion to wish our readers a Holy Easter that will bear fruits of interior joy and conversion (Father Mauro Gagliardi).

* * *

The Letter to the Hebrews is the only text of the New Testament that attributes to our Lord Jesus Christ the titles "priest," "high priest" and "mediator of the New Covenant," thanks to the offering of the sacrifice of his body, anticipated in the mystical Supper of Holy Thursday, consummated on the Cross and presented to the Father with the Resurrection and Ascension to Heaven (cf. Hebrews 9:11-15). This text is meditated in the Liturgy of the Hours of the fifth week of Lent -- or Passion week, as in the liturgical calendar of the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite -- and in Holy Week.

We Catholic priests must always look at Jesus Christ and have his same sentiments, to the point of absorption in Him; this ascesis occurs with permanent conversion. How does conversion take place in us priests? In the rite of Ordination we are asked to teach the Catholic faith, not our ideas, "to celebrate with devotion and fidelity the mysteries of Christ -- namely, the liturgy and the sacraments -- according to the tradition of the Church" and not according to our taste; above all, "to be ever more united to Christ high priest, who as pure victim offered himself to the Father for us," that is, to conform our life to the mystery of the cross.

The Holy Church honors the priest and the priest must honor the Church with the holiness of his life -- proposed St. Alphonsus Mary of Liguori on the day of his Ordination -- with zeal, with work and with decorum. He offers Jesus Christ to the Eternal Father, that is why he must be clothed in the virtues of Jesus Christ to prepare himself to encounter the Holy of Holies. How important is the interior and exterior preparation to the sacred Liturgy, to the Holy Mass! It is about glorifying the high and eternal priest Jesus Christ.

However, all this is carried out to the greatest degree in Holy Week, the Great and Holy Week as the Eastern Church says. Let us look at some of its principal ceremonies on the basis of the Pontifical of bishops.

1. On Palm Sunday, the priest enters Jerusalem with Jesus in joy. On this Sunday the Church celebrates the Lord's triumph and anticipates the joy of the victory of the Risen One. The solemn procession in honor of Christ the King is the most characteristic rite of the day: It recalls the triumphal cortege that accompanied Jesus on his entry in Jerusalem, expresses the actual meeting of the Church in the holy mysteries and represents, ahead of time, the entrance of the elect in the heavenly city, as the Apostle says: "Provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him" (Romans 8:17).

The liturgy of the Palms orients us, therefore, to the definitive Presence of the Lord, in Greek "parousia." It is not just about commemorating the Lord's entry in the heavenly Jerusalem but, bringing us close to the Eucharistic banquet, where the Bread will be broken, about proclaiming symbolically what will really happen at the end of the world. Then the Lord's Cross will open the entrance of the heavenly Jerusalem to that "great multitude" that St. John contemplated in the prophetic vision, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and tongues -- clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, "Salvation belongs to our God who sits upon the throne, and to the Lamb!" (Revelation 7:9-10).

2. With the Missa in Cena Domini of Holy Thursday, the priest enters the principal mysteries, the institution of the Most Blessed Eucharist and of the ministerial priesthood, as also of the commandment of brotherly love, signified by the washing of the feet, gesture that the Coptic liturgy does ordinarily every Sunday. Nothing expresses it better than the song "Ubi Caritas." After communion, the priest, taking the humeral cloth, goes up to the altar, genuflects and, helped by a deacon, takes the pyx with his hands covered by the humeral cloth. It is the symbol of the need for pure hands and hearts to approach the Divine Mysteries and touch the Lord!

3. Good Friday in Passione Domini, the priest is called to go up to Calvary. At 3 p.m., the Passion of the Lord takes place in three moments: the Word, the Cross, Communion. It moves in procession and silence to the altar. After reverencing the altar, which represents Christ in the austere nakedness of Calvary, he prostrates himself on the ground: It is the "proskynesis," as in the day of ordination. Thus he expresses the conviction of being nothing before the Divine Majesty, and repentance for having dared to measure himself, through sin, with the Omnipotent. As the Son who abased himself, the priest recognizes his nothingness, and so begins his priestly mediation between God and the people, which culminates in the solemn universal prayer.

The exposition and adoration of the Holy Cross takes place: The priest goes to the altar with the deacons and there, standing, receives it and uncovers it in three successive moments, or shows it already uncovered, and invites each of the faithful to adoration with the words: Look at the wood of the Cross. In its bare solemnity, here, in the heart of the liturgical year, tradition has endured tenaciously more than at other moments of the year. The priest, after depositing the chasuble, if possible barefoot, is the first to approach the cross, kneels before it and kisses it. Catholic theology does not hesitate to give to the word "adoration" its true meaning. The true Cross -- bathed with the blood of the Redeemer -- makes itself, so to speak, one with Christ, and receives adoration. Because of this, prostrating ourselves before the sacred wood, we say to the Lord: "We adore you, Oh Christ, and we bless you, because by thy Holy Cross you have redeemed the world."

4. The Easter of the Kingdom of God has been realized in Jesus: the Supper offered and consumed, "on the night he was betrayed"; immolated on Calvary on Good Friday, when "the earth was covered in darkness," once again at night receives the consecration of divine approval, in the resurrection of Christ the Lord: From John we know that Mary Magdalene went to the sepulcher "while it was still dark"; hence, it happened in the last hours of the night after the Paschal Saturday.

In the Novus Ordo, the priest, from the beginning of the Vigil, wears white vestments as for the Mass. He blesses the fire and lights the Paschal Candle with the new fire, if he proceeds, after having nailed, as in the old liturgy, a cross. Then he traces on the vertical side of the cross the Greek letter alpha and below, instead, the letter omega; between the arms of the cross he traces four numbers to indicate the current year, saying: Christ yesterday and today. Afterward, having made the incision on the cross and the other signs, he can nail in the candle five grains of incense, saying: Through his holy wounds. Then, singing the Lumen Christi, he leads the procession to the church. The priest is at the head of the faithful people here on earth, to be able to lead them to heaven.

It is the priest who intones solemnly the Alleluia. He sings it three times, gradually raising the tone of his voice: the people repeat it each time in the same tone.

In the baptismal liturgy, the priest, standing before the font, blesses the water singing the prayer: Oh God, through the sacramental signs; while he invokes: Descend, Father, on this water. He can submerge the Paschal Candle in the water once or three times. The meaning is profound: the priest is the fertilizing organ of the ecclesial womb, symbolized by the baptismal pool. Truly in the person of Christ Head he engenders children that, as father, he fortifies with the chrism and nourishes with the Eucharist. Also by reason of the marital functions to the Church Bride, the priest must be a man. All the mystical meaning of Easter is manifested in the priestly identity, coming to fullness, the pleroma, as the East says. With him sacramental initiation reaches its culmination and Christian life the center.

Hence, the priest, having ascended the cross with Jesus on Friday and lowered into his sepulcher on Holy Saturday, can really affirm on Easter Sunday with the sequence: "We know that Christ has truly risen from the dead."

[Translation by ZENIT]

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Wednesday Liturgy: Weddings in Lent

ROME, MARCH 23, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q: Last Saturday I participated in a wedding Mass. As I remembered that there is no wedding celebration in the Lent, I asked the presider about this. He answered, "Holy matrimony is a sacrament so we can celebrate it even in Lent." Is this true? -- N.T., Houston, Texas

A: The precise answer to this question is yes, no and it depends.

There is no universal rule that would prohibit celebrating the sacrament of matrimony during Lent.

The ritual for matrimony foresees this possibility (No. 32 in the Italian ritual) but indicates that pastors should inform couples so that they take the nature of the season into account. This would usually mean moderating the external elements such as flowers and decorations in the church. On some days, it might also mean that the ritual nuptial Mass would not be allowed and that in some cases the priest would have to celebrate the wedding in violet vestments.

Weddings are forbidden on Good Friday and Holy Saturday. According to the Congregation for Divine Worship's 1988 Circular Letter Concerning the Preparation and Celebration of the Easter Feasts:

"61. All celebration of the sacraments on this day [Good Friday] is strictly prohibited, except for the sacraments of penance and anointing of the sick. Funerals are to be celebrated without singing, music, or the tolling of bells.

"75. On this day [Holy Saturday], the Church abstains strictly from celebration of the sacrifice of the Mass. Holy Communion may only be given in the form of Viaticum. The celebration of marriages is forbidden, as is also the celebration of other sacraments, except those of penance and the anointing of the sick."

In cases of imminent danger of death, even these restrictions on the celebration of matrimony could be lifted.

Therefore, the universal laws do not forbid weddings during Lent but nor are they particularly enthusiastic in promoting it.

Some dioceses have gone further than the universal laws and have established rules that range from encouraging pastors to dissuade couples from scheduling weddings during this season, to actually forbidding weddings.

For example, after its diocesan synod in 1993 the Diocese of Rome for all practical purposes forbade the celebration of weddings during Lent. Exceptions can be made but only for very good reasons, and the celebrations have to be sober.

This is more a pastoral question than a doctrinal one. The decision regarding the Lenten celebration of matrimony depends on many factors, including local traditions and culture. The Roman synod's decision probably stems from the great difficulty in persuading couples and their parents to tone down the typically pompous and ebullient external elements associated with a wedding.

Other places and countries, with diverse traditions and customs, might see no need to make such restrictions on the celebration of matrimony during Lent.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Rite of Election of Catechumens

ROME, MARCH 23, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Our comments regarding preparation for adult baptism at Easter (see March 9) brought to mind another e-mail. A reader described this case:

"During the second week of Lent, our DRE [director of religious education] approached our RCIA coordinator to let her know that this year confirmation was not going to take place during the Easter Vigil for our newly baptized. While I was attending a class on canon law, Fr. X stated that all three sacraments -- baptism, confirmation and first Communion -- should all be conferred upon the newly baptized. When I mentioned this to the DRE, I was told that Fr. Z said that it was going to be done that way [that is, no confirmation] and that he has the authority to make those changes. I had asked Fr. X in regards to 'pastor privilege,' and he said that there was no 'pastor privilege' -- this was 'full initiation' and all three sacraments should be done together. My only thought is that all of the newly baptized will be missing out on a very important sacrament and there is nothing that I can do to help."

In this case, Fr. X is correct that a pastor does not have blanket authority to omit confirmation to adults baptized during the Easter Vigil. The fact that canon and liturgical law grants the baptizing priest the faculty to confirm on this occasion is a clear sign that this should be the normal process.

In some dioceses the bishop prefers to do most adult baptisms, but this does not change the fact that all three sacraments are given.

That said, however, it is necessary to point out what the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults (RCIA) says in No. 24: "In certain cases when there is a serious reason, confirmation may be postponed until near the end of the period of post-baptismal catechesis, for example, Pentecost Sunday."

The RCIA, unfortunately, does not give examples of what a "serious reason" might be. The reason is certainly not a large number of catechumens; No. 23 already foresees this possibility and suggests that the solution is celebrating several full initiations during the Easter octave.

Nor would it usually be the case of lack of preparation, because if an adult is unprepared for confirmation, he or she would be equally unprepared for baptism.

It can only be supposed that No. 24 refers above all to special one-off cases and not to an entire catechumen class. It is certainly not a simple option or alternative that can be adopted for supposed pastoral reason.

Since serious reasons are required for postponing confirmation, the candidates have a right to know those reasons from the pastor himself. "Because I said so" is not an adequate response.

The faithful have a canonical right to receive the sacraments from the sacred ministers unless they are subject to some legitimate impediment. The pastors have a corresponding duty and responsibility to provide the spiritual blessing to the faithful who request them and are adequately prepared.

In our column of Aug. 29, 2006, we presented the case of the Holy See's telling a bishop to confirm a young girl who was adequately catechized, had spontaneously requested the sacrament, but was refused because she was below the diocesan age of confirmation.

If this is the attitude shown by the Holy See toward a child, then it can only be supposed that it would hold the same stance in favor of adults, unless there were authentic serious reasons for acting otherwise.

If the pastor cannot justify his decision, then it might be necessary to bring up the issue with the bishop.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

The Spirit of the Liturgy: The Priest in the Communion Rites

By Paul Gunter, OSB

ROME, MARCH 19, 2010 (Zenit.org).- The priest approaching the Communion rites in the Mass is disposed by the Eucharistic prayer, which he has just completed, to know that "the power of the words and the action of Christ, and the power of the Holy Spirit, make sacramentally present under the species of bread and wine Christ's Body and Blood, his sacrifice offered on the cross once for all."[1]

Moreover, as the moment approaches when priest and people receive the Holy Eucharist; that is, as they prepare to eat the Lord's Body and to drink his Blood, we might turn to Jesus' speech at Capernaum which presents the reception of the Blessed Eucharist as both a coming and an encounter.[2]

In the context of a coming, St. John's Gospel states: "For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world."[3] As an encounter, the Eucharist is no less placed as an expression of the relationship within the Blessed Trinity and witnessed in the filial relationship of Jesus and his heavenly Father. Jesus explains: "Not that any one has seen the Father except him who is from God; he has seen the Father. Truly, Truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life."[4] "As the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me, he also shall live because of me."[5] Consequently, personal and public preparation for the Blessed Eucharist, which the Communion rites so vividly amplify in both the ordinary and extraordinary forms, do not prepare the priest and others to receive a "thing" but a person. As Romano Guardini summed it up, "Not it but He, the supreme Person praised in all eternity."[6]

In the ordinary form (or the missal of Paul VI), the people stand to begin the Communion rites, which are led by the priest. Symbolically, the image of the priest, centrally at the altar, with the people standing around, anticipates the Church standing with Christ in heaven at the end of time. The priest introduces the Pater Noster according one of a number of formulas before it is said or sung by all. Various authors comment on the words Jesus taught us to pray with confidence and which we use before approaching the Blessed Eucharist.

Our Father

Texts from the commentary by St. Cyprian on the words of the Lord's Prayer are designated to the Office of Readings for the eleventh week of ordinary time in the Liturgia Horarum to catechize us into a greater appreciation of their meaning.[7] They counsel the priest to remember that every recitation of the Pater Noster is an ecclesial act that has its bearing on the lives of others. St Cyprian wrote: "Before all else the teacher of peace and of unity would not have us pray on our own and in private in such a manner that each prays only for himself. We do not say: 'My Father, who art in heaven', or, 'Give me this day my bread.' [] Our prayer is public and for all, and when we pray, we pray not for a single person, but for the whole people, because we are all one."[8]

The Libera nos continues in a gentle way to expound the resonances of the Pater Noster and describes the human unworthiness and need for deliverance with which we approach the Eucharist. The priest, who prays on behalf of everyone, acknowledges, on the one hand, the compromises that mar our peace in lives blurred by sins and anxieties, and on the other, the joyful hope that the coming of the Lord brings. The people complete the prayer with a doxology that expresses expectancy that the Lord will fulfill his promise to be glorified in us. The prayer, Domine Iesu Christe, takes the focus from our sins and anxieties and places it on the faith of the Church that awaits the peace and unity of the kingdom in fulfillment of God's will. Then the priest extends his hands and exchanges the greeting with the assembly: Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum. Et cum spiritu tuo.

Sign of peace

The physical sharing of the pax is not an obligatory component of the liturgy. The deacon or the priest may invite everyone to offer a sign of peace.[9] Controversies about when the sign of peace might be deemed more appropriate in the liturgy remains a separate discussion from that which describes how it is done. The missal maintains ecclesiological distinctions. It is not a moment when formality gives way to informality but a moment when the human intimacy that is an intrinsic part of order reveals itself in just proportion. "It is a ritual exchange, not a practical greeting."[10] St. Thomas Aquinas expressed this relationship between intimacy and order in his beautiful hymn to the Blessed Sacrament "Pange Lingua" that is sung on Holy Thursday and Corpus Christi in the Roman liturgy.[11] Verse three illustrates: "On that night of the supper, reclining with the brethren, observing the fullness of the law."[12]

The priest gives the pax to the deacon or minister. It is not envisaged he leave the sanctuary to greet the faithful in the nave, though the faithful exchange the pax with those nearest to them. The rubric distinguishes these parallel demonstrations of the pax that avoids the ecclesiological confusion that might arise from a purely horizontal model. Clear punctuation marks affirm the distinctions intended. "Everyone, according to their local customs, gives expression to communion and charity, the one to the other; the priest gives the peace to the deacon or minister."

The fraction that follows is both a practical and a symbolic moment. Ritually, in many circumstances, the celebrant breaks the larger host that he alone consumes. However, this rite allows for a larger host to be broken into the pieces that will be distributed to the faithful, while a particle is placed into the chalice when the priest says secretly, "May the commingling of the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ bring eternal life to us who receive it."

Agnus Dei

The Agnus Dei which accompanies this action asks for mercy and addresses Jesus as the Passover Lamb whose sacrificed body has poured out his blood for the forgiveness of sins. The image of Jesus as the Lamb is outstandingly portrayed by an altarpiece in the Ghent's Cathedral of St Bavo where a lamb who stands on the altar pours out his blood into a chalice.[13] The Agnus Dei is the same as that cited in the Book of the Apocalypse which proclaims the worthiness of the Lamb that was slain [14] and the blessedness of those invited to the wedding feast of the Lamb.[15] The antiquity of the Agnus Dei in the Roman rite is such that many scholars accept that it was Pope Sergius I, 687-701, who introduced it in the Mass. The third invocation, Agnus Dei, asks for peace because the Blessed Eucharist is a Sacrament of Peace because it is the means whereby all who receive it are bound together in unity and peace.[16]

The priest says secretly one of two personal preparatory prayers before Holy Communion. In the first, through the Body and Blood of Christ, he asks to be liberated from his iniquities and from any other evil, for the grace to keep the Lord's commands and that nothing may permit any separation from him. In the second, the priest prays that his receiving of the Body and Blood of Christ may not bring him judgment and condemnation but a defense and a cure for his mind and body.[17] The priest's communion, which precedes that of the faithful, always, consists in both species to complete the liturgical action of the Mass. He prays that the Body and Blood of Christ bring him personally to eternal life. However, at the purification of the vessels, he asks on behalf of all who have communicated, including himself, that what they have received with their lips may be received with a pure heart and that from being a merely temporal gift it may become for them an everlasting remedy. The sum of these words and actions announce that a great mystery has been celebrated where, in the Eucharistic celebration, kairos, the favorable time of the Lord, has intercepted chronos which is the time otherwise restricted by the successive events described around us. Nevertheless, before God, silence is ultimately the only appropriate personal response from the innermost part of our beings to express faith, reverence and loving communion in him whom we have received.

The period of silence should be carefully protected. It should last minutes rather than seconds to provide a clearly defined space for prayer.[18] In the prayer after communion, which also envisages a period of silence after the call to prayer Oremus, especially if a period of silence was not observed previously, the priest leads the thanksgiving of the Church and prays that the gift of the Communion that has been shared may bear its fruit in us. The Amen with which the faithful answer this prayer made by the priest concludes the Communion rites that began with the priest's invitation to pray the Pater Noster.

Extraordinary form

The priest in the Communion Rites of the extraordinary form performs more complicated gestures that no less indicate priestly identity and function in preparing for Holy Communion. As in the ordinary form, it makes coherent sense to consider its parameters as the same, namely, from the introduction to the Pater Noster until the conclusion of the Post-Communion prayer. However, allowing for the different mentalities of the forms that unite to construct the Roman Rite, certain differences are noteworthy.

Since the Tridentine Missal envisages celebrations of distinct grades of solemnity, the assistants perform surrounding actions that a priest would fulfill himself at a Low Mass. The priest recites the Pater Noster alone and the server answers sed libera nos a malo. The Libera Quaesumus includes the intercession of all the saints in general but beyond mentioning Our Lady also includes St. Andrew presumably because of particular devotion to that apostle.

When the priest prays "for peace in his day,"[19] he makes the sign of the cross on himself with the paten and kisses the paten at its upper inside edge prior to slipping the paten under the host before preparing to carry out the fraction. In his explanation of the prayers and ceremonies of the Holy Mass, Guéranger provides a commentary to describe the purpose of the Haec Commixtio at the commingling which is at once engaging even in its tendency toward allegory:

"The priest then allows the particle which he had in his hand, to fall into the chalice, thus mingling the Body and Blood of the Lord, and saying at the same time: Haec commixtio et consecratio Corporis et Sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi fiat accipientibus nobis in vitam aeternam. Amen. What is the meaning of this rite? What is signified by this mingling of the Particle with the Blood which is in the chalice? This rite is not one of the most ancient, although it is quite a thousand years old. Its object is to show, that at the moment of Our Lord's Resurrection, His Blood was reunited to his Body; by flowing again in his veins as before. It would not have sufficed if This soul alone had been reunited to His Body; His Blood must necessarily be so likewise, in order that the Lord might be whole and complete. Our Saviour, therefore, when rising, took back His Blood which was erstwhile spilled on Calvary, in the Praetorium, and in the Garden of Olives."[20]

Lord, I am not worthy

After the Agnus Dei, there are three prayers the priest says before Holy Communion with his eyes fixed on the Sacred Host and whose content is largely found in the Communion Rite of the ordinary form. Then holding the Host he says the Domine, non sum dignus three times when simultaneously striking his breast. As he purifies the paten into the chalice prior to consuming the Precious Blood he quotes from Psalm 115, "What return can I make to the Lord for all he has given to me. I will take the chalice of salvation and call on the name of the Lord" but adds "praising, I will call on the Lord for I will have been saved from my enemies."[21] During the purifying of the chalice, after the Quod ore sumpsimus, the priest prays that there remain in him no stain from his misdeeds and that the Body and Blood of Christ which he has received transform his entire being.

It can be seen that any emphasis placed on priestly character and on the priest's liturgical actions in the Communion rites are overwhelmingly encouraging. While they do not hide a priest's awareness of his unworthiness, they highlight his unique dignity and remind him of how he must strive to become pure and holy like Christ. Then they are inviting; that is, immediately inviting to the sacrificing priest to enter into a closer union with Jesus Christ The High Priest and Victim, and inviting to the faithful that they may recognize with joy the ministry of the priesthood whose mystery is essential for the Eucharist, the 'Source and Summit of the life and mission of the Church'.[22] In those different aspects of that invitation, the Church glimpses at the wonder of the love of God who humbled himself to share in our humanity, renewing his invitation each time his Covenant of Love is made present on the altar when Christ draws our human existence ever more deeply into his Risen Life. As the author of the Book of the Apocalypse testifies: "Look, I am standing at the door, knocking. If one of you hears me calling and opens the door, I will come in to share his meal, side by side with him."[23]

* * *

[1] CCC 1353
[2] John 6

[3] John 6:33
[4] John 6:46-48

[5] John 6:57
[6] GUARDINI R., Meditations Before Mass, tr E.CASTENDYK, reprinted Sophia Institute Press, Manchester NH 1993, 174

[7] ST CYPRIAN., «De Oratione Dominica» 4-30, PL 3A, 91-113
[8] ST CYPRIAN., «De Oratione Dominica» 8

[9] #128, 'pro opportunitate', Missale Romanum, Editio Typica Tertia, Typis Vaticanis 2002
[10] J. DRISCOLL, What happens at Mass, Gracewing Publishing, Leominster 2005, 123.

[11] During the Solemn Transfer of the Blessed Sacrament on Holy Thursday and as the hymn at vespers on Corpus Christi.
[12] "In supremae nocte caenae recumbens cum fratribus, observata lege plene []"

[13] J. VAN EYCK., The Adoration of the Lamb, detail from the Ghent Altarpiece, 1432, St Bavo Cathedral, Ghent, Belgium
[14] Apocalypse 5:11-12

[15] Apocalypse 19:7,9. The priest introduces the Domine, non sum dignus based on Matthew 8:8 and Luke 7:6-7 with the image of the Feast of the Lamb.
[16] St. Augustine, 'O Sign of Unity, O Bond of Charity' In Jo. ev. 26,13:PL 35,1613; cf. SC 47.

[17] #131 Missale Romanum 2002
[18] #139 Missale Romanum 2002 refers to sacrum silentium and temporis spatium.

[19] da propitius pacem in diebus nostris
[20] P. GUÉRANGER, Explanation of the Prayers and Ceremonies of Holy Mass, tr. L. Shepherd, Stanbrook Abbey, Worcestershire 1885, 61.

[21] Laudans invocabo Dominum et ab inimicis meis salvus ero
[22] BENEDICT XVI., Sacramentum Caritatis, 3, AAS 98 (2006)
[23] Apocalypse 3:19-20

* * *

Benedictine Father Paul Gunter is a professor of the Pontifical Institute of Liturgy Rome and Consulter to the Office of the Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff.

Friday, March 19, 2010

Article: before i go

PETER KREEFT

My unutterably dear children (and grandchildren), I give you this book about the most valuable life lessons I have learned because I want to give you everything I can, and writing books is something I can do.

Introduction

My unutterably dear children (and grandchildren),

I give you this book about the most valuable life lessons I have learned because I want to give you everything I can, and writing books is something I can do. I wish I had given you more of myself, that I had been a stronger, wiser, and more present father to you. This book is a poor substitute for that. But its motive is not poor; its motive is my love for you, which is stronger than my love of life itself.

I wish I had shaped that love into stronger forms. Any parent, if only he or she is honest, humble, and loving, must regret not having had godlike powers to fulfill the godlike responsibility of being a God-stand-in, a parent. What a job! All the other jobs in the world combined can't compare.

Jesus didn't have to write any books because He lived all His teaching perfectly. No one else ever did. That's why we write books for each other. All books say, "Do as I say, not as I do." Even the Bible was written by sinners.

Love can take many forms. Let my love for you now take the form of this book. True, it is not an adequate substitute for the living words of a person, any more than banging on a drum is a substitute for being a drummer. Yet Jesus accepted the little drummer boy's gift, so please accept mine, in the same spirit, as a gift of love.

The order of these life lessons is random, deliberately undeliberate. They come in the order in which they were written, like life itself.


1. From the Dying to the Living

This book originated in my musing on Doctor Samuel Johnson's famous observation, "I know of no thought that so wonderfully concentrates a man's* mind as the thought that he will be hanged tomorrow morning."

As I begin this book I am still young (in my sixties) and in good health. It is hard to imagine that one day the hand that penned this will be the hand of a skeleton. But I know it is true. Death is life's one certain prognosis.

*Grammar note: As in all the prefeminist books, "man" here means males and females equally. I do not believe men are superior to women, but I do believe that inclusive language is superior to exclusive language. So I use "he" and "man" to mean males and females equally. What feminists call "inclusive language" is really exclusive language, and what they call "exclusive language" is really inclusive. Naturally, the sixties radicals who hated and killed femininity called themselves "feminists." And Mao Zedong's China was called "the people's republic."

Those are yours alone, part of the secret identity known only to you, your two procreators, and your Creator and Designer. (We all wear Designer genes.)

C.S. Lewis says somewhere that no one should be allowed to die without having read Plato's Symposium. (I'd say his "Apology.") I think that I should not be allowed to die before saying these things to you. I have written dozens of books, and thousands of strangers have read them; it is high time I wrote one for four of the five people I love the most – my own children.

Nearly as universal as death is a parent's love for his children. But when the parent is dead, it's too late to share the most precious things he knows. The parent, thus, is in a dilemma: after he is dead, he can no longer speak; but before he dies, his words do not carry the weight of death with them, and they are lost in the crowd of other words. A dying man's words step up and come forth out of the crowd of other words, and they have an edge because their speaker stands at the edge. No child forgets the last words of a dying parent or vice versa. My father's last words to me were simply "I love you" and my last words to him were the same, and then "Go, Dad, under the mercy." Writing a book is a way of escaping that dilemma, for a book is like a ghost – it remains, even though it is not the living author but only his "remains." It is a word-insurance policy. It is a way of speaking even after you are dead.

These words are for you. Whether anyone else reads them is not my main concern. I have published this book only to give them the chance to overhear our conversation.

But this book is universal enough for all. I did not include the unique, the private things: John's giraffe Girard, Jenny's Raggedy Ann, Katherine's dead squirrel, and Bean's falling-apart, blue Binkie – or their psychological equivalents. Those are yours alone, part of the secret identity known only to you, your two procreators, and your Creator and Designer. (We all wear Designer genes.)


2. Who Am I To Give Advice?

Who am I to give advice to others; I, who need to take advice myself? Isn't this hypocritical?

No, it is not hypocritical, because I begin right here with the one thing I know we all need – absolute honesty. My advice is to admit that you need advice. Honesty and humility are almost the same thing.

But who am I to speak of this? Am I some kind of expert in humility? Can I be proud of my humility? Far from it. But if we were forbidden to preach or to hear preaching until we practiced, we would all be deaf and dumb.

Who am I to give advice? I'm like you.


3. The Best Thing in Life

My dear children, because I love you the most, I want to give you the best things in life. But I can't give you the very best thing because that is not a thing at all, and it is not something any of us can give to another. Each of us has to get it for himself or herself. I didn't get it from my parents, though they helped me enormously, and you can't get it from me, though I can try to help – and this book is part of that attempt.

What is the very best thing in life? The greatest good?

before i go
by Peter Kreeft

Everything in life is good for something. But maybe something is good for everything. The very best thing is. Everybody knows that there's something good in everything, but not everyone knows that there's everything good in something. One word for that something is "God." God is total, infinite goodness. If that isn't true, God isn't God and let's be atheists.

But how do you get this "best thing in life"? How do you "get" God? What can it mean to "have" Him?

Of course we can't "get" Him or possess Him. We can't even possess other human beings, though fools keep trying to. But we can know God and not just know about Him. We can be His friends. We can even spiritually marry Him! We can make Him in our lives what He is in fact: number one.

It's very simple: He's actually there, and we actually meet Him when we pray, whether we feel that or not, and He actually does stuff to us when we pray, whether we feel it or not. And that relationship is called "religion" (the word "religion" means, literally, "relationship"), and that is the very best thing we can do in this life because it's what we're going to be doing forever, and it's the only thing there is that's going to give us joy without boredom forever.

Everybody in the world knows that. We can all sense something like that, deep down. Christians know more: that since we couldn't make it up to Him, He came down to us and became one of us. He let down His "Jacob's ladder" from Heaven, and that ladder is not a thing but a person, with a face and a name and a place. And we can find that person, that face, that name, and that place very easily: just look at a crucifix. It's the world's most important road map.


4. If There Was Time to Say Just One Thing

If I knew there was only one minute left for us to talk to each other and after that minute we would never again see each other in this world, what would be the one thing I would most want to say to you and to hear you say to me?

"I love you," of course. But also, "I forgive you." Because love has enemies, and forgiveness destroys all those enemies.

Jesus thought forgiveness is so important that He made our salvation depend on it. He made us pray, "God, forgive us our wrongs just as much as we forgive those who have wronged us."

So I ask your forgiveness for neglecting you, misunderstanding you, not trying harder, not taking more responsibility for your lives, and not sharing with you more of my feelings, dreams, and wisdom (whatever that may be). Despite all that, I have always loved you, I always will, and I know you know that. I also know you love me and forgive me for all my faults. I know you accept my forgiveness for all the little stupid things you've done. (Welcome to the human race.)

You've really been wonderful, lovable, beautiful kids. You give us far, far less trouble and much more love than most kids do today. You deserve to be loved more than you are and that's one of the reasons I'm glad there's a God – because He can do that even when I can't.


5. Everything Is Love

Not only is love everything, but everything is love.

Love is everything. Love is the soul of everything valuable. The most precious gift in the world given without love is worthless; the cheapest gift in the world given with love is priceless.

But everything is also love. Everything valuable is made of love. Everything that exists, from yourself to a grain of sand, is God's love made visible, made incarnate – love in the form of creation. The words He spoke to create everything in the universe – "let it be" – were the words of love. He loved stuff into being. Space is love's spread. The room you are in now is a thousand cubic feet of God's love spread out. Time is love's life ("lifetime"). History is love's drama. Matter is love's body. Gravity is love's energy when it moves not souls but stars and stones and storms. We are love's children. "Be made" means "I love you." Your very existence is God's love of you. Love is the meaning of life and the meaning of religion and the meaning of everything.


6. The Most Important Person

One of the stupidest songs I ever heard on TV was the theme song of a kids' show of the seventies, "The Electric Company." It said: "The most important person in the whole wide world is – you!" Implied message: be a self-centered little spoiled brat. You're number one, everyone else is number two.

Here is an alternative philosophy:

  1. The most important person is God. This is as necessarily true as 2 + 2 = 4. It is true whether you know it or not, whether you like it or not, whether you believe it or not. So you'd better learn to know it and like it and believe it.

  2. The second most important person in the world is the person you marry. Nobody else comes even close. That's what marriage is. If you don't know that, you're not really married.

  3. Next come your kids.

  4. Then comes yourself. Take care of yourself before taking care of anyone else except your kids, your spouse, and your God. Because if you don't inflate your own oxygen mask first, you won't be able to help others inflate theirs.

  5. Then comes your friends. Never betray a friend.

  6. Then comes everyone else you know, your neighbors.

  7. Then comes the rest of the world.

  8. Then comes things, any and all things: money, the things money can buy – houses, cars, and vacations. Stuff (Remember George Carlin's routine about "stuff.") Always, people before things. Use things and love people, not vice versa.

  9. Finally, abstractions: ideas, causes, organizations, political parties, etc. They are means to the rest as ends. By the way, the Church is not an "organization," it's a family. I never saw "organized religion," only disorganized religion, like Noah's ark.


7. Memento mori

That's Latin for "remember death." It's a medieval saying, and it's a good test of our perspective. Death (our own death) puts life into proper perspective. Things that seemed important recede into triviality when you're dying – things like fame and money and stuff. And things we usually ignore – things like love, trust, honesty, self-giving, and forgiveness – these stand out as infinitely more important in light of death. Death's dark light is pretty bright!

Whatever you can't take with you is only placenta, after-birth. What you can take with you is the baby.

By the way, the Church is not an "organization," it's a family. I never saw "organized religion," only disorganized religion, like Noah's ark.

When Elizabeth was (mis-)diagnosed with a fatal brain tumor, I was amazed at how unimportant a thousand things suddenly became: paying bills, getting things done on schedule, and keeping up life's appearances, facades, makeup, all its sandcastles. They could all wait. One day soon it will all have to wait forever.

Ask yourself: what can't you take with you? And whatever answers you find, stop worrying about them now.

Ask yourself: what can you, will you, and must you take with you? And whatever answers you find, care about those things now.

"In the evening of our lives, we will be Judged on our love." (St. John of the Cross)

The number one regret people have when dying is not having told their children or their parents how much they loved them.

The most destructive mistake in life is not forgiving, since forgiving is love's first deed.

What will be important to you on your deathbed? Let that be important to you now. Because you are on your deathbed now. As soon as you are born, you are born onto a deathbed. Nobody gets out of this place alive. Doctor Johnson is right: the thought of your death "wonderfully clarifies the mind." Demand clarity now.




ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Peter Kreeft. Introduction and chapters 1-7 of before i go (Lanham, MD: Sheed & Ward, 2007): 1-17.

Excerpted by permission of Rowan & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Sheed & Ward is an imprint of Rowan & Littlefield Publishers.

THE AUTHOR

Peter Kreeft, Ph.D., is a professor of philosophy at Boston College. He is an alumnus of Calvin College (AB 1959) and Fordham University (MA 1961, Ph.D., 1965). He taught at Villanova University from 1962-1965, and has been at Boston College since 1965.

He is the author of numerous books (over forty and counting) including: The Snakebite Letters, The Philosophy of Jesus, The Journey: A Spiritual Roadmap for Modern Pilgrims, Prayer: The Great Conversation: Straight Answers to Tough Questions About Prayer, How to Win the Culture War: A Christian Battle Plan for a Society in Crisis, Love Is Stronger Than Death, Philosophy 101 by Socrates: An Introduction to Philosophy Via Plato's Apology, A Pocket Guide to the Meaning of Life, and Before I Go: Letters to Our Children About What Really Matters. Peter Kreeft in on the Advisory Board of the Catholic Education Resource Center.

Copyright © 2007 Rowan & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Wednesday Liturgy: Why Only One Chrism Mass

ROME, MARCH 16, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q: I recently heard of a diocese with two co-cathedrals having two Chrism Masses each year. Is this proper, given the fact 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? -- D.T., Dallas, Texas

A: Apart from the rubrics in the Missal, the essential norms regarding this point are found in the Congregation for Divine Worship's 1988 circular letter on the Easter celebrations, "Paschales Solemnitatis." Regarding the Chrism Mass, this document says:

"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. 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 which 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."

Similar norms are found in the Ceremonial of Bishops, Nos. 274-278.

All of the relevant documents emphasize the importance of this Mass as an expression of the unity of the entire local Church; as many faithful and clergy as possible should be present. This is the principal reason why there must be only one chrism Mass in any diocese.

It is precisely in order to foment and optimize this unity that the norms grant flexibility regarding the time and place of the celebration.

Thus, in extensive dioceses where priests might not be able to reach the cathedral and get back on time for the Mass of the Lord's Supper on Holy Thursday, it is common to celebrate the Chrism Mass on Monday or Tuesday of Holy Week.

Likewise, when the cathedral is unsuitable for a major concelebration, another major church is chosen. In Rome, for example, the Chrism Mass is celebrated in St. Peter's Basilica rather than St. John Lateran, in order to cater for a multitude of concelebrants. Some ancient European cathedrals are so full of untouchable historic monuments that large concelebrations are a logistical nightmare.

The presence of con-cathedrals (or co-cathedrals) is not sufficient to justify breaking up the unity of the celebration. A con-cathedral is usually a church that once served as a cathedral but no longer serves this purpose. This can happen in several ways, such as when the bishop changes his principal town of residence; when dioceses are amalgamated; or when a new and definitive cathedral is built.

The presence of several cathedrals happens frequently in Italy; some modern dioceses embrace several extinct, ancient but tiny sees. For example, in the Archdiocese of Sorrento-Castellamare, I know of at least five churches that have the title of cathedral, including one on the isle of Capri which once had its own bishop. In this diocese, however, there is only one principal cathedral and only one Chrism Mass.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Commemorating Saints in Lent

ROME, MARCH 16, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Subsequent to our comments on the celebration of saints during Lent, an attentive reader apportioned a small correction.

She wrote: "In your column of March 2, you stated that the feast of St. Cyril of Jerusalem on March 18 'almost always falls during Lent.' However, in reality the feast of St. Cyril always falls during Lent, since the earliest possible date for Easter is March 22, in which case his feast would be Wednesday of Holy Week."

Our correspondent is correct. This is also true for April 25, the latest possible date for Easter. In this case, Ash Wednesday falls on March 10.

The two extremes are quite rare. Easter last fell on March 22 in 1818 and won't fall again on that date until 2285. The April 25 occurrence is slightly more frequent; it last occurred in 1943 and will return in 2038. At least some people will twice experience the latest possible Easter.

Another reader asked if my answer also applied to the extraordinary form. I answered according to the norms of the ordinary universal calendar.

It is beyond the scope of this column to explain the complex rules of the extraordinary form's liturgical calendar. However, both forms follow the same basic principles, and weekdays of Lent are ranked higher and have precedence over third-class feasts of saints of the universal calendar. Third-class feasts correspond roughly to the memorials found in the ordinary form.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Article: The Great Heresies

CATHOLIC ANSWERS

From Christianity’s beginnings, the Church has been attacked by those introducing false teachings, or heresies.

The Bible warned us this would happen. Paul told his young protégé, Timothy, "For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths" (2 Tim. 4:3–4).

What Is Heresy?

Heresy is an emotionally loaded term that is often misused. It is not the same thing as incredulity, schism, apostasy, or other sins against faith. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him" (CCC 2089).

To commit heresy, one must refuse to be corrected. A person who is ready to be corrected or who is unaware that what he has been saying is against Church teaching is not a heretic.

A person must be baptized to commit heresy. This means that movements that have split off from or been influenced by Christianity, but that do not practice baptism (or do not practice valid baptism), are not heresies, but separate religions. Examples include Muslims, who do not practice baptism, and Jehovah's Witnesses, who do not practice valid baptism.

Finally, the doubt or denial involved in heresy must concern a matter that has been revealed by God and solemnly defined by the Church (for example, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the sacrifice of the Mass, the pope's infallibility, or the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary).

It is important to distinguish heresy from schism and apostasy. In schism, one separates from the Catholic Church without repudiating a defined doctrine. An example of a contemporary schism is the Society of St. Pius X—the "Lefebvrists" or followers of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre—who separated from the Church in the late 1980s, but who have not denied Catholic doctrines. In apostasy, one totally repudiates the Christian faith and no longer even claims to be a Christian.

With this in mind, let's look at some of the major heresies of Church history and when they began.

The Circumcisers (1st Century)

The Circumcision heresy may be summed up in the words of Acts 15:1: "But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brethren, 'Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.'"

Many of the early Christians were Jews, who brought to the Christian faith many of their former practices. They recognized in Jesus the Messiah predicted by the prophets and the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Because circumcision had been required in the Old Testament for membership in God's covenant, many thought it would also be required for membership in the New Covenant that Christ had come to inaugurate. They believed one must be circumcised and keep the Mosaic law to come to Christ. In other words, one had to become a Jew to become a Christian.

But God made it clear to Peter in Acts 10 that Gentiles are acceptable to God and may be baptized and become Christians without circumcision. The same teaching was vigorously defended by Paul in his epistles to the Romans and the Galatians—to areas where the Circumcision heresy had spread.

Gnosticism (1st and 2nd Centuries)

"Matter is evil!" was the cry of the Gnostics. This idea was borrowed from certain Greek philosophers. It stood against Catholic teaching, not only because it contradicts Genesis 1:31 ("And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good") and other scriptures, but because it denies the Incarnation. If matter is evil, then Jesus Christ could not be true God and true man, for Christ is in no way evil. Thus many Gnostics denied the Incarnation, claiming that Christ only appeared to be a man, but that his humanity was an illusion. Some Gnostics, recognizing that the Old Testament taught that God created matter, claimed that the God of the Jews was an evil deity who was distinct from the New Testament God of Jesus Christ. They also proposed belief in many divine beings, known as "aeons," who mediated between man and the ultimate, unreachable God. The lowest of these aeons, the one who had contact with men, was supposed to be Jesus Christ.

Montanism (Late 2nd Century)

Montanus began his career innocently enough through preaching a return to penance and fervor. His movement also emphasized the continuance of miraculous gifts, such as speaking in tongues and prophecy. However, he also claimed that his teachings were above those of the Church, and soon he began to teach Christ's imminent return in his home town in Phrygia. There were also statements that Montanus himself either was, or at least specially spoke for, the Paraclete that Jesus had promised would come (in reality, the Holy Spirit).

Sabellianism (Early 3rd Century)

The Sabellianists taught that Jesus Christ and God the Father were not distinct persons, but two.aspects or offices of one person. According to them, the three persons of the Trinity exist only in God's relation to man, not in objective reality.

Arianism (4th Century)

Arius taught that Christ was a creature made by God. By disguising his heresy using orthodox or near-orthodox terminology, he was able to sow great confusion in the Church. He was able to muster the support of many bishops, while others excommunicated him.

Arianism was solemnly condemned in 325 at the First Council of Nicaea, which defined the divinity of Christ, and in 381 at the First Council of Constantinople, which defined the divinity of the Holy Spirit. These two councils gave us the Nicene creed, which Catholics recite at Mass every Sunday.

Pelagianism (5th Century)

Pelagius denied that we inherit original sin from Adam's sin in the Garden and claimed that we become sinful only through the bad example of the sinful community into which we are born. Conversely, he denied that we inherit righteousness as a result of Christ's death on the cross and said that we become personally righteous by instruction and imitation in the Christian community, following the example of Christ. Pelagius stated that man is born morally neutral and can achieve heaven under his own powers. According to him, God's grace is not truly necessary, but merely makes easier an otherwise difficult task.

Semi-Pelagianism (5th Century)

After Augustine refuted the teachings of Pelagius, some tried a modified version of his system. This, too, ended in heresy by claiming that humans can reach out to God under their own power, without God's grace; that once a person has entered a state of grace, one can retain it through one's efforts, without further grace from God; and that natural human effort alone can give one some claim to receiving grace, though not strictly merit it.

Nestorianism (5th Century)

This heresy about the person of Christ was initiated by Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, who denied Mary the title of Theotokos (Greek: "God-bearer" or, less literally, "Mother of God"). Nestorius claimed that she only bore Christ's human nature in her womb, and proposed the alternative title Christotokos ("Christ-bearer" or "Mother of Christ").

Orthodox Catholic theologians recognized that Nestorius's theory would fracture Christ into two separate persons (one human and one divine, joined in a sort of loose unity), only one of whom was in her womb. The Church reacted in 431 with the Council of Ephesus, defining that Mary can be properly referred to as the Mother of God, not in the sense that she is older than God or the source of God, but in the sense that the person she carried in her womb was, in fact, God incarnate ("in the flesh").

There is some doubt whether Nestorius himself held the heresy his statements imply, and in this century, the Assyrian Church of the East, historically regarded as a Nestorian church, has signed a fully orthodox joint declaration on Christology with the Catholic Church and rejects Nestorianism. It is now in the process of coming into full ecclesial communion with the Catholic Church.

Monophysitism (5th Century)

Monophysitism originated as a reaction to Nestorianism. The Monophysites (led by a man named Eutyches) were horrified by Nestorius's implication that Christ was two people with two different natures (human and divine). They went to the other extreme, claiming that Christ was one person with only one nature (a fusion of human and divine elements). They are thus known as Monophysites because of their claim that Christ had only one nature (Greek: mono = one; physis = nature).

Orthodox Catholic theologians recognized that Monophysitism was as bad as Nestorianism because it denied Christ's full humanity and full divinity. If Christ did not have a fully human nature, then he would not be fully human, and if he did not have a fully divine nature then he was not fully divine.

Iconoclasm (7th and 8th Centuries)

This heresy arose when a group of people known as iconoclasts (literally, "icon smashers") appeared, who claimed that it was sinful to make pictures and statues of Christ and the saints, despite the fact that in the Bible, God had commanded the making of religious statues (Ex. 25:18–20; 1 Chr. 28:18–19), including symbolic representations of Christ (cf. Num. 21:8–9 with John 3:14).

Catharism (11th Century)

Catharism was a complicated mix of non-Christian religions reworked with Christian terminology. The Cathars had many different sects; they had in common a teaching that the world was created by an evil deity (so matter was evil) and we must worship the good deity instead.

The Albigensians formed one of the largest Cathar sects. They taught that the spirit was created by God, and was good, while the body was created by an evil god, and the spirit must be freed from the body. Having children was one of the greatest evils, since it entailed imprisoning another "spirit" in flesh. Logically, marriage was forbidden, though fornication was permitted. Tremendous fasts and severe mortifications of all kinds were practiced, and their leaders went about in voluntary poverty.

Protestantism (16th Century)

Protestant groups display a wide variety of different doctrines. However, virtually all claim to believe in the teachings of sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone"—the idea that we must use only the Bible when forming our theology) and sola fide ("by faith alone"—the idea that we are justified by faith only).

The great diversity of Protestant doctrines stems from the doctrine of private judgment, which denies the infallible authority of the Church and claims that each individual is to interpret Scripture for himself. This idea is rejected in 2 Peter 1:20, where we are told the first rule of Bible interpretation: "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation." A significant feature of this heresy is the attempt to pit the Church "against" the Bible, denying that the magisterium has any infallible authority to teach and interpret Scripture.

The doctrine of private judgment has resulted in an enormous number of different denominations. According to The Christian Sourcebook, there are approximately 20-30,000 denominations, with 270 new ones being formed each year. Virtually all of these are Protestant.


Jansenism (17th Century)

Jansenius, bishop of Ypres, France, initiated this heresy with a paper he wrote on Augustine, which redefined the doctrine of grace. Among other doctrines, his followers denied that Christ died for all men, but claimed that he died only for those who will be finally saved (the elect). This and other Jansenist errors were officially condemned by Pope Innocent X in 1653.

Heresies have been with us from the Church's beginning. They even have been started by Church leaders, who were then corrected by councils and popes. Fortunately, we have Christ's promise that heresies will never prevail against the Church, for he told Peter, "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). The Church is truly, in Paul's words, "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).

NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004



ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Catholic Answers. "The Great Heresies." chap. 47 in The Essential Catholic Survival Guide: Answers to Tough Questions About the Faith, (San Diego: Catholic Answers Inc., 2005): 359-374.

Reprinted by permission of Catholic Answers. Order The Essential Catholic Survival Guide here.

Visit the Catholic Answers book and tract shop here.

Catholic Answers, 2020 Gillespie Way, El Cajon, CA 92020 USA
Main: 619-387-7200 | Fax: 619-387-0042
U.S. Orders: 888-291-8000 | Non-U.S. Orders: 619-387-7200

Copyright © 2009 Catholic Answers

Article: The happiness in their hearts

BARBARA KAY

One of the greatest challenges of being a parent is figuring out what and how to teach your child about religion. Here Barbara Kay extols the virtues of children thinking about God.

I was walking my four-year-old granddaughter home from her (parochial) junior kindergarten a few weeks ago, a frequent pleasure, when she announced, “You can’t see God, because He is inside you.”

I agreed that was the case. But how, she wanted to know, could you be sure He was there. Simplicity my watchword, I replied that when people do good things, God is the happiness in their hearts, and when they do bad things, God is the sadness in their hearts. Summoning up the history of her parents' strictures around good and bad behaviour and consulting her own emerging conscience, she nodded with grave approval: God as the ultimate parent suited her vision of what a worship-worthy deity should be.

As we continued chatting about God and His mysterious ways, I noticed that I was occasionally glancing behind me in what I later shamefully identified as a furtive reflex—as though God-talk to the innocent young were something a secularly correct passer-by might consider suspicious.

Within my adult lifetime I have witnessed God and religion decline from supremely important topics all thinking people grappled with—even left-wing academics; God (not to mention Israel) was very welcome on campus in my day—to subjects it is an intellectual act of defiance to take seriously.

Humans gravitate to religion—or, faute de mieux, to ideology—because we are by nature worshipful creatures with an instinct for codifying and institutionalizing belief systems, the better to strengthen civic bonding and rationalize social decency.

Today a vociferous cluster of arrogant intellectuals, circulating spiritually untethered through life like unvaccinated children in a vaccinated populus, and mistaking their unmolested health for a useful global template, would persuade us that is not the case. They insist that if religion disappeared, society would function perfectly well on the basis of reason alone. But no society, religious or godless, ever has, so the burden of proof is on them.

Worshipfulness abhors a vacuum and history shows that in a vacuum, whatever absolutism—communism, multiculturalism, environmentalism—pushes itself forward most aggressively will claim people's attention and acquiescence.

In our Western case, after many a historical divagation and slough of despond, religion has for the last few centuries put its highest moral and social ideals to the service of democracy and a market economy to produce the freest, happiest, most peaceful, egalitarian, compassionate, productive and prosperous societies in recorded history.

Indeed, so successful have our societies become that our heavy thinkers believe we arrived at this pinnacle of tolerance and sensitivity and equality by sheer intelligence, and that our Western religious tradition is an actual hindrance to even greater social progress. Now we are told to jettison the God and religion that got us where we are (but romanticize the religions that didn't) and worship society's beautiful minds.

But this would be a disaster for children. It is a great mistake to think that a child's mind has the capacity to satisfy his inherent but inchoate yearning for transcendence through reason. The ability to reason one's way to a world-view emerges too late, when a child's confidence and friendliness to the world has already been established—or not.

Children are born conservatives. They are not satisfied with chaos theory or moral relativism. They want order, a system, a precise identity (my friend's grandchild told a schoolmate he was “half Jewish, half Christmas”).

Children are born conservatives. They are not satisfied with chaos theory or moral relativism. They want order, a system, a precise identity (my friend's grandchild told a schoolmate he was “half Jewish, half Christmas”). They need an infallible “GPS” to navigate their way through “mean” playmates, unfair or insensitive teaching, the troubling deaths of pets and family members, rumours of war and natural disasters.

In their evolved character, our heritage religions coexist in perfect harmony with the ideal of a pluralist society. Properly transmitted by parents and dedicated educators, instruction in God and religion has nothing to do with indoctrination, a political strategem that seeks to enslave, not ennoble, young minds, proclaiming all other paths to righteousness as thought crimes or worse.

(A perfect example of indoctrination is Quebec's universal school Ethics and Religious Culture program, where the state is co-opting vulnerable minds to implant the relativist canard that all religions, cults, (state-approved) ideologies and pagan legends are morally, intellectually and spiritually equivalent.)

Until recently most atheists grew up with God and religion. Their reasoning skills were not impaired. On the contrary, once intellectually autonomous, they were far better equipped for self-interrogation than those raised with no beliefs at all. There is nothing to be lost in gifting children with God and religion, but much to be gained—for them as individuals and for society as a whole.




ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Barbara Kay "The happiness in their hearts." National Post, (Canada) 24 February, 2010.

Reprinted with permission of the author, Barbara Kay, and the National Post.

THE AUTHOR

Barbara Kay is a Montreal-based writer. She has been a Comment page columnist (Wednesdays) in the National Post since September, 2003. She may be reached here.

Copyright © 2010 National Post

Article: Catholic schools: Partners in faith with parents

CHARLES J. CHAPUT, O.F.M. CAP.

Denver news media have reported in recent days on the case of two children of a lesbian couple in Boulder. The couple was informed by Sacred Heart of Jesus parish school that the older child, whom they were enrolling in kindergarten for next year, would be allowed to attend kindergarten but would not be able to continue into first grade the year after.

Their younger child would be welcome to finish preschool, but not continue into kindergarten. Many have wondered why. Sacred Heart of Jesus parish has borne the difficult publicity surrounding this issue, but archdiocesan policy was followed faithfully in this matter, and the policy applies to all Archdiocese of Denver schools.

Some background is important. Then we'll turn to the human realities involved.

Catholic schools began in this country in the early 19th century. Catholics started them as an alternative to the public schools of the day, which taught a curriculum often hostile to Catholic belief. In many ways times have changed, but the mission of Catholic schools has not. The main purpose of Catholic schools is religious; in other words, to form students in Catholic faith, Catholic morality and Catholic social values.

We take great pride in the academic excellence of our schools as well. The reason is simple. A strong, well-rounded academic education helps to create mature citizens who contribute to the wider community. It's also true that some of our schools exist as a service outreach in largely non-Catholic communities. Many of our schools also accept students of other faiths and no faith, and from single parent and divorced parent families. These students are always welcome so long as their parents support the Catholic mission of the school and do not offer a serious counter-witness to that mission in their actions.

Our schools, however, exist primarily to serve Catholic families with an education shaped by Catholic faith and moral formation. This is common sense. Other religious traditions do the same according to their beliefs, and at a heavy sacrifice. We need to remember that Catholic families pay twice for a Catholic education: through their taxes, they fund public education; then they pay again to send their children to a Catholic school. The idea that Catholic schools should require support for Catholic teaching for admission, and a serious effort from school families to live their Catholic identity faithfully, is reasonable and just.

That's the background. Now to the human side of a painful situation. The Church never looks for reasons to turn anyone away from a Catholic education. But the Church can't change her moral beliefs without undermining her mission and failing to serve the many families who believe in that mission. If Catholics take their faith seriously, they naturally follow the teachings of the Church in matters of faith and morals; otherwise they take themselves outside the believing community.

The Church does not claim that people with a homosexual orientation are "bad," or that their children are less loved by God. Quite the opposite. But what the Church does teach is that sexual intimacy by anyone outside marriage is wrong; that marriage is a sacramental covenant; and that marriage can only occur between a man and a woman. These beliefs are central to a Catholic understanding of human nature, family and happiness, and the organization of society. The Church cannot change these teachings because, in the faith of Catholics, they are the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Most parents who send their children to Catholic schools want an environment where the Catholic faith is fully taught and practiced. That simply can't be done if teachers need to worry about wounding the feelings of their students or about alienating students from their parents.

The policies of our Catholic school system exist to protect all parties involved, including the children of homosexual couples and the couples themselves. Our schools are meant to be "partners in faith" with parents. If parents don't respect the beliefs of the Church, or live in a manner that openly rejects those beliefs, then partnering with those parents becomes very difficult, if not impossible. It also places unfair stress on the children, who find themselves caught in the middle, and on their teachers, who have an obligation to teach the authentic faith of the Church.

Most parents who send their children to Catholic schools want an environment where the Catholic faith is fully taught and practiced. That simply can't be done if teachers need to worry about wounding the feelings of their students or about alienating students from their parents. That isn't fair to anyone—including the wider school community. Persons who have an understanding of marriage and family life sharply different from Catholic belief are often people of sincerity and good will. They have other, excellent options for education and should see in them the better course for their children.


Editor's note: Click here to read the comments of Father Bill Breslin,
pastor of Sacred Heart of Jesus Parish, for additional perspective.




ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap. "Catholic schools: Partners in faith with parents." Denver Catholic Register (March 10, 2010).

Reprinted with permission of Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.

THE AUTHOR

The Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., has been the archbishop of Denver, Colorado since February 18, 1997. As member of the Prairie Band Potawatomi Tribe, Archbishop Chaput is the second Native American to be ordained bishop in the United States, and the first Native American archbishop. He is the author most recently of Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life, and Living the Catholic Faith: Rediscovering the Basics.

Copyright © 2010 Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.

Article: The Lord loves a good game

DEACON DOUGLAS MCMANAMAN

I don’t know how many of you saw the hockey game between the U.S and Finland, but I watched about 4 seconds of it. That’s how long it took for me to see the score after the first period: 6–0.

The final gold medal game against the U.S was especially exciting precisely because it was close throughout and went into overtime. There's nothing exciting about a game that's a complete blow out. That's why some people found the women's hockey less exciting; team Canada was just too strong against the others.

I used to play a lot of chess when I was younger, and it was always exciting to play against someone who really knew the game. But the more one plays, the better one gets, and then it becomes more difficult to find a player who can offer a real challenge.

Well, God loves a good game. He loves to play. One of the best theological works ever written in the 20th century is Hugo Rahner's Man at Play. In his chapter entitled "The Playing of God", he quotes Proverbs: "When he established the heavens, I was there,…when he marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside him, like a little child; and I was daily his delight, playing before him all the while, playing on the surface of his earth, and I found delight in the sons of men" (8, 27-31).

I am convinced that God's favourite game is Hide and Seek. It's the favourite of every child. When you study the cosmic religions of the world, such as Hinduism, Buddhism, the Primal Religions of Africa, Australia and North America, or the Taoism one finds in China, one can't help being touched at the sight of man's ardent search for God. His search is so intense that on his own, without the help of divine revelation, he discovers so much that is true and wise, and so much of his ritualistic behaviour can only be fully understood in light of God's self-revelation in the Person of Christ.

But if we can be so moved by that search, it should be no surprise that God chose to respond to it. He chose to become a part of the game. He came looking for man in the Garden of Eden, and man hid from him among the trees. Once expelled from the garden, man goes looking for God. Hence, the history of religion. Eventually, however, God has mercy and actually comes looking for us, in order to make it easier on us. But He hides Himself so that it will not be too easy to find Him; because if it is too easy, the game won't be all that fun anymore.

So He finds Abraham, makes a covenant with him, and begins to reveal Himself through His relationship with Abraham's descendents, Israel, and He reveals Himself through His fidelity to the promises He made to Abraham.

Then God makes the game more interesting. He wills to draw closer to us, to reveal Himself more directly, and more completely. But He loves to play, and if He comes out of hiding, the game will be over. So, He has to continue to hide himself. He can now be found, but one has to be willing to search. But once He's been found, the game is not thereby over. He still has to be uncovered. We can come to know where He's hiding, but we still have to dig Him out, so to speak, and that's going to take a life time.

The Lord loves a good game: "Unless you change and become as little children, you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven." Children love to play, and He calls us to be children so that we will play.

That's why the lives of the saints are so exciting. We find the saints in the midst of great battles, and they are exciting battles, at least for those of us who read about them later on, centuries after the fact. For the saints, they can be very fearful battles; but they persisted and they fought with great courage and tremendous wit. The tougher the game, the cleverer one has to be. And that's what makes the game so memorable and so exciting to play.


I've always been inspired by the lives of the Canadian Martyrs, especially St. Jean de Brebeuf and St. Isaac Jogues. It is their supernatural fortitude that I find remarkable and so inspiring. Whenever I think I have it tough as a Catholic teacher in Ontario, I think about these two saints. For two years Brebeuf travelled with the Indians without preaching a word. He simply had to live in their midst, patiently, learning their language and customs. He was nothing but a holy presence in their midst. He didn't have a laptop, no air conditioning in the summer, no furnaces in the winter, no home cooked meals, and he knew that his life would likely end in extreme torment. He even prayed for the gift of martyrdom. St. Isaac Jogues was captured in 1642 and spent thirteen months in slavery, suffering "beyond the power of natural endurance". He had a number of his fingers cut off, and yet he returned to Canada from France in 1644, where he could have stayed and lived comfortably for the rest of his days.

I heard once that when St. Padre Pio was being attacked by the devil, he saw his guardian angel off in the corner, watching. Later he asked his angel: "Why didn't you help me?" His angel replied: "Because you didn't need my help, I could see that you were winning." Even the angels love to watch a good fight.

When we read about their lives and the lives of other great saints, many of us begin to realize that we really don't have it all that tough. But if things start to get tougher, if the battle begins to heat up, I think we need to pray for a genuinely magnanimous spirit. Magnanimity, according to Aristotle, is a part of the virtue of fortitude. The unmagnanimous, says Aristotle, will bellyache, whine, and complain. The Lord calls us to stretch forth to the pursuit of great and honourable ends, and to fight bravely, in a spirit of joy, and to fight, above all, with wit. A good player must play with wit, that is, practical wisdom or prudence.

If we don't fight bravely, we will begin to fear and allow ourselves to be overcome with anxiety. Then we lose our peace, we complain, and then are vulnerable to making imprudent decisions, reckless decisions, that can do more harm than good. I remember having a sword fight with an altar boy many years ago; our swords were made of plastic, but they were hard enough to inflict pain. This kid started at me, swinging with all his might, fast and furious. He managed to hit me a couple of times, and it hurt. So I got him to start again, and once again he came at me fast and furious, but this time I was a bit more relaxed. I surprised myself, because I'd managed to block all his attacks with his sword. After backing me into a corner, we started again from the center of the room, and he attacked again, swinging hard and fast. This time I wasn't as calm and collected. His aggressiveness unnerved me. I allowed fear to seep into me, and because of that, I wasn't as agile, and he'd managed to stab me. But when I remained calm, I was able to fend off his attacks. I was quite fascinated by this. It's a good principle to remember.

The mind works much better and faster when we remain calm and peaceful and refuse to allow ourselves to be disturbed. The devil always seeks to sow seeds of fear and anxiety within us, he always attempts to destroy our peace, and if we allow him to do so, we allow him to diminish our wit. We can't battle as well, we make mistakes, imprudent mistakes. And we have everything we need to help us not to be afraid. We have the revealed truth which tells us that the final victory is ours in the Person of Christ. God cannot lose the game He's playing. He has already won. He entered into death in order to inject it with his life, and he rose from the dead. In other words, the battle has already been won. The Psalms testify to this, the history of the Church and the lives of the saints testify to this. Whenever an angel appears to a person in the bible, the first words out of his mouth are always: "Do not be afraid". And more than anything else Christ exhorts us not to worry. Although the war has been won, if we allow ourselves to worry, we open ourselves up to the risk of losing the particular battle in which we find ourselves.

I think too often Catholic teachers who love the faith, who are faithful to the teachings of the Church, allow themselves to lose sight of how much the Lord loves a good game, how much He loves a good fight, or better yet, how much of a warrior the Lord really is. Perhaps we've allowed ourselves to be too influenced by the heresy of Marcionism and we no longer take seriously the Old Testament depiction of God as a warrior: "The Lord is a warrior, Lord is his name! Pharaoh's chariots and army he hurled into the sea; the elite of his officers were submerged in the Red Sea" (15, 3).

I heard once that when St. Padre Pio was being attacked by the devil, he saw his guardian angel off in the corner, watching. Later he asked his angel: "Why didn't you help me?" His angel replied: "Because you didn't need my help, I could see that you were winning." Even the angels love to watch a good fight. The Lord is so powerful that He defeated the one enemy that we could not defeat, and He did so by allowing himself to be "defeated". That's how powerful our God is.

Very often faithful Catholic teachers would like to teach in schools in which there is 100% faithful Catholic teachers and over 80% of the students are devout and faithful to the sacraments, and of course that would be nice, just as it would be nice to be in a game in which, after the first period, the score is 6-0. But it's not that exciting for the spectators.

My friend the Late Monsignor Tom Wells from the Archdiocese of Washington used to say that this is the age of Christian heroes. He said that the 50s did not produce many heroes, because in the 50s it was easy to be a Catholic—everyone agreed with you. This is no longer the case. If you are a Catholic standing up for Catholic principles, almost everyone disagrees with you. Consequently, anyone who stands up for Catholic principles today will do so heroically.

If we had it our way, I think we'd probably lead very unheroic lives. If we were given the option to choose the life we want, we'd probably choose a life for ourselves and others that would not produce many heroes.

This is why it is good to look to the lives of the great missionaries, the great martyrs, who were so motivated by the love of God, who were on fire for souls, who had no fear of suffering, who knew that God is in control. We really don't have to lose our peace. In fact, the great spiritual writers of the Catholic tradition instruct us not to. Let me quote from Lorenzo Scupoli's Spiritual Combat: "The life of man is nothing else but a warfare and a continual temptation; and in consequence of this warfare, you must live in a state of watchfulness and ever keep a guard over your heart, so that it may continue in peace and quietness."

In another chapter of the same work he writes: "Be careful, as I have said, not to permit anything to disturb your heart, and do not meddle with things that are likely to disquiet it, but labor ever to keep it in peace. Thus, the Lord will build up within your soul a city of peace..when you feel agitated, you should begin again to quiet and calm yourself in all your actions and thoughts."

Many years ago my spiritual director said to me that the disputes people have with the Church or with Catholicism very often have little or nothing to do with theology, but more to do with psychology. I think it is good to keep that in mind whenever we run into dissent. If we keep in mind that much of the dissent we will encounter in the schools and in the Church has more to do with psychology than theology, it will go a long way in helping us to keep our peace, so as to enter into battle with greater prudence. Moreover, it is wise to keep this in mind as a way of growing in the knowledge of ourselves. If someone or something is causing us to react with agitation, anger, frustration, etc., that in turn can tell us a great deal about who we are and what we have yet to deal with, if we care to stop and listen carefully to what we need to know about ourselves. Self-distrust is an essential part of the spiritual life, and it constitutes a very important chapter in Scupoli's great work. He writes: "Distrust of yourself is so necessary in the spiritual combat that, without it, you may be assured that you will neither gain the desired victory, nor be able to overcome even the weakest of your passions…Live in continual fear of yourself, of your own judgment, of your great proneness to sin..."

Life is about Christ; it is not about pleasure. Love alone frees the human person, and the more we insert ourselves in the Person of Christ and the more we love the cross he gives us and carry it with fortitude and magnanimity, the more meaningful life becomes. That's what young people desire above all: meaning and freedom.

Recently I got an email from someone I've never met before, a teacher in a Catholic school from another board. He asked me how to deal with the situation in which he and some of his colleagues in other schools find themselves, i.e., in schools with Gay-straight alliance clubs, teachers apparently hostile to Catholicism, etc. He wanted to know what they could do about it.

If we are teachers, then all we can do at the most fundamental level is to pray often before the Blessed Sacrament that we find in our school chapels, grow closer to God—because holiness is more attractive to students than unholiness—, grow in a spirit of joy, and never allow yourself to get discouraged. Dark times produce heroes. The saints all come from very difficult and dark situations. The situation we find ourselves in at this time is, again, nothing compared to what so many of the saints and martyrs had to go through. Candles shine brighter in the dark, and one small candle can do a great deal in terms of giving light to young students who need it in order to make their way through life.

It's important to join prayer with fasting, learn the faith well, challenge students to think, turn them on to the faith, as many of you well know young people love truth, and word will get around that you stand for the truth, you love the students, you live gospel, and those who want truth will flock to your classes, including students who have a same-sex orientation. Often they are the real seekers, and we can reach them and touch them if we relate to them with great charity, reverence, and humility. One student I had used to attend Pride Parades and had all the piercings and tattoos, but she loved coming to philosophy class, she loved to think, question, and challenge, and she was not offended by Catholic teaching.

But we have to enjoy the battle, stay calm and play with wit, that is, with a shrewd mind. Archbishop Fulton Sheen used to say that discouragement is pride. It's God's world and it is His battle. Our task is to enter into the game, but we're His pieces, on His board, in His hand. Our job is to battle with joy, with peace, and with magnanimity, with charity and humility, and to rely on God, because He alone is in control.

We need to be very shrewd when it comes to Church teaching on sexuality. Be prudent, teach it clearly, but we must teach it against the background of a Christocentric spirituality. Young people must see that the moral life is the good life, that happiness is virtue, happiness is holiness, and that enduring joy comes from inserting ourselves in the Person of Christ, carrying the cross he gives us to carry. The same-sex orientation really is an invitation to holiness, and all of us have proclivities that we have to contend with. Some have proclivities to excessive alcohol, some have to battle with depression, others with sloth, others with pride, some have to battle the tendency to greed, some have inordinate anxiety as a cross, some have to battle with their appetite for food, and some have to contend with their sexual appetite, whether that is a homosexual orientation or a heterosexual one, whether married or single.

Life is about Christ; it is not about pleasure. Love alone frees the human person, and the more we insert ourselves in the Person of Christ and the more we love the cross he gives us and carry it with fortitude and magnanimity, the more meaningful life becomes. That's what young people desire above all: meaning and freedom. It's all about Christ. It's not about being right, it's not about winning an argument, it's about winning souls for Christ, and we do that not with irrefutable and incontrovertible arguments, but with the heart of Christ. Christ alone is the victory.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Deacon Douglas McManaman. "The Lord loves a good game." CERC (March 2010).

This article was an address given to the Catholic Teachers Guild Retreat at St. Augustine's Seminary in Toronto, Ontario on March 7th, 2010.

Printed with permission of Deacon Douglas McManaman.

THE AUTHOR

Doug McManaman is a Deacon and a Religion and Philosophy teacher at Father Michael McGivney Catholic Academy in Markham, Ontario, Canada. He is the past president of the Canadian Fellowship of Catholic Scholars. He maintains the following web site for his students: 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. Deacon McManaman is on the advisory board of the Catholic Education Resource Center.

Copyright © 2010 Douglas McManaman