Hark, the Herald...

Imagine, for a moment, a beautiful sunset. In the distance, you see three men approaching another man seated under an oak tree. A short while later, a woman brings out bread and cheese curds and milk, as well as some freshly roasted beef, and you see her begin to laugh. What might be going on, you wonder. Perhaps one of the three men is a comedian. Scripture says plainly what happened:

The LORD appeared to Abraham by the terebinth of Mamre, as he sat in the entrance of his tent, while the day was growing hot. Looking up, he saw three men standing nearby. When he saw them, he ran from the entrance of the tent to greet them; and bowing to the ground, he said: "Sir, if I may ask you this favor, please do not go on past your servant. Let some water be brought, that you may bathe your feet, and then rest yourselves under the tree. Now that you have come this close to your servant, let me bring you a little food, that you may refresh yourselves; and afterward you may go on your way." "Very well," they replied, "do as you have said." Abraham hastened into the tent and told Sarah, "Quick, three seahs of fine flour! Knead it and make rolls." He ran to the herd, picked out a tender, choice steer, and gave it to a servant, who quickly prepared it. Then he got some curds and milk, as well as the steer that had been prepared, and set these before them; and he waited on them under the tree while they ate. "Where is your wife Sarah?" they asked him. "There in the tent," he replied. One of them said, "I will surely return to you about this time next year, and Sarah will then have a son." Sarah was listening at the entrance of the tent, just behind him. Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in years, and Sarah had stopped having her womanly periods. So Sarah laughed to herself and said, "Now that I am so withered and my husband is so old, am I still to have sexual pleasure?" But the LORD said to Abraham: "Why did Sarah laugh and say, 'Shall I really bear a child, old as I am?' Is anything too marvelous for the LORD to do? At the appointed time, about this time next year, I will return to you, and Sarah will have a son." Because she was afraid, Sarah dissembled, saying, "I didn't laugh." But he said, "Yes you did."

A little further reading will show that she did, indeed, bear a son and name him Isaac. A similar story is told in the Gospel of St. Luke:

In the days of Herod, King of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah of the priestly division of Abijah; his wife was from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. Both were righteous in the eyes of God, observing all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blamelessly. But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren and both were advanced in years. Once when he was serving as priest in his division's turn before God, according to the practice of the priestly service, he was chosen by lot to enter the sanctuary of the Lord to burn incense. Then, when the whole assembly of the people was praying outside at the hour of the incense offering, the angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right of the altar of incense. Zechariah was troubled by what he saw, and fear came upon him. But the angel said to him, "Do not be afraid, Zechariah, because your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall name him John. And you will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth, for he will be great in the sight of (the) Lord. He will drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will be filled with the holy Spirit even from his mother's womb, and he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God. He will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah to turn the hearts of fathers toward children and the disobedient to the understanding of the righteous, to prepare a people fit for the Lord." Then Zechariah said to the angel, "How shall I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife is advanced in years." And the angel said to him in reply, "I am Gabriel, who stand before God. I was sent to speak to you and to announce to you this good news. But now you will be speechless and unable to talk until the day these things take place, because you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled at their proper time."

What do these two passages have in common, besides the fact that potential parents scoff in the face of messengers from God when told that they would be parents? Both revelations were to men. The Blessed Virgin Mary, however, does not scoff. Indeed, she asks faithfully how something will happen, not how she will know that the revelation is true. Perhaps it is the Blessed Virgin's sinlessness which allows her to receive a revelation from God. Perhaps it is that no one had more of an ability to see an angel and live. What we do know is that the Blessed Virgin, not Joseph (as great as he was), received the revelation of her coming pregnancy. Interesting? I think so. Does it reveal much? Perhaps not, but I do wonder what explanations non-Catholics would attempt.

God bless,

Micah

Marketing Morality

My friend Travis and I like to make fun of commercials. Not in the sense of laughing at beer-advertising frogs or car-insuring geckos. No, that would be too normal, and theology students are far from normal.

We sat around one day and thought of all the stupid slogans we had seen.

Wendy's - "Do what tastes right."

Seriously, could Wendy's be to blame for the downfall of American morality? I mean, we know from good Catholic moral theology the common phrase agere sequitur esse ("action follows being") meaning that who we are should determine what we do. What if our tastes determined what we did? Let's use the broad definition here: taste can mean any general inclination toward something. It makes sense. That perhaps explains why some women will murder other women in department stores because the tasteful dress one woman desires permits her morally (so she may think) to beat to death anyone else looking at it. Perhaps this explains why so many people steal cars because they look good. Heck, even taking the narrow definition of taste, perhaps this is the reason Eve ate the apple.

Nike - "Just do it."

Really, though, this one is far worse. Don't think about it. Don't decide. Just do it. If there was ever a more animalistic approach to morality, I don't know what it is. To tell someone to "just do it" seems to imply that natural inclinations - instincts - are entirely capable in themselves of creating a civilized soceity. This coming in a world where everyone is told to follow their animal instincts: fornicate, rape, steal, murder, whatever keeps you alive, whatever keeps you "pleasured."

Now before people start shooting off at me, I realize that these companies aren't meaning to set moral standards with their slogans. I just find it amusing because, hey, I'm a nerd like that.

What's far more upsetting is ABC Family Channel's slogan: "a new kind of family." This new kind of family, which they perhaps are trying to reconstruct in the image of their television line-up, is something only the media could dream up. I was watching Kyle XY yesterday during their marathon. I'd never seen the show before, but it looked intriguing, so I thought I'd give it a shot. In the first episode, within a very short period of time, there was a situation which was clearly meant to indicate teenage fornication, a co-ed sleepover of two, and lying to parents to get the once naked boy out of the house through a window. Shortly after, a young teenager (possibly a pre-teen) was shown running in to the bathroom, pulling down his pants, taking out a pornographic magazine, and sitting down on the toilet. The implication was clear and disturbing. A few of the other episodes indicated that the real purpose for going to the pool should be "babe scoping," that lying was sometimes okay if it was for a good reason, and that part of the goal of summer vacation is to lose your virginity. In short, the series was disturbing. Kids do not need to be exposed to this "new kind of family" on ABC Family Channel. The show had a TV-14 rating, but the fact is that nobody should be led to think that trying to lose your virginity is a step to adulthood. Adulthood should come before losing virginity. No one should be led to believe that masturbation is normal or morally permitted. It's an abuse of God's gift of sexuality, which is only fulfilled in being a gift to another.

The whole situation is startling. Whether this is their goal or not, I do not know, but one thing is certain: there is a new kind of family emerging, and it is no family at all.

God bless,

Micah

The Trinitarian Dynamic of Theology

On this Trinity Sunday, I'd like to reflect on something I call the Trinitarian Dynamic of the Theology.

At the beginning of my college experience, when I was engaged in my seminary studies, I had the pleasure of taking liturgy classes from Fr. Marcel Rooney, OSB, former abbot primate of the Benedictine Order. On the first day of class, he entered and said he had something to show us. Drawing a diagram on the board, he told us to remember it, promising that it would be very helpful in all our studies of the liturgy. I believe he was wrong; it is very helpful in all theological study.

The diagram was simple enough. The word "Father" was written above the word "Son" with an arrow going down from the first to the second and another going from the second to the first. The arrows were the Holy Spirit.

I have found this diagram to be extraordinary helpful in theology. Take, for instance, the theology of the Trinity itself. As we know, the Father expresses His Being in His Word (the Son). The Holy Spirit comes forth from the Father (St. Thomas Aquinas used the word "procedes") as that love by which the Father expresses Himself to the Son, who is eternally born (St. Thomas used the term "generated," which is a technical term for "born") through that love. The Son also pours Himself back to the Father, thus making the love a mutual expression, and the Holy Spirit procedes from the Son to the Father.

Very well, it sounds simple enough (the dynamic, not the Trinity), but how does it relate to the rest of theology. I believe that every aspect of theology is either involved itself in this dynamic or reflects it.

Take creation, for instance. God, through His Word (the Son), pours out the Holy Spirit to create the world. It is this Trinitarian dimension which is evident in the account of creation in Genesis. God spoke and the world came into being and the Holy Spirit hovered over the waters. Interesting. So the Word is fruitful--it creates. That's much like the Father is fruitful in generating the Son. The Holy Spirit, likewise, is poured out in that fruitfulness upon the earth. So God pours out His love on the earth. What does that mean creation is supposed to do in response? We're supposed to let that Love bring us to full maturity and offer ourselves back to God.

Okay then, but what about sin? Where does that fit into the picture?

Well, that's simple. Sin is when we refused to return the love. We got very proud of our being, of our growth and maturity, and we decided that we didn't want to give God back what He deserved.

Now, since the Son is the one in the Trinity who returns love, it only seems fitting that He would want to urge us to do so as well. The Son came and became man in order to take on creation, particularly human flesh, and offer it to the Father. The circle is completed by His salvific actions. This is, in fact, precisely what the Scriptures indicate was happening--Jesus Christ came to reclaim the world, the lost sheep, and offer them to the Father. I never understood when I was younger what the Bible meant when it said that all things would be placed under Christ's feet and that when this was complete, He would give it over to His Father. That didn't make much sense to me...did that mean Christ would, at some point, no longer be King or God? Of course not. It meant that Christ would do with creation the same thing He's done for all eternity with His Being: give it back to the Father out of love.

So then what about the Church? Where does that fit in? Well, we know that the Church was born when Christ poured out the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. What does that designate? If we look to the Trinitarian dynamic, whenever the Holy Spirit is flowing, something is either being born or being offered back to God. The Church was born at Pentecost and her entire purpose is to give herself to the Son, who made her by giving her the Spirit. Meanwhile, the Holy Spirit moves from the Church into the world via the great work of evangelization and catechesis. He does this in order to draw in more people. As the Holy Spirit goes out from the Church, He gives His guidance (in a way, His very self) to those being evangelized, who then can either reject the grace He offers (that would stop the circle from being complete, which is always a sign of sin) or offer themselves to the Church and through the Church to Jesus and through Jesus to the Father by pouring out their whole being.

Okay, but what about the sacraments? Where do they fit in? Well, the sacraments are the work of Jesus Christ to initiate us, guide us, and support us. The sacraments are means of salvation. That makes them particularly the work of the Holy Spirit. It's no surprise, either. The sacraments bind us more and more closely to Christ. As we receive them, we receive them in Christ, so that the sacraments are a way for God's love to come to us, who are in a way, alteri Christi ("other Christs"). The sacraments, by renewing us in Christ, carry out the work of generation (or "regeneration"), thus giving us new birth. The Holy Spirit is the means of generation of the Son in the Holy Trinity and the sacraments, through which the Holy Spirit operates, are the means of regeneration of the Son in His people. Likewise, the sacraments are liturgical, so that when we, now more deeply bound to Christ, return that love, we do so in the liturgy.

Now it becomes especially clear how this relates to liturgical theology. In the liturgy, we receive love from God. That love regenerates us. We then return our renewed, regenerated selves to God in prayer, worship, and adoration. We also are obliged to return that love in service and works of love to other men, since by loving God's people, we love Him. The liturgy pours forth into the world around us, then, because by working in service and evangelism, the Holy Spirit runs through us as instruments of His love to help in the renewal and regeneration of others, so that they may come to the Church and offer themselves to God.

Last, but certainly not least, I have spoken of our being bound to Christ. This binding more and more greatly conforms us to Him. The end, when all creation is at last under Christ's feet, is when all the circles conjoin into one, which is only possible when all His people are conformed completely to Him in heaven.

I hope that this dynamic helps you to see theology in a new light. I'll try to point it out in future articles.

God bless,

Micah

Controversy

In case my readers have never noticed, we Americans thrive on controversy. You always can tell a free culture by that culture's media. In a world where the media is commercial and driven by economics, ratings, and sweeps, we can count on the media always to be seeking the attention of the public. I think what I notice most in the media is controversy.

It's everywhere. You can flip through all the news networks and you will immediately see controversy. If not, just watch the news ticker for a while. It's not just that, either. We can see controversy on the pseudo-news...you know what I mean...the "news" that's really not necessary for us to know...gossip, entertainment news, etc. You can see it on "informational" television. When was the last time a week went by on the History Channel or TLC or Discovery without some program on the DaVinci Code, Exorcisms, the secrets of the Vatican, the "bad popes," the malicious plans of some presidential administrations, etc.?

Okay, okay, it's fairly evident, I'm sure you'll agree. What, precisely, is my point?

Controversy has infiltrated the lifeblood of America. Case in point: in my several years' work on a popular Catholic youth forum, www.phatmass.com, which appears as one of the links on my blog, there has been an increasing number of members who think with a controversial mindset. We see the world through lenses, lenses which are imposed upon us and lenses which we choose and reaffirm for ourselves. Some people have put on lenses for controversy. They see in everything an ulterior motive. It is impossible in their mind that anything good could be honest. It is impossible that the Church's generosity in social welfare could be anything other than the "New World Order" extending it's great tentacled arms into the world to bring others toward it. It is impossible that the Church's insistence on a male priesthood could be anything other than a continuance of the oppression of women once carried on by the masculine hierarchy of a patriarchal society. It is impossible that Vatican II, the ecumenical movement, and all the popes since Blessed John XXIII could be involved in anything other than a unitarian plot for world domination or, alternatively, a complete lack of interest in control, domination, or certitude. The controversial lens thus becomes in its full form a sort of conspiratorial lens which becomes visible in the fact that the same set of circumstances and premises can lead to two completely contrary conclusions when two different people are opining. It seems to me that such inconsistency can only indicate that there is a bias, since if the premises and circumstances involved truly led to the conclusion arrived at, they would lead to the same conclusion regardless of the person observing, or, at the very least, the conclusions would be similar.

Okay...so what? Well, it's quite simple. Common sense. In then Chronicles of Narnia, the old professor likes to question why schools no longer seem to teach logic. Indeed, he has a point, and it has become increasingly worse since those days. Logic, in the professor's opinion, is simply common sense. I happen to agree. Maybe if we could all just let down our lenses, we'd be able to see the world as it truly is. Maybe if we did that, there'd be a lot less controversy and we'd all be a lot happier.

As for my own lenses, I have them, though they don't tend to have a prescription for controversy. Maybe if you read my blog a bit more, they'll become apparent. Let's hope that God will cure my sight.

Let the scales fall, Lord Jesus.

God bless,

Micah

New Look

So, how does everyone like the new look? I'm interested in tips, if anyone has any. The site has been under construction for a while.

Now, if only I could find something to write about.

God bless,

Micah