New Sandals

The Optimism That is Spring Training

2012-02-20T09:54:00.001-05:00

“You’re damn right. … You know what? Jose’s not here. The first time I hear someone say, ‘Oh, Jose would have caught that ball,’ we’ve got problems. … So our payroll’s down. How many guys here care what our payroll is? … I truly believe, in my heart, we’re going to surprise a lot of people. I’m not saying we’re going to win a championship. I’m just saying we’re going to be better than people think we’re going to be.”

~ Terry Collins, as quoted by Andy McCullough of the Star Ledger

The Kid, #8

2012-02-16T20:21:00.001-05:00

So, Gary Carter has passed away from cancer at the age of 57.

I admit, that the death of Number 8 has hit me a bit harder than I thought it would. And it's not because I really got a chance to see Carter play.

But I've watched this clip a million times:

<p>&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;Your browser does not support iframes.&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;</p>

And it still gives me goose bumps. Carter hits one out at the Old Shea, my absolute favorite ballpark to watch a a game. And Bob Murphy, rest in peace, calls the play-by-play and is confused on whether it gets out or not -- perfect.

I know by heart the single in Game Six in '86 that kept the Mets season alive. I know that they called him the Kid -- that he was tough and confident, bordering on cocky and arrogant. I know he had some pop in his bat and had a reputation for clutch hitting. I know all these things because people have told me, because I've watched it on video.

But you see, Gary Carter is the same age as my parents, one of whom is a cancer survivor. And so, in a way, the passing of someone I don't know hits closer to home.

And what's more (and as some of you already know), my father for as long as I remember, calls me "Kid." It's always been a baseball thing.

Me toeing the rubber: Come on kid, throw strikes.
Me at the plate: Come on Kid, two to get loose, one to produce.
Me swinging at a pitch up and away (I loved those): Kid, that one could have broken your nose.

I don't know if there's a connection between my father calling me "Kid" and it being Carter's nickname. I've never asked. And it really doesn't matter.

What I do know is that I'm sitting in my room right now getting emotionally involved in this post, thinking about my history playing ball, how much joy it brought me and how I tried to play the game in much the way Carter seemed to always play the game. I'm recalling how much I miss the game, how I'll become all depressed when the weather gets warm and I'm not able to get onto a field for infield practice. I'm remembering how my dad always hit fungoes at me harder than all the other infielders, because he knew I needed to work harder than everybody to keep an edge.

I remember all these things about Carter and about myself. But you know, until my last game, I played with the joy of a child, the joy of a kid. So did Carter.

And so, from one Kid to another: Touch 'em all, Gary.

2012-02-16T08:53:00.001-05:00

"To the praise of God, and the honor of the Apostolic See
receive the red biretta, the sign of the cardinal's dignity;
and know that you must be willing to conduct yourselves with fortitude
even to the shedding of your blood:
for the growth of the Christian faith,
the peace and tranquility of the People of God,
and the freedom and spread of the Holy Roman Church."

Joseph Ratzinger, FTW

2012-02-13T19:24:00.001-05:00

We can also note, according to these witnesses, the anchoring of a person in the Church is not something which death disrupts or destroys. Even when they have crossed over the threshold of the world beyond, human beings can still carry each other and bear each others' burdens. They can still give to each other, suffer for each other, and receive from each other. More clearly at Alexandria than in the Western tradition, this conviction rests on the Pauline-Johannine belief that the real frontier runs not between earthly life and not-life, but between being with Christ, on the one hand, and, on the other, being without him or against him. The decisive step is taken in baptism: while the fundamental option of the baptismal candidate becomes definitively established with death, its full development and purification may have to await a moment beyond death, when we make our way through the judging fire of Christ's intimate presence in the companionable embrace of the family of the Church.

Joseph Ratzinger, Eschatology, p. 227

(emphasis added)

Sacramental Theology

2012-02-11T13:10:00.000-05:00

A recent paper submission:

Far from doing “anything” or somethings, the sacraments of the Churchdo, in actuality, everything. Yet, at the same time, without the responseof those participating in the sacraments themselves, they might be thought(incorrectly, yet not unreasonably) to do nothing. Sacraments make present the grace of Christin a profound and visible way through the symbols employed therein. They also manifest the unity symbolized bythose gathered to celebrate the sacrament. More finely: they symbolize and make present Christ and the unity of theBody of Christ (Power, esp. 474). Inthis configuration, the presence of Christ in a sacrament claims an objectivestatus; while the desired unity and the changes required from participants tendtoward subjectivity.

Any formulation ofthe sacraments must attempt to explain the tension between these two realities. Even in the final estimation, however, such adifficulty cannot be worked out to a satisfactory end. Kelleher, echoing Chauvet, points out that theseintricacies actually find their convergence in the ecclesial subject, theChurch (192). Here one finds a sensiblesynthesis of the objective and subjective – the unmerited actions of God andhuman response, mediated through the Church’s ritual/symbolic actions in thesacraments. This realization builds upon Irwin’s plea for an “either/or”sacramentality that recognizes both the graced nature of the world as well as itsinherent need for renewal through the saving actions of Christ (Irwin, 204).

Such a model admitsthe grace “produced” in the sacraments requires a receiver to achieve its truegoal (Chauvet). Simultaneously, the freegifting of the sacraments mirror God’s overwhelming beneficence in all thingsand thus give us both the model and means for attempting to manifest these samedivine characteristics. In the final consideration, recognition of the mysteryinvolved in the sacraments preserves the objectivity of the gift given, whilealso recognizing the particularity necessary in each human subject to receivethe same gift.

Paul VI Love

2012-02-08T19:38:00.001-05:00

Charles of New Haven @FrCharles

Paul VI, if he wasn't fully employed enjoying the vision of God, would be clutching a copy of Humanae vitae and saying, "I told you so"

Theological Education Schematics

2012-02-08T19:14:00.001-05:00

I've been receiving religious instruction since I was three years old. I'm now twenty-seven years. Thus far, I've identified what I think to be three models of religious instruction. The below configuration is not exclusive, as there may be other means of education that I have neither experienced nor remembered. Also, the models presented in this schema are not rigid; that is to say, one model may bleed into another at a time. I intend the models to be heuristic. They do not, in of themselves, connote positive or negative values as such. At one time or another, one model may be more appropriate than others, yet standing alone, with all things being equal, one does not possess greater or lesser value than another.

Model #1: Catechetical
This model is perhaps the most simple. It relies upon a dissemination of information from one subject to another, usually taking the form of a teacher articulating facts in the presence of students. The students are judged through tests which measure whether or not they have assimilated what is considered to be the minimum amount of material necessary deemed for competence.

Model #2: Speculative
This model is perhaps the most fluid. It assumes that certain basic catechetical standards have been met. Speculative theology as a teaching tool is based largely in induction. It takes experiential knowledge or theological principles and submits them to an entire series of speculations. It is the most value neutral of the models in actual practice, since there is little control over the conclusions to be reached. This type of instruction is primarily concerned with concepts and methods such that these are the entry points into insight.

Model #3: Socialization
This model might be considered a hybrid of the first two. It brings the facts of a particular subject to bear in such a way that consensus on a model, sometimes preconceived, is reached. The goals of this educational model are three-fold: 1) there is a transmission of facts and/or principles, conceived or presented in a repeated pattern by the instructor; 2) these same facts are arranged in such a manner as to achieve a desired result: bringing the learning subject into a "community" of sorts that collectively holds these agreed upon truths and thus acts upon other ideas accordingly; 3) the learning subject gains the ability to use the set of facts learned in order to pursue speculative theology in an effort to discover further information which matches with the facts or principles taught (1) and the conclusions desired in (2). Failure to do so requires an reworking of the previously agreed upon facts and/or principles.

That's what I have so far. Discussion and comments welcome. I'm sure that this is only a start, and thus highly incomplete. In other words, I invite the hounds of Model #2 to be released on the above material.

Comment of the Day

2012-02-07T09:53:00.003-05:00

From Jesuit. (No word on whether or not I need a disparity of cult note to publish this.)

...Your post seems to indicate that God is the only source of desires and that all of our desires are, at least, permitted by God if not caused by God. According to Ignatian spirituality this is not the case. Our desires emerge from a complex interaction of the free self, the good spirit, and the evil spirit. The promise that God will give us the desires of our heart follows on the imperative that we delight ourselves in God (Ps 37). There are certainly disordered desires and incompletely discerned desires that plague us all the time. These desires might not be fulfilled, and possibly should not be fulfilled. For instance, a man might have a mighty and holy desire to marry a certain woman, but unless the desire is reciprocated the reality will not, and should not, be fulfilled. Another example, a man might have a strong and holy desire to become a priest, but he cannot discern this on his own. Like marriage, the decision of a man to be a priest is a common discernment between him and the Church. Since it is not in his power to make himself a priest, he can only discern his side of the equation. The desire to be a priest can emerge from many places, but the discernment to be a priest is a process guided by the holy spirit acting in the realm of possibility and community. Desires have to be discerned if they are to be translated into action or attended with expectation. The existential angst that emerges from disordered, incomplete, and difficult to discern desires is a natural part of the finitude of our human existence, and accepting that fact might be part of our true freedom. New spiritual growth comes when we abandon the project of perfect control and utter self-transcendence and delight in God with a simple kind of joy that can purify and rightly order our desires. We can only trust that our desires flow from God when we are confident that we are delighting in God--the absolute horizon who orients and grants eternal perspective to our desires.

Developing a Theology of God

2012-02-07T06:30:00.000-05:00

Excerpt of an email from a friend to me:

So my question for you is: are you saying that God wouldn't give a person the desire for something impossible? Or is nothing impossible because God wouldn't let you desire it if it were?

Or is that question irrelevant because you're only talking about desires "implanted" in people by God? If so, then what's the difference between that desire and any other, if we're all products of his creation?

These questions are, it should go without saying, great ones. They cut right to the heart of what it means to be a believer in God. Indeed, these questions are all the more important for a Christian, and a Catholic no less, because they point to the nub of all theology: the mediation of God's revelation. Of course, for Catholics, this mediation is found in complete fullness in the person of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Before answering these questions, one may recall the old Scholastic exercise: Could God make a square circle? The conflict is summed thusly: God can do anything; but, the question then runs, could God do what is against the nature of things (that God has made)? The answer, it seems, is "no." At the same time, what is missing from this debate is a bit of intellectual honesty. For in all reality, how can we know the nature of things better than the Creator?

So, with that bit of epistemic honesty noted and applied, we may continue.

My response to the above questions would run something like this:

The Spirit of God would not call us to be something impossible in a final, irrevocable way. Such a calling would be capricious and uncharitable, dooming a creation of this same God to constant existential misery. Yet, at the same time, it cannot be said that that which we believe ourselves called may not, at some or most or close to all times, appear to be impossible.

Especially helpful in this matter is that the old Thomistic adage that "grace builds upon nature." If we are to understand grace as the gratuitous self-giving of God's self in his only Son, and the experiences gained therein, we can see this gratuitous giving as building upon what we already are. More simply, Christ helps us to become something that otherwise we would not be. This is what makes the Christian different from his or her fellow co-religionists. Because this thing called grace builds upon our nature, each individual human is an unrepeatable act of God, wherein his or her life and subsequent salvation is, in fact, also unique and unrepeatable.

Because of this, one might correctly allow that God might permit unrealistic desires into one's consciousness for any number of reasons, provided that in the final accounting such desires do not do permanent harm to one's soul. Yet at the same time, one might also allow that God uses these same desires to bring us closer to him.

In summary, we find that God would not call us to something ultimately existentially destructive because it would be against his nature. At the same time, God builds our own desires and appetites so that we may ultimately reach our salvation in him. Thus, all good and holy desires comes from God, yet one must allow for some desires that seem not to be from God as being from him and some desires that seem to be from God as originating from other sources.

Inadequate, I know. But it's the old college try.

On Coughlin and My Old Man

2012-02-06T18:36:00.002-05:00

I've always liked Tom Coughlin, but until last night, I wasn't sure why.

Growing up, I found myself intrigued by the expansion Jacksonville Jaguars, built to win "now," as opposed to their newly birthed counterparts, the Carolina Panthers. The Jags had a left-handed quarterback with some mobility, Mark Brunell, and a coach that didn't take any prisoners, Tom Coughlin. Both of these men, as stock characters of sorts, intrigued me. I've always liked Coughlin.

I (think I) remember that soon after the Giants hired Tom Coughlin, he manged to get a whole bunch of players upset. He was too tough, too demanding. He instituted these meetings and asked the players to be here or there earlier than they had been required to be in the past. And the media railed. I've always liked Coughlin.

And then Coughlin allegedly got kinder and gentler. So, a few years ago, there went Eli Manning (who had problems of his own) and Tom, never wavering, winning the biggest game of their respective lives against the Goliaths of football, replete with the Darth Vader of Coaching, the guy who was meaner than Coughlin but could get away with it.

A not-so-flashy coach defeats Bill Belichick. Eli Manning has the game of his life. Giants win the Super Bowl. I've always liked Coughlin.

I found myself in almost the same place last night. Sitting on a couch. Fourth quarter. Giants down. Eli with the ball. Coughlin with his trademark glare. Gone were the questions over whether Eli could be considered elite. Gone were Coughlin's detractors who whispered whether he had "lost the team" after a few terrible losses this season.

Eli to Manningham in one of the best money throw and catches you'll ever see.

Bradshaw up the middle. Touchdown. Down goes Goliath. Again.

There stood Coughlin on the podium after the game, giving the credit to his guys, the players he had supposedly lost during the season. Same steely eyes. Some measured voice. I've always liked Coughlin.

But why?

Last night, as I watched Coughlin coached I realized why I liked him. I thought it was great when he got upset over the non-pass interference call. I thought it was great how quickly he calmed down again. I loved it when he put his hands on his hips with that, "you got to be kidding me" look. I loved the consistent clap, rap-rap-rap, that he always does, urging his guys on. I've always liked Coughlin.

I realized I like Tom Coughlin because he reminds me of my dad. I realized that I loved the way Coughlin supported Eli because that's the same way my dad supported me.

I've always loved my dad.

2012-02-06T10:43:00.000-05:00

I'm battling a cold at the moment, but there are a few posts percolating:

Tom Coughlin and his mien.
Fundamental theology and its discontents.
Nick Lowe's "Sensitive Man."
What kind of God, part 2 (cue the Steve Forbert video).

On Disagreement

2012-02-02T20:53:00.001-05:00

Recently, I've received some strong challenges from folks, both en vivo and via social medium about things that I've written.

I really do appreciate it.

But what I appreciate more is both the manner in which I've received it and that I've received it at all.

You see, part of the beauty of the disciplines of the humanities -- or which, I might add, theology is the highest -- is that there is room for disagreement and dialectic. In fact, I might go so far as to say that a constiuitive part of the theological project is disagreement. And perhaps even a step further, contingent to all Christian theology is the specter, if not the guarantee of disagreement.

The root of this disagreement, I've come to believe, is all about fundamental theology. That is to say, the reason why Christians can't agree is that we all bring slightly different thoughts on the way God makes himself known.*

This is why Christian theology excites me so much, and, consequently, why I believe that God is calling me to a lifetime at its service. So, there you go, faithful readers. In one post: 1) I love when I receive disagreement; 2) its tone makes all the difference; and 3) my thesis suggests that most theological disagreements are not based in the matter at hand, but rather in the fundamental theologies which presuppose the positions upon which there are disagreements.

*Even there, by referring to God as himself, I've made a claim which falls under the guise, most basically, of fundamental theology.

Existential Terror

2012-01-31T21:57:00.000-05:00

I found myself wondering today what type of God might we be worshiping if we believe that this God is calling us to something that is physically, spiritually, vocationally or theologically impossible. I shan't name what might fall under these categories, but with a bit of imagination I believe we could all come up with a few.

It seems terrifically unfair for God to do this.

And if God is doing this, it thus means that God is unjust. Or that other circumstances are frustrating the will of God beyond measure. Yet, if this second option obtains, does not this still reflect poorly upon God? If our God is a God of the living and a God of history, certainly He knows what is going on here on earth. It seems to me that God responds to injustice by raising up prophets and that it is up to you and me to discern the validity of the allegedly prophetic message.

Yet, I simply cannot assent to a God who plunges members of his creation into constant existential terror by allowing his Holy Spirit to implant in them the desire for something that is, for all intents and purposes at the current moment, impossible.

Raiders of the Lost Ark Reference of the Night

2012-01-29T22:20:00.001-05:00

Maj. Eaton: [sees a picture of the Ark with rays of power coming out of it] Good God!
Brody: Yes, that's what the Hebrews thought.

Why Then, God at All?

2012-01-26T13:27:00.004-05:00

One of the ongoing reflections that I have had as a student of theology is the means by which I handle sin in whatever formulation of fundamental theology I possess.

Sketching in broad strokes, it seems as the transcendentalists of Rahner's stripe don't give enough credence to sin.

The political theologians, beginning with Metz, largely assign sin to the other -- of course, the other isn't you or me -- which is rather helpful in maintaining a righteous indignation toward the world.

I think both of these theological positions -- and of course, I'm painting in entirely too broad of strokes -- miss the boat on what exactly is going on with sin. Sin is social and structural, surely. Yet, when examining my conscience nightly, I'm troubled -- nay, horrified -- by my own commitment to my own personal sins.

It seems to me that the only way God makes any sense at all is if we acknowledge our own atrocious insistence on sin. Because quite frankly, if sin is always outside of us, then I would be best off engaging in self-worship predicated on self-serving altruism. Thus, I feel good and appropriate for myself what I need. Salvation thus becomes a parlor game of avoiding all of the bad people out there.

And, well, I think that is missing the point.

Not a Wimpy God

2012-01-24T08:55:00.001-05:00

Sometimes I wonder if we don't insist upon God's conformity to ourselves. This, of course, is backwards.

In other words, for all of the speaking about the turn to the subject, I detect that the human desire in much of this is to have one's self -- opinion, foibles and everything else -- acknowledged as being true, just -- and alright. Once our own opinions have been completely actualized and the lines between objective and subjective truth sufficiently blurred, we can than project this "realization" back to God.

And, thus we discover a God who loves us so much that's he's just like us. Ergo, there are no restrictions required upon our lives, because God has deigned it so.

Thus, truth and freedom are reordered (or disconnected really) and whatever you (or I, or us) think is best, goes.

If the above thesis is correct, then we have a rather wimpy God on our hands. In fact, we don't even have God anymore, but solely ourselves.

I'd rather not worship that god (me).

2012-01-20T13:58:00.001-05:00

Greetings from 90-West in Massachusettes. Heading to Saugerties for a Come and See Discernment Weekend. Please pray for us.

Posting there as wireless connection allows.

John Paul II Beat (Tom) Friedman. Really.

2012-01-19T12:48:00.002-05:00

Sound like a familiar caution of Thomas Friendman's? What do you think, Virginia Matt?

Take from speech given by Blessed John Paul II, January 1, 1990.

Just Thinking Outloud (Not that I Mean Anything By It At All Edition)

2012-01-19T09:14:00.001-05:00

Take a look at Paul VI’s social teachings, including hisfamily and reproductive ethics.

Think about the demographic crisis sweeping the WesternWorld.

Humph.

An Ecclesial Thought

2012-01-19T08:58:00.002-05:00

Sometimes I wonder that if by translating unrealistic ortemporal expectations onto the Church, we place both ourselves and the Churchin the position of being, quite frankly, in a no-win situation. In a metaphor which is sure to limp, Iquestion whether the expectation of the Church being run as a liberal democracyis not as foolish as asking a point guard to run the two-minute drill.

Perhaps it’s being a Mets fan, or having grown up in NewJersey, but empirically speaking, illogical expectations are the quickest way Iknow (and I have verified this) to disappointment and unhappiness. Itseems that many of our theological ailments are contingent upon our expectingthe Church to ontologically be somethingthat it was never meant to be, or doctrinally define areas in which it bearslimited competence. Expectations of theChurch all too often stem from whatever historical or political milieu thecritic is wading into at the time of the criticism. I am reminded of the peasant in a MontyPython and the Search for the Holy Grail verbally assaulting King Arthur aboutrights and liberties. The scene is funnyfor several reasons, but as someone trained – in a limited sense at least – asa historian, its anachronistic irony is the best part.

Or, from another direction, whenever I hear the Church’sstructure of governance critiqued vis-à-vis liberal democracy, I cringe. I recall Charles Taylor writing thatsecularism has something to teach the Church. Of course. In this vein, one mayaccept liberal democracy’s ability to teach the Church a thing or two. But: best practices at government? Come now.

Quite often in our critiques of the Church (or, dissent, orhowever one might qualify it nowadays), it seems as if we forget the realpurpose for which we belong to the Church in the first place. The Church is our Mother, our home: it ispresent reality and eschatological hope. I recall a professor of mine once remarking about the heavenly liturgy,quipping “whatever that means!” I thinkhe was right. Whatever that meansindeed!

Allow me then, to expand the quip: whatever the Churchmeans, it certainly is something at once analogous and yet different from itscoming eschatological culmination. Thenagain, I guess that’s what the Communion of Saints will do for you.

A New Semester Resolution

2012-01-18T09:19:00.000-05:00

My new semester resolution has been to post daily -- or perhaps twice -- on these pages. The reason for this, I can tell you, is largely personal. I'd like to better hone my writing -- and perhaps even more importantly, my ability to articulate my thoughts. Thus, you'll be finding more posts (provided I can find the internet) in the coming days.

As always, comments are welcome and encouraged.

And away we go.

Gearing Up for the Semester

2012-01-18T08:41:00.000-05:00

Greetings from the study bubble on the second floor of the STM. The semester is underway, but the internet is down at San Lorenzo -- and will not be reconnected it seems until the Geek Squad undertakes a rescue mission next week. For the time being, we're reduced to a single computer that is hooked up via a LAN attachment, as opposed to tapping into our wireless.

Upshot: downloading needed articles in other locations and bringing them back to the friary for review.

And so it goes.

2012-01-17T15:20:00.001-05:00

The Router appears to have burned out.

That means no posting. Back to work.

On Cardinals

2012-01-06T09:15:00.002-05:00

Perhaps we can pray this day for Archbishops Dolan and O'Brien that they may be open to the grace of their new positions, that they may discharge faithfully the duties the Church asks of them from this day until their passing:

CHAPTER III.THE CARDINALS OF THE HOLY ROMAN CHURCH
Can. 349 The cardinals of the Holy Roman Church constitute a special college which provides for the election of the Roman Pontiff according to the norm of special law. The cardinals assist the Roman Pontiff either collegially when they are convoked to deal with questions of major importance, or individually when they help the Roman Pontiff through the various offices they perform, especially in the daily care of the universal Church.

Can. 351 §1. The Roman Pontiff freely selects men to be promoted as cardinals, who have been ordained at least into the order of the presbyterate and are especially outstanding in doctrine, morals, piety, and prudence in action; those who are not yet bishops must receive episcopal consecration.

Thoughts on Hell

2012-01-05T21:47:00.002-05:00

I spent most of my evening reading Diary of a Country Priest by Bernanos in our chapel.

In a (or is it the? I won't be certain until the end of the book) climatic scene, the priest-diarist relates what he said to Mme. la Comtesse:

Hell is not to love any more. As long as we remain in this life we can still deceive ourselves, think that we love by our own will, that we love independently of God. But we're like madmen stretching our hands to clasp the moon reflected in water...

It is no longer good and proper for the clergy to speak of hell in any situation, most especially from the pulpit on Sunday mornings. The same rule obtains for funerals, weddings, baptisms and any other large gathering of worshipers at which some type of reflection upon Holy Scripture is expected.

I think this might be one of the greatest theological lacunae of modern age: we never really speak about hell anymore. We've made a caricature of it in a way: devils, demons, goblins are constitutive parts of both hell and Halloween. These inhabitants of hell also make a good mascot.

In still other ways, we've made hell something grand and extreme: hell is genocide, catastrophic natural events taking the lives of innocent. Poverty, we claim, is hell -- or a mighty good indication that the residue of hell, sin, is present. This is true indeed, at least in the purest sense of the metaphor. In this manner, we use hell to mean a place where there seems to be an absence of God, a temporary suspension in God's outpouring of grace or a particular privation that contradicts our sense (and yes, God's sense too, if I can be so bold) of what ought to be.

And, of course, in a secular sense, hell is discomfort -- and, in the case of Sartre, other people. Hell is something unjust that one person or another, likely through poor chance, is forced to existentially approach and overcome: an illness, death of a loved one, losing employment. The list can go on and on.

Surely all the items mentioned above are hellish -- and that includes the play of the Blue Devils last evening -- yet they do not really confront the true reality of hell. I wonder if Bernanos' poor country curé isn't more correct that we might wish to think: hell is not to love anymore. And by not anymore, I mean to ultimately refuse to love -- forever, never again. We get to thinking that someone, just as Mme. la Comtesse did, that we can live in such a manner that makes our love completely self-propelling and under our own control. Thus, it can be turned on and off as it were but an affective light switch.

And one day, after spending a long time thinking we have control over this switch, we grab for it, as one might grab for the moon reflecting in the pond, only to find that it isn't there.

Hell.

In Your Charity

2012-01-04T08:10:00.002-05:00

Please pray for the repose of the soul of Nina E. DeNinno, mother of my spiritual director in the novitiate.

NINA E. (PILLOW) DeNINNO

Age 82, of the East End, on Monday, January 2, 2012. Beloved wife of the late Richard F. DeNinno; loving mother of Fr. Dale DeNinno, Pastor of St. Elizabeth of Hungary Parish, Joe and his wife Kathy DeNinno and the late Gary R. DeNinno; devoted grandmother of Joshua and his wife Tria DeNinno, Nicholas DeNinno and Daniel DeNinno; cherished great- grandmother of Marina and Ryan DeNinno; sister of the late George Pillow; also survived by many loving nieces, nephews, cousins and friends. Family and Friends received at the WALTER J. ZALEWSKI FUNERAL HOME, 216 44th Street, Lawrenceville, on Wednesday and Thursday 2-4 and 7-9 p.m. Funeral Mass at Our Lady of the Angels Parish, St. Augustine Church on Friday at 11 a.m. Interment at Mt. Carmel Cemetery.

On Discerning Religious Life, Part II

2012-01-02T19:57:00.001-05:00

Before Christmas, a commenter asked about the living of religious life, not, it seems, in terms of through consecration by vows, but rather more generously. Her questions centered around one possessing the ability to make such a great decision as to commit to God and the underlying question as to whether God provides the grace required to make such a decision and remain faithful to the choice once made.

It appears that most basically the election may be made to doggedly pursue a Christian life precisely because of the Incarnation. That is to say, because the Word became Flesh, human choices and pursuits are possible -- we are able, as humans, to make real decisions about real things because God became man. The historical reality of the Incarnation gives real weight to what happens between the white lines of life.

At the same time, the ability to make meaningful decisions that last are possible because of the Holy Spirit -- there can be no other explanation, it seems.

More on this to come....

2011-12-27T10:01:00.000-05:00

Of course, blogging hits the skids when I'm at home. More soon, I hope.

Merry Christmas

2011-12-25T00:39:00.001-05:00

George Bailey:Just a minute... just a minute. Now, hold on, Mr. Potter. You're right when you say my father was no businessman. I know that. Why he ever started this cheap, penny-ante Building and Loan, I'll never know. But neither you nor anyone else can say anything against his character, because his whole life was... why, in the 25 years since he and his brother, Uncle Billy, started this thing, he never once thought of himself. Isn't that right, Uncle Billy? He didn't save enough money to send Harry away to college, let alone me. But he did help a few people get out of your slums, Mr. Potter, and what's wrong with that? Why... here, you're all businessmen here. Doesn't it make them better citizens? Doesn't it make them better customers? You... you said... what'd you say a minute ago? They had to wait and save their money before they even ought to think of a decent home. Wait? Wait for what? Until their children grow up and leave them? Until they're so old and broken down that they... Do you know how long it takes a working man to save $5,000? Just remember this, Mr. Potter, that this rabble you're talking about... they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath? Anyway, my father didn't think so. People were human beings to him. But to you, a warped, frustrated old man, they're cattle. Well in my book, my father died a much richer man than you'll ever be!

On Discerning Religious Life

2011-12-16T08:38:00.003-05:00

From a paper I'm editing at the moment:

In a practical sense, all of what the Church asks for candidates forprofession of the evangelic counsels only sets a moral bar for validadmission. Yet, the next step that mustbe taken is to understand both the life task being undertaken as well as thoseopportunities that are being passed up. In this way, one’s discernment does not determine if one might bejuridically capable of making profession and remaining in religious life untilthe end of one’s days. Instead, thediscernment should be made as to whether or not one may flourish in the contextof the vows as well as the particular laws and practices of the institute. This decision requires a clear-mindednessthat will, of course, be facilitated by spiritual direction and otherecclesial-spiritual mechanisms. Yet, inthe final account, the individual must discern whether or not religious life isthe place God has called one to die, both spiritually and physically, so as tobe made suitable for resurrection.

Robert Imbelli, FTW

2011-12-15T13:20:00.003-05:00

Priesthood in Light of the Eucharist

Many theologians endorse the view that one of the characteristics of Catholicism is its instinct to emphasize “both/and.” We confess Jesus both God and man; we affirm both Scripture and tradition; we insist that the Church lives both from invisible grace and visible sacraments. Yet, in practice, Catholics too often fall into binary modes of thought. One pervasive either/or regards the priesthood. We are often informed that Vatican II replaced a “cultic model” of priesthood with a “servant model” – thereby falling into an unhelpful “either/or.”

The late Pope John Paul II never wrote an encyclical on the priesthood. But his last encyclical, "Ecclesia de Eucharistia," stressed the intimate relationship between the Eucharist and the Church. He taught that the whole Church "draws her life from Christ in the Eucharist; by him she is fed and by him she is enlightened" (Ecclesia de Eucharistia, n. 6). He often reiterated that the Eucharist is "the center and summit of the Church's life" (n. 31).

Thus, had he written an encyclical on the priesthood, the Pope might well have called it: “The Priest within the Church whose Life Comes from Christ in the Eucharist”. For the priest is certainly not outside the Church. He is one of the faithful: a member of the community of the baptized who have been washed in the regenerating waters of baptism. Like all his sisters and brothers, he is called by Christ to holiness of life.

At the same time, by virtue of his sacramental ordination, the priest is ordered to the Eucharist in a way that is distinctive and defining. He represents sacramentally Jesus Christ who, through his paschal mystery, has become Eucharist and continues to nourish his Church with his own glorified body. As Vatican II teaches: the ordained priest "acting in the person of Christ, brings about the eucharistic sacrifice and offers it to God in the name of all the people" (Lumen Gentium, 10). The priest's ministry is not limited to the eucharistic celebration in a narrowly cultic sense; rather, the Eucharist centers and orients the entire life and ministry of the priest. It is that from which everything else comes forth and to which all returns. The priest is pre-eminently the servant of Christ in the Eucharist.

Hence both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have frequently urged the priest, who presides at the Eucharist, to himself "sit at the 'school' of the Eucharist" so that he might instruct his people in Christ's eucharistic way. I suggest that the priest does so in three principle ways: by leading a prayerful celebration of the Eucharist, by forming eucharistic community, and by promoting eucharistic practice. Let me briefly comment of each of these exercises of priestly ministry.

First, by his prayerful celebration of the Eucharist the priest exercises a mystagogic function. Through the body language of fervor, reverence, and silence he orients the assembly beyond itself to find its center in Jesus Christ, the one bridegroom of the Church. The placement of the altar – whether ad orientem or versus populum -- fades in importance compared to the priest's prayerfulness in evoking a sense of the transcendent Mystery in whom we live and move and have our being.

Second, the priest's sacramental representation of the presence of the living Lord in the midst of the community must, of its nature, inspire and support his ministry of enabling the community's growth into a eucharistic community. This includes but goes beyond promoting that "active participation" in the liturgy the Vatican Council so desired. It entails discerning and encouraging the sharing of the manifold gifts of the Spirit present in the community. The priest bears special responsibility to foster such eucharistic consciousness and sharing within the local community. Indeed, the concrete exchange of gifts serves as an important criterion for discerning the vitality of our actual communities.

Finally, sitting with his community at the "school of the Eucharist" will lead the priest to realize anew that the community's eucharistic celebration and contemplation must overflow into eucharistic practice. The liturgical proclamation, "the Mass is ended go in peace to love and serve the Lord," is a call to diaconal service, especially of the most needy. Certainly individual actions of outreach and service to family, neighbors, and parish are the responsibilities closest to hand. However, in a time of growing interdependence and globalization, local communities need to engage in the more demanding task of structural discernment: reading the signs of the times in light of the Gospel.

To live ordained priesthood in the light of the Eucharist is to discover anew the mystical heart of the priest's life and ministry. Jesus Christ, truly present in the Eucharist, life-giving head of his body the Church, is the origin and goal of priestly existence. To preside and guide, teach and learn in the midst of the eucharistic community is the ordained priest's all-embracing vocation ..... and endless joy.

Robert Imbelli

October 14, 2011

Text available by clicking here.

The Purpose of Me

2011-12-13T22:38:00.001-05:00

I'm in the middle of correcting a final written project for a class, but I have the echoes of a conversation with a confrere in my head at the moment. This evening, we found ourselves speaking about what the purpose of our particular chosen path in life might be, why one might deign to be a Christian, a Catholic, a Franciscan, a Capuchin and a student at this point in history.

Here are my best answers:

I am a Christian because I believe that God was up to something in the person of Jesus Christ

I am a Catholic because I know God mediates his own presence through the sacraments.

I am a Franciscan because Francis lived a life sitting between brash confidence and dreadful fear -- and that's more or less the condition of my soul.

I am a Capuchin because it's the way I believe the Holy Spirit wishes me to respond to my own participation in original sin.

I am a student because I wake up everyday wondering how I've come to believe in all the above.

And why do I believe all these things? Because the Holy Spirit wants me to, or so I think. It's as complicated; or as simple, as that.

Well, Which One is it in Theology, Indy?

2011-12-09T16:58:00.001-05:00

Indiana Jones: Archaeology is the search for fact... not truth. If it's truth you're looking for, Dr. Tyree's philosophy class is right down the hall.

And You Think I Don't Pay Attention

2011-12-08T14:39:00.001-05:00

I do. Thus:

Thus,the contextual reality of being a white, male, celibate, future member of theRoman Catholic priesthood, vis-à-vis the perception (rightly or wrongly) thatgiven my own location I have a privileged and unassailable place within thehierarchical structure of the institution at the expense of others, bears heavilyboth upon my perception of my theological context and the perceptions of others.

Ongoing Reaction to (Pre)Primary Season

2011-12-07T23:15:00.001-05:00

Oxford Dictionary Fun (with the SJs)

2011-12-06T22:35:00.001-05:00

A member of the Society of Jesus pointed out to me that I used "jesuitical" incorrectly tonight to refer to something related to the Jesuits. Turns out he was (mostly) right:

Jesuitical(Jes·u·it·i·cal)

Syllabification:

Pronunciation:/ˌjeZHo͞oˈitikəl, ˌjez(y)o͞o-/

adjective

of or concerning the Jesuits.
dissembling or equivocating, in the manner associated with Jesuits.

Christianity and the Banality of Evil.

2011-12-05T20:00:00.001-05:00

Before you read the below post, I highly recommend checking out Virginia Matt's blog that he's writing while traveling in Africa. The reference to the door at the conclusion of the post won't make sense if you haven't checked out this particular post.

I recently sent something similar to this email to Virginia Matt -- there are a few additions for clarity:

I just ordered Hannah Arendt's The Banality of Evil from the Boston Public Library.

I think I should start there. The banality of evil. The ho-hum, cover your mouth when you yawn indifference to evil. And not because the yawner is a bad person; no, I think it's something more insidious than that. How can one group of people look at another group of people who live in terror and suffering and not be moved by it? How can one look upon the face of another who is suffering for no other reason than losing the genetic game of geography, being born here and not there, and not want to do something? And then you do nothing, not because you're a bad person or because you don't care, but because you don't know how to care. And again, that's not your fault either: because who ever taught you to really care?

I wonder about this a lot. I think, for starters, that this is the Franciscan insight to human life: you can't stand still, you can't watch when others go wantonly past you to their demise. Or, maybe that is a generally religious insight. Maybe it's better phrased like this: the Franciscan insight is that you can stand still, but if you do, you lose something a whole lot important than just your time or your ability to sleep well at night. You lose your life, your humanness, your ability to suffer with, to scream at, to rage, rage against the night of suffering being experience by someone who is just like you but looks nothing like you. Nothing like you, except his organs, of course.

And when you do something -- whatever it is -- the insight that I've gained is that you must do it fearlessly*. That's what I think, at the end of the day, is most important: to live without fear. I've been on this fear/salvation/Christianity kick lately and I'm sort of proud of it. In a lot of ways, it's the insight that I think I started to gain in Honduras and am only now attempting to figure out what to do with it.

*And fear: fear of what? A lot of things: death, failure, sanction, censure, abandonment, the list could continue.

So, that's the reaction your writing about the door brought out in me. It was one of the best reflections on evil that could be written. Why? Because, simply put, it doesn't truly matter how many slaves passed through that door. 1, 10, 1,000, or over a million. They were human beings, wrong time, wrong place and this has happened throughout history and even today. And still we yawn.

NT Wright Lays the (Resurrection) Smackdown

2011-12-05T16:21:00.001-05:00

Taken from NT Wright's "How Jesus Saw Himself,"

Bible Review (June 1996) 29.

Why the Trinity?

2011-12-05T14:40:00.001-05:00

From a paper I recently turned in. (If you desire the specific articles referenced in what follows, please ask for them in the comments section)

The purpose of the doctrine of the Trinity is to makethe God presented in the New Testament intelligible to Christians. Efforts to interpret and appropriate the NewTestament’s account of God find expression in the bedrock of the Christianbaptismal formula: Father, Son and Holy Spirit (CCC§222; CF §7,§12). Explanationsas to how the persons of the Trinity interact and are named are rooted in theEast/West divide and the use of Greek philosophical terms; moreover, the termsthemselves found their genesis as responses to new theological questions thatemerged in the fourth century (LaCugna, 165) Yet, it must be remembered that when Christians speak of the Trinity,they are not “point[ing] to a numerical mystery, but rather to name the God whoredeems us in Christ and deifies us through the Holy Spirit” (161).

Recalling the basic reason of the Trinity –intelligibility – reminds us why the doctrine remains important forcontemporary Christianity; the result of ignorance of the Trinity is a warpingof the Godhead, culminating in theism guilty of an overly optimisticepistemology (Crowe, 300). Thus, the Trinity reminds us that “God is not alone;He is communion” (Zizioulas, 56). Godexists in relationship to God’s own self and to creation. Thus, humanity is given a model for its ownrelationships: one of complete communion, “without deprivation or domination”(cf. definition of David Couturier). TheTrinity also prevents a “two-fold distortion” of Jesus that eliminates the roleof the Holy Spirit (Crowe, 303; 312). Distinguishingthe persons of the Trinity prevents an appropriation of Jesus to our particularsituations replete with our desired answers (i.e. Jesus as a monk, a socialorganizer) (297ff). The Trinity is thusthe antidote to the heurism phrased “What Would Jesus Do?” Incorrect blending of the Son and Holy Spiritresults in a warping of the historical kenosisthat took place in the Incarnation; in this case, the historical restraints ofthe Jesus event are ignored, as is the presence of the Holy Spirit among us(312). Without the Trinity, we would,quite plainly, be left without the Christian God.

The People Have Spoken

2011-12-05T07:27:00.001-05:00

Vote: Should Mets have topped Miami’s offer for Reyes?

posted on December 4th, 2011 at 11:34 pm

Thank you for voting!

Yes 31.79%

No 68.21%

After attending Handel's Messiah ...

2011-12-03T19:19:00.001-05:00

a question is on my mind: are things True because they are Beautiful, or does something being Beautiful make it true?

Discuss.

Dog Love

2011-12-02T14:24:00.001-05:00

Readers know my feelings on dogs.

I'm glad to see there's a priest out there who agrees:

At St. Patrick's Cathedral, a dog owned by Msgr. Robert Ritchie joins Jesus, Mary and Joseph in Christmas creche

Statue of yellow Lab beloved by Ritchie comes from Italy to be part of holiday tradition

BY Samantha Snowden & Corky Siemaszko
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Friday, December 2 2011, 7:44 AM

Jefferson Siegel/Jefferson Siegel for News

Msgr. Robert Ritchie, rector of St. Patrick's Cathedral, places statue of his beloved dog, Lexington, in the Nativity scene alongside Jesus, Mary and Joseph.

This is a Christmas story about a priest and his dog — and it is the heartwarming tale of this year’s holiday season.
It began shortly before Christmas 15 years ago, when a yellow Lab puppy nuzzled and licked the hand of Msgr. Robert Ritchie in a Manhattan pet shop.
And now, Ritchie, rector of famed St. Patrick’s Cathedral, has given his beloved pup a near sacred honor — placing a statue of the dog beside the figures of Jesus, Mary and Joseph in the sanctuary’s Christmas crèche.
While the Gospels make no mention of pooches in the manger on the first Christmas, Ritchie said it makes perfect sense to place the likeness near statues of a sheep, donkey, ox and camel.
“Didn’t the shepherds have dogs to help herd the sheep?” the clergyman said with a smile.
Two weeks before Christmas 15 years ago, Ritchie was heartbroken over the death of a previous dog when he reached down to pet a puppy at a now-defunct shop on Lexington Ave.
“I had just lost a dog who had been with me for 10 years and I swore I wouldn’t get another,” he recalled. “But my best friend dragged me to the store and said, ‘We’re getting you another.’ ”
The little Lab was full of love. “He licked my hand, and I was smitten,” the monsignor said. “He’s named after the street.”
A decade and a half later, Lexington now weighs 86 pounds, has a love for “any cookie from Petco” and is a faithful member of the St. Patrick’s flock. He’s a hit with the other priests, and Ritchie takes him every morning and night on long walks through the upper East Side. “My secretary gives him a lot of treats behind my back,” Ritchie joked.
Ritchie is in charge of the cathedral’s Nativity scene — and for years has felt something was missing. “I was in two parishes before I came here where they had dogs in their crèches,” he said. “And when I was in Rome last January I was in two churches where they had dogs. So I said, ‘St. Patrick’s had to have a dog.’ ”
Ritchie reached out to the Demetz Art Studio in Ortisei, Italy, where the figures of Jesus, Mary, Joseph and other parts of the crèche were lovingly carved out of wood. They just happened to have a dog statue already carved, although it wasn’t an exact match for Lexington.
“It was a golden retriever,” Ritchie said. “Lexington is a yellow Lab. But the man from the studio happened to be coming to New York and saw Lexington and liked his coloring.”
Which explains why the 25-inch statue that Ritchie dubbed “Lexington II” and personally placed into St. Pat’s crèche on Thursday is also honey brown and white — not yellow.
Ritchie said that when Lexington first saw his doggie doppelganger “he came over and gave it a sniff, a lick on the nose and then kind of ignored him.”
When asked if he has plans to add a cat to the crèche, Ritchie laughed and said no. “I’m a dog man,” he said.
Churchgoers gave mixed reviews to the newest addition at St. Patrick’s.
“I was a little surprised to see a dog in there,” said 28-year-old Emily Moore of Manhattan. “I’ve never heard of a dog being in a Nativity scene before. Doesn’t really make sense.”
Ethan Furman, 32, of Manhattan disagreed. “I think it makes sense,” she argued. “Jesus was a kind-hearted person, so why wouldn’t he have grown up with a golden retriever? It fits. It’s not like he would have had a Rottweiler.”

QOTD

2011-12-02T14:17:00.001-05:00

From an email sent to me by a loyal reader:

I have all my Ratzinger books stacked around me, commentaries on his theology, the bible and the Catechism (as well as Denzinger!)... I'm in a book fort... a Catholic book fort.

On Fear

2011-12-01T22:11:00.001-05:00

There is a dear friar friend of mine who often asks the question: salvation from what? Or, put in another way, "From what are you being saved?" The theological background to this question is simple. If we are saved by the action (in some way) of Christ, then from what are we being saved? This question, I think, is as important, if not more so, than the question of "how."

And so, from what are we being saved?

Quite simply: fear.

This isn't just any fear mind you; no, this is crippling fear which places us on the defensive toward anything that might cause us discomfort. Because we are afraid of final death, we also find ourselves scared of all the interim, minor deaths that plague our lives. We end up living less freely, less joyfully than we might otherwise have lived.

By the very nature of the Resurrection, Jesus has freed from us the fear of death; and thus, freed us to live completely, totally, giving ourselves completely over to that which that which is best. It is fear, it seems, that prevents us from living as Bonheoffer suggested: as people for others.

I guess what I'm trying to say is this: if we truly believe in the Resurrection, death loses its sting and its power.

We have been saved from fear and death -- now what?

Something New.

2011-11-28T10:40:00.001-05:00

Something new is coming to the blog, but I'm not sure what form it shall take.

Stay tuned.

Barth on Looking Into the Sun

2011-11-25T13:20:00.001-05:00

Courtesy of Richard Lennan in the Australasian Catholic Record, 2007

Theology Humor

2011-11-21T20:13:00.001-05:00

Hauerwas, FTW

2011-11-19T15:07:00.001-05:00

"The theologian's task is faithfulness, not the creation of the new."

So, You Want to be a Theology Student

2011-11-14T09:06:00.001-05:00

A continuing list of topics one is assumed to have mastered before entering graduate studies in theology:

Sacred Scripture
The Documents of Vatican II

Thoughts.

2011-11-12T10:29:00.001-05:00

I presented a paper last night and found myself quite pleased with the results. I'm attempting to clean it up and then I'll post some highlights here at some time or another.

It's crunch time in the semester, and yet I find myself being distracted by questions that I (likely not my professors) find more pressing and interesting than those which I am addressing in class. I possess the kernel of an idea about them, yet I don't wish to write them up, hither and yon, without spending a bit more time in prayer.

Stay tuned.

Monday Morning Hume

2011-11-07T09:02:00.004-05:00

Thanks, Bradford DeLong:

"Abstruse thought and profound researches I prohibit, and will severely punish, by the pensive melancholy which they introduce, by the endless uncertainty in which they involve you, and by the cold reception which your pretended discoveries shall meet with, when communicated. Be a philosopher; but, amidst all your philosophy, be still a man…"

David Hume: A Treatise of Human Nature

Advice for Preachers

2011-11-05T14:11:00.001-04:00

“For he [Francis] used to say: ‘The preachermust first secretly draw in by prayer what he later pours out in sacredpreaching; he must first of all grow warm on the inside, or he will speakfrozen words on the outside.’”[1]

[1] 2 Celano 163.

Why I've Been Quiet

2011-11-04T20:44:00.002-04:00

My abstract for presentation on Friday:

“Do Not Extinguish theSpirit of Prayer and Devotion”

Receiving papal approval on 29 November 1223, the Later Ruleof Francis of Assisi permitted the members of his order to find work, provided theirlabors did not “extinguish the spirit of holy prayer and devotion to which alltemporal things must contribute.” Later, Francis wrote to Anthony of Padua grantinghim permission to “teach sacred theology to the brothers” so long as he did not“extinguish the Spirit of prayer and devotion.”

What did Francis consider to be the “Spirit of prayer anddevotion”? Why would he worry that involvementin theological reflection might extinguish this spirit of prayer?

In contemporary times, we must ask what type of devotion isappropriate for a theologian engaging in speculative theology. How can theological reflection deservire [contribute] to this spirit ofprayer and devotion?

The role of prayer in the vocation of a theologian figuresinto the nature of catechesis. If weunderstand catechesis to be a never-ending process of participation in themystery of the Christian faith, then we cannot escape the necessity of prayer. Catechesis is not merely watered-downtheology; rather it is an effort by which theology, pedagogy and mystagogycombine to achieve understanding.

My presentation suggests the vocation of the theologian isnecessarily influenced by prayer. Thisprayer serves to catechize the theologian as he or she vocationally grows. Mostbasically, I will argue that a constitutive part of theological reflection isthe work of prayer.

Denzinger

2011-11-02T22:00:00.002-04:00

For those of you wondering at home ...

My version of Denzinger sits upon my desk, ready for reference.

Here is the wikipedia entry for the great Denzinger.

Here is the most updated version.

Henri FTW

2011-11-01T22:22:00.001-04:00

From DeLubac's Catholicism

Amen, Brother Charles.

2011-11-01T13:15:00.001-04:00

Advice to Theology Students

from A Minor Friar by Brother Charles

Here's how it goes in one of your courses: You are assigned a textbook or two and a bunch of articles to read. If you're lucky, you are also made to read some primary sources. Then you hear some lectures and participate in some discussions, with might nor might not be illuminating.

Then you have to write papers or even give a presentation. But here's the thing, if the papers you write or the presentations you give only serve to reproduce the lines of argument and theological assertions of the textbooks and articles you were assigned, or the lectures you heard, you are not receiving an education. You are only allowing yourself to be socialized.

The textbooks you are assigned often do a marvelous job of summarizing and serving up centuries of theological reflection on divine revelation and reasoned reflection of God's action in the world. But in doing so they all have embedded in them very certain choices of theological opinion. This is even more the case with articles. Even the primary sources you are assigned have been selected from various possibilities.

This isn't about the tedious old divisions of liberal and conservative, progressive and traditional, etc. Being socialized into learning to utter the slogans and pet concerns associated with any of these labels is boring and beneath your intellectual dignity when you can have a real theological education instead.

So, do your homework. Read the things assigned to you. But when it comes to a chance to reflect upon theological questions yourself, go further and deeper. First, pick up your Bible. What do the Scriptures say about the question or topic at hand? Second, read your Catechism. Or better, read your Catechism alongside your Denzinger. Don't have one of those? Click here and order one. Not later, now.

Don't settle for being socialized into the 'theological imagination' of your school or the 'correct' opinions of the authorities in your life, whatever camp these fall into among the factions of this tired world. Stay close to the Scriptures, stay close to the living tradition of the Church's teaching. Be empowered, and be educated.

Brilliant Thought of the Day

2011-10-29T21:53:00.002-04:00

Brought to you by my good friend, Michael Rozier, SJ:

It is not enough to criticize what is insufficient. New perspectives and new approaches
are what solve old problems.

Saddest Day of the Year

2011-10-29T09:32:00.001-04:00

The day after the end of the World Series is always a gray day.

All you need to do is replace October 2 with October 29 and you know the way I feel.

It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone. You count on it, rely on it to buffer the passage of time, to keep the memory of sunshine and high skies alive, and then just when the days are all twilight, when you need it most, it stops. Today, October 2, a Sunday of rain and broken branches and leaf-clogged drains and slick streets, it stopped, and summer was gone.

From A Great and Glorious Game: Baseball Writings of A. Bartlett Giamatti
by A. Bartlett Giamatti, et al

"The Green Fields of the Mind "

Sunday School

2011-10-28T14:46:00.001-04:00

Indiana: The Ark of the Covenant, the chest that the Hebrews used to carry around the Ten Commandments.
Major Eaton: What, you mean THE Ten Commandments?
Indiana: Yes, the actual Ten Commandments, the original stone tablets that Moses brought down from Mt. Horeb and smashed, if you believe in that sort of thing...
[the officers stare at him blankly]
Indiana: Didn't any of you guys ever go to Sunday school?

Good Morning, Winter

2011-10-28T08:30:00.001-04:00

QOTD -- Benedict XVI

2011-10-27T08:41:00.002-04:00

Have you read Porta Fidei yet? It's a must read. (And I'm only halfway through it.)

How's this for a gem?

Only through believing, then, does faith grow and become stronger; there is no other possibility for possessing certitude with regard to one’s life apart from self-abandonment, in a continuous crescendo, into the hands of a love that seems to grow constantly because it has its origin in God.

Benedict XVI, Porta Fidei, # 7

Another Reason I Love Being a Friar

2011-10-26T19:44:00.001-04:00

So, there I am in Logan Airport with one of the smartest, humblest, kindest, funniest men I've ever known huddled over a table. He's about fifty years older than me, the first friar I've met. We're huddled over a napkin. Actually, it's more accurate to say that I'm hunched over a cocktail napkin, taking notes as he attempts to explain what Francis understood by the word "spirit."

I'm Being Announced

2011-10-26T13:26:00.001-04:00

RESPONSIBILITY OF THEOLOGY?
What is the catechetical responsibility of theology? Does such a responsibility exist? Inspired by discussion in America Magazine on theology and catechesis, Lumen et Vita has adopted this as the theme for our Fall 2011 Colloquium, which will take place on Friday, November 11, from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. in Room 135. We are pleased to announce our three presenters for our Colloquium: Br. Matthew Janeczko, Daniel Justin, and Susannah J.P. Petro. All are welcome to join us! We will provide refreshments and snacks. Please send questions to Dave de la Fuente at lumenetvita@listserv.bc.edu.

For Your Consideration

2011-10-26T08:06:00.001-04:00

I'm not saying I endorse this, but it certainly made me think:

(From Scott Adams, h/t to DC Matt)

That Top 1% Thing

via Dilbert.com Blog on 10/23/11

I'm a big fan of the Occupy Wall Street movement. And what I like most about it is the ambiguity of their demands. There's a deep honesty to that. It is okay to say the system is broken while also saying you don't know how to fix it. I'd feel uncomfortable if the protesters had specific demands. I don't want my economic policy coming from "guy in tent."

But I worry that the media needs specificity in order pit pundits against each other. It's no fun having two people agree that unemployment is too high. You need one pundit to recommend a specific solution so the other can say he's crazy. Ideally, you also need a villain for your story. That's the standard media model.

So I've been watching in horror as the media tries to transmogrify the honest ambiguity of the Occupy Wall Street movement into a sort of tortured logic with convenient villains. Everyone starts with the same facts:

Some CEOs are overpaid
Some banks take advantage of the system (while others fail)
Some billionaires pay a lower tax rate than other people
Some CEOs, some bankers, and all billionaires are part of the top 1%
The top 1% are getting richer while the 99% are getting poorer
Unemployment rates are obscene.
Corporate profits are up.

From that set of facts, the illogical conclusion I'm starting to see is that the top 1% are stealing the nation's wealth. Villains! But how many people in the top 1% are engaged in some sort of evil? Is it 1% of the 1%? That's my best guess. I know a lot of people in the top 1%, and all they do is go to work. They hardly ever perpetrate evil. But they do create jobs for the 99%.

One problem with the top 1% simplification is that people who have college degrees aren't experiencing high unemployment. So it would be equally fair - and by that I mean equally illogical - to conclude that highly educated people are stealing the nation's wealth from less educated people. That's a bumper sticker you won't see.

I would also be willing to bet that the average math skills of the people who are doing well in this economy are better than the average math skills of the people who are suffering. In other words, the Occupy Wall Street protesters are probably comprised of more psychology majors than engineering majors. But no one is suggesting that people who are good at math are stealing the nation's wealth from people who are not. That's not a catchy slogan.

Some people believe the problem with our economy is that social programs are sucking all of the money out of the system. If you have that view, you might conclude that the poor, the sick, and the elderly are stealing from everyone else. But that doesn't look good on a protest sign.

And what the hell does it mean to steal the national wealth anyway? If my flower shop does well, but your donuts shop doesn't, did I steal some national wealth from you? It might look that way on paper, but it doesn't tell you anything about what's going on.

The most objective explanation of our problem is that the economy is changing faster than humans can adapt. We have more high-end jobs and fewer unskilled opportunities. That's not anyone's fault. And obviously we have a smattering of rich crooks and rich people taking advantage of the system. That has to be addressed, but it's not the underlying problem.

Some say the government is the problem. But I think it is more accurate to say the government is failing to offer a solution. And that's because the government has also evolved more slowly than the world in general. It's an anchor on the economy. What we need is a form of government that is more nimble, and designed from scratch to support the economy.

And for that we need a constitutional convention. The genius of our constitution is that it has a big red button labeled "evolve." We just need to push it.

Scientific Admonition

2011-10-25T14:27:00.001-04:00

Dr. Ian Malcolm: Gee, the lack of humility before nature that's being displayed here, uh... staggers me.
Donald Gennaro: Well thank you, Dr. Malcolm, but I think things are a little bit different then you and I had feared...
Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, I know. They're a lot worse.
Donald Gennaro: Now, wait a second, we haven't even seen the park...
John Hammond: No, Donald, let him talk. There's no reason... I want to hear every viewpoint, I really do.
Dr. Ian Malcolm: Don't you see the danger, John, inherent in what you're doing here? Genetic power is the most awesome force the planet's ever seen, but you wield it like a kid that's found his dad's gun.
Donald Gennaro: It's hardly appropriate to start hurling generalizations...
Dr. Ian Malcolm: I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power you're using here: it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done, and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you, you've patented it, and packaged it, you've slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now
[pounds table with fists]
Dr. Ian Malcolm: you're selling it.
[pounds table again]
Dr. Ian Malcolm: You want to sell it, well...
John Hammond: I don't think you're giving us our due credit. Our scientists have done things which nobody's ever done before...
Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.
John Hammond: Condors! Condors are on the verge of extinction...
Dr. Ian Malcolm: No...
John Hammond: If I was to create a flock of condors on this island, you wouldn't have anything to say.
Dr. Ian Malcolm: No. Hold on. This isn't some species that was obliterated by deforestation, or, or the building of a dam. Dinosaurs had their shot, and nature selected them for extinction.
John Hammond: I simply don't understand this Luddite attitude, especially from a scientist! I mean, how can we stand in the light of discovery, and not act?
Dr. Ian Malcolm: What's so great about discovery? It's a violent, penetrative act that scars what it explores. What you call discovery, I call the rape of the natural world.
Dr. Ellie Sattler: Well the question is, how can you know anything about an extinct ecosystem? And therefore, how could you ever assume that you can control it? I mean, you have plants in this building that are poisonous. You picked them because they look good. But these are aggressive living things that have no idea what century they're in, and they'll defend themselves, violently if necessary.
John Hammond: Dr. Grant. If there's one person here who could appreciate what I'm trying to do...
Dr. Alan Grant: Well, the world has changed so radically, and we're all running to catch up. I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but look: Dinosaurs and man, two species separated by sixty-five million years of evolution have just been suddenly thrown back into the mix together. How can we possibly have the slightest idea what to expect?
John Hammond: I don't believe it. I don't believe it! You were meant to come down here and defend me against these characters, and the only one I've got on my side is the blood-sucking lawyer!
Donald Gennaro: Thank you.

B16 on Pastoral Burdens

2011-10-24T09:36:00.002-04:00

Passed along to me by a brother:

These are comments of Pope Benedict made recently to the Australian Bishops:

"It is true that yours is a pastoral burden which has been made heavier by the past sins and mistakes of others, most regrettably including some clergy and religious; but the task now falls to you to continue to repair the errors of the past with honesty and openness, in order to build, with humility and resolve, a better future for all concerned. I therefore encourage you to continue to be pastors of souls who, along with your clergy, are always prepared to go one step further in love and truth for the sake of the consciences of the flock entrusted to you (cf. Mt5:41), seeking to preserve them in holiness, to teach them humbly and to lead them irreproachably in the ways of the Catholic faith."

Away for a While (and back again)

2011-10-24T08:40:00.000-04:00

You may have noticed just how blank these pages have gone during the past couple of weeks. Nothing is wrong, I assure you, I've just been trying to come to grips with biting off a bit more than I planned to chew this semester.

At the moment, I'm attempting to put together a few presentations for the next few weeks, as well as some thoughts on a mid-term or two. I'll be posting my musings on these topics periodically.

Until then, let's resume normal posting.

Big Thoughts

2011-10-17T10:06:00.001-04:00

I have a big thought brewing.

It goes something along these lines....

How do we make the Christian faith intelligible in a post-modern world?

2011-10-12T19:38:00.000-04:00

Obviously life has been getting in the way of writing. There will be more opportunities soon, I hope.

How Sweet It Is!

2011-10-10T13:28:00.002-04:00

A Response to a Comment

2011-10-06T22:36:00.003-04:00

I received a very detailed and thoughtful comment in response to my last post and I'll attempt to answer thoughtfully in the space below. To see the comment which prompted this post, click here.

First things first:

The reason why I chose Gutierrez as the medium by which I would test Lonergan's theory is because it was the material I had in front of me. My choices for this particular paper were liberation theology or feminist critiques. I found myself a lot more conversant with the theory and practice of liberation theology. I spent my summer in Honduras and read A Theology of Liberation in its entirety while there. That being said, while I am very sympathetic to liberation theology, I don't consider myself a liberation theologian by any means. (If you look at the previous posts on this blog, I think you'll agree with me.) I think, however, that Gutierrez is definitely on to something when he asks his primary question: how do you tell the poor that God actually loves them, given their particular and awful plight? I don't know if I agree with Gutierrez's conclusions, but I certainly sympathize with his question. In fact, I would suggest that the rise of secular humanism and fundamentalist atheism is in large part due to Christianity's failure to offer a compelling narrative about why the world is as it is and what a Christian's task is in the (post-) modern world.

As for where I view Lonergan vis-a-vis Sacred Scripture... That's an excellent point and I spent the better part of my night crafting a paper on a corollary question. I think two elements are in play here. Lonergan's epistemology gives Christianity at least an even-money shot to enter into fruitful dialogue with modernity (and post-modernity, whatever that is). The very nature of the inductive/deductive method bases itself on a sort of epistemological honesty. In other words, this model recognizes that the fundamental questions of life -- and thus, faith -- are mystery at their core. One can grow in knowledge using the method I elucidated in the previous post. Yet, all efforts are short-circuited by sin on one hand and mystery on another. At its very core, faith requires just that: faith. All explanations are but sand slipping through our clutching theological fingers. However, I don't believe that the implicit ineffability of God should dissuade us from pursuing his truth doggedly. For my money, God spoke definitely through Jesus Christ. This reality is communicated through Sacred Scripture, the living Tradition of the Church and the existential reality of the lived Christian life. Thus far, Bernard Lonergan gives me the best tools to attempt to make sense of all this stuff called life and also keeps me honest while doing it.

That brings me to the second question raised, namely that of Tradition and its place within the Church's professed faith. I think, perhaps, it would help to clarify a definition of Tradition. Tradition is the lived wisdom and experience of the Church. It is Tradition that brought us the canon of Scripture; Tradition animated the Church Fathers. Tradition is at its very core the Holy Spirit working to keep the Church ever-new and ever-ancient, to riff off Augustine. As a Catholic, I affirm that the Holy Spirit continues to work through the Church -- from the Roman Pontiff on down the line to a newly baptized baby -- and it does so through this collective wisdom.

I'm sure these answers are insufficient, because in many ways, the questions asked in response to my latest post are the enduring questions that animate my faith, my prayer and my feeble attempts at this thing called religious life.

Bottom line: whoever you are, Anonymous, thanks for your questions and know of my prayers for you this evening.

Dolan, FTW

2011-10-06T21:12:00.001-04:00

@JamesMartinSJJames Martin

Funny! Archbishop Timothy Dolan at young adult event, after seeing closed-circuit screens with his image: "I thought Chris Christie was on!"

Lonergan and Gutierrez

2011-10-06T15:46:00.002-04:00

My attempts at using Lonergan's method to approach liberation theology, as submitted to my professors a few days ago:

Scripture, tradition and contemporary experience must operate in an inductive/deductive model. Artificially attempting to balance these elements or reflecting upon them linearly (A to B to C) consigns one’s argument to inadequacy. Additionally, the most appropriate theological departure point does not seem to be any one particular element, but the place at which all of these elements intersect: the lived life of the Christian community itself (Faithful Witness, Haight, 191). By inductive/deductive, I mean that one should examine a particular situation, weigh evidence from the three elements mentioned above, and reach a tentative conclusion (Sytematic Theology,Fiorenza, 48-49). This particular conclusion will then offer insight to other theological issues; to complete a new judgment or even maintain the veracity of the old, more reflection is always necessary.

Gustavo Gutiérrez highlights the always-extant tension between elements of scripture, tradition and contemporary experience as he elucidates his theology of liberation and reflections on right praxis (Theology of Liberation, Gutiérrez, 11). Gutiérrez notes the pleas of Gramsci for a sort of ‘organic intellectual’ (13). Thus, Gutiérrez suggests a heavier emphasis on contemporary experience not rooted in the didactic approach of the magisterium, which he considers inadequate (6, 11).

Gutiérrez names contemporary experience as the starting point for a theology of liberation. Yet, a fully mature theology can only be reached if one exposes this experience to both scripture and tradition. The claims made by Gutiérrez can only be strengthened when passed through the prism of scripture and tradition. This will also, of course, result in newtensions and incongruities. Such realities then allow a reexamination of both the conclusions drawn from contemporary experience and the hermeneutical methods used to interpret tradition and scripture. By such an inductive/deductive process, the original theological reflection gains in strength and new, possibly insightful reflections upon scripture and tradition are reached as well.

A Thought (That May Get Me in Trouble)

2011-10-05T08:49:00.000-04:00

Perhaps part of our theological problem is that we still use categories largely synthesized from the 1980s. One might use ecclesial models that move authority along a horizontal axis, instead of a vertical one in an effort to be inclusive, post-modern or conciliar. Yet, the fact remains that a significant portion of the most passionate Christians are fundamentalists or Pentecostals who possess no marked ecclesiology.

Thus, our current of ecclesiological critique speaks right past them.

Thoughts?

Morning Coffee

2011-10-01T08:50:00.001-04:00

Even in an unfamiliar friary, I can always manage to find the coffee.

All you angels, bless the Lord.

My Buddy Bernard

2011-09-29T21:39:00.001-04:00

Saint Bernard (1091-1153), Cistercian monk and doctor of the Church
1st Sermon for the Feast of Saint Michael

«Bless the Lord, all you his angels..., his ministers who do his will» (Ps 103[102],20-21)

Today we are celebrating the feast of the holy angels... But what is there to say about those angelic spirits? This is our faith: we believe them to enjoy the presence and sight of God, to possess unending happiness in those good things of the Lord, which «eye has not seen nor ear heard, nor have they entered the heart of man» (1Cor 2,9). What can one simple mortal man have to say about it to his fellow mortals, impossible as it is to imagine such things?... If it is impossible to speak about the holy angels' glory in God, at least we can speak about the grace and love they show towards ourselves, for not only do they enjoy an incomparable dignity but also a willingness to serve that is full of loving-kindness... If their glory is beyond our understanding, we hold all the more tightly to the mercy with which these friends of God, these citizens of heaven and lords of paradise, are filled

The apostle Paul himself who, with his own eyes, beheld the heavenly court and knew its secrets (2Cor 12,2), testifies that: «all the angels are ministering spirits sent to serve, for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation» (Heb 1,14). There is nothing incredible in this since the Creator, the King of Angels himself, «came not to be served but to serve and to give his life for many» (Mk 10,45). So what angel is there who would despise such a service, in which he whom the angels serve in heaven with such readiness and joy has gone before them?

Cobb on Baseball

2011-09-29T08:53:00.001-04:00

“Baseball is a red-blooded sport for red-blooded men. It’s no pink tea, and mollycoddles had better stay out. It’s a struggle for supremacy, a survival of the fittest.” — Ty Cobb

(stolen from Drew Silva at NBC's Hardball Talk)

That Just Happened

2011-09-29T08:40:00.002-04:00

The Problem with Experience

2011-09-29T05:30:00.000-04:00

``Why do you doubt your senses?''

``Because,'' said Scrooge, ``a little thing affects them. A slight disorder of the stomach makes them cheats. You may be an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of an underdone potato. There's more of gravy than of grave about you, whatever you are!''

The Problem of Sin

2011-09-28T21:53:00.001-04:00

I have found myself thinking about sin an awful lot lately. Simultaneously engaging the readings of two theology courses that have taken method and fundamental theology as their initial topics will do that, I guess.

The particular problem that I have found with the authors which I have read is that they don't particularly answer the problem of sin and its (possibly) deleterious effect upon our reception of revelation. To put it more finely: all of this anthropology is well and good, but at the end of the day, my ability to know God is hampered more by my own propensity to mess it all up than anything else.

Creating a fundamental theology that focuses on the transcendent is engaging; creating one which places sin on the social level is magnificent too. But, it leaves me feeling cold, empty and entirely too optimistic about my own ability to discern the presence of the Living God.

Francis told the brothers that they only thing they owned was their own sin.

If I forget it, let my Capuchin heart wither...

Cosmas and Damian

2011-09-26T07:43:00.000-04:00

I used to visit a woman in Pittsburgh who always prayed to Saints Cosmas and Damian.

She always said the names together; in the singular. She thought she was praying for the intercession of Saint Cosmasanddamian.

I think her prayers were heard.

Sunday Night Bonhoeffer

2011-09-25T22:22:00.000-04:00

So our coming of age forces us to a true recognition of our situation… God is teaching us that we must live as men who can get on very well without him. The God who is with us is the god who forsakes us (Mark 15.34)… Before God and with him we live without God. God allows himself to be edged out of the world and onto a cross. God is weak and powerless in the world, and that is exactly the way, the only way, in which he can be with us and help us… it is not by his omnipotence that Christ helps us, it is by his weakness… Man’s religiosity makes him look in distress for the power of God in the world… The bible, however, directs him to the powerlessness and suffering of God. Only a suffering God can help. (Bonhoeffer, Letter from Tegel prison 16 July 1944).

It Never Gets Old

2011-09-23T23:11:00.001-04:00

There are feelings in ministry which never quite go away, never quite dissipate. I usually think that if I ever begin to lose these feelings, then it will be time for a long period away from ministry and serious time spent on renewal.

--

I spoke with a first grader at the parish grammar school where I am helping these days on Thursday. I knelt next to the lunch table so I could be eye-to-eye with the first graders. They guessed how old I was ... 32 ... 45 ... 97! (great fun). We talked a little bit about their lunch choices and they asked me why I wore a brown robe. Then a little girl next to me, without prompting said, "My brother is far away from home. He's somewhere fighting the bad guys. I haven't seen him since the summer."

My heart breaks for a little girl who has no idea how complicated her life is going to be.

--

I drive through South Boston and see woman, more or less my age, distended bellies, sunken eyes, terribly skinny: all the characteristics of heroin abuse.

I want to stop my car, hop out, introduce myself and get them some help. Shake them: don't you know you're dying?

--

I saw a former resident at the Shattuck sitting on a returning wall near a local park. He was red-faced and much heavier from when I had last seen him. His beard appeared terribly unruly. His eyes were hollow. If you ever are in Boston and run into "Hoss" -- he'll introduce himself as such, please be careful. And then get him to a shelter.

--

And my heart breaks over and over again. It never gets old, though it makes me feel old.

You're Far Too Trusting

2011-09-23T22:46:00.000-04:00

This has been on my mind lately and now I've found it. Take it away, George Lucas:

Tarkin: There. You see, Lord Vader? She can be reasonable. Continue with the operation. You may fire when ready.
Leia: [panicked] What?!
Tarkin: You're far too trusting. Dantooine is too remote to make an effective demonstration, but don't worry. We will deal with your rebel friends soon enough.
Leia: No.

Is Theology Possible?

2011-09-20T21:05:00.000-04:00

(The below is adapted from a reflection I recently presented in a class at the STM.)

Despite the apparently ribald theological debate of recent years, touching on matters of language about and relating to God, the possibility of a Christ who liberates and subverts dangerously or even the recognition of previous methodological (and thus, theological) faults , the most pressing theological question of our time precedes these matters. Simply put, it must be asked: can theology still be done? Or, asked in another manner, is it possible in a post-modern age to speak of and study about God in a systematic and meaningful manner? Each of the above-captioned authors, along with the works of Williams and Dulles read in advance of this week’s class grapple with an appropriate method of thinking and writing theologically. One may or may not agree with the methods – and the subsequent results of these methods – but the authors focus on how theology may be done, not if it is even possible to do so. Rowan Williams appears to come closest to this issue, suggesting that the language of theology must be “surrendered” to God if one is to theologize effectively. Instead of surrender, however, one instead finds authors such as Johnson and Metz focused more on righting what they perceive to be typological mistakes. They diagnose, but do not truly examine the consequences of their diagnoses. I am reminded of de Lubac’s admonition in Medieval Exegesis, “It is the rushing tide of ‘science’ in the almost modern sense of the word that pushes aside humble spiritual commentary as belonging to inferior stages of growth”. Perhaps then, the real question toward which this response drives is different than originally stated; rather, it can be formulated thusly: in future theological conversations, how much (too much?) will our theological conversation be conditioned by post-modernism? And, at which point does this conversation descend to primarily personal renderings of one’s own theological preferences?

Welcome to Panic, New England

2011-09-18T21:21:00.001-04:00

2011-09-18T18:48:00.001-04:00

Blogging will resume when I catch my breath.

Perfectly Turned Phrase of the Day

2011-09-14T21:19:00.001-04:00

"The ethics of love is often but a cover for the what is fundamentally an assertion of ethical relativism."

-- Stanley Hauerwas

Down the Stretch

2011-09-12T21:27:00.001-04:00

@mtjofmcapmtjofmcap

Cards winning, Braves losing; Rays winning, Sox off. Holy pennant race!

4 seconds ago via webFavorite Reply Delete

Vince Scully & Mike Pizza

2011-09-11T20:48:00.000-04:00

Today

2011-09-11T15:05:00.002-04:00

This afternoon, I watched as five babies received the Sacrament of Baptism at St. Brigid Church in South Boston. It's fascinating -- and a bit chilling, really -- to know that upon their baptismal certificates will forever reside the date of September 11. Baptized in 2011, I would imagine that when they hear of 9/11, they will ask the same question that I often asked of my grandparents: Where were you when you heard about Pearl Harbor?

Today, we remember those lost on 9/11. This is the same. We do not, however, wait breathlessly for a commemorative tape from Osama Bin Laden. This is different.

Today, we read at mass three verses of Paul's Letter to the Romans (14:7-9):

Brothers and sisters:None of us lives for oneself, and no one dies for oneself.For if we live, we live for the Lord,and if we die, we die for the Lord;so then, whether we live or die, we are the Lord's.For this is why Christ died and came to life,that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.

This is the same. However, for the last ten years, we have read this passage differently. For, if Christ be both the Lord of the dead and the living, then He exists as the Lord of all -- those on the earth, those above the earth, and please God, those below the earth.

I watched babies baptized today: little saints, little people, all of them having the potential for greatness. And yet, reminded by painful memories, capable of either causing or being the subject of terrible heartbreak.

Today, yes, we remember the dead, we pray for them, we ask our God "Why?" and "How?" and at the same time, beg the Lord to spare us from another such catastrophe. And yet, at the same time, we recall that deep within all of us is the potential for saintliness, goodness, charity and love. The picture remains incomplete, however, if we do not also realize that human beings are simultaneously endowed with the potential to do terrible, egregious things to their fellow residents of this earth. Members of my species -- flesh of my flesh -- have killed the innocent, flown planes into buildings, crucified the Son of the Living God.

At the same time today, we are reminded by Saint Paul that in the process of our redemption, Christ first died and then came to life. By the very nature of this process, Christ claimed us all as His own, his precious possession. From the moment of our baptism until the day we die (and beyond), we belong solely, completely, eternally to the Lord.

Blessed, blessed are those babies baptized on this day of all days, September the eleventh, in this year of grace, two thousand and eleven. And still more blessed are those who went before these innocent babies, for though all leave this earth without innocence, all the baptized also leave with the mark of Christ upon their brows. Indeed, all humanity leaves this earth returning to the One who has created them in His image and likeness.

It Scares Me

2011-09-10T22:22:00.002-04:00

Recently, I have found myself in a few situations where the palpable emotions of the particular conversation simply terrify me. The insipid and visceral judgment (and possibly, yes, even hate) of some involved have caused me to stop and reflect, asking God for the grace to understand from where these dark actions arise.

I recall Gerald O'Collins' comment in the first chapter of Jesus Our Redeemer: At the very least, theology means watching one's language in the presence of God.

With all earnestness, I must admit that too often, I find abundant reasons to despair about the current tone of our theological (not to mention political) discourse. There has always seemed to be a difference between passionate, fiery prophetic words and those which are tinged with the intent to maim (or worse).

In my own reflections, I find myself guilty of getting too near this particular line. Yet, I'm heartened by the comment of one of my professors last year to me: It's okay for you to be conservative; just so long as you're not a jerk. (Only, he said something stronger than jerk.) I came away from the conversation with head help high -- regardless of my theological disposition, it's more important that we can have a beer together and argue about the Red Sox.

Theology over a beer: perhaps an antidote to vituperation.

What Have You Done for Me Lately?

2011-09-07T09:12:00.000-04:00

I'm in the midst of a beginning of the semester writer's block, but here are a few musings that I put together as I walked back from mass at St. Mary's Hall this morning.

I now have a picture of Paul VI sitting on my desk. Most everyone takes my passion for this Servant of God with a grain of salt and good humor, attributing it as one of my many theological eccentricities. Yet, I tell you this: I truly do pray for Paul VI's intercession on a regular basis. Here went a man who lived through the maelstroms of ideological battle and maintained his humanity. This pope realized the simultaneous necessities of the Christian meta-narrative and a dialogue with modern culture. If I pass through this earth and am able to grasp and articulate just a bit of Paul's message and come away with just a bit of his courageous holiness, I will believe my life to have been well-lived.

I need to write a single page about a major theological question by Monday at noon. My initial instinct is to go towards the retrieval of the Christian meta-narrative.

The step to writing this paper:

Find can of worms.
Open can.

I got to thinking about a song co-written by Steve Goodman and Shel Silverstein this morning, "What Have You Done for Me Lately?" The premise of the song is simple: the narrator of the song saves someone from drowning, nurses her back to health and then is asked in the morning: what have you done for me lately?

I wonder if this isn't the question that we need to start asking: what have you done for us lately? The narratives have been taken apart, the altars of the gods have been stripped, rigidity has been imposed and you have left us with what?

Writer's block indeed.

Wise Words before School

2011-09-06T07:36:00.000-04:00

First, from Pope Benedict:

Let us love being with the Lord! There we can speak with him about everything. We can offer him our petitions, our concerns, our troubles. Our joys. Our gratitude, our disappointments, our needs and our aspirations.

Homily from Vespers

Altotting , Germany

September 11, 2006

And then, Bernard:

Hear also the prophet Habakkuk in today’s reading. Far from hiding the Lord’s reprimands, he dwells on them with attentive and anxious care. He says: I will stand upon my watch-tower and take up my post on the ramparts, keeping watch to see what he will say to me and what answer I will make to those who try to confute me. I beg you, my brothers, stand upon our watch-tower, for now is the time for battle. Let all our dealings be in the heart, where Christ dwells, in right judgement and wise counsel, but in such a way as to place no confidence in those dealings, nor rely upon our fragile defences.

A New Home (on Sundays)

2011-09-04T11:34:00.000-04:00

In my three years with the Capuchins, I have lived in East New York, NY, Victoria, KS, Allison Park, PA, Jamaica Plain, MA and Ocotepeque, Honduras. Transitions are never easy; even for those of us who seem to often find ourselves in this liminal state.

For the past year I had the privilege of ministering in a variety of roles at Our Lady of Lourdes Parish in Jamaica Plain. As is often the case in this life (and especially religious life), all good things must come to an end. Thus, this year I will find myself ministering at the parishes of St. Brigid and Gate of Heaven in South Boston (Southie, for you locals). At the moment, it appears as if I'll be working at the South Boston Catholic Academy on Thursday and assisting with numerous pastoral and religious education duties on Sundays.

Please pray for the wonderful people of the parishes -- parishioners and priests alike -- and for me, as I begin a new ministry.

Oh. And here's the bio that appeared in today's bulletin, with a bit of requisite Jersey snark.

The Watchman

2011-09-04T11:12:00.000-04:00

Liturgical confluence is always a matter of providence, says I.

From today's first reading from the Prophet Ezekiel:

Reading 1 Ez 33:7-9

Thus says the LORD:
You, son of man, I have appointed watchman for the house of Israel;
when you hear me say anything, you shall warn them for me.
If I tell the wicked, "O wicked one, you shall surely die, "
and you do not speak out to dissuade the wicked from his way,
the wicked shall die for his guilt,
but I will hold you responsible for his death.
But if you warn the wicked,
trying to turn him from his way,
and he refuses to turn from his way,
he shall die for his guilt,
but you shall save yourself.

And then, from yesterday's second reading from the OoR, Gregory the Great reflects on this particular passage:

Reading	A sermon of St Gregory the Great

For the love of Christ I do not spare myself in preaching him

‘Son of man, I have appointed you as watchman to the house of Israel.’ Note that Ezekiel, whom the Lord sent to preach his word, is described as a watchman. Now a watchman always takes up his position on the heights so that he can see from a distance whatever approaches. Likewise whoever is appointed watchman to a people should live a life on the heights so that he can help them by taking a wide survey.

These words are hard to utter, for when I speak it is myself that I am reproaching. I do not preach as I should nor does my life follow the principles I preach so inadequately.

I do not deny that I am guilty, for I see my torpor and my negligence. Perhaps my very recognition of failure will win me pardon from a sympathetic judge. When I lived in a monastic community I was able to keep my tongue from idle topics and to devote my mind almost continually to the discipline of prayer. Since taking on my shoulders the burden of pastoral care, I have been unable to keep steadily recollected because my mind is distracted by many responsibilities.

I am forced to consider questions affecting churches and monasteries and often I must judge the lives and actions of individuals; at one moment I am forced to take part in certain civil affairs, next I must worry over the incursions of barbarians and fear the wolves who menace the flock entrusted to my care; now I must accept political responsibility in order to give support to those who preserve the rule of law; now I must bear patiently the villainies of brigands, and then I must confront them, yet in all charity.

My mind is sundered and torn to pieces by the many and serious things I have to think about. When I try to concentrate and gather all my intellectual resources for preaching, how can I do justice to the sacred ministry of the word? I am often compelled by the nature of my position to associate with men of the world and sometimes I relax the discipline of my speech. If I preserved the rigorously inflexible mode of utterance that my conscience dictates, I know that the weaker sort of men would recoil from me and that I could never attract them to the goal I desire for them. So I must frequently listen patiently to their aimless chatter. Because I am weak myself I am drawn gradually into idle talk and I find myself saying the kind of thing that I didn’t even care to listen to before. I enjoy lying back where I once was loath to stumble.

Who am I — what kind of watchman am I? I do not stand on the pinnacle of achievement, I languish rather in the depths of my weakness. And yet the creator and redeemer of mankind can give me, unworthy though I be, the grace to see life whole and power to speak effectively of it. It is for love of him that I do not spare myself in preaching him.

Proof

2011-09-03T18:43:00.000-04:00

Dog Humor

2011-09-01T14:41:00.002-04:00

It is vow renewal day and I'm attempting to put together a dinner that will be ready for serving after I leave the chapel after I've renewed vows. There will be time for reflection later, I'm sure. But in the meantime, here is something for the lowest common denominator. Dog humor, courtesy of RZ:

A woman brought a very limp duck into a veterinary surgeon. Asshe laid her pet on the table, the vet pulled out his stethoscope andlistened to the bird's chest. After a moment or two, the vet shook his head and sadly said,"I'm sorry, your duck, Cuddles, has passed away." The distressed woman wailed, "Are you sure?" "Yes, I am sure. Your duck is dead," replied the vet.. "How can you be so sure?" she protested. "I mean you haven'tdone any testing on him or anything. He might just be in a coma orsomething." The vet turned around and left the room. He returned a fewminutes later with a black Labrador Retriever. As the duck's ownerlooked on in amazement, the dog stood on his hind legs, put his front paws on theexamination table and sniffed the duck from top to bottom. He thenlooked up at the vet with sad eyes and shook his head. The vet patted the dog on the head and took it out of the room.A few minutes later he returned with a cat. The cat jumped on the tableand also delicately sniffed the duck from head to foot. The cat sat backon its haunches, shook its head, meowed softly and strolled out of theroom. The vet looked at the woman and said, "I'm sorry, but as Isaid, this is most definitely, 100% certifiably, a dead duck." The vet turned to his computer terminal, hit a few keys andproduced a bill, which he handed to the woman.. The duck's owner, still in shock, took the bill. "$1500!" she cried, "$1500 just to tell me my duck is dead!" The vet shrugged, "I'm sorry. If you had just taken my word forit, the bill would have been $20, but with the Lab Report and the CatScan, it's now $1500."

In Your Charity

2011-08-30T09:41:00.002-04:00

Please remember Msgr. James Sheehan in your prayers. Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon him.

Reverend Monsignor James Matthew Sheehan, J.C.D.

Msgr. James Matthew, Judicial Vicar and Secretary for Canonical Affairs of the Archdiocese of Newark, entered eternal life on August 28, 2011 surrounded by his family and friends. He was 39.
The fourth of four children, he was raised in Garwood, NJ and attended St. Anne's Catholic grammar school and the local public high school. Following his graduation from Mount Saint Mary's College, Emmitsburg, MD, he entered Immaculate Conception Seminary, Seton Hall University, and was ordained a priest for service to the Archdiocese of Newark in 1998.

Fr. Sheehan was assigned initially as a parochial vicar in St. John the Evangelist Parish, Bergenfield, and served in ministry to both the growing Spanish community there and the youth group and religious education programs. He also served during this period as an Advocate in the Archdiocese's Tribunal. During this assignment, Fr. Sheehan undertook studies at Catholic University, Washington, DC, and was awarded a Licentiate in Canon Law in 2001. He returned to the Archdiocese in 2001 and served as a parochial vicar in Corpus Christi Parish, Hasbrouck Heights, until he was named priest secretary to Archbishop John Myers. He served in that position from 2001 until 2006, when Archbishop Myers released him for studies at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, Rome toward a doctorate in Canon Law. He completed his studies and was awarded a doctorate Summa Cum Laude in 2009.

In 2005, Fr. Sheehan was invested into the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem, a major Catholic order of knighthood under the direct supervision of the Holy See. In 2009, His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI, named Fr. Sheehan a Chaplain to His Holiness, with the honorary title Monsignor. Also in 2009, Archbishop Myers named Msgr. Sheehan to the post of Judicial Vicar of the Archdiocese, responsible for the affairs of the Metropolitan Tribunal. In addition, Msgr. Sheehan was named Secretary to the Ecclesiastical Delegate for the Pastoral Provision for admitting former Anglican clergy to the Catholic priesthood in the United States, the subject of his doctoral work in Rome.

Monsignor Sheehan was the son of the late William and Marie Sheehan. He is survived by: Michael and Lillian Sheehan, Sr. and nephews Michael Jr., Kevin and Matthew; Daniel and Wendy Sheehan and niece Madison; Mariann and Adriana Obando and nieces Sara and Alicia.
In lieu of flowers, the family asks you to consider making contributions to Immaculate Conception Seminary and/or Saint Andrew's College Seminary. These may be sent through the Office of the Archbishop of Newark, 171 Clifton Avenue, Newark, NJ, 07104.

Obsequies are as follows, all at the Cathedral Basilica of the Sacred Heart, 89 Ridge Street, Newark, NJ 07104. For inquiries, please call: 973-497-4020:

On Wednesday, August 31, 2011, 12:00 Noon – Reception of the Body, followed by Viewing until 7 PM. At 7 PM: Recitation of the Rosary, At 7:30 PM: Vigil Mass - Principal Celebrant: The Most Reverend Arthur J. Serratelli, S.S.L., S.T.D., Bishop of Paterson; Homilist: The Reverend Geno Sylva, S.T.D., Vicar for Evangelization, Diocese of Paterson.

On Thursday, September 1, 2011, 11 AM: Funeral Mass - Principal Celebrant: The Most Reverend John J. Myers, D.D., J.C.D., Archbishop of Newark; Homilist: The Reverend Monsignor Joseph R. Reilly, Ph.D, Rector, The College Seminary, Saint Andrew Hall.

Published in The Record and Herald News on August 30, 2011

Barth on the Resurrection

2011-08-30T08:37:00.000-04:00

The past week I have been reading Dogmatics in Outlines, a rather fascinating book based upon a series of lectures the great Karl Barth gave at the University of Basel in the post-World War II era. Barth moves through the Apostles' Creed in a systematic manner, more or less outlining his own systematic theology.

Now, I do not, by any means, consider myself a Barthian, or, for that matter, as comprehending on any passable level his theology. However, Barth caught my attention with several of his statements, in particular those on politics and later those regarding the Resurrection. His comments on politics will require some more reflection, but as I drifted off to bed last night, I found myself moved to prayer by his commentary on the Resurrection.

Barth writes:

In the resurrection of Jesus Christ the claim is made, according to the New Testament, that God's victory in man's favor in the person of His Son has already been won. Easter is indeed the great pledge of our hope, but simultaneously this future is already present in the Easter message. It is the proclamation of a victory already won. The war is at an end -- even though here and there troops are still shooting, because they have not heard anything yet about the capitulation. The game is won, even though the player can still play a few further moves. Actually he is already mated. The clock has run down, even though the pendulum still swings a few times this way and that. (p. 122-23)

I think it safe to say that the reality of the Resurrection is exactly what, on any given day, keeps me in religious life. Without this guarantee, this grand gesture from God, all of what I do as a Christian seems rather pointless, a series of sad futile gestures performed by a man who has misplaced his trust and position himself for perpetual disappointment.

Add the Resurrection to the equation and suddenly anthropology takes a second place to Revelation and the world can be seen in different hues. Perhaps even more importantly, if one -- me! -- can truly appropriate the reality of the Resurrection into prayer and action, the daily tribulations, failure and shortcomings of one's self become mere vestiges of the final shots fired by those who do not yet know that irrefutable victory has been achieved.

New Sandals

The Optimism That is Spring Training

The Kid, #8

Joseph Ratzinger, FTW

Sacramental Theology

Paul VI Love

Theological Education Schematics

Comment of the Day

Developing a Theology of God

On Coughlin and My Old Man

On Disagreement

Existential Terror

Raiders of the Lost Ark Reference of the Night

Why Then, God at All?

Not a Wimpy God

John Paul II Beat (Tom) Friedman. Really.

Just Thinking Outloud (Not that I Mean Anything By It At All Edition)

An Ecclesial Thought

A New Semester Resolution

Gearing Up for the Semester

On Cardinals

Thoughts on Hell

In Your Charity

On Discerning Religious Life, Part II

Merry Christmas

On Discerning Religious Life

Robert Imbelli, FTW

Priesthood in Light of the Eucharist

The Purpose of Me

Well, Which One is it in Theology, Indy?

And You Think I Don't Pay Attention

Ongoing Reaction to (Pre)Primary Season

Oxford Dictionary Fun (with the SJs)

Jesuitical(Jes·u·it·i·cal)

adjective

Christianity and the Banality of Evil.

NT Wright Lays the (Resurrection) Smackdown

Why the Trinity?

The People Have Spoken

Vote: Should Mets have topped Miami’s offer for Reyes?

After attending Handel's Messiah ...

Dog Love

At St. Patrick's Cathedral, a dog owned by Msgr. Robert Ritchie joins Jesus, Mary and Joseph in Christmas creche

Statue of yellow Lab beloved by Ritchie comes from Italy to be part of holiday tradition

QOTD

On Fear

Something New.

Barth on Looking Into the Sun

Theology Humor

Hauerwas, FTW

So, You Want to be a Theology Student

Thoughts.

Monday Morning Hume

Advice for Preachers

Why I've Been Quiet

Denzinger

Henri FTW

Amen, Brother Charles.

Advice to Theology Students

Brilliant Thought of the Day

Saddest Day of the Year

From A Great and Glorious Game: Baseball Writings of A. Bartlett Giamattiby A. Bartlett Giamatti, et al

Sunday School

Good Morning, Winter

QOTD -- Benedict XVI

Another Reason I Love Being a Friar

I'm Being Announced

For Your Consideration

That Top 1% Thing

Scientific Admonition

B16 on Pastoral Burdens

Away for a While (and back again)

Big Thoughts

How Sweet It Is!

A Response to a Comment

Dolan, FTW

Lonergan and Gutierrez

A Thought (That May Get Me in Trouble)

Morning Coffee

My Buddy Bernard

From A Great and Glorious Game: Baseball Writings of A. Bartlett Giamatti
by A. Bartlett Giamatti, et al