Being/Not-being: there is no question

4th Sunday of Lent: 2 Chr 36.14-16, 19-23; Eph 2.4-10; Jn 3.14-21
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS. Domenico e Sisto, Roma

Have you given much thought to the difference it would make in your self-understanding if you chose to believe that you are a cosmic accident rather than a created being? Assuming, of course, that you think of yourself as a creature—a wholly made person, made by a Maker—a creature gifted with not only biological life but an immortal soul made for life eternal; assuming you think of yourself in this way, how different would your life be if you decided this afternoon to believe that you are nothing more than the fortunate consequence of cosmic circumstance, an admittedly freakish development wrought from chance chemical reactions, advantageous climatic conditions, aggressive genetic survival, and the heir to all the fortunes an opposable thumb gives this world’s more advanced primates? Would you think, for instance, that this world, this universe needs you? Needs us? Would we have any reason at all to believe that we are any more necessary to the other biological accidents of this planet than if we believe ourselves to be creatures made for a purpose? I would say, we would have less reason to believe ourselves necessary, fewer good reasons for thinking ourselves particularly important. Accidents are accidents; by definition, random clashes of things tossed at one another by chance in circumstance. If you don’t think of yourself as an accident, what difference does it make to you then to read Paul writing to the Ephesians: “. . .we are [God’s] handiwork, created in Christ Jesus for the good works that God has prepared in advance, that we should live in them”?

The great German poet, Rainer M. Rilke, in what is arguably the greatest modern elegy, the “Ninth Elegy” of his Dunio Elegies, asks my question this way: “Why, if this interval of being can be spent serenely/in the form of a laurel[…]: why then/have to be human—and, escaping from fate,/keeping longing for fate?...” His question is not an easy one; however, rather pointedly, Rilke is asking: since we have escaped fate by being human—our human choices design our futures not fate—, why continue to long for fate, for destiny? Why do we yearn for a purpose, a story already written out for us? He says, “Oh not because happiness exists,/[…]But because truly being here is so much; because everything here/apparently needs us, this fleeting world, which in some strange way/keeps calling to us. Us, the most fleeting of all.” Fleeting though we are, we are gifted with the use of words. Rilke argues that the ungifted things of this world need us to say the unsayable, to name those things that cannot name themselves, and not only name them but praise them as well, and in praising them, change them: “[…] transient,/they look to us for deliverance: us, the most transient of all./They want us to change them, utterly, in our invisible heart,/within—oh endlessly—within us! Whoever we may be at last.” Whoever we may be at last. . .

Who are we, at last? Paul says that we are God’s handiwork. This is who we are now and at last. Rilke tells us that “truly being here is so much.” And he is right. Truly being is so much. Too much, perhaps. Just being here is overwhelming—even as rational animals crafted to live immortally and knowing it to be so—simply being so, no more than being so, just this one thing right now, this can be too much. Forget doing. Forget thinking. Forget past and future. Just being exactly who and what we are—just being this here—can be too much. Being God’s handiwork, being made, created in Christ Jesus. . .each one of us composed, molded, drawn, built; from nothing, generated and blessed with breath and memory and intellect and will. And why? Why are we made? To name our inanimate cousins in creation? No. To take them into ourselves and change them? No. To propagate our DNA like herd animals, breeding like livestock? No. None of these is too much. None of these is truly being. Why, then?

Paul writes, “God, who is rich in mercy, because of the great love he had for us [. . .] brought us to life with Christ [. . .] that in the ages to come He might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.” We were brought to life in Christ so that our Father might show us His infinite kindness through Christ. We were created in love for no other reason than to be loved. And we know that are loved by Love Himself when He shows us “the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness…” The oft-repeated and much-loved gospel reading says this perfectly: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life.” The ultimate demonstration of the Father’s infinite mercy, His immeasurable kindness. . .is His Son dying on a cross—a death that gave us birth to a new life in Christ. Prophecy and history meet to fulfill God’s will. That was no accident, no random clash of free-floating events!

So, if you don’t think of yourself as an accident, what difference does it make to you then that you are a creature created in love by Love? At the very least, you must think of yourself as the recipient of a divine gift; not only life itself, but every good thing that can given to one who lives faithfully in Christ. Read Paul again: “. . .we are [God’s] handiwork, created in Christ Jesus FOR the good works that God has prepared in advance, THAT we should live in them.” We are creatures created for the good works of Christ so that we should live in these good works. Do you live in the good works of Christ? If you do, then you do not live an accidental life, a life of chance, but rather a life of truth, as Jesus teaches us, “…whoever lives the truth comes to the light, so that his works may be clearly seen as done in God.” Live in the good works of Christ, do these same good works, and your good works are seen as holy works done by God’s will.

Notice, however, what happens when someone begins to think of himself as the product of random processes. Paul says that we are created in Christ Jesus to live in his good works. But if you hold that you are a product rather than a creature, then you will not acknowledge Christ or the good works you were created to use and imitate. Jesus says, “Whoever believes in [Christ] will not be condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned…” Already been condemned. How so? Random products of natural processes have no purpose, no end. Random products are not good, true, or beautiful. They just are. They cannot truly be as beings loved by a Lover. For them, there is no Lover. No love. Random products can feel passion, think rational thoughts, enjoy art, literature, and music. But can they do truly Good Things if they will not acknowledge they are the handiwork of Goodness Himself? To what—beyond their chanced, mechanical lives—does the true, the good, and the beautiful refer? What can love be but the pre-determined firing of neurons in the proper sequence to produce the physiological effect most often labeled “love”? Is this condemnation? Yes, of a sort. Life in Christ is life lived knowing you are living out a divinely-gifted purpose. Life without Christ is life lived knowing you are living until your body parts fail you—a very limited warranty indeed.

We can end with Rilke. . .knowing that we are creatures who “live and move and have our being” in God Himself, our God “who is rich in mercy [and] brought us to life with Christ,” knowing we are not products but sons and daughters, we can shout with Rilke: “Look, I am living. On what? Neither childhood nor future/grows any smaller. . . .Superabundant being/wells up in my heart.”


Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Homily Coming Soon!

Yes, there is a Sunday homily in the pipeline. . .it got weird, so some revision was necessary. . .and it is still a little strange.

New Faith + Science posts

Three new posts at my faith + science blog: suppl(e)mental.

Check 'em out!

Questions about habits (Updated)

[NB. Thank you all for the great comments on this post! I believe that my initial assertion--habit-wearing can stir conversation and controversy!--has proven to be true. I remember one thing my novice master told us the first time we met in a novice chapter, "Brothers, we can wear the habit as a weapon--to intimidate, to segregate, to hide. We can also refuse to wear the habit, and this too can be a weapon--to intimidate, to segregate, to hide. The habit can be made into a costume to hide who you are. It can be an outfit to accessorize. It can be a symbol of power and authority you do not rightfully have. It can also be a sign of your preaching." In my mind, "to wear or not to wear" is not the question. The question is: what is the Dominican habit to a Dominican?]

If you want to start an argument among Dominican friars you could not do it more quickly than to ask: "So, why don't you guys wear your habits all the time?" The next sound you will hear is the room exploding.

My first argument as a Dominican--during the pre-novitiate retreat, no less!--was about when and how often we should wear the habit. My first yelling match in the novitiate was over the habit. My first challenge to authority in the Order was about wearing the habit to class at our Dominican owned and operated school of theology (that's right, we were forbidden to wear our habit at our own school!). I've turned down teaching opportunities at Catholic schools where wearing the habit would be discouraged.

You might think then that I am almost never out of the habit. You'd be wrong. I spend most of my day in shorts and a tee-shirt. I go out shopping in street clothes. I travel in civvies. Generally speaking, I wear the habit here in Rome on three occasions: to class, to ministry, to liturgical celebrations (and when you consider that I am almost always doing one of these or all three, I'm in-habited more often than not). I have worn it to show visitors around town. And to dinner if someone is treating me.

Religious habits in Rome are like cats in the forum--many and variously colored. The white Dominican habit is very striking. Add the black cappa and you have what we like to call "The Cadillac of Habits." I'm told that we Dominicans must always wear the black part of our habit when walking around in Rome. Apparently, only the Holy Father may wear white in urbe. I've never seen this written down anywhere, but some of the friars insist on it and others dismiss it. The Norbetines and one other male religious group in Rome have habits almost identical to ours. Some of the African sisters' groups have bright pink habits. Some have a deep indigo. Others a pale yellow. The strangest habit I've ever seen belongs to the Heralds of the Gospel. These guys look like knights w/o their armor!

So, why not wear the habit all the time? There are many practical reasons: 1) it's white, so it gets very dirty, very quickly; 2) it's not the most utilitarian garb--lots of flowing material makes working in libraries, etc. difficult; 3) it's hot, sometimes very hot depending on the material. None of these alone nor all of them together are perfect reasons not to wear the habit all the time. More like a list of excuses, really. Sometimes wearing the habit draws the wrong kind of attention--anti-clerical types, religious nuts (and I mean the dangerous, mentally unstable types), people wanting to convert you, people demanding apologies for the abuse heaped upon them by Sr. Mary of the Five Wounds when they were in third grade, etc. However, you also get positive attention as well--kind comments about being a priest, requests for blessings and prayers, sometimes a quick confession, often simple questions about something Catholic in the news.

For the OP's there are no hard and fast rules for wearing the habit. I've noticed that among some of the European friars, the habit is pretty much dead. Here at the Angelicum, OP students and profs wear them to class. We wear them to meals and prayer. I often see the younger friars leaving the university in habit. Sometimes I will see a friar in the cloister hallway wearing just the tunic and belt, indicating to me that he's in habit while in his room. I've even seen friars coming out of the bathroom in full kit! That's dedication right there.

Some wear the habit as a sign of consecration. Others because it is a way to maintain poverty. Many because they need the reminder that they are religious. And even a few as a form of obedience. There may be one or two in the Order who wear it for all these reasons. There are some who refuse to wear the habit because they see it as a medieval garb inappropriate for the 21st century. The habit is a sign of male authority. The habit encourages clericalism. The habit is weapon, a shield, a barrier, a mask, an obstacle. It's too monastic. I've heard otherwise perfectly sane and highly intelligent OP's say all of these things. Fortunately, these friars are in a tiny, tiny (and shrinking) minority.

Now, watch the combox fill up with OP arguments!


Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Seminarians: do NOT be bullied! (Updated)

[NB. Mar 30: Again, thanks so much for the informative comments in the combox. I am delighted to hear that the CPE has not always been an odious task for seminarians. I still maintain that our American bishops need to re-evaluate and reform the CPE process for Catholic seminarians so that the unique character of the priestly charism is honored and developed. Though CPE programs have tempered their more abusive practices in recent years, the focus is still too narrowly placed on the therapeutic restructuring of the student's fundamental belief system to accord with mainstream-liberal Protestant norms for counts as ministry to the sick. IOW, too often Catholic seminarians are pressured to hold and practice an essentially anti-sacramental view of ministry to the sick and dying. Why? Because the Catholic sacramental system requires ordained priests to be licit and valid and mainstream-liberal Protestant theology/eccesial politics (both deeply committed to secular-feminist ideology) abhor the all-male, celibate Catholic priesthood.]

[NB. Mar 20: Re-reading this post I am a little nervous about the tone. . .I wrote it under the influence of Polaramine--an Italian OTC version of Benadryl--and a nasty head cold. However, I'm not going to change it. What's said needed to be said. I would encourage those who have had good CPE experiences to leave comments. A little balance to my negative experience couldn't hurt!]

__________________________________________________________

This post is intended to incite a rebellion.

I want to encourage and embolden any seminarian--diocesan or religious--who is being forced to complete a course in Clinical Pastoral Education to decide here and now to resist the indoctrination and ideological brainwashing that the Liberal Prot CPE process encourages.

You will be required to complete one summer of this ridiculous zombification. You have no choice. Go in fighting. Wear your habit. Wear your clerical garb. Insist on being authentically, fully, faithfully Catholic. Don't let the moonbat sisters or the Prot "ministers" or the "social justice" priests warp your dedication to the Church's mission to teach and preach the gospel.

During my horrific summer of CPE I was told many times by hospital chaplains that hospital chaplains are the "misfit toys" of the Church. They are the rejects of their denominations. This doesn't mean that they are bad people or bad Christians. But it does mean that they are unfit to form the hearts and minds of Catholic seminarians.

Let's be absolutely clear here: Clinical Pastoral Education is nothing more than a systematic "weeding out" of orthodox seminarians through a process of enforced radical leftist indoctrination. I survived b/c I was 37 years old and had years of working in mental health institutions under my belt. I was able to manipulate the system using the rhetoric and strategy of victimization that seemed to garner the attention of the administration. In other words, I knew how to position myself as the underdog in a system dominated by radical leftist queer/liberationists supervisors. They didn't dare push me into a corner. I knew the system too well. In fact, at the end of my ordeal, I received an apology from the director of chaplaincy services and a glowing CPE report. Anything less would have resulted in a lengthy and detailed report from me to Archbishop Rigali.

To the seminarians who are embarking on CPE: do NOT let these people intimidate you or in any way dissuade you from being fully, authentically Catholic. Listen. Learn. Take what you will. But DEMAND that your Catholic identity be respected. DEMAND that your understanding of your priestly vocation be respected. Do NOT let these people bully you. If they try, call them out. Tell them to stop bullying you. Report them to your bishop. Keep detailed records. Names, dates, times, quotes. I wish I had done this. Do not hesitate to bring bullying incidents to your supervisor and your bishop.

These people have power over you and they will use it to derail your vocation if you dare to oppose them. Document, document, document!

Can you learn something from CPE? You better believe it! I did. But I learned in spite of the goofy new-agey bullshit that passed for Catholic pastoral care at SLUH. I learned from the patients and their families. I learned from the nurses and doctors. I also learned from the chaplains. . .I learned exactly how NOT to be a Catholic minister.

Go in confident. Assured. Eager to learn. Open to being wrong. But go in with a clear sense of being Roman Catholic. And don't be duped by lefty Prot religious psychologies and purely political ideologies.

Write to me if you have any problems. . .I will gladly advise and assist any seminarian who is approaching this gauntlet. No names. Leave a comment with contact info, and I will contact you privately. We will assume the seal!

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Many questions. . .

1). How was the Greece trip?

Wonderful! We had a few problems with running late. . .some of the students got very sick. . .the boat was tossed around on the sea rather dramatically. . .two students got pick-pocketed. . .a strike kept us off the Acropolis. . .I was verbally assaulted in Athens for being an American. . .we had to deal with several large groups of loud, obnoxious Italian tourists at various sites. . .the food was good but predictable. . .HOWEVER, the students were fantastic. . .smart, funny, wise beyond their years, compassionate with one another. . .the profs did an excellent job in their presentations. . .the R.A.'s were both professional and caring with the students. . .all the sites were fascinating, especially Delphi and Olympia. . .I would move to Greece tomorrow and never look back.

2). The Pope spoke the truth on condom use in Africa! Now he's in trouble.

Yea, what's new? Never for a second believe that the media are pressing the Church to allow the use of condoms b/c they believe that condoms prevent the transmission of STD's. The media and our dissidents are pressuring the Church to change her teaching on artiufical contraception so that they can then point to this change as a precedent for changing other so-called "unchangeable" teachings, i.e. women's ordination, same-sex marriage, etc. Like petulant teenagers for generations, the media and our ecclesial whiners are testing limits.

Also, dissidents constantly point to the fact that very few Catholics actually follow the Church's teaching on artifical birth-control. If this is the case, why push so hard for a change in the teaching? Simple: the point of the push is to see a change for the sake of change so that more change will be easier down the line.

3). The Pope's letter to his fellow bishops on the SSPX controversy?

A truly classy move. The letter is magnificent in its sense of truly catholic collegiality and shows our Holy Father at his humble-best. This man impresses more and more every day. Of course, the "controversy" is media-made and the hysterical bluster among E.U. bishops is more about reacting so as not to look complicit in the eyes of their "betters." Holocaust denial is plainly stupid, bordering on the freakish; but it isn't a sin. Nor is it a theological error. We do not excommunicate Catholics (or refuse to un-excommunicate them) because they hold stupid opinions about historical events. Williamson's readmission into communion with the Church did not establish him as a Catholic bishop in good-standing. He wasn't given a diocese and put in charge of souls. His Holocaust denial shows him to be imprudent in the extreme, possibly incapable of making sound judgments, and should prevent him from ever serving in the Church as a sitting bishop. However, none of that should prevent him being a Catholic.

4). The new Mass translations being "accidentally" used in South Africa?

Yea, right. Sorry. I don't believe for a second that these new (and unapproved) translations were accidentally used. Yes, it's possible and charity requires that we assume that this was an accident until proven otherwise, but my stipend won't be on the line in that bet! Here's my guess: an opponent of the new translation, possessed by the Spook of Vatican 2, intentionally released the new translations to parishes where the language would be rejected rather dramatically. The controversy that followed was intended to be a "preview" for the Pope of how people more broadly will react to this attempt "to turn back the clock on Vatican Two" (what a tiresome phrase!). This was a staged usurpation. Am I willing to be convinced differently? Yes, of course.

I also find it highly amusing that the every people who shoved the abysmally clunky and trite langauage of the 1970 missal down the Church's throat are the same ones now screaming that the new translation will be unfamiliar to the average Catholic. Where was this concern for average Catholics when these same Liturgical Revolutionaries were wrecking churches and trashing missals, vessels, and vestments in the 70's? Irony, uh?

More later!

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Podcast question...

Anyone else having trouble getting the podcasts on "Roman Homilies" to play?

"Texas Homilies" seems to be working just fine. . .

Podcasts & Texts for Kenrick Conferences (updated)

Fr. Thomas McDermott, OP, director of spiritual direction at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary in St Louis, MO, invited me to be the speaker at the seminary's day of recollection in April 2008. I was tremendously honored to be invited. Kenrick is one of the church's fast-growing seminaries. It is one of the very, very few semimaries in the U.S. that is expanding its physical plant to accommodate an upsurge in priestly vocations!

My two talks are based on the post-synodal exhortation, Sacramentum caritatis, written and issued by Pope Benedict XVI. This exhortation comes from the Synod of Bishops held in Rome in October of 2005. The document was issued in March of 2007.

I believe that this document is greatly underappreciated by theologians and lay folks alike. It could easily serve as the text for an adult faith formation class or the series of parochial talks. It is, quite simple, a brilliant piece of historical and theological reflection.

One: "figura transit in veritatem: Jesus' radical novum

Two: "Penetrating the hearts of all things": Eucharist as Moral Fission (partial)

Recollection Day homily

Complete text for Conference One

Complete text for Conference Two

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Suffering from the Grudges

3rd Week of Lent (T): Dan 3.25, 34-43; Matt 18.21-35
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS. Domenico e Sisto, Roma

[NB. Also podcasted. . .right sidebar under "Roman Homilies."]

Why is it so difficult to forgive those who have sinned against us? Perhaps you are one of the lucky ones who find forgiving others to be an effortless joy, a pleasant boon to be given away like peppermints at Christmas or chocolates at Easter. Perhaps you are willing and able to toss pardons at your enemies like paraders toss beads at Mardi Gras. Your reward will be great in Heaven. The rest of us, however, suffer from the Grudges, that obstinate refusal to release anger, hurt, annoyance; that inordinate love of nursing a wound, or spending time petting the devil of vengeance. Our prayer is: “You will pay.” For us—unlike the angels among us—for us, the commandment to love is absolutely necessary; we need the admonition to forgive and the threat of eternal pain and darkness to pry open our pouting hearts to forgiveness. Once those creaky, rusting hinges grind open, the light of God’s mercy sears the grudging fungus of offense, and we are able to see a bit more clearly the way out of our hellish labyrinth. But getting in there, parting those corroded doors can be a life’s labor. Why? Why is forgiveness so difficult? And why is Jesus so insistent that forgiveness be a bottomless cup of infinite mercy?

First, forgiveness is difficult because to forgive a sin seems to suggest that the sin was of no consequence, meaningless or harmless. In my grudge, I say, “No! Your sin hurt me!” To forgive it minimizes my pain.

Second, forgiveness is difficult because to forgive a sin seems to imply that we are OK with being sinned against again. Wouldn’t forgiving a sin imply that that sin could easily be repeated because it caused no real harm in the first place?

Third, forgiveness is difficult because to forgive a sin seems to imply that I must forget your sin, never bring it up again, not dwell on it, or let it influence my view of you or our relationship. How can I forget a sin?

There are many other reasons that forgiveness is difficult, but these three are the most common. They make up the unholy trinity that rusts the hinges of our heart and keeps the doors of mercy corroded and closed. Now, I suppose, you expect me to give you a tidy way of dispelling each one of these corrupting ghosts. What’s the magic pill that will wipe my memory clean? Make me never worry about consequences again? Leave me free from anxiety about being offended in the future? No such thing. Jesus never once promises that forgiving others their sins against us will magically erase our doubts about the wisdom of that forgiveness. Like his commandment to love God, neighbor, and self, we are told to forgive. Ordered to do it, in fact. We have no option. Practice makes a habit and habits ordered to love quickly become virtues. And who among us can’t make us of a virtue?

If you have difficulty forgiving others, think on this: forgiveness is impossible for those who have no sense of their own sinfulness. Holding a grudge, refusing to forgive, is very often our way of refusing to confess our sins, a self-righteous cover for our own transgressions. If I can delude myself into thinking that my hurt, my anger, my annoyance is righteous, then my own sins seem somehow less immediate, less important. Eventually, I may even find a way to turn my sins into virtues while seeking justice for my hurts. Unfortunately, while I am chasing self-righteous justice, God’s mercy goes uncollected and I go unforgiven.

Fine. What I will not allow the light of Christ to illuminate, the fires of Gehenna will burn eternally.


Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

We're Back!

We are back from Greece!

Lots of waves, bumps, pickpockets, rude Italians, loud teenagers, a strike. . .

Also, lots of great food, wonderful sights, good friends, and lots to learn!

Thank you for your prayers and your good wishes.

Now. . .back to work. . .(bleech). . .

OH! And thanks for the WISH LIST activity while I was away. . .

Rebels Without a Clue

Many of you have asked me to comment on the recent email from Sr. Sandra Schneiders concerning the upcoming apostolic visitation of U.S. religious sisters. The email is long and whiney and chocked full of delusional meanderings on the reality of women's religious life in the U.S. I don't intend to fisk the whole thing. This is Lent after all.

As I read the email though I was reminded of my years working in adolescent psych. Most of our teen patients were drug and alcohol abusers and most had been sexually molested. By far the most common diagnosis was ODD, "oppositional defiant disorder." Below you will find a description of this affective-mental disorder. Read it and then click over to Sandra's missive and see what you think.

In children with Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD), there is an ongoing pattern of uncooperative, defiant, and hostile behavior toward authority figures that seriously interferes with the youngster's day to day functioning. Symptoms of ODD may include:

• frequent temper tantrums
• excessive arguing with adults
• active defiance and refusal to comply with adult requests and rules
• deliberate attempts to annoy or upset people
• blaming others for his or her mistakes or misbehavior
• often being touchy or easily annoyed by others
• frequent anger and resentment
• mean and hateful talking when upset
• seeking revenge

Check all the above.

Here's my take on the whole thing. . .most of the dissident women's orders in the U.S. have spent the last four decades destroying their history, dismantling their faith, and deluding themselves into believing that they are somehow leaders in the vanguard of an ecclesial revolution. Well, they are leaders of a sort, leaders of a devolution into non-existence. We don't need to recount the stats that trace their rapid disappearance from the Church scene. As I have said many times before, "Tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock. . ." Fr. Z. rightly calls this the "biological solution" to the problem of New-Agey priests and religious.

What's interesting to me about these groups is their oppositional-defiant relationship with Church authority. You see, when I worked with ODD teens in the hospital, it was often the case that the teens would act out when discipline on the unit grew lax. When staff and clinicians got a little lazy about the rules, the teens would let us know--through their bad behavior--that they felt unsafe and needed the boundaries to be enforced. When the staff got tough again, there was a little sassy lip and the occasional time-out, but most of the teens quickly dropped back into their polished disinterest in authority. . .all the while carefully crafting for themselves and for their peers attitudes that let them be safely contra staff.

Sandra and sisters like her have spent the last forty years establishing themselves as oppositional-defiant figures in the Church. Their entire identity as Catholics, religious, women, and human beings is so deeply entangled in being O-D to the Church that they no longer know how to exist outside their comfortable (i.e., well-funded, tenured) bubbles of oppositional nastiness.

If I had to bet this month's stipend on a sure thing, I would bet on this: Sandra and her sisters are thrilled to hear about this visitation! It gives them something to oppose, something to rally against, something TO DO that ratifies their already self-confirming identity as courageous ecclesial rebels. There will be workshops, conferences, websites, petitions, "calls-to-action," oh but the phone trees and email lists will be lit up, rallying opposition to the visitation.

Why?

Because in the absence of any identifibly Catholic characteristics in their "religious lives," Sandra, et al only have the reassuring warmth of their communal temper tantrums and the thin gruel of their rebellion to sustain them in the few winter years they have left. Without this Evil Vatican Visitation--heck, without the Evil Vatican!--Sandra and her goddess-worshipping sisters, would be rebels without a cause.

As it is, their whining is little more than adolescent snarking from the time-out room.

Here's my deadly serious challenge to Sr. Sandra and her ilk: Leave. Simply, leave. Go to another ecclesial communion that will celebrate your wingnut religiosity. If the Roman Catholic Church is so horribly oppressive, so unjustly bigoted, so irrecoverably patriarchal, and these features cause you so much distress and anguish, then leave! But see, you won't leave. Why? Because you have an ODD relationship with Church authority. If you join the Episcopalians, a group that will embrace you and all your moon-batness, if you join the Episco-pagans, you become the establishment. You become the norm, the regular. . .and since you are constitutionally incapable of forming a positive identity, you will cling for dear life to your oppositional-defiant identity in the RCC. You need the Pope. You need the hierarchy. You need the haunting spectre of an Evil Vatican Visitation. You need the orthodox sisters of the CMSWR. You need bloggers like me writing posts like this. . .ah well.

If that weren't so sad, it would be funny.

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Bountiful desert of Lent

First Week of Lent (T): Is 55.10-11; Mt 6.7-15
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS. Domenico e Sisto, Roma

[NB. Also podcasted. . .right sidebar under "Roman Homilies."]

Our Lord says to Isaiah, “My word,” falling like rain and snow from the heavens, watering the earth, “shall not return to me void, but shall do my will, achieving the end for which I sent it…[to give] seed to the one who sows and bread to the one who eats.” Rain and snow watering the earth. Bread to eat. Sowing seed on fruitful soil. Can we see the desert sands of Lent as rich, fertile ground, abundantly sown with well-watered seed? Is this how we should be imagining our fasting and prayer? Isn’t this a time for cutting away, cleaning up, setting aside, and trimming down? Aren’t we suppose to find ourselves wounded and weak, in need of rescue and restoration? Is Lent the proper time for us to be thinking about planting well-watered seed in fertile ground? As any good farmer will tell you: you cannot plant a field choked with weeds and brush…first, you have to clear the land, then you start to plant.

Let’s clear some spiritual land this morning! Starting with prayer. How do you pray? Jesus tells his disciples not to babble like the pagans when they pray. Don’t babble? That’s right, don’t babble. He says, “Your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.” So, how then should we pray? We ask for what we need. Nothing more. Daily bread. Forgiveness. Rescue from temptation, deliverance from evil. And for these we are to give constant thanks and praise. Why ask for what we need when the Father already knows what we need? We are completely dependent on God for everything. Asking for what we need exercises our humility, thus making our prayer all the more fruitful for understanding ourselves as creatures loved by our Creator.

How about fasting? First, why are you fasting? Are you taking advantage of Lent to lose a little weight for summer? Maybe trim down for the beach? Are you fasting to acquire a good habit? Or perhaps to lose a bad one? Are you following the rules merely to follow the rules? If your fasting is something other than a means of clearing away the spiritual brush, a way of pulling the noxious weeds that strangle your fruitful growth, then your fasting is without good purpose. Fasting is a discipline, that is, it is a way of learning. What are you learning from your Lenten fast? Come Easter, what will you know about your life in Christ that you do not know now? What can fasting teach us? Like praying for our needs, fasting can teach us about our dependence on God, about our need to acknowledge our dependence and give God thanks for His generosity. Fasting is not about “going without” food or drink or shopping. Fasting is about “going with” God instead of food or drink or shopping.

The Lord tells Isaiah, “[My word] shall not return to me void, but shall do my will, achieving the end for which I sent it.” If the Word of the Lord is to achieve its end for you, it must do so with you. The Word must find in your heart and mind a field cleared of strangling weeds and choking brush. The Word waters thirsty ground, and the seed finds welcome in rich soil. We have forty days to turn a Lenten desert into a verdant field. Pray, fast, and never forget, never forget: gives thanks, always give thanks!

Why is Jesus tempted?

First Sunday of Lent: Gn 9.8-15; 1 Pt 3.18-22; Mk 1.12-15
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS. Domenico e Sisto, Roma

Jesus is driven into the desert. Not invited or called. Not lured or encouraged. But driven. With the waters of the Jordan still running off his head and the Spirit’s proclamation of his divine Sonship still ringing in his ears, Jesus is sent forth, by that same Spirit, into the wilderness sands to be tempted by Satan for forty days and nights. This is not a very dignified way to celebrate the baptism of the newly announced Son of God. This is not the welcome we would expect for the freshly washed, the newly purified. Nonetheless, Jesus is driven into the wilderness to live among wild beasts and to be ministered to by angels. What purpose does this indignity serve? What possible good could come from allowing Jesus to be tempted by the Devil?

Let’s understand what all this business about being “driven into the desert” implies about Jesus and his baptism. How is he driven into the wilderness? It seems as though he goes out into the sand reluctantly, under compulsion by the Spirit. Other English translations use “sent forth into,” “impelled to go out,” “put forth” instead of “driven out.” What’s missing from these other translations is the sense of immediacy and urgency Jesus feels. But using “driven out” leaves the impression that Jesus goes unwillingly. In fact, his baptism and the announcement of his divine Sonship by the Father—events immediately prior to his going out into the desert—are so profoundly definitive of Jesus’ ministry, mission, and identity that he is “driven into” the desert in the same way that athletes are driven to competitive perfection and artists are driven to creative expression. Gifted at his incarnation with both a human nature and a divine nature, the one person, Jesus, perfects his gift of Sonship in the crucible of the desert so that that gift might be used for God’s greater glory in the service of others—the salvation of all creation.

This first chapter of Mark clearly indicates the incarnational nature of Jesus’ Sonship by marking the divine with his baptism and marking the human with his temptation in the desert. After the forty days with the devil, Jesus is a finely honed, razor-sharp weapon of gospel preaching and miracle-working. Having been shown the limits of human loyalty to the Word and tempted to violate them, and having been shown the limits of angelic loyalty of the Word and tempted to violate them, Jesus walks out of the desert victorious over the devil, proclaiming: “This is the time of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.” How much more forceful is this proclamation once we know that its clarity and simplicity were forged in the heat and sweat of the devil’s wilderness by “a man like one of us.” And how much more are we encouraged to hear this proclamation knowing that it comes from a man like one of us, and not only a man like one of us, but also the Father’s only-begotten Son. Fully human, fully divine—the gift of divine Sonship perfected in the trials of the desert—Christ Jesus comes to us as John prophesied, and we hear the gospel preached from the Word himself.

Jesus proclaims, “This is the time of fulfillment,” this is the moment of consummation, of satisfaction and completion; this age is the age of achievement and conclusion, of having done and being done. Every contract has its terms to be fulfilled. Every promise comes due. Every I.O.U. waits to be made right. We have a covenant with the Lord that surpasses Law, that surpasses Promise, that surpasses even the words of the Prophets. Our covenant with the Lord is the Lord himself in human flesh. The terms of our covenant, if you will, are etched on his skin, signed with a whip, and sealed with nails. Peter puts it rather succinctly: “Christ suffered for sins once, the righteous for the sake of the unrighteous, that he might lead you to God. Put to death in the flesh, he was brought to life in the Spirit.” If our sins were to be healed, Christ had to become sin for us. If our sufferings were to be relieved, Christ had to become suffering for us. If our temptations were to be defeated, Christ had to become temptation for us, standing in the stead of our dis-ease, so that health might triumph. Origen gets it exactly right, “The whole man would not have been saved, unless Christ had taken upon himself the whole man.”

In as much as the man Jesus goes into the desert to try the limits of his humanity against the enticements of evil, so we are driven into that same desert to test the limits of our divinely-gifted end. All too familiar with the devil’s lures, we should look instead for the enchantments of our loving Creator, our God Who made us to come to Him and live with Him forever. Of course, the devil will lurk as he always does, but our attention, our focus and energy are wasted fighting the Loser. Christ has beaten the devil. But the devil refuses to concede the fight. Though he has lost, he can still find some satisfaction in convincing you that there is something to fight him about! And if he can convince you to spend your Lenten retreat fighting him, then he has succeeded in preventing you from glorying in God’s gifts of mercy and care.

We asked early on: what possible good could come from allowing Jesus to be tempted by the Devil? Simply put: our good, that is, the good of all the Father’s children who strive to reach and grasp His promise of divine life beyond this life. Without the bridge of the incarnation, without the sacrifice of Christ—fully human, fully divine—and the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, we would be left to our natural end: death and decay. Christ’s defeat of the devil’s enticements in the desert marks just the beginning of our recovery as loved creatures destined for divine union!

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

New suppl(e)mental posts

Two new posts at suppl(e)mental. . .

"Big Bang, Lemaitre, and scientific dogma"

and

"Biblical basis for western science"

Check 'em out!

The Devil preaches on Lent

Back in Lent 2006, I preached one of my more experimental/literary homilies, "With the Devil in the Desert."

Some loved it, some hated it, and some thought I had gone over the edge into the diabolical by preaching a homily in the voice of the Devil.

Since the homily got exactly one comment on the blog, I'm curious about what folks might think about it now. . .I thoroughly enjoyed writing and preaching this homily. It's one of my favorites!

Give it a read/listen and let me know. . .

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Godzdogz: English OP's "do" Lent

Not a penance but a pleasure!

Godzdogs

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Seminar report on science, theology, philosophy

I had decided not to post my science, philosophy, and theology seminar report b/c it needed some re-working.

Then I thought, "You're just being fastidious. Post it."

So, I did: Polkinghorne's Complementarity.

Sr. Ginger Peters, OP. . .RIP

I ask your prayers for the repose of the soul of one my favorite Dominican sisters, Sr. Marygrace "Ginger" Peters, OP.

Ginger died on Feb 21, 2009 after a long battle with lung cancer and pneumonia.

Her last duty to her Houston Dominican sisters was to serve as their Prioress. I remember her best as my Church History professor from Aquinas Institute. Ginger never failed to smile, never failed to encourage nor cajole when necessary.

She had one the best senses of humor among my O.P. sisters. When I introduced her to friends as "Queen of the Houston Dominicans," I always got a exasperated sigh and an easily dodged slap at my impertinent head.

She will be dearly missed.

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

A Lenten Prayer

Merciful and loving God, you give us* this Lenten desert for our purification, for our chance to become your faithful friends.

Because we are wearied by our sins and exhausted by the weight of our guilt, the devil seeks to tempt us further away from you.

Let us hear his false promises with your ears and see his counterfeit prizes through your eyes. With your Word in our mouths, we reject his poisonous gifts and run to you for our salvation.

With our every thought and deed, you give us the grace to turn temptation into witness, to make an enemy of the devil, and grow in your love.

Lord, grant us hearts bound in obedience to your Word and freed in your love. And even though we may suffer for a little while, we know our purpose is fulfilled when we offer you thanks and praise for the gift of your Son.

Purged of sin and guilt by your desert, we walk to his death on the cross; we watch for his resurrection from the tomb; and we await his coming again in glory!

In his holy name we pray. Amen.

(written by Fr. Philip N. Powell, OP)

__________________________________________________________________

*Change the plural pronouns to singular for a more personal prayer.

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Thanking the Devil

A few provisions for your Lenten trek. . .

Jesus went into the desert to pray and fast for forty days and forty nights. The devil shows up and tempts our Lord with a variety of goodies.

How is Jesus tempted?

First, he is tempted to reject God with a show of pride. Prove you are who you say you are by performing a miracle.

Second, he is tempted to reject God by testing His promise of love and care. Place yourself in danger so that God will be forced to prove His promise to rescue you when you are in trouble.

Third, he is tempted to reject God by taking on worldly power and prestige. Forsake the worship of the Lord and be rewarded with temporal prominence and political power.

Each time Jesus rejects the temptation and rebukes the devil. How? Each time Jesus successfully resists the devil, he does so by placing God first, by putting his Father upfront and on top of their intimate relationship, making his Father and His Word the lense through which he sees these tempting offers.

Notice also what Jesus doesn’t do when tempted. He never appeals to himself or puts his “needs” ahead of God. Never does he invoke his own power as the Son, or try to fight the devil with theological argument. He doesn’t negotiate or dialogue. He doesn’t listen carefully, ponder his options, and then decide based on a cost-benefit analysis. He doesn’t compromise or make any temporary deals. He doesn’t parse the language of the temptations, contextualize their content, or critique their literary forms. He doesn’t re-envision their meaning or try to make them relevant. He rejects them. Outright.

Jesus resists the devil by boldly and obediently speaking the truth. With each temptation, Jesus begins his rejection and rebuke in the same way, “It is written. . .” He pulls on the prophetic tradition of his heritage, God’s Word in scripture, and turns the devil’s deceit into a fulfilled revelation, a unveiling of the truth made manifest in the desert.

Lent is our chance to do what Jesus does. While in this desert for forty days, we take the devil’s false promises to us and turn them into the fulfilled promises of God’s love and care for us. God will love us against our will, but He will not prevent us from taking the devil’s deal if we will to do so. He will give us everything we need to say No to the devil, but He will not say No for us. We must act; we must say to the devil’s face, “It is written…” God and His promises come first.

The devil knows what we sometimes forget: the power of temptation lies not in accepting his lies as true in but rejecting God’s truth as false. In other words, we do ourselves far more spiritual damage when we make God an enemy than when we make the devil a friend. Why? With God as your enemy, all His gifts become intolerable burdens. You will not hope. You will not love. You will not trust. Enmity with God is a much darker, a far more dangerous place to be than mere friendliness with error and deceit.

Each time Jesus resists the devil’s temptation and rebukes him, he invokes his love of the Lord with the words of our prophetic tradition, “It is written…” He invokes the Covenant between the Father and His people; he opens the doors of his heart’s tabernacle and lets the Word blind the devil. He turns the devil’s false promises into the fulfillment of the Father’s promise to love us and care for us.

When tempted to reject God in pride, humble yourself in gratitude for what you have been given.

When tempted to reject God by testing His promise of love and care, remember that He will never lie; He will never fail.

When tempted to reject God by taking on worldly power and prestige, offer worship to this world’s only Lord and King.

And when you have successfully rejected all these temptations, do something to really make the devil crazy: thank him for his temptations because without them you might have made it through this Lenten desert without the urgent chance to become better friends with God.

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Benedict, Monkeys, RCIA...

Questions. . .

1). What's going on in the Vatican? Why all the tumult around the Pope?

There's always been tumult around the Pope. Even a quick glance at Church history will tell you that there's never been a pope who hasn't had to deal with an entrenched curia, disobedient cardinals, scheming advisers, and throngs of dissident insiders lusting for his downfall. Nothing has changed. This is a good time to remind Catholics that the Holy Father cannot fail in the only ministry of his that matters: teaching and preaching the gospel of Christ. He might not be the best administrator, or the best diplomat, or the best crowd-pleaser. So what? None of these are his principal task. Pope Benedict has made some controversial decisions lately and "professionally aggrieved grievance professionals" (Mark Shea's wonderful phrase) are using these decisions to hit at the Holy Father in an attempt to discredit his whole program of reviving a strong Catholic identity. Don't be fooled: the Pope is under attack b/c he is doing his job as the Vicar of Christ. Like Cardinal Ratzinger said one time: "If I don't read something in the press at least once a week attacking me, I don't feel like I'm doing my job." This too shall pass.

When reading any news story about the Holy Father or "the Vatican" in the secular press, always remember that the reporters know almost nothing about the Church or her faith. They are trained to see and report in purely political terms, usually leftist terms. Recent hysterical news stories about the SSPX and the LC's are evidence of this. They see the Holy Father as a democratically elected official--a prime minister or president--and then proceed to evaluate his "performace" based on criteria used to judge secular politicians. Also keep in mind when you see the phrase "a senior Vatican official says" that this phrase is utterly meaningless. There is no way of knowing who this person is or if there even is such a person. How easy is it to insert anti-papal wishful thinking into the mouth of a ficitious "official" and then report this official's criticism as fact? As I said to a fellow friar recently, "These reporters need to name names, or shut up." Fat chance.

Now, does any of this mean that the Holy Father needs to ignore criticism or fail to learn from mistakes? Absolutely not. Benedict is a brilliant man. He will listen, and he will adapt where he can. But as faithful Catholics, we need to separate out what matters to the faith from what matters to the anti-Catholic press and our perpetually whining internal dissidents. Recent controversies change nothing that is true, good, and beautiful about the faith as taught by the Church's magisterium. So, watch out for dissenting opportunists who will use the blood in the water as an excuse to push their private agendas. Administrative mistakes do not equate to doctrinal mistakes. There is no connection between the two.

2). What is "Monkey Mind"?

I've used this phrase often in describing my own persistent mental state. Basically, it is borrowed from Zen Buddhism and is used to describe a mind that swings rather wildly from thing to thing to thing. Think of a monkey swinging from tree branches, chattering, squealing, and just having a bit of fun. When Zen monks sit for hours on end in zazen (formal "sitting meditation") they are left with no other distraction but the flashing images of their minds. A large part of any mental discipline is mastering these images to the point where they no longer occupy the mind as distractions. I've noted before that I am plagued by both dyslexia and ADD. Fortunately, I found out about both of these well into my doctoral studies, so they never became excuses for me not to succeed in school. Still, I find it extraordinarily difficult to concentrate for even short periods of time. I've adapted my "learning style" to these realities by perfecting the art of procrastination! Papers, presentations, lecures, etc. all get done at the last possible moment b/c I need the pressure of a deadline to serve as a taskmaster. This system has always served me well. Yes, it causes me some anxiety and leaves me exhausted, but any paper I start too early in the semester becomes an unmanagable monster before it is finished. Of course, this method is useless for learning languages. . .foreign language acquisition requires a steady exposure to vocabulary, grammar, and reading. Frankly, I'd rather be beaten bloody than told to memorize verb forms! Seriously, if my dean told me that he would waive the French requirement for my license if I took three lashes from a leather whip. . .I'd think about it. . .I'd seriously consider it.

3). What to do if my parish's RCIA program is not very Catholic?

I've posted before about my own RCIA experience in 1995-6. Not good. The process as it is laid out in the relevant documents promises to be something of an adventure in learning to become a good Catholic. In the hands of a faithful pastor and a dedicated RCIA team, the process is wonderful. Unfortunately, too often the process leads converts into a world of pseudo-Catholicism, or worse, anti-Catholicism. The central difficult, I think, is that the pedagogy of the process places too much emphasis on "sharing the faith" and almost none of learning the faith. How can a group of people who know little or nothing about the Catholic faith share that faith with others who know as little as they do? This is not to say that they have nothing to share! Of course, they do. But RCIA is meant to be an introduction to the CATHOLIC faith not a year-long process of sharing feelings, impressions, and opinions about bullet-point theology and ecclesial politics. Many converts are left with the impression that the Catholic faith is simply a matter of joining a parish, signing up for duty as communion ministers, and occasionally going to Mass on Sunday. When the emphasis is placed on the subjective experience of the individual, the whole of the faith is lost in personal reflection and opinion. The strongest/weakest link in any RCIA program is the dedication of the teachers to the magisterium of the Church. Often these teachers are reluctant to present the more controversial elements of the faith for fear of being confronted by disagreement or disparagement. Tough. Teach the faith or find another ministry in the parish. I know a young RCIA convert who was shocked to discover when he came to U.D. that the Church teaches that Christians who struggle with same-sex attractions are called to celibate chastity. As one such Christian, he was told that the Church honors one's conscience on this issue and says nothing at all about the sinfulness of sexual behavior for homosexuals! In other words, he joined the Church believing that he could, as a homosexual, find a partner and live, in good conscience, a sexually active lifestyle. To his credit, he accepted the Church's teaching once he knew the truth. However, he signed up believing a lie told by his RCIA team. Why did they tell him this? Maybe they believed they were telling him the truth. Maybe they didn't want to risk controversy. Maybe they don't accept the Church's teaching on this issue. and use the RCIA program to teach error in the hope of undermining the teaching. Who knows? Whatever the reason, this young man was lied to and those who did the lying shouldn't be teaching the faith!

Ideally, you want to go through the RCIA program of the parish you will eventually join. If the program seems to you to be teaching something other than the Catholic faith, you might approach the pastor for clarification. You need to be open to the idea that your take on the faith might be wrong and that you have simply misunderstood what your RCIA teachers have told you. In other words, don't assume that you are being taught error simple b/c you disagree with what you have heard. Use the Catechism. Do a little research and find out. Ask faithful Catholics you know, or leave a comment here. I'm not shy about answering tough questions. If it seems as though something might be awry, bring it up in discussion and ask for clarification. Many articles of the faith are not easily understood and often lead to innocent mistakes. Also, orthodox teachings can be expressed in a number of legit ways. Don't assume that what you are being taught is mistaken simple b/c you aren't hearing it presented in a traditional way. In the face of learning and digesting 2,000 years of Catholic doctrine and dogma, a little humility goes a long way. I would resist the temptation to bail on a program and look for another one. Take what your program has to offer but understand that learning the faith is your responsibility. You are not absolved for ignorance when there are so many resources for you to consult.

If all else fails, use my Three-Year Plan for Faith Formation.

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

On purpose, with a purpose

7th Sunday OT: Is 43:18-25; 2 Cor 1:18-22; Mark 2:1-12
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS. Domenico e Sisto, Roma

[NB. This homily is an example of "Praedicator primum sibi praedicet" if there ever was one!*]

The Lord says to Isaiah, “…see, I am doing something new! Now it springs forth, do you not perceive it?” This astonishing exclamation by the Lord raises three questions: 1) what is this new thing that the Lord is doing?; 2) what does He mean by “now” when He says that this new thing is springing forth now?; and 3) do we perceive this new thing as it springs forth? As always, scripture is best read as both a history of the faithful response our ancestors to God’s grace and as a script for our own response to the identical grace. Given this, what are we to make of this revelation of immediate newness? On the eve of our Lenten trek, we think first of sin and repentance, the old and the new. Fair enough. Reading the story of the healing of the paralytic in light of Isaiah, let’s think as well on disease and healing, also, the old and the new. But let’s put all four of these themes (sin, repentance, disease, and healing) into a larger theme: as divinely-given purpose as creatures. Who and what are we as creatures—made things—of an all-loving Creator given a purpose beyond our creation? It is not enough to say that we are forgiven our sins upon repentance. It is not enough to say that we are healed of our diseases when we believe. The Lord is doing something new. And He is doing it now.

No doubt this sounds familiar: “You burdened me with your sins, and wearied me with your crimes.” How often do we hear God’s prophets tell us that our Lord is wearied by our disobedience, that He is fed up with our sin? And almost every time we hear the Lord’s lament, we hear something like, “It is I, I, who wipe out, for my own sake, your offenses; your sins I remember no more.” We sin. The Lord tires of it. He forgives us. And remembers our sin no more. Thanks be to God! Surely we are deeply grateful, but we must wonder why we are forgiven. Why do we find ourselves able to stand in the presence of the Lord washed clean of our willful disobedience? The Lord tells Isaiah: “The people I formed for myself, that they might announce my praise.” We cannot praise God while wallowing in our sin. Nor can we forgive our own disobedience, so God Himself, for His own sake, must forgive us our trespasses so that we might accomplish our purpose as His creatures: to praise Him, to bless Him, and to preach His Good News!

Think for a moment about what it means to be redeemed as a fallen creature. We can see this is a rescue from Hell. We can see this as establishing again our original relationship with God. We can also see our redemption as a kind of perfected health. What does the healing of the paralytic in Mark’s gospel tell us? Notice a few things about the story. Since the man is paralyzed, he cannot come to Jesus alone. He needs help. Four men lower him through the roof to Jesus. No mean feat of dedication or labor! Note that Jesus heals the man not only because of his faith, but also because of “their faith,” the faith of those men who worked so hard to get him to Jesus. Note as well that Jesus, in response to the kvetching of the scribes about blasphemy, draws a direct link between sin and disease, forgiveness and healing. He asks, “What’s the difference between me saying ‘Your sins are forgiven’ and ‘Get up and walk?’” Answer: none. In fact, Jesus says both to the paralyzed man: “Child, your sins are forgiven” and “…rise, pick up your mat, and go home.” Given back his mobility, the man rises and walks away. Miracle over.

Not quite. Notice one last thing. . .Mark reports: “He rose, picked up his mat at once, and went away in the sight of everyone.” Not only did Jesus restore his health, he restores his purpose: to be a creature in praise of his Creator! In the sight of everyone, this healed creature amazes the on-lookers; he witnesses to the power of God’s forgiveness by doing what he was made to do. Mark reports: “They were all astounded and glorified God…” Through his faith in God’s mercy, the man is healed. In his healing, he is given new purpose. With his new purpose, he restores the purpose of those witnessing his healing: “They. . .glorified God, saying, ‘We have never seen anything like this.’" What God does for us, He does for His glory. What we do in response, we do in praise and thanksgiving. That is our purpose.

Think about your dis-eases. Not so much your physical afflictions but your uneasinesses, your anxieties and doubts. Aren’t these usually the doors through which you walk to sin? Uneasy about the future, you plan against God’s promise to care for you. Anxious about your current situation, you try to fix things according to your passions, your own dimmed lights. Or maybe doubting some truth of the faith, you decide against right reason and the teachings of the Church and go out into the world’s intellectual desert to find an answer more pleasing to your broken mind. Though we are certainly free to follow these leads, we are never freed in following them. In fact, we are always enslaved more tightly, made sicker, paralyzed more thoroughly when we turn from our divinely-given purpose and follow an attractively decorated but nonetheless deadly end.

We have one purpose: to praise our God with body and soul, heart and mind through time and space. And when we are no longer bound by any measures of movement or created expanse, we praise Him face-to-face, complete in our end, fulfilled in our purpose. Perhaps the best way for to think about sin/forgiveness, disease/health is to think in terms of whether or not we are living out our created purpose, whether or not we are living toward our divinely-gifted end. This is not to say that every scrape and bump, or cough and headache is a sign of disobedience. These are reminders of creation’s falleness and our participation in a world groaning after its own purpose. Our illnesses are opportunities to see a purpose beyond simply enduring pain for pain’s sake, beyond the experience of disease as a natural dysfunction of the body. Like the paralyzed man in Mark’s gospel, we are children faithful to a Father, and we are healed/forgiven when we trust that our dis-eases are not who or what we are as loved creatures. If we are not our diseases, then we are our sins either. What tumor or fracture or infection or mental disorder or willful disobedience praises God? They don’t. Their purpose is wholly-other-than, something else entirely.

We can smell the Lenten desert from here. It’s hot and dry as always. All the better for cleaning those nasty wounds. All the better for stripping away the dead flesh and draining those abscesses of sinful infection. Rather than obsessing on what’s wrong with our spiritual lives—our living day-to-day with Christ and his people,—focus instead on praising God. Fast from purposeless posing in Narcissus’ mirror. Fast from rending your religious garb and heaping ashes on your fallen head. Fast from beating your breast and making a show of piety. Instead, feast on forgiveness and showing mercy. Feast on praising God in His infinite goodness and love. Feast on giving Him thanks for His gifts of life, redemption, and eternal residence near His throne. He’s done, is doing, and will always do something new for us. Spend these forty days of Lent in the excessive luxury of gratitude, sparing no moment to self-indulgence, giving nothing to disease or anxiety.

Our wounds are healed. And even if we still bleed, even if we still hurt, our purpose is renewed. Bleed, hurt, cry…do it all “on purpose,” do it all for one purpose, the purpose you were made to complete: praise God; bless God, and preach His Good News.

*"The preacher preaches to himself first."

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

New podcast!

Lazy me. . .I finally got around to posting the podcast of last Tuesday's homily, "Resisting the world's leaven."

Check it out by clicking on the "Roman Homilies" link in the right side-bar.

Let me know what you think. . .good, bad, and/or ugly! I haven't listened it yet.

Fr. Philip, OP

Question for book benefactors

A question to my book benefactors. . .

Someone (or someones) recently purchased about six books from my Wish List. . .mostly the books on Eastern Orthodox prayer and spirituality.

My question: were these shipped to Rome or Texas? I'm asking b/c if they were shipped to Texas, I will need to find other sources for my prayer book since I won't be back in Texas 'til July. This doesn't mean the books won't be used. . .I have a second book brewing in my Monkey Mind that will make good use of these gifts!

Leave comments, please. . .I won't publish them.

Some navel-gazing. . .

BE WARNED: this is a fairly rambling piece of somewhat self-indulgent navel-gazing. . .

Normally, I am all-too aware of "where I am" spiritually--usually, somewhere around Not Quite Mortally Wounded Enough to Give Up Entirely but never Flying High Near the Throne. Like most struggling Catholics, I do as well as I can and throw my lot in with God's promise of mercy. This is as it should be. We struggle; we hope; and we get on with our day. Lately, something has changed, and I can't figure out what exactly is different.

Though I value the intellectual life, my basic instinct is intuitive; that is, most of my decisions/evaluations are deeply rooted in empathetic urgings, or fits and starts--maybe even leaps--of insight that push me onward and outward. I hate to admit it, but many of my choices in the past have been gambles rather than reasoned choices. For the most part, these bets against logic have worked out to my benefit. I vaguely remember someone once saying something about only children and fools rely on Providence. . .

Anyway, during my recent visit to the U.S., I was in touch with a strange sense of Something Isn't Right. There's nothing I can point to concretely as an example. Just a really bizarre, almost physical, twinging that I am in the wrong place spiritually. This isn't about being in Rome or about studying philosophy. . .it's more about my relationship to God and His Church, something more fundamental than what I am doing intellectually or vocationally and more about who I am as a priest.

During my three years as a campus minister at U.D. I was in a position to work as a priest on a daily basis. I celebrated Mass as many as five times a week. I was spiritual director to several students, a few staff members, some folks from the community. I heard confessions daily. There were even a few weddings and some baptisms. There's not much of that here in Rome. Two Masses a month. One spiritual directee. No confessions, baptisms, or weddings. Who is a priest without his people? Hmmmmm. . .

Though I taught literature and theology at U.D. the entire time I was there, these were academic exercises rather than strictly priestly ones. Teaching thrills me almost as much as preaching. . .I've learn more in front of a classroom than I ever have sitting in a desk. It's the give and take of a good discussion rooted in a text that stretches me intellectually not the solitary life of a scholar sitting in his room reading. The teaching I did stretched my spiritual muscles as well as my brain. But nothing strains against my naturally spiritual laziness like having to prepare five homilies a week. Of having to read, study, pray over, and preach about the scriptural readings for the ecclesial occasion. Add to that a poet's pride in needing to be original (i.e., not simply reaching into the file and pulling out a homily from three years ago) and you have a recipe for growth. I recently reviewed some of my earlier homilies and compared them to the few I've preached since October 2008. Though my more recent homilies are better focused and more clearly communicated, there's not as much energy there, not as much verve in the text or the delivery. Is that a bad thing? Maybe this is an indication that I am maturing, or maybe I'm feeling spiritually constipated. Stunted. Or held back. Who knows?

In many ways--despite my years in the academy--I was not prepared to be a student again. Sitting in a desk, taking notes, being examined. There's a different kind of discipline in being a teacher. Come to think of it. . .I've rarely been a student without also being a teacher. The typical model of university teaching is Master/Apprentice. Accomplished scholar imparts his/her mastery to those who want to attain competence in a field on the way to achieving expertise. From the beginning of my professional training as a reader/teacher of literature, I have been steeped in a different model: Coach/Athlete. Though I rebelled early on against the Marxism used to fuel this model (the so-called "pedagogy of the oppressed"), it best fits my personality. It is more dynamic, more intuitive, less authoritarian than authoritative, and it gives the teacher lots of room to grow. There's content to impart, of course, but the power of this model is the demonstration of a skill and the constant need to hone that skill.

Maybe my current spiritual discomfort has something to do with my academic discomfort? For Dominicans, study is a form of prayer. But I don't study well alone, or rather, I study best when studying is a communal activity, something done with others who need to sharpen their intellectual skills. What's a coach without his/her athletes?

So, I'm a priest without his people and a coach without his athletes. That goes a long way toward explaining my current malaise. Don't get me wrong here! I'm not unhappy or depressed or anything like that. Just. . .blah. Just tepid in all things spiritual and academic. The intellectual work I have ahead of me is daunting, even overwhelming. But that's not new. What's new, I guess, is that I feel little or no urgency to engage it or complete it. Why? I dunno. I'm reading. I'm thinking. I'm praying. Doing what I can to progress. But my heart isn't in it right now. I wish I could say that I'm being unduly distracted by more urgent problems. Nope. Or that I am being oppressed or burdened with third party problems. Nope. Yet, the sense of being stalled, of wading through molasses remains. Even my creative project--the prayer book--isn't moving my spirit to bigger and better things.

Who knows? It could be this Roman winter--cold, dark, damp. Could be that I am focusing on my health right now. Losing weight. Getting my HBP meds atraightened out. Or that I am too much concerned about where I will be this summer. It's easier to live in the future, isn't it?

What I need is a Coach standing over me yelling, "One more page, you wimp! Come on, you lazy bum! One more book! One more homily!" Ha! Yea, that's the ticket.

post-Pelosi announcement from the Vatican (Updated)

The Vatican Press Office published the following notice after Pelosi's visit with the Holy Father:

Following the General Audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Mrs Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage.

His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in cooperation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.

Will this have much influence on our nation's third-ranking abortion fan? I'm not holding my breath; however, hope springs eternal. . .even in politics.

A report from Breitbart:

VATICAN CITY (AP) - Pope Benedict XVI on Wednesday told U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, a Catholic who supports abortion rights, that Catholic politicians have a duty to protect life "at all stages of its development," the Vatican said.

Pelosi is the first top Democrat to meet with Benedict since the election of Barack Obama, who won a majority of the Catholic vote despite differences with the Vatican on abortion.

The Vatican released remarks by the pope to Pelosi, saying Benedict spoke of the church's teaching "on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death." That is an expression often used by the pope when expressing opposition to abortion.

Benedict said all Catholics—especially legislators, jurists and political leaders—should work to create "a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development."

Pelosi could not immediately be reached after the 15-minute meeting, which was closed to reporters and photographers [HA! So much for the photo-op. There'll be no campaign posters touting the Holy Father's visit with Pelosi flying around SanFran in 2010. Good for them]. The two met in a small room of a Vatican auditorium after the pope's weekly public audience.

A number of the bishops in the United States have questioned Pelosi's stance on abortion, particularly her theological defense of her support for abortion rights.

Benedict has cautiously welcomed the new Democratic administration, although several American cardinals have sharply criticized its support of abortion rights in a break from former President George W. Bush.

Pelosi had meetings with Italian leaders the past few days, including Premier Silvio Berlusconi.

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Recent arrivals

Grazie mille! Mille grazie!

Recent book arrivals from the WISH LIST:

Metaphysics and the Idea of God

Aquinas: God & Action

Finite and Eternal Being

Science and the Spiritual Quest

"Work on Oneself": Wittgenstein's Philosophical Psychology

God? A Philosophical Preface to Faith

Vatican II: Renewal within the Tradition

Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages

Thank You notes go out tomorrow to all for whom I have a return address!

Resisting the world's leaven

6th Week OT (Tues) Gn 6.5-8; 7.1-5, 10; Mk 8.14-21
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento Domenico e Sisto, Roma

Is Jesus surprised or disappointed? Is he exasperated or angry? Maybe all of these and more? Once again his best students and closest friends fail to “get it.” Having lived with him, traveled with him, listened to him, badgered him with questions, witnessed his miracles, the disciples seem to be as deaf, dumb, and blind as they were the day he netted them and pulled them into his ministry, gaping like fish for a breath. Exhibiting the same obstinance that the Pharisees seemed to favor when dealing with Jesus, his own students apparently need some sign, some miraculous konk on the head in order to see who Jesus is and to hear his saving Word. Fortunately, for the disciples, Jesus was with them, right there with them to continue teaching them, to continue showing them his unfailing Way. Two thousand and nine years later, what do we have to open our eyes and unstop our ears? When we clamor for signs and wonders, who steps up and reminds us that faith is first and always about trust, about throwing ourselves on the powerful mercy of God?

In the time it takes to cross to the opposite shore of the sea, the disciples had forgotten the lesson of the fishes and loaves. The Pharisees come forward after this miracle and demand signs from heaven to prove Jesus’ divine mandate, signs he refuses to give. Once on the opposite shore, Jesus warns his friends against the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod, warning them against the poisonous influence of legalism and worldly politics. They think that Jesus is rebuking them for failing to bring bread. Frustrated, disappointed, he says, “Do you not yet understand or comprehend? Are your hearts hardened? Do you have eyes and not see, ears and not hear? And do you not remember?”

They do not understand. Their hearts may be hardened. They are blind to his signs and deaf to his Word. And surely they have failed to remember. They have Jesus among them to remind them of their failures and to enlighten their ignorance. What do we have now when we find ourselves in the same predicament? Thanks be to God, we have Christ among us as well! What else is the Eucharist but our present-day miracle of the loaves? What else is scripture but our spoken Word, divine words that open eyes and unstop ears? What else we are doing here this morning as the Body of Christ than being reminded of who Christ is for us? We do not merely remember a story or recall a lesson, we witness again in this breaking of the bread the cross and Christ’s sacrifice. What other signs could we possibly want or need?

When we allow the leaven of the Pharisees—the poisonous influence of religious legalism—or the leaven of the Herodians—the poisonous influence of accommodating the Church to the world’s philosophy—we risk forgetting who we are; we risk confusion, loss, hard-heartedness, spiritual blindness, and eternal death. We risk not only our own lives here and here-after, but we risk the lives of those we are sent to save through our witness to God’s mercy. We cannot risk ignorance of God’s Word, so we read, hear, and enact His Self-revelation in scripture. We cannot risk misunderstanding, so we listen to and follow His Church’s apostolic faith. We cannot risk hard-heartedness, so we care for the least among His people. We cannot risk forgetting, so we come together as one heart and one mind and we remember. And in remembering what he did for us in this Eucharist, we go out, out there, and we tell others what we have remembered and to whom we give thanks and praise for our salvation.

If you have seen God’s abundance at work, if you have heard His saving Word, you cannot fail to share what your eyes have seen and your ears have heard. To fail in this is poisonous. To you and to everyone you meet. Thanks to be God, you never need to forget; you never need to grow cold. You have us and we all have Christ with us, always with us.

Of many things. . .

Of many things. . .

1). Comments on SSPX controversy?

The canonical questions in this mess are beyond me., so I will leave those aside. I'm always delighted that those who have excommunicated themselves in disobedience find their way back to the Church in obedience. Bishop Williamson's holocaust denial is just dumb. However, we don't excommunicate Catholics (or refuse to rescind an excommunication) because they hold dumb ideas about historical events. I find it bizarre (and telling) that the very people who whine and carp about the Church excommunicating heretics, etc. are the same people demanding that the Holy Father exclude Williamson for his non-theological ideas. Make no mistake, this controversy is a media-made event designed to embarrass the Holy Father. Bishop Williamson needs to obey his SSPX superiors and recant his nutty notions of the holocaust.

2). Comments on the Legionaries of Christ controversy?

The Bible is pack full of sinners being used by God to put His Good News into the world. Think: if we only allowed living Saints to found orders, build churches, write theology, etc. how much could we get done toward preaching the gospel? Not much. That being said. . .I see two paths for the L.C. right now: 1). keep what is good, true, and beautiful about the L.C. spirituality and 2). rapidly distance the movement from the founder. The first is just good spiritual practice. The second is just good P.R. In philosophy there's a informal logical fallacy called "poisoning the well." In this fallacy an opponent will attempt to discredit an argument by pointing out that the defender of the argument holds indefensible positions or is somehow dodgy morally or intellectually. The idea is to cast doubt on the position under debate by poisoning the source of the offending argument. We see this a lot when debaters resort to comparing their opponents to Nazis, or pointing out that their opponents hold positions similar to some other undesirable ideology. That the founder of the L.C. was a sinner is plain. Who isn't? Does this discredit his spirituality? No. L.C. spirituality stands on its own quite apart from its author. In other words, L.C. spirituality is either true, good, and beautiful or it isn't. That it was composed and promulgated by a sinner is irrelevant. For P.R. purposes, the L.C. needs to distance itself from its founder, that is, quickly and irrevocably disconnect its spirituality from the man who founded it. This means apologizing, cleaning house for any co-conspirators, re-organizing, and basically starting from scratch in terms of promoting itself as a Catholic religious order. The Church needs the fervor and discipline that the L.C. offers. However, the L.C. does not need its founder in order to thrive.

3). Obama's stimulus package?

Pork. Pure and simple. Pork. Millions of taxpayer dollars to left-wing political groups and allies of the Democrats. I'm worried about something Mike Huckabee noted on FoxNews last week: the stimulus bill is fundamentally anti-religious in that it has a number of provisions that forbid the practice of the faith for those receiving money from the bill. Of course, the MSM has made no mention of this nor will it. I don't watch TV here in Rome, but I managed to get in a few hours of watching CNN while I was at home. Though I knew that the MSM is basically a televised Obama cheerleading camp, I had no idea the extent to which these "journalists" have abdicated their responsibility as our nation's fourth estate. On Lincoln's birthday, I watched a "report" on CNN that spent almost an hour comparing Obama to Lincoln. It was a fawning, saccharine, duplicitous Hallmark card of a show. Little more than a propaganda piece. An early Valentine's gift to The One. How can we have any sort of proper political debate when our media refuses to report the most basic facts about the political process? This is why I regularly visit Newsbusters. . .and you should too.

4). Increasing number of attacks on the Church?

This is old news. The Church has been under attack since the Holy Spirit visited the apostles in the Upper Room on pentecost. Nothing new in this. As an institution, the Church represents one of the few places left in the west that teaches personal responsibility and virtue. So long as we do this we can expect to be the targeted by the world's culture. Yes, we need to fight back. But not for the sake of the Church. The Church has been around for 2,000 years and will continue to be around until the Lord decides otherwise. Our fight is not against the culture but for those who cannot fight for themselves. Our job is to preach the Good News and teach the truth of the faith "in season and out." Those in the Church who would see us compromise or accommodate in order to get along are seriously deluded. I'm not suggesting that we become belligerent or aggressive. We don't need to be violent in order to speak the truth to the powers of this world. We just have to be persistent, unwavering in speaking the Word to those who will see and hear. Those that refuse to see and hear have condemned themselves. Remember: our treasure is not of this world. We can lose all of our stuff and still flourish as a Body. What the Church needs now more than anything are courageous leaders among the laity and clergy to stand up and assert what we know to be true: God has won this fight. From all eternity, God has won.

5). What's your book about?

If I manage to get a manuscript to Liguori Publications by May 8th, my book will be available in August 2009. Basically, all I am doing is adapting traditional litanies and novenas for contemporary use and writing several original litanies and novenas. The original prayers are taken from a variety of sources, including the works of Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. I'm also including some prayers based on the mystical works of Meister Eckhart, Aquinas, Dionysus, Gregory of Nyssa, and a few other Patristic sources. Right now, I am working on the original pieces, including a triology of novenas rooted in the creation theology of the Eastern and Western Catholic traditions. If this book does well, I am going to propose a second book that will be a set of short reflections based on Patristic texts. This will be more of a daily-use book for growing in holiness. We'll see how thing go!

6). Lots of books about Eastern Orthodoxy on your Wish List. Considering a move to the East?

No, I'm a happy Latin Catholic. The books about Orthodoxy on my Wish List are there for two reasons: 1). I'm using them for my own book of prayers and 2). I'm giving the lectures on Orthodoxy to the U.D. students during our March trip to Greece. Generally, the E.O. do a better job of unpacking a theology of the Holy Spirit than the West does. I appreciate the more literary approach of the East and find their style of writing (less rational, more poetical) more appealing. As a Dominican, I am commited to the use of right reason in theological discussions, but sometimes we miss the subtlies when we focus exclusively on the rational. More than anything, the East has a better understanding of how creation and deification work in our salvation.

7). How was the trip home?

All went really well! No airport delays. No problem getting the meds through customs. I was very happy about this. I was also delighted on my flight over b/c the plane was only 2/3 full. This meant I got an extra seat next to me to stretch out! The flight back was full, however, so I was cramped and couldn't sleep. Ah well, the price of paying cattle-car rates, right? I visited with Mom and Pop for about a week and then drove to Irving where I was greeted warmly by students and faculty. One of my former students and some of his friends threw me a party. I had a chance to visit with several guys considering priesthood. Spent some time in Wal-Mart stocking up on things I can't get in Rome. Ate too much fast food, so this week is dedicated to puring Burger King and Wendy's from my system. Yuck. Had an unexpected visit with my provincial while in Texas. . .always a pleasure. I watched too much TV while visiting in MS. My mom loves HGTV, so I am once again up on all the latest yard fashions and my armchair skills at renovating old houses and shopping for new ones are up to par. Took my two nieces to see "Hotel for Dogs" and was astounded at the political messge of the movie: animals are just like humans and animal shelters are evil. The personification of animals is nothing new in cartoons and children's movies, but the none-too-subtle message of this movie is that animals and humans are morally equivalent agents with freely acting souls. I also found it interesting that all of the evil animal control agents were white men while the sympathic public was a hodge-podge of racially mixed women. The main characters were racially mixed too, but without fail the evil in the movie had a white male face. Something else I noticed while in the U.S.: we are a really fat nation. I've struggled with my weight all my life, but returning to the U.S. after only seven months in Rome gave me a perspective I hadn't counted on. I can see why the world thinks of the U.S. has an all-consuming Mouth and Stomach. Granted, I contribute to this image just by walking around Rome! Sigh. Am I glad to be back in Rome? Yes. I was surprised to find myself looking forward to returning. This semester is going to be tough. . .all Italian classes, thesis-writing, finishing up the book, trip to Greece, etc. But I am pleased to be back.

Unsigned comments will be deleted. Permission is given to re-post or reprint with attribution for non-commercial use only.

Priests on American military bases in E.U.?

Request for info:

Anyone out there know anything about American military bases in Europe needing English-speaking priests?

I have a couple of months that I may be able to spend this summer serving as chaplain if the particulars (transport, housing, compensation, etc.) are right.

Let me know.

Back in Rome

I made it back to Rome!

Got back to the university at 9.30am local time.

Thanks for the prayers and the recent activity on the Wish List. . .

Now, back to bed!