Recently in Apologetics & Evangelization Category

A Capuchin friar has become a heavy metal star. Now I have no problem with heavy metal as a style of music. I fully support Christian heavy metal and even have an album or two myself. But I support Christian heavy metal because it is evangelistic. This friar, by his own words, doesn't attempt to communicate the message of Christ at all. He says his goal is to get people to "live life to the full". Hmmm. I am reminded of a scroll on my icon of St. Isaac of Syria which says, "This life has been given to you for repentance, do not use it for vain pursuits." You say "live life to the full" to a bunch of metalheads, what are they going to think? Partying? Drinking? Drugs? Even if you take a more benign interpretation, it sounds like your goal is to enjoy the pleasures of this life, which I think is opposed to the Gospel. I don't picture St. Paul or any of the Apostles "living life to the full" in this sense. On the other hand, Jesus did say that he came that we might have life and "have it to the full." That's not quite "living to the full" but there is a sense one can live a spiritually fulfilled life. But in order to do that, one needs to be living in a deep relationship with Jesus Christ, and if he's not evangelizing these people, they aren't going to be able to live that kind of life.

Of course I haven't heard his lyrics so I have no idea what message he's actually sending so perhaps I shouldn't make too many assumptions. But for a priest to deliberately not speak of the Gospel in favor of "living life to the full" does not sound like something I can endorse.


(Thanks to Worm)

Churchmarketingsucks.com (who came up with that domain?) reports how in the Netherlands they are trying to pitch Lent by comparing it to the Islamic month of Ramadan, because apparently young people there are more familiar Islam than with Christianity.

The big disappointment (and surprise) here is that Dutch youth are more familiar with Islam than with Christianity. I guess it wouldn't be surprising that they aren't familiar with Christianity as it is largely a secular country, at least last I checked. The question is where is this interest in Islam coming from them? Is there a large immigrant population that they rub elbows with? Or are they just interested? Maybe there is a small but effective Muslim contingent evangelizing them? Obviously what we have here is a gross failure to evangelize on the part of the Christians. The Netherlands has been under the sway of liberal Christianity for many years so this should not be surprising. Now we're reaping the fruits of it.

I knew that Europe was seeing an influx of Muslims but I didn't realize the extent of their effect on the society there. We're seeing an influx as well; will the results be similar? Will we become so politically correct and tolerant that we allow our culture and religion to be effaced from society and perhaps from most of the earth? I think that's what we're facing, what with falling birth rates and a militant Islam. Perhaps they'll compete the conquest of Europe they failed to accomplish in the Middle Ages. Just so you know what we are up against.

(From my friend Caleb from the Hail2Pitt blog who read this on ChurchMarketing sucks who read it on Cheaperstising which highlighted the Got Religion blog that covered this story in the Telegraph.)

The United States is arguably the most religious nation in the developed world, yet it is also the most religiously ignorant. Here are several statistics cited in a recent survey:

  • 10% of Americans polled believe that Joan of Arc was Noah’s wife
  • Only one-half could name even one of the four Gospels
  • 1 in 3 knew who delivered the Sermon on the Mount
  • Less than half could identify the first book of the Bible
  • 75% believe the bible teaches “God helps those who help themselves.” (Ben Franklin said it.)

One wonders how Catholic Christians might fare up against such statistics … ?

(Excerpted from a review of the book titled, Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know -- and Doesn’t, by Stephen Prothero. The review appeared in Biblical Archaeology Review, Sept/Oct 2007. The excerpt was shamelessly lifted from the St. Nicholas Orthodox Church [Shrewsbury, MA] e-bulletin.)

I thought of an excellent argument against the JWs today while carrying out this recipe (which I tested today and worked out splendidly; thanks, Greg K.). It reminded me of the koshering of meat that Jews do. The reason that Jews kosher meat is to remove the blood. My question is whether Jehovah's Witnesses, which are immensely scrupulous about obeying their proscriptions against blood transfusions (which are based on the same laws the Jews are subject to), are equally solicitous about removing the blood from their meat or at least not eating the blood (which as you may know is fairly common in grocery meat). I tend to ask them about this next time they come around. I'm debating how strongly to point out their inconsistency (hypocrisy?) if they do not.

I just learned of a very interesting fact I had never heard before. It was in the re-debut issue of Envoy Magazine.

It seems that there were some German Jesuit missionaries who were in the habit of praying the rosary daily at the Church of Our Lady's Assumption in Hiroshima. Despite the fact that they were eight blocks from the epicenter of the atomic bomb, they came away with only minor injuries. They were in a house attached to the church which was unharmed; the church was destroyed, with everything around it.

By all rights they should have died — there is no explanation for how someone could have survived an atomic blast so close. They didn't even contract radiation sickness. Details with references and interviews can be found on this page. What an awesome testimony to the power of God!

As if that wasn't enough, a similar miracle occurred in Nagasaki with some Franciscan friars, though a bit different: the monastery was providentially built, against the advice of the superstitious locals, on the side of a mountain that protected it from the blast.

God is good!

I was just listening to Catholic Answers Live again on a show about evangelization (June 18th) and I got an idea. They pointed out the fundamental principal of evangelization and that is that the most effective form of evangelism is relational evangelism, that is, forming friendships with people and slowly drawing them to the faith that way, rather than, say, streetcorner preaching or handing out tracts or inventing some new program.

That might help solve the problem in my church. Not to get into it, but my impression is I'd get stalled if I proposed any ideas. Perhaps one solution might be to work through my relationships there and invite people to informal get-togethers, like a bible study. Work outside of the parish bounds within the confines of existing relationships. Invite people one by one to join us. I'm not entirely sure what the pastor would think if he knew we were gathering for a bible study outside of church, but there is not a lot he can do about it.

This also helps because Evangelicals have an advantage in that they typically have a congregation to be proud of: they can invite newcomers to church and be confident that the parishioners will make a very positive impression on the newcomer. Alas, we have no such advantage. If, however, you had a small group of fervent believers and invited them to a gathering with them, that might work better.

This reminds me of the fact that this is how the early church worked. The liturgy was off-limits to non-believers, at least the liturgy of the Eucharist was. (Note the rite of dismissal of catechumens that was restored after Vatican II.) Contact with non-believers was made outside the liturgy. So maybe it must be today.

More than once, in listening to Catholic Answers Live, I have heard them make dismissive comments about people who complain that they "aren't being fed" in the Catholic Church. Usually these are people who have left. And usually the remark is that these people are ostensibly seeking good feelings. The guests should be good enough apologists to know that the metaphor of bread, to a Protestant, refers to the (written) Word of God, and that "I'm not getting fed" probably means "I am not hearing enough solid, challenging, thoughtful teaching based on the Bible". After all, being fed has to do with sustenence, with what you need to live, and having good feelings does not. So I'm disappointed in this. Heck, I am one of those people who doesn't feel he is being fed by his pastor, or nearly any priest I hear preach at Mass. (Or by the parish for that matter.) I count myself blessed to come away from a homily with a single interesting point relevant to my life. (Some days I settle just for interesting points.) (I hope my pastor doesn't run across my blog. If so, he's much better than most, and he will actually quote the Fathers, which I won't get from nearly any Roman priest.)

Is it possible that some who say they aren't getting fed are referring to emotional highs, what we call "consolations"? I can't rule it out, but this is not the only case.

Interestingly, Jeff Cavins, a solid guy whom I respect, has written a book on this topic: I'm Not Being Fed: Discovering the Food That Satisfies the Soul.

Now he seems to define it as longing for a more personal, 'spiritually nourishing' relationship with Jesus. I looked inside the book and he describes people with these complaints as wanting "more upbeat and informal worship, impromptu prayer, small Bible study groups, and a vibrant sense of community and fellowship. They want to be around people who love Jesus and aren't afraid to say so. They aren't satisfied with going to church once a week, but want to meet with other Christians several times a week, even on a daily basis, if possible. They are on fire for Jesus and frustrated by what they perceive to be roadblocks to expressing their passion."

This sounds right on target. There is nothing wrong with these desires. Ok, so wanting more upbeat and informal worship may be what they have in mind when they talk about feeling good. Maybe, possibly, people "feel good" from the fellowship, but I'd hardly criticize someone for wanting to meet with other Christians. But I don't think you can reduce the frustration and emptiness that fervent believers feel to a question of "they don't get good feelings". That's just downright insulting. There is nothing about these desires that shouldn't be a goal of every Catholic parish, save for upbeat and informal worship, and that's not because I don't personally like it, it's just not essential like the other things.

So there is more to not getting fed than not getting warm fuzzies. The comment more often, I think, means "This is place is almost totally dead".

When you have several people in your church you can call on to assist you in a way that for the typical person, only a family member would come to mind, then that could be a parish that feeds you. When the parish challenges you and helps you be a better Christian on a regular basis beyond just dispensing sacraments, then that could be a parish that feeds you. When most of the people you go to church act like a Christian the other 167 hours of the week, then maybe it feeds you.

I just got this email from Envoy Magazine ...

Summer's a Perfect Time to Brush Up on Your Faith!

Listen to this FREE Catholic apologetics talk by Patrick Madrid!

"ANSWERS TO LIES SOCIETY TELLS YOU"

In streaming digital audio!



Listen as Patrick tackles these common errors . . .

* Nobody really goes to hell
* The Catholic Church is hypocritical
* If it feels good, do it
* Reincarnation
* Having lots of money will make you happy
* There's no such thing as "objective truth"
* Question authority!
* The earth is overcrowded
* Suffering is bad
* And more!

In this FREE seminar (click to listen), Catholic author, lecturer, and television host Patrick Madrid helps you cut through the clutter so you can spot these anti-Christian messages in the media, movies, and in everyday life.

Using real-life examples, humor, and a down-to-earth, easy to understand style, he critiques these subtle and not-so-subtle "error messages" that our modern culture bombards us with, showing how to respond to them in a calm, convincing, Christian way.