My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Why art thou so far from helping me,
from the words of my groaning?
O my God, I cry by day, but thou dost not answer;
and by night, but find no rest.
Yet thou art holy, enthroned on the praises of Israel.
In thee our fathers trusted;
they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.
To thee they cried, and were saved;
in thee they trusted, and were not disappointed.
But I am a worm, and no man;
scorned by men, and despised by the people.
All who see me mock at me,
they make mouths at me, they wag their heads;
“He committed his cause to the LORD;
let him deliver him, let him rescue him, for he delights in him!”
Yet thou art he who took me from the womb;
thou didst keep me safe upon my mother’s breasts.
Upon thee was I cast from my birth,
and since my mother bore me thou hast been my God.
Be not far from me, for trouble is near and there is none to help.
Many bulls encompass me, strong bulls of Bashan surround me;
they open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion.
I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint;
my heart is like wax, it is melted within my breast;
my strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue cleaves to my jaws;
thou dost lay me in the dust of death.
Yea, dogs are round about me;
a company of evildoers encircle me;
they have pierced my hands and feet –
I can count all my bones — they stare and gloat over me;
they divide my garments among them,
and for my raiment they cast lots.
But thou, O LORD, be not far off!
O thou my help, hasten to my aid!
Deliver my soul from the sword, my life from the power of the dog!
Save me from the mouth of the lion,
my afflicted soul from the horns of the wild oxen!
I will tell of thy name to my brethren;
in the midst of the congregation I will praise thee:
You who fear the LORD, praise him!
all you sons of Jacob, glorify him,
and stand in awe of him, all you sons of Israel!
For he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted;
and he has not hid his face from him,
but has heard, when he cried to him.
From thee comes my praise in the great congregation;
my vows I will pay before those who fear him.
The afflicted shall eat and be satisfied;
those who seek him shall praise the LORD!
May your hearts live for ever!
All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the LORD;
and all the families of the nations shall worship before him.
For dominion belongs to the LORD,
and he rules over the nations.
Yea, to him shall all the proud of the earth bow down;
before him shall bow all who go down to the dust,
and he who cannot keep himself alive.
Posterity shall serve him;
men shall tell of the Lord to the coming generation,
and proclaim his deliverance to a people yet unborn,
that he has wrought it.
Psalm 22

I have longed to eat this meal with you before I suffer.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I recently finished reading Cur Deus Homo by St. Anselm. From this work developed the theory of atonement called “penal substitution” (note I don’t call it a doctrine nor do I wholly credit it to Anselm). This theory goes something like this:

Man sinned against God and thus in justice deserved punishment. Since the offense was against an infinite God, the punishment deserved to be infinite as well. But since it was committed by man, only man could receive the punishment. Jesus, as both God and man, was able to represent man but also accept an infinite punishment. His death thus substitutes for our punishment of death.

Or put another way: I am found guilty of murder and am sentenced to death. However, an innocent man (who happens to be the judge’s son) offers to die in my stead. So he is executed and I am set free.

I think it should be clear from the second explanation the problem with this theory: how is it just to kill an innocent man instead of a guilty one, even if he volunteers for the punishment?

Anselm himself uses a different analogy, which is a bit better: the people of a kingdom reject their king and the king decides to punish them. His son, however, does a great service for the king and the king grants him anything he desires as a reward. The son choose pardon for the people.

This analogy, it seems to me, comes closer to the theory of fiscal substitution. In this theory, we owe a debt to God we cannot pay (and Anselm often uses debt language in Cur Deus Homo). However, Jesus offers to pay this for us if we follow him. This is more understandable to me, for if I had a debt to the bank there is nothing against justice if someone else were to volunteer to pay that debt (and anyone can feel free to contact me for my mortgage payoff information).

Thus I am more apt to accept the theory of fiscal substitution over penal substitution. And yet…Jesus died for us. He died a horrible, humiliating death to atone for our sins. This is how he paid our debt for us; it was not just a financial loan – our sins literally brought death upon us.

Yet why does the death of an innocent man help us who are guilty? Perhaps, in the Incarnation, Jesus becomes part of the guilty race of men. He no longer is really innocent of the charges against man – he takes humanity on so completely that he too is guilty. So his death for our sins is not against justice. So although I’m uncomfortable wholeheartedly accepting the theory of penal substitution, there does seem to be a great deal of value in it.

I think the key is to realize that no theory fits completely. If you go too far with any one, it will fall apart. We can speculate for eternity how Christ’s death atones for our sins, but ultimately it comes down to this: his death does save us and I’m very thankful for that fact.

Perhaps I should use this beautiful video to promote my upcoming book on the titles of Jesus:

H/T: Archdiocese of Washington

Today is Spy Wednesday, so named because tradition tells us that this is the day that Judas betrayed our Lord.

It has been vogue in the past century to try to give noble reasons for Judas’ actions. Most of these efforts picture Judas as a zealot who wished to hasten the coming of God’s kingdom on earth. His betrayal becomes an attempt to force Christ’s hand, as it were.

If there is truth in this theory, it is not found in the Scriptures. The Gospels don’t fully explain Judas’ actions, but the references it does give to his betrayal revolve around that most basic of evils: love of money.

Mark tells us:

When he was in Bethany reclining at table
in the house of Simon the leper,
a woman came with an alabaster jar of perfumed oil,
costly genuine spikenard.
She broke the alabaster jar and poured it on his head.
There were some who were indignant.
“Why has there been this waste of perfumed oil?
It could have been sold for more than three hundred days’ wages
and the money given to the poor.”
They were infuriated with her.
Jesus said, “Let her alone.
Why do you make trouble for her?
She has done a good thing for me.
The poor you will always have with you,
and whenever you wish you can do good to them,
but you will not always have me.
She has done what she could.
She has anticipated anointing my body for burial.
Amen, I say to you,
wherever the gospel is proclaimed to the whole world,
what she has done will be told in memory of her.”

Then Judas Iscariot, one of the Twelve,
went off to the chief priests to hand him over to them.
When they heard him they were pleased and promised to pay him money.
Then he looked for an opportunity to hand him over.
Mark 14:3-11

Notice that Judas’ betrayal is linked to the woman’s “wasteful” use of the spikenard: “Then Judas…went off”.

John likewise links Judas’ actions to money:

Mary took a liter of costly perfumed oil
made from genuine aromatic nard
and anointed the feet of Jesus and dried them with her hair;
the house was filled with the fragrance of the oil.
Then Judas the Iscariot, one of his disciples,
and the one who would betray him, said,
“Why was this oil not sold for three hundred days’ wages
and given to the poor?”
He said this not because he cared about the poor
but because he was a thief and held the money bag
and used to steal the contributions.
(John 12:3-6)

As much as we would like to think that the greatest crime ever committed had at least a great intention behind it, the truth is that it probably was done for very base motives. It is hard to comprehend someone living so closely to Jesus for years, yet succumbing to something like simple greed. Yet, don’t we do the same every day? We receive Jesus at least every week at Mass, yet we all succumb to basic impulses like greed, anger, lust, and gluttony. We must be constantly aware of our weakness to the flesh and ask our Lord to let his presence transform us more into his image so that we can repent for our daily betrayals.

It’s well-known now that Newt Gingrich recently became Catholic. This past Sunday he spoke to Chris Wallace on FOXNews about his conversion:

WALLACE: We’ve got less than two minutes left.

Mr. Gingrich, you have been a Baptist most of your life, and last Sunday you converted to Catholicism. Why, sir?

GINGRICH: I’m not talking about this much publicly, but let me just say that I found over the course of the last decade, attending the basilica, meeting with Monsignor Rossi, reading the literature, that there was a peace in my soul and a sense of well being in the Catholic Church, and I found the mass of conversion last Sunday one of the most powerful moments of my life.

WALLACE: You have — it’s no secret — been married and divorced twice. Will you be able to participate fully in communion and all the other rites of the Catholic Church?

GINGRICH: Yes, we have done everything within the law of the church, following all of the rules of the church over the last 10 years. And it’s been a process. It’s been a very long process and something which was deeply affected, in part, by Pope Benedict XVI’s visit and the opportunity I had to sit in — as you know, my wife, Calista, sings at the basilica every Sunday, and I was allowed as a spouse to be there as part of the vespers program when the pope came. It’s been a long process.

WALLACE: And if I might ask, just briefly, what is it about the pope’s visit that led to this?

GINGRICH: I really believe, first of all, seeing the joy in his eyes, listening to his message, and I really believe that his basic statement, Christ our hope, is right. And I think much of what’s wrong with our country and with the western world is a function of looking inside ourselves, not just looking at money or looking at our wallets.

(Source) H/T Opinionated Catholic

I of course am overjoyed that Mr. Gingrich has joined the Church. Some, however, are not so happy:

I was stunned to learn via Fox News Sunday that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has left evangelicalism to become a Roman Catholic. Apparently Newt hasn’t discussed this publicly much yet, but Chris Wallace asked the question and Newt replied in the affirmative. He then proceeded to give an explanation of why, which didn’t improve my mood any.

It’s sad. If someone of Newt Gingrich’s obvious intelligence and knowledge of history can dump biblical doctrine for a bunch of warm fuzzies and rituals, it doesn’t bode well. I don’t mean to suggest that only stupid people fall for false religions and cults. Actually, it’s quite the opposite. But Newt knows better. And he is grooming himself to be the next GOP standard bearer.

It’s funny, because Newt was warning about the possibility of there being a third party formed by disgruntled conservative Republicans if the GOP doesn’t get its act together. I can tell you in advance that you can count me in to the third party, because I am not going to be led by Rome.

“Led by Rome”? What is this, the Middle Ages? Politicians haven’t been led by Rome in centuries – and never have been here in America. Frankly, I wish they were, but unfortunately it goes against the American way to think something like a 2,000 year institution might actually have some wisdom to offer.

I just finished reading Cur Deus Homo by St. Anselm. It was my second reading of the book, the first being almost 15 years ago shortly after I became Catholic. Although not as well-known as classics such as Confessions by St. Augustine, Cur Deus Homo is one of the most influential books ever written. It is the foundational text for the theory of atonement know as “penal substitution”: the belief that man deserved death for his sins, but Christ as the God-man was able to die in our stead, thus taking the punishment we deserve. This is the most widely-held theory of atonement in Evangelical Protestant circles today.

I have a number of difficulties with the penal substitution theory, which I’ll attempt to address in a later post, but for now I’m more interested in the acceptance of this theory in Evangelical circles. At the time of the Reformation, Anselm’s theory reigned supreme in the West (it never gained traction in the East), and it was assumed as true by both Catholics and Protestants. However, it is a bit odd that Protestants have accepted Anselm’s arguments so readily. First. Anselm explicitly argues from reason, not the Scriptures. The whole purpose of Cur Deus Homo is to show to the “infidels” (i.e. Jews and Muslims) why God had to become man and die. Since these peoples don’t accept the authority of the New Testament, Anselm bases his arguments on reason, not revelation. There are few Scriptural references in the text and none are part of the main argument. This does not mean his arguments are contra Scripture, but considering the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura, I find their wholesale acceptance of Anselm’s arguments ironic.

Furthermore, Anselm’s theory was quite innovative for his time. Penal substitution is not found widely in the Fathers, and it is only after Anselm that it becomes a “tradition.” Thus it seems to be the type of theory that Protestants are most leery of: a later tradition “added on” to the purity of the Gospel. Yet it endures as the heart of the Evangelical message.

Of course, proponents of penal substitution would argue that it is biblical and clearly in the sacred text. I’m not so sure. There is plenty of talk in the New Testament of the fact that Jesus’ death saves us, but very little as to why this is so. Also, if it is so clear, why did it not become prominent within the Church until the Middle Ages and then only after it had first been shown by reason alone?

Regardless of Evangelical acceptance of this theory, there is much value in the theory of penal substitution, but I also think much is problematic with it. I’ll try to address those concerns in another post.

I recently received an email announcement about the upcoming Orientale Lumen conference in Washington D.C. OLC is an ecumenical conference held each year which focuses on Eastern Christianity. I attended last year, and it was quite remarkable. The speakers are great, but the real benefit to this conference is the interaction between participants. In one day last year I discussed homeschooling with a Russian Orthodox nun, the Ecumenical Patriarch with a Greek Orthodox priest, and the Latin Mass with Fr. Robert Taft, a biritual Catholic priest who is a foremost authority on Eastern Christianity. I would highly recommend attending. Here are some details about this year’s conference:

The Orientale Lumen XIII Conference is now all set for June 15-18, 2009 at the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center in Washington, DC on the theme of “Monastic Spirituality for Everyday Life.” I am very hopeful that this ONE conference for 2009 (rather than the three locations we had last year) will bring everyone together in one place and foster more “face-to-face” ecumenical dialogue and exchange of understanding among Eastern Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics and Oriental Orthodox.

We have quite an interesting mixture of speakers this year. Let me tell you a little about them and why they will be particularly exciting to come and hear. They will include:

Metropolitan Jonah, Primate of the Orthodox Church in America — a year ago, Archimandrite Jonah was a monastic on the West Coast and after being elected and consecrated bishop last summer, he gave a stunning speech at the OCA Sobor which then elected him their leader. We are very honored that he has agreed to be with us for most of the conference agenda, will serve a Divine Liturgy for the Orthodox participants, and will surely have some unique ideas about monasticism for the every day life of lay persons and clergy alike.

Bishop Hlib Lonchyna, Ukrainain Greek Catholic Church, Kyiv, Ukraine — I have known Bishop Hlib for almost ten years, meeting him in Rome several times when I accompanied Archbishop Vsevolod there. He has also attended both Orientale Lumen Conferences in Constantinople, accompanying Cardinal Husar there in May 2007. He is responsible for Monastic Matters of the Patriarchal Curia of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church along with other jobs and has family (his brother is Father Taras Lonchyna, pastor of Church of the Holy Trinity in Silver Spring, MD) in the Washington area and is American born. I am certain he will also provide a wonderful perspective on monastic life for lay persons.

Mother Lois Farag, Coptic Orthodox Church, Luther Seminary, St. Paul, MN — Mother Lois earned her doctorate in Early Christian Studies at the Catholic University of America and also holds an MDiv from Harvard Divinity School She attended several of the early OL conferences while a student in Washington. She teaches Early Church History at Luther Seminary and is doing research on a book project related to the conference theme of spirituality. She will have a special perspective for the conference working in Church history, teaching at a Lutheran-oriented college, and being from the Coptic Orthodox tradition.

Sister Barbara Jean Mihalchick, OSBM, Retreat Center Director, Mt. St. Macrina, Uniontown, PA – In addition to her current position of directing and giving retreats to a wide range of participants, Sister Barbara Jean was also the Vicar General (number two) of the Order of Saint Basil the Great at their world headquarters in Rome for some 12 years. She has traveled the world, visiting Basilian monasteries and other religious institutions in many places, and will bring a wealth of experience for our spiritual journey of “theosis,” becoming like God.

Professor Richard Schneider, Orthodox Church in America, Director of the Orthodox Eastern Studies Program at Trinity College, Toronto, Canada — Prof. Schneider has been a speaker at the last three OL conferences, 2007 on Icons and 2008 on Feastdays in the US, and at OL EuroEast II on Liturgy in Constantinople. He has a unique perspective of understanding and learning from icons that he refers to as “iconology,” and will apply that to personal spirituality and growth in our Christian journey.

Mr. Elias Damianakis, Greek Orthodox Church, Iconographer and Lecturer — Mr. Damianakis has been studying and living the spirituality of an iconographer for many years, and has developed a well-respected studio of iconography which not only has decorated many churches around the world, but also produced icons for the Vatican and Ecumenical Patriarchate. His talk will bring iconography and spirituality together, and he will also display an exhibit of icons and the process of painting an icon at the conference.

Father John Crossin, OSFS, Executive Director of the Washington Theological Consortium and President of the North American Academy of Ecumenists — Father Crossin has written several books on spirituality, teaches courses on ecumenism, and served as the moderator of OL XII East in Washington last year. We welcome him back as moderator this year, and as an Oblate of St. Francis de Sales, he brings a unique perspective to spirituality.

So as you can see, this lineup is quite exciting and will provide some very unique perspectives on individual spirituality. This year’s agenda for OL XIII will be a little like Noah’s ark — two by two! We have two bishops, two nuns, and two lay men! It will be fun, exciting, and spiritually rewarding. To reflect current economic conditions, we’ve lowered the cost, and the airline and gasoline prices are as low as two years ago, so come and join us!

More details and registration information can be found at:

http://www.olconference.com/OL_FutCon_OL_XIII

My servant, the Just One, will justify many by taking their sins on himself.

- Morning Prayer, Antiphon 3, Tuesday of Holy Week

A man in Cleveland has been healed of a “non-survivable” gunshot wound to the head, and it appears as if the miracle is due to the intercession of John Paul II.

Jory Aebly, 26, suffered the gunshot would five weeks ago. Doctors at the Metro Health Medical Center declared it to be a “non-survivable” injury, ABC’s Good Morning America reports.

Hospital chaplain Fr. Art Nedeker administered Aebly with the Sacrament of the Sick, asking Pope John Paul II to pray for Jory and to protect him.

Fr. Nedeker explained that the Pope had promised him he would always pray for the patients at the hospital and blessed a dozen rosaries with special patients at the hospital.

The priest gave Aebly the last of the rosaries that had been blessed by the Pope, after which Aebly consistently improved.

He was released on Tuesday, two days before the fourth anniversary of Pope John Paul II’s death.

Dr. Robert Geertman, a neurosurgeon involved in Aebly’s treatment, told Good Morning America his patient’s survival was “one in a million.”

“My jaw was on the floor after a day or two of seeing he is hanging on. …I’d say it’s pretty miraculous,” he said at a press conference days after the shooting.

Pope John Paul II, pray for us!

It appears that the Episcopal church is losing priests left and right. Last week I blogged about an episcopal priest who has become Catholic. Now I find this story:

Episcopal Priest Defrocked After Refusing to Recant Muslim Faith

In response to the charge, Redding claimed becoming a Muslim “is not an automatic abandonment of Christianity,” according to the Seattle Times. “For many, it is. But it doesn’t have to be.”

An ordained minister in The Episcopal Church for over two decades, Redding made headlines in 2007 when she told the Seattle Times she was “100 percent” Muslim and Christian. Her story was first revealed in the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia’s newspaper, the Episcopal Voice.

Three years ago, Redding attended an interfaith gathering where she said was moved by Muslim prayers. She said she felt an overwhelming conviction to surrender to God and soon after she became a practicing Muslim.

Convinced that her new Muslim faith did not contradict her beliefs as a Christ follower, Redding declared she was both a Muslim and a Christian.

“Both religions say there’s only one God,” Redding said, according to CNN, “and that God is the same God. It’s very clear we are talking about the same God! So I haven’t shifted my allegiance.”

Something tells me that most Muslims would not accept that she can be both Christian and Muslim either. But to be fair, she is not really Christian, as can be seen from this statement:

She also said she does not believe that God and Jesus are the same and believes Jesus is divine just as all humans are divine.

If Episcopal priests still heard confessions she would probably be quickly disabused of her notion that “all humans are divine.”

Now the time has come for this world to receive its sentence; now the prince of this world will be driven out.

- Morning Prayer, Antiphon 2, Monday of Holy Week

I’ve posted my reflection on this Sunday’s readings, in which I consider how Jesus is always in control of his life, even during the Passion.

I’ve been on the internet long enough to run into many examples of Godwin’s law, which basically states that any argument, after enough time, will eventually have someone compared to Nazis. A corollary is that the person who first makes the comparison automatically loses the argument.

Well, in this case, I think the comparison is apt: Evangelical German Family Seeks U.S. Asylum to Homeschool Kids. In Germany, homeschooling is illegal, and school attendance is compulsory until the age of 18. What is often not noted is that the German compulsory school law was first created by the Nazi regime, who understood the best way to control a nation is to control the children, and that can best be done through the schools.

Pray for this family that they might have the God-given freedom to educate their children in the way they think is best.

I can never get enough of stories like these:

Anglican priest returns to Catholic Church

I especially noticed the demographics of his family:

“We want to bring them to a place of permanency and a fullness of the faith,” said 37-year-old Mr. Scharbach.

Keelan, 11, Isaac, 10, Cady, 9, Ander, 6, Ellie, 4, and Thomas, 3, are preparing for the next stage of their religious journey with their parents.

Six kids ages 11 and under at the age of 37 – of course they are becoming Catholic!