I’ve always had a positive impression of Rick Warren, author of The Purpose-Driven Life and the heir apparent to Billy Graham as “America’s Pastor.” Obviously, I disagree with much of his theology and I found PDL to be pretty much an Americanized (i.e. watered-down) version of classical Christianity. Yet I’ve always sensed that his heart was in the right place and that he is sincere in his desire to follow Christ.

But now he has gone too far and I might have to reassess my opinion of him:

Rick Warren Joins Twitter

I’m sure that this has been predicted somewhere in the Book of Revelation…

Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and get as many ‘decisions’ for me as you can.”

Matthew 28:18-19, Campus Crusade for Christ edition

This week the Episcopal church voted to allow the ordination of active homosexuals to the episcopate. This was expected, as most conservative members of their community have left it in recent years. However, this is in direct violation of the world-wide Anglican communion’s moratorium on such ordinations, and thus puts them at direct odds with the rest of the Anglican Communion.

N.T. Wright, one of my favorite scholars and a bishop of the Anglican church, is known to be very careful with his words. Yet he says that this action marks a “clear break” with the Anglican Communion and formalizes a “schism”. Strong words.

Unfortunately, this day has been long in coming, but I still find it sad that a supposed “Christian” body would so willingly conform themselves to the world instead of striving to be transformed by Christ. Pray for all Anglicans, and especially all Episcopals.

Pope Benedict suffered a fractured wrist last night after he fell during his vacation:

Pope Benedict XVI fell overnight, fracturing his right wrist. The pope was in the Salesian-owned chalet in the northern Italian Alps where he is vacationing.

Papal spokesman Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi said, “after a fall in his room overnight, the Holy Father suffered a slight fracture of his right wrist.”

“Nevertheless, in the morning the Holy Father celebrated Mass and had breakfast, then was accompanied to the hospital in Aosta where the slight fracture was discovered and his wrist was immobilized.”

Pope Benedict is undergoing a procedure under local anesthesia to set his wrist, the spokesman of Parini Hospital in Aosta told the Italian news agency ANSA.

(ANSA also said the pope asked to be treated like any other patient and had to wait in the radiology department for his X-ray, then again outside the surgical unit for the treatment room where the fracture was reduced.)

My, my, isn’t this charming:

A group of Orthodox clergy in Greece, led by three senior archbishops, have published a manifesto pledging to resist all ecumenical ties with Roman Catholics and Protestants.

“The only way our communion with heretics can be restored is if they renounce their fallacy and repent,” the group said in a “Confession of Faith against Ecumenism” that they circulated recently.

“The Orthodox church is not merely the true church; she is the only church. She alone has remained faithful to the Gospel, the synods and the fathers, and consequently she alone represents the true catholic church of Christ,” says the document.

The funny thing is, I’m more sympathetic to these clergy than this guy:

Peterborough MP Dean Del Mastro is a confirmed Roman Catholic who attends an evangelical church and says it’s time to set aside “the differences” in the Christian faith.

The Examinerhas received several calls about what church the MP attends since he met with the Pope at the Vatican on Saturday, after the G8 summit in Italy.

On Sunday, in a statement, Del Mastro said it was an “incredible opportunity,” to meet with the pope, “as a confirmed Roman Catholic and Christian.”

Del Mastro said he’s a member of the congregation at Calvary Pentecostal Church, but is also “a good friend” of Diocese of Peterborough Bishop Nicola De Angelis.

Christianity shouldn’t be “divided up into small little cross sections,” Del Mastro said.

He was born at St. Joseph’s Hospital, baptized at Immaculate Conception, confirmed at St. Paul The Apostle in Lakefield and married at St. Alphonsus in Peterborough.

“I’m a Catholic,” Del Mastro said.

It seems to me that these are the two (faulty) extremes of true ecumenism: either wholesale rejection of all other churches and denominations or glossing over and ignoring our legitimate differences. Neither is the proper attitude. As Christians, we must be humble enough to realize that we can learn a lot from our separated brethren about how to follow our Lord, yet we also must not compromise our fundamental beliefs which we believe have been given to us through the agency of the Holy Spirit.

True ecumenism has its basis in charity and truth, which are not opposing forces, but intimate brethren (after all, God is called both “love” and “truth” in the Scriptures). We must always look for the best in our separated brethren and acknowledge the truth that they possess (as well as recognize that often they are more fervent in their practice of the faith than we can be). Yet we must never diminish the truth of Catholic doctrine, including the “hard” doctrines such as the sinlessness of Mary or the primacy of the pope. Only by engaging in charitable dialogue which seeks the truth can we hope to one day be united at the one table of the Lord.

Years ago I wrote a paper about the history of Catholic ecumenism, and it has always been one of the most visited articles on my website. Most people believe that the Catholic Church started being interested in ecumenism with Vatican II, but my research showed that it actually predated Vatican II by about a century. It is true that the emphasis changed greatly after Vatican II, but Catholics have always recognized the need for all Christians to be united in “one faith.”

Please pray that all Christians might be one someday soon!

The relationship beween biblical scholarship and Catholic doctrine has frequently been tense in modern times, and often we see this trickled down to the Catholics in the pew. Many catechetical works as well as homilies emphasize the (dubious) findings of modern scholarship rather than the truths of our Faith found in Scripture. Nothing is worse, however, than the footnotes in most Bibles – they are almost exclusively focused on undercutting any traditional interpretation of the Bible and turning the authorship of the Biblical books into an alphabet soup of J, E, D, P and their crazy brother Q.

My own studies have shown that the more a scholarly theory is pushed as “settled,” the less likely it is to have any real basis in true scholarship. Most often theories are advanced that help promote preexisting ideologies, and any academic challenge to those theories is regarded as heresy and must be condemned immediately and loudly (the Two-Source Hypothesis is probably the best example of this).

But how does the average Catholic, who has little formal biblical training, traverse this minefield? How does Joe or Jane Faithful Catholic deal with apparently intelligent men claiming that the infancy narratives are myths, the Gospels were not written by eyewitnesses and most of Jesus’ words were later inventions?

Curtis Martin, founder of the Fellowship of Catholic University Students (FOCUS), has a wonderful article over at Ignatius Insight which addresses this issues. Some excerpts:

It is not always easy to discern how modern scholarship can be reconciled with the official teachings of the Church. It was widely reported a few years ago that most scholars doubt the historical nature of many passages in Scripture: “[M]ost U.S. Catholic scholars now generally view the Infancy narratives—the visit of the magi, the flight into Egypt, the massacre of the innocents-as religious legends created by the evangelists, or their sources, to convey theological truths about Christ”…The average Catholic wants to be well-informed and intelligent, but also to be faithful. From my own studies it is far from clear how the two positions can come together. It almost seems as though some biblical scholars are suffering from doctrinal amnesia…

I remember teaching seventh grade catechism several years ago. One night we were to discuss the Gospel of St. John. The teacher’s manual began, “Be sure to stress to the students that the Apostle John was not the author of the fourth Gospel.” Even if this were true-the Pontifical Biblical Commission, in its findings of 1907, stated that St. John must be acknowledged as the author—this is not catechesis. Here is the tragedy: In St. John’s Gospel we have many wonderful teachings, including the most compelling explanation of the Eucharist (Jn. 6), the institution of the Sacrament of Confession (Jn. 20:23), some of the clearest teachings on the divinity of Christ (e.g., Jn.1:1-18; 8:58), and many profound passages found nowhere else. But all of these things were supposed to take a backseat, so that I could stress to the students that St. John did not write the Gospel of St. John. How does this help young people to deepen their faith in Jesus Christ and his Church? Even if it were true, it is relatively trivial.

The confusion seemed unnecessary to me. As a fallen-away Roman Catholic, it was by reading the Protestant Bible that I came to see that the true Bible Church was in fact the Church of the Bible: Roman Catholicism. As a recent “revert,” I quickly began to see that reading the Bible as a Catholic involved many apparent challenges and difficulties. I wanted to be faithful to the Church that I had rediscovered to be the mystical Body of Christ, but the “experts” seemed to be taking the Bible right out of my hands. Thank God for sacred Tradition and the Magisterium! The more I listened to the modern scholars, the more confused and frustrated I became. I decided to go to the source. By studying what the Church had said in her official documents, it became clear that it was her desire for all Catholics to be Bible Christians, and all Bible Christians to be Roman Catholics.

I have come to discover five basic principles which allow us lay people to read the Bible as Roman Catholics and maximize the profit we can gain from the sacred page. I will now share these principles with you, and then look at a couple of ways in which we might be able to begin our own personal study of the Word of God in Scripture, so that this “grand source of Catholic revelation [may] be made safely and abundantly accessible to the flock of Jesus Christ” (Pope Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, no. 2, 1893).

Be sure to read the whole article here.

Sometimes societal norms change slowly. It took milennia for slavery to be considered the barbaric practice it is. Women fought for decades to gain the right to vote in our country.

But sometimes, societal norms transform almost instantly. Such is the case with the acceptance of artificial contraception. Although forms of artificial contraception have existed since ancient times, it was not practiced on a widespread basis until very recently, and now it is accepted as normal (and moral) by almost everyone in Western society. In fact, announcing that you believe artificial contraception to be immoral at a party would most likely result in the same reaction as announcing that you are an alien from the planet Zaron (which of course is ridiculous as everyone knows that native Zaronites cannot breath in our environment).

Yet I firmly believe that falsehood cannot become a permanent fixture in any society. Even slavery, which existed for so long, eventually was seen to be evil by mankind. We are created with an innate sense of what is right and wrong (what philosophers call the Natural Law), and deep down men and women know that sex is created for more than just personal pleasure, and trying to reduce it to only that undermines the truth and beauty of the sexual act.

Currently, it is only the Catholic Church which recognizes the immorality of artificial contraception (even many Orthodox Churches sadly allow for it within marriage now). In order to begin to change the culture, Catholics will need to first convince our natural allies on this issue, which I believe are Evangelicals and Environmentalists. Two articles I recently saw should help in this process:

Should Evangelicals stop using contraceptives? is written by an Evangelical and he reminds his co-religionists that many contraceptives – such as the pill – are in fact also abortifacients, meaning that in some situations they can cause an early abortion. This argument does not address the more fundamental issue when it comes to artificial contraception, but it is a good start to address the mindless acceptance of modern birth control by Evangelicals.

A tough pill to swallow is an article that shows the destructive nature of flooding our environment with all these pills: male fish can actually become “feminized” from hormones found in the pill being dumped into wastewater. Environmentalists preach against the destructive nature of man in this world – yet artificial contraception might end up being one of our most destructive legacies to our environment.

Hopefully, both Evangelicals and Environmentalists will begin to recognize the harmful effects of articifical contraception both on the soul and our world. Then the tide might turn and the societal norm which accepts artificial contraception as moral could be rejected as quickly as it was accepted.

As readers of this blog know, I have a deep appreciation for the Eastern liturgies of the Church. A few weeks ago, I blogged about a Baptist minister (the “Real Live Preacher”) who visited an Orthodox Church for liturgy and was overwhelmed (in a good way). I just ran across (via Byzantine, TX) another great description of someone attending a Divine Liturgy for the first time. This time, it is a Latin Catholic who is visiting churches in Manhattan and just recently attended Divine Liturgy at St. Michael’s Russian Catholic Church. Some excerpts:

What an experience this week! I wandered into the celebration of The Divine Liturgy. I had never attended this before and it was like entering another world, so different than the Masses I am used to…

Peering through the window of the door I witnessed the beginning of the Divine Liturgy. There were four priests, fully decked out in traditional Byzantine Rite robes, gathered around an altar behind an ornate altar fence; I could hear the small congregation praying and singing in Russian; incense wafted through the air – immediately I was overwhelmed and my first thought was to flee. However, something made me open up the doors and walk in, standing alone in the small entryway corridor. Then, an older gentleman saw me and ushered me inside, and I entered the chapel…

The song and the prayer that followed for the next hour and a half were incredible, and it was really something special to be in that small, intimate space of such devotion. There were no chairs, save a few exceptions for some older members of the small congregation, and though admittedly an hour and a half is a long time to stand, it seemed to fly by…

I made my way to the altar, spoke my name, then the priest dipped the bread into the wine and using a little spoon dropped it into my mouth.* The deacon wiped my lips with a cloth and I kissed the base of the chalice as I had witnessed the others in the chapel do. To the left of the altar, a small table had been set up between two priests (or maybe they were deacons or acolytes, I’m not sure) that contained another plate of bread and small ladles of wine. My hand was shaking as I picked up the ladle. I quickly drank the wine, took another portion of bread, crossed myself clumsily and went back to my place against the wall to listen to the post-Communion hymns and prayers…

Read the whole article here.

*Note: since this was a Russian Catholic Church (i.e. not an Orthodox Church), communion is allowed for all Catholics, including Latin Catholics.

After reading this story, I have a confession to make, one that is sure to scandalize many people:

I am a fan of Harry Potter

Yes, it’s true – I’ve read all seven books (twice) about the boy-wizard, have seen the first five movies, and plan to see the latest movie installment next week.

It all started like this: a few years ago I was desperate to find books for my bibliophile 10-year-old daughter. My mother-in-law, who is a former middle-school teacher and is now a librarian, couldn’t stop raving about the Harry Potter books. I had heard some negative things about them from people I respected, but my mother-in-law is a good Catholic as well, so I began to think they might not be so bad. I also saw a positive review of the HP books by my friend, Catholic author Regina Doman, so I thought there might be more there than I suspected. But since I had heard so many negative things about them, I wanted to read them for myself before allowing my children to read them.

So when I was at my mother-in-law’s one Christmas, I picked up the first book and read it quickly (I make no claims that the HP books are dense literature – they are children’s books, first and foremost). I wasn’t wowed by the story, but I also found nothing in it objectionable, and much to like. The most controversial part of the books in the Christian world – the use of magic – seemed to me to be so clearly tongue-in-cheek that I had a hard time taking seriously the argument that it could lead children to dabble in real-life magic. To be honest, I think Lord of the Rings is more likely to tempt a child to try magic than Harry Potter (and I consider LOTR the greatest fictional books ever written). Most of the magic in the books is laugh-out-loud funny, not a serious introduction to “black arts” in any way. Furthermore, magic in the Harry Potter books is clearly intended to be fantastical – you are born with it or you are not, and nothing a “Muggle” can do can lead them to be able to perform magic.

So I decided that it would be okay for my daughter to read the books, but didn’t actually get around to picking the books up at the library for her. I then was at my mother-in-law’s again and bored and picked up the second book in the series. At that point, I was hooked: I became immersed in the story and read through the sixth book (the seventh had not yet been released) in quick succession. I put the seventh book on hold at the library as quickly as possible and was able to pick it up the morning of its release and read it in one weekend. I have since then gone back and read them through a second time.

A note at this point to those who do not know me personally: I am quite over-protective of my children. My wife and I are very intentional in what entertainment we allow our children to consume. We don’t own a television, and we restrict what books they are allowed to read (on an age-appropriate basis – for example, my eight-year-old is currently only allowed to read the first three books in the HP series). I take very seriously my responsibility to protect my children from harm, and I have no problem resisting societal pressure to have my children have what other children may have.

So why do I like the series? Number one, I find the characters very interesting. Rowling does a marvelous job of populating the HP universe with a broad diversity of characters, and like real life, none of them are perfect and none of them are pure evil (expect perhaps Voldemort, and even he has a back story that can produce sympathy for him). I have read a good deal of “Christian fiction,” and the biggest criticism I have of the genre is that most of the characters are very one-dimensional: they are either “good” (i.e. born-again Christians) or “bad.” I am not looking for books which represent a reality in which my children do not live – I am looking for books in which “real” (read: flawed) people do their best to make the right choices in their lives.

That brings me to a common criticism of the books: you often hear that Harry Potter himself is not a good role model because he often breaks the rules and doesn’t suffer any bad consequences. In actuality, though, Rowling does a good job of reflecting real life: sometimes Harry – like every teenage boy – breaks the rules, and when that happens, sometimes good things result, and sometimes, very bad things happen (think about what happened to his godfather in the fifth book when Harry didn’t do what the grown-ups wanted him to do). To act like we live in a world where following rules (not moral laws, necessarily, but just rules) always has good consequences is simply not accurate.

Furthermore, Harry clearly is a good role model in a fundamental area of life: he willingly sacrifices himself for those he loves. Yes, at times he acts like a typical teenager in doing that, but to me that makes him all the more powerful; it conveys to youth that one can have faults and problems and still rise above them to perform heroic acts of charity for others.

I am a strong believer that every parent must decide what is best for their own children – I cannot say what someone else’s children should or should not read. But I would say to all Catholic parents who are hesitant to allow their children to read the books based on what they have read (from Michael O’Brien, for instance): read the books yourself and then come to your own conclusion. Like me, you might be surprised to find a quite engaging and positive series of books that your children – and you – will greatly enjoy.

Over the past few years, I have increasingly come to appreciate the importance of prayer in our daily lives. I have been told since I became a practicing Christian in high school that I must pray every day, yet for some reason I never took that seriously. I would often make attempts to pray more, but they would inevitably fail as the demands of my daily life (read: my laziness) interfered.

About five years ago, my attempts finally “stuck.” I eventually found that if I missed prayer in my day (for me, that involves at least Morning Prayer and a Rosary each day), I would notice it in my bones – my day felt incomplete. I have since come to see prayer as the lifeblood of every Christian – if you are not praying regularly, you are spiritually dead.

With that in mind, I found this interview with a lay Catholic contemplative very interesting and educational. Some excerpts:

So you are a “mystic”?

Well, I used that word because that’s both the theological technical word as well as the popular term to refer to my “thing”. But I also shy away from the word “mystic” because in our popular context it gives rise to misunderstandings. Like with the word “metaphysics,” the word “mystic” has been tied to New Age mumbo-jumbo and emptied of its rational contents. I would prefer “person of prayer” or “contemplative.” Then again, I would rather be called “a normal Christian” because this is the life we Christians are called to live, a life of prayer.

What do you mean by this connection between being a “normal Christian” and living a “life of prayer.”

I mean that all Christians are called to pray, and to pray with intensity, to engage with God in a constant conversation.

So, it is not a matter of saying certain words or applying certain techniques.

Heavens, no! There’s no recitation of words, there’s no “technique” that can produce “contemplation.” Contemplation is a gift freely given by God. A person can’t presume to be “ready” for communion with God after saying a set number of prayers, rosaries, chaplets, novenas, or psalms; or after mastering certain psychosomatic techniques like quieting the breath and the mind. God is certainly not obligated to increase our consciousness of His indwelling merely because we think we are ready. What we can do is to be willing to engage Him in dialogue and to humiliate ourselves before Him, something that doesn’t come easy for most of us.

Then, there’s minimal discipline involved?

The Holy Spirit is a Spirit of order; an undisciplined prayer life, like a life of work and creativity, must include a healthy amount of discipline. The discipline start with a clear act of the commitment: one commits oneself to pray regularly. The best way to do this is to pray the Liturgy of the Hours. In this way one will be praying with the Church. Commit yourself to pray at least Morning or Evening Prayer every day. If you can commit to both it would be even better. Pretty soon and with His help the practice will grow in you. You’ll learn to desire it and will find out that your day would become incomplete without those set prayer times. Use them as your “jumping board” to a deeper prayer life with God in worship, adoration, and petition.

Isn’t that time consuming?

Not at all; a person can pray the Morning or Evening prayer properly and with devotion in 10 or 15 minutes. Some people would find even that amount as excessive. I pity them, particularly those who watch TV or are in the Internet for hours at an end but can’t spare 30 minutes to talk with their Father and Creator every day. Take it from me, if I can do it, anyone can. I am nothing special in this regard.

Be sure to read the entire interview – it can help you draw closer to God. And isn’t that why we are here?

A deacon who organized a door-to-door campaign for his parish this past Saturday writes,

Our door to door this past Saturday was fantastic! I had the experience of my life! Of course it was a little different reaction for me, as I was wearing clerics I suppose. We had some children and youth with us, which turned out OK. (The youths were too shy to talk) We had some 4 teams, of 2s and 3s (with the kids). We handed out fliers about our Church with mass times, holy hour time, and RCIA contact information, we had the pillar of fire, OSV pamphlet, and a conversion story CD in each packet. The goal was not numbers but trying to have a long conversation which includes spreading the message of Jesus. We were somewhat successful, my partner and I had some long conversations and we were thrilled with the response, some of the other teams did not do as well. But a great experience and I preached about it today as well. I am hoping to go out a couple more times this summer.

May the Lord bless these people for stepping out in faith to search for lost souls!

The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field – Luke 10:2

St. Paul, pray for us!

Last week I blogged about the episcopal ordination of Augustine Di Noia, O.P. and his appointment as the secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, using it as an opportunity to write about the proper “direction” of worship – towards Almighty God.

Well, listening to Archbishop Di Noia’s remarks at his ordination was music to my ears:

A brouhaha has erupted in Canada over the Prime Minister, who is an Evangelical Christian, receiving a consecrated host at a Catholic Mass, then appearing to walk away without consuming it (see the video here). Later, the Prime Minister’s office stated that he did consume it after returning to his seat, but for a Catholic, the real scandal is the fact that the presiding bishop:

1. gave communion to a known non-Catholic.
2. didn’t confirm that the host was consumed immediately after reception.

Regarding the second issue, I am reminded of an incident that occurred in my parish just a week ago. A young boy, who appeared to be mentally disabled, went up for communion. Our associate pastor first looked to the mom to confirm that he could receive communion, and when she nodded her assent, he gave the boy communion. However, the boy started to walk away without consuming the host. Our associate pastor stopped distributing communion and (gently) told the boy to consume the host immediately. He did not resume the distribution of communion until he was sure that the youngster did in fact consume the host. This is what a minister of the Blessed Sacrament is supposed to do: ensure that it is treated with the great respect that is should have.

Regarding the first issue (giving communion to a non-Catholic), this of course brings up the whole issue of “closed communion” vs. “open communion.” In the Catholic Church (as in the Orthodox Churches) we practice closed communion, meaning only a member of our church in good standing should receive communion. This causes no end of confusion and problems in America (and apparently Canada as well) as just about every other Christian group practices some form of open communion.

But what it reflects is radically different understandings of what communion is. In the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, communion – the Eucharist – is the central act of worship and the means by which we are united in one Body, the Church. As Henri de Lubac said, “The Eucharist makes the Church.” It is the central mystery of our faith. This is not merely a symbolic reenactment of the Last Supper, but a participation in the Paschal mysteries.

Partaking of the Eucharist intimately unites a person to Christ, as well as to everyone else who partakes worthily of the sacrament. In many ways, it is analogous to marital relations – it both represents an existing union as well as strengthens that union. So to partake of that union when one has not been initiated into the relationship – by the sacramental wedding ceremony for marital relations and reception into the Church for the Eucharist – is to betray at a very fundamental level that intimate union.

Of course, the Canadian Prime Minister most likely didn’t realize that he was doing something that would offend Catholic sensibilities. But that is why the presiding priest (or, as in this case, bishop) should be vigilant, especially in cases in which it is know that many non-Catholics are in attendance. A priest casually handing out communion to anyone and everyone is like a father who allows boys to come and go into his daughter’s room without supervision.

Tomorrow here in the Archdiocese of Washington, DC, a very special espiscopal ordination is taking place. Fr. Augustine Di Noia, O.P., will be ordained the Archbishop of Oregon City, Oregon. Why is this special? Because Archbishop-elect Di Noia has been appointed the secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, the body in charge of overseeing the liturgy. As such, he was raised to the rank of Archbishop, and like all Vatican officials, was made the titular head of a diocese that doesn’t really exist (in this case, Oregon City).

The appointment of Di Noia I think is interesting. He is known as a tremendous theologian, but not necessarily a liturgist. This seems to be consistent, however, with Pope Benedict’s desire to re-establish the theological importance of the liturgy in the life of the Church. The main contact the vast majority of Catholics have with the Church (and for that matter, with Christ) is through Sunday Mass, and the Pope recognizes that if the Mass is not a time in which man can encounter God, it has not done its job properly.

Nothing ignites passions among Catholics on the internet more than a discussion about the Mass. What I have found in real life, however, is that most Mass-going Catholics do not have strong opinions about how the Mass is celebrated – they simply attend each Sunday and do not care that much what music is played, which way the priest is facing, or how close the English translation is to the original Latin. But it is clear that they are deeply shaped in their own walk with Christ by the way Mass is celebrated each week.

This is why the liturgy is so important, as it either assists or detracts from our ability to fulfill our most primary responsibility in life: to worship God, our Creator and Redeemer. Personally, I am not a traditionalist who insists that the old Latin Mass is the only proper way to say the Mass. Yet I do believe that many of the innovations that have entered the Mass over the past 40 years have been detrimental to proper worship.

My own standard is this: in what “direction” does each aspect of the Mass – the words, the motions, the music, etc. – take us? Is it to God, or is it to ourselves? Liturgy is fundamentally an encounter between God and man, and as such, all the actions of the liturgy should direct man towards God.

Note that nothing I say here is culturally conditioned – I believe that each culture can adjust the Mass (within properly-defined boundaries, of course) as best fits its own genius. So there can be a wide variety of music, for example. Yet all music within the liturgy should be directed towards God, not towards ourselves (which thus excludes a large portion of music currently being used in parishes across the nation – what I call the “How Great We Art” song list).

This is one of the reasons I love the Eastern liturgies; they have maintained the proper “direction.” There is no question that everything that goes on in an Eastern liturgy is directed towards God. Yes, this can make it difficult for a newcomer to become comfortable with such a liturgy, but there is no question for any visitor what is going on when they enter: the worship of the Trinitarian God. I have been to many Roman liturgies in which this occurs as well, but too often I have attended Masses in which it is unclear at best exactly who is being worshiped.

I pray for Archbishop-elect Di Noia that he will work hard to make the Roman liturgy one that is always directed towards the Almighty God.

Today is the 500th birthday of John Calvin, one of the great Protestant Reformers. I have to admit, even as a Protestant, I was never attracted to Calvin’s teachings – although appearing imminently “logical,” they seemed too detached from reality for my taste. Yet there is no question that Calvin is one of the greatest and most influential religious thinkers in Christian history.

One of the best little books which compares Calvinism with Catholicism is Jimmy Akin’s The Salvation Controversy. One of the things that might be surprising to many Catholics is that the Church has not defined exactly many aspects of her soteriology (i.e. how we are saved by Christ), and thus, many parts of Calvinism are within the bounds of Church teaching. Also, one might also be surprised to find how close St. Thomas Aquinas’ teachings on predestination are to Calvin’s.

For those interested, a great site to explore is Called to Communion, which is authored by a number of former Calvinists who are now Catholic.

Happy Birthday to you,
Happy birthday to you,
You may have been a heretic,
But we’ll still pray for you!