Category Archives: Catholicism

South Birds Fly, But How? And Why?

Leave a reply

Animals have instincts. Some migrate. Some hibernate. All of them search for food. They nest and they breed without question. Humans have instincts, too. What separates us from the animals is our search for meaning. We question our instincts. Animals simply live and die by them.

I have never completely understood why some scientists display such animosity towards the idea of God. These same scientists show no distain towards animal instincts. Indeed, some scientists have devoted their lives to studying such animal phenomena. However, the human instinct to search for meaning in God draws fire from them.

Humans have always been, and still are, spiritually inclined. Certainly, science has debunked many superstitions. However, the scientific method has not replaced the instinctual desire to know God. Religion is not comparable to the impotent scales on the tail of a snake that used to be functional legs. Human spirituality is still operative and functioning. In fact, science has excelled partly because humans are spiritually inclined. Many of the greatest scientists throughout history have been priests and other religiously inclined people.

Science is but one aspect of the human search for meaning. There is more than one way of “knowing.” Birds don’t fly south for the winter due to their scientific conclusions about weather patterns and food sources. Birds simply “know” to migrate, and scientists accept and study this fact. Therefore, I see nothing scientifically incongruent with accepting that humans can simply “know” that God exists. In other words, it is built into our wiring.

I had one person tell me that, eventually, science will close all the gaps in our knowledge and demonstrate how invalid religious thinking really is. But, science is basically in the business of answering the mechanistic, “how?” questions. The human search for meaning includes existential, “why?” questions. Science may tell us how we arrived on planet Earth, but not why we are here. Consequently, science can never “close all of the gaps in our knowledge.” Humans instinctively desire to know answers to the “why?” questions.

The issue we face as humans is that our instinctual desire for meaning can derail our instinctual “knowledge” of God. Doubt is an intrinsic quality of this instinct. Animals do not have this problem. Animals follow their instincts without question. Yet, doubt is not a bad thing. One does not seek and find without doubt. I don’t blame anyone for doubting the existence of God or the intentions of religious people. However, when such doubt leads to the complete elimination of one’s spiritual instinct and/or the ridicule of those who follow their spiritual instinct, doubt has become a dehumanizing element.

People “know” there is a God the way animals “know” to migrate and hibernate. I see no reason to ridicule human instinct while praising animal instinct. Both are equally real and worthy of study. Science may someday be able to decipher the mechanisms behind such knowledge. However, science will never answer the question of why such knowledge exists within us. Ultimately, we instinctively want to know why. We are scientifically and existentially inquisitive beings.

The “Religion vs. Relationship” Fallacy

Leave a reply

I’ve posted about this before, but, since it’s such a recurring theme on social media, I might as well revisit it. I’m not sure when it happened, but someone, somewhere, sometime got the idea that religion is “bad” and relationship is “good.” I don’t know who it was, but it certainly wasn’t Jesus. He never told anyone to abandon religion in order to have a good relationship with God.

Jesus did give the religious leaders of His day a hard time for being hypocrites. Jesus did not say that the religion they had been placed in charge of was bad. In fact, Jesus was a faithful Jew. He knew that God had established the Jewish religion through Abraham, Moses and the Prophets.  Jesus was not Jewish by accident. He was Jewish because Judaism was God’s established religion (His religion). Jesus actually told the people to obey the Pharisees. However, He also warned them not to be hypocrites like the Pharisees (Matt 23:1-3).

When Jesus established the New Covenant, He did not abolish religion. He fulfilled the Law and started the new religion that the old religion had foreshadowed. He founded His Church and chose leaders for it (you don’t need leaders if there is no religion to lead). Jesus gave these new religious leaders specific instructions on how to follow the new religion which we, of course, know as Christianity. Jesus did not do this so that we could “earn our way to Heaven.” He did it so that we would know HOW to be in the proper relationship with Him.

There is a false idea being preached that we must either choose “religion” OR “relationship.” This is not the only “either/or” fallacy floating around. Here are some others:

  • EITHER the Church’s authority is right OR the Bible’s authority is right.
  • EITHER you believe faith saves OR you believe works save.
  • EITHER you wrongly confess to a priest OR you confess to God.
  • EITHER you believe Jesus is the One Mediator OR you wrongly pray to Mary and the Saints.

To correct such fallacies, one only needs to understand what Jesus understands, namely, the great BOTH/AND:

  • Jesus gave His authority to His Church and from that Church sprang the canon of Scripture (i.e. The Bible). Authority belongs to BOTH the Church AND the Bible. They work together.
  • Faith without works is dead (James 2:17). Faith alone does not save you, nor will your works alone save you. What saves you is faith working in love. BOTH faith AND works together save.
  • Jesus breathed on them and said, “Who’s sins you forgive are forgiven, who’s sins you retain are retained.” (John 20:22-23) Such forgiveness is allowed only by the authority of Jesus. The sins are confessed to God and God forgives the sins through His official instrument the priest. BOTH the priest AND God are involved in the process, not either/or.
  • Jesus is “the One Mediator between God and Man.” (1Tim 2:5) He allows all members of His Body to participate in His mediation with Him. That’s why we can pray for each other (i.e. mediate or intercede for each other). The saints in Heaven are part of the Body of Christ. We can ask them to pray for us, too. Such mediation does not “replace” Jesus any more than you are “replacing” Jesus when you ask your pastor to pray for you. Again, it’s the great BOTH/AND.

Jesus does not want us to “give up religion” in order to “accept a relationship” with Him. Jesus wants us to accept BOTH Him AND His religion together. The either/or fallacy of religion vs. relationship causes a lot of harm because it keeps people away from the very thing Jesus created to keep us close to Him; His Church and the Sacraments! The either/or fallacies are often directed specifically at Catholic Christians. “You’re just following a religion! You need a relationship with Jesus!”

There are indeed many Catholics that need to discover an authentic relationship with Christ, but abandoning Christ’s established religion is not the remedy! The remedy is for these Catholics (and all Christians) to embrace the true meaning of Catholicism and understand the great BOTH/AND that Jesus intended!

There are also a great many Christians that feel they have a relationship with Christ, but they have abandoned, or perhaps never discovered, His true religion! In this case, relationship lacks the authentic religion established by Christ. They love Jesus, but they are unaware of just how close He desires to be to them through His Sacraments (particularly the Eucharist). Many of them believe that Church problems justify rejection of the Church, but that is not the response of Jesus. He never condemned Judaism because of the Pharisees. The Apostles never abandoned the Church because of Judas or even their own disputes. Whatever problems Catholics may have, The Catholic Church still remains Christ’s one, holy, apostolic Church.

Many people claim a relationship with Jesus but reject all notions of “organized religion.” Essentially, they create their own religions with their own rituals and observances. Somehow, they have determined that their own, “unorganized” religion is superior to the religion established by Jesus Himself. This is a symptom of the predominant relativism and self-centered thinking of our age. Doing “whatever feels best to you” doesn’t typically work in a marriage, a family, a job or any real friendship. Why do people believe it is the best way to have a relationship with God? The object of worship in such a “religion” is one’s personal feelings, not Jesus.

We don’t need to choose between “religion” and “relationship.” We need to choose THE religion that embodies the fullness of the relationship Jesus wants with us. Why would a husband get his wife a toaster for a gift when she desires flowers? Perhaps because he does not know her very well, or he simply does not care what she wants? Maybe the toaster was conveniently at hand or more to his liking. He may give her such misguided gifts “religiously,” but it is not the relationship his wife truly desires. What he needs to do to nurture the relationship is religiously bring her flowers.

We all have some “religion” we follow. What we must determine is, “What religion does Jesus desire us to have, and why did He make it so? For the faithful Catholic, religion is not the opposite of relationship; our religion is the embodiment of the relationship Christ desires to have with us. Religion/relationship; the great BOTH/AND.

What? To Jesus Through MARY?!

Leave a reply

I used to worry about the phrase, “To Jesus through Mary.” In my years away from Catholicism, I took it as verification that Catholics were misled into placing way too much emphasis on Mary, to the detriment of their relationship with Christ. I used to think, “No, we go through Jesus to God, not to Jesus through Mary. Jesus is the ‘one mediator between God and man.’ This “going through Mary” stuff just isn’t right.”

Then, during my journey back to Catholicism, I began to become aware of something. How did I learn about Jesus? How did I learn that Jesus is called “the one mediator?” I learned it through people at my church who knew the Bible. How did those people learn about the Bible? They learned about the Bible through other people. It seems that no one simply picks up a Bible and learns it in isolation. There are always other people involved, even if it is just the person that placed that Bible in the drawer of your hotel room. The Bible itself came to us through the Catholic Church.

No one actually goes directly to God through Jesus alone. There is always someone else involved, just like Philip with the Ethiopian eunuch. I once had a pastor that liked to talk about how he found Christ through Billy Graham. I think Billy Graham is a great preacher. Lots of people have discovered Christ through Billy Graham.

One might argue that the Apostle Peter or Paul was even greater than Billy Graham. Many have come to Christ through Peter and Paul. But, do you know who is an even greater disciple than either Peter or Paul? Mary. She is the perfect disciple of Christ. When I ask myself, “Who can take me by the hand and lead me to Jesus Christ?” I have to respond, “Mary.” No one was physically or spiritually closer to Christ than Mary. No one lived a more pure life of devotion to Christ than Mary.

Mary was always within the will of God, even when she was confused, scared and grief-stricken. If anyone can show me how to live for Christ, it’s Mary. So, should I go through Mary to Christ? Of course! It makes perfect sense. I can’t think of anyone better than her. “Let it be done to me according to your word.” Hmm…sounds like something her Son would say (“Not my will, Father, but your will be done”). Yeah, now I have no problem going through Mary to Christ.

Go Ahead And Be A Princess, Girl!

Leave a reply

I recently took my family to see the new Cinderella movie.  I applaud Disney for making this movie.  Prior to seeing it, I watched Fr. Barron’s video commentary.  You can watch it yourself, so I’ll not go into everything Fr. Barron said.  Suffice it to say, he helped me see the story from a Christian perspective.  For me, it made the movie that much more impressive and inspirational to watch.  (If you have not seen the movie, there are a few little spoilers in Fr. Barron’s commentary, but they didn’t bother me).

Disney princesses tend to get a lot of criticism from people that disapprove of their unrealistic representation of girls.  Disney makes their waists too thin, their eyes too big and their hair too perfect.  These princesses rely too much on being rescued by handsome princes when they ought to be fending for themselves and determining their own destinies.  They give girls the wrong idea of what true feminism is, superficially and internally.  Some of this criticism is probably justified.

Recently, there were billboards around my city advertising for an all girl Catholic high school.  The ads had fairy tale imagery and the message was, “You’re not a princess,” or “Make your own dreams come true.”  I understood that the idea being promoted was for girls to get their heads out of the fairy tale clouds, quit waiting to be rescued, stop being the proverbial “fair maidens in distress” and get a practical education.  I think the idea certainly has merit.  However, I believe girls need not relinquish the title of “Princess,” as long as they know where true royalty comes from.

The Cinderella story (and the movie) focuses on the Catholic virtues of fortitude (courage) and charity (kindness).  Other virtues are exemplified within the movie as well.  Fr. Barron’s video commentary highlights the Christian salvation theme in the story and how it mirrors the relationship between Christ and His Church.  Cinderella is all of us.  We do need to be rescued from the slavery of sin which covers our true beauty.  We do need to embrace virtue.

As Christians, we are all called to embody fortitude, charity and all the virtues.  We know from Romans 8:15 that we are adopted children of God and cry, “Abba, Father.”  We know from 1Peter 2:9-10 that we are royalty.  We are destined to reign with God on high.  As children of The King, what else can we be but princesses and princes?

I have no qualms about referring to my daughter as a princess and my son as a prince, because I am teaching them that they are children of the King.  As they grow, they will know that their ultimate destinies lie not with Disney, but with royalty on high.  They will know that, long before there ever was a Disney, they were called from above to have courage and to be kind.  They will know they have a seat at the royal table.

This Is That Love

Leave a reply

Out of all the religions, what makes authentic Christianity unique is that, from the beginning of time, God seeks us. It’s not about adopting a set of moral values and principles…it’s about knowing God, the person of Jesus Christ, intimately. So intimately, in fact, that an eternal, physical AND spiritual union between God and His creatures takes place.

You know that love that everyone yearns for in the deepest places of their hearts? This is it.

Tolerance?

Leave a reply

Do you really want tolerance? We tolerate things that we hope will eventually go away, like a cold, bad weather and annoying people. What you actually want is for me to embrace, approve of, validate and agree with that which I know in my heart to be wrong. I think you can’t tolerate me.

Self

Leave a reply

Self awareness is good. I must pay attention to my body, my thoughts and my soul. I must know myself and know how I may be affecting myself and those around me for better or for worse.

Self care is good. My body, my mind and my soul are gifts given to me. I must take good care of these gifts and not neglect them or abuse them.

Self control is good. I am responsible for managing my emotions and for choosing my thoughts and my actions. No one else can do this for me.

Self-centeredness is not good. I am not the center of all things; God is. My life must revolve around God. God is love. Love includes self, but love is not centered on self. Love must ultimately be centered on others.

A Shift In My Focus

2 Replies

The largest percentage of my blog has been apologetic in nature.  Partly I’ve been motivated by a desire to grow in knowledge of my own faith by explaining some of it to others.  I also hoped others might take an interest in the Faith and discover Christ for the first time or rediscover Him in new ways.  All I can really measure is my own growth.  Maybe others have been influenced, maybe not.

I’ve come to a point where apologetics interests me less.  Certainly, if someone asks me a question about Catholicism I will do my best to answer or suggest further resources.  However, I’m finding that too much focus on apologetics is stunting my spiritual growth.

Apologetics is, after all, a discipline of defending a certain position.  It has its place.  Nevertheless, as a marriage and family therapist, I am keenly aware that defensiveness can be quite toxic to relationships.  In fact, high levels of defensiveness between spouses has been deemed a “marriage killer.”  I see it play out often in my therapy office.  Considering the fact that marriage models the relationship between Christ and His Church, it seems fitting for Christians to avoid a defensive stance as much as possible and choose the opposite approach of vulnerability.  Vulnerability is the birthplace of the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23).  Vulnerability is the cross.

Vulnerability leads to openness, dialog, discourse, empathy, understanding and unity. Defensiveness leads more often to division, blame, accusations, lack of personal accountability and closed hearts.  Would one rather embrace a knight in armor or a vulnerable child in swaddling clothes?

Again, apologetics has its place and I do not disregard it as important.  But even apologetics must contain a degree of vulnerability to be effective.  No human can be 100% right all of the time.  The best armor is never completely impervious to attack or injury.  Christian apologists must be humble, vulnerable and willing to admit error.

Personally, I’m becoming less interested in explaining Catholicism and more driven to live it.  Let’s face it, most people really don’t care how something works as long as they know they can depend on it to work.  There’s only so much I can explain anyway.  I just want to be an example of the transforming power of Christ and His Church.  Hopefully I can shift my writing to reflect that goal.

The following is a song written and performed by a skeptic who also happens to arguably be the most popular and talented rock drummer in the world, Neil Peart.  (If you don’t like rock music, humor me.  The lyrics are pertinent.  I’m a drummer, so, there you have it).

Hypocrites In The Church

2 Replies

Imagine if you were watching the Family Feud game show and the host said, “Name a reason people stop going to church.”  The number one answer on the board would likely be “Hypocrisy.”  We hear this frequently.  “I stopped going to church,” or “I never go to church,” or “I changed my church,” or even, “I no longer believe in God because of all the hypocrites.”

The fatal flaw in such reasoning is that there is nowhere in the world to go where there are no hypocrites.  It has often been said that if you discover the “perfect” church, don’t go in.  If you go in, it will then contain a hypocrite, and you will have ruined it.  We are all hypocrites.  Some of us may try to deny it, but the fact remains that we are all imperfect.

Should you decide to eschew “organized religion” and worship God independently, all you will accomplish is to organize your own, private religion with one member that just happens to be a hypocrite.  So, that doesn’t solve the problem.  Your “private church” will still be full of hypocrites.

Hundreds of years ago, reformers tried to “fix” hypocrisy in the Church.   Consequently, all of the churches started since the Reformation have been started by imperfect human beings who happen to have all been hypocrites.  The Church was originally formed by Jesus Christ.  Jesus is the only man who ever lived that was a perfect, non-hypocrite.  Consequently, when choosing a church, why not at least choose the one that was formed by a perfect, non-hypocrite?  Why should an imperfect hypocrite believe that he or she can re-form what was already formed by the perfect, non-hypocrite, Jesus Christ?

Hypocrites in the Church do not negate the truth of the Church anymore than out-of-shape people in a gym negate the benefits of exercise.  Instead of trying to run away from hypocrites we need to be running towards Christ and embracing the benefits of His Church.  Otherwise, we’re just running from hypocrisy into the arms of more hypocrisy.

“What Would Jesus Do?” Try Asking, “What Did Jesus Do?”

Leave a reply

“What would Jesus do?”

The answer to that question often depends on who you ask.  It’s a question that fits nicely into the relativistic mind of our age.  It allows each of us to thoughtfully rub our chins, look up at the sky and say, “Well, I believe Jesus would…”  So, the question is really just Jiminy Cricket’s “follow your conscience” line wearing a Christian mask.  It is relativism presented as religion.  Whatever answer you come up with is as good as anyone else’s answer as long as we are all “sincere.”

Often, the honest answer to the question “What would Jesus do?” is “I really don’t know.”  His disciples lived with him for three years and Jesus constantly kept them surprised and guessing.  Why are we so convinced that we have Jesus pegged?  For example, it astounds me when celebrities claim to know what Jesus would or would not approve of, as if being a famous celebrity makes one an authority on the mind of Christ.

When we ask, “What would Jesus do?” we can only think and act hypothetically.  We can only speculate and take our best guess.  Maybe we’re helping, maybe we’re doing harm.  What if we decide to do the exact opposite of what Jesus would actually do?  Our world faces daily situations for which there are no explicit instructions in the Bible.  Dealing in general, biblical principles does not always provide enough specifics.  Asking what Jesus would do often doesn’t help much.

Perhaps a more helpful question is, “What did Jesus do?”  There are documented answers to that question.  In terms of what our world faces today, an important answer is, “Jesus established an authoritative, teaching Church to guide us and to spiritually feed us.”  In the midst of all the confusion over what Jesus would do, we have a Church to inform us of what we as followers of Jesus in this present day are to do and what we are not to do.

I sometimes hear people defend immorality by stating that the Bible is silent or ambiguous about certain modern day issues.  Of course it is!  Jesus never told his disciples to write a book to instruct us on every possible, future, moral issue.  Jesus established a Church (only one Church) with the authority to provide us with those instructions on faith and morals.  Jesus did not establish multiple church denominations to speculate and argue about what He might or might not do.  Men established those churches (some very recently).

God is not the author of confusion.  Jesus did not leave us with a Bible, the Holy Spirit and hypothetical questions about what He would do.  He left us with His Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, to lead us into all truth.  Does this mean we always have every answer to every question?  No.  Does it mean we put it to a vote when we are confused about what Jesus would do?  No (Christianity is not a democracy).  It means that by following His Church we are following Jesus.  We are to strive for obedience to the faith, not speculation.

It comes down to trust (i.e. faith).  Either we trust with all our heart that Jesus knew what He was doing when He established the Church (trust what He did), or we try to constantly change the Church to conform to our speculations about what Jesus would do (lean on our own understanding and feelings).