Remodeling The Church (Part One)

On January 7, 2012 the Vatican unveiled the plan to remodel the Church. It is being called the Year of Faith. The Vatican is not calling this a remodel, but c’mon, if it looks like a remodel, sounds like a remodel, it is a remodel. I am going to try to outline this plan for you. It is too early to give specific details, but I hope you will be able to get a good idea with the information that is available. This blog post represents part one of a two part posting outlining the Year of Faith.

As I was reviewing the Year in Faith I had a nagging feeling that I had heard this stuff before. I seemed to remember a prediction I had read that was very reminiscent of this plan. I dug through some of of my older resource materials and I discovered where I had heard this prediction; Fr. Andrew M. Greeley, of course.

If you are not familiar with Fr. Greeley you should know he is one of my favorite Catholic authors. In the 80′s I read one of Fr. Greeley’s fiction novels (The Cardinal Sins) and that got me started reading his books. I recommend that you read his books, fiction and non-fiction. He is an excellent author and he understands Catholicism well. When the pedophile Priest scandal was churning and my parish had two Priests convicted of pedophilia, Fr. Greeley’s book (Priests: A Calling In Crisis) helped me deal with the concerns I was experiencing. He might help you too.

Back to the prediction. In 2004 Fr. Greeley published a book (The Catholic Revolution) and he predicted that there would be attempts to bring back the preconciliar Church. He even named Joseph Ratzinger (then a Cardinal) as one of those in the Church who would lead the old Church comeback. Now, as Pope, Joseph Ratzinger has surrounded himself with Bishops who are obedient to Rome and he is ready to start remodeling.

Unlike some commentators, I entertain no nostalgia for the so-called confident Church of the years 1945-1960. Most of those who lament the passing of that Church weren’t there at the time… Nor am I persuaded, as some in the Vatican [i.e. then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger], that a strong effort should be made to restore much of the discipline that existed in the preconciliar Church, to undo the mistakes that have been made since 1965 and to protect the Church from even greater harm.
- Andrew Greeley (Author, Priest, Sociologist)

Fr. Greeley saw the difficulties during Vatican II in terms of a metaphor; new wine being poured into old wineskins. The old wineskins burst and nobody knew what to do. Some set about attempting to repair the old wineskins. This could not be done and yet even today there are those who still try.

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger would doubtless like to remodel the Church to fit the rural Bavarian paradigm within which he remembers growing up… However, his Bavaria… [is] not there anymore… Moreover, their restoration four decades after the Council is impossible.
- Andrew Greeley (Author, Priest, Sociologist)

I hear what you are saying to yourself right now; “why is he dragging all of this Vatican II baggage out?” “I thought this blog post was about the Year of Faith?” Dear surfers, it is only because of Vatican II that we now have the Year of Faith. Don’t let anybody tell you otherwise. Let me explain. One of the components of the Year of Faith will be a convocation of the Synod of Bishops.

Okay, right now you are saying to yourself; “what is a convocation?” “Better yet, what is a Synod?” Perhaps a “Year of Faith” quote, or two, from the Vatican will help?

To assist in the correct understanding of the Vatican Council II, the communiqué cites the next General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on The New Evangelisation for the Transmission of the Christian Faith. [The communique] also states that from the outset of his Pontificate Pope Benedict has strived to encourage “a correct understanding of the Council rejecting as erroneous the so-called “hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture” and promoting what he himself has termed “the ‘hermeneutic of reform’, of renewal in continuity.”.
- Door of Faith

Vatican Council II, “beginning with the light of Christ… wanted to elaborate on the intimate nature of the Church and its relationship with the contemporary world.” “After the Council the Church – under the sure guidance of the Magisterium and in continuity with the whole Tradition – set about ensuring the reception and application of the teaching of the Council in all its richness.” “To assist in the correct reception of the Council, the Popes have frequently convoked the Synod of Bishops… providing the Church with clear guidance through the various post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortations.”
- Year of Faith

These are not my words, and they are not taken out of context. Click through to the article I drew the quotes from and see for yourself.

Basically, the Pope plans to gather a special group of Bishops for a meeting. From the meeting of this group will come assistance on the correct way to receive the reforms of Vatican II. This meeting of the special group of Bishops is necessary because, up until now, our understanding of Vatican II has not been correct. The Pope and the Bishops will tell us the proper way to understand the reforms of Vatican II.

Fr. Greeley predicted that given the right circumstances there would be a strong effort to restore preconciliar discipline.

Welcome to the Year of Faith.

Let me put it to you another way.

If we control the spin, or direction, of an object, we are showing sides of it we want to show while not shedding light on the rest. A spin doctor uses spin control to emphasize or exaggerate the most positive aspect of something.
- What is a Spin Doctor

The Vatican is spinning this Year of Faith as a time to elaborate and encourage renewal in continuity of our Catholic faith, but they are hiding the fact that they are frantically patching the old wineskins that burst in 1965. B16 has his clique of Bishops, and maybe together they can restore that preconciliar discipline (bring back the good old days). That is what this whole Year of Faith is about.

Still not convinced? Okay, here is another quote that describes how we might use our time during the Year of Faith.

Practical suggestions include a greater focus on the quality of the teaching of the faith and an examination of local catechism as well as a greater use of the mass media and art, with a focus on the faith, its principles and content and the ecclesial significance of Vatican Council II.
- Door of Faith

Did you catch that last part? Trust me, I am not going to be spending my time focusing on the ecclesial significance of Vatican II. Fr. Greeley said it best.

I believe that, for all the confusion, all the mistakes, all the false prophets, all the stupidity of the last thirty-five years of Catholic history, the new Church is a great improvement on the old Church.
– Andrew Greeley (Author, Priest, Sociologist)

Christian Faith Provides A Surer Basis For Love Than The Secular Vision

I borrowed the words for the topic of this post from Pope Benedict XVI. His words were actually “Christian faith provides a surer basis for life than the secular vision.” I changed it to love because that is a more accurate statement, in my opinion.

B16 continued on to discuss further the New Evangelization Pontifical Council which is setup to promote “a renewal of authentic Christian living based on the teachings of the Church.” I don’t know about you, surfers, but I have been struggling with my faith and religion for many years. I am ready for my renewal of Christian living that is authentic. I fear that New Evangelization will not be able to help me because it only sees the struggle for our renewal against the backdrop of the secularization of our societies.

Fellowship with one another is one of the bases for love in Christian faith. As I continue to struggle and search for answers regarding my faith there are members of the Catholic Church who continue to call me a small-c Catholic, or worse. One name I have not been called is a secularist, but I am sure that name is coming soon. Most of these conversations end with the same sentiment that I should leave the Catholic Church. Many years ago my wife and I considered changing our religious practice to one of the Protestant denominations, but we didn’t. No matter where we would go the result would be the same. We continue to struggle with that decision every day, but we know our Christian obligations.

Can. 210 All the Christian faithful must direct their efforts to lead a holy life and to promote the growth of the Church and its continual sanctification, according to their own condition.
- Code of Canon Law, Title I. THE OBLIGATIONS AND RIGHTS OF ALL THE CHRISTIAN FAITHFUL

My children are receiving a Catholic School education. As they are growing they ask questions about why my understanding of Catholicism and our Parish Priest’s differ. They will make up their own minds about the teachings of the Church. My role in their education is to provide authentic witness on Christian faith and fellowship through example. A true Catholic Church witness to true Catholic values.

Education is the most interesting and difficult adventure in life. Educating – from the Latin educere – means leading young people to move beyond themselves and introducing them to reality, towards a fullness that leads to growth. This process is fostered by the encounter of two freedoms, that of adults and that of the young. It calls for responsibility on the part of the learners, who must be open to being led to the knowledge of reality, and on the part of educators, who must be ready to give of themselves. For this reason, today more than ever we need authentic witnesses, and not simply people who parcel out rules and facts; we need witnesses capable of seeing farther than others because their life is so much broader. A witness is someone who fi rst lives the life that he proposes to others.
Where does true education in peace and justice take place? First of all, in the family, since parents are the first educators. The family is the primary cell of society; “it is in the family that children learn the human and Christian values which enable them to have a constructive and peaceful coexistence. It is in the family that they learn solidarity between the generations, respect for rules, forgiveness and how to welcome others.”
– Papal Message December 8, 2011

For my conservative friends out there, I am not certain I can leave the Catholic Church even if I wanted to. OMNIUM IN MENTEM signed by B16 in 2009 ensures I will always be a Catholic. Because I have questions regarding Catholic teachings and struggle with my faith does not make me a threat. The Catholic values of a peaceful and constructive coexistence with those who struggle with their faith, like me, must be a Catholic hallmark. Welcome me, and those like me, with love that comes from God.

“I’ve been experiencing some challenges to my beliefs lately, and I feel like I have nowhere to go to help me with my questions…. I cannot imagine giving up and leaving Christianity, but at the same time I don’t want to close my eyes and ears to genuine issues that should be faced. I don’t know where to really even look for answers to my problems. Most of the people I know are either too conservative with regards to Christianity, or against it. I feel stuck in the middle!
– A woman named Stephanie

Regarding the challenges outlined by Stephanie, she is not alone. B16 made the statement that “it is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of humanity truly becomes clear” (Gaudium et Spes, 22), and I am in 110% agreement with the Pope on this account. I also believe that this mystery of the Word strikes religion as much as it strikes secularism. There are teachings of the Church and teachings of secularism that need to be exposed to the light of the Word in order to achieve the renewal that the New Evangelization Pontifical Council is looking for. I sometimes wonder if Catholic leadership established this New Evangelization for purely economic reasons. If they did, it will fail.

God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all.
If we say, “We have fellowship with him,”
while we continue to walk in darkness,
we lie and do not act in truth.
But if we walk in the light as he is in the light,
then we have fellowship with one another
– 1 Jn 1

So the question remains; if I feel that there are teachings of the Church that need to change, why am I still Catholic?

I am still a Catholic because of the beauty of Catholicism, beauty being truth in its most attractive form. It is the beauty of the images and stories of Catholicism which keep me in the Church, not the wisdom or intelligence or the virtue of the Church leadership. Beauty, truth in its most attractive form, is not weaker than prosaic truth but stronger… I’m still a Catholic because of the beauty of the Catholic stories.

So are most of us Catholics.

An appeal to beauty may seem a weak argument; surely it will seem weak to many of the Catholic conservatives who write in this book. Again I remind them that we were Catholics for several centuries before the doctrines acquired some precision. It was the beauty of the stories and the lives inspired by the stories, particularly the Christmas and Easter stories which appealed to those who heard them. Whatever appeal our idiot leaders have left us is still to be found in the beauty of the stories.

Beauty is not opposed to truth. It is simply truth in its most attractive form.

I wonder how I would be able to explain that I am still a Catholic to Sam Donaldson. If I said to him it was because of the beauty of Catholic stories, he wouldn’t know what I was talking about.

Or to the ineffable Phil Donahue whose main concern seems to be whether masturbation is a mortal sin. Or to those Catholic conservatives for whom a list of doctrinal assents is the proper measure of Catholicism.

One of which assents is NOT to the notion that God is love, a notion which they find dangerous.

Too bad for St. John.

They are the heretics, the falsifiers of the tradition, the scribes and Pharisees of our time, the false prophets.

Pay them no heed.
- Andrew M. Greeley, Author, Priest, Sociologist

Father Greeley has a wonderful way with words. He is an author, after all. I am in 110% agreement with Fr. Greeley regarding why I am still Catholic and why I will remain Catholic. I also tend to agree with his opinion regarding the scribes and Pharisees of our time. I will keep my obligations to the Church. I may not agree with every teaching of the Church but there is no secular vision that includes a basis for LOVE.

Plea For Contribution From All Members And Holding Hands During Our Father

I dedicated this blog to bringing to you some Catholic Church facts, and some Catholic Church opinions informed by those facts. I consider my opinions to represent those of the Church in the pews. I am a fully imbued member of the Catholic Church and I am not an ordained minister or a paid member of any parish faculty. This is just me talking to you as a lay faithful. Not everybody in the pews will hold my opinions, but they will resonate with a portion of lay faithful.

Once you read the facts you can derive your own opinions, and they may differ from mine. I do the same on Sunday during the woeful homilies we are forced to endure by getting the readings ahead of Mass and developing my own homily. 99 times out of 100 my homilies are better. This is an example of my opinion. If you heard my homilies you may look at me askance, but that is okay.

Let me provide for you a fact. The Pope said recently, and you can open the link I provide to view this for yourself, that the Church needs the contribution of all its members. He specifically pointed to the lay faithful, that would be folks like me, to help carry out it’s mission. The Pope also recently said that we should keep our eyes fixed on God and prayed for solidarity in the service of our neighbors.

Finally, the Pope ending with words of encouragement, said to those present the Church needed the contribution of all its members, especially the lay faithful, in order to carry out its’ mission.
- Lydia O’Kane’s report

During his address the Holy Father also underlined the fact that because our earthly existence is marked by impermanence our life should be lived as a “pilgrimage” and we should keep our eyes fixed on the ultimate goal, the God who created us.

“In today’s Gospel, the parable of the talents, Jesus invites us to reflect with gratitude on the gifts we have received and to use them wisely for the growth of God’s Kingdom. May his words summon us to an ever deeper conversion of mind and heart, and a more effective solidarity in the service of all our brothers and sisters. “
- Lydia O’Kane’s report

These are not my words, surfers, they belong to the Pope and are in proper context. Let me provide for you another fact. The USCCB just finished Fall Plenary Sessions where they laid out the plans for the Church in the USA. Specific items of interest are; to face the challenge of reclaiming the truth, credibility, and beauty of the Church. In the Catechism the Church is defined as the people of God. That would be folks like me. There is a challenge to re-engage with people who have fallen away from the Church and the practice of the faith. Also, two observations were made that we need to embrace the sinful members of the Church and resist the desire to make the Curch just some organizational system that requires maintenance.

In his opening address, Archbishop Dolan stated that the bishops “most pressing pastoral challenge today is to reclaim that truth and restore the credibility, the beauty of the Church”, to re-engage with people who have fallen away from the Church and practise of the faith.

He stated “they drift from her, get mad at the Church, grow lax, join another, or just give it all up. If this does not cause us pastors to shudder, I do not know what will. The reasons are multiple and well-rehearsed, and we need to take them seriously”.

Archbishop Dolan went on to note: “Two simple observations might be timely as we as successors of the apostles embrace this urgent task of inviting our people and our world to see Jesus and His Church as one. First, we resist the temptation to approach the Church as merely a system of organizational energy and support that requires maintenance”.

The second he said regard’s the sinfulness of Church members which however, “reminds us precisely how much we need the Church. The sinfulness of her members is never an excuse, but a plea, to place ourselves at His wounded side on Calvary from which flows the sacramental life of the Church”.

In fact, the focus of the Autumn session is on internal Church matters, which has drawn the criticism of some mainstream media who expressed disappointment at the church leaders failure to put economic justice to the forefront.
- Emer McCarthy

I would like to sum up the facts that were just recently published by the Vatican and the USCCB.
1) Encourage the contribution of all Church members, especially the lay faithful.
2) Keep our eyes fixed on God and bring some solidarity to service to our neighbors.
3) Face the challenge of reclaiming truth, credibility, and beauty of the Church.
4) Re-engage with those people who have fallen away and no longer practicing the faith.
5) Avoid seeing the Church as a system needing maintenance

This is all fact and I expect Sunday sermons are filled with this important information. We are hot on the heels of these meetings and the information is fresh in the minds of the Bishops. Even if the Bishops are slow to get this info out to the parishes I have access to this information so there is no excuse for Church leaders not knowing the plans going forward.

With those facts in mind, now I will give you my informed opinion. Bishop Roger Foys of the Covington Diocese was clearly asleep during the meetings, or has no desire to embrace the urgent tasks laid out by the Pope and the USCCB. You can read the article regarding holding hands during the Our Father. This is an embarrasment, in my opinion, as it flies in the face of all the efforts outlined by the Bishops. How does this hand holding decree accomplish any of the tasks that are important to the future of the Church?

If it is not bad enough that Bishop Foys didn’t get the message, his decree has spawned more buzz about restoring the liturgy to some old practices that didn’t stick. That is why we don’t practice them today. If the old practices were any good people would have taken hold of them and continued to use them. Holding hands is a good example of an organic practice that the Church likes. That is why we do it. In my opinion if you want to find a way to bring people back to practicing the faith keep the hand holding and reprimand Bishop Foys for not staying on task.

Father Boyle has a blog posting on this hand holding decree where he stated “It is most encouraging to hear news from so many places that the liturgy is being restored to what was really intended by the Second Vatican Council.” Father Boyle should have been outraged that the Bishop was issuing decrees that directly countermanded the USCCB urgent tasks. Praising this move, by Bishop Foys, that will clearly send more faithful people away than bring people back is a terrible idea.

I have to say that there is a vocal group of lay faithful who are praising Bishop Foys. If you read the blog comments and message boards you will see almost no discussion of how bad this decree is for the future of the Church. Unfortunately, those people who have fallen away and need to be brought back don’t comment on these blogs. I can tell you that Bishop Foys is not bringing those people back to the Church.

Gut check time; if you feel that what Bishop Foys did was the right decision you need to ask yourself if you are part of the solution. Sorry to be a wet blanket, but the direction of the USCCB and the Pope are clear. We all need to get on board.

Atonement

In this blog, surfers, we are going to discuss substitutionary atonement. Although the blog revolves around substitutionary atonement the blog title is intentionally left without the substitutionary part because the first definition of atonement is the underlying subject of this blog post. The request for reparation of a wrong is what I would like to begin with.

It is time to publicly reject that whole idea of substitutionary or vicarious Atonement theories and repent for the harm this religious relic has caused over the centuries .

… I think it is time to publicly repent for the pain and suffering that the whole idea that we as humans are born faulty and unworthy by some vindictive god who demanded that there be some severe punishment to make up for this same god’s mistake. Therefore, according to creed this God would have to sacrifice his only begotten son, (who is actually himself) to avenge something that really never happened. Do you have any idea how many people throughout history have suffered in fear, humiliation, doubts, at the hands of sick clergy, mobs, abusive husbands, and anybody [who is] into power because of this flawed piece of our theology. It is way past time [to] separate ourselves from this delusion to make a clear and [a] public statement for allowing it to go on for so long.
- Fred Plumer President of the Centre for Progressive Christianity

This is a bold proclamation for a religious leader to make. For a cradle Catholic, such as myself, I am not certain that any person who has grown up kissing the wood of the cross on Good Friday will let this theology of sacrifice go. If this is the first time you have heard the request, to publicly reject substitutionary atonement, now is your chance to enter the debate.

A debate generally has two sides. You have read the position of Fred Plumer, and in the interest of full disclosure, I am of the opinion that Fred is correct. To introduce the opposing side of this debate I have brought you the words of Father Z.

We oh-so-modern Catholics will benefit from clear talk about sin and the physical action of beating our breast to counteract the “I’m Okay, You’re Okay” rubbish so prevalent today.

We need Mass precisely because we are not “okay”.

Sinners need a Savior.

A realistic recognition of who we are and who we are not is a necessary starting point for all worthy prayer and liturgical worship.
Fr. Z’s Blog – What Does The Prayer Really Say?

Father Z does not mince words, and much like Fred Plumer is passionate about the atonement subject. If you are like me and experienced deep emotional sadness at the Stations of the Cross, especially during the Triduum, it will not be easy to just drop substitutionary atonement. I don’t want to put words in Fr. Z’s mouth, but I believe he feels we need the doctrine of substitutionary atonement and cannot be without it. Substitutionary atonement continues to be a fundamental theology in all of Christianity, and the roots are deep. The question is; do we need it any longer. Does the future of Christianity need the sacrifice of Jesus for our sins? How did this substitutionary atonement come to be such an important part of Christianity? Bishop Spong offers one explanation.

Self-conscious people always experience loneliness. That doesn’t appear to be a problem for just conscious creatures. Conscious creatures see themselves as part of the universe, they don’t see themselves as separate. But self-conscious people center consciousness in themselves and look out from a different center, and see themselves alienated from, separated from, different than, apart from the rest of the world. That’s why in every human religion that has ever been developed there is some doctrine of atonement to speak to the universal sense of separation. It is the product of self-consciousness. It is the natural state of our humanity.
John Shelby Spong – Chautauqua Institution Speech

The Catholic leaders have published the Catechism of the Church. Within the Catechism is the atonement doctrine that speaks to our sense of separation. Before we can publicly reject substitutionary atonement the doctrine will need to be removed from the Catechism.

Surfers, the writing is on the wall. Atonement theology has one foot in the grave. The change will not happen tomorrow, but it will happen and more quickly than you might think. We must let it go if Christianity is to continue to be viable in the future. The future of Christianity hinges on our ability to shed old outmoded ideas that have a flawed meaning. “If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.” Substitutionary atonement is a stumbling block for the Catholic Church, and all of Christianity. It is flawed and if we do not gouge it out and toss it away the whole body of Christianity will continue to suffer. Included next is the text of the Catechism to help you understand what must be removed in order to publicly reject the doctrine of substitutionary atonement.

Jesus substitutes his obedience for our disobedience

615 “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous.”443 By his obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering Servant, who “makes himself an offering for sin”, when “he bore the sin of many”, and who “shall make many to be accounted righteous”, for “he shall bear their iniquities”.444 Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father.445

Jesus consummates his sacrifice on the cross

616 It is love “to the end”446 that confers on Christ’s sacrifice its value as redemption and reparation, as atonement and satisfaction. He knew and loved us all when he offered his life.447 Now “the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died.”448 No man, not even the holiest, was ever able to take on himself the sins of all men and offer himself as a sacrifice for all. the existence in Christ of the divine person of the Son, who at once surpasses and embraces all human persons, and constitutes himself as the Head of all mankind, makes possible his redemptive sacrifice for all.

617 The Council of Trent emphasizes the unique character of Christ’s sacrifice as “the source of eternal salvation”449 and teaches that “his most holy Passion on the wood of the cross merited justification for us.”450 and the Church venerates his cross as she sings: “Hail, O Cross, our only hope.”451
Catechism of the Catholic Church

When you have children you are often faced with having to answer a question, or two. Each of my children asked the same question about Adam and Eve, when they reached the age where they studied Genesis in religion class. Were Adam and Eve real people?

Be careful how you answer because there are at least two shells loaded on this topic. 1) If you say “yes” Adam and Eve were real people the very next question becomes a biological one; where did all the people on the earth come from? Surely not just Adam and Eve? Biological scrutiny will not let you pass this question. 2) If you answer the question “no” Adam and Eve were not real people then you come face to face with the the fact that there never was an Adam or an Eve. The next question becomes why does the Bible have the story of Adam and Eve? Children can ask some tough questions.

No Adam and Eve = no Garden of Eden and therefore no original sin. Do the math, if there is no original sin then there is no reason for a sacrifice (substitutionary atonement).

I really do think that’s been a curse to the faith. It’s a mythology. It was added. I mean if you read any of the people who’s done the latest scholarship on atonement, we can track where it came from, how it was added in… Furthermore, I do believe that it’s very clear that Jesus not only opposed the whole sacrificial system but he made it clear that if we repent, that is we accept our responsibility, we make corrective actions, we ask for forgiveness where we can and to take corrective action on those things that we did that caused harm to others, that we’re free to go, we get a fresh start.
Fred Plumer President of the Centre for Progressive Christianity

This notion that we should eliminate substitutionary atonement is not a new concept. It has been around a while, but the Bishops will not tell you about this. You will not hear the sermon on Sunday mention our human condition and the sense of separation that led to the mythology of the atonement doctrine. On this topic our religious leaders duck and cover. This next statement is going to seem harsh, but in the Catholic Church “religious leader” is an oxymoron. True leaders stand out in front of those they lead and have a vision of where they will go. The Bishops have their heels dug into the ground and are holding their people back. Their vision is a return to the days before Vatican II. We can’t go back. Christianity has to keep up with the times, just as it has done for many centuries. Sometime along the way the Church leaders added the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, so sometime along the way they can take it back out. No time like the present?

It all goes back to the doctrine of sin, the foundation stone of the Christian dogmatic system. My own theological teacher, John Dickie, regarded by conservatives in his day as a dangerous liberal, wrote in 1930 on the first page of his magnum opus (our text-book), “If there is no alienation between God and man, man has no need of a Saviour and historical Christianity is a mere illusion?.”… Indeed Rudolph Bultmann, arguably the greatest New Testament scholar of the 20th century, concluded that we know practically nothing for certain about Jesus except that he was crucified. Yet he believed that does not really matter. What remained important for Bultmann was what he called the kerygma, the preached or proclaimed message about Jesus. Yet he conceded that even that had to be demythologised, by which he meant reinterpreted into today’s cultural “non-mythological” or “non-supernatural? context.”
- Lloyd Geering

I know that many of the examples provided are not from Catholic sources. If you are looking for a decidedly Catholic academic position in this debate, let me introduce you to Stephen Finlan, Ph.D. Stephen has written a book Problems with Atonement that you can read to get a better understanding of why substitutionary atonement must go. There is a blurb on the book cover from Robert J. Daly, S.J., who is Professor Emeritus of Theology from Boston College.

“This is the most helpful book on the atonement to appear in modern times. While the Incarnation is an essential Christian idea, the atonement is not. Finlan suggests that we look to the doctrine of theosis as more true to the implications of the Incarnation”
- Robert J. Daly, S.J.

I know what you are thinking, the doctrine of theosis… ZZZZZZzzzzzz…

In all honesty, this book is a tough read unless you are really into theology, for example; an academic theologian. You will not find a Catholic perspective on removing atonement theology broken down into layman’s terms. If any leader in the Catholic Church were to stand up and say that we should get rid of atonement they would be censured immediately. This is why I have brought this debate to you. It is important and you need to know.

Stay tuned to this blog for more information on this topic, and many more like it.

Consubstantial – The Mystery Described With Precision

Surfers, the new roman missal launched November 27, 2011 across the USA. Were you ready? Did you manage to get all of the changes memorized before the launch? Did you complete all the catechesis you needed to grapple with the new words? Incarnation? Consubstantial? I believe I can still help.

I know what you are saying to yourself; this blog is written by an angry nut job, so how can he help me? Well, help is a relative word.

Lean a little closer to the screen… A little closer… Good, just between you and me the kind of help I am referring to is to make you uncomfortable with the decisions of the Bishops. They are not always working for your best interests.

This blog post will take up the word consubstantial. It is a tough word to wrap your mind around. I would like to tell you about a book you can purchase that may help you with understanding the word, and some catechesis. The book was co-authored by a Cardinal of the Catholic Church. This may help you decide to purchase it, or not.

Cardinal Wuerl [The Mass: The Glory, the Mystery, the Tradition Cardinal Donald W. Wuerl (Author), Mike Aquilina (Author)] and his co-author asserts: the phrasing of our translation was changed to make it reflect the historical creeds with greater accuracy. Some of the terms – like ‘consubstantial’ and ‘incarnate’ – are taken from the unfamiliar and technical language of theology. But no other words describe the mysteries with such precision. The Father and the Son are of the same substance. The Word took flesh – became incarnate. Through repeated, prayerful profession over the course of a lifetime, we make such words our own, and we make the faith our own.” (130-31) While I agree with the above, I believe it must be said that in the past, and this reveals itself to a degree in the present translation, there was some effort to bring understanding to the faith by “dummying down vocabulary rather than taking time, sometimes a great degree of time explaining the depths of the mysteries of faith to the degree it is possible.
Fr. Brian McWeeney

The word consubstantial was originally used to describe who is Jesus. As a little insight to your catechesis, who Jesus really was, or is, had not been formally decided with any word until some 300 years after his death. No matter what the Bishops might allude to, or what your Parish Priest is homilizing, it has been well documented that the Church leaders fought bloody battles to decide the nature of Jesus. Some of you are saying that this is old news, but others are saying: What? Surely from the Apostles on down we knew Jesus was God? How we are taught to see Jesus today is very different from the way the early Christian Church saw Jesus. Our understanding evolved over time, and the word consubstantial plays a huge role in our understanding today.

… And the debate in the New Testament is how that God got into Jesus. And it is fascinating, you know, we today think that those issues are very clear, but Paul says, and he writes to Romans about 57 / 58 [CE]. He says God made Jesus the Son of God at the time of the resurrection. That’s a very interesting idea. It would be called heresy in orthodox circles today. You come to Mark, who writes in the 70′s [CE] and Mark said God enters Jesus in his baptism, the heavens opened and the spirit descended. Mark assumes He is fully human until He’s infused with the Holy Spirit.
- John Shelby Spong

If this information on the evolution of our understanding of the nature of Jesus is new to you please spend some time learning more about this topic. Getting a better grasp of how we arrived at this point will help you understand the changes made to the Roman Missal in 2011.

Spend a little time with the Holy Spirit to discern just how much information you really want to uncover. Feel free to go to your Parish Priest and ask him when Jesus was first defined as consubstantial with God. The Priest should know, and as part of his pastoral ministry he has an obligation to discuss these questions with you. Don’t be surprised if he says he does not know, or does not want to discuss this with you, because he is not getting the support he needs from the Bishops. I am not letting him off the hook, but the Bishops are still trying to manage the pedophile scandal. The Bishops foisted these textual changes upon the Church and provided some books and videos on the changes but they did little or no real preparation with the parish Priests who will be left to their own devices when answering these questions.

Are you one of the folks who are frustrated with the changes in the Missal? There is a grass-roots effort to hold off the changes to the Roman Missal until more can be done to make the language better understood. Consubstantial is one of the word changes being protested. Sign your name to voice your concerns.

Stay tuned to this blog for more info on changes in the Catholic Church.

“New Evangelization” Confronting Serious Challenges Part 2

Dear surfers, this is part 2 of a two part blog on New Evangelization. If you would like to read part 1, click here.

When last we saw our intrepid heroes… I have always wanted to use those words. I know that this is not a Saturday morning serial, but I couldn’t help myself.

At the end of part 1 the question was raised “are there are also leaders speaking up on behalf of secularization?” As it turns out, there are and they have heard the preaching of the good Cardinal O’Brien. Are we expected to believe that these are the people trying to destroy Christian heritage and culture? You can read their comments and decide for yourself.

Andrew Copson, from the British Humanist Association, described O’Brien’s remarks as “ill-informed” and “alarmist” and accused him of sectarianism.

He said: “What these attacks ignore is that campaigners for secularism in our public life are overwhelmingly motivated, not by anti-religious prejudice, but by a positive desire for equality and an equitable public sphere.

“These alarmist speeches, designed to stir up the faithful and foster a false narrative of persecution, are divisive and sectarian.”

Such attacks “obscured” the reality of the situation, he said. “The churches are seeking to defend a level of influence and privilege totally out of proportion to their significance,” Copson added.
- Cardinal Keith O’Brien warns of threat from ‘aggressive secularism’

The British Humanist Association seems to have a group of people campaigning for secularism in public life. This does appear to be a coordinated effort to increase secularization. Do these folks present the serious challenge we are going to be asked to confront? Do folks like Andrew Copson present such an account of their religious renunciation, by word and example, that it is convincing and attractive to our society? Are we being asked to fight their words and examples by our very own words and examples? Is this what New Evangelization is about?

The conflicts of the past are said to be due to excessive zeal and misunderstanding on both sides. Peaceful coexistence and even a measure of syncretism are assumed to be possible as long as each concedes to the other’s authority in their separate worlds of knowledge: that of matter and facts for science, and that of the spirit and values for religion.

Let us be blunt. While it may appear open-minded, modest, and comforting to many, this conciliatory view is nonsense. Science and religion are diametrically opposed at their deepest philosophical levels. And, because the two worldviews make claims to the same intellectual territory — that of the origin of the universe and humankind’s relationship to it — conflict is inevitable… The issue at stake here is whether or not our worldview is to possess consistency and integrity. Science has worked so well and has been so successful that it is difficult, if not impossible, to live in the modern world while rejecting its findings. But by accepting those findings as a free bounty — while rejecting the hard assumptions and hard work that made them possible — the supernaturalist embraces a lie.
- Dr. Norman F. Hall and Lucia K. B. Hall (Is the War Between Science and Religion Over?)

There does appear to be a line drawn in the sand. Those in favor of secularization are using science as their backdrop and the foundation of their arguments in the public square. It also appears that peaceful coexistence is not going to be a viable alternative. The Catholic Church will be asked to brush up on the faith fundamentals and enter the fray with words and actions to win the hearts and minds of our neighbors. The Church will have faith in God as their backdrop and the foundation of their arguments. Ask yourself, dear surfer, are you willing and capable to accept the challenge that the program of New Evangelization may lay before you? The Bishops believe you are.

The biggest problem with this assertion is that it presumes that people of faith are only capable of expressing positions on issues of public concern that are explicitly grounded in their religion. i.e. “I believe [insert issue position here] because the Bible says so…” or “…the pope says so…” or “…it’s God’s will.”

And that simply isn’t the case.

The Catholic Church in particular believes that faith and reason are highly compatible and that someone imbued with the values of his or her faith is perfectly capable of making arguments — privately and publicly — based on reason, or secular terms.If people of faith are capable of making arguments grounded in reason, one would hope that we continue to have a place at the table in public debate and participation in public life… It’s one thing to say that the language and arguments in our public discourse shouldn’t be explicitly religious. It’s another thing to say that people whose values are informed by their faith have no role in that discourse.
- Don Clemmer: Assistant Director of Media Relations, USCCB

I know many people who are fully imbued with the values of their faith and when I pose these arguments to them they shrink. The common response is that if somebody approaches them with questions of faith they will be happy to share. The notion of reaching out to people with no faith does not sit comfortably with them. Maybe this also speaks to your sensibilities? Perhaps the Church hierarchy will only take volunteers for this New Evangelization program? Can those shy individuals who wish to remain wall flowers be allowed to avoid participation? I don’t believe that the Church leaders are moving in this direction.

We also have to pray for the Church’s mission of the new evangelization. Because the people of our day are really longing for the gift of faith.

When look at our society and the challenges that we have in our country, in our world, my brothers and sisters, we know that the solution to those challenges is in our faith.

We know that God wants us to find peace in our society. That God wants us to have a happy life. That God wants us to really find a way, as a society, that we can love each
other in our daily life. But, as we are witnesses, unfortunately in our society sometimes, faith is not a priority for people.

That is what it is so important for us to feel responsibility for the new evangelization. We all have the beautiful duty of sharing the joy of our Christian faith with others.
- The Most Rev. José H. Gomez Archbishop of Los Angeles

All the faithful have the responsibility and duty to share their faith. Be prepared to be asked to bring God closer to yourself, your family, and your community. Speaking of community, I also believe that there is a political component of this responsibility and duty that may be a part of the New Evangelization program. Hold on to your seat as New Evangelization may enter the world of politics. The water can get rough in the political arena.

If you’re a Catholic who is hesitant about getting involved in the political process on behalf of the church and advocating for public policies consistent with church teaching, Anthony Picarello Jr. has some advice for you: “Don’t be afraid.”
- Joe Towalski

Well surfers, I tried to give you a look at New Evangelization from the bits of information that are available. I am certain this will not be the last time we discuss this topic. Stay tuned to this blog for new discussions of this and many other topics.

“New Evangelization” Confronting Serious Challenges Part 1

Surfers, This blog post is part one of a two pat blog on New Evangelization. The Catholic Church hierarchy is working on an evangelization plan for the faithful called New Evangelization. Not much information is available on this program yet, but the information is already being discussed (leaked, as it were). What does this new program mean for you? Good question. Can’t really say much, but what I can say is you will be asked to confront serious challenges.

If you are anything like me when you hear the words confronted with serious challenges you are envisioning Indiana Jones facing the unknown with only sketchy cryptic knowledge to act upon. Okay, guilty of hyperbole. I call it artistic license.

What type of serious challenges will confront us in the New Evangelization program? We can gather more information from a recent speech from the Pope.

Saint Mary MacKillop’s courageous response to the difficulties she faced throughout her life can also inspire today’s Catholics as they confront the new evangelization and serious challenges to the spread of the Gospel in society as a whole. All the members of the Church need to be formed in their faith, from a sound catechesis for children, and religious education imparted in your Catholic schools, to much-needed catechetical programmes for adults. Clergy and religious must also be assisted and encouraged by an ongoing formation of their own, with a deepened spiritual life in the rapidly secularizing world around them. It is urgent to ensure that all those entrusted to your care understand, embrace and propose their Catholic faith intelligently and willingly to others. In this way, you, your clergy and your people will give such an account of your faith by word and example that it will be convincing and attractive. People of good will, seeing your witness, will respond naturally to the truth, the goodness and the hope that you embody.
- Pope Benedict XVI’s address to the bishops of Australia

Based on the words of B-16 we will be facing the challenge of urgently using formation to deepen our spiritual lives because secularization will be rapidly working against our Catholic faith. We will have to keep up the spiritual pace in measures at least inversely proportional to the rapid rate of secularization. We will be called upon to douse the fire of secularization by witness of our faith in word and action. The goodness and hope we embody will need to be both convincing and attractive. Because I have a face for blogging the convincing part seems achievable, but the attractive part…

This “secularization” of the world seems to be a major stumbling block to New Evangelization. Perhaps if we understood secularization better we might understand New Evangelization better, also. What is secularization anyway? Another good question.

What is the classic secularization thesis? Hugh Heclo, professor of public affairs at George Mason University, recently described it this way: “A hundred years ago, advanced thinkers were all but unanimous in dismissing religion as a relic of mankind’s mental furniture.”1 Thinkers like Max Weber, Sigmund Freud, John Dewey and others assumed that the consequences of modernization—that is, the consequences of capitalism, industrialization, the bureaucratizing of businesses, democracy and pluralism, and the dominance of scientific and technological ways of understanding all aspects of life—that the consequences of these movements would not only marginalize religion, but eventually make it simply disappear as a vestige of the past. Religion, they explained, depended on supernatural revelation, miracles and religious authority, all of which are based upon and produce superstition. Modern science, by contrast, encouraged questioning, recognized no authority without empirical verification, and, unlike dogmatism, is self-correcting. To these thinkers, science equipped scholars with a method vastly superior to religion for developing knowledge.
- James Heft, S.M., University Professor of Faith and Culture and Chancellor

Unless you are a science equipped scholar, Professor Heft paints a pretty bleak picture for the faithful. Based on this description it seems that the plans of secularization are to grow through attrition. The proponents of secularism don’t feel that they need to do make any plans. Society will just gravitate toward secularism. Many factors coming together to conspire against the faithful seem to be rather uncoordinated, I mean what entity could coordinate capitalism, industrialization, bureaucratizing of business,democracy and pluralism? Some Catholic leaders do feel that there is some coordination from the secularization side.

The Cardinal called on Christians of all denominations to resist the efforts of such people to destroy Christian heritage and culture… The Cardinal said: “Perhaps more than ever before there is that ‘aggressive secularism’ and there are those who would indeed try to destroy our Christian heritage and culture and take God from the public square.

“Religion must not be taken from the public square.
- Cardinal Keith O’Brien

Are there are also leaders speaking up on behalf of secularization? We will pull on that thread in part 2.

The Future of Christianity

I have a question for you, surfers. Why did the people, the Church, in the time of Jesus not believe the words of John the Baptist? We are told by the Evangelists that they did not believe him. If John the Baptist were here today and spoke to the Church what would our reaction be? We are the Church and the Evangelists tell us the future is up to us to decide. Could we recognize John the Baptist if he were speaking to us today?

I have long held the belief that the Parables were stories meant to make us feel uncomfortable. If you read a parable and you don’t feel discomfort, you are reading it but not understanding it. The Parable is meant to shake us awake. Here is a perfect example:

Jesus said to the chief priests and elders of the people:
“What is your opinion?
A man had two sons.
He came to the first and said,
‘Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.’
He said in reply, ‘I will not, ‘
but afterwards changed his mind and went.
The man came to the other son and gave the same order.
He said in reply, ‘Yes, sir, ‘but did not go.
Which of the two did his father’s will?”
They answered, “The first.”
Jesus said to them, “Amen, I say to you,
tax collectors and prostitutes
are entering the kingdom of God before you.
When John came to you in the way of righteousness,
you did not believe him;
but tax collectors and prostitutes did.
Yet even when you saw that,
you did not later change your minds and believe him.”
Mt 21:28-32

How did this Parable make you feel? Did it shake you awake? The future of Christianity depends on you. The Evangelists warn us all that if we fail to believe in John the Baptist others, who we thought were destined for eternal fires, are actually getting into heaven before us. Who are those people we think are destined for eternal fires today?

Who is our John the Baptist? Who is coming to us in the way of righteousness today? The Evangelists tell us to pay close attention to those people we feel certain are destined for eternal fires. Who are those people listening to, that we have summarily dismissed?

In the world of Christian scholarship, for example, to read the Bible literally is regarded as absurd. To call the words of the Bible “the Word of God” is more than naïve. No modern person can still believe that a star can wander through the sky so slowly that wise men can keep up with it, that God actually dictated the Ten Commandments — all three versions, no less — or that a multitude can be fed with five loaves and two fish. No modern person understanding genetics and reproduction can believe that virgins conceive, nor can those who understand what death does to the human body in a matter of just minutes still view the resurrection as the resuscitation of a deceased body after three days. Biblical scholars know that the accounts of the crucifixion read in Christian churches on Good Friday are not eye witness reports, but developed interpretations of Jesus’ death based on a series of Old Testament texts selected to convince fellow Jews that Jesus “fulfilled the scriptures” and thus really was the “messiah.” These issues and many others are assumed in the world of biblical scholars, but are viewed by many church-goers, together with the vast majority of television evangelists and radio preachers, as attacks on divine revelation that must be resisted in order to save Christianity. They thus, knowingly or unknowingly, join in a conspiracy of silence, ignoring truth when they feel they can and viewing biblical scholars, strangely enough, as the church’s ultimate enemy.
- John Shelby Spong – Retired American Bishop of the Episcopal Church

How do the words of Bishop Spong make you feel? Do you feel that biblical scholars are your enemy? The future of Christianity depends on the Church connecting the dots. You need to connect the dots, because others are getting into heaven before you.

What is the Church to do? How do you get the words of today’s John the Baptist? How do you know if you are listening to the words of today’s John the Baptist? Where do you turn? What does the Catholic hierarchy have to say about getting information today and in the future?

Social media has a place in the 21st century church, though some oldsters may have to be drawn into it, collars, veils, rosaries and lapel crosses askew. Facebook, Twitter and other social media can be worthy instruments of the Gospel to nurture our faith life, though some are just warming up.
- SR. MARY ANN WALSH

The fact that you are reading this blog shows that you are warm on technology. Based on this you may decide to stay in contact with the Church hierarchy through their social media presence. Just remember that the Church hierarchy did not believe John the Baptist in Jesus’ time, and may not be be the best source for John the Baptist in our time. The Catholic hierarchy is working on a plan for the future of the Catholic Church. You are the Church, so these are plans for your future. It is called the “New Evangelization.”

“we want to reinforce that evangelisation is the very mission of the Church and it has been going on for over two thousand years, but it needs to find a new language, a new lifestyle one that is respectful but has a deeply rooted identity”, evangelisers “who have a profound sense of belonging to the Church and the Christian community but at the same time who are open to others. And also a good dose of joy and enthusiasm, which is never a bad thing!”
Archbishop Fisichella: New evangelisation needs “joyful” evangelizers

It appears the “New Evangelization” program has not been fully developed. What might it include; tax collectors and prostitutes? That was sarcasm, I know the Catholic hierarchy does not subscribe to the message of today’s John the Baptist. They do, however, begin the program on a strong note.

On 29 September the theme of reflection for the next World Day of Social Communications was announced: “Silence and Word: path of evangelisation”… While we inquire how to give wings to the “new evangelisation” and its messages, we should not forget that their efficacy arises from listening. Their foundation is silence, full of the reality of the life of God.
- Federico Lombardi – Wondrous silence

The Holy Spirit can guide you to today’s John the Baptist. Listening is vital. Silence can help us discern if the message from our social media and other sources are correct for us. The future of Christianity is in our hands. We lead the charge, and the first step is to find our John the Baptist. Remember, look for the John the Baptist of today by beginning with that person whose message you have chosen not to believe. Those people that you feel are destined for the eternal fires are likely to be getting into heaven before you.

Were Not Our Hearts Burning Within Us?

You may not be able to tell by the title, but I am about to anger some of those Catholic surfers who lean more toward the traditionalist side of the scale. This is a fair warning. If you hold the Eucharist in highest esteem and enjoy the ringing of the bells during consecration, do not read further.

Okay, for those who chose to read on I wanted to speak about a disappointment in my worship life. Let me start by telling you about the physical sensation I experience when certain worship topics are brought up. You know the feeling you get when the hairs on your body are rubbed against the grain? That fingernail scratching the chalk board sensation? I have this kind of physical reaction when certain of my “hot buttons” are pushed. The definition of a hot button is a controversial subject or issue that is likely to arouse strong emotions, and I can tell you there are subjects that send me off the edge immediately. Because I have such a strong emotional reaction to central tenets of traditionalist Catholic worship, I have been known to blurt out angry comments when my buttons are pushed. This has led me to avoid social circumstances where my buttons can be pushed, such as Sunday Mass. In Catholic circles the purposeful avoidance of Sunday Mass is heinous, but if I allow myself to speak freely about those hot button issues I will become a pariah in my community. Believe it or not, it is better if I simply let my community believes that I am too lazy to get up and go to Sunday Mass. Lazy is better than evil, which I have been called in the past.

Now that you have the backdrop let me explain my disappointment. Read the passage that follows and tell me if you can spot the hot button.

Reflection
“The Lord entrusts to you [priest(s)] the mystery of this Sacrament [Eucharist]. In his Name you can say: ‘This is my Body …. This is my Blood.’ Allow yourselves to be drawn ever anew by the Holy Eucharist, by communion of life with Christ. Consider the center of each day the possibility to celebrate the Eucharist worthily. Lead people ever anew to this Mystery. Help them, starting from this, to bring the peace of Christ into the world” (Pope Benedict XVI, Homily at Mass and priestly ordinations on Pentecost, May 15, 2005).
(A time of sacred silence should be observed.)
Novena Day 1: That Priests will Celebrate the Eucharist Worthily

Did anything bother you in that reflection? Well, my hot buttons are probably different than yours. Let me try to elucidate. The title of this blog post is a quote from Luke 24: 32 which is a favorite Jesus story of mine. The road to Emmaus is both a blessing and a heartache to my current worship difficulties.

In the story a Priest, a Rabbi, and a Minister walk into a bar… Okay, a little humor to cut into my misery may seem out of place but it helps me cope. In the story two fellows meet Jesus on the road to Emmaus. They presumably knew who Jesus was from past encounters, but they didn’t recognize him on the road. They listened while Jesus talked. When they reach Emmaus the fellows convince Jesus to stay with them for a meal. At the meal, specifically when Jesus said Grace before passing out the bread, the fellows recognized Jesus. They then said to one another “Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?”

The traditionalist Catholic will say something like “See, we meet Jesus in the celebration of the Eucharist.” After this statement I will blurt out something like “What? Didn’t you hear what the fellows said about how they met Jesus while he opened up scripture?” This might be a good point to note that I don’t want to get into a tangential discussion regarding the sitz im leben but I do understand the symbolism of the Biblical act of breaking bread.

After I blurt out that Eucharist is not the center of the universe, people run away from me screaming the prayer to St. Michael.

As the English speaking Catholic community prepares to usher in a new Roman Missal the Bishops have started a Novena that will lead up to the first Sunday of Advent. What words did they choose as a reflection for the first day? Anybody? Anybody? Bueller? “The Lord entrusts to you [priest(s)] the mystery of this Sacrament [Eucharist]. In his Name you can say: ‘This is my Body …. This is my Blood.’ Allow yourselves to be drawn ever anew by the Holy Eucharist, by communion of life with Christ. Consider the center of each day the possibility to celebrate the Eucharist worthily.” Just reading these words again as I add them to this blog has caused my blood to boil.

How can we allow our leaders of the Church to be so focused on one act that was not the center of each day for Jesus? The disciples on the road to Emmaus did not find Jesus in the breaking of bread, but in his teaching. Before Vatican II there were Catholics who would wait until they heard the Church Building bells on Sunday, announcing the prayers of consecration, to arrive. This was so that they could receive the Eucharist. It was considered by them to be the center of each Sunday. Vatican II asked that the bells stop ringing during the Eucharist celebration because there should be no differentiation between the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. They stopped ringing for a while, but they are back with a vengeance. When the bells ring during the Liturgy of the Eucharist they take me out of the worship service and I cannot stop thinking about how this was the pay-off for most of the Church sitting in the pews.

I would like to hear our Church leaders say that the Eucharist is a nice remembrance but what will really bring you closer to God throughout the week is listening to the Holy Spirit. Teaching the Church in the pews to respond to their hearts burning within them, as the Holy Spirit meets them on their daily road, should be the center of each leader’s day. I will save my diatribe on why the Pope is so focused on the Eucharist for another blog post.

Life After Death

Raising his eyes toward his disciples Jesus said:

“Blessed are you who are poor,
for the Kingdom of God is yours.
Blessed are you who are now hungry,
for you will be satisfied.
Blessed are you who are now weeping,
for you will laugh.
Blessed are you when people hate you,
and when they exclude and insult you,
and denounce your name as evil
on account of the Son of Man.

Rejoice and leap for joy on that day!
Behold, your reward will be great in heaven.
For their ancestors treated the prophets
in the same way.

But woe to you who are rich,
for you have received your consolation.
But woe to you who are filled now,
for you will be hungry.
Woe to you who laugh now,
for you will grieve and weep.
Woe to you when all speak well of you,
for their ancestors treated the false prophets in this way.”
- Lk 6:20-26

Surfers, when you read these words what pictures come to mind? When Jesus says your reward will be great in heaven; are we talking about the afterlife with wings and harps? Do we only receive our reward after we die, or are we talking about heaven on Earth? How are we to interpret these words spoken from the figure of Jesus, as expressed by the anonymous evangelists we have chosen to call Luke?

In my life I never really accepted the wings and harps vision of heaven. In our parish we have a traditionalist Pastor who often likes to discuss heaven from the pulpit. His homilies are filled with images of life after death where we all become perfect and all turn age 33. I can’t tell if he really believes what he says, or not. The people in the pews like him. I would like a more honest and frank discussion, and that is one reason I seldom go to mass there, or anywhere.

It is not just the Pastor at my parish that brushes my hair in the wrong direction. I would like to offer you words spoken by our current Pope B16.

“We must give ourselves much exercise both in fraternal correction, which requires a great deal of humility and simplicity of heart, and in prayer, so that what we offer up to God in Heaven might be the prayer of a community truly united in Christ.” These were some of the words Pope Benedict XVI spoke to the faithful gathered in the courtyard of the Papal Summer residence at Castel Gandolfo, for the Sunday Angelus.
- Pope Benedict XVI on fraternal charity

Here we have a message where, in the spirit of humility, we are meant to redirect our neighbors when they are off the path to greater spirituality. Should I remind the Pope that God resides in us, and that offering up our prayers to God in heaven is no longer a valid reference, humbly speaking? Perhaps we are we meant to believe that if our neighbors gain material wealth, eat well, enjoy our happiness and are well thought of by others that they are in danger of not going to heaven, whatever that means? Are we, as alluded to by Pope Benedict XVI, responsible to correct those we see exhibiting these behaviors? In our day and age does this concept of heaven continue to make sense? Is the Pope out of step with life after death as we know it, or does he really believe what he says?

In my search for greater spirituality I read a lot. I read some of the book by B16 on Jesus, but I found that I disagreed with some of what he had to say, thank goodness he explained that we all might not agree with his words in his introduction. I read all the popular atheist diatribes by Dawkins, Hitchins, Harris, and the like. These I completed to various degrees as I disagreed with some of what they had to say also. Other religious books pit their position against their detractors and the three tier [heaven, earth, hell] model is a choice of believe the Bible or science.

Pointing out that religious stories of human purpose fail miserably, Dawkins indicates that science may be able to offer a better explaination for human existance. Starting out with Darwin, he claims that Darwin’s theory of evolution may offer the only explaination for humanity’s raison d’état that we are likely to ever get.
Why Are We Here – Richard Dawkins

What is a person to believe?

What do you believe?

… And we’ve got really in this debate today essentially atheism versus Christian theism, if you like, and that will certainly do us for tonight. There are other worldviews of course. But in the academy, those tend to be the main two. I have a whole series of tests which I run on saying, look, here are these two worldviews, take science itself; with which worldview does it sit more comfortably? Does it sit more comfortably with atheism or with theism?
John Lennox

Richard Dawkins is an Athiest and he claims science to prove his point. John Lennox is a Christian and he claims science to prove his point. Who do we turn to in matters of life after death? How do we understand the words of Jesus and put that into our daily spirituality?

If one side is busily engaged in trying to do artificial respiration on the dead images of our religious past. Images that have no reality any longer. And the other side believes there is nothing beyond these lifeless images, to which they can appeal, then why should any of us bother? So the Christian world is more and more today divided between an irrational hysterical fundamentalism, which comes in both a Catholic and a Protestant form, and which does not like to engage thought on any level that challenges their preconceived notions. And on the other side there is a rising tide of secular humanism that sees no place in it for God. We are either fundamentalists or member of the Church Alumni Association. There seems to be almost nothing in-between that is substantive. And I think both of these responses are sterile. And I think they are both dead and without the possibility of finding themselves being sources of new life… A new possibility… Beyond religion. Beyond Theism. Beyond Heaven and Hell.
- John Shelby Spong

Of all the authors I read Spong makes the most sense. As we march on in our lives (time does not stop) we need to look past those crazy arguments made by people looking to resuscitate old images or toss God out with the proverbial bath water. I feel we need to find a new meaning to the words of Jesus. We need a new image of heaven and life after death.

Reflecting on the Sunday Gospel readings, which focus on fraternal charity in the life of the community, the Holy Father recalled how the brotherly love also involves a “sense of mutual responsibility,” which includes calling a brother who has fallen into sin back to the right path – first personally and then, gradually, at the community level. Pope Benedict went on to note that, in the face of the stubbornness of a brother or sister, this can lead even to separation from the Church community. “All this,” he said, “indicates that there is a sharing of responsibility in the way of Christian life: all of us, aware of our limitations and defects, are called to welcome fraternal correction and to help others with this particular service.”
- Pope Benedict XVI on fraternal charity

Based on the words of B16, and in a spirit of fraternal correction, I would like to say that the stubbornness of my brothers and sisters in the Catholic Church regarding spiritual growth in matters of life after death, heaven and hell, needs to change. As a service to all, because I have a responsibility to be aware of my limitations and in humility to help others, I would like to say that heaven may be holding you back from full communion with God. For our future, let us discuss life after death, as Spong says, in a new way with new possibilities that go beyond religion and heaven.