Laudato Si

Laudato Si is an encyclical letter, written by Pope Francis.

Some of its main focuses were on environmentalism, poverty, science and moderns, and technology. The encyclical has been seen by many a breath of fresh air; Pope Francis has been able to in many ways show the positions that the church should take. Asking for global collaboration to bring change to our planet. In doing so, we take care of it. 

Pope Francis was deeply influenced by St. Francis, as we know he took his name, but also his love for nature. “In Pope Francis’ encyclical letters and his speech, he uses the language of St. Francis and his early biographies to tie contemporary environmental theory to the Franciscan lineage. The mission and message of Pope Francis mirror those of the beloved saint who lived over 800 years ago. At that time, numerous saints emerged in Christian history.” [1]

We can see more of his influence over the fact that he used the Canticle of the Sun to express the love of all things that St. Francis had. “However, these are just the tip of the iceberg of this saint’s life. The core values of St. Francis’ lifelong journey are truly derived from his continuous conversion to God and his profound contemplation as entry into its deepest gift—the mystery of life, the presence of God in life, and mirrored by life.” [2]

The environment was one of the greatest emphasis that the pope made, to some it was quite controversial for others it was something that they felt that the church needed to speak about. Pope Francis says, “The destruction of the human environment is extremely serious, not only because God has entrusted the world to us men and women, but because human life is itself a gift which must be defended from various forms of debasement.” [3]

Furthermore, he talks about the destruction of the planets along with the animal life, “Each year sees the disappearance of thousands of plant and animal species which we will never know, which our children will never see because they have been lost forever. The great majority become extinct for reasons related to human activity. Because of us, thousands of species will no longer give glory to God by their very existence, nor convey their message to us.” [4]

I think this is very important because we tend to take our planet for granted, not using all of its resources, especially at a rate that it cannot recover. Scientist has said that we have entered the sixth stage of mass extinction. Meaning that wildlife has begun to die, at an incredible rate. “Since 1500, more than 320 terrestrial vertebrates have become extinct. Populations of the remaining species show a 25 percent average decline in abundance. The situation is similarly dire for invertebrate animal life.” [4] Which is quite devastating for all life the site goes on to say that because this extinction rodents tend to multiply faster and with them disease as well.

Pope Francis makes it a point to say that this is a job for all of us, saying that the world's government must work together to find a solution. But he also says that this might bring new problems, “One authoritative source of oversight and coordination is the law, which lays down rules for admissible conduct in the light of the common good. The limits which a healthy, mature and sovereign society must impose are those related to foresight and security, regulatory norms, timely enforcement, the elimination of corruption, effective responses to undesired side-effects of production processes, and appropriate intervention where potential or uncertain risks are involved.” [5] So when he ask humanity to work together, he does not just want us to do it for the world but one another. To work on peace for the good of humanity. 

In the final part of his encyclical, the pope speaks about the importance of dialogue between religions. The world needs to be united, and religion shouldn't be the cause for division. “The majority of people living on our planet profess to be believers. This should spur religions to dialogue among themselves for the sake of protecting nature, defending the poor, and building networks of respect and fraternity. Dialogue among the various sciences is likewise needed since each can tend to become enclosed in its language, while specialization leads to a certain isolation and the absolutization of its field of knowledge.”[6]

In conclusion, although Pope Francis message to humanity may seem like something new, in reality, it is the same message that the church has been giving the world for years. It is then up to us to find a solution to the world's problems.  

1. Sikkema, Doug. "Is Ecology Haunted? An Ecocritlc Reads Laudato Si." CARDUS (2015): 27-30. Print.

2. Zhang, Xue Jiao. "How St. Francis Influenced Pope Francis’Laudato Si." CrossCurrents Cross Curr 66.1 (2016): 42-56. Web.

3. Francis, Pope. Laudato Si': On Care for Our Common Home: Encyclical Letter. Print.

4. Carey, Bjorn. "Stanford Biologist Warns of Early Stages of Earth's 6th Mass Extinction Event." Stanford University. N.p., 24 July 2014. Web. 2 Aug. 2016.

5. Francis, Pope. Laudato Si': On Care for Our Common Home: Encyclical Letter. Print.

6. Francis, Pope. Laudato Si': On Care for Our Common Home: Encyclical Letter. Print.

7. Francis, Pope. Laudato Si': On Care for Our Common Home: Encyclical Letter. Print.

Fides et Ratio

Faith and Reason

Fides et Ratio is an encyclical letter written by St. John Paul II on the 14th of September 1998. Pope John Paul II is known for his great works such as the theology of the body and of course Fides et Ratio.  The encyclical Fides et Ratio is concerned with the use of faith and reason and is addressed to the bishops of the Catholic Church. 

“Faith and Reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed iii the human heart a desire to know the truth in a word, to know himself so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves.” 

Faith and reason are extremely important in understanding the human condition. We live in a world that is plagued with flawed philosophy and the world where reason is based on emotions. Since man naturally philosophies, he is then driven to find truth, scripture tells us, …” the truth shall set you free.” Which is why man is constantly trying to find this truth, and since we know God to be truth, we must continue to move towards Him to obtain this truth. 

For this reason, Pope John Paul II attempts to guide us in this modernist society where materialism and material idolatry has taken over man. “The more human beings know reality and the world, the more they know themselves in their uniqueness…” Some if not all have fallen victim to the understanding that faith and reason are incompatible, that those who believe in God are not able to think logically or even worse use reason. 

“Faith intervenes not to abolish reason’s autonomy nor to reduce its scope for action, but solely to bring the human being to understand that in these events it is the God of Israel who acts.” It is then made clear when we look at where our society is, and how it has gotten there. The Church has then been persecuted for its inability to move through time and conform to it. Keeping science in the middle ages and not allowing any sufficient scientific advancements. We now know this to be false, we know that most of the greatest discoveries made by mankind were made at the hands of Catholics. 

The Church then attempts to reconcile the separation of faith and reason, calling for the use of not only natural philosophy, which is that which we can only perceive but to also use revelation in our search for wisdom and knowledge. “ The truth of Christian Revelation is found in Jesus of Nazareth, enables all men and women to embrace the “mystery” of their life.” 

Thomas Forstheoefel in his journal asked the questions, “How free are we to create new paradigms, models, and metaphors to respond to questions that are basic to our humanity and our vocation? What does it mean to be human? Who is Jesus for us, especially in light of non-Christian wisdom?” Furthermore, how do we answer these questions with our limited knowledge of the world and creation?

It would then be easier to remain at a surface level, to see the world from an empirical perspective. In doing so, the world might seem like an easier place to understand. But empiricism falls short in understanding all of the reality. Meaning that it can only observe the physical world, and theorize on what assumption is made from it. So in reality scientism makes the error to assume, that everything relies on theories because theories are nothing more than faith in something that can hypothetically be proven, but has yet to. 

“Wisdom knows all and understand all.” [wis 9:11] Pope John Paul II brings the point up about how the book of wisdom gives us cues on how wisdom and faith are ever intertwined. He goes on to explain how there is no reason for competition between faith and reason, but that they should work together so that man can reach his full potential. 

Finally, Pope John Paul II concludes by reiterating the importance of both faith and reason, saying the reason is built upon philosophical thought. “Philosophical thought is often the only ground for understanding the dialogue with those who do not share our faith.”[FR]148 Which leads to ecumenism and the interpretation of what ecumenism means. Michael Torre wrote an article about the reflections of thinking within a tradition. This is extremely important because it assures that we will not fall into error by attempting to make connections which do not exist or that cannot exist. He said, “One of the most common features of many, diverse, schools of contemporary philosophy is the common insistence that we think within a certain context. Thinkers are rightly opposed to the notion that we think in a vacuum, in some "abstract space" or from "God's point of view." We are creatures of time and place, language, and culture; we always think from and within that context. This, it seems, is quite true and virtually beyond dispute.”

Moreover, the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World spoke about the importance of this dialogue, which cannot take place without the philosophical aspect of faith. “For our part, the desire for such dialogue, undertaken solely out of love for the truth and with all due prudence, excludes no one, neither those who cultivate the values of the human spirit while not yet acknowledging their source, nor those who are hostile to the Church and persecuted her in various ways.”  

In conclusion, faith and reason come together to bring the fullness of truth to man, understanding that uses all of creation and revelation, that which cannot be accomplished without the two. 

1. Paul, John. Encyclical Letter, Fides Et Ratio, of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II: To the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Relationship between Faith and Reason. Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1998. Print.

Forsthoefel, Thomas A. "FIDES ET RATIO AND THE FUTURE OF COMPARATIVE THEOLOGY." Journal of Ecumenical Studies 39.3/4 (n.d.): n. pag. Web. 25 July 2016.

Torre, Michael. "FIDES ET RATIO AND THE UNIVERSITY: REFLECTIONS ON THINKING WITHIN A TRADITION." Dialogue & Universalism 9.7/8 (1999): n. pag. Print

Dark Night of the Soul

“The loving mother is like the grace of God, for, as soon as the soul is regenerated by its new warmth and fervor for the device of God.”[1]

Saint John of the Cross was a Spanish Carmelite who along with St. Teresa of Avila reform the Carmelite order. He is the patron saint of contemplative life as well as mystical theology. He is one of the greatest mystics in the Catholic Church. St. John was canonized in 1726 by Pope Benedict XIII and then declared a Doctor of the Church in 1926 by Pius XI. 

One of his greatest books that have touched countless over time has been Dark Night of the Soul. In this book, he speaks about the importance of spirituality at a personal level, and at a level where we connect with God, but to do so, we must cleanse ourselves. Most of the book then speaks of the stages of the heart, and the correlation of our soul. The yearning for God, and the inability to find love our happiness elsewhere. The book is divided into two books with twenty-five chapters governing everything from spiritual imperfection to the secret of wisdom. 

“The soul can cease to feel that there is something that it lacks within itself or that it has still to do.”[2]

As a seminarian, this books spoke to me in so many different ways. One would obviously be in the approach to spirituality, the intense love of God. For anyone who hopes to dedicate their lives for the kingdom of God, this attitude is extremely needed. But that is not enough, St. John goes even further to give advice about one's life and discernment. He can connect in such a profound way the things that are happening in one's life that it seems almost like the book was written for you.

For example; he speaks of human nature, and how pride can take hold of one's heart. When living in a community this becomes dangerous because pride can make the individual feel as if he is better than the others, and even though they are following and doing what they should be, they are not able to find peace in it. “For, although they have the habit of the three theological virtues-faith, hope and charity the present realization which they have of their affections and their deprivation of God allows them not enjoy the present blessing and consolation of these virtues.”[3]

Moreover, St. John speaks about the importance of humility, being able to humble oneself so that we may grow closer to God, that our love may be genuine and that once again our flaws be taken away from us. The importance of a spiritual director is then brought up, and not simply of just having one but also being open and honest with them. He points out that many tend not to be honest with their spiritual directors and instead tend to keep things to themselves to remain on the good side of their spiritual director. “Many such persons desire to be the favorites of their confessor and to become intimate with them, as a result of which there beset them  continual occasion of envy and disquiet.”[4] Meaning that rather than being honest and allow Christ to work through our confessor to wash away our sins, we do not want to look bad in the eyes of our confessor, so we withhold “the bad sins” and instead maintain a surface level relationship. 

I suppose that honesty is one of the main themes of this book, it shows how important it truly is, to be honest with ourselves. G. Dura-Vila a specialist in neuroscience and mental health at the Imperial College in London said, “It is not uncommon to hear religious people say that they’re going through a Dark Night of the Soul.”[5]  Christianity has based much of its understanding on suffering as a part of life. When we suffer we offer it up, and we are reminded of the suffering of Christ.  

She goes on to further say, “Those who have undergone the night emphasizes the important role of having an accompanying personal relationship during this time of spiritual suffering. Spiritual mentors and confessors can be inestimable companions to give assistance during the Dark Night as they can provide the orientation and the perspective of someone experienced and wise, and someone who is not immersed in this darkness.”[6] So from a psychological perspective the dark night that is described in the book, happens to many of, she expresses how it is more common with religious people. Her paper further explains the importance of the psyche in this type of situation.   

Furthermore, she explains how Dark Night of the Soul does not avoid the social aspect but makes a distinction between solitary life to communal including the depressions of everyday life, and emphasizing the importance of it. Fr. J. Font speaks of this, “Socially, the individual suffering from ‘‘salutary’’ depression is characterized by passivity and slowness in action and speech. Everything is unachievable, even the most ordinary daily activities. In contrast to the ‘‘pathological’’ depression, the individual going through the Dark Night does not run away from social interaction.”

Throughout the book, St. John guides us in a kind of purgation, a release of ones prideful and self-centered outlook on life. He makes it a point to say that our lives will be deprived of any joy or love of God unless we can contemplate and allow our soul to go through the stages of cleansing. 

Finally, “The soul is combated and purged after two manners-namely, according to its sensual and its spiritual parts-with its senses, faculties and passion, so likely after two manners-namely, according to these two parts, the sensual and the spiritual- with all its faculties and desires, the soul attains to an enjoyment of peace and rest.”[190]

1. Cross, John Of the, and E. Allison Peers. Dark Night of the Soul. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Page. 38

2. Cross, John Of the, and E. Allison Peers. Dark Night of the Soul. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Page. 112

3. Cross, John Of the, and E. Allison Peers. Dark Night of the Soul. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Page. 113

4. Cross, John Of the, and E. Allison Peers. Dark Night of the Soul. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Page. 41

5. Durà-Vilà, G., and S. Dein. "The Dark Night of the Soul : Spiritual Distress and Its Psychiatric Implications." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 12.6 (2009): 543-59. Web. 27 July 2016.

6. Durà-Vilà, G., and S. Dein. "The Dark Night of the Soul : Spiritual Distress and Its Psychiatric Implications." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 12.6 (2009): 543-59. Web. 27 July 2016.

Render unto Caesar: a book review

We as Catholics have a duty to be involved in the political affairs of our community and country. It is a part of evangelization to be sure, but more than this it is putting our money where our mouth is when it comes to living out our Catholic faith. But exactly what is that supposed to look like?

Archbishop Chaput writes several compelling arguments in his book Render unto Caesar. As you might have guessed, Chaput sums his arguments around Jesus’ famous words to the Pharisees and the Herodians when they, trying to trip him up, ask him if it is unlawful to pay the Roman tax. Jesus asks whose inscription is on the coin; they answer that it is Caesars. “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:21)

Render unto Caesar delves in to our responsibility to Jesus’ response. We as Catholics have a rich theology which is very explicit, especially when it comes to Catholic social teaching, or the way that a Catholic should view the world through their faith. As American Catholics, we are given the amazing freedom to practice our faith in the public square, a liberty which most Catholics around the world do not share with us. It might seem that there is no room for the Catholic worldview in today’s America. However being counter cultural has never made one wrong, and certainly never made one un-American; just ask the founders!

Jesus made it clear that some things were in fact ‘property’ of earthly rulers, but wisely clarified that we owed something altogether different to God. Before America’s founding, the separation of Church and State was never implemented. In fact, the monarchs and rulers of old always claimed ‘divine authority’ as their ‘right to rule.’ Christianity has always made a clear distinction of what allegiances are owed to kings, and which are owed to God. But herein lies the heart of the issue: these forces should never be opposed. And if they are, it means that the king has no claim to authority. At least this is the way that the founders saw it. But then what is the ultimate authority?

The founders claimed that “Nature’s God”¹ was the ultimate authority by which to judge regimes. And that when regimes failed to govern by the Natural Law, that they are no longer entitled to rule. The Natural Law is not man’s natural disposition, nor does this law flow from nature, but is rather the full recognition of man’s deep seated responsibility to his conscience, and ultimately to a moral life. Living by the Natural Law invokes autonomy and self-restraint, integrity and virtue, and those good dispositions of humanity which create a society which is not only qualified, but capable of governing themselves.

Archbishop Chaput makes clear in Render unto Caesar that our country is not founded on religion, or the Gospel, or even God. It is founded on the notion that no principality can deny man his right to freedom; a freedom which can be found by his allegiance to the Natural Law. What does this mean in for Catholics in the public sphere? It means that, of all the many voices blasting political noise today, there is not one more sincere to preserving the country which our founders established or one more aligned to the founders than the Catholic one.

Catholic social teaching is founded in absolute equality among the children of God. It is rooted in the true common good of society both in our country and abroad. And it is a strong voice for natural morality, real freedom, and not only promises but delivers true happiness and peace for all peoples. Despite a long history of Catholic suspicion, America as a principled constitutional republic finds its last ally in the American Catholic community; at least on paper.

Chaput points to a glaring apathy in today’s modern American Catholic. It seems that, in practice, we are just as politicized and secular as the population at large. We simply don’t practice what the Church preaches! Chaput’s main argument in the book is for us to be better educated in our faith, and to use that knowledge to make political decisions; instead of the secular model of doing it the other way around. This is coupled with his second argument, which is to do his main argument boldly.

In today’s modern world, the idea of separation of Church and State is sorely abused, and there is certainly an anti-Christian (especially anti-Catholic) sentiment. This cannot be overlooked, but it certainly cannot be submitted to. The latter seems to be the choice among recent generations of Catholics, and this must change. Not because we need to in order to save our country, but because we must in order to save our souls. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who struggles with the Catholics role in American politics. This is also a great historical resource to understand the most basic concepts of our country’s founding which have become so foreign to modern Americans. It was a compelling read start to finish, and would be a great help to any faithful Catholic trying to navigate our increasingly hostile and turbulent political sphere.

1 The Declaration of Independence

John 6:63… why are you just now bringing this up?

Throughout the history of Christendom certain sects of Christianity have, for one reason or another, questioned or even denied the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Most sects fell into historical antiquity, at least before the Protestant revolt occurred in 1517. This was a different denial altogether, as it was for the first time ‘fashionable’ to rebel against the Church’s authority. With this rebellion, came many new and novel theological ideas, each as eccentric as the local revolutionary leaders themselves. Ulrich Zwingli, a former Catholic Priest, certainly left his mark on this changing landscape. In 1525, he even defied Luther to make the bold claim that the Eucharist was merely a symbol.¹ It is pretty heavy stuff theologically speaking, but a basic break down is this:

                                                TRADITIONAL                  ZWINGLI

Zwingli was a mental gymnast, and used every faculty at his disposal to support his new claim. It should be noted that the aforementioned groups that have denied the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist were so marginal, so theologically inaccurate, that ancient history has not even documented them as relevant in the Christian discussion. The Catholic Church has always held the belief that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist, even before it was formally defined and re-iterated at the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century. This clarification from the Church, by the way, was prompted by the radical new teachings of the so misleadingly named ‘reformers.’ Zwingli was known to make such arguments that the translators mis-recorded Bible texts (omitting ‘symbolizes’ from Luke 22: “This is my body.”). He also argued that Jesus was pointing to himself when he utters the words of consecration at the Last Supper (conveniently left out of the Biblical text). Zwingli even made the argument that Jesus is the ‘bread of life’ in the same way that he ‘is the vine.’ After receiving a letter in 1524 from his Dutch colleague Cornelius Henrici Hoen, he began adopting the notion that the word ‘is’ in the phrase “this is my body” should be translated as ‘signifies.’² However, his most raucous argument centered around John 6:63: “The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing.”

I always ask non-Catholics about the Bread of Life discourses in John’s Gospel (chapter 6), and what they think Jesus meant when He told the crowds, “Unless you feed on my flesh and drink my blood, you shall not have life within you.” I usually get the stock answer: v.63 negates the previous 62, as though GOD might be confused, or ignorant to the fact that his metaphorical speech was being misinterpreted by the crowd, or that He willingly drove followers away under false pretenses that He later contradicts to His Apostles. He uses strong language, speaks very literally, and when people say that this teaching is hard, He does not stop them or clarify his speech, but re-iterates again with even more literal speech. You have to take a bite out of Jesus to have eternal life!! Many of His followers left Him that day. Right after that guess what happened? He turned to His Apostles and said, “Will you also leave?” No one escaped scrutiny! When they stayed, he said the words in verse 63. When he did so, his words were a clarifier of the text, not a nullifier of his teaching.

What Christ is telling his Apostles in verse 63 is this: the Eucharistic mystery is a spiritual truth that cannot be discerned simply by reasonable deduction. He is not telling the Apostles that he was earlier speaking metaphorically; He is telling them that they have to have faith to understand! As ‘the flesh’ (not HIS flesh, but the general term describing all things not of the Spirit) is of no avail in understanding the deep spiritual truth He was laying before them.³

To make the bold claim that Jesus’ flesh was of no avail (remember, if we are going down this rabbit hole, we have to acknowledge that Christ was previously talking about eating his flesh), is to make far reaching theological claims that border on being dangerously un-Christian. Was his flesh ‘of avail’ the day he died on the cross? Is his resurrected and glorified body of any avail? If not, what was the whole point of the Incarnation? Like the other excuses that Zwingli gives for his unbelief, they are merely mental exercises that eventually lead to only one place: opposite of fifteen centuries of Christian belief and away from the Catholic Church.  

The Eucharist is not a single teaching of the Church, or a single story in the Bible. The Eucharist is the whole narrative of the Bible, Judaism, and the fulfillment of Jewish prophesies. The Eucharist became a necessary part of GOD’s plan at the fall of man in Genesis 3, and is the whole point of the Old Testament, the foundation of the New Testament, and the source and summit of the Christian faith. No amount of mental gymnastics can lead us to avoiding the reality of Jesus’ teachings on the Eucharist. Throughout Church history, there have been numerous councils called into session to discuss Trinitarian doctrine, the nature(s) of Christ, the efficacy of Sacraments, and the Christian life. Not once was there a council called among the body of believers to discuss whether or not Christ was present in the Eucharist. This belief went absolutely uncontested until the Protestant revolution of the sixteenth century.

The case against the Eucharist is too fleeting, and comes on the scene too late. All Christians believe that Christ was the fullness of God’s revelation to man. This seems like a large fallacy that, when corrected at such a later time in Christian history, would fall under the category of ‘new revelation.’ Why was this not an issue prior to 1525? If you must protest a couple getting married, you do so before the vows begin, not during the recession. The most logical reason Zwingli was so adamant about the symbolic nature of the Eucharist, is because his church did not have the authority of consecration. And that is not a powerful enough excuse to deny one of the least contested traditions of the Church.

1 Vidmar, John OP, The Catholic Church Through the Ages, Paulist Press, pg.198

2 Theology of Huldrych Zwingli https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology_of_Huldrych_Zwingli

3 John 6:63 Footnote of Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: New Testament, Second Catholic Edition