Truth and Lies (A Catholic's Perspective)

 It was 2003 when we learned the news that would uproot us once again from our church home. We had only just recently begun feeling like we belonged in the Episcopal Church.  After a great deal of church shopping around our area, we had hoped to be able to finally settle down.  It was the ordination of a practicing homosexual named Vicky Gene Robinson to the position of bishop within the Episcopal denomination that spiritually sent us reeling.  According to what we understood, Vicky Gene Robinson of New Hampshire set the tone of his new relationship with the abandonment of his wife Isabella and their child.  To me, it seemed like there was a clear disregard for Biblical truth there.

 

Having become somewhat accustomed over the preceding years to speaking our minds regarding issues with which we disagreed, my wife and I sent a letter of concern to the bishop of the Episcopal Churches of Western Oregon.  I remember mentioning the writings of Saint Paul in my correspondence, and, despite the issue making me sick to my stomach, I was careful to keep it courteous and respectful.  I may have also made a reference to C.S. Lewis’ essay “Fern Seed and the Elephants,” but I don’t recall for certain.  When the response arrived, the bishop’s assistant dismissed Pauline theology outright and took an unusually vitriolic tone with me.  It was abundantly clear that it was time to prepare for some more church shopping…all because of that thing called truth.

 

Because of the preceding example I chose, I should hasten to add that I am not selecting the sin of homosexuality for some kind of mortal sin extraordinaire, compared to which other sins pale in wrongdoing. I am also not espousing a view where we treat homosexuals with derision or rudeness; I have good friends who have chosen this lifestyle. It’s a common Christian teaching, however, that the teacher or leader within the faith needs to be exceedingly careful “because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.” (James 3:1) That Episcopal bishop’s new role becomes a particularly public embrace of a watered-down and misunderstood version of the Bible, one where truth becomes subservient to warm feelings and “good will,” divorced from their underlying meaning. For more information, see paragraph 2357 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church for a discussion of “Chastity and homosexuality.”

To a paraphrase one of my favorite Catholic authors, a good truth is hard to find.  In a similar way to how the Book of Wisdom describes its namesake, truth shares similar reflections of the divine.  It’s worth remembering that in Inferno, Dante saves the eighth circle of hell for fraudsters and liars.  Each is eternally sentenced to suffer in these pits within the inferno as punishment for their crimes against God and man.  These days, we might describe Truth like a tired refugee who is denied shelter again and again; no room at the inn.  The evidence of this is all around us.  We have politicians as well as elected officials who seem to lie with the same ease with which they breathe.  On the international stage, we see Russia deceiving her own people (not to mention our own) concerning the carnage being wrought upon the innocents of Ukraine.  We have the former Chief of Police for Uvalde Schools, Pete Arredondo, who appears to have done his best to shield the truth from the public’s eyes.  Then, speaking of a school shooting, there’s Alex Jones, who tormented parents who had lost their children so tragically.  And don’t forget the entertainment industry, Big Pharma, and, of course, Big Tech.  There are too many to name.  

If you have ever read Nicholas Carr or perhaps listened to his thought-provoking debate “Is Smart Technology Making Us Dumb” on Intelligence Squared Debates, you have been introduced to his idea that technology may be fundamentally changing the way our brains function.  We are more distracted than ever, and the contention is that our ability for deep thought is being eroded by these constant interruptions.  Like I have written elsewhere, there is also a sense in which social media itself pushes us apart as much as it brings some of us closer together.  As the Catechism of the Catholic Church so eloquently puts it, “The means of social communication (especially the mass media) can give rise to a certain passivity among users, making them less than vigilant consumers of what is said or shown. Users should practice moderation and discipline in their approach to the mass media. They will want to form enlightened and correct consciences the more easily to resist unwholesome influences.”

We are all familiar with classic dystopian literature like a Brave New World or 1984.  Many in our culture seem to have withdrawn with suspicion and scorn from mainstream news sources or dialogue upon current events.  They may identify all such reputable media as “fake news,” for instance.  They focus on highly questionable sources of information for their daily sources of news, and this leads to obvious problems of isolation.  While I’ve tried recently to reason with some of these individuals, the responses I receive are usually along the lines that the Ukraine war atrocities are faked, or that the videos have been re-purposed from previous conflicts.  The denial of reality is sadly reminiscent of cult members.  I can almost understand where this media cynicism grew from; we have all witnessed bias in broadcast and print news.  Their answer, however, is to embrace a lie, a particularly dangerous lie.  In an article entitled “Clarity of Vision,” which appeared on Catholic365 last year, I said of conspiracy theories that they “seem particularly sinful for the Christian, since it’s taking the worst of gossip and melding it with characteristics of false witness, then running one’s view of the world through this inherently defective (subjective) lens. We shouldn’t cling to information that is beyond our reasonable knowing. Matthew 7:5 comes to mind here.”

 

Novelists such as George Orwell have repeatedly warned readers of the prospect of state and media manipulation; it’s a valid concern.  The following passage from 1984 also touches on a vocabulary and language deterioration in a way that seems to echo some of Nicholas Carr’s thoughts as well. 

 

‘Even when you write it you’re still thinking in Oldspeak. I’ve read some of those pieces that you write in “The Times” occasionally. They’re good enough, but they’re translations. In your heart you’d prefer to stick to Oldspeak, with all its vagueness and its useless shades of meaning. You don’t grasp the beauty of the destruction of words. Do you know that Newspeak is the only language in the world whose vocabulary gets smaller every year?’ Winston did know that, of course. He smiled, sympathetically he hoped, not trusting himself to speak. Syme bit off another fragment of the dark-coloured bread, chewed it briefly, and went on: ‘Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. Already, in the Eleventh Edition, we’re not far from that point. But the process will still be continuing long after you and I are dead. Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller…

 

Orwell, George. 1984 (Deluxe Hardbound Edition) (pp. 58-59). SHJBOOX. Kindle Edition.

Some may be responding to that important warning, however, in an impulsive rather than thoughtful or reasoned way.  Technology and particularly social media are the perfect mediums with which to instantly share valuable news around the world.  While that’s a powerful good, one lie clothed within a half-truth can speed around our planet at the same hypersonic speed.  The only remedy against the lies swirling around us is to counter them with truth, full disclosure.  Of course, we can also convince ourselves of our own lies over weeks, months, or years.  Lies can also lead to pride over time.  When someone believes they are privy to information known only to a select few—e.g. those listening to a particular radio, television, or podcast episode—shared viewpoints between listeners can be acknowledged with a knowing wink or other subtle sign.  When we are imagining conspiratorial insights far beyond the ability of our direct knowledge, there may be a tendency to call those on the other side “sheep,” for instance.  C.S. Lewis addresses the nature of pride most eloquently in “A Case for Christianity.”

There is one vice of which no man in the world is free; which everyone in the world loathes when he sees it in someone else and of which hardly any people, except Christians, ever imagine that they are guilty themselves. There is no fault which makes a man more unpopular, and no fault which we are more unconscious of in ourselves. And the more we have it ourselves, the more we dislike it in others. 

According to Christian teachers, the essential vice, the utmost evil, is Pride. Unchastity, anger, greed, drunkenness, and all that, are mere fleabites in comparison. It was through pride that the Devil became the Devil: Pride leads to every other vice. It is the complete anti-God state of mind.

Of course, there are times when truth may not help one’s larger argument, may even jeopardize one’s job, but one still needs to share the necessary words of accountability.  While the stated objectives of the Russian Federation, for example, concerning the allegations of Nazism in Ukraine are ludicrous, it must be conceded that the Azov Special Operations Detachment, a right-wing militia, has served for some time.  We need not paint the Ukrainian government as pure as the new fallen snow to establish that what Russia is doing to the country is a reprehensible war crime.  The following passage concerning the nature of truth and lies is taken again from the section of the Catechism of the Catholic Church concerning bearing false witness.

2485 By its very nature, lying is to be condemned. It is a profanation of speech, whereas the purpose of speech is to communicate known truth to others. The deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error by saying things contrary to the truth constitutes a failure in justice and charity. The culpability is greater when the intention of deceiving entails the risk of deadly consequences for those who are led astray. 

2486 Since it violates the virtue of truthfulness, a lie does real violence to another. It affects his ability to know, which is a condition of every judgment and decision. It contains the seed of discord and all consequent evils. Lying is destructive of society; it undermines trust among men and tears apart the fabric of social relationships.

When we were faced with leaving the Episcopal Church over its ordination to bishop of a practicing homosexual, we were attempting to discern the truth or mission of an organization, but we are all called upon to make determinations on truth or veracity throughout each and every day of our lives.  How we arrive at our decisions, and how we communicate those decisions to others, can become terribly important.  Critical thinking techniques can help us discern the truth.  For a church, for instance, you might have many litmus tests that are required before you are truly at home.  While it is a little different for a Catholic, the Nicene Creed might still serve as an important anchoring point for a new parish.  For new religious traditions with which you may not be so familiar, issues such as homosexuality or abortion may shine a light for you on the overall legitimacy or truth of the denomination in question.  Are they in support of the Culture of Life or the Culture of Death?

 

Let’s change gears a bit and try approaching this issue of truth from an entirely different direction.  My wife and I were recently in Florence, Italy on a wonderful vacation. In Tuscany, one thing you must do is try a true Florentine Steak.  The locals will warn you, though, if your steak is under a pound and a half or not meeting other listed requirements, it is a fraud.  Calling a steak Florentine in Italy when it is not, is apparently quite a big deal. At any rate, the local advice is that a restaurant that misrepresents steaks as Florentine should not be considered trustworthy in anything else; they’ve forfeited the diners’ trust with their deception in this single area.  It’s entirely possible to apply a similar standard of trustworthiness and logic to both organizations and individuals. 

One thing in particular about conspiracy theories is that they usually read more like a story than real life.  If you’re familiar with the cliché pattern of urban legends and conspiracy theories, they become easier to pick out; you almost can start to smell them.  If you’re reading an account, and it sounds just too good to be true, try Googling a few lines of the account within quotes.  You can also use the “-“ sign to help fine-tune your search results.  This is a simple version of what is called a Boolean Search, and it can be particularly useful for spotting repurposed urban legends or conspiracy stories that have no root in truth. Sites like Snopes.com can also prove of some benefit.  Another suggestion when it comes to testing information’s veracity is careful review of its original source.   See, for instance, what others have written in the way of criticism of the particular account that has caught your eye.

In the fourth chapter of 1 John, we are urged to “test the spirits to see whether they are from God.”  A similar method can be employed to assess something’s reliability.  There are many tools available to discover the truth of a questionable assertion.  As a matter of fact, if you overhear a legal phrase such as neutralizing the credibility of the witness or false in one thing, false in everything, you are getting warmer; these techniques are already all around us.  Among the tools available to us, then, are direct examination of the assertion itself using critical methods previously highlighted, credibility review of the source—e.g. has the organization or individual taken positions in opposition to the Bible, Church teaching, or other tried and true standards—and finally seeking the input of others whom you trust.  Of course, your own skills at spotting deception should quickly improve as you make a more conscious effort to fact-check claims and not assume the information you are being given is correct.  If we all do this, committing to stop spreading misinformation, imagine the clearer world we could begin to create.  This allows us to focus more on the truly meaningful things.

If we distill all of this down to its essence, we see a need for renewed emphasis upon living truth in all that we say, do, and believe—whether in-person or in the anonymous world of online communications.  If lies, half-truths, fabrications, and exaggerations are coming at us all day long, requiring us to mentally filter the content, our duty as Catholics should be to stand for truth in word and deed.  People should know that we are different, that we can be trusted.  This kind of adult accountability is sorely lacking in today’s world.  As Saint Augustine wrote in On Choice and Free Will, “If there is something more excellent than the truth, then that is God; if not, then Truth itself is God.”  If people see calm reason and truth reflected in our lives and hearts, perhaps it will point them in the direction of divine Truth.  “Behold, I stand at the door and knock.”  In embracing this one at the door called Truth, we may jeopardize relationships, damage connections with political parties, and lose friends, but we will gain something so much more real, substantive, and eternal in return: Truth.

 

This article is adapted from Catholic365.

 

Sing a New Church Karaoke Night! (Humorous Aside)

In honor of The Babylon Bee's  regular body slamming of traditional news outlets through the art of satire, I give you my little contribution to this important literary...genre.  Hope you enjoy!  (For my real take on this hymn, go to page 53 or here too.)


The 5th annual “Sing a New Church” Karaoke Festival is scheduled to start directly after the 11am Mass on Sunday, August 23rd in Minot’s Saint Cecilia Catholic Church. The excitement is quickly building for this fun-filled event for the entire family. As done in past years, winners will have an opportunity to win valuable prizes from two of the following five categories: Social Justice, Multiculturalism, Gender Discovery, Diving for Diversity, and (the wildcard) Ecumenical Experiences!

Parish staff encourage attendees to recall that the event follows Mass. This means, for instance, that the Boykin and Smith families would want to actually stay in the nave AFTER the recessional hymn begins (and finishes too). Please contact staff with questions.

The first-place winner will progress to the second round with an opportunity to capture the National Karaoke Pennant! Round 2’s music has just been announced as the angelic and inspiring “Earth and All Stars.”  Of course, we're all stars when we sing together!!

Don’t be left out in the cold, join us in Minot on Sunday! This is a great time to bring friends along, so that they can learn more about important things-- such social justice and ecumenical diversity.

Let’s hit last year’s winners where it hurts the most and take the much-prized Karaoke Pennant of the Greater Minot Diocese (conveniently shortened to the KPGMD).

PS.  In this strange time of long lines for sanitizer and social distancing from the Boykin family, let's remember to get things right on Sunday.  Washing your hands at least once on August 23rd would be a super fabulous start!

Understanding the Abuse Controversy

The essay below began as a simple article, but I have decided to scratch the project for now. For one thing, the latest developments make this particular approach less timely than it was, and I have neither the time nor inclination to re-write this. Think of it as a stream of consciousness of sorts on the current controversy.  Please note that all photos are my own.  Perhaps this essay will be of some use or help to you!

(Unfortunately, for several reasons including possible future publication options, a couple sections of this essay have been removed from the blog.)

     

   
     Once I first became aware of the nightmarish news out of Pennsylvania, I felt ill.  Since learning of the crimes, I’ve been dealing with alternating feelings of  shock, anger, and embarrassment for the immoral and criminal behavior of some of our clergy and leadership.  Where do we begin?  

     It seems that we must endeavor to address the victims of these crimes first.  But what can we possibly say to them besides sincerely seeking their forgiveness as members of the Church?  They already understand all too well that there are no perfect earthly institutions.  The Catholic Church betrayed them so completely, so scandalously, that one wonders if any of them remain Catholic today.  While it is true that institutions are run by imperfect people, and that we should endeavor to avoid letting negative experiences unduly color our larger view of an institution like a church, this is an essentially worthless and tone-deaf argument to try to make to a suffering victim.  Victims already understand perfectly well the evil that can come from otherwise good institutions, but what can we possibly offer them today?

     Perhaps it’s worth considering something like the safety message we are all familiar with hearing when we fly.  Remember the warning we receive to remember to put the oxygen mask on first in the event of a depressurization before trying to assist someone else?  That advice seems to be in accordance with common sense. In an emergency, it is sometimes prudent to attend to ourselves before we can adequately provide aid for those who depend upon us.  We are all in shock here, and it makes a modicum of sense to suggest that it’s too early for most of us lay people to offer much in the way of constructive words for the victims—other than we are terribly sorry for what happened. Meanwhile, may I suggest that we take hold of the mask and breathe in some fresh air to counter the growing stench of shock and anger?  As we begin to make sense of the larger picture, perhaps other meaningful, substantive words will be forthcoming for those who suffered evil at the hands of these ordained men of our church.

     One dimension of this tragedy that warrants particularly careful reflection and prayer is the way this issue keeps recurring within our history; it’s hardly new. In the 11^thcentury, for example, Saint Peter Damian wrote the following.

Listen, you do-nothing superiors of clerics and priests. Listen, and even though you feel sure of yourselves, tremble at the thought that you are partners in the guilt of others; those, I mean, who wink at the sins of their subjects that need correction and who by ill-considered silence allow them license to sin. Listen, I say, and be shrewd enough to understand that all of you alike are deserving of death, that is, not only those who do such things, but also they who approve those who practice them.

     The following related passage was purportedly written by Basil the Great within an early compilation of canon law known as the Decretum Gratiani. Its recognition today, however, seems to stem more from references made by Saint Peter Damian within hisown writings rather than this original compilation or collection of canon law. As a consequence, this quote is often misattributed to Saint Peter Damian rather than Basil the Great.

Any cleric or monk who seduces young men or boys, or who is apprehended in kissing or in any shameful situation, shall be publically flogged and shall lose his clerical tonsure. Thus shorn, he shall be disgraced by spitting into his face, bound in iron chains, wasted by six months of close confinement, and for three days each week put on barley bread given him toward evening. Following this period, he shall spend a further six months living in a small segregated courtyard in the custody of a spiritual elder, kept busy with manual labor and prayer, subjugated to vigils and prayers, forced to walk at all times in the company of two spiritual brothers, never again allowed to associate with young men for purposes of improper conversation or advice…

     Of course, even before Basil’s strong words from the 4th century, the New Testament itself seems to foreshadow this particular evil within the Church with the following passages from Mark 9:42 and Luke 17:2.

If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea.

and

It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble.

Between the preceding stern warnings and passages such as 1 Corinthians 11:27, concerning the eating of the bread and drinking “of the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner,” or the warning concerning the “stricter standard” with regard to the teacher found in James 3:1, one can hardly deny that both holy Scripture and sacred tradition concretely warn of the fruits of this kind of immorality.  For those ministers who would dare lead Christ’s precious sheep astray, it would likely have been better for them, like Judas, if they had never been born.

     This dimension of stark severity, however, seems strangely absent within today’s modern Church: replaced often with dimensions of popular psychology or echoes of the Sexual Revolution.  Voices such as Father James Martin, the at-large editor of the once great America, The National Catholic Weekly, seem bent on moving the Catholic Church to an altogether different place—e.g. expressing “reverence” for homosexual unions and even the encouraging of transgenderism.   Unflinching orthodoxy, on the other hand, sees clearly that each act of abuse like those that took place in Pennsylvania, represents an act remarkably similar to Judas’ betrayal of Christ, actions that attack not only the living person of our Savior, but also His followers, and the Gospel itself.  

     Bishop Fulton Sheen, a particularly inspiring communicator for Christ’s Church, puts it this way in Radio Replies, Volume 1.

If I were not a Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which did not get along well with the world; in other words, I would look for the Church which the world hates. My reason for doing this would be, that if Christ is in any one of the churches of the world today, He must still be hated as He was when He was on earth in the flesh. If you would find Christ today, then find the Church that does not get along with the world.

It doesn’t take a genius to see that the closer the Church moves to embracing the world, the worse things become. It seems that we have exchanged being the salt of the world for the…flour, but where does this leave us today? I suggest that we first must acknowledge that something is seriously wrong with the structure and spirit of any church in which these crimes can be tolerated and overlooked. I have heard recently that Pope Francis may be prepared to call for a change to our Catechism to reflect the perceived immoral nature of the death penalty—and even more baffling pronouncements concerning a belief now that life sentences are tantamount to torture. Yet, so far as have heard, the relatively small section addressing sexual abuse (CCC 2389) does not appear to be headed for any similar expansion.

---

     Given the numbers and historical context of this—not to mention a sense that things have grown worse as steps towards liberalization have been more greatly tolerated—I think we as Catholics must demand that the Church’s own published instructions be more closely followed. Below is an excerpt from “On Priesthood and Those with Homosexual Tendencies, Instruction from the Congregation for Catholic Education.”

From the time of the Second Vatican Council until today, various documents of the Magisterium, and especially the Catechism of the Catholic Church, have confirmed the teaching of the Church on homosexuality. The Catechismdistinguishes between homosexual acts and homosexual tendencies.

Regarding acts, it teaches that Sacred Scripture presents them as grave sins. The Tradition has constantly considered them as intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law. Consequently, under no circumstance can they be approved.

Deep-seated homosexual tendencies, which are found in a number of men and women, are also objectively disordered and, for those same people, often constitute a trial. Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. They are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter.8

In the light of such teaching, this dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question,9 cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called "gay culture."10 

Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies…

---

     If I were to endeavor to offer concrete advice going forward it would be to safeguard all vulnerable populations as if our spiritual lives depend upon it, take a one strike, you are out approach to abuse, embrace the cleansing quality of light and transparency in all of these affairs, and take meaningful steps towards reconciliation and forgiveness with those victims the Church has wounded so terribly.  Perhaps some of the wisest commentary concerning this spiritual crisis, however, is found within Archbishop Alexander Sample’s recent pastoral letter to the faithful of the Archdiocese of Portland. In this important letter, Archbishop Sample outlines four recommendations that include: increasing accountability of bishops in concrete and meaningful ways, initiating an outside investigation, bringing investigation to bear not only upon the perpetrators, but also those in authority who knew but failed to act, and ensuring that new reports of concern are never again whitewashed or ignored. These recommendations of accountability, if enacted, would take us far along the road of healing, reconciliation, and justice, because what we need today is unflinching orthodoxy and not false promises.

It's Not Stealing...if You Need it?

There is no rationalization of "petty theft."  If there is any theft, it's on the part of the employer by not paying their employee enough where they can't afford basic necessities. There's a world of  difference between taking one roll of toilet paper in order to make it until the next paycheck comes in and taking a box of pens/paper just for the sake of taking them.  (Catholic social media user)

Sometimes, you get into a conversation with so-called Christians that really catches you off guard.  Yesterday was one of those days.  The writer of the above paragraph on social media apparently believes that the seventh commandment offers an exception--if you really want or need something.  It’s particularly interesting to me, because of the echoes of Catholic social justice thinking within her response.  The discussion began with a woman’s admission that she regularly stole toilet paper from her employer.  She believed it was perfectly appropriate because, after all, she needed the item due to insufficient income; the employer didn't pay her enough, so she'd take something a little extra.  I assumed I wouldn’t be the only Catholic to take her to task, but I was.  

In the guise of social justice, then, people like this are rationalizing petty theft from their employers.  This attitude needs to be confronted head-on because it’s a perversion of social justice, as explained in The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Section 1928-1948.  We all need to root out and expose this deceptive line of thinking for what it truly is: rationalization for theft.   (Some might unconvincingly argue that Section 2408 of the CCC gives an out for this behavior, but my argument is that this clearly fails to apply to a country such as the United States.  Too many redundant safety nets exist for those in need.)

In fact, I suggest that the attitude of those who rationalize along these lines betrays the sin of pride in addition to the sin of stealing.  That is, they are ashamed to ask others for help, so they take it upon themselves to steal to satisfy their own needs/desires.  It’s a lie clothed in shreds of truth, and this is why it's an attitude that must be confronted.  It's also worth noting that moral law is not based upon dollar and cent values--as civil and criminal laws are.  I would argue that the moral sin of taking a small item is tantamount to taking a much larger item; God doesn't care whether your toilet paper was on sale, or not.

Before coming to work for the State of Oregon in 1997, I worked for retailers like Nordstrom and Sears in the field of loss prevention.  This primarily involved arresting shoplifters as well as investigating internal thefts revealed through overs/shorts register analysis and other means—hidden cameras, for example.  After I would chase down the suspects and place them in custody, I routinely heard every excuse one can imagine.  There was always a reason why I should let them go, but, of course, I never released them before the police (and once or twice US Border Patrol) arrived to finish the reports in my cramped office.  

Rationalization is a way for life for these people.    As one is removing bundles of stolen jeans or electronic devices from concealed compartments within the shoplifter's baby stroller, though, there is little inclination to feel sorry for them; they made their choices.  We live in the richest and most generous society on the planet, I will never excuse those who steal—by force or deception.  I will always gladly assist in holding these individuals accountable.

Writing Quality Fiction

Writing fiction can be a lot of fun, but other times it can feel like herding cats.  Marketing, in particular, often turns into a chore because we (as writers) fail to understand or respect our audience.  When talking about understanding the audience, a good essay on the topic--especially for Catholic authors--is this post be Regina Doman.  This is a good starting point, but, of course, just because fiction is written by a Catholic doesn't necessarily imply its Catholic fiction.  The latter term implies a writing infused with belief and the substance of our faith.  This does not mean preaching, but simply describing the spiritual realities of the world, not shying away from anything.  This quality then leads us to the absolute necessity of respecting one's audience.

This is beautifully addressed by C.S. Lewis in Of Other Worlds: Essays and Stories.  Here is a passage that describes what I am referring to--especially with regards to children's literature.

The third way, which is the only one I could ever use myself, consists in writing a children's story because a children's story is the best art-form for something you have to say: just as a composer might write a Dead March not because there was a public funeral in view but because certain musical ideas that had occurred to him went best into that form. This method could apply to other kinds of children's literature besides stories. I have been told that Arthur Mee never met a child and never wished to: it was, from his point of view, a bit of luck that boys liked reading what he liked writing. This anecdote may be untrue in fact but it illustrates my meaning.

Whether we are talking about children's literature or a work for older audiences, one dimension of this respect lies in whether, or not, the story comes first. Many years ago, for example, I tried to use a short story format to write a tale to prove that some people find right behavior wrong and wrong behavior right. These days we hardly need reminding of this, but, at that time in my life, I was exploring the moral compass of a drug dealer. The story didn't work for many reasons, but probably the main reason was that it began as a kind of moralizing piece; the story was secondary to the message, and this almost always brings ruin to the writer's endeavor.

When it comes to fiction for older readers, my pet peeve is sanitizing dialogue or situations for the taste and preferences of the writer or a select group of potential readers. If you have a story, tell it truthfully. As Flannery O'Connor so eloquently put it,"Fiction is about everything human and we are made out of dust, and if you scorn getting yourself dusty, then you shouldn't try to write fiction. It's not a grand enough job for you.”

Not too long ago, I was discussing a work of fiction with some fellow Catholic writers who were very passionately debating their view that profanity had no place in fiction--especially the writing of a Catholic.  While I don't agree with the premise at all, it did encourage me to lighten the profanity in my own novel, The Blood Cries Out.  (As an aside, I hope when fellow writers make recommendations along these lines (that you accept in part), they have the courtesy to at least read your work.  If they have no interest in the art you create, I'd just as soon they keep their writing suggestions to themselves; they're not part of your audience.)  Some might say that my lightening of the profanity was an unnecessary sacrifice to political correctness, but I suggest that realism and truth can be achieved with a lighter touch at times.  Finding that balance can be hard, but it's what lies at the heart of writing that matters the most: truth. 

Like I wrote for Seattle Pacific University in "Art and the Christian Gospel," we engage the culture around us for Christ by seeking truth even if we happen to be writing fiction or creating another form of art.

Art calls us to worship; it also empowers us to engage our culture with the gospel. Given the present world crisis, I believe Christians have a responsibility to address the moral issues facing us in this troubling time. The words of Christian writers and theologians from C.S. Lewis to Dietrich Bonhoeffer still give us much to consider and discuss. From Michelangelo to Handel, our Christian heritage is also replete with the finest artists and composers who have ever lived. This rich Christian perspective plays a vital role within our culture. It is our responsibility to ensure that this legacy endures and continues.

Christians are aware that there is more to life than what simply meets the eye, and that the spiritual world is just as real as the earth they are standing upon. The Christian must focus and hold on to “whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable.” That is the only way we can maintain our clear vision and grip on the eternal priorities facing us.

What I Learned from Samwise, My Interview with Sean Astin FREE on Kindle (May 24th-May 27th)

I am excited to announce that my latest e-book, What I Learned from Samwise, My Interview with Sean Astin is scheduled to be available for free between May 24th and May 27th.  I hope you can check it out!

You may recognize Sean Astin first as that brave hobbit, Samwise Gamgee, from Peter Jackson's motion picture The Lord of the Rings, but there is a lot more to Sean than this brilliantly played role. This is a man for whom theater runs in his blood--hard to avoid when Patty Duke is your mother!

This e-book features my wide-ranging interview of Sean Astin from 2011. The interview touches on everything from his role as Sam and spiritual reflections to his thoughts on the much loved children's book he and his wife hope to bring to the big screen soon. (Lois Lowry's Number the Stars)

It also contains a review of Sean Astin's impressive book, "There and Back Again," as well as a short essay on Sean's newest project known as #Run3rd. What does he hope to accomplish with his newest endeavor?

The e-book concludes with a variety of links which may be helpful to the reader in learning more about this great actor/director.

Moral Relativism in the Postmodern Church

I had an interesting experience recently to attend a diversity conference in Salem.  While diversity is not a term with which I am always at ease--primarily on account of its most vociferous supporters' proclivity for using it as a weapon with which to pound conservatives--my feelings on the topic have somewhat softened of late.  Someday I'll tell the whole account, but suffice to say that I have had a realization that sometimes it's important to lend support to a movement when it helps brings about the greater good.  While there may be elements of the diversity movement which strike me as unhealthy and cliche-ridden, the bottom line is that it draws attention to what many of us Christians either are doing already or should have been be doing all along: engaging our fellow man with respect and courtesy.  (The fact that many of its supporters exclude conservatives from all the other differences they are quick to praise is unfortunate.)

As I commented in another blog post recently concerning "Lost in Translation," I think I recognize now more than in the past that racism sometimes takes a more subtle and insidious grasp than we may realize.  So, even if some dimensions of the movement are troubling, I support it insofar as it helps bring respect and courtesy to communications with those of different ethnic or social backgrounds.  That's the Christian thing to do, after all.

Dr. Delman Coates

Returning to the previously mentioned conference, I was excited to have the opportunity to attend a lecture given by Dr. Delmar Coates, pastor of Mt. Ennon Baptist Church in Maryland.  This is described as a "mega Church" with thousands of members.  I quickly realized in the session Dr. Coates was giving that he seemed more comfortable with the world than the relatively conservative positions with which the Baptist denomination is usually associated.  He began, for instance, in suggesting that the Golden Rule needed to be updated to the Platinum Rule where we do unto others as they want to be treated.  While this kind of thing wouldn't bother me so much from a "regular Joe," I find it troubling when a pastor explains in a secular setting how a section of Gospel could be updated.  Teachers, after all, are held to a higher standard.  When the good pastor began to praise the benefits of gay marriage, I lost hope in him entirely.  If a Christian minister can turn a blind eye to the sanctity of marriage, what will come next?

It raises the larger question, though, of why so many Christian denominations seem to be losing their way and surrendering to the siren call of moral relativism and confirming the spiritual law--if you will--of moral entropy.  We're used to hearing the old materialistic arguments from the secular world, but now pastors are rallying against important teachings of the Bible, seeking to undermine the very nature and meaning of marriage itself. Having been baptized in the Baptist Church as a child, I am keenly aware of how far some of its churches are now drifting away from the straight and narrow way of Christ--from Pastor Coates to Pastor Terry Jones.  While it's no secret that we have since made the journey home to the Catholic Church, the states of the Baptist, Episcopal, and Presbyterian denominations at present seem particularly saddening--especially when we recall Christ's call for unity.  Pastor Coates would apparently dismiss a good deal of the New Testament--especially perhaps the stern warnings of Saint Paul-- in his quest for peace with the world.  They would exchange it all for a peace with a passing age instead of embracing the timeless message of the Gospel.

What G.K. Chesterton Might Tell Sensationalistic "Converts" from Catholicism

Mt. Angel Abbey

I'm at a disadvantage in this post, because for personal reasons (happily explained off my blog), it would neither be gracious nor thoughtful for me to identify the person that sparked this weekend's reflection.  In short, though, I'll say I was disappointed to read a vitriolic account of one man's journey from the Catholic faith earlier this week.  While these accounts are certainly nothing new, they do have a way of getting my dander up.  


What especially gets under my skin, I suppose, is when broad, baseless assertions are made without any attempt at either objectivity or Christ-like charity.  When the baseless opinions are woven into a garment of hate and religious bigotry, it demonstrates more than anything else, I think, that the love of Christ is either not present within the life of the writer, or, at the very least, the person's has a spiritual "blind spot" when it comes to the Catholic Church.


In this particular case, the man coming forward gave a breathless account of  having been raised in the Catholic Church only to later have found new freedom within the Baptist tradition.  Today, his livelihood apparently depends upon anti-Catholic diatribes, end-times predictions, and book censorship.  Although his posting implies a book on his conversion in the form of thumbnail image, he apparently has authored no such work.  As alluded to earlier, it is neither wise nor gracious for me in this case to mention the person's name.  (I am happy to explain why off the blog, if interested.)  If you wish to consider this blog posting, a sort of constructive venting...that's fine.  I am endeavoring, however, to offer more than that today.


If you check our own story of conversion to the Catholic Church (more of an enrichment than conversion really) at Catholic Answers, I hope the reader doesn't come away with any feelings that I bear ill will towards any of the Protestants in my life.  On the contrary, we are where we are today because of the high regard for faith, reason, and reverence with which I was raised.  Church, after all, is not entertainment; it is worship.


As a personal aside, I will share that I felt that the conversion story for This Rock, needed more positive things to say about our family's background in the Protestant tradition.  Originally, it did, but some of the positive elements were edited out by TR in order to make it a better fit for the magazine; I think that's unfortunate.  The following quote from G.K. Chesterton's wonderful work on Saint Thomas Aquinas is a powerful argument of how all believers should endeavor to debate these issues which seperate us.

We have already noted why,in this one quarrel with Siger of Brabant, Thomas Aquinas let loose such thunders of purely moral passion; it was because the whole work of his life was being betrayed behind his back, by those who had used his victories over the reactionaries. The point at the moment is that this is perhaps his one moment of personal passion, save for a single flash in the troubles of his youth: and he is once more fighting his enemies with a firebrand.  And yet, even in this isolated apocalypse of anger, there is one phrase that may be commended for all time to men who are angry with much less cause.

If there is one sentence that could be carved in marble, as representing the calmest and most enduring rationality of his unique intelligence, it is a sentence which came pouring out with all the rest of this molten lava. If there is one phrase that stands before history as typical of Thomas Aquinas, it is that phrase about his own argument: "It is not based on documents of faith, but on the reasons and statements of the philosophers themselves." Would that all Orthodox doctors in deliberation were as reasonable as Aquinas in anger! Would that all Christian apologists would remember that maxim;and write it up in large letters on the wall, before they nail any theses there. At the top of his fury, Thomas Aquinas understands,what so many defenders of orthodoxy will not understand. It is no good to tell an atheist that he is an atheist; or to charge a denier of immortality with the infamy of denying it; or to imagine that one can force an opponent to admit he is wrong, by proving that he is wrong on somebody else's principles, but not on his own. After the great example of St. Thomas, the principle stands, or ought always to have stood established; that we must either not argue with a man at all, or we must argue on his grounds and not ours. We may do other things instead of arguing, according to our views of what actions are morally permissible; but if we argue we must argue“on the reasons and statements of the philosophers themselves."


(Note: strange format problems on the above quote.  Paragraph division not exactly matching text.)

Like the successful married couple, all Christians should learn to fight with fairness and charity--even when we find ourselves in strong disagreement.  

A good place to begin in the dismantling of the fences between Catholics and Protestants might be avoidance of terms that polarize rather than unite—especially when the terms themselves offer little in the way of illumination. There is a devout and brilliant Catholic apologist who recently wrote a book defending Catholic theological positions from Protestant and secular attack.  While this author does a wonderful job explaining the Catholic perspective and pointing out some of the top issues which separate us, the book fails at times to accurately convey the subtle range of differences between the Protestant denominations. As an example, the author implies that all “fundamentalists” are Calvinists—e.g. believing in “heretical Predestinarianism”, as Joseph Pohle describes it, or “once saved always saved”.  Neither the Free Methodist nor Nazarene churches, however, fall into this category.  In fact, they share their roots in Charles Wesley, the great hymn writer.  Likewise, not all Calvinists can be broadly categorized as fundamentalists—e.g. Presbyterians.  Generalizations and labels are not the way to build dialogue or understanding.  The key to communication is to build upon our commonalities and avoid constantly emphasizing our differences.  If Catholics are properly catechized, they should have no problem explaining how our traditions have grown closer over issues like the profound gift of sanctifying grace.  They might also mention how Catholics often work together with Protestants to battle such cultural tragedies as abortion and pornography.  It’s also worth noting that some of the present divisive issues were of little or no concern to Martin Luther—for example, infant baptism or Mary’s place of honor within the Catholic Church.

As a way of concluding this post, I thought I would offer some references on the different areas shallowly and angrily discussed in this Baptist's blog.  (If you don't know of what your speaking, sometimes it's best not to place your soul in peril by opening your mouth.)

Infant Baptism

See also Catholic Answers.

Saved by Grace, not by works

See also The Book of James. 

Confession

More personal recommendations:


A Call to Christian Unity


Joseph Pearce's Literary Giants, Literary Catholics


6 of the Most Unexpected Converts


Alec Guiness and Catholic Conversion


The Catholic Revival (503 notable conversions)


Does God positively set apart those persons bound for hell?  Does free will even exist?  Read about Heretical Predestinarianism .

Faith and Deeds (James 2)

¹⁴ What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them?¹⁵ Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. ¹⁶ If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? ¹⁷ In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
¹⁸ But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. ¹⁹ You believe that there is one God.Good! Even the demons believe that —and shudder.
²⁰ You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless^[d]? ²¹ Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? ²² You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. ²³ And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”^[e] and he was called God’s friend. ²⁴ You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.
²⁵ In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? ²⁶ As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.