Catholic Labs

When Religion Gets Ugly

2010-08-16T14:27:00.000-04:00

Recently, I added a new friend to Facebook. He was writing some rather poignant ideas on a friend's Wall about the need to establish peaceful dialog between races and religions, both at home and abroad. I expected to look on his info page and find that he was a devoutly religious man, but what I found was even more interesting. Listed under his "religious beliefs" was the following phrase:

Religion has caused more damage to man kind than any other hobby in the history of mankind.

I was disappointed, but not surprised. Increasingly, many I've encountered who are most interested in peaceful coexistence, tolerance, and consistency and integrity in beliefs are disillusioned with the traditional organized religions. The most famous example of this was Mahatma Gandhi, when he said, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Who could argue with that? From Crusades, to the KKK, to sex abuse scandals, inquisitions, holocausts, and beyond, the white baptismal gowns of the Western religions are spotted with centuries of dirt and blood.

There are several intriguing and challenging aspects of this problem that can basically be relegated into two distinctive categories. The first is the actions of believers, or supposed believers, in the name of religion. The second category is the religious teachings and sacred texts that may contain contradictions, violence, hate, or other material that are objectionable or questionable to the contemporary person.

Frankly, the first category is the human condition. Jesus and his mother are unique, potentially in the entire history of human kind, because they are the only people who were ever perceived as perfect. For the rest of us, we are doomed to fall short of the expectations that our religious traditions hold us to. This is sin, imperfection, hypocrisy, and the ever present reality of our human condition. This is NOT an excuse, however, for the failure of humanity. Most importantly, it is not the excuse for licentiousness, a reason to stop aiming for perfection. In other words, even though none of us is perfect, even the holiest of people and the leaders and scholars of religions, this does not excuse us from the quest to constantly seek to better ourselves and more closely align our will with the Will of God. There will also always be fringe elements of every religious belief who practice hypocrisy or violence in the name of their religion. Some of these folk may be evil, mentally ill, or mistaken. But these people do not, and should not, reflect negatively on faith as a whole.

The problem, therefore, is not that the faithful, sometimes, are not. The problem is not that the leaders of religions do not avoid sin and hypocrisy. After all, one of the stated goals of religion is to approach and fix these problems. The real problem is that those who claim they are religious sometimes seem content or arrogant in the way they are leading their lives.

However, more troubling are the internal contradictions contained inside religious texts and traditions. What can we make of the violence, the immorality, the intolerance and the hypocrisy sometimes contained within the very fabric of religion?

Christians don't need to spend much time finding a guide through this process, because Jesus Himself struggled with this very idea. There is a reason that we call the Gospels and the following books of the Christian Bible the "New Testament" and Jesus' Word as the "New Covenant" because they reinterpret and renew the established promises between God and man. One such example, and perhaps the most powerful, is the story of the adulterous woman.

But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people were coming to Him; and He sat down and began to teach them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court, they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act. “Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?” They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground. But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court. Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.”

Jesus does not contradict the previous law, but rather he points out that in in his contemporary time, it had become superseded by a new law, a new covenant, a New Testament. There are other, similar stories in the Gospels, such as the disciples decisions to not follow certain Jewish traditional washing during meal time, or the decision after Jesus' death to allow Gentiles to become Christians without first becoming Jews.

M0dern scholars would point out that within the Old Testament there is a huge amount of ethnocentrism, strict moral code with a high emphasis on external symbolic acts, and a rigid order. They would also argue that these things were important to the early Jews because of their tribal nature and the open hostility of their pagan neighbors. These symbols set them apart from the other tribes, their rigid order and focus on ethnic and religious identity would help preserve the Jews and spread their culture and influence. To be successful, the Jews would need to become wealthy and powerful. The weak would NOT inherit the earth, especially as the Jews escaped slavery and established their homeland.

By the time of Jesus, the world was a different place. The focus on non-violence and harmony would set the Christians apart from the Romans, as would the emphasis of weakness and poverty as superior to wealth and strength. The Christians would make their impact culturally, not militarily (initially). Things changed, and so did the interpretation of religion.

The concept of evolution of religion would not be foreign to Buddhists either. The Buddha often explained that his public teachings evolved as his disciples grew in understanding. Christ himself uses similar methods with his own disciples, and changes his teachings as the circumstances of his own followers change. The truth has not shifted, but rather the application of truth to the situation has changed. These ideas help explain some of the contradictions in the religious texts.

But there is one more thing that we are ignoring. Even though most religions believe that their texts are sacred truth, they are still set down into writing by the hands of flawed men.

Perhaps the real problem here isn't that the religious texts evolve, or are contradictory, or that the history and tradition of all of the major religions are marked with flaws, and sometimes blood. Perhaps the problem has become that our own clerics and religious thinkers have stopped evolving themselves, that they have become more rigid than even their religious texts and traditions. Once this occurs, the inconsistencies of thousands of years of history and thousands of pages of scripture become glaring signs of hypocrisy.

We live in troubled times. Traditional religions have struggled to keep up with the pace of globalism, relativism, and new technological and scientific knowledge. This does not nullify the truth of faith, but rather it points out that those who take these issues seriously need to help evolve religion, instead of simply evolving out of it.

Because if we don't do this legwork, who will?

Righteous Indignation: My Response to the Pope's Scandal

2010-03-31T09:48:00.002-04:00

We started Catholic Labs to escape writing about wedge issues, church politics, or any other nonsense that has little relevance to the daily lives of Catholics. Neither one of us, however, can ignore the elephant in the room any longer.

I am sick to my stomach. I've been a Catholic since birth, and I made a commitment before I was confirmed that I would learn about my faith and accept its tenants so that I would not be making promises that I did not understand. I attended The Catholic University of America, I've studied my religion, I've participated in my Parish Pastoral Council, and I've taught religious education. I've defended my faith from slander, attempted to educate the ignorant. Even when I've struggled in my own faith, or when I have fallen from grace, I have NEVER attacked the Church. This Church has failed us all. If you are not angry, you might want to look into this more deeply. If you are angry, don't you dare let anyone convince you that you have no right to be.

This does not mean that I believe everything I've read. It does not mean I am making drastic statements, like calling for resignations of the Holy See. It doesn't even mean that all of the charges and allegations against the Bishops, and Benedict XVI, are accurate or fair.

Here is what all of this means. Even when the Bishops have aggressively pursued allegations of wrong doing by their priests, which is a rarity, they have done so behind closed doors. Until recently, they have never apologized for their cover up. No Pope, before Benedict, has ever met with the victims of sexual abuse. Pope Benedict has been praised as the most aggressive member of the church to investigate sexual abuse, as he was head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which was given this responsibility under John Paul II. Previous to this, however, Cardinal Ratzinger was written a memo describing the transfer of a priest, accused of sexual abuse, into his diocese. The letter was ignored. The priest abused again. From Ireland, to Ratzinger's diocese in Germany, to the now infamous Wisconsin case, the Pope's hands have been tarnished by the very scandal he has been trying to fix. The tragedy is that, despite evidence that no one in the Church's hierarchy worked harder to fix this mess, the CEO of a business who took similar actions as Cardinal Ratzinger has taken during a similar scandal would be facing jail time if proven guilty. Is the evidence there? Can this possibly be true?

I want to tell you that the evidence isn't there. I want to say that these are lies made up by the media that has an anti-Catholic agenda. I can't. The fact is, I've spent days trying to figure out what I can say.

Part of my message came to me on Palm Sunday, during the reading from Isaiah.

Reading I
Is 50:4-7
The Lord GOD has given me
a well-trained tongue,
that I might know how to speak to the weary
a word that will rouse them.
Morning after morning
he opens my ear that I may hear;
and I have not rebelled,
have not turned back.
I gave my back to those who beat me,
my cheeks to those who plucked my beard;
my face I did not shield
from buffets and spitting.

The Lord GOD is my help,
therefore I am not disgraced;
I have set my face like flint,
knowing that I shall not be put to shame.

This spoke to me. I believe (the readers of my blog may argue this) that I have been given a well-trained tongue, and God knows that the Catholics of the world are weary. So, I opened my ears, and this is what I heard.

I am not disgraced. We, the Catholics of the world, are not disgraced. We have done nothing to warrant the shame that too many of our leaders and priests now wear. We must not rebel, or turn back, because the sins of other men have nothing to do with our Covenant with God. Clearly, we have been and will be abused, but we need to set our faces to stone.

Then came second reading came, when Paul describes the humility of Jesus, how He emptied himself to become like man and be crucified for our sins. I once again realized what the church needs now.

We need humility. The crimes of the institution of our Church are now front page news. The frailties and failings of the Church are nothing new, either. From inquisitions, to Crusades, and relentless persecutions of some pretty amazing scientists, the Church has proven that it is made up of human beings, and human beings who are not part of the Holy Family are pretty far from perfect. The problem, as Mark will point out in his next article, is that we, the Catholics of the world, have let the institution be the Church for far too long. But WE, the Catholic people, are the church. We need to hold our leaders accountable. But we also just need to do a better job of being good, faithful Catholics. We need to engage, not retreat, we need to repent, not rebel. We need to be ambassadors for our faith, and we need the world to see it. Simply put, we need to become the Catholic Church.

The message of the first two readings was flowing through me. I knew now what I needed to say, how I could possibly tackle such a disastrously treacherous subject at the sex abuse scandal without either defending the Pope nor condemning the Church. The promise of the first reading, that I may open my ears and my well-trained tongue would know how to handle all of this...

...came to a screeching halt. Instead of the Passion of Jesus as told by Luke, my pastor had replaced the "Gospel of the Lord" with a poem. As the sing-songy poetics, loosely based on the Gospel, washed over me, and as I opened my ears once again, I heard a new message.

Righteous indignation. Too many of our priests have gone astray. My own Pastor breaks canonical law on a daily basis, by changing the words of the consecration, removing the responsorial psalm, and replacing religion with theatrics. My friends in Africa tell me stories of seminarians who become priests because it is a good paying job with free education, and then they sneak off to have sex at night. Our Bishops have failed to keep our deviant priests in check (my Bishop has been written about the infractions of my pastor, so we shall see if I get a response). The Bishops have operated unchecked themselves, neither by the Archbishops, nor by the Pope, nor by the throngs of Catholics who number over 1 billion.

How did we get to this dismal place? Because the overarching rule that the Bishops, Cardinals, and even the Popes have followed is that under no circumstances should the church look bad. Exposing scandal should be avoided at all cost, and the path of least resistance should be followed, because the entire institution of the Church must maintain, according to this way of thinking, an aura of perfection, infallibility on God's Green Earth. This guiding principal has transformed itself into an apparent megalomaniacal attitude that the leadership of the Church, despite being composed of tragically flawed men, can operate with impunity. We've been taught that we should not even challenge them.

New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan said this week that, "Palm Sunday Mass is surely a fitting place for us to express our love for and solidarity for our earthly shepherd now suffering from the same unjust accusation and shouts of the mob as Jesus did." The arrogance of this statement, in the face of the current crisis and the history behind it, makes my stomach churn. It was the fear of public backlash that caused the Bishops to bury these allegations, and empower some very sick priests to continue victimizing the weakest in our society. It was the vanity of the pursuit of the image of holiness that brought us to where we now are. For Archbishop Dolan, and the Pope himself, to blame the media for the outrage is to wash their hands of the sins that they themselves have not committed, but they have enabled. How dare any Bishop compare the suffering that the head of the Church, an elderly man surrounded by luxury, has endured because of his own actions to the wounds of our Savior himself? How dare the Bishop insinuate that to question or criticize the Pope or the Bishops is tantamount to inflicting pain upon Jesus? Where is the humility?

Dolan should be ashamed. So should the Pope. So should my pastor, and if actions are not taken then so should my Bishop.

Is there other evidence of the arrogance of the Bishops? Plenty. We, the Catholic laity, deserve better. We deserve the shepherding from the priests that I know and love. We deserve the humility of those who listen.

The time has come for us to realize that we have let the leaders of our Church become the Church, while we've been along for the ride, sitting in the back seat and rarely questioning where we were going. The time has come, not for rebellion, or slander, or retreat, but for courage, the courage to speak truth to power, the courage to stand up and be counted as Catholic. The time has come to become the Catholic church.

Do not be afraid. The Lord, our God, is our help, therefor we shall not be put to shame.

The Ways of the Lord

2010-03-21T16:16:00.000-04:00

Old and New

Fourth Sunday of Lent - March 14, 2010

Reading I: Jos 5:9a, 10-12
Responsorial Psalm: Ps 34: 2-3, 4-5, 6-7
Reading II: 2 Cor 5:17-21
Gospel: Lk 15:1-3, 11-32

Fifth Sunday of Lent - March 21, 2010

Reading I: Is 43:16-21
Responsorial Psalm: Ps 126:1-2, 2-3, 4-5, 6
Reading II: Phil 3:8-14
Gospel: Jn 8:1-11

I would be at serious risk of biting off way more than I could chew if I were to attempt to cover the readings from both this past Sunday and today. In the interests of keeping things manageable here, I will omit (with some regret) any direct reference to the Gospel readings. Both of them expound very beautifully upon the reality of forgiveness, and I would encourage everyone to give each reading its due. I happen to know of a few excellent resources for reflection on these Gospels which I promise to reference here in an update in the near future.

This post will concentrate on the first readings, because I think they lay out a very important background to the message of the Gospel readings. It may be easy to miss that fact.  Perhaps I should speak for myself: when I read the first reading from this past Sunday, I had no idea what it had to do with the subsequent readings. Okay, so the Israelites celebrated the Passover. Yes, I understand that the Passover is central to Jewish life. But why are we reading about this particular Passover--what makes this one so important?

Taking another look at the broader context of this event gives us some valuable clues. Our reading begins with the Lord declaring to Joshua: "Today I have removed the reproach of Egypt from you." This "reproach of Egypt" refers to the mocking words Pharaoh levels against the Israelites (see Exodus 14:3) and, implicitly, against the Lord God. These words are fulfilled in the form of a curse the Lord pronounces, as a punishment for disobedience, against the very generation of Israelites whom he released from captivity in Egypt. But just prior to today's reading, we see the next generation of Israelites receiving the ritual sign of circumcision.  In other words, this generation is taking up anew the same covenant their parents had taken in the desert. They are a new beginning, a second chance for God's plan of salvation through his people Israel. This new beginning receives its ritual or "sacramental" fulfillment in the Passover meal. In this meal, a new generation of Israelites witnesses and receives the graces "today" (in reality, in the sacramental sense) of the Lord's great deed of salvation--liberation from Egypt--which their parents before them had also witnessed and of which they too had received the benefits (in reality, in the historical sense).

We also hear, after this narration of the Passover meal, that God ceased to provide the manna, the "bread from heaven" the Lord had provided to Israel in the desert. This makes a certain amount of sense: they no longer needed the manna, for now they had plenty to eat. God had begun to provide for them "the yield of the land of Canaan". But here again, I ask: what makes this detail important?

It seems to me that all of the elements of this very brief reading which we have been considering begin to paint a picture of God's characteristic ways of dealing with Israel. There are two points I would like to make here on the Biblical "character" of God. First, God saves. He liberates his people from captivity; through the covenant, he initiates a life-giving relationship with them; he provides them with food; he forgives and releases them from the full consequences of their unwise behavior.

Second, the form taken by God's salvation varies depending upon historical circumstances.  During their slavery in Egypt, God sent them spokespersons and champions in the persons of Moses and Aaron, and he battled against their oppressors in miraculous ways.  While Israel wandered in the desert, and even after their disobedience, God continued to sustain them by providing quail and manna for their food. Once they reach the land of Canaan, the manna ceases, and Israel eats of the fruit of the earth: but this is no less God's providence for them. This differentiated pattern of salvation, to which the letter to the Hebrews alludes, continues throughout the history of Israel. Sometimes the manner of God's saving work will change precisely because of the behavior of the people, even when this behavior is defiant. The first book of Samuel portrays as an act of disobedience the people's demand that they be given a king, rather than be satisfied with the judges whom God appointed to fight for his people as the need arose. God used the occasion afforded him by this sin to open yet another chapter in the story of salvation.  The monarchy of Israel became an instrument of God for the protection and good governance of his people, to the point that God even sent his Spirit upon David and attached special blessings to his rule and the rule of his descendants.

The first reading for this Sunday recaps this same Biblical pattern while augmenting it sharply. As in last Sunday's reading, we are reminded of God's great act of emancipation on behalf of Israel. But this time, God dramatically downplays this pivotal event--the event that formed Israel as a nation--in comparison with what is to come:

Remember not the events of the past,
the things of long ago consider not;
see, I am doing something new!

At some point in the near future--better still: this very day, for those who have eyes to see it--God is about to trump all the expectations of his people with something utterly mind-blowing. God is declaring himself the God of the unexpected, the God of new beginnings, who overcomes oppressive situations of doubt and despair before breakfast. A striking message, as much to its most likely historical audience--the people of Israel in exile, still under the rule of the Babylonians who conquered them, with no end in sight--as it is to our own unstable, war-torn, anxiety-ridden world, struggling to emancipate itself from the seemingly relentless momentum of its often gruesome history.

The Scriptures do not present us with a God eager to prove to human beings that he exists. Rather, we meet in the Bible a God bent on saving human beings from the forces that enslave them, stripping them of their humanity. And although the history of humankind seems all too often to push against the great efforts of human beings to secure their own dignity, even with crushing force, God shows himself capable of working through this very history to initiate ever new acts of salvation. Christians believe that God confirms his commitment to humanity, first revealed to the Israelites, in a definitive way by revealing himself in Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit. Those who would be Christ's ambassadors ought not, therefore, expect to be freed from the conditions of their human nature and their human history, including the suffering this will entail. Yet God offers to them a special liberty that works within these conditions, so that they might be free to announce his praises with joy.

Unsettling

2010-03-08T15:46:00.003-05:00

Third Sunday of Lent
March 7, 2010

Reading I: Ex 3:1-8a, 13-15
Responsorial Psalm: Ps 103: 1-2, 3-4, 6-7, 8, 11
Reading II: 1 Cor 10:1-6, 10-12
Gospel: Lk 13:1-9

"Therefore, whoever thinks he is standing secure
should take care not to fall." (from the second reading)

"Unsettling" seems to capture the overall mood of the readings for this past Sunday. St. Paul reminds us of the great favor that God showed to Israel, of which we hear in the first reading. God announces to Moses his intention to liberate the Israelites and to make them his own people, granting them "a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey." "Yet," Paul continues "God was not pleased with most of them." Yikes! That's a heck of a transition. How do we get from the Chosen People of God to "not pleased with most of them"?

Something similar happens in the Gospel reading from Luke.
Here we see "some people" delivering a report to Jesus the tragic fate of a group of Galileans under the bloody regime of Pontius Pilate. Here we have to do a little reading between the lines. What exactly is the purpose of this report? How has this tragedy affected the lives of these "some people"? Many reactions are possible: sadness for their killed brethren; anxiety for their lives or the lives of those close to them; indignation at the injustice done; anger at the authorities for their crimes or at God for letting them happen; gratitude that they themselves were not the victims. We really do not know. Jesus, however, seems to sense that some of his interlocutors are using this episode as a prop for their self-righteous attitudes, and he will have none of it. Abruptly, and almost rudely, he turns the question back on them:

“Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way
they were greater sinners than all other Galileans?
By no means!
But I tell you, if you do not repent,
you will all perish as they did!"

These readings sweep our preconceptions right out from under our feet and address us with some pointed questions. Paul entreats us to see these Israelites ("most of them") as a mirror of ourselves. We must then ask, What evil things did they desire? Do I desire such things? Jesus calls us away from distraction tactics and focuses our attention on the pressing issues. The question then becomes: From what should I repent?

I could say a lot on the topic of sin here-- and I intend to do so soon-- but for the moment I would like to mention two pitfalls that have accompanied my own self-examination at one point or another. The first is pride. When I am not conscious of mortal sin, or really of any sin that I consider at all serious, then it is easy for me to feel smug and self-righteous, almost as if there is nothing from which I need to repent. The second, perhaps the more insidious of the two for me, is scrupulosity. On the outside, it looks like the opposite of pride: I react to my own behavior with a hyper-sensitivity to sinful attitudes. In reality, however, both have a similar effect: they distract me from what is really going on in my life, they keep me from focusing on the real issue. In my experience, there is at any given time some issue that lies at the forefront of my struggles. (Today, I think that issue is procrastination in its various forms, particularly videogames and playing with my new PDA.) In other contexts, such an issue has been called a "sticking point" or a "top plate". I interpret this as the main issue that keeps me from having an authentic relationship with God today and from being present in love to the people God has put in my life. To this extent, it doesn't matter whether the particular act or pattern of acts under discussion technically qualifies as "mortal" or "venial" sin. The salient point is that this issue is for me what lies between praying "The Lord is kind and merciful" with my lips alone and praying the same words with my whole being.

I think Jim (and Merton, whom he cites) is right on target when he talks about the importance of self-awareness: I need to know what concrete aspects of my life stand in the way of my being an authentic disciple, from doing God's will today. Without this knowledge, repentance is impossible. But there is something at work within me-- call it what you like-- that works against my awareness of the truth about myself, something that would have me remain in the dark. So I am frequently in need of the vision of others, people who see more clearly than me, or at least who can see me more clearly than I can see myself. For this reason, today I pray for the jolt that I need to unsettle me from my complacency and to reveal me ever more clearly to myself.

Ambassadors of Christ - The Power of Holiness

2010-02-24T06:24:00.000-05:00

The Jedi/Ninjas/~~Pirates~~/Neo-from-the-Matrix of the Ancient World

Phil 3:17—4:1 or 3:20—4:1
But our citizenship is in heaven,
and from it we also await a savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.
He will change our lowly body
to conform with his glorified body
by the power that enables him also
to bring all things into subjection to himself.

In the readings for this upcoming Sunday, Paul speaks about the power of holiness. He contrasts those who serve the world against those who have devoted themselves to Christ. The quote above describes how, by following the teachings of Jesus, God will give a holy person the grace to become aligned with the Spirit of God, to become greater than oneself with the aid of God. We see the ultimate example of what this looks like in last weeks readings, when Jesus is tempted in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights. Yet he resists the devil's temptations, because "one does not live on bread alone." Jesus is able to resist the devil and overcome temptation. Paul is promising that, through the Holy Spirit, we too are capable of turning ourselves to the Will of God.

Paul is not the origin of this idea, by far.

Ezekiel 36:25-28

I will sprinkle clean water upon you to cleanse you from all your
impurities, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
I will give you a new heart and place a new spirit within you, taking
from your bodies your stony hearts and giving you natural hearts.
I will put my spirit within you and make you live by my statutes,
careful to observe my decrees.
You shall live in the land I gave your fathers; you shall be my
people, and I will be your God.

Throughout the Old and New Testaments, there are stories of God granting abilities. Moses lifted up his arms strengthened his armies, King David spread the kingdom of Israel with the help of God, and the authors of the Holy Texts themselves became scribes of the Word of God.

These concepts are familiar in pop culture. In Star Wars, Luke Skywalker uses his senses to tune into "The Force," the ultimate fabric of the Universe. In The Matrix, people can predict the future, change reality, and even stop bullets by focusing their minds on the underlying truth of the world in which they operate. These two pop-culture examples have their roots in history. Ninjas and warrior monks used concepts deeply routed in Eastern philosophy, Buddhism, and Confucianism. They believed that by understanding the truth about reality, they could tune their consciousness to truth itself, and through the unification of their minds, bodies, and spirits with the truth, they could become holy warriors, invincible and impervious to the attacks of their foes. They could ignore pain, move faster, and focus their senses beyond the abilities of a normal man.

What Paul is saying is that, in a way, these ideas are also applicable to Christianity. We often think of religion as an activity (things one does or doesn't do, i.e., going to church, not eating meat on Fridays during Lent, refraining from stealing, giving to charity, ect.). Others often think that religion is a spiritual exercise, involving meditation, singing, praising, and praying. What Paul seems to be suggesting is that in order to become an ambassador of Christ, one has to conform their entire will to the Will of God. In doing so, God grants the grace to unify one's body, soul, and mind with the power of the Holy Spirit.

Thomas Merton, perhaps the greatest Catholic thinker of the 21st century, once said this: "The first step toward finding God, Who is Truth, is to discover the truth about myself: and if I have been in error, this first step to truth is the discovery of my error." Merton, who studied Eastern religions and Buddhism with Asian monks, believed that the ultimate Truth, God, was inside all of us always, and that by reconciling ourselves to who we really are, by actualizing our holiness, we would become Christ-like. During a period of time in his life where he was struggling with his own morality, he asked an old monk how he determined right from wrong. The monk replied that he prayed so much that he hadn't had the need to think about right or wrong in several decades; he simply lived the Will of God.

I think we've lost touch with Christian meditation. We don't think about religion as the pursuit of who we already are, we think about it as a Quest for something external. We have also lost the understanding that our minds, bodies, and souls are deeply integrated. The idea that we can become stronger and holier by finding God through finding ourselves is both challenging and inspiring.

If you want to be holy, then be. That's the most important step in becoming an Ambassador to Christ.

READERS, share some obstacles, meditation methods, or tips on how to become holier with us. We'd love to hear some suggestions on how to actualize the words of Paul.

Plus, I really want to know what it's like to be a Ninja/Jedi.

Ash Wednesday and a Lenten Experiment

2010-02-18T00:58:00.014-05:00

Readings for Ash Wednesday:

Reading I: Jl 2:12-18
Responsorial Psalm: 51:3-4, 5-6ab, 12-13, 14 and 17
Reading II: 2 Cor 5:20—6:2
Gospel: Mt 6:1-6, 16-18

"Even now, says the LORD,
return to me with your whole heart..." (from the first reading)

With my whole heart... That is a tall order. Has there ever been a time when I have served God "with my whole heart," without any kind of reservations? Can I truly say that my intentions at any given time were absolutely pure, without ulterior motive?

I am forced to ask myself whether I belong in the category of "hypocrites," in the sense in which Jesus invokes the term in the Gospel reading for Ash Wednesday. It may be worth our time to put this label into its historical context.
In all likelihood, Jesus is referring to certain members of the party of the Pharisees as "hypocrites" (although, you may notice, the term "Pharisee" nowhere appears in the reading). This is because the Pharisees were the leaders of a spiritual and religious renewal among the people of Israel. They appeared on a scene characterized by religious corruption and social and political unrest. During a time when the sacrificial cult of Israel had grown decadent, the Pharisees spearheaded an effort to revitalize the religion of Israel through a retrieval of traditional Jewish practices. They became, for all intents and purposes, the pastors of the people because they had earned for themselves a reputation for holiness and erudition. They were precisely the ones you would expect to find praying, fasting, and giving alms.

And it was men of this class, men from whom all expected high standards of holiness, whom Jesus accused of being "hypocrites," play-actors. This is a jarring statement, and it contains a powerful lesson. We human beings, even the most holy among us, are capable of transforming sacred and life-giving activities into their opposite. The spirit in which we act is at least as important as the objective goodness of the act itself. It's hard to resist citing First Corinthians here: "If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing."

I want to begin this Lent by being honest about my own intentions, the spirit in which I am prone to act. I suffer from, and practice, a variety of vices. (Comparing the date of this post with that of Ash Wednesday, sloth comes to mind.) But one of the most deep-seated attitudes that seems to color almost everything I do is my desire to please people and to avoid conflict. While I do have good moments, and there are times in which I endeavor to witness the Gospel of life in what I say as well as how I say it, I am ashamed to say that in the majority of my interactions, my deeds and words are slanted by my conscious and unconscious efforts to keep people from thinking ill of me. I find myself bound, tied down to this fear of making people upset; I am thereby prevented from witnessing to what I believe, from risking the criticism of others, and from engaging in an honest and fearless pursuit of truth. Though I would like to think I speak the truth in love, all too often I find myself practicing false irenicism instead, which is neither truth (it exchanges the truth for what seems to placate the other person) nor even loving (for I deny the other person my own insights and thus fail to treat her or him with dignity, as a fellow searcher for truth).

Because of this, it is fitting, as far as I am concerned, that we should be launching a blog at the beginning of the Lenten season. Our mission here at Catholic Labs dovetails with some personal goals of mine for this Lent: victory over ignorance and error, and the intellectual courage to seek this victory regardless of its possible effects on my pride or on the opinions of others.

I could not achieve these goals on my own. So I would like to close this entry, my first of many (God willing), on a note of gratitude to those on whom I rely: to James the Hype, my friend and colleague, who continues to challenge me to be an authentic follower of Christ; to those who contribute to these humble experiments, either by joining the conversation or simply by reading and reflecting; and to the One whose abundant grace has been and continues to be "sufficient for me". And so, praying for victory over the reign of sin in my members, particularly over my own special brand of hypocrisy, I join my prayers with that of the Psalmist:

"A clean heart create for me, O God,
and a steadfast spirit renew within me."

Becoming an Ambassador of Christ

2010-02-17T12:00:00.007-05:00

A lot of Catholics, when discussing the readings of the day, typically start with the Gospel and then attempt to make sense of the old testament and/or new testament readings. Some will opt to start with the old testament and compare the old covenant message with the new covenant message. I'm weird, so today I'm going to start with Paul and move outwards.

Today, Paul says,

We are ambassadors for Christ, as if God were appealing through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.

The "we" is pretty clearly the early Christian missionaries, the apostles and disciples of Jesus who are preaching to the Corinthians. They are the ambassadors, and those who have only recently become exposed to the Gospel are the ones in need of reconciliation. Two thousand years later, we could hardly consider ourselves ignorant of Christianity, but I wonder how many of us consider ourselves "ambassadors?" We have ambassadors in our world, and are familiar with the concept (especially those of us who have gone trick-or-treating, as young-adult college kids, on Embassy Row in D.C.), but would we connect that concept with religion? When I think of ambassadors, I think of two foreign nations, foreign cultures, with many misunderstandings and competing interests, as well as many common values and partnerships, attempting to work together to solve problems. Often, we think of ambassadors as bridges across those cultural misunderstandings, as knowledge seekers and peacemakers. Occasionally, we think of ambassadors as the last line of diplomacy before the bombs begin to fall. But what does it mean when we apply any of those concepts to Christianity?

For a clue, let's jump to the old testament reading. The reading itself speaks of returning to God, "with fasting, and weeping, and mourning," in order that the Lord might show pity and mercy on the people. In a wider context, the book of Joel describes a plague of locusts, later described as "God's army," that descends among the people because of their turning away (side note, if the Bible's depiction of locusts-as-army is accurate, the U.S. marine corps COLD NOT HANDLE THESE BUGS!)). After this call to fast and repent, the balance of nature is restored and the people of Israel are once again blessed. Perhaps, then, ambassadors of God are the repentant ones, those who turn back to God, praise him publicly, and receive favor from him?

An interesting line in this passage is, "rend your hearts, not your garments," a theme which Jesus picks up on in our next clue, the Gospel. In the old testament, the Israelites are big on external signs of worshipping God. Rituals are very important, circumcision, and following all of the many laws. There are lots of reasons for this, but the Israelites lived in an area of the world where they were surrounded by polytheists, and most aspects of their religion would have seemed very strange, so the external symbols promoted unity and devotion in the face of large external odds, which God protected them from. Jesus changes this, possibly because He's working in different circumstances. In this Gospel, Jesus talks about rewards on earth vs. rewards in heaven. As in the beatitudes, he argues that the internal qualities are more important than the external ones. He says that a person who is fasting shouldn't brag about it, or look dirty, because then only God will know the holy act, which will in turn be rewarded in heaven. Perhaps Jesus is arguing that an ambassador of Christ isn't someone who plays the part, but someone who is holy on the inside.

To go back to Paul, most of us, two thousand years later, can't honestly align ourselves with either Paul's ambassadors or the Corinthians. We are neither devoutly fanatical followers who have given up everything to spread the Word of Christ, nor are we ignorant foreigners untouched and unfamiliar with the message of the Gospel. However, we have commonalities with both camps. We also have internal qualities and external symbols that might set us in both camps. Perhaps we go to church (external quality, Paul's camp) but don't pay attention (internal quality, Corinthians). Or maybe we give money to charity (internal quality, Paul's camp) but then we laugh when others say hurtful things to fit in (like sexist comments during the Super Bowl ads).

WOW! Being an ambassador of Christ is pretty challenging stuff. So this Lent, I'm going to be writing a lot about being an ambassador for Christ. I'm going to look at the ins and outs of what that looks like, how to do it, and what's in the way. I'm also going to try to look at what else, whether we are trying to or not, we've become ambassadors for. If I had to guess, we're ambassadors for a lot of things, both good and bad, that we've never even realized. Also, I think this will dovetail pretty well with PNC's discussion of hypocrisy.

Until then, be good!

What is Catholic Labs?

2010-02-17T11:05:00.000-05:00

Catholic Labs is a place where thinkers can work together to discover the truth. We aim to apply a global worldview to Catholic issues and a Catholic worldview to global issues in order to foster dialogue and see the world in a new light. Challenging as well as encouraging one another, we endeavor to investigate pertinent questions, improve lives, and foster a spiritual community. Through these efforts, we intend to do our part in building up the Church in our day and to become salt, light, and leaven for the online community and the world.

The 21st century is a turbulent time for the world. Religious beliefs are fragmented, East and West are colliding, and atheism is trying to stake out the high ground in discussions about progressive human thought. At Catholic Labs, we don't believe that religion is an outdated and primitive product of evolution whose time has passed. We don't believe that Catholic thinkers have to shield themselves from dialogue with the non-Catholic world. We don't believe Catholicism is a dinosaur, and we don't believe that Catholic thought stopped with Thomas Aquinas.

In the Gospel of John, chapter 8, Jesus said to those Jews who believed in him:

"If you remain in my word, you will truly be my disciples,
and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

We believe that the truth will set us all free, and that God has made the truth accessible, through our own senses, our intellects, the teachings of the Bible, of Christ and his apostles, and through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. We believe that Catholic thinkers have lots to bring to the table when confronting the problems of our day. Catholic thinking and Catholic spirituality have the potential to play a powerful and life-giving role in the 21st century, and we've built Catholic Labs as a place for the kind of spiritual and intellectual growth needed to make this happen.

Our goal at Catholic Labs is to broaden the conversation towards the fullness of what our faith teaches us about the struggles, obstacles, and blessings of our daily lives. We want to connect with Catholics and non-Catholics and engage in a frank and fearless dialogue about the future of our world.

Is Catholic Labs a Real Laboratory?

We picked the name Catholic Labs because we aren't afraid to ask questions, explore, and experiment in order to find the truth. We're not talking about sending Bibles into orbit or devising empirical tests for measuring the divinity of Christ. We intend to contribute to the growth in understanding of Christian revelation (cf. Dei Verbum, no. 8) and of the inner meaning and value of all creation (cf. Lumen Gentium, no. 36) that manifests the living dialogue between God and human beings and includes progress in human knowledge and understanding. We believe that this sometimes requires going outside our comfort zones, encountering God's Word in unfamiliar places, and searching out new ways to express old truths. Catholic Labs offers a "controlled environment" where anyone looking for wisdom can examine their beliefs, probe unexplored territory, play with new ideas (mindful that some of these will need to be rejected!), and challenge one another in a fraternal spirit to seek the truth in all its fullness.

We take seriously the instructions of the Apostle to the church of the Thessalonians:

"Do not quench the Spirit.
Do not despise prophetic utterances.
Test everything; retain what is good.
Refrain from every kind of evil."

So Where are the Test Tubes?

God speaks to us in many ways, some of which we could never have expected. As Catholics, we believe that we encounter God in his Son through the living witnesses of holy women and men, through the teachings of our pastors and our fathers and mothers in faith, and in a special way through word and sacrament each time we celebrate the Eucharist. We will be reflecting on the traditional sources of Catholic faith in light of contemporary issues, bringing to them our questions, our challenges, our experiences, our concerns.

So let's begin!

blog under construction

2010-02-04T12:27:00.001-05:00

under construction