Zombies!

Snapshot from Night of the Living Dead (source:Wikipedia)

One of the frustrating aspects of being Catholic is that there is so much to learn about the teachings of the Church. Actually, it's a blessing and a curse. The blessing is the recognition that the mysteries of the faith are inexhaustible; one can delight in this playground of the mind forever. The curse is that there is a lot of ignorance, which can lead one into error if one is not too careful.

One of my self-identified weaknesses is the understanding of grace. In understanding the complete human being, there is the order of nature, which most people have a reasonable grasp, but over and above this there is the order of grace (or supernature). When reading Scripture, it might be confusing when it talks about life and death. 

For instance, God warned Adam and Eve that eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil would lead to death. But they didn't die, at least not immediately (or so it seems). It's true that God intended that they be immortal, so they did become subject to natural death. But they did die immediately upon disobeying God. They changed. They realized that they were naked, and they attempted to hide from God. They lost sanctifying grace, and hence they were dead at a supernatural level.

The Greek language has several words for life and this is explained by the late Fr. John Hardon, S.J. (from his book, History and Theology of Grace):

The most fruitful analogy that revelation gives us for sanctifying grace and the state of righteousness is the concept of life, which the Greek authors of the New Testament regularly rendered by the word zôê, in preference to two other terms they might have used, bios and psuche.

Where English and Latin have only one word, life and vita, the Greek has three; and the choice of one of these to describe the divine life we receive through grace must be significant. The true antithesis of zôê is thanatos (death), and means life taken intensively, as contrasted with bios, which refers to life extensively, or its duration, and with psuche, the breath that in animated beings is a sign of life.

The term zôê is used selectively and exclusively to designate the supernatural life which God communicates to us through Christ; indeed, He is our life and its Author. Most often the combination, zôê aiônios (eternal life), is found in the Gospels and St. Paul; yet the same zôê that we possess on earth will continue into eternity. This is the divine life that was in the Word from the beginning, “and the life was the light of men.” It is also the life that the Persons of the Trinity have in common. “For the Father has life in Himself, even as He has given to the Son to have life in Himself.” It is a participation in this life that those who believe in Christ have received.

So there is such a thing as "the walking dead," those who have natural life but have lost supernatural life ("need brains!"). An interesting aspect of this analog is that zombies are deficient in the brains department; they're not quite the rational animal God intended them to be. "Sin makes you stupid." On the other hand, "the living dead" should be applied to those who have died naturally (when the soul separates from the body, leaving a corpse and an immortal soul), but who have persevered with sanctifying grace, and retain supernatural life.

The saints in heaven are alive! This is why we rejoice in the liturgy. The entrance antiphon for All Saints Day (the reason why we have Halloween: All Hallows Eve) is:

Let us all rejoice in the Lord,
as we celebrate the feast day in honor of all the Saints,
at whose festival the Angels rejoice
and praise the Son of God.

A question comes to mind: What might it look like to have supernatural life during this life time? Stay tuned to this channel. (update: I've tackled the question here.)

How Do You View the World?

 "I have come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it were already blazing!" (Luke 12:49)

Image by Cristian Ibarra from Pixabay

How do you view the world? How do you see the world? I think that Kant was partially right in that we view the world through the subjective lens of the mind. But I think this lens itself is not static, but in formation throughout a person's lifetime. The way we interpret the world can change over time, and the way this lens is formed can either allow us to see the world objectively, or this lens can distort reality.

The Christian claim is that through the lens of faith, we can see the world as it really is. "I once was blind, but now I see." My own experience is that this is a process. As I look through the lens of faith, I begin to trust this faith as I see clearer than before. And the process continues as faith makes sense of the world.

Indeed, we find meaning through faith. And metaphysically, this makes sense if the Christian claims are true. God is Being itself ("I AM Who AM" Ex 3:14). God is Truth itself. Jesus, the incarnate God, said, "I AM the Way, the Truth, and the Life" (Jn 14:6). God is the light by which we see light (Ps 36:9). We come to see objective truth through faith.

But this is not the only way of seeing the world. One way of viewing the world is through the lens of ideology. That is, instead of shaping his lens (his world view) through his experience, a person chooses to shape his lens through ideology, a view of the world through a particular political perspective. The person gives himself over to this ideology in a similar way as a person gives himself over to a faith. But like a dangerous cult, the ideas forming the ideology closes a person off from seeing reality clearly, admitting no other perspective (e.g. lens) but that of the ideology. An ideology is a faith which won't be tested by the world as it really is. Rather, the ideology forces itself on the world.

And in a similar fashion, conspiracy theories are formed. It is a way of viewing evidence to fit a narrative.

The common feature of ideologues and conspiracy theorists is a sort of self-righteous pride. The claim is that only they see the world as it truly is, and that an enemy prevents others from seeing as they see. With an ideology accepted by ideologues, this can get really dangerous when ideologues judge that the only solution is to purify the world of evil persons who refuse to get completely onboard with the ideology; the orthodox must expunge the heretics. It becomes an evil parody of the Christian religion; the spiritual battle is waged only in the material realm.

In Christianity, the spiritual battle is waged in each individual's heart -- not the material heart which pumps blood throughout the body, but the very core of a person's identity, that thing which defines a person as he truly is. In Christianity, the virtue of humility is the gateway for all other virtues. It is not the virtue of making one see himself as worthless, but rather it is the virtue of seeing oneself as he truly is -- a sinner loved by God, a person of infinite worth. This is where God's grace truly changes the world -- not from the outside world forcing itself on the person, but from an interior conversion bringing an interior love to the outside, setting the world on fire with God's love.

With the interior change, a person truly sees. "I once was blind, but now I see."

Source and Summit

This the truth each Christian learns,
Bread into his flesh he turns,
To his precious blood the wine:
Sight has fail’d, nor thought conceives,
But a dauntless faith believes,
Resting on a pow’r divine.
—From the sequence Lauda Sion, given during the Mass of Corpus Christi

As Catholics, we would do well to reflect on the Eucharist which the Catechism of the Catholic Church calls “the source and summit of the Christian life” (from paragraph 1324, and sourced to Lumen Gentium 11 which says that the Eucharistic sacrifice “is the fount and apex of the whole Christian life”).

In the Gospel of John, when Jesus claims, “I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world,” the Jews quarreled among themselves and asked “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” These Jews did not have faith in Jesus Christ. They did not trust God’s Word. A little bit later in the Gospel, Jesus turns to other Jews, who are also his disciples, and he asks them if they also wished to leave him. Simon Peter replies, “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God” (see John 6:51-69). Peter, our spiritual father in the Christian faith, does have faith in the Christ.

Was Peter’s faith perfect? Far from it. He later denied Christ during his Passion. Peter is part of that long line of sinners since Adam and Eve. Imperfect though he was, he followed Christ as a Christian to the end of the race, his trial here on earth. So does our faith rest on Peter? Not entirely. Although Peter is the Rock upon which Christ builds his Church (cf. Matthew 16:18), Peter’s faith depends very much on Christ. Peter was the fertile soil in which the Holy Spirit planted faith. The gift of faith just as the gift of life and the gift of eternal life is not our own, but grace from God. We need to be receptive to that grace.

It is a mystery why the Father chose to express his love for us by having his Son take on our frail humanity. Why should He transmit this grace through human Body and Blood? And while this particular human body and blood is also Divine, God continues in this mode of transmitting the faith though human body and blood.

Our senses cannot perceive that Jesus is actually and truly present in the Eucharist. The accidents remain. Putting aside Eucharistic miracles, there is no test using the modern scientific method that reveal anything other than bread and wine. And so this is the apex of the faith, for if one cannot trust the Church (insofar as she is guided by the Holy Spirit) and if one cannot trust Jesus himself, then it seems natural to be skeptical about Jesus being actually and truly present in what appears to be bread and wine. One only has God’s Word on this.

And so regarding the Eucharist sacrifice—called "the breaking of the bread" in Acts of the Apostles—as the source, it seems to me that I would not be a Christian but for the Catholic Church. From the beginning, Christians in an unbroken chain witnessed to their faith, and many times their witness extended to the point of giving up their lives as martyrs. Without that faith, the belief that Christ, the Son of God incarnate, was crucified, died and rose again on the third day, everything would be undone. It’s not because any mere human being merits that trust. The Christian faith would be a failure if it were not for God. That is, with God, nothing is impossible; but without God nothing is possible. What I mean to say is that I trust the Father who gave us his Son, and I trust the Son who gave us his all in all, and I trust in the Holy Spirit whom the Father and the Son sent to guide His Church. The failure to give us eternal life would be the the failure to give us eternal life.

“Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day” (John 6:54).

Illustrating Theology: Grace and Mercy

The Bible often uses light for God and his grace. Indeed the Nicene Creed states, "God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God." But for today, it seemed to me that rain and umbrellas would work to illustrate grace and mercy.

God rains down his grace and mercy, but in our free will we can reject it. We can put up an umbrella to shield us from the rain.

Image by _Alicja_ from Pixabay

But on the other hand we can take great joy in the water pouring down.

Image by Fifaliana Joy from Pixabay

And this also illustrates something about creation and God. These days, it seems that we view rain pouring down in a negative way. But these negative things which come our way can turn out to be for our greater good.

Rejoice always,
pray constantly,give thanks in all circumstances;
for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.
(1 Thes 5:16-18)

Participation

One possible reason people why people find belief in God unreasonable is related to their understanding of the nature of God.

Deist understanding of God

Deists accept God as creator of creation. God is transcendent but unconcerned and uninvolved in his creation. A common analogy is of God as a watchmaker. God creates and sets creation in motion (as one would wind up a watch -- if anyone still winds a watch these days -- or winds up a toy), but the existence of creation is now independent of God. That is, in the universe of all being, God, creation, and all creature stand side by side. I think this understanding of God is ultimately untenable, and makes belief in the Trinitarian Son of God becoming incarnate very difficult. How would God enter into and move within his creation? The huge problem with this understanding of God is that it puts limits on God who is infinite.

St. Thomas Aquinas argued that the essence of God is existence. That is the nature of God is existence itself or that there is no division between God's nature and his existence. In Aristotelian terms God is pure act, lacking any potential. God simply Is.

A Trinitarian Theistic understanding of God and creation

In the figure above, creation is not apart from God. God is both transcendent and immanent. Of course there are problems with graphical representations of God (indeed, trying to express the nature of an infinite God with limited human words and concepts is fraught with difficulties). Putting the green dot representing creation within God might lead someone to think that I'm saying that creation is a part of God. Creation is distinct from God, not part of God, but participating or sharing God's to-be or being. (Additionally, the graphical representation of the Trinity might lead someone to think that each person, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are pieces of the whole God. Rather the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. The shield of the Trinity is a better, but still limited, way of representing the Trinity)

I did a presentation trying to explain this participation for my local Bible study group. Here are the notes with graphical slides of that talk.

Merry Christmas

I Have Not Suffered as I Should

Drawing of the crucifixion by St. John of the Cross (Public Domain)

"I do not promise to make you happy in this life, but in the next."
-- Our Lady of Lourdes to Saint Bernadette Soubirous

I have not suffered as I should. I have been lucky or unlucky, depending on perspective. I've been lucky enough to have tasted love. Enough to know that I would promise to suffer anything for that love. Of course, I know I am not as reliable as all that. I am fortunate that I've not been tested to my breaking point. And I know that I should be preparing for that test, that measure of love (cf. Jn 21:15-19).

I have not suffered as I should, because someone suffered for me. On the Cross, he cried out the mystery of suffering, "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?" Part of the resolution of this mystery (again, only a partial resolution) is knowing those words begin Psalm 22. The Psalms are the good, the bad, and the ugly of human experience. From the imprecatory "Blessed the one who seizes your children and smashes them against the rock" (Ps 137:9) to the comforting "Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff comfort me" (Ps 23:4). And the Word of God became incarnate, He became human; "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (Jn 1:14). And in His human nature, the incarnate God knew suffering.

The crazy part about this is that this Jesus tells us crazy things like "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me" (Lk 9:23, see also Mt 16:24 and Mk 8:34). And His Apostle says, "pray constantly, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you" (1 Thes 5:17-18). I remember the apostle's words particularly because soon after praising the words as wisdom, I was tested. I wasn't greatly tested, but I was tested enough to remind me that I should take them seriously, and truly take these words to heart. Indeed, God seems to have that twisted sense of humor such that St. Teresa of Avila complained, "If this is how You treat Your friends, no wonder why You have so few of them!" St. John of the Cross of the dark night of the soul fame was a friend of St. Teresa.

But I have not suffered as I should, so I cannot wholly know the sufferings of those who have deeply suffered. I see some clutch desperately to their faith, and others whose sufferings test their faith beyond imagining. I am helpless. But I will pray for them. If I can, I'll walk with them. And listen.

Life as Suffering

We modern Catholics in America are not well prepared for suffering. Bourgeois Catholics are used to material well-being, and pain and suffering are unfamiliar. We don't know how to deal with suffering within ourselves or in others.

So while this post is in response to Leticia Adams' Inadaquecy, Changes and Life and Elizabeth Scalia's When There Are No Human Answers to Our Measures of Pain, and in response to observations of friends in their struggles with faith due to suffering, and although I lack the requisite wisdom to help those who are deeply wounded and surrounded in darkness, I will dare to suggest how we might prepare for suffering.

Pray: there is no way we can help without Christ. Find your own Calcutta: copy Mother Teresa by finding a ministry or situation to help others. Mortification: more than just for disciplining ourselves, consider penance for ourselves and others.

Suggested reading: Peter Kreeft's Three Philosophies of Life where I borrowed the subtitle Life as Suffering. C.S. Lewis' The Problem of Pain and A Grief Observed. Saint John Paul II, Salvifici Doloris.
Suggested devotion: consecration to Jesus through Mary. I find St. Louis de Montfort's method and 33 Days to Morning Glory compliment each other.

Final suggestion: be humble. My contribution is a Socratic I don't know a whole lot.