Penance

Penance

Lent is just around the corner.  Ash Wednesday is next week.  I work at a Catholic school and one interesting phenomenon is that during Lent the teachers’ lounge is overflowing (more than usual) with cookies, cupcakes, candy and other temptations.  Another interesting phenomenon is that any comment about it draws the admonition that for an adult to give up chocolate or sweets for Lent displays an immature spirituality.

          The point they’re trying to make is valid, but the conclusions are faulty.  As we approach the season of Lent it would be good to consider what we will be offering.  Traditionally we think in terms of giving something up for Lent, and it’s true that if we just drop some habit that returns after Easter without any personal growth, the value is limited.

          Part of our discipline is purely the sacrifice of giving something up as an offering to God.  If we have a particular affinity for chocolate, that can be a valid sacrifice.  More than that, our Lenten offering should provide lasting spiritual growth.  Certainly, self-mastery is a trait our entire culture can do with much more of.  The discipline it takes to abstain from something we normally indulge in helps develop a self-mastery and strength we can apply to other areas of our lives, particularly the resistance of sin.  That’s one of the beauties of fasting.

          But my point is not that everyone should give up chocolate for Lent and be done with it.  We must prayerfully consider what offering we want to make to God and what will be most beneficial to our long-term spiritual growth.  Perhaps our Lent can open us to living with a more penitential character the entire year.

          I used to fast quite often.  As I’ve grown older it has gotten harder and harder.  But it’s not age that’s the culprit, it’s the increased workload and three small boys, with the resulting lack of sleep.  Struggling with fasting is not bad, but it seemed physically impossible for me to maintain the discipline at the level I had before.  At first I was disappointed in myself, but I prayerfully accepted that these were real limitations and I had to accept reality.

          However, this did not mean that I could not still develop a penitential spirit.  Father Hubert Van Zeller explains in his book Spirit of Penance, Path to God that we have opportunities all the time to offer things to God in a spirit of penance.  Many mothers in years past gave the advice, “Offer it up,” to their children when they experienced some form of suffering.  This is excellent advice, but not just for children.

          We have sufferings small or large all day long.  There are constant inconveniences that we can turn into prayers of penance.  The car that cuts us off in traffic, or the clerk who answers us rudely, perhaps the waiter who messes up our order, all give us an opportunity for penance.  One of the spiritual works of mercy is to bear wrongs patiently.  But we don’t even have to be wronged.  The plans that had to be changed, the stubbed toe, the broken transmission, are also opportunities.  If we develop a penitential spirit we can bear these things with patience and love, and offer them, large or small, in reparation for sin, or for the conversion of sinners, or the intentions of the Holy Father, or the souls in Purgatory, or simply for the love of God.

          Fr. Van Zeller points out that these penances have the added benefit of our offering our will, as well. When I fast, I choose my own penance.  But I don’t choose the broken down car or to be treated disrespectfully, I receive them.  If I offer them willingly to God, I offer my will as well, since I accept the penances given to me rather than choosing them for myself.

          Without question fasting is valuable.  So are the sacrifice, prayer and alms we offer during Lent.  Perhaps one of our disciplines this Lent can be to live a penitential spirit all the time, and offer our sufferings and inconveniences to God.  This can certainly become a habit that will provide lasting spiritual growth.

Why Obama's 'Accommodation' is a Joke

Why Obama’s ‘Accommodation’ is a Joke

          The past few weeks there has been a lot of news regarding President Obama’s contraception mandate, which required all employers, including the Catholic Church, to provide free contraception, including abortifacient drugs, to all employees through their health coverage.  There was no attempt to protect individual conscience rights or religious liberty in the President’s mandate.

          The Christian response was definitive, with Catholics and Protestants alike promising to defy the mandate and even go to jail if necessary.  Bishops urged the faithful to oppose the President, and even some of his most faithful supporters spoke out against him.  On Friday, the President responded with an “accommodation” that he declared solved the problem.  The Catholic Church, and all Christians, had better be satisfied, by executive decree.

          The problem is that his “accommodation” is a joke, nothing more than an exercise in semantic gymnastics.  In essence it says that religious employers can offer health insurance coverage that does not include contraception or abortifacients but that the insurance company that provides the plan must cover these items for free.

          Obviously the result of this adjustment, practically speaking, is that nothing changes.  It is a manufactured way for certain institutions to separate themselves from the coverage that they would be providing.  Perhaps it’s an opportunity for Christians to abandon their principles while saving face.  If the President thinks the Church will jump at the chance, he is sadly mistaken.

          Why does this “accommodation” do nothing to protect conscience and religious liberty?  Imagine this hypothetical conversation:

          “Where did you get your contraception?  Was it expensive?”

          “Not at all, my insurance covered it completely.”

          “Wow, you work at a Catholic school.  I’m surprised they cover that.”

          “Oh, they don’t.  It’s my insurance company that covers it.”

          “Where did you get the insurance policy?”

          “My job provides it.”

          Obviously, you don’t have to connect too many dots to say that the Catholic institution provided free access to contraception and abortion.  How again does that protect the liberty of the Church, which considers these things objectively evil?  And since the insurance company passes the cost of its services to those who pay the premiums, the Church pays for its employees to have access to free contraception and abortifacients.

          The President would have to be pretty arrogant if he expects the gratitude of the Church for this concession.  Sadly, there have been plenty of people who have already applauded him for his flexibility.  And of course it allows the media to portray him as quite reasonable, and the Church as stubborn and rigid, unwilling to accept a “reasonable compromise.”

          Politically shrewd, perhaps, but morally bankrupt.  We can’t fall for it.  And we can’t let down our guard or stifle our outrage.  If we do, we will not only lose this battle, but more violent ones will be on the way.

          Consider one of the Mr. Obama’s justifications for his mandate – it is cheaper to contracept than to have a child.  Financially there is an interest.  (I wonder if he’s ever explored what the financial benefits of chastity are.)  With his thinking, it won’t be too far a leap to make the same argument for abortion in general.  He clearly considers it a “women’s health” issue, as though pregnancy were a disease.  And considering how much campaign money he gets from the abortion lobby, the temptation will only get stronger.

          But why stop there?  Euthanasia is cheaper than treating any serious condition.  Why shouldn’t we all pay to kill the sick, disabled and elderly?  Think of the long-term savings. 

          When our government at the highest level doesn’t understand the most basic concepts of human dignity, can measure human beings in terms of dollars and cents, and shows no regard for conscience and religious liberty, there is no evil that should be beyond our imagination.

          Now is the time for all Christians to speak more loudly than ever.  We must make clear that we have no intention of accepting this insulting “accommodation,” and we are duty-bound to use our energy and resources to ensure, as Psalm 109:8 says, “that his days are few and that others replace him.”

Lighthouse Catholic Media

Lighthouse Catholic Media

                You may have noticed some new graphics on the sidebar of this blog, concerning Lighthouse Catholic Media ministry.  Lighthouse is a not-for-profit organization that was started in response to Pope John Paul II’s call for a new evangelization, which has also been taken up by Pope Benedict.

          Lighthouse is best known for distributing Catholic CDs from St. Joseph Communications to parishes and schools in order to get them in the hands of the faithful.  They have titles from well-known speakers like Fr. Robert Barron, Matthew Kelly, Scott Hahn, Mother Teresa, and Archbishop Fulton Sheen, among others.  They also have agreements with Catholic publishers like Ignatius Press so people can receive good Catholic books at a discount.  If you click on the “online store” link in the sidebar, you will have a chance to browse and purchase CDs, books, and other Catholic materials.

          Below that is a link for the CD of the Month Club.  Members of the CD of the Month Club receive a new title delivered in the mail each month.  This is a wonderful opportunity, which I began taking advantage of a few months ago.  I used to be a voracious reader, but it has gotten increasingly difficult to find time to read as my family has grown.  With these CDs I can get great information from wonderful speakers and listen on my way to and from work.  Members can also sign up to receive multiple CDs every month at a discount to distribute them to family and friends.  Click on either link for more details about Lighthouse’s programs.

Is There a 'Catholic Vote'?

Is There A ‘Catholic Vote’?

          For many election cycles in this country candidates had to be concerned about the “Catholic vote.”  Who would win the “Catholic vote?” pundits wondered.  Would the “Catholic vote” swing an election?  Well, it would seem those days are over.  However, might it be the case that Barack Obama can bring them back?

          Catholics are as mainstream as they come in American life these days, and generally speaking, that’s not a good thing.  By and large we fit in perfectly with the modern American culture, which is largely based on hedonism and materialism.  In the last Presidential election, the votes cast by Catholics broke essentially as the national average did.

          Of course, those numbers can be rather deceiving.  For the first thing, Catholics make up by far the largest religious group in the United States, but that simply counts all people who identify themselves as Catholic, including those who are lucky to see the inside of a church twice a year, which sadly is a monstrous number.  I don’t say that as a way to cast judgment on anyone; it’s just a fact, and a major factor in our mirroring of the culture at large.  President Obama, for example, actually lost among practicing Catholics in 2008.

          There are segments of the Catholic community that are seeing a great resurgence of faith and devotion, and which are fruitful ground for vocations and evangelization.

          However, that being said, inactive and former Catholics still make up an incredibly large segment of the population in the United States and the so-called “Catholic vote” will include us all.

          So why do some people think President Obama may definitively lose the “Catholic vote” in 2012?  In short, it comes down to the indefensible, immoral contraception mandate (which includes sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs) he is inflicting on the American people, which is designed to particularly violate the rights and freedoms of the Catholic Church.

          If it hadn’t come before, the time for outrage is certainly here now.  Mr. Obama seems to think he can violate the most sacred rights and freedoms of all Americans, those of conscience and religion, simply because it suits him.  He seems to be targeting the Catholic Church specifically with this mandate perhaps to drive her from health care altogether, which would be a huge step forward in the push for socialized medicine that he has championed in the past.

          But this issue goes far beyond health care.  It is about the freedom of every American to follow the dictates of his conscience, and the freedom of the Church to live according to the principles given to her by Jesus Christ. 

          Will the average Catholic stand up and take notice?  Will we let Mr. Obama know that he is not a totalitarian dictator with our votes?  I think there are signs that we might.  The USCCB has tried very hard in the past not to be partisan or to seem as though they are endorsing a particular candidate.  The statement put out in 2008 about responsible voting, though true to Catholic teaching, seemed a bit tempered to have likely had much effect on most people.  I don’t say this as a criticism.  It is up to us to form our consciences properly (the bishops have an important role to play in that) and then apply those well-formed consciences to our civic duties.  We shouldn’t need or ask the bishops to tell us what to do in that regard.

          However, the bishops are being anything but tempered now.  They are speaking out strongly in defense of the rights and freedoms of their flock as any father should.  Some have spoken quite clearly that in this election year we Catholics need to take a stand to protect our religious freedoms and the rights of the Church.  Much media attention has been paid to this issue and there have even been some rather partisan Democrats that have publicly scolded the President for this shameful act.

          Mr. Obama has even taken a play right out of China’s playbook by censoring the military archbishop’s statement on the mandate.  The archbishop, it seems, was being seditious for daring to criticize the President and defend the rights of his people.

          It seems now that the President has seen the writing on the wall, and he’s begun backpedaling faster than a New England Patriots cornerback, but this is not the time for us to be stupid.  He has clearly shown us his face, and what he thinks of us and the Church.  We have every reason to be terrified about what he will do if he doesn’t have reelection concerns to deal with.

          There is no question that if Barack Obama wins reelection this November Catholics will be fighting for their religious lives in this country.  The time for us to be concerned about appearing partisan is over.  We put our trust in Jesus, not in any political party or candidate, but we also have a duty to do what we can to ensure that once again there is a “Catholic vote” in this country and that come November it speaks with a very clear voice.

Santoromentum? and The Contraception Mandate

Santoromentum? and

The Contraception Mandate

          There are three important votes in the Presidential primary tonight, in Colorado, Missouri and Minnesota.  Recent polling shows Rick Santorum in potential position to win all three.  Rasmussen and Gallup also released polls this week showing Santorum as the only GOP candidate to win head-to-head against Barack Obama.  This blog, of course, endorsed Mr. Santorum approximately a month ago, but regardless of who you are supporting, let’s offer prayers for wisdom and entrust our nation to God at this pivotal time.  The link below offers an interesting perspective about the high profile Obama contraception mandate that has been of such concern recently.

http://catholicexchange.com/2012/02/07/142703/

Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger

Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger

When I was in college, I had a very unexpected experience that ended up being quite profitable.  I was playing baseball at Santa Barbara City College at the time and a teammate had just undergone a conversion to Christianity.  One day he asked me if I would go to church with him the following Sunday.  I thought it would be a good thing to encourage so I agreed to accompany him after I went to Mass in the morning.  The church he belonged to ended up being the Protestant denomination known as the Church of Christ.

          The service was held on a grassy hill with a stage at the bottom and was focused around the minister’s sermon.  The people were very nice and welcoming. And many of my teammate’s friends invited me to a Bible study.  I agreed, not knowing what to expect.  The student Catholic parish had a Bible study I attended at the time which focused on understanding the upcoming Sunday readings.  This Bible study was quite different, though.  The young men knew I was Catholic and spent the better part of an hour attacking me and trying to get me to leave the Church.

          Well, I knew nothing about apologetics at the time and very little about Scripture.  They jumped from topic to topic and from Bible verse to Bible verse.  Thankfully, I was able to recognize the taking of Scripture out of context and God gave me the Grace to persevere in my Catholic Faith and search for answers to the many challenges they brought up.  The great blessing was that I discovered every challenge had an answer and I developed an interest in apologetics.

          I remember at one point turning to the Second Book of Macabees in order to give a Scriptural defense of Purgatory and they dismissed it by saying, “That book isn’t even in our Bibles.”  Well, I had no idea why the book wasn’t in their Bibles so I dropped the point.

          Who do some Bibles lack both Books of Macabees, as well as Baruch, Wisdom, Tobit, Judith, Sirach, and parts of Daniel and Esther?  Some Protestants will tell you that the Catholic Church added those books at the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century, but that is factually absurd.  The fact is that the Catholic Church officially established the canon of the Bible in the end of the fourth century, containing all 73 books that Catholics have today, and Martin Luther took out the disputed books in the sixteenth century himself.

          In the first few centuries of Christianity, there was not total consensus about which books belonged in the Bible.  The seven books that differentiate Catholic and Protestant Bibles are in the Old Testament, but there were disputed books in the New Testament as well.  Some groups thought the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas or Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians were Scriptural, for example.  Others thought Revelation or Second Peter were not.  In the fourth century the Church used the authority given her by Christ to make a definitive decision.  Pope St. Damasus ratified the decision of the Council of Rome, authoritatively canonizing the Bible with the 73 books we have today.  That decision was reinforced by the African councils of Hippo and Carthage in the fourth century and others since, most notably being a reaffirmation of the canon at the Council of Trent in response to Martin Luther’s heretical removal of the seven previously mentioned books.

          These are all easily verifiable historical facts that really can’t be disputed.  But why did Luther do it?  The story of Luther’s rebellion and his promulgation of his heresies is a long one and the Church is not without fault in it.  However, the bottom line is that some of the books that were removed from Protestant Bibles contain references to teachings that Luther jettisoned, one notable one being the reference to Purgatory in Second Macabees that I attempted to share with my teammate’s friends nearly 20 years ago.

          Luther claimed authority to do this from the Council of Jamnia, a meeting of rabbis in A.D. 93.  This council explains why modern Jewish Scriptures also contain only the 39 Old Testament Books that Protestant Bibles have.  During Jesus’s time the version of the Scriptures most widely used in and around Israel was called the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Scriptures made by rabbis for the library in Alexandria.  It is also the version most quoted in the New Testament.  Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 and the Jewish people of the ancient world were struggling to find an identity.  One thing they decided to do was resist Hellenization, or Greek influences, so they decided that any books of Scripture that they did not have a Hebrew version of would be dropped.  This also allowed them to distinguish themselves from the nascent Christian community, which used the Septuagint at the time.

          You can probably see some of the problems with Luther citing this council in his decision.  First, this is a council of rabbis after the birth of the Church.  They had no authority.  In fact, one of the decrees at the Council of Jamnia was that Jesus of Nazareth is not the Messiah.  Also, one of their goals in dropping the seven books was to distinguish themselves from Christianity.  Ironic that Luther would follow their lead in this matter.

          Finally, even the reasoning of the rabbis at Jamnia, which Luther accepted, proved to be flawed.  The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the middle of the last century unearthed Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, such as Tobit and Wisdom, which date to before the time of Christ.  So as you can see, not only did Martin Luther not have the authority to change the canon of Scripture, even the logic he used in doing so was flawed.

          This has been a very short explanation of this issue and there are wonderful books on the topic, such as Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger, by Gary Michuta.  So if anyone complains to you that a piece of Scripture you are quoting isn’t even in their Bibles, don’t disregard it.  It’s not your fault they have an incomplete Bible.  Give them the directions to your nearest Catholic bookstore (or the address of this blog, which features a great translation of the full Bible on the sidebar) and say a prayer that they will find great riches in the Scriptures they will be encountering for the first time.      

Happy Candlemas Day

Happy Candlemas Day!

          Today, February 2, is the Feast of the Presentation of the Lord, when we remember Mary and Joseph taking the Baby Jesus to the Temple (Luke 2:22-38).  In some cultures today is the day the Christmas decorations come down.  It is also Candlemas Day.  Though not usually a public celebration today, historically Candlemas Day is when all the candles to be used during the year were blessed, and given to the clergy and laity.  It was marked by a candlelight procession.  Though it would be profitable to meditate on the Presentation of the Lord today, may we also have a happy Candlemas Day!

Also, please follow the link below to see Bishop Dolan’s statement as head of the USCCB in response to the Obama administration’s contraception mandate that denies freedom of religion to individuals and specifically targets the Catholic Church.

http://bcove.me/ob5itz9v

The bishops have also provided us a simple way to contact our representatives on this matter at the link below.

http://actions.nchla.org/Core/core.aspx?APP=GAC&AID=970&IssueID=25200&SiteID=-1