KC Young Adults

Image via CrunchBaseIf the key to the Socratic method is provoking serious reflection by asking insightful questions, sometimes I think the key to the N.Y. Times "method" is to provoke serious reflection by presenting obtuse perspectives with a straight face without noting the great ironies involved. Here we go. 1. A front page story on the economy has this statement by a Democratic housing expert with ties to the current administration: "The administration made a bet that a rising economy would solve the housing problem and now they are out of chips . . . . They are deeply worried and don't really know what to do." Source link (emphasis added). Yes, the best and the brightest (a phrase made popular to describe the eggheads who got us into a quagmire in Vietnam and kept us there even when they already knew that their tactics would not work), all the Ivy League economic experts associated with the administration, simply don't know what to do. Back in the thirties during the first Great Depression, many, who later became famous economists, decided to study economics in search of solutions. Maybe, we need another wave of new students of economics to rejuvenate a field that has discredited itself again. The wider moral and philosophical lesson is one that all academics and assorted experts should relearn daily: the man from Nazareth was right--humility, humility, humility. 2. Another front page article has Muslims in the U.S. wringing their hands over all the alleged hostility unleashed by the debate over the Ground Zero mosque (I use "Ground Zero" because I firmly believe that the only reason this particular location was so sought after by the developer in the first place was precisely because it would be a Ground Zero mosque--why else continue to resist the obvious solution of choosing a new location as an overwhelming majority of New Yorkers desires?).  Here is the quote that ends the article: Ingrid Mattson, the president of the Islamic Society of North America, said many American Muslims were still hoping to salvage the spirit of Ramadan.“In Ramadan, you’re really not supposed to be focused on yourself,” she said. “It’s about looking out for the suffering of other people. Somehow it feels bad to be so worried about our own situation and our own security, when it should be about empathy towards others.” Source link (emphasis added). Well, empathy usually begets empathy: why propose putting a mosque in the first place so close to a very sensitive spot that will cause suffering to others? Is that proposal empathetic towards others? Having a legal right to do something is not enough--it is only the first step in a common sense analysis. The second, essential step is asking whether one should exercise this legal right in these particular circumstances. Empathy will give you the right answer. Again, humility, humility, humility.

In classicist Edith Hamilton's The Greek Way, we read: Plato's rulers  . . .  were to be given absolute power only upon the condition that they did not want it, a curious parallel to the attitude prescribed by the early Church. A man appointed to the episcopacy was required to say--perhaps still must say, forms live so long after the spirit of them is dead--"I do not want to be a bishop. Nolo episcopari." To the Fathers of the Church as to Plato, no one who desired power was fit to wield it. Hamilton, Ch. V, p. 68 (Norton, 1993). Later, in the same book, she quotes from a play (Plutus) by Aristophanes, where a slave named Carion quizzes a politician: Carion: How do you make a living?Politician: Well, there's several answers to that. I'm Supervisor General of all things here, public and private too.Carion: A great profession that. What did you do to qualify for it?Politician: I WANTED it. Quoted in Hamilton, p. 115. The Old Testament gives the same warning: those who want power are unfit for it (see this previous post on Judges 9:8-15).

Image via Wikipedia Here is the website link with many resources. The resources include basic information on the Catholic faith and how to learn more about Catholicism, including how to become a Catholic and how to resume practicing the Catholic faith (scroll to very bottom of page).  In addition, here is the itinerary from the Vatican website.

Image via WikipediaMESSAGE FOR WORLD YOUTH DAY 2011 [Emphasis added]  VATICAN CITY, 3 SEP 2010 (VIS) - "Planted and built up in Jesus Christ, firm in the faith" is the title of the Message of Benedict XVI for the twenty-sixth World Youth Day, which is due to be celebrated in the Spanish capital Madrid during the month of August 2011.   The Message - dated from the Vatican on 6 August, Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord - has been published today. Paragraphs taken from the English-language version are given below. The Pope writes:   I often think back on the World Youth Day held in Sydney, Australia, in 2008. There we had an experience of a great festival of faith in which the Spirit of God was actively at work, building deep communion among the participants who had come from all over the world. That gathering, like those on previous occasions, bore rich fruit in the lives of many young people and in the life of the whole Church. ... Now, at a time when Europe greatly needs to rediscover its Christian roots, our meeting will take place in Madrid with the theme: "Planted and built up in Jesus Christ, firm in the faith". 1. At the source of your deepest aspirations   In every period of history, including our own, many young people experience a deep desire for personal relationships marked by truth and solidarity. ... In thinking of my own youth, I realise that stability and security are not the questions that most occupy the minds of young people. True enough, it is important to have a job and thus to have firm ground beneath our feet, yet the years of our youth are also a time when we are seeking to get the most out of life. ... We wanted something great, something new. We wanted to discover life itself, in all its grandeur and beauty. Naturally, part of that was due to the times we lived in. During the Nazi dictatorship and the war, we were, so to speak, "hemmed in" by the dominant power structure. So we wanted to break out into the open, to experience the whole range of human possibilities. I think that, to some extent, this urge to break out of the ordinary is present in every generation.   ... Is this simply an empty dream that fades away as we become older? No! Men and women were created for something great, for infinity. ... The desire for a more meaningful life is a sign that God created us and that we bear His "imprint". God is life, and that is why every creature reaches out towards life. Because human beings are made in the image of God, we do this in a unique and special way. We reach out for love, joy and peace. So we can see how absurd it is to think that we can truly live by removing God from the picture! God is the source of life. To set God aside is to separate ourselves from that source and, inevitably, to deprive ourselves of fulfilment and joy.   In some parts of the world, particularly in the West, today's culture tends to exclude God, and to consider faith a purely private issue with no relevance for the life of society. Even though the set of values underpinning society comes from the Gospel - values like the sense of the dignity of the person, of solidarity, of work and of the family - we see a certain "eclipse of God" taking place, a kind of amnesia which, albeit not an outright rejection of Christianity, is nonetheless a denial of the treasure of our faith, a denial that could lead to the loss of our deepest identity.   For this reason, dear friends, I encourage you to strengthen your faith in God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. You are the future of society and of the Church! As the Apostle Paul wrote to the Christians of Colossae, it is vital to have roots, a solid foundation! This is particularly true today. Many people have no stable points of reference on which to build their lives, and so they end up deeply insecure. There is a growing mentality of relativism, which holds that everything is equally valid, that truth and absolute points of reference do not exist. But this way of thinking does not lead to true freedom, but rather to instability, confusion and blind conformity to the fads of the moment. As young people, you are entitled to receive from previous generations solid points of reference to help you to make choices and on which to build your lives: like a young plant which needs solid support until it can sink deep roots and become a sturdy tree capable of bearing fruit. 2. Planted and built up in Jesus Christ   In order to highlight the importance of faith in the lives of believers, I would like to reflect with you on each of the three terms used by St. Paul in the expression: "Planted and built up in Jesus Christ, firm in the faith". We can distinguish three images: "planted" calls to mind a tree and the roots that feed it; "built up" refers to the construction of a house; "firm" indicates growth in physical or moral strength. These images are very eloquent.   ... The first image is that of a tree which is firmly planted thanks to its roots, which keep it upright and give it nourishment. ... What are our roots? Naturally our parents, our families and the culture of our country are very important elements of our personal identity. But the Bible reveals a further element. The prophet Jeremiah wrote: "Blessed are those who trust in the Lord, whose trust is the Lord. They shall be like a tree planted by water, sending out its roots by the stream". ... For the prophet, to send out roots means to put one's trust in God. From Him we draw our life. ... Jesus Himself tells us that He is our life. Consequently, Christian faith is not only a matter of believing that certain things are true, but above all a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It is an encounter with the Son of God that gives new energy to the whole of our existence.   ... There is a moment, when we are young, when each of us wonders: what meaning does my life have? What purpose and direction should I give to it? This is a very important moment, and it can worry us, perhaps for some time. ... Here, once more, I think of my own youth. I was somehow aware quite early on that the Lord wanted me to be a priest. Then later, after the war, when I was in the seminary and at university on the way towards that goal, I had to recapture that certainty. I had to ask myself: is this really the path I was meant to take? Is this really God's will for me? ... A decision like this demands a certain struggle. It cannot be otherwise. But then came the certainty: this is the right thing! Yes, the Lord wants me, and He will give me strength. If I listen to Him and walk with Him, I become truly myself. What counts is not the fulfilment of my desires, but of His will. In this way life becomes authentic.   Just as the roots of a tree keep it firmly planted in the soil, so the foundations of a house give it long-lasting stability. Through faith, we have been built up in Jesus Christ, even as a house is built on its foundations. Sacred history provides many examples of saints who built their lives on the Word of God. ... Being built up in Jesus Christ means responding positively to God's call, trusting in Him and putting His Word into practice.   Dear friends, build your own house on rock. ... Try each day to follow Christ's Word. ... With Him at your side, you will find courage and hope to face difficulties and problems, and even to overcome disappointments and set-backs. You are constantly being offered easier choices, but you yourselves know that these are ultimately deceptive and cannot bring you serenity and joy. Only the Word of God can show us the authentic way, and only the faith we have received is the light which shines on our path. ... Do not believe those who tell you that you don't need others to build up your life! Find support in the faith of those who are dear to you, in the faith of the Church, and thank the Lord that you have received it and have made it your own! 3. Firm in the faith   You are "planted and built up in Jesus Christ, firm in the faith". The Letter from which these words are taken was written by St. Paul in order to respond to a specific need of the Christians in the city of Colossae. ... Our own cultural context, dear young people, is not unlike that of the ancient Colossians. Indeed, there is a strong current of secularist thought that aims to make God marginal in the lives of people and society by proposing and attempting to create a "paradise" without Him. Yet experience tells us that a world without God becomes a "hell": filled with selfishness, broken families, hatred between individuals and nations, and a great deficit of love, joy and hope. On the other hand, wherever individuals and nations accept God's presence, worship Him in truth and listen to His voice, then the civilisation of love is being built, a civilisation in which the dignity of all is respected, and communion increases, with all its benefits. Yet some Christians allow themselves to be seduced by secularism or attracted by religious currents that draw them away from faith in Jesus Christ. There are others who, while not yielding to these enticements, have simply allowed their faith to grow cold, with inevitable negative effects on their moral lives.   Dear friends, the Cross often frightens us because it seems to be a denial of life. In fact, the opposite is true! It is God's "yes" to mankind, the supreme expression of His love and the source from which eternal life flows. ... I can only urge you, then, to embrace the Cross of Jesus, the sign of God's love, as the source of new life. 4. Believing in Jesus Christ without having seen Him   For many people today, it has become difficult to approach Jesus. There are so many images of Jesus in circulation which, while claiming to be scientific, detract from His greatness and the uniqueness of His person. That is why, after many years of study and reflection, I thought of sharing something of my own personal encounter with Jesus by writing a book. It was a way to help others see, hear and touch the Lord in whom God came to us in order to make Himself known.   Dear young people, learn to "see" and to "meet" Jesus in the Eucharist, where He is present and close to us, and even becomes food for our journey. In the Sacrament of Penance the Lord reveals His mercy and always grants us His forgiveness. Recognise and serve Jesus in the poor, the sick, and in our brothers and sisters who are in difficulty and in need of help. Enter into a personal dialogue with Jesus Christ and cultivate it in faith. Get to know Him better by reading the Gospels and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Converse with Him in prayer, and place your trust in Him. He will never betray that trust! ... Thus you will acquire a mature and solid faith, one which will not be based simply on religious sentiment or on a vague memory of the catechism you studied as a child. You will come to know God and to live authentically in union with him, like the Apostle Thomas who showed his firm faith in Jesus in the words: "My Lord and my God!" 5. Sustained by the faith of the Church, in order to be witnesses   In the history of the Church, the saints and the martyrs have always drawn from the glorious Cross of Christ the strength to be faithful to God even to the point of offering their own lives. In faith they found the strength to overcome their weaknesses and to prevail over every adversity. ... The victory born of faith is that of love. There have been, and still are, many Christians who are living witnesses of the power of faith that is expressed in charity.   Christ is not a treasure meant for us alone; He is the most precious treasure we have, one that is meant to be shared with others. In our age of globalisation, be witnesses of Christian hope all over the world. How many people long to receive this hope!   In the same way, if you believe, and if you are able to live out your faith and bear witness to it every day, you will become a means of helping other young people like yourselves to find the meaning and joy of life, which is born of an encounter with Christ! 6. On the way to World Youth Day in Madrid   Dear friends, once again I invite you to attend World Youth Day in Madrid. I await each of you with great joy. Jesus Christ wishes to make you firm in faith through the Church. The decision to believe in Jesus Christ and to follow Him is not an easy one. It is hindered by our personal failures and by the many voices that point us towards easier paths. Do not be discouraged. Rather, look for the support of the Christian community, the support of the Church!   Throughout this year, carefully prepare for the meeting in Madrid with the bishops, priests and youth leaders in your dioceses, parish communities, associations and movements. The quality of our meeting will depend above all on our spiritual preparation, our prayer, our common hearing of the word of God and our mutual support.   Dear young people, the Church depends on you! She needs your lively faith, your creative charity and the energy of your hope. Your presence renews, rejuvenates and gives new energy to the Church. That is why World Youth Days are a grace, not only for you, but for the entire People of God. The Church in Spain is actively preparing to welcome you and to share this joyful experience of faith with you.MESS/                                                                                                         VIS 20100903 (2440)

Image via WikipediaIt's a collection of short articles from various informed and interested activists and scholars. The one I found most refreshing in its unabashed and straightforward manner was the article by Tawfik Hamid, a former Islamic radical who is now an Islamic reformer. His article is entitled "Don't Gloss Over the Violent Texts." Here is an excerpt from his contribution to the collection on moderate Islam at the Wall St. Journal online: Radical Islam is not limited to the act of terrorism; it also includes the embrace of teachings within the religion that promote hatred and ultimately breed terrorism. Those who limit the definition of radical Islam to terrorism are ignoring—and indirectly approving of—the Shariah teachings that permit killing apostates, violence against women and gays, and anti-Semitism. Moderate Islam should be defined as a form of Islam that rejects these violent and discriminatory edicts. Furthermore, it must provide a strong theological refutation for the mainstream Islamic teaching that the Muslim umma (nation) must declare wars against non-Muslim nations, spreading the religion and giving non-Muslims the following options: convert, pay a humiliating tax, or be killed. This violent concept fuels jihadists, who take the teaching literally and accept responsibility for applying it to the modern world. Source link (scroll down to get to Mr. Hamid's article; emphasis added by blogger). I have to admire the honesty and courage of  Mr. Hamid. Many Western "progressives"  will ignore his warning just as many Western "progressives" ignored reports of Stalin's murderous ways back in the thirties, forties, and fifties. As a Christian, I cannot help but to respectfully propose this option to Islamic reformers: the Gospel of the prophet Jesus ("Isa" in Islam) never once has Jesus using force or advocating military conquest. Although throughout history Christians have been quite violent and have committed many shameful atrocities, the founder of Christianity never remotely proposed the use of force by anyone for religious reasons. In my opinion, the ultimate, most practical, quickest, and most effective reform of Islam involves embracing the Gospel of the prophet Jesus as contained in the New Testament. With all due respect, the way of the prophet Jesus, of Isa, set forth in the New Testament is the best Islamic reform possible.

Image via WikipediaLast Sunday's N.Y. Times Magazine published an interesting article by an English linguist on how our native language influences our perceptions. Here is the concluding segment: The habits of mind that our culture has instilled in us from infancy shape our orientation to the world and our emotional responses to the objects we encounter, and their consequences probably go far beyond what has been experimentally demonstrated so far; they may also have a marked impact on our beliefs, values and ideologies. We may not know as yet how to measure these consequences directly or how to assess their contribution to cultural or political misunderstandings. But as a first step toward understanding one another, we can do better than pretending we all think the same. Source link (emphasis added). The first language I spoke as a child was Spanish, which was the language spoken exclusively at home at least whenever an adult was speaking. The powerful, intangjble ways in which language influences our visceral and emotional reactions to facts can be shown by looking at one risqué linguistic example from my Spanish upbringing. I recall comments by the Spanish-speaking adults, especially the women, about other women and their dalliances. The rhetorical question would be asked in a somewhat sardonic, Yiddish-like way about an unmarried woman who had a sexual partner or a history of more than one sexual partner: "¿Quién es el marido?" or "¿Y qué marido tiene ahora?" These phrases can be roughly translated, respectively, as, "Who is the 'husband'?" ; "And what 'husband' does she have now?" Of course, the unmarried woman had no legal husband; but her being the compliant "bed-mate" of a male and thereby treating the male for all practical purposes (and certainly in the most significant emotional and physical way possible) as if he were indeed a legal husband needed to be expressed. Such a woman could have many such "husbands" (maridos) at different times.  The implied and abundant sarcasm that dripped from this way of describing unmarried sexual partners is hard to articulate explicitly. Such sarcasm struck and strikes a profound emotional core--what is profoundly marital is in this situation a flagrantly casual, recklessly easy, and outrageously dishonorable reality. Certainly, premarital sex is now so common-- serial sexual partners before marriage are so common--that merely to note the reality is nothing spectacular today. What is noteworthy in this Spanish idiom is the profound disdain traditionally expressed for such easy and casual behavior. That cultural disdain is why for many of us from immigrant cultures it is hard to accept the unacceptable with the calm, puzzling indifference that is so absurdly common in America. This linguistic difference highlights the contrast between a more traditional culture of sexual honor and a rootless, vanilla culture of sexual indifference. It's a big difference, and language shows the difference. Such linguistic differences, rarely expressed to outsiders, quietly and privately shape how many, here and abroad, view American culture.

Image via WikipediaThat is the subject of the Pope's comments about St. Hildegard of Bingen, a German mother superior who exercised authority humbly and who had the charism of prophecy (funny that from time to time people ask me if the charism of prophecy is present in the Church after the biblical period--well, just pay attention to the Pope's history lessons for the obvious answer!). Here is a leading Catholic women, highly influential and educated, with full scope for the exercise of her talents and charisms way back in the Middle Ages. Like St. Teresa of Jesus and Mother Teresa of Calcutta, St. Hildegard affirms that no woman need fear that her talents and charisms will find no scope in the Catholic Church, even if only men are eligible for ordination. The ordained ministry is not the only form of ministry in the Catholic Church, by any means. I recall how Pope John Paul II said that the "Marian dimension" of the Church (that is, the dimension exemplified by the humility of the Virgin Mary) is more fundamental ("precedes") the Petrine dimension exemplified by the Apostle Peter and others exercising ordained ministry (scroll down to Abbot's message in the latter link). If anyone else had said that, some would have called it heresy. It is not heresy. It is also important to emphasize the great and influential role of women in Christianity from its very beginnings to the present in order to draw an accurate and respectful comparison with the role of women in Islam. Let us not engage in disrespectful or uncharitable attacks--but let us make intelligent and informed comparisons so that individuals can freely decide for themselves which religion they prefer to remain in or to join. In the political world, shrewd candidates eschew negative "attack" ads in favor of "comparison" ads. That approach is wise. Below are the Pope's timely remarks, with emphasis added by me: HILDEGARD OF BINGEN: EXEMPLARY MINISTRY OF AUTHORITY VATICAN CITY, 1 SEP 2010 (VIS) - The Holy Father held his general audience this morning in the square in front of the Apostolic Place of Castelgandolfo, where he is spending the summer. His catechesis was dedicated to St. Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179), a great seer known as the "Teutonic prophetess".   Before focusing on the saint the Pope turned his attention John Paul II's 1988 Apostolic Letter "Mulieris dignitatem", which examined "the precious role women have played and continue to play in the life of the Church". The Church, that text states, "gives thanks for all the manifestations of the feminine 'genius' which have appeared in the course of history".   "During the centuries we customarily call the Middle Ages", said Benedict XVI, "certain female figures also stood out for the sanctity of their lives and the richness of their teachings". One of these was Hildegard of Bingen, born to a noble family who chose to dedicate her to the service of God.   Having received an appropriate human and Christian formation at the hands of her teacher Jutta of Spanheim, Hildegard entered the Benedictine convent of St. Disibod where she received the veil from Bishop Otto of Bamberg. In 1136 she was elected as mother superior, a role she carried out using "her gifts as a cultured and spiritually elevated woman, capable of dealing with the organisational aspects of life in the cloister", said the Pope.   Soon afterwards, due to the large number of vocations, Hildegard founded another community, located in Bingen and dedicated to St. Rupert, where she spent the rest of her life. "The manner in which she exercised the ministry of authority remains exemplary for all religious communities", noted the Holy Father. "She aroused saintly emulation in the practice of good works".   While still superior of the convent of St. Disibod the saint began to dictate her mystical visions to her spiritual advisor, the monk Volmar, and to her own secretary, Richardis of Strade. "As is always the case in the lives of true mystics, Hildegard wished to place herself under the authority of the wise, in order to discern the origin of her visions, which she was afraid could be the fruit of illusions and not from God".   To this end she spoke with St. Bernard of Clairvaux who calmed her fears and encouraged her. In 1147, moreover, she received the crucial approbation of Pope Eugene III who, in the Synod of Trier, read out one of the texts dictated by Hildegard which had been presented to him by Archbishop Henry of Mainz.   "The Pope authorised the mystic to write her visions and to speak in public. From that moment Hildegard's spiritual prestige grew to the point that her contemporaries gave her the title of the 'Teutonic prophetess'", said Benedict XVI.   "The sign of an authentic experience of the Holy Spirit, the source of all charisms", the Pope concluded, "is that the individual possessing supernatural gifts never boasts of them, never shows them off and, above all, demonstrates complete obedience to ecclesiastical authority. All gifts distributed by the Holy Spirit are, in fact, intended for the edification of the Church and it is the Church, through her pastors, who recognises their authenticity".AG/                                                                                       VIS 20100901 (550)

One thing they have in common is the tendency to raise one single language above all others when it comes to the holy.  The book at left is one I am reading now on the history of Christianity. In the course of the book, the author must, of course, deal with the rise of Islam. In doing so, he reminded me of how, for Muslims, the Arabic language of the Koran has a singularly privileged role and how any translations from the Arabic are viewed as deficient: Muslim sources have often ascribed the Qu'ran's power to its exceptional beauty in the Arabic language, and the Qu'ran does not translate well, particularly into English. MacCulloch, Kindle location 4788. Here is how one Muslim source describes the Muslim view of Arabic's importance: Ninety percent of the world's Muslims do not speak Arabic as their native language. Yet in daily prayers, when reading the Qur'an, or even in simple conversations with each other, Arabic rolls off any Muslim's tongue readily. It may be broken or heavily accented, but most Muslims make the attempt to speak and understand at least some Arabic.Why is Arabic so important to understanding the faith of Islam?Regardless of their linguistic, cultural, and racial differences, Muslims form one community of believers. This community is based on their shared faith in One Almighty God, and the guidance He has sent down to mankind. His final revelation to mankind, the Qur'an, was sent over 1400 years ago in the Arabic language. Arabic thus serves as a common language among this diverse community of believers.The original Arabic text of the Qur'an has been preserved from the time of its revelation. Translations have been done into various languages, but they all refer back to the original Arabic. In order to fully understand the magnificent words of their Lord, Muslims make every attempt to understand the rich and poetic classical Arabic language.Source link (emphasis added by blogger). Hebrew plays a similar role among the Jewish people. Yet, in the Jewish case, there is the difference that Hebrew is also the historical and cultural language of ethnic Jews who make up the overwhelming majority of the Jewish religion. In contrast, Islam emphasizes Arabic even for the 90% of Muslims who are not ethnically Arab. Interestingly, some Catholic traditionalists act as if the Catholic Mass is best celebrated in the Latin language (although the Roman or Latin liturgical rite is only one of several linguistically diverse liturgical rites in the Catholic Church).  I like Latin very much, to say the least--but such a view of language strikes me as more Muslim than Christian. The Pentecost event (described in Acts 2) gives us the distinctively Christian approach: let the celebration of Christ's sacrifice take place in all the languages of all ethnic groups. No one language is intrinsically privileged over any other as the essential vehicle of divine revelation or as the essential means of liturgical celebration of that revelation. Yes, it is good to study Latin to go deeper into our faith by studying the writings of our great Latin theological and spiritual writers. It is even better to study biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, the languages of the Scriptures which are uniquely central to Tradition. Nevertheless, for Christians, at the end of the day, no one language can claim an intrinsic preeminence remotely like that of Arabic in the Islamic world. That linguistic difference is an important theological difference between Christianity and Islam that we should not be in the business of blurring.

A good friend lent me evangelical biblical scholar D.A. Carson's book on exegetical fallacies (2nd ed.), that is, fallacies in biblical interpretation. I recommend it. I was also pleased to see that Carson relied twice on the work of Jesuit Fr. Maximilian Zerwick, an expert on biblical Greek, whose Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New Testament I sometimes use. Here are some of my reactions to the book: 1. We need books like these, whether we are reading the Bible or liturgical documents or papal encyclicals, even if we are reading secular texts. For we are all in danger of committing these fallacies. It is easy to commit them. Carson discusses word-study (etymological) fallacies, logical fallacies, grammatical fallacies (a little bit of knowledge can be very dangerous when it comes to Greek grammar), fallacies stemming from our presuppositions, and fallacies in historical reasoning. As Carson notes, if we can be saved from committing any of these fallacies or simply become somewhat more vigilant about them, the book has accomplished its purpose. 2. Yet, as a Catholic reading this book full of examples of fallacious and conflicting interpretations of the Bible, I am more convinced than ever that the chaos of biblical interpretations that has spawned thousands of denominations points to one essential thing: we do need a doctrinal Tradition to guide our interpretations or at least set the outer boundaries and limits of our interpretations. The quibbles of scholars over the very same Scripture verses indicate that, without the parameters of a Christian Tradition (especially the parameters of the historic Creeds of Christianity), we are left with a profusion of conflicting opinions on a wide range of issues and few certainties that we can hold in common. We as Christians need a teaching authority--the unworthy Catholics have received it through the Petrine ministry. A text needs an authoritative, final interpreter; or else any individual interpreter can argue that the line ought to be drawn at a different place, and no one can logically deny him the right to do so. 3. Finally, I was happy to read the book after writing my series on liturgical fallacies concerning the ordinary form of the Mass. The book reminded me of some the fallacies that I tried to expose, fallacies that float around without challenge among too many on the theological right who consider themselves "super-Catholic." Let me give one example of the logical fallacy underlying one of the false myths about the ordinary form of the Mass that followed Vatican II. Many on the internet and elsewhere follow a causal fallacy about the ordinary form, namely, that, because the ordinary form arose as the ordinary or normal form of the Mass after Vatican II, the ordinary form represents a rupture from or an illegitimate development of the Mass of all ages. Well, an examination of what the Catechism calls the "Mass of all ages" (in contrast to what traditionalists, with a small "t," call the "Mass of all ages") indicates that the ordinary form is simply a restored version of the fundamentals of the Mass--just as restoring an old, obscured, smoky but extremely valuable and beautiful mural clarifies the original rather than creates a completely new and different art work from scratch. Yet, many live by the fallacy that, just because this restored form of the Mass arose after Vatican II, this  restored form was invented whole cloth by Vatican II or shortly thereafter. Two causal fallacies are involved here: post hoc, propter hoc (after this, because of this) and cum hoc, propter hoc (with/during this, because of this). The first causal fallacy states that, because something came after X, then X is the cause of it. The second causal fallacy states that, because something is correlated with X, then X caused it. Simply because this liturgical restoration, the ordinary form, arose after Vatican II does not mean that the ordinary form was invented from scratch by Vatican II. Or, if some feel that the alleged "liturgical betrayal" happened, more precisely, in the aftermath of Vatican II, then we see the other causal fallacy: just because something was restored during the aftermath of Vatican II when many things went wrong (and also when many things went right) does not mean that it was invented from scratch during the aftermath of Vatican II. The bottom-line is that the unstated assumption held by many is that the ordinary form was created out of the blue by Vatican II or created out of the blue in the aftermath of Vatican II.  That unstated assumption needs to be proven, not assumed. In my judgment, the Church's living magisterium clearly and officially teaches that this unstated assumption is profoundly and radically wrong. I would add that, in my personal opinion, this unstated assumption even borders on the blasphemous.

Image via WikipediaI call the "Vatican II" Mass the Mass of Justin Martyr, whose second century description of the Mass of all ages is quoted at length in the Catechism of the Catholic Church  (paragraph 1345). Below are 5 False Myths about the Mass of Justin Martyr. They give a succinct overview of my recent series on this topic. You can click each of the false myths to go to the associated blog post. By the way, some of the comments are also instructive. Thanks to all who have commented and who will comment. 1. The first false myth is that the Vatican II Mass arose as something new only after and because of Vatican II. 2. The second false myth about the Mass of Justin Martyr is that the English translation of this Mass is gravely flawed. 3. The third false myth about the Mass of Justin Martyr is that it is intrinsically predisposed to irreverent celebration. 4.   The fourth false myth is that to have a Mass without a significant amount of or at least some Latin defies the original intent of the Second Vatican Council. 5. The fifth false myth is that it is improper to celebrate the Mass of Justin Martyr with the priest "facing the people."

Image by Steadyjohn via Flickr "The Church requires much less of us than her pharisees seek to require of us." --Blogger

Image by photine via FlickrThey are now so common in Michigan that I call them the "Michigan birthmark," but I may be unfairly singling out one state due to my provincialism. When growing up, I remember only merchant seamen with tattoos. Thanks to our Rhode Island friend for this link on the subject in the New Criterion website (warning: the author quotes here and there an Anglo-Saxon expletive in his analysis). Finally, let me be clear that I am not denigrating anyone by posting this link. I am certain that there are individuals much better than I who have tattoos (I know some), but the wider social phenomenon is indeed troubling. I am also of the opinion that in many cases excessive display of tattoos likely points to deeper and darker emotional issues that need to be addressed and, hopefully, cured or mitigated. Update: Our Rhode Island friend also sends this link to a commentary on tattoos by a Jewish rabbi. The rabbi's view is consistent with a Christian and Catholic view of the body. I, for one, endorse the rabbi's analysis.

Image via Wikipedia5. The fifth false myth is that it is improper to celebrate the Mass of Justin Martyr with the priest "facing the people." The official rules that govern the celebration of the Mass provide as follows: 299. The altar should be built apart from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible.  Source link (General Instruction on the Roman Missal, Third Typical Edition, 2002; emphasis added by blogger ). That's the answer.  Here are some purely extra comments by me: 1. "Facing the people" does not imply that the priest is ignoring God, or that the people are transfixed by the wonderful face of the priest during the liturgy, especially at the time of or immediately after the consecration. Any such allegation is clearly polemical and, in my view, absurd, although it is commonly made and strangely presumed to be a self-evident description of celebration facing the people. 2.  In fact, the most accurate way to describe celebration facing the people is that both the priest and the people are together offering the sacrifice to God the Father. The priest is, certainly and of course, not offering the sacrifice to the people and is not fixing his gaze at the people at the moment of consecrating and offering the host and chalice, just as the people are not focused on admiring the face of the priest during the consecration. What the priest does after the consecration is to show the sacrificed body and blood of Christ to the people-- appropriately enough because, at the moment of Christ's crucifixion, the veil of the Jewish Temple was torn (Matthew 27:51). Interestingly, offering the sacrifice "toward" a crucifix arguably blurs the fact that the priest acting in the person of Christ is actually offering the sacrifice of the body and blood of Jesus to the Father. A crucifix behind the offering priest or above the offering priest in fact better matches in visual terms the role of the priest standing in the person of Christ to make the offering of the broken body and poured out blood to the Father. (But I am not implying in any way that offering the sacrifice toward or facing a crucifix is in any way improper or blameworthy. Of course, it's not.)

Image via Wikipedia4. The fourth false myth is that to have a Mass without a significant amount of or at least some Latin defies the original intent of the Second Vatican Council. The only way I know of discovering the intent of the Council is to go to the relevant text and read it, putting aside polemical agendas that can cloud what we see in the text. Oh my, you can write hundreds of pages on this particular false myth, hundreds of pages that probably are not worth the effort. So, I will be concise.Let us go to the famous relevant text of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium): 36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.2. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.3. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2 [namely, "competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established"] to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See.And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language. 4. Translations from the Latin text into the mother tongue intended for use in the liturgy must be approved by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned above. Source link (emphasis added by blogger). My translation of the above legislative language follows: "The bishops' conference, with the approval of the Vatican, determines the extent of the use of the vernacular language in the liturgy. Translations are to be approved by the bishops' conference." So, any questions about the how much Latin a priest must use in celebrating Mass comes down to this issue: has the national bishops' conference and the Vatican approved how much of the vernacular or mother tongue the priest is using? If they have approved, there are no grounds for complaint based on the text of Vatican II.  In fact, the new English translation of the Roman Missal to be implemented in 2011 translates the entire Roman Missal into English. There is an option to use the Greek Kyrie eleison in the penitential rite (a reminder that even the early Roman liturgy was in Koine Greek). The only Latin I saw in the new translation was the Latin rendering of the Sanctus (Holy, holy, holy, . . .), use of which is optional, in the sample "Order of Mass" at the bishops' website. In other words, Vatican II left the extent of use of the vernacular to the competent authorities. It was not the original intent of the Council to set forth a preordained limit to how much of the vernacular could be used. How do I infer this view about the Council's intent? I make this inference precisely because they did not set such a preordained limit. Case closed. Now, if you want to argue that some Latin should be present, you are certainly free to do so; and even I might very well agree with you (I recall personally requesting some Latin in the Mass in at least one of the parishes I attended in the past). Yet, my current view is that it is false to say that a Mass with no Latin is in defiance of Vatican II; while, at the same time, I am happy to see at least some Latin used in the Mass of Justin Martyr, especially the Agnus Dei

Image via Wikipedia3. The third false myth about the Mass of Justin Martyr is that it is intrinsically predisposed to irreverent celebration. You hear this false myth often among some, both explicitly and implicitly. There is no basis for it in the text of the Roman Missal. I defy anyone to show anywhere in the Roman Missal of the ordinary form any instruction (rubric) that fosters irreverence. It's just not there. So what is the basis of this false myth of intrinsic irreverence? People claim to have seen the "Vatican II" Mass celebrated in an irreverent manner. I, for one, have not, although I have been to Mass in the ordinary form in many parishes in several states and cities and even overseas. If people disobey the Roman Missal, that is a different matter entirely. But such disobedience to the Missal is obviously nothing intrinsic to the Missal but something that a disobedient or ignorant or clumsy celebrant brings to the Missal. The same can happen in any other form of the Mass. In fact, the more complex the form of the Mass, the more likely there will be some unintentional deviation from the particular missal used. Hence, I argue that the noble, uncluttered (and very Roman) simplicity of the Mass of Justin Martyr is a good safeguard against such deviation.

Image via Wikipedia2. The second false myth about the Mass of Justin Martyr (see first post in this series) is that the English translation of this Mass is gravely flawed. Well, as of the First Sunday of Advent 2011, November 27th, a new English translation of the Vatican II Mass (I prefer calling it the "Mass of Justin Martyr") goes into effect. You can get the details at this link from the U.S. Bishops' Conference. Moreover, if you look at the changes noted at the bishops' website, surprisingly, the changes are not, in my view, either major or radical. They strike me as adjustments that seek to make the language a more literal reflection of the official Latin text and lend a somewhat more majestic and biblical air to the English used. Here is how the bishops themselves describe the changes: The texts of the revised translation of the Roman Missal are marked by a heightened style of English speech and a grammatical structure that closely follows the Latin text.  In addition, many biblical and poetic images, such as “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof…” (Communion Rite) and “…from the rising of the sun to its setting” (Eucharistic Prayer III) have been restored. Source link. So, even without this certainly welcome and overdue English revision, it is clear to me that the "old" English text which will soon be replaced is not, by any means, a gravely flawed translation, as some might have us think. So, put the false myth to bed that the English translation of the Vatican II Mass, whether the present one still in use or the new one that will come into effect next year, is somehow gravely flawed. The English translation of the Mass of Justin Martyr was not gravely flawed, it is not gravely flawed, and it will certainly not be gravely flawed. Let me make a related point. The Church has done a great service to the English-speaking world with this new translation. It is a service that is very theologically powerful: as in Pentecost (Acts 2:6b, "each one was hearing them speak in his own language," ESV), the Church praises God and proclaims the Good News in the languages of all people. This effort at refining the English translation of the Vatican II Mass is squarely in that ancient theological tradition and reflects one facet of the gift of tongues and the related gift of interpretation: seeking to make Christ more understandable to all people everywhere in their own language.

Image by jimforest via Flickr1. The first false myth is that the Vatican II Mass arose as something new only after and because of Vatican II. No, the Mass that we inartfully call the "Vatican II Mass" is merely a form of the Mass of all ages, what I call the "Mass of Justin Martyr" who in the second century described the Mass that underlies all forms of the Mass. Please do not take my word or that of anyone else. Take the word of the Catechism of the Catholic Church: The Mass of all ages1345 As early as the second century we have the witness of St. Justin Martyr for the basic lines of the order of the Eucharistic celebration. They have stayed the same until our own day for all the great liturgical families. St. Justin wrote to the pagan emperor Antoninus Pius (138-161) around the year 155, explaining what Christians did: On the day we call the day of the sun, all who dwell in the city or country gather in the same place. The memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read, as much as time permits. When the reader has finished, he who presides over those gathered admonishes and challenges them to imitate these beautiful things. Then we all rise together and offer prayers* for ourselves . . .and for all others, wherever they may be, so that we may be found righteous by our life and actions, and faithful to the commandments, so as to obtain eternal salvation. When the prayers are concluded we exchange the kiss. Then someone brings bread and a cup of water and wine mixed together to him who presides over the brethren. He takes them and offers praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and for a considerable time he gives thanks (in Greek: eucharistian) that we have been judged worthy of these gifts. When he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all present give voice to an acclamation by saying: 'Amen.' When he who presides has given thanks and the people have responded, those whom we call deacons give to those present the "eucharisted" bread, wine and water and take them to those who are absent.[169]1346 The liturgy of the Eucharist unfolds according to a fundamental structure which has been preserved throughout the centuries down to our own day. It displays two great parts that form a fundamental unity:- the gathering, the liturgy of the Word, with readings, homily and general intercessions; - the liturgy of the Eucharist, with the presentation of the bread and wine, the consecratory thanksgiving, and communion. The liturgy of the Word and liturgy of the Eucharist together form "one single act of worship";[170] the Eucharistic table set for us is the table both of the Word of God and of the Body of the Lord.[171] Source link. The Mass of all ages includes a kiss of peace exchanged by the entire assembly. Hmm, doesn't sound Tridentine. The Mass of all ages includes distributing the Eucharist in the forms of both bread and wine. Again, doesn't sound Tridentine. By the way, the Mass of all ages described by Justin Martyr was probably in Greek, not Latin. Justin wrote in Koine Greek, which was the common spoken language (the vernacular) of the eastern Mediterranean. Koine Greek was the vernacular, apparently, even of the Roman Christians at that time, a fact which is consistent with the fact that Paul's Letter to the Romans (circa 56 A.D.) was also written in Greek (see appendix at end of this post). Again, not Tridentine. Yet, what makes the Tridentine Mass itself a Mass to begin with is that it shares the same fundamental structure as the Mass of Justin Martyr. Yet, in my view, the so-called "Mass of Vatican II" more clearly reflects the description of Justin Martyr. That's my judgment as I read the description by Justin quoted in the Catechism. My suggestion is this plea: stop calling the ordinary form of the Mass that became widespread after Vatican II the "Novus Ordo" because it is not new at all (in addition, it seems that "Novus Ordo" is not used in any official Church document on the liturgy--see link). The ordinary form of the Mass is, in my opinion, best called the "Mass of Justin Martyr" or the "Mass of all ages." Ironically, very ironically given the way many speak, it is the Mass of Justin Martyr that is most traditional. I will move on to some other false myths about the so-called "Vatican II Mass" in future posts, Lord willing.  Let the chips fall where they may. Let the facts carry the day. Appendix: Cardinal Arinze notes: The Church in Rome used Greek from the beginning. Only gradually was Latin introduced until the fourth century when the Church in Rome was definitely latinized (cf. A.G. Martimort: The Dialogue between God and his People, in A.G. Martimort, ed.: The Church at Prayer, Collegeville, 1992, I, p. 161-165). Source link. See also Catholic Encyclopedia.

Shack Up InnThis weekend's N.Y. Times magazine has a lengthy article on people in their twenties as a group that seems to be delaying assiduously the markers of adulthood: independence from parents, marriage, childbearing, and careers. I admit that I only skimmed the ten-page article; I could not bring myself to read, line by line, what very quickly tipped its hand as a very superficial analysis. The gist of the article is that this rudderless existence may signal the emergence of a new stage of development, on the par with adolescence--a stage that will require social recognition and support. Why did I find the analysis so superficial? The typical academic mindset just can't see what is actually dysfunctional as dysfunctional and tends to canonize whatever it observes as "normal" and immune to challenge. I would like to make several points about this rudderless phenomenon of drift among "twentysomethings." 1. I have observed the same drifting phenomenon among this age group, especially among, surprisingly, graduates of a very prestigious public university. The particular subgroup I came across seemed quite alienated, dispirited, and bored--full of ennui. Sometimes that alienation was reflected in a fetish for body painting or tattoos, which I took as a sign of that ennui and of immaturity. 2. Yet, this rudderless existence is, contrary to the impression made by the article, not new at all. I know people in their fifties who went through their twenties in exactly the same way: casual sex with serial partners, moving from city to city, no passionate attraction to a particular calling or vocation, finally settling into something just in the hope of maximizing income. So, my first advice to the author of the Times article is to look further back in time: the twentysomethings of today are simply following the pattern set by the baby boomers in the sixties, seventies, and eighties. 3. All this drifting, in my opinion, reflects some deep emotional and psychological problems which I categorize as despair, despair at finding true love, despair about marriage as a workable and desirable institution, despair about careers that are fulfilling, and general despair about any meaning or purpose in life. That general despair is reflected by a complete indifference to the very idea of God so that even if the possible existence of God is granted, any such God is viewed as indifferent to and distant from one's individual life, desires, and needs. Now, let me state a few, blunt opinions. Having entered middle age, I find myself more impatient with beating around the bush because I have seen so much of it for so long, to no purpose. The article notes the delay of the traditional adult milestones such as financial independence (whether from parents or others), marriage, and career. Well, if, as a male, you can get all the sex that you want anytime you want without being expected by females to even remotely contemplate marriage, you end up, voila, delaying marriage. If you are getting all the sex you want, maybe even on a daily basis with a live-in partner, then your female partner is likely accommodating your needs by taking care of the contraception angle. Hence, you are, of course, delaying parenthood. If marriage is not on the horizon, then there is also no urgency to quickly establish a career so you have enough income to marry, buy a house, and support a family. Your female partner will likely even pay half your rent and maybe even provide other financial assistance, in addition to providing sexual services, a highly convenient economic arrangement that further reduces the urgency to get on with a career. In other words, for previous generations (pre-baby-boomer generations), to get steady sex you needed to get married. Good, marriageable girls did not supinely accommodate and hence did not contracept. In turn, to get married, you needed to be financially independent of your parents and establish a career path.  In other words, the joining of steady sex to marriage, naturally pressured people to grow up and get on with it. Today, you can get steady and varied sex without marriage crossing the mind of anyone involved. Hence, in my opinion, many twentysomethings have now for decades drifted along without any sense of urgency about marriage or parenthood or about becoming financially self-sufficient in a promising career as soon as possible. That's my take, but I think it takes into account the uncomfortable elephant in the room that too many in academia ignore at the expense of dealing with reality. Sometimes the explanations are not so complicated. You do not need to grow up to get all the sex you want. Hence, many are growing up much, much later than was true in prior generations.

For Michigan readers, here is information about an upcoming Life in the Spirit Seminar in Macomb County: Life in the Spirit Seminar“Wind and Fire” Wednesdays,September 8 to November 3, 2010 St. Augustine Church68035 Main St.Richmond, Michigan Contact persons: Diane Novak #586-716-2830 Heidi Sabella #586-725-9636

"It is Jesus that you seek when you dream of happiness; He is waiting for you when nothing else you find satisfies you. He is the beauty to which you are so attracted. It is He who provokes you with that thirst for fullness that will not let you settle for compromise. He is He who urges you to shed the masks of a false life. It is He who reads in your hearts your most genuine choices, the choices that others try to stifle. It is Jesus that stirs in you the desire to do something great with your lives, the refusal to allow yourselves to be grounded down by mediocrity, the courage to commit yourselves humbly and patiently to improving yourselves and society making the world more human and fraternal."  -Pope John Paul the Great (World Youth Day 2000) [Emphasis added by blogger; credit to a friend you passed this quote on to me] Blogger comment: This quote is an apt companion to the post on "twentysomethings." Jesus is the rudder that is missing.