How to evaluate our time of crisis.

On the Fox News Channel, Glenn Beck’s editorial program presented this comment made by Senator John Conyers of Michigan concerning the massive health care bill proposed by the Obama administration:

“You have these members who get up and say, ‘read the bill!’  What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?”  Beck commented that Conyers could consider the novel idea of actually telling his colleagues and the administration that he cannot finish evaluating the bill and therefore they are going to have to wait.  As it is, it seems that political pressure to maintain unity in the party pushes many current congressman to neglect the one task for which they were voted into office: govern. 

The current climate of political animosity and insanity, so often animated by the hijinks of Beck, could easily lead the citizenry to cynicism.  And this cynicism can lead to two actions.  On the one hand a citizen can despair of ever accomplishing the necessary tasks of self-governance, which is to educate one’s self of the facts at hand and apply the appropriate principles.  This citizen then resorts to following the emotional impulse of blind and un-reflective party loyalty.  Such loyalty usually results from upbringing where the citizen votes the party of their parents, or against it.  Or, they may rally around a charismatic national celebrity, with a good narrative, and emotionally invest in the success of that celebrity as one would if they were participating in American Idol.

On the other hand, cynicism can lead a citizen to dismiss themselves from the political process altogether.  The citizen can feel as if their vote makes little difference since neither of the major national political parties satisfy the citizen’s criteria.  If the citizen voted for the other options, that person would be “throwing their vote away.”  This feeling is not without foundation.  Indeed, the progressive political deference of the local and state governments to the federal has created a new political system very different from the kind formed in 1776.  A citizen did not just vote.  A citizen held free associations, volunteered, ran for office, wrote to his statesman, considered local politics far more relevant and, most importantly, engaged in heated political, philosophical and religious debate at the local pub or at the dinner table.  As it stands now, it appears as though much of the political process has been removed from the citizenry by at least 3 degrees of separation.

In the midst of this current political climate, where does the Christian citizen find herself?  A Christian can easily say none of this really matters since Christ is coming again.  Or, a Christian can say this question carries the heaviest weight…that salvation depends on it.

The Naked Public Square, the seminal work produced by the late Fr. Richard Neuhaus, offers this Christian perspective: 

“In our world-weary moments we may agree with the observation…that history is just one damned thing after another.  While history contains much that is eminently damnable, however, that view hardly accords with a Christian understanding of God’s intent in time.  An awkward consequence of the Christian view…is that we are frequently unsure what that intent is with respect to specifics at hand.  We are not disinterested observers, we are not an audience, but, however large or small our role (and we can never know that for sure either), we are both the subjects and the objects of our inquiry into what may be happening.  Our Lord cautions us in no uncertain terms about unwarranted certainty.  We are not to say, “Lo here! or, Lo there!”  Yet we cannot help but say, “Maybe here, and, Maybe there.”  And then we must act in the courage of our uncertainties.”

Neuhaus continues by saying that what gives us the courage to engage politics and the public square is faith.  It is faith that God does not waste his time and he does not waist history.  It has a definite direction and purpose.  The purpose is salvation and the direction includes the public engagement of Christians in politics and in the public square.  The insanity and uncertainty of the current time of crisis do not change the story of humanity that God pens in his providence.

More on Spe Salvi and Engaging the Public Square

Pope Benedict said, “On the strength of his hope, Augustine dedicated himself completely to the ordinary people and to his city–renouncing his spiritual nobility, he preached and acted in a simple way for simple people.”  If this does not point out some of the most central points of this blog then I don’t know what does.  Part of the challenge for me is to take so much of the wisdom of our tradition and distill it for folks who are educated and full of information in so many ways, yet are still simple on the level of faith and on the level of life.  Are the people in the congregation fired up about tackling the major cultural problems of this secular-progressivist society?  Probably not.  Do they need to be?  I don’t think so.  This is why there is the academic side of this question, and then on the other side (the more important side for us pastors) there is the pedagogical.

For example, I have encountered many instances where people identify a strong and spirited congregation by looking at how much of a percentage do church stuff.  Is that really what we are about when we say that the people of God must live out their faith?  A large part of our mission as priests, with Augustine as our model, is to remind the people of God of their dignity in the simplicity of their lives.  They need not start a television show, or lead a large church group, or start a new ministry.  Where they are is where God is sending them.  Are they looking for where God is sending them in their life now?  Or are they regretting that they cannot dedicate as much time being a lector, or attending church functions, or helping out at the pantry.  I cannot overemphasize that I do not mean to discourage by any means participation in the ecclesial life of the Church.  But, obviously, not everyone is supposed to help out on the Church grounds beyond what is their duty (tithing, participation in some community functions).  If this were so, the Church should be crowded with thousands of people all the time, and the world would be vacuous of Christians.  Rather, it is supposed to be the opposite.  The people of God ARE the leaven that God places in the dough that is the world to make it rise.  Brothers, let us preach this tirelessly.

Spe Salvi and the Public Square

Allow me to diverge from my thoughts on the public duty for Catholic voters as I have been struck with inspiration from the Pope Benedict’s last encyclical, Spe Salvi and I may spend the next several days reflecting on the implications this message has on our conversation.  He says in paragraph 25, “On the other hand, we must also acknowledge that modern Christianity, faced with the succeses of science in progressively structuring the world, has to a large extent restricted its attention to the individual and his salvation.  In so doing it has limited the horizon of its hope and has failed to recognize sufficiently the greatness of its task…”  What is the horizon of its hope but the public square?  The Holy Father makes the point that much of what belonged the hope for building the Kingdom of God was transferred to what we know call science.  Freedom and Reason became the main forces that liberated humanity and became an absolute value for progress.  Progress itself became an absolute value as well.  In this course of human history, Christianity was relegated to the private sphere, irrelevant to establishing the Kingdom of God.  The Kingdom of God became possible merely by studying human nature, sociology, history, and science.  Then we had only to place the right kind of structures to force humanity from the outside into a perfect society…free, happy, and progressing towards greater accomplishment over nature and over itself.  The results, of course, as many have noted, not just Christians, have been disastrous.  Men such as Karl Marx and Francis Bacon neglected one thing: “human freedom.”  And human freedom deals with interior transformation rather than exterior structuring.  And this pertains to the transformation that can only take place through a response to the hope that is offered in Jesus Christ.

The American Catholic Voter

Is there such a thing as an American Catholic voter?  Do Catholics allow their faith to shape ALL that they do, including their politics?  This question is ultimately multi-faceted.  First, there arises the question of the nature of American politics in general.  Second, there arises the question of the nature of American Catholicism in general.

As to the first question, I think that much of one’s political persuasion comes from one’s family background.  One is conservative if one’s parents are conservative, and vis versa if one’s parent’s were liberal.  Or, if one is rebellious than one would be the opposite.  In any case, many people adopt their political perspective from a super-ego construct that stems heavily from up-bringing.  Less of an influence comes from doing actual homework, research, and trying to answer the tough questions.  There are exceptions to this.  Those exceptions have nothing to do with how intelligent one is.  A person can be quite intelligent and yet still be ruled by their super-ego, especially when it comes to something so opinion-based like one’s political point of view.  The exceptions about which I speak are those who KNOW their super-ego construct…those who are self-aware.  Then they are little more capable of distinguishing themselves from outside reality.  They are little more driven to truly become informed of facts and to weigh opinions (those who are the swing-voters are not necessarily these people.  I suspect that many of these merely come from a background where the parents have no solidified persuasion but I would not know the statistics on this).  In conclusion to this first paragraph, I suppose that most of the work of self-formation towards true political opinion invovles managing one’s super-ego so that one’s political decisions are not merely emotion-driven and so that one’s discussion in politics are less shrill and loud (ala Hannity and Colmes).  More tomorrow…

Holy Cross Chapel as an example of engaging the public square

Last night, amidst the hustle and bustle of Catholic high-society (and the River Oaks Country Club), a group of dedicated benefactors gathered to celebrate 25 years of the Holy Cross Chapel. Located smack-dab in the middle of downtown, just off the (aptly named) “Main Street Square” MetroRail stop, the Holy Cross Chapel is described as a “spiritual oasis” to a world that too-often forgets the presence of God in the midst of daily business activities.

George Strake, Jr, (one of the honorary co-chairs) commenting on this weekend’s Gospel, tied together the message of Jesus with the mission of Holy Cross Chapel. The Gospel for this weekend presents us with two figures, a pharisee and a “publican” (or a tax collector). The one (the pharisee) prides himself on not being like the other. The tax collector, the publican, hides in the back, begging God for forgiveness. Mr. Strake commented that Holy Cross Chapel’s mission is precisely for those businessmen (and -women), who – even though aren’t perfect – are struggling to do good and striving to do the right thing.

The mission of the church should necessarily be seeking out these men and women – for Our Lord certainly came to “seek and save the lost”

Holy Cross is definitely a locus that engages in the public square. Especially now at street-level, it is a visible sign to the community that the Church is present and welcoming to all. She is also challenging the business community to be ethical, to do the good, and to remember the contemplative dimension to humanity. This is an excellent example of how the public square can be evangelized.

Cardinal-designate Daniel N. DiNardo talks about his role in the public square.

On Wednesday, October 17, 2007, the day the announcement was made that Daniel N. DiNardo, Archbishop of Galveston-Houston, was named to the College of Cardinals, DiNardo made a comment about his role as a cardinal in engaging the public square. A press conference was held at noon of that day.  Speaking both in English and with a prepared statement in Spanish, he expressed his gratitude to the Holy Father for his being named, reflected on the meaning of this announcement for the Church in Texas, and thanked his predecessor, Archbishop emeritus Joseph A. Fiorenza, for the groundwork laid before him.

When asked if are there any issues he wanted to raise as a Cardinal, DiNardo responded:

Obviously the all issues we have dealt with here in the State of Texas on matters of faith and how faith intersects in the public square, I certainly will intend to do that. And I think, rightfully so, and because with the voice of a cardinal, people might stand up and take notice maybe a little more. … We’ll have to see how this plays out.          

(cf. The official, edited, vetted article from the Houston Chronicle.)

After seeing Cardinal DiNardo at the TMO education session on the Church and the Public Square, I am extremely excited to see DiNardo’s interest in what he calls the “intersection” of faith and culture in the public square. Kudos to the TMO and their persistence. It is also obvious that DiNardo has taken time to internalize the necessity of the Church to speak in the public square, because his above comments were made spontaneously.

I believe that Cardinal DiNardo’s prominence in this part of the United States will definitely have a valuable impact on the discussions about the Church’s role in the public square. More and more pastors (curae animarum) should take his lead, doing what St. John Chrisostom and St. Leo the Great did in their day. These saints were great spiritual leaders, profound theologians, loving pastors, hard workers, liturgical priests, and advocates for the social needs of the most-vulnerable in their charge.

You don’t have to be pick just one of those characteristics, as many do today. You don’t have to pick just two. It is possible to be cura animarum and embrace both spiritual matters and social questions. It not only is possible, but it is, in fact, necessary in today’s world and in today’s church. By way of example, even the most-progressive of the periti of the Second Vatican Council were spiritually nourished by the older liturgical form. (Obviously, this is not a digression into matters liturgical, but it is meant to illuminate the issue.) A pastor who is spiritually grounded will have the ganas to face the social challenges that lie ahead for this generation.

With chief shepherds like DiNardo, the other shepherds of the diocese can see a model of leadership that is both theologically grounded as well as socially engaged.

Where is the agorà?

Now that a basic gist of the agora has been established, the next question is, “where is it located?”. Obviously, the current use of the word ‘agora‘ is analogous. What is trying to be re-discovered or re-presented is the place (or places) in which the exchange of ideas and dialogue takes place. In European cities and towns, this was most-obviously in the town square (plaza, piazza, etc.).

But what about now? What about here? Where is the public square? What and where is the forum or medium of the exchange of goods and ideas?

The agora does not exist-per se as a physical location anymore, but there are a panoply of locations that can qualify as the public square.

But more-concretely, right now, in my lived situation, where is my public square? Where is my forum? That is harder to nail down.

Is it the office? The watercooler?

What if people don’t have an office or a watercooler?

Last week at the event that springboarded this new endeavor, I was at Starbucks. Irony abounds. Public legend says that the ideas for the French Revolution and even the American Revolution took place at cafes. (Moreso in pubs ["public houses"] in the english colonies than cafes.) Indeed, when in italy, i am impressed at how folks just stop by at their local cafe, no only for a shot of espresso, but to BS. Just to talk, to rest, and to chat. I noticed that people kept coming to one particular cafe, rather than going to any-old cafe. There was a sense of being at home, of familiarity, of knowing people, and of being known.

I must admit, I’m something of a coffee snob. Or at least a person who likes the atmosphere of coffee shops (the closest thing we have to cafes in the states.) I don’t really go there for coffee. I really never have. I enjoy coffee (very much thank you), but it’s really the ambiance that i’m after. A chill place, interesting people, indy music, and an atmosphere that promotes both reading and discussion.

I’ve noticed over the years that there are two kinds of people that come to a particular coffee shop. (and perhaps three kinds).

(1) “Gimmee my coffee and let me go on with life” people. These are usually the exact same people at mass (we call them the ‘give me my Jesus and let me go home‘ people) who don’t give a rip as to what the homily is about, nor do they care that they are called to do anything more than do their ‘duty’ and get on with what really matters in life. (whatever that may be). They are usually rude, in a hurry, demanding of their product, and most-often self absorbed in other affairs.

(2) The “residents”. These are the locals who treat a cafe as “their” place. They sit in the same seats; the hold court; they visit with their friends; they BS. These folk are fantastic. They usually are of an intellectual bent, and are fascinated with what’s going on in the world. This is their public square. This is their place to meet and greet. They usually pick a place or two and call it home. They know the baristas by name and can tell you everything about them. And the baristas can usually call them by their first names and know exactly what drink they will order – even before they open their mouths.

There. That’s probably ‘my’ public square, although i don’t go to a single cafe enough to be known. I used to, but not yet anymore. They’ve gone a bit commercialized for me.

But where is the public square for the people i serve? The lavaderia? possibly. The street corner? Maybe. That is an unknown for me – and i need to start finding out.

Because, in the end, once we find out where the public square exists, then the free-exchange of goods and ideas can be leveraged.  Identifying the locus of the agora is but a first step.  The next is to engage in public dialogue.

What is the Agora?

From the Wiki article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agora

<quote>

An agora (αγορά), translatable as [a public square], was a public space and an essential part of an ancient Greek polis or city-state. An agora acted as a marketplace and a forum to the citizens of the polis.

Agora also means a place of assembly in any Ancient Greek state. It is sometimes used in modern language to refer to a crossroads, either metaphorically (the point or concept which links, or is the crossroads of multiple related concepts), or literally, a point at which many physical roads or paths meet.

</quote>

The agora is simply the Public Square, a forum that allows for a free exchange of goods and ideas. It is where the “movers and shakers” go. It is where politicians go to make their case and to exact taxes. It is where free-thinkers go to espouse their ideas, hoping to gain more adherents. It is where Christian missionaries went in “gentile” towns, seeking ears and hearts open to the Gospel. It is where Christian families and communities went in order to safeguard their values. It is where secularists do battle with people of faith, seeking the eradication of religion as the scourge of humanity. It is the locus of a new dialogue, ripe with passion and nothing to lose. For to lose is to admit that Christianity has ceased to be a relevant and significant voice that can shape the world of today and tomorrow.

First-cut at the Agora

So, this is how it goes.

(1) The Church has every right to engage in the agora, because the church has a public dimension to its mission that cannot and must not be denied.

(2) Those who relegate religion – and Christianity in particular – to the realm of private piety, punctures the very heart of Christianity. The Christian is “Saved” by Christ precisely so that his saving work can be continued publicly.

(3) Those whom Christ saves are saved – not just as individuals – but as an “elected” member of his body. Christians did not choose Christ; Christ chose them.

(4) Christians have a duty (i.e. non-optional) to engage the agora precisely because Christians have “Good News” to share with it. Not only about “Jesus” (and all that), but that there is hope, life, goodness, and true joy that comes from the God who calls his people to himself.

(5) Human Persons who are Christians have every right to imbue the culture in which they live with the “marks” of Christianity. The lived reality of Christians in a particular culture is just that – particular. Historically speaking, Czech Christianity has a different lived-culture than Italian Christianity, even as different as Vietnamese Christianity is from Mexican Christianity. Same faith, just “incarnated” differently, and particularly.

(6) The arrogance of post-Enlightenment elitists have done much harm not only by eroding the cultural bases of their own culture, but also deny even the possibility of a sustained contribution of Christians in their own culture. The baby is most-definitely being thrown out with the bath water. Europe, and European-derivative cultures (such as the USA) that jettison the continued influence of Christianity risk becoming an entity altogether un-conceived-of. The end of which will not be Europe, nor even remotely receptive to Christianity.

(7) The Sitz-im-Leben: the horizon of cultural dialogue in the West is markedly post-Christian. Indeed, it has all the trappings and possible flavorings of Christianity, but it is most-definitely not-Christian. We have again arrived at the agora, the marketplace of ideas. The Marketplace where not only goods are exchanged but also the free-exchange of thought and ideas. The situation is again ripe for a re-telling and a re-presentation of the Gospel. The same truths can be re-told, but this time, just like Paul’s speech at the acropolis, the message must be re-inculturated, and told with a voice that will be attractive to the native hearers, but will, ultimately, be a message of contradiction.

(8) The Agora already is a marketplace. It is already set up and running. The question for Christians is whether or not Christians will choose to engage in a dialogue.

Hello World

My first post for this blog will essentially be an email i drafted to my friends, hoping to elicit some response. Here it is in its entirety.

after spending an hour engaging in conversation with a former-catholic buddhist and a former-jehova’s-witness secular-humanist at *$’s this morning, i decided that i need to write some books. here’s what i’ve come up with so far. let me know if you’d like anything written, or if you’d like to write one, so i can take it off my plate. which one should i write first???

Book Ideas

(1) The public square (and social grace) – the case for christianity to either be engaged in the public square or resign itself to cultural and religious insignificance. This is not simply a Re-hash of R.J. Newhouse’s work, though influenced by it – basing itself in the mandate of the Gospel as well as the impetus for cultural dialogue and evanglization as taught by the second vatican council.

(2) Religion is Good for the Human Person – the case for religious formation for all human persons – b/c it forms their worldview with an ethical sense of right / wrong, even if they do not believe. The case why such formation is even _better_ for those who believe. i.e. why i am a ‘better’ person b/c i have a religion

(3) Fides et ratio – part deux. The case for the continual intellectual pursuits of persons of faith – how it is essential that persons of faith use their intellect to “think through” their faith – so that their entire person – not just their spirit and their ’soul’ – but also their intellect is ‘conformed to the mind of christ’ – or – as st paul says ‘ the renewal of our minds’. A discussion of post-enlightenment religious reactionism is also part of the discussion, which fuels many anti-intellectual threads in post-enlightenment christianity, namely in protestant (and pseudo-protestant) strands as well as in the socially-driven catholic sphere.

(4) The Human Person – spirit, soul, body. Why we are a ‘quid unum’ of spirit, soul, body. Why the work of redemption is not just a matter of ’saving souls,’ but also the transformation of the body and mind and culture. – this plays out both in ‘heaven’ and in the final judgment, where every human person will not only be resurrected from the dead, but also receive the ‘resurrection of the body’ – before the final judgment. — all consequences of the Incarnation of the Divine Word, with homages to Plato, Aristotle, and Thomas Aquinas.

(5) The Incarnation, the Paschal Mystery, and the Sacraments – Why the single-most-important event that has occurred in human history is the incarnation, which laid the groundwork for the redemption brought about by the Paschal Mystery, and why the sacraments are the living re-presentations of the Paschal Mystery and the ‘living christ’ who comes to us during the celebration of His Mysteries, which we call the sacraments.

(6) The New Evangelization – the case for a renewed sense of evangelization of all peoples, particularly the peoples of europe, but localized in their eldest-daughter-colony, the United States. Emphasizing that the work of the spreading of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is far from over, indeed, a new impetus is required to re-christianize a culture that has forgotten its origins, not to mention its ultimate destiny.

(7) Mary and Peter – the Church as both inspired and hierarchical – as both disciple and apostle – as both prophet and teacher. Based heavily on the works of Hans Urs von Balthazar, this is a rendering of ecclesiology that allows one to see that their is indeed room for – and is required – both ‘new movements’ and ‘new expresions of the spirit’ as well as the triple-muneric-gift of the church. The interaction between religious orders, congregations, consecrated movements and those who have been gifted with the sacrament of Holy Orders.