The Great Catholic Counter-Liberation 1968-2025

Catholicism: Attacks and Counteroffensives 

Among the greatest attacks upon the Church we distinguish those from the outside, those that divided us and those from the inside.

 From the outside: 1. The barbarian invasions of the ancient Roman Catholic world. 2. The Islamic devastation of Christian civilization across the Middle East and Northern Africa which reached up into Spain and was repelled by the Reconquista, at Lepanto and other battles. This war continues around the globe today. 3. The Enlightenment-inspired revolutionary movements from the French Revolution up until the Mexican persecution of the Church and the Spanish Civil War. 4. Communism, Soviet and Chinese.

Those that divided us: 1. The East-West schism. 2.Protestant Reformation.

Those from the inside: Arianism. Iconoclasm. Other heresies. 

Arguably worse than these is the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s. It was an attack from an exterior enemy. But it also penetrated, like a viral infection, into the Church itself in the form of theological progressivism. It has the Church institutionally united but theologically divided.  

In the history of the Church, real apostolic synods have decisively guided the Church. Nicea renounced Arianism; Nicaea eliminated iconoclasm. Trent contradicted the Reformation: clearly, authoritatively, efficaciously, finally. Trent triggered a robust, revived Catholicism: Ignatius and the Jesuits, Philip Neri, Charles Borromeo, John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila, Francis DeSales, Vincent DePaul, the missionary orders all over the globe, the entirety of Baroque culture. 

Vatican II

By a misfortune of chronology, Vatican Council II predated by a few years the explosion of the Cultural Revolution. So it was not a response to that attack. It was not a preparation for it. Unfortunately, it weakened the Church in its ability to fight this attack. It lowered the Catholic immune system, just as a bacterial infection was about to attack. It embraced an openness, a positivity, a credulity just when that world was turning dark.

It was an authoritative act of the Church, surely inspired by the Holy Spirit. It was many things:

-A refocusing of the Church on its Evangelical center: the person/event of Jesus Christ.

-A return to the sources of the early Church.

-A reconciliation with what is good/true/beautiful in modernity.

-An ecumenical reconciliation with the Churches and world religions (especially Judaism).

-A quintessential expression of the post-War Church and the various movements thriving in it (ecumenism, scripture, lay leadership, etc.)

-The culmination, the final closure of the Tridentine Church. It was a splendid conclusion to a historical era. It was not the defining statement for a new Church.

Curiously, it failed to address the battles the Church would wage in the coming decades. With regard to both Islam and Communism it advocated mutuality in respect and dialogue and avoided candid witness to the violence that continues from these adversaries. More significantly, its positivity towards contemporary culture left it unarmed for the assault about to be mounted. A future historian looking at the documents and then at the travails of the Church that followed would have to note the dissonance.

What followed the Council was the collapse of the institutional Church from within and continued persecution from Communism, Islam and Cultural Progressivism. 

If the Reformation elicited from the Tridentine Church an explosion of energy, is it possible that the Cultural Revolution did the same for the Church of our time? A Catholic Counter-Liberation?

Catholic Counter-Liberation

Yes, we have in our time just such a counter-liberation. The problem with the Vatican II documents is that their positivity gives encouragement to the progressive affirmation that a new Church was initiated by that event. The so-called "Spirit of Vatican II" was a vulnerability, a openness to the viciously anti-Catholic virus of the sexual revolution, an impulse to accommodate to, to surrender to that assault. And so, we look beyond the Council for other dynamics that provide a correct hermeneutic for it and directly confront the sexual-cultural revolution.

Let's go back to 1968. The Cultural Revolution is exploding. The thriving institutional Catholicism of the past 23 years is about to collapse catastrophically. Mainstream Catholic leadership and theology is clueless. I myself am a mild-mannered, introverted student spending endless hours in the Fleckinstein Philosophy Reading room, Maryknoll College Seminary, with the uber-Catholicism of Etienne Gilson, Jacques Maritain and Ivan Illich. 

Catholic charismatic renewal is spreading from its birth in Duquesne University in 1967 to Clark/Martin in Ann Arbor, to Notre Dame and then beyond. The disciples of Monsignor Luigi Giussani (previously  encouraged by Archbishop Montini of Milan) form Communion and Liberation in response to the radical student rebellions.  They adopt that name signaling that genuine liberation lies in communion with Christ in his Church. Amidst that same Italian/global unrest, Chiara Lubich founds the Focolare Gen Movement for young people 15-30 years old. Kiko and Carmen arrive in Rome to spread their Neocatechumenal Way beyond Spain. Giuseppe Gennarini converts from leftwing radicalism and becomes the apostle of this "way" to the USA. Pope Paul VI, tutored by the brilliant Polish Cardinal Wojtyla, is about to issue Humanae Vitae, the defining authoritative statement that divided the conjugal mystics from the political activists. (SO MUCH is happening in Italy!) Initial conversations begin among Ratzinger, Balthasar, Boyer, DeLubac and others regarding the Communio journal to be founded in 1972. Ratzinger himself, observing the violence of the student protests, retains his theological grounding but repositions himself from Vatican II progressive to culture war conservative and publishes his influential Introduction to Christianity.  Cardinal Wojtyla initiates the beatification process for Sister Faustina of the Divine Mercy as he develops his catechesis on sexuality, covertly wages war with hegemonic Communism, and becomes famous for his support of the Jews among anti-Semitic student protests. Mother Teresa of Calcutta expands her work around the globe as she enters her extended dark night of the soul. We see that 1968 is the year the Cultural Revolution exploded across the West; even as the Great Counter Liberation was percolating quietly, humbly, anonymously, hopefully.

The primary dynamics and agents of the Great Catholic Counter Liberation include:

1. John Paul and Benedict. Their output, authoritative and scholarly, lucidly defines the Great Counter Liberation, as Trent did for the earlier Church.

2. Von Balthasar. His theology, unparalleled in depth and breath, brilliantly compliments that of John Paul and Benedict.

3. Charismatic Renewal. A powerful outpouring of the Holy Spirit; bringing ecumenical communion between Catholicism, Evangelicalism and Pentecostalism; and a fresh communion with the supernatural to a Catholicism whose mainstream was tending strongly to the progressive and secular.

4. Lay Renewal Movements. Neocatechumenal Way, Focolare, Communion and Liberation and others.

5. Evangelical-Catholic Culture War Alliance. Unified Christians against Cultural Liberalism even as it risked intimacy with rightwing, Republican ideology.

6. Divine Mercy Devotion. Encouraged by John Paul and articulated in his masterful Dives in Misericordia, this articulated a powerful message of God's compassion but always in tension with divine truth, justice and wrath against sin.

7. The Latin Mass. Pope Benedict especially appreciated the value of maintaining practice of this rite in a healthy diversity.

8. New, Strong Catholic Colleges. 20 such schools (another 5 provisionally) are recognized for strong Catholic identity in contrast to the marked liberalization across most of higher education: Franciscan, Benedictine, Ave Maria, Dallas, Catholic University, Christendom, and others.

9. Homeschooling. Since the pandemic, the number of students homeschooled has been stable at 4 million, 10% of the population, up from 3-4% previously. A major motive is religious education with the widespread radicalization of the public schools and collapse of many parochial schools. Anecdotal evidence indicates good fruit.

10. New, Small, Orthodox Religious Orders. Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, Community of St. John, Sisters of Life and several new Dominican orders of sisters are vigorously orthodox in contrast to mainstream orders in swift decline.

11. Martyrs, Especially across the Communist and Islamist Worlds. Mainstream, liberal media gives little attention to the very large number of martyrs across the globe. In the economy of the Church, however, we know that "blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church."

12. Enduring Catholic Practices: Worship, Service of the Poor, Family Life. Overall, of course, more important than all these significant developments, is the steady, based, humble practice of our Catholic faith by countless families, parishes, priests, brothers, nuns all united around the Eucharist, within the Communion of Saints, in confession of sins and aspirational holiness, fidelity to our legacy, service of the poor and suffering, and loyalty to state of life.

What is the Great Counter Liberation?

-The affirmation that genuine liberation of the human person and community is found in communion with the person/event of Jesus Christ in his Church.

-Articulation of core, perennial Catholic values in a fresh, contemporary vernacular.

-Vigorous, militant resistance against cultural liberalism as: rupture of sexuality from the spousal union, deconstruction of gender, genocide of the helpless, disconnect from authority-revelation-tradition, denial of the supernatural, exaggerated trust in science, adulatory elevation of the isolated-sovereign-Self.

-A conjugal mysticism that finds in Christ's spousal love for his bridal Church the hermeneutical key to sexuality, gender, family, sacramental life, priesthood and religious life.

-Eucharistic, Marian, aspirational of holiness, chaste, faithful to vows and state of life, docile to the hierarchical Church, close to the poor, detached from political ideologies, Philo-Semitic, ecumenical.

If counter-reformation was the interpretive key to Catholicism after Trent, counter-liberation as explained above is key to that after Vatican II. Similar to Baroque Catholicism, it is defined by opposition, contradiction: not of Protestantism (with which it largely reconciled in Vatican II), but against cultural liberalism including its penetration of the Church as theological progressivism. 

In contrast to Baroque Catholicism which prevailed up to the Council,  Counter-Liberation:

1. Not only reconciles with the Reformation, but restores a balance to Catholicism with a fresh evangelical focus on Christ and an enhanced grasp of the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit.

2. Is a sophisticated, intellectual engagement with modernity, discerning the good from the bad, especially in the brilliant intellects of John Paul, Benedict, Balthasar and others.

3. It ponders more deeply, in response to the Cultural Revolution, the Mystery of spousal communion: that of Christ with the Church, within marriage/family, and at the core of the Catholic cult of worship, sacrament, priesthood and religious life.

4. It engages confidently, assertively, always in truth and love, with global adversaries including communism, Islamism, cultural liberalism, and various disordered political ideologies.

It is a singular blessing to be Catholic in the time of the Great Counter Liberation.

We, the Church Militant on earth, are always at war. Always under attack, from the world, the flesh and the devil. Always under attack by our adversaries. But more importantly, always on the offensive. We are assured by our Savior that the gates of hell will not prevail. Our eventual victory is assured. But we do play the long game. We are assertive, confident, zealous, fearless...with John Paul, Benedict, Luigi, Kiko and Carmen, Mother Teresa, those who have gone before us and who march with us now.

Dueling Catholicisms: John Paul/Benedict vs. Francis/Leo

The Durbin affair was a clear disclosure of the divide within our Church. Cardinal Cupich planned to prominently honor the senator for his work on behalf of immigrants despite his longtime, fervent advocacy of legal abortion. Durbin's bishop Thomas Paprocki was joined by nine in strongly protesting this as a blatant violation of the episcopal policy to not honor pro-abortion leaders. Of the 441 active and retired bishops, none came to the support of Cupich. That makes 2% of our bishops who defended the agreed upon policy. We see that the default of our episcopacy is to avoid conflict.

Durban cannot receive communion in his own parish or diocese of Springfield, but in the Archdiocese of Chicago next door he is feted as a hero. Clearly we are dealing here with two different religions: Catholic Thick and Catholic Lite.

Most significant was the response of Pope Leo. With a candor and transparency more typical of his predecessor, he responded that "if you are against abortion but indifferent to immigrants you are not prolife." This off-the-cuff, non-authoritative response was telling: clearly the deportation of  immigrants is more troubling to him than the destruction of the unborn.

It is now clear that  Francis and Leo share a theological vision that contrasts sharply with that offered by John Paul and Benedict. Before contrasting the two, lets see what all four popes have in common.

Fervent Evangelical Catholics

Each is a man of prayer, clearly close to the person of Jesus Christ, and zealous in the mission to share this faith with the world. They all love the Church. They are complex personalities who combine aspects that might be considered progressive and conservative. 

They differ primarily in their responses to the cultural revolution that swept the West in the 1960s. John Paul and Benedict articulated a clear, strong contradiction of sexual liberalism; Francis and Leo are accommodating and conciliatory, seeking to downplay the conflict. A second difference is that the more recent popes present a political, global agenda as integral to Catholicism. The prior pontiffs do not disagree with the values in this political vision but resist giving them such prominence as they see more clearly the limits of papal competence in political policy and the inevitability of diversity in ideology among Catholics in prudential matters. The two are not in absolute contradiction of each other. As Catholics, we profess allegiance to every pope. But the inconsistencies and incompatibilities, blatant in the Durbin affair and other issues, are evident and require a decision from the thinking Catholic: Which vision do I follow? Most serious thinkers fall into one school or the other: to fail to decide is to remain indecisive, confused and ambivalent.

What follows will consider the heart of each vision, here described as "conjugal mysticism" and "social justice activism," and then highlight major differences.

Conjugal Mysticism

At the very start of his papacy, John Paul presented a long "catechesis on the human body" (later known as "theology of the body") that decisively answered the sexual revolution as it deeply developed Catholic teaching on the human person, body, gender, sexuality, marriage and family. He highlighted masculinity and femininity as God's creation and as mutuality in self-gift between the spouses and together to family and the broader community. In continuity with Catholic tradition, he brought illumination from contemporary thinking, especially phenomenology, to unveil the sacredness of sexuality and marriage. This deeper penetration into the Mystery of sexuality also illuminated the "spousal" nature of Catholic liturgical/sacramental life. Pondering the scriptural/Pauline view of Christ as Bridegroom of the Bridal Church, light was thrown upon the masculine role of the priesthood, the feminine-virginal identity of the Church, the primacy of the Marian over the Petrine dimensions of the Church, the bridal nature of professed virginity and more. With a novel freshness, classic Catholic principles around fidelity to vows and state of life, personal chastity, marital and religious stability were given new life and perspective. This teaching, in my view, was the most significant development in Catholic theology in the 20th century. It is not an abstract philosophy, but practical and concrete, especially inspiring for those of us who struggle with chastity.

Ratzinger-and-then-Benedict worked closely with John Paul so that their teaching can be seen as a unity. He combined brilliance in scholarship, erudition in scripture/tradition, a philosophical personalism similar to John Paul's with an inspired catechetical touch. Theirs can be considered one papacy.

Differences Between John Paul and Benedict

Along with the unity, we can see that two such original thinkers did differ in emphasis on certain matters.

Benedict was more positive and supportive of the Latin Mass which he elevated. He loved that tradition. John Paul, to my knowledge, did not strongly address the issue one way or the other. We know that Leo apparently will continue the repression of the rite begun by Francis.

Ecumenically, John Paul collaborated with the Islamic countries at the UN conferences in Cairo and Bejing to fight the abortion imperialism of American and Western sexual liberalism. He also participated in the Assis ecumenical event which appeared to join Christianity/Judaism/Islam in prayer together.

Benedict was not comfortable with the relaxed theological grounding of that ecumenical event. Additionally, early in his papacy he delivered the (in)famous Regensburg lecture in which he defended the Catholic synthesis of faith and reason as he critiqued the West for a reason without faith and Islam for a faith cut off from reason. This was, in my view, a brilliant presentation which exemplified his theological clarity and depth. But it provoked violence across the globe from Muslim crowds. So we see a difference in their relationship with Islam. It seems obvious that both reacted to real realities in that religion, the bright side and the dark side.

Social Justice Activism

Neither Francis nor Leo intend to change Church teaching on sexuality. Rather, they want to avoid the topic. Early in his pontificate, Leo hosted James Martin S.J., thus continuing his predecessor's close collaboration. Martin does not explicitly contradict Catholic teaching. Rather, he ignores it. He implicitly devalues it. His gay-affirmation crusade intends, of course, to welcome those who feel rejected by the Church. In doing so, he devalues the sacred significance of sexuality, including the gravity of sins against chastity. In effect, he declares the spousal meaning of sexuality (fruitful, exclusive, faithful, free, male/female) as insignificant.  In gospel of gay affirmation, homosexual practice is reconfigured from a sin to be confessed to an expression of wholesome affection. This requires, obviously, a resolute avoidance of the evident indignity and pathology of the specific acts. If these acts are benign, then the Church is indeed homophobic, hateful and condemnatory. If they are disordered, than Martin, Francis and Leo are supporting patterns of sin. And so we have the blessing of homosexual unions which affirms the goodness, even of the physical dimension.

The heart of Francis/Leo Catholicism is care for the suffering, the violated, the poor, not just in traditional works of mercy practiced by Mother Theresa and so many saints, but in social policy. They articulate a global, political vision: welcoming of immigrants, green policy for the environment, prohibition of the death penalty, redistribution of wealth. A few years ago Cardinal Joe Tobin of NJ, close friend of both popes, identified Francis as the political protagonist against antagonist Donald Trump. 

The problem here is that they swerve out of their lane, as authoritative on faith and morals, and exercise a "clericalism" that presumes authority about complex, prudential matters. Social policy is properly the expertise of political processes and leaders, assisted by scientists, theorists, activists, and others. The basic moral vision is properly the concern of the pope. But when the pope involves with concrete policy (like border walls, etc.) he depletes his authority, polarizes the Church and alienates those who come to different practical conclusions about the best policies to follow.

Difference Between Francis and Leo

Leo has consistently said he will continue the policies of his predecessor. He is man of his word.

But the difference in temperament is startling. Francis was impulsive, indiscrete, intentionally provocative and disruptive. He was viscerally hateful of the Latin Mass, "clericalist" priests, the USA Evangelical-Catholic coalition against abortion, and "rigid" traditionalism. 

Leo is restrained, modest, steady, institutional, moderate, and looking to reconcile and stabilize the Church. In the same week he met with Fr. Martin he met with Cardinal Burke and allowed a Latin mass in St. Peter's. 

Style has about it already a substance. This is why I have hopes for this papacy. My hope is that he will listen to the voices that Francis repressed; the voices of many devout Catholics; the voices of John Paul,  Benedict, Augustine and others. My hope is that he will bring peace to the Church by hearing what is true in the views of those opposed to Francis.

Key Issues of Difference

Chinese Church.  While the agreement of the Vatican with the Communist state remains secretive, it is clear that Francis surrendered control of the Church to the government. This contrasts sharply with the war John Paul waged and finally won against Soviet Communism. This will surely rank as the most disastrous, shameful policy of Pope Francis. We wait to see how Leo will proceed.

Sexuality. Francis destroyed the John Paul Institute for the Family in Rome. This had institutionalized the magisterial legacy of John Paul and Benedict. Leo said he will continue the Francis direction. He avoided laying out a theological vision but intends it to be a more practical assist to family life. He shares an anti-intellectualism with Francis: an indifference  or aversion to the deep philosophical legacy of that school.

The Latin Mass.  Indications are that Leo will continue the repression of this rite. His meeting with Burke and allowance of the rite in St. Peter's signal that he will be less heavy handed and more open to dialogue with that important movement in the Church.

Synodality.   Influential participants in Vatican II, John Paul and Benedict understood "synod" to be a gathering of bishops to exercise their apostolic authority. Leo follows Francis' novel contrivance of "synod" as an open, democratic, dialogic process. It is an unprecedented, alternate source of Church authority which includes even those who reject the Catholic legacy. Vulnerable to manipulation by progressive activists, it excludes many voices who are loyal to the Church, including those who avoid it as a big mistake.

Dogmatization of Political Policy.  The elevation of leftist, Western ideology into Catholic dogma is best exemplified in the death penalty. Perhaps our widest catechetical error is that "the Church is against the death penalty." John Paul and Benedict both strenuously opposed it for prudential reasons. They argued, for example, that contemporary prisons are so good that we do not need capital punishment to protect society. By this logic, they upheld the traditional teaching that use of lethal force for protection of society is the duty of the state when necessary. They maintained the issue as prudential, about which Catholics can disagree. It is not inherently/always evil (like adultery, abortion, rape) but dependent upon circumstances (like warfare, theft (of bread to feed starving) or lying (to gestapo about Jews in attic.)) They knew the limits of their finite, practical opinion; they realized they had no authority to unilaterally change an ancient teaching. What I know of American prisons makes me skeptical. And I am sure many other countries are worse. Neither they nor Francis consulted with the world's bishops or produced a scholarly, authoritative study considering the classic aims of retribution: deterrence, protection, rehabilitation and retribution.  Impulsively, dictatorially Francis ruled the practice as "inadmissible as a violation of the dignity and inviolability of the human person." He presents here a moral intuition that is taken to be self-evident but is not part of our tradition. It is a rupture with a consistent practice.  It is supported by no historical legacy, no episcopal consensus, no authoritative argument. Rather, Francis, with most of the secular ("no afterlife") progressive West does not like the thing.

Will Our Unity Hold?

The German Church seems to be moving towards schism. But on the whole, I see no danger of a catastrophic global divide. We have lived with this divide for 60 years. Powerful dynamics, interior to Catholicism, hold us together.  The sources of our union are dual: truth and love. The truths in dispute are all hills upon which we are willing to die. But that dedication to truth is infused by, as it infuses, love of the brother and sister. The exigency to witness to truth coexists with the urgency for unity. 

Catholic leadership at its best retains a generosity, a tolerance for difference, a reverence even for the adversary. Francis was weak on this: he emotionally attacked those with whom he disagreed. Leo by contrast, from the start, shows a deep intention to maintain unity and listen to all sides. This is a good thing! The response of the American episcopacy to the Durbin controversy also shows this valuation of unity.

Going Forward

The pronounced divide in our Church is not normal. But it is not unusual. Our Church is not a sect, with clearly defined, protective boundaries setting us apart. Rather, we mingle in the broader society; we seek to influence it; but we are also unavoidably influenced by it. And so, a tension between accommodation and resistance is unavoidable. 

In the long game, thick, countercultural Catholicism is far more promising than the thinner version, which adapts to the surrounding world. Consider, for example: which is more likely to move our youth to priestly and religious vocations...conjugal mysticism or social justice activism? Clearly, one passionate about the immigrants, global warming or economic inequality will more likely want to be an activist, a politician, a policy expert. Which will draw our young to have large families: the ethos of chastity and fertility or that of contraception and gay-affirmation? The questions answer themselves.

John Paul and Benedict were world class theologians of the calibre of our Church doctors. Their teachings will be forming seminarians and students of theology far into the future. It was a sadness that Francis rejected their vision. We hope that the Catholic intuitions of Leo will overcome the superficial theological heritage he received from his predecessor.

 

 

Sin of Omission (2): Praying for My Enemies

"Fredo, you're my older brother and I love you, but don't ever take sides with anyone against the family with anyone, ever, again."  Michael Corleone to brother Fredo in Godfather.

 I confess: I do not much pray for my enemies. 

Well, I don't have many enemies. Will Rogers famously said "I never met a man I didn't like." I don't go quite that far, but pretty close. My wife says I like people more than they like me and I think they like me more than they do. She may be right. But this is a good problem to have. I have no intention to correct it.

My enemies are intellectual: Marx, Darwin, Nietzsche, Freud. They are dead. I would do well to pray for their souls.

In this diverse American society, I have always been keenly aware of my cultural-religious tribe: Catholic. We are in competition with other tribes: mainline WASP Protestants, Evangelicals-Fundamentalists, Jews both secular and orthodox, Black Evangelicals and so forth. But raised in the harmonious, ecumenical post-war period, I see these more as competitors or benign adversaries, not enemies, like in a wholesome recreational athletic league. 

And so, I do not have a personal animus against those from other tribes: Clintons, Trumps, Obamas, Bushes, and so forth. They are what they are; they don't know better.

Rather, the enemy I despise is the Catholic who betrays our family and our values: politicians like the Bidens, Kennedys, Pelosis, Cuomos, and such who crusade for abortion, force Catholic agencies to place adoptee children with gay couples, force the Little Sisters of the Poor to pay for contraception, force our daughters to compete with biological boys. 

Worse still are the Church leaders...theologians, priests, bishops...who betray us in the Culture War by blessing gay unions, tolerating abortion, abandoning our deposit of faith to accommodate fashion: Cardinals like Fernandez, Cupich, McElroy, Parolin and others. 

These are to me what Fredo was to Michael Corleone. 

It is important that I pray for them...for a number of reasons.

First of all, for my own soul. That I grow in charity; and not surrender to contempt, resentment, hatred.

Secondly, to enhance my own witness to Truth since I will be far more effective when I speak from a heart of serenity, love and openness. 

Lastly, for the good of the Church. By speaking the truth always in love, out of prayer, humbly and open-mindedly, I contribute to the unity of the Church.

Yes...praying for my political-theological enemies within the Church is a salutary exercise: for my own heart, soul and intellect...and for the good of the Church.

 

Sin of Omission: Praying for the Souls in Purgatory

Today being the last day of November, the month of the last things and the souls in purgatory, I publicly confess: in my Catholic adulthood of 60 years I have almost never, excepting wakes and funerals, prayed for the souls in purgatory. I never confessed the sin until Friday. The priest, who is about my age, clearly resonated and seemed to almost co-confess with me.  I knew about the souls, of course. But I didn't care. Purgatory was not part of my lived world. 

It is not just me of course. I am a product of my society and age. At the time of the second Vatican Council, our society, including Catholicism, turned increasingly secular...right about 1965 as I graduated from high school. I ingested the flavor of the age and lost interest in the souls. On purgatory we Catholics for practical purposes went Protestant. No need for purification or reparation: God's mercy is all that matters. Souls pretty much go smoothly, directly to heaven: they are "in a better place." And so, we gather "to celebrate a life." Judgment, wrath, purgatory, retribution, reparation, purification...all that is SO pre-Vatican Council!

It was not always so. Medieval and Tridentine Catholicism placed great emphasis upon prayer for the souls. The Mystical Body of Christ was a sophisticated economy of grace: the saints in heaven (Triumphant) pray for us who struggle on earth (Militant) as we assist the souls in purgatory (Suffering). Prayers, masses, and sacrifices for the souls was a foundation of Catholic life. Our generation learned this from the Baltimore Catechism, but we cavalierly discarded it after the Council in our implicitly arrogant dismissal of our legacy. 

My emergent consciousness is not unrelated to my age. Born 8/20/47, I was conceived circa 11/20/46 and so have just completed 79 years alive and begun my 80th year. Life expectancy for men in the USA is around 75. So, purgatory is becoming increasingly probable and imminent!

I hope my family and friends are more diligent in prayer for my soul than I have been for those who have gone before me.

The "saint for the day" in Magnificat for November 2025 has been "saints who teach us about purgatory." This has opened my eyes. My favorite is Blessed Christina the Wonderful. She died; in the middle of her funeral mass she sat up in the casket and levitated up to the rafters of the Church. Later she explained that she had gone to heaven, hell and purgatory and seen in each people she knew. She was told she could go to heaven or return to earth to pray for sinners and the souls in purgatory. She opted to return and spent the rest of her life doing just that. 

Saint Maria Assunta Pallotta prayed the "Eternal Rest" prayer 100 times a day to help the souls. This is very doable and salutary. The prayer takes about 5 seconds to say, without rushing. So, said 100 times is 500 seconds which comes to under 10 minutes a day. It is a good aspiration: short, direct, inspiring. It can be said while walking, driving, or restless in bed at night. It fruitfully occupies a mind that otherwise can become distracted, discouraged or restless.

No, this is not "salvation by works." It is a work, an act, but it is inspired and empowered by the Holy Spirit. It is not human initiative. It is a work of Christ in his Church.

Prayer for the souls is a win/win/win. It helps them to get to heaven. They help us from heaven. But in addition, like any meritorious act...prayer, act of mercy, sacrifice...it sanctifies our soul. After I pray for the souls, I am flowing with faith, hope, charity, serenity, gratitude, joy, and integrity.

I had an argument with Sister Joan Noreen, of happy memory, who insisted that the souls in purgatory pray for us and that we can pray to them, as well as for them. I resisted: insisting we pray for them, not to them. When I looked into it a little further I saw that it was unclear. Most of the earlier fathers and doctors have us praying for, not to them. They are passive; dependent upon our prayers. But more recent authorities, including a statement in the Catechism have them also praying for us. It seems to me to be something Catholics can disagree about as the teaching is not clear. But my position is "lex orandi, lex credendi." "The way we pray is the way we believe." Our traditional prayers and liturgical practices NEVER have us praying TO the souls. So why start now?

I pray daily TO those I know who lived holy lives, who are not canonizable, who had evident flaws, but lived in the state of grace and are surely in God's presence, even if serving a mild purgatory: Sister Joan Noreen herself,  my father/mother Ray and Jeanne, Aunt Grace, Betty Hopf, Fathers Joe Whelan S.J., Avery Cardinal Dulles S.J., John Wrynn S.J., Neal Doherty S.J., Paul Viale, John and Mary Rapinich, Sisters of Charity Patricia Brennan, Virginia Kean, Maria Martha Joyce, Alberta, Peggy McCarthy. 

Souls I did not know but pray TO:  Pope Benedict, Baron von Huegel, Dietrich and Alice von Hildebrandt, Maurice Blondel, Jacques and Raissa Maritain, Etienne Gilson, Fr. Schleeben, Elizabeth Anscombe, G.K. Chesterton, Ronald Knox, C.S. Lewis, Fathers Delubac, Danielou, Congar, Boyer, Phillips, Cardinal Suenens, Archbishop Martinez, Popes Pius XII and John Paul I, Caryll Houselander, Dorothy Day, Catherine Doherty, Adrienne von Speyr, Madaleine del Brel, Elizabeth Leseur, Rose Hawthorne, Mother Margaret Cusak, and others I cannot recall at the moment.

My friend Tim does not the "Eternal Rest" prayer. He understands "rest" to be absence, negation, privation. I differ. I see "rest" in the context of prayer as plenitude, reception, joy, gratitude, praise, liberation from stress and striving. I see that genuine, wholesome, holy action always springs forth from deeper grounding in "rest" as abiding, reception, communion, plenitude. In God and his life, of course, the polarity of rest/action that structures our finitude is transcended in an eternal rest that is at the same time an eternal event of love.

Eternal Rest grant unto them, O Lord, and let the perpetual light shine upon them.  May their souls and those of all the faithful departed rest in peace.

Fierce Women: Mary Crushing the Head of the Serpent and Maccabee's Mother of Seven Sons

 Rightly, we honor Our Lady of Sorrow's in the Pieta, the sorrowful mysteries of the rosary, the seven sorrows prophesized by Simeon. The heartbreak of a mother seeing her son suffer  is a staple of Catholic piety. Put perhaps there is a problem of balance: she is also the one who crushes the head of the serpent. She is Our Lady of Victories. With her son she is triumphant over sin, death, guilt, the world and the devil. She is determined, steadfast, ferocious, fearless, courageous, long-suffering, hopeful, magnanimous, longanimous, exultant and victorious. She is not pitiable. She is not a victim. She, with her son, is victor.

Recall the mother of seven sons in Maccabees. Her sons are being tortured to death, one at a time, by the gentile Greeks who insist they eat pork and adore false gods. She is free of a soft, sentimental pity. She does not seek to shield them from pain and suffering. She exhorts them to courage, perseverance, loyalty to God and their faith. 

The masterful Mel Gibson film The Passion of Christ is overheavy with pain and torture but redeemed by many scenes. The crucial one is half way through the movie: Christ falls under the cross and Mary bends down close to his face. He looks at her, his face grotesque with bleeding. Serenely, confidently, even ecstatically he says: "Mother, see, I make all things new." This was a brilliant touch by Gibson. We have, of course, no record of him saying this on his walk up Golgotha. But it is the point of the entire drama: he is making all things new by his passion and death. When he stretches out his arms, in pain, on the cross, he embraces the entire world, and every sinner, as he turns and tells his companion " this very day you will be with me in paradise." This was the ultimate moment of victory!

Consider also Jesus encounter with the women of Jerusalem, recalled in the 8th station of the cross. Falsely, it is usually called "Jesus Comforts the Women of Jerusalem." This is blatantly wrong. There is not comfort here. He flatly rejects their pity and comfort. He says: "Do not weep for me but for yourselves." He warns them of the suffering to come upon themselves and their children as a day of judgment is coming. He is calling them to repentance from sin. And to ready themselves for the imminent suffering. This is severely discomforting. It is a call to conversion, to courage and endurance. It is a word meant to sober and strengthen. There is here severity, ferocity, brutal honesty.

Contemporary Catholic, especially progressive piety, is saturated with an effete, toxic ethos of sentimental pity and victimhood. The "bleeding heart" grieves victimhood in Ukraine, Gaza, the ghetto, the "LGBTQ community." This does not spring from a genuine, holy femininity...that of Mary and the Mother of seven. Rather, from a decadent feminism. It flourishes in distance from the actual people pitied. The Ukrainians are tough, resilient people who want to fight the Russians for their sovereignty. The Palestinians in large number approve of the slaughter/rape that started the war. The gay community is now privileged, affluent and powerful. Black men are not powerless, pitiable victims of systemically racist police.

Protestants mostly avoid crucifixes with the suffering body of Jesus. Catholics glory in that image, and in the 14 stations, the 5 sorrowful mysteries, the Pieta and our Lady of Sorrows. But, Jesus suffered for three hours on the cross. It was temporary. He reigns, with his mother-virgin-queen at his side, eternally in unending Joy. 

I imagine that Jesus in carrying his cross and looking down from it, to Mary and John and the women, in his fragile, vulnerable flesh was heartened by the presence of his mother, the women, and his beloved disciple. He did not feel viewed with pity, as a victim. Rather, he was heartened by their pride in him, his courage, his fidelity, and his triumph. 

May we be just such encouragement to each other. 

Dialing Down the Temperature...in the Political and Theological Wars...in the Time of Trump and Leo

Napoleon Bonaparte: "If you want to understand a man, look at what was happening in his world in his 20s." I was 20 in 1967, exactly as the Cultural Revolution exploded in the West. That remains, for me, the defining Event of my world/time. EVERYTHING ELSE...fall of the Soviets and rise of China, immigration, global warming, internet/AI, wars in Vietnam/Iraq/Afghanistan/Ukraine/Gaza, Islamic terrorism, Civil Rights, gun violence...EVERYTHING ELSE is a sideshow, a subplot. What matters most is the dignity and value of the human person (especially the small, vulnerable and incompetent), of marriage, family, sexuality, gender, chastity, fidelity, tradition, the sacramental life, revelation, the Eternal. It took me a little time: I graduated college 1969 and married 1971 as a moderate liberal. But by 1975, under the influence of some holy, brilliant Jesuit theologians and Cursillo/Charismatic Renewals, I recognized the new structure of the world. I have been a culture warrior for the last 50 years. This war is only intensifying.

I am not retiring from the conflict. But I am drawn to dial down the heat: to be serene, confident, gracious, open-minded, 

Perhaps I am old, tired, mellow? A "made man" who has nothing to prove? Who is less anxious, threatened, indignant, angry?

Perhaps I am returning to the more innocent, positive world of my youth, the early 1960s, the robust American Catholicism at the time of the Council, serene, confident and ecstatic in urgency to engage and embrace everything, in the world beyond the Church, that is Good, True and Beautiful. 

It has to do with the amygdala! We know this is the primary cerebral location of the emotions: fear, anger, anxiety, hatred, indignation. If the passions here are raging furiously it is difficult for the intellect, largely located in the prefrontal cortex, to function well: soberly, perceptively, intuitively, empathetically, wisely. Rather, disordered emotions of anxiety, rage and indignation distort the intellectual apprehension. 

In this age of Trump, everyone's amygdala seems to be aflame. The underclass and we moral conservatives are enraged at the progressive, overclass hegemony and have rallied around Trump as our champion. Our feelings of vulnerability, threat, rage and indignation can be so overwhelming that we lack sobriety and clarity. Progressives, on the other extreme, are apoplectic. And so, Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS), as inflamed amygdala, is epidemic on both sides of the political divide.

Similarly, in the Church, the theological civil war rages on undiminished. John Paul and Benedict gave the definitive, lucid response to theological progressivism. But the more recent dual-pontificate has taken a different direction. They have not directly contradicted the Catholic legacy on the nature of the human person, but have downplayed it, diverted attention to political issues (environment, immigration) and sought to appease the progressives. 

Our Catholic civil war of over half a century continues under Leo. He leans to appease the left. But, in contrast to Francis, he embodies a sincere intent to listen to both sides, to maintain harmony, to steady the bark of Peter. He intends to minimize conflict. To do this he will, in my opinion, compromise on fundamentals of our heritage. But the underlying pastoral intent has value. 

And so, in American politics and the Church we do well to lower the temperature, to diminish the anxiety and rage, to relax a little.

This is also good for the soul. My own sense is that God is drawing me into his peace, to a relaxation, to cessation of anger and anxiety, to "abide, thrive and bear fruit in Him." With regard to Trump and MAGA we all do well to lighten up. With regard to Pope Leo, we do well to emulate his tranquility, his pastoral compassion, his stability, his desire for unity and harmony. 

This does not mean we compromise on the truth. Rather, with charity, patience, serenity and graciousness emergent, our witness to the truth will become more gentle, confident, and appealing.

Above all: we invoke the Holy Spirit...to inflame...not our amygdala...but our souls ...with simple praise and thanks, with liberation from resentment and fear, with supernatural charity, with quiet zeal,

Be Still My Soul!

Come Holy Spirit! 

In Praise of In-Laws

In-Laws: underrated. Underappreciated. Rarely discussed, considered, studied. 

They are TERRIFIC! I know because I have a ton. Oldest of nine, happily married, father of seven...I am "well connected." In the "social capital" that counts...spiritual, moral, cultural, intellectual...I am more wealthy than the Trumps, the Russian oligarchs, and the Saudi princes all together!

They are family, not by blood, by covenant. How marvelous: every marriage is a unique, unprecedented "creation from nothing" whereby God gives life to a new family, which combines two distinct families, and promises an entirely novel legacy going forward.

When I look at my grandchildren I swell with amazement: they belong to me, the are "mine," but they are so much more, they are also "other," as they come from the other side as well, and they move into a novel, new, promised future largely obscure to me, in God's good Providence.

There is a mutual belonging, a bond, a covenant with in-laws. In ancient societies we would come to fight for each other when attacked. Royal families married to form alliances. 

That doesn't happen now, but there abides a deep, unspoken connection. In  this era of isolation, loneliness and individualism we do well to appreciate our in-laws!

Last week I attended the wake-funeral-repast of my brother's wife's brother. I got to know the family. I was deeply touched and impressed. Their flaws and gifts are so different from those of my family; but so fascinating, impressive, talented, and charming! I am thrilled that my brother married into this family; that my niece and two nephews belong also to this family; and I and mine are well connected.

There is a deep Catholic intuition in the appreciation of the in-laws. Some societies allow and even prefer, for example, marriage of 1st cousins. This may help explain some of the fierce, tribal militancy of some Muslim groups. The Church forbids (with dispensation possible) marriage of 1st cousins and so urges us to move beyond boundaries of blood to bond with other families. This expresses the "catholic" passion to move outward, to share our faith, to unite with all peoples to the ends of the earth.

Beyond family, a similar, analogous bond unites us with other groups. There are many to which I do not fully belong but am connected. As a charismatic Catholic, I am bonded with all Evangelicals and Pentecostals. As a non-MAGA Republican, I am part of the broad, diverse conservative movement. My daughter "married into" (as a professed participant) the Memores Domini of Communion and Liberation and my son and his family into the Neocatchumenal Way. My son-in -law works in Jesuit secondary education and my granddaughter now for America magazine. I am close to the Jesuits, Maryknoll, CFRs and some Salesians as I have worked closely with religious women Dominicans, Felicians and Charities.  I am friend of Catholic Worker, the Latin Mass and the  Bruderhof.

I am proud member of the Fox Family (with Brett, Martha, Shannon), the CNN Family (Erin, Anderson), the NY Times (Ross, Maureen, Bret, Nicholas, Ezra, Thomas), and (as non-subscriber) the Wall Street Journal  (Peggy, Kimberly, Daniel, Jason, Allysia) but moreso of Communio, Crisis, The Catholic Thing, EWTN, and National Catholic Register.

Obviously, I cannot endorse all the positions of all these groups. Every family has its flaws as well as its gifts, charisms and charms. The problems and sins do not stop us from loving them.

You can see my Catholicity urges me to engage even my intellectual adversaries: to draw close, to listen, to embrace what is good. I cannot retreat into a culture war silo or tribe. I cannot shrivel up in the bunker in rage, anxiety and indignation. Rather, I learn from my enemy; I pray for him; I delight in what is good and true; and I assist him, by my affection-respect-prayer, as I am myself assisted, to overcome the errors that entrap. 

To the Catholic sensibility, the "otherness" ... of the in-laws, of the theological or political adversary...is not something to be feared, but to be cherished.  And that is why it is such a blessing to have in-laws! 

The Charism and Charm of the Fat Guy

I got thinking about "fatness" after reading my friend Stephen Adubatto's provocative Substack (Cracks in Postmodernity)  on priests fat, skinny, weight-lifting and so forth. 

My mother and her mother did not like fat. I think that is common among the Irish. Our society is relentless in its distaste for it as ugly and unhealthy. "Diet and exercise" we hear endlessly. Okay! But lets be honest: when it comes to the body you are pretty much stuck with what you are given...short/tall, skinny/muscular/fat. There's not a lot you can do. You know: genetics, metabolism, etc. The implicit moral judgment that the heavy person is somehow indulgent and lazy is a vile rash judgement. (By the way: rash judgment is by far the most prevalent sin! It is a sin of the intellect but rooted in an uncharitable and lazy will.) Fear and loathing of fatness is widely prevalent, especially among our young women. 

What is true is that oftentimes the fat guy/girl is the most fun, funny, humble, self-effacing, intuitive, generous, ironic, eccentric, warm, intelligent and holy person in the group. 

Consider:

St. Pope John XXIII

St. Thomas Aquinas

Monsignor Lorenzo Albicette

Servant of God Catherine Doherty

Winston Churchill

G.K. Chesterton

Chris Farley

Oprah Winfry

Jackie Gleason

Lou Costello

Luciano Pavarotti

Oliver Hardy

Burl Ives

John Goodman

Rush Limbaugh

Obesity is a serious suffering, a cross, physically-socially-psychologically. But spiritually, there is possible a profound irony, a la Flannery O'Connor type insight: when suffered graciously it yields fruit in compassion, humility, comedy, intuition, and wisdom. By a strange paradox, the "dis-appeal" of the heavy body comes to manifest as a startling temple of the Holy Spirit. 

So, fatness becomes a sacramental of the transcendent and the eschatological. Our appearance, here and now, in time and history, in the flesh...is not the ultimate. What is ultimate is the life of the soul, in union with God, starting now and going forward into eternity. 

PLEASE...PLEASE...PLEASE...Do not tell me "If you have health, you have everything!" That is so so so so wrong. People lack or lose health...do they have nothing? That may the the stupidest statement I have ever heard.

Fatness is similar to vowed poverty, chastity and obedience. Gratefully, generously, humbly accepted it points beyond to the deepest meaning of life, under the appearance of the appealing and the healthy...to the soul in communion with God. 

I think with gratitude and respect of my father-in-law, Al, a big man who danced like Fred Astaire, was smart and funny and humble and a good husband and father to my bride.

I think of our classmate, friend John: undisputed leader of our class, mature, hilarious, fatherly, generous, super-fun, gifted. Recovering from alcoholism, he embraced 12-step spirituality, and went on to do superb work for the addicted, homeless and mentally ill. Always a Joy to be with.

Another college roommate and friend, George. Italian, he was the first one to point out to me the Irish bias against the fat. He was a two-pointer. He was also homosexual. That, like fatness, is an affliction of suffering that is often accompanied by interior charisms like empathy, intuition, intelligence, charity, wisdom, creativity. George, of happy memory, was also a Joy to be with.

I honor the memory of Al and George by gratitude for those we love who free us from our fear, shame and loathing and bring light and levity into our lives.

Grieving the Charismatic Movement while Riding the Pentecostal Current

 'The Charismatic Renewal is not a movement, but a current of the Holy Spirit."

The above was spoken by Cardinal Suenens half a century ago and more recently by Cardinal Raniero Cantalamesa. These are the only two charismatic Catholic cardinals that I know. They have impeccable credentials. Suenens was one of the presiders at the Vatican Council, a prelate of immense prestige and influence at the time, and the ecclesiastical godfather of the Catholic charismatic renewal. Cantalamesa was papal preacher for 44 years, in service of John Paul, Benedict and Francis. That these three distinctive popes would all surrender to his influence is extraordinary. To disagree with such authorities takes a lot of chutzpah. Fleckinstein does not hesitate: With due respect, your Eminences, but, as in most things Catholic, this is not an either/or. This renewal was a movement, as it continues as a Pentecostal current. But first, a confession.

Craving the Renewal of the 70s

Nostalgia is at least a near occasion of, if not an actual sin: a disordered attachment to an idealized past and thereby a disconnect from the actual graces of the present as they move us into the promises of God for the future. I stand guilty as charged: I have been longing for the Renewal of the 70s.

They were the best years of my life...in regard to zeal for God and the things of the spirit.

Spring 1973, we were happily married for two years when we made Cursillo and joined a charismatic prayer group. Our lives changed drastically. We entered into intimacy with Jesus as our Lord and Savior and then received the "baptism of the Holy Spirit," an internal surge of the Spirit, within a community of prayer, and a defining sense of God's powerful, loving presence and guidance. We filled up with praise of God, prayed in tongues, experientially received clear guidance, and surged with Joy and Hope. For the remaining 7 years of that decade, we participated fervently in the prayer group and life took on a steady ecstatic tone. From joy to joy!

We received our first three children. My wife, fully engaged with me in this new life (at once, and miraculously, Pentecostal and Catholic), stayed home with the children. I made just enough money to get by. I taught religion in a tough Jersey City Catholic high school and fought the good fight to maintain discipline and share the faith in a time largely disinterested in the things of the spirit. I was employed by a local parish to connect with Spanish-speaking families in a housing project and to teach summer bible camp. For 18 months  I was without a steady job, bounding from one thing to another: painting homes of friends, loading trucks, teaching school, riveting trucks at the Ford plant, going to job interviews. We always received, providentially, just enough money, just in time, to meet our needs. I was blissfully unconcerned, although our parents were not so fortunate. My serenity was in part my temperamental positivity, in part the result of coming of age in a thriving economy in which I always found a job, and largely our intense trust in God's perfect providential plan and guidance. Things like career planning and financial security were nowhere on my horizon. Why worry about such trivia when every day brought a fresh encounter or revelation...spiritual, intellectual, dramatic. "Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and all these things will be given to you."  And so, November 1977 I had no work and went to UPS which was hiring seasonal help; they hired me for my typing skills as a clerk at $9,000 annual, almost enough to support us with some raises and overtime. That became a 25 career, mostly in supervision. Praise the Lord!

The Charismatic MOVEMENT

My son reminds me that lay leadership in the Neocatechumenate, like the Cardinals quoted above, are averse to the word "movement." Perhaps they associate it with movements of human agency: civil rights, farm workers, peace, etc. I firmly believe both are actions of the Holy Spirit, but they are also human, sociological, empirical phenomena. Cardinal Suenens said "there are no founders to the Renewal." This is accurate. But there were clear leaders who shaped it in specific directions. The foundations of the Charismatic Renewal as a movement:

1. Baptism in the Holy Spirit.  This is a very specific event, which manifested in the Pentecostal movements from 1900 and across the denominations in mid-century. It is not primarily emotional. It is the prayer, in expectant faith, to receive the Pentecostal anointing of intimacy and empowerment that the apostles, with Mary, received in the cenacle 10 days after Jesus ascended. It includes: intimacy with the powerful Holy Spirit, prayer in tongues, ongoing guidance through interior messages-scripture-communal discernment, divine healings, deliverance from demons, prophesies, and more.

2. Prayer Meetings.  In contrast to traditional formal Catholic liturgy these were informal, spontaneous, characterized primarily by praise in words, song and tongues along with attention to readings from scripture, teaching and personal witnesses. These spread all over the country in the 1970s; and largely disappeared as quickly going into the 1980s.

3. Pentecostal/Evangelical Teaching. With extraordinary efficiency and speed, a gifted elite of lay leaders, especially Ralph Martin and Steve Clark, emerged spontaneously and worked together to incorporate elements of Pentecostal and Evangelical spirituality into the Catholic Charismatic Renewal: strong sense of the supernatural, spiritual combat with demons in deliverance ministries, openness to the miraculous in healings and guidance, strong traditional gender roles, new forms of authority including in very personal direction, the emergence of covenant communities. 

4. Countercultural, Anti-Progressive.  These Pentecostal/Evangelical elements were entirely contradictory of the broader cultural-sexual liberalization and specifically theological progressivism dominant in academia and clerical/hierarchical circles. This included opposition to abortion and homosexuality, emphasis on supernatural, more literal (but not fundamentalist) reading of scripture, traditional family patterns and other. Predictably, this led to conflicts with more liberal bishops.

5. Strong form Catholicism. Along with the movement into Pentecostalism, in tension with but not complete contradiction, was the move into stronger forms of Catholicism: Marian devotion (Medjugorje), Divine Mercy practices from St. Faustina, sacramental life (especially Eucharist and Penance), and fidelity to the magisterium. 

6. Vast Theological Literature.  A large, comprehensive body of practical, theological literature surged, largely from Martin, Clark and other lay leaders. These were lay in two senses:  non-clergy and non-credentialed academically. Martin and Clark had walked together away from doctoral programs in philosophy, Martin at Princeton and Clark at Yale, to serve the Lord in Cursillo and then Charismatic. They stand out as among the most dynamic, talented and influential partnerships in Catholic history. They were also assisted by a cadre of outstanding Catholic academic theologians who combined holiness of life, solid scholarship, and pastoral sensibility: Francis Martin, Killian McDonald, George Montague, Edward O'Connor...all clergy and credentialed academics. 

7. Huge Rallies and Conferences.  Thousands of people would convene (in NJ in Atlantic City) to hear inspired teaching in a charged atmosphere of ecstatic, expressive praise. These were markedly ecumenical, deliberately including gifted preachers from other denominations. 

What Happened in the 1980s?

Our own prayer meeting, sponsored by the People of Hope Community in Christ the King Parish, Jersey City, disbanded around 1980. Strangely, the same happened across the country. All these prayer meetings disappeared instantaneously as they had appeared, like the annuals of early Spring. Rallies that had drawn 30-40,0000 were getting a few thousand.

It did not completely disappear. But the flourishing revival among white, middle class Catholics diminished greatly. The movement is powerful in Africa and parts of Latin America and Asia. It remains among Hispanics and Philippinos in the USA. It  consolidated into small, intense covenant communities; as the broader movement merged into the Evangelical Catholicism of John Paul/Benedict. This later was zealously Evangelical in its focus on the person/event of Jesus Christ, as it interpreted Vatican II positively, in continuity with tradition, with strong sense of the centrality of family, sexual chastity and marital fidelity in opposition to progressive theology's embrace of the sexual revolution. 

Paradigmatic for the broader movement was the split between Ralph Martin and Steve Clark. Martin reveals how painful that was in his recent memoir. He spent the early 80s in Brussels and Rome, working on the international renewal with Cardinal Suenens. He aligned himself closely to the New Evangelization of John Paul and threw himself into study of the Catholic saints and mystics. He deepened his Catholicism, although retaining a sharp Evangelical edge.

Meanwhile, Steve Clark had guided a new coalition of covenant communities into an even more pronounced Pentecostalism, stridently countercultural on gender roles and authority structures and micromanaged into a detailed, monastic-like rule of life for families. The two parted ways. They did reconcile years later before Clark's passing. 

Martin's journey was typical of most of the Catholic Renewal. It blended into more mainstream Catholic currents, including the New Evangelization of John Paul. Martin maintained an amazing zeal in this effort, worked with EWTN, continued to preach and write, gained a doctorate in theology at the Angelicum, and taught at Sacred Heart Seminary in Michigan. The specifically charismatic elements (tongues, healings, extreme gender and authority views) were downplayed; communion with the broader sacramental Church emphasized; and focus remained on the salvific person/event of Jesus Christ. 

My own path was similar: I was simply enamored of the theology of John Paul, Benedict and their colleagues. Like many charismatics, I was encouraged by the revelations on the Divine Mercy of Saint Faustina, the messages of our Lady at Medjugore, and the entire John Paul/Benedict agenda. 

This pattern seemed to be across the Church. Evangelical crusades like N.E.T. and FOCUS had immense influence as an energized, appealing Evangelical Catholicism without much attention to the extraordinary charismatic gifts. Franciscan University thrives as a center of hardcore Catholicism, retaining a strong, but not overwhelming charismatic charism.

The Sword of the Spirit, with its own alternative hierarchy had problems with the American episcopacy, notably in Newark and Steubenville. But they seemed to have weathered the storms. In NJ, the People of Hope, after a long quarrel with the Archdiocese, is back in good graces and manifesting good fruit. They sponsor a thriving school, Koinonia Academy, and a dynamic summer camp which has had a strong impact on our own family. For instance, one granddaughter is studying at Franciscan University and a number of great-nephews are planning to go there.  

The influence of the movement is broad: music, healing prayer, deliverance ministry, focus on Scripture, an ecumenical awareness. Many moved on to more normal parish life and ministry with greater depth and passion.

Going Forward in the Holy Spirit

We cannot replicate the fervor of the 70s. We know the Holy Spirit remains with the Church of Christ, if in a quieter mode. Yet, I personally ambition to retrieve the fire, the zeal of that time.

1. Primacy of Praise. Recently, Cardinal Cantalamessa exhorted charismatics to rekindle the fire of praise that inflamed all those prayer meetings and conferences. In our own small prayer group, one woman seemed to especially exercise the gift of prophesy. She was a simple, humble, charming, local Afro-American woman, Harriet, and she tirelessly repeated the same prophesy: "Ma people: Continue to praise me!" Every time she said that, in her modest, straightforward manner, it seemed to be words directly from heaven. I believe that message was from the Holy Spirit and meant for us then, now and into the future. I have been trying to inflame my life with thanksgiving and praise, even as I yearn for more communal ways to do so.

2. Ecumenical. Cardinal Suenens had said that the heart of the renewal is the reunion of Christians in the love of Christ. That surely is correct. Many of us leaned more deeply into our Catholicism. This is good. But the Holy Spirit surely is urging us to union with others, especially Evangelicals, Pentecostals and Orthodox. My wife and I are volunteer chaplains in our local hospital and enjoy the opportunity to pray often with non-Catholics. This is a great blessing. It was the Renewal that prepared us to pray with them.

3. Closeness to the Poor. Pope Francis encouraged the Renewal, especially to be close to the poor. This was a message that was heard in the Renewal, but not very powerfully. The two covenant communities in our area of north NJ seemed to be suburban, bourgeois, middle class, career and security focused. Our encounter with the People of Hope was in our prayer group in a  poor area of Jersey City: we benefited from engagement with the Renewal and also with the poor.

4. Deepening, Intensifying of our Catholic Faith.  As noted, the ordinary itinerary of the charismatic Catholic post-1980, strikingly exemplified  by Ralph Martin, has been deeper engagement with Christ and his Church in prayer, liturgy/sacraments, charity, morality, theology and all arenas of life. 

5. Covenant Communities? I have not followed developments within the Sword of the Spirit. They have been quiet. This is a good sign. Good fruit is evident. Consider our Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett. And, as noted, after a rupture with the Archdiocese, the People of Hope are positively impacting our Church, specifically in their school and summer camp. Praise the Lord!

6. The Young? My own primary concern has always been the passing of our faith to the young. Working a variety of jobs, my professional vocation is  catechist, one who "echoes" our faith. The singular Joy I share with my wife is that our seven children, along with their spouses and families, all live our Catholic faith with vigor and enthusiasm. They received our Catholic faith, but not in its specifically charismatic dimensions.   Realizing the toxicity of our culture, our philosophy in raising our family was that Catholic family/school/parish was insufficient so we methodically exposed them, especially summers during high school, to a variety of intense encounters with Catholicism: Youth 2000, NET retreats, service trips, Friars of the Renewal, Magdalllen College summer programs, Scranton Charismatic Conference. These were not fully Pentecostal, but surely charismatic-adjacent in their evangelical fervor. And so our children received a charismatically-flavored Catholic faith.

So my big question: how have the covenant communities done in passing on the faith? How many of their children and now grandchildren practice Catholicism? How many are charismatic? Are any charismatic but not Catholic? I have been told that the People of Hope, under the Sword of the Spirit, is a stronger, bigger community and more successful than the smaller, unattached Community of God's Love. 

This is the same question I bring to the other lay renewal groups: especially the Neocatechumenate and Communion and Liberation.

The Holy Spirit continues to breathe in many ways in the Church. Ours has been the age of the lay renewal movements. As the religious orders have declined, we have seen surges of zealous, lay spirituality. The currents of renewal are many: all moving us into the Kingdom. The charismatic renewal remains an important one.

I myself am eager to inflame the gift of praise that burned brightly in the 1970s. Out of that foundational praise, including tongues, personal and communal, the Holy Spirit moves us deeper into the Church, into communion with our Evangelical/Pentecostal brothers and sisters, and companionship with the poor and suffering. 

Above all, we pray for our young:  COME HOLY SPIRIT1

Longanimity

 Longanimity is underrated. 

Actually, longanimity is unknown. 

Let's bring back longanimity!

I am reading about it in the spiritual classic The Sanctifier by Archbishop Luis Martinez of Mexico City in the 1950s.

From the Latin "anima" for spirit, the word means "long-spirited." It is a virtue and gift of the Holy Spirit which elevates the intellect and will to "play the long game." It is the ability to endure hardship, suffering and difficulty for long periods. So it is almost synonymous or overlaps patience, longsuffering, endurance, perseverance, tenacity, and persistence. In that it is a virtue of the will. But it is also a virtue of the intellect: to see things in the long run. In the long run, of course, we are all dead. So it is fitting to ponder this virtue and gift now, November, as we remember the last things: death, judgment, heaven and hell. And as we pray for the souls and honor the saints.

St. Mother Teresa suffered the dark night for about 40 years: longanimity.

Jimmy Lae is suffering bad health in a Hong Kong prison: longanimity.

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett in her recent book Listening to the Law diligently unveils the nature and workings of our constitutional system and The Court. She is emphatic: their decisions are not focused so much on the particulars of the moment, but upon the broad logic of law and the repercussions well into the future. Longanimity.

My friend Adrienne (who I saw yesterday for the first time in 50 years) is lovingly caring for her husband of 48 years who is suffering Lewy body dementia, arranging her home and schedule around his needs. Longanimity.

Our Senate Republicans recently found the courage and integrity to resist the President's pressure to discard the filibuster. They were protecting a protocol essential to the integrity of the Senate. Longanimity.

When we were raising our children, our friend (really sister-in-Christ and aunt to our children) Betty would calmly announce: "This too will pass." Longanimity.

Yesterday I spoke with an inmate in a local county jail who was just denied recourse to Recovery Court and so will spend more time in prison. He was understandably disappointed. I recalled the story of the patriarch Joseph of Egypt and the reality of Divine Providence and encouraged him to: Longanimity.

Longanimity of the intellect keeps us in communion with those who have gone before us, across the generations, and the legacy they have given us. It inclines us to view the future, well beyond our lifetimes, like Moses looking into the Promised Land, the promises to our children and theirs. It situates us well beyond our own limitations of space and time within the broader contours of family, community and Church.

I encourage you, dear Reader, as I encourage myself to practice the virtue and pray for the gift of Longanimity.

Come, Holy Spirit, giver of all good gifts. Bring patience, peace and longanimity!

Epstein and Maxwell: Eunuch's for the Kingdom of Darkness

November: Month of Souls in Purgatory and of the Last Things (death, judgment, heaven, hell)

Jeffrey Epstein is dead. There is nothing we can do about him, except pray for his soul. But: do we pray for the soul of Jeffrey Epstein? He relentlessly seduced hundreds of adolescent girls. Many were in some degree innocent; many no doubt virgins. Do we ask forgiveness so that he can live eternally in Joy? I don't get a good vibe. Jesus said of such "It would be better for them to have a weight tied to them and thrown into the sea."  

My conclusion: Yes, we pray for him. We commend him to God...to his mercy and his retribution. Yes, retribution. Judgment. Punishment. Wrath. Here is a case where the God-who-is-only-Mercy-Compassion-Acceptance who has become so fashionable in progressive theology is unveiled as anemic and repulsive. As you have heard, Dear Reader, from Fleckionstein: Let's bring back retribution! Let's bring back judgment! Let's bring back heaven, hell and purgatory! Let's resist the Protestant propensity to deny purgatory! Let's pray for the souls! Let's pray for Jeffrey. We leave it to God to do the right thing, merciful and just.

Eunuchs for the Dark Kingdom

Jeffrey and Ghislaine were a "power couple." They did not marry; did not bear new life. They seemed singularly devoid of parental and maternal love. They parodied it: they faked it in a highly expert, perverse game of grooming. They offered to mentor aspirational young women, to assist in their careers, to give them a new and exciting life. 

A friend had asked Ghislaine "What of the girls?" She responded "They are nothing, they are trash."  both are possibly sociopaths, or close to it....void of conscience or empathy.

She told a friend that psychologists had confirmed to Epstein that he "needed three orgasms a day." Such "need" is not natural; it is the fruit of sexual addiction at a deep level. 

She is a more complicated, puzzling case. She was deeply disturbed in her own sexuality, well before meeting Epstein. An acquaintance remembers a party where she disappeared and then returned with scarfs and announced '"the game": the men were to be blindfolded by the scarfs. The women were to bear their breasts and be fondled by the men who were to guess whose breasts they were. She was known for teasing and provoking unchaste behavior. 

Clearly she was deeply influenced by her father, whom she adored. Theirs was a family of eight, thought to be the perfect family. It was in fact dysfunctional. The mother was blatantly disrespected as the father had affairs shamelessly. He seems to have had a sadistic streak himself. He treasured Ghilane as a "trophy daughter" as she would accompany him socially at the very highest levels of society. There is no evidence of sexual wrongdoing, but this was clearly a violation of the father's duty to protect the innocence of his daughter. In a very real sense, she was already prostituted by father as a symbol of prestige, sexual glamour and power. This was what she knew.

She was devastated by his death and then by the fact that he had plundered the pensions of his workers. She clearly found in Epstein an adequate replacement: tons of money, status, and perverse excitement. They settled together into the diabolical game of seduction of the innocent.

Remarkably, the family stayed together to support her through her trial and may well be involved with the current machinations to get her sentence commuted. 

This couple, along with homosexual practice and the pandemic of isolating porn/masturbation, is the epitome of the sexual ethos of our time: sterile, joyless, perverse, despairing, death-dealing.

Conspiracy Theory: the World, the Flesh and the Devil

I am immune to conspiracy theories about Jews, Masons, Communists, deep state, yada yada yada. I do not think there is a list of a circle of powerful men who contrived to seduce women. The evidence suggests it was Jeffrey's obsession. No doubt he shared it with anyone interested. But no, it was not a conspiracy. He was not a spy for Israel or the CIA. He did not have a list of men he was blackmailing. He made tons of money because he was expert in channeling large funds to avoid tax.

The real conspiracy, aggressive to entrap each of us: the world, the flesh and the devil. Epstein and Maxwell are a case study. The word was that Epstein would not work for anyone that was not a billionaire. If you are only worth, say $950,000,000,  you did not meet the bar. The two of them mingled with the highest levels of society. She mixed with royals already in adolescence. She provided him access to the elite and he provided her tons of money: a match made in he....ll! This is the world at its most seductive, glamorous, alluring. Regarding the flesh, they both suffered severe bondage to lust, greed, avarice. And the hand of Lucifer is clear in their passionate crusade to seduce the innocent.

They are for us a cautionary tale: the allure of the world, the enslavements of the flesh, and the brilliant perversity of Lucifer. They are something out of Dante's Inferno. 

As we commend them to the mercy and the justice of God, we ourselves do well to ponder those holy realities. And beg for the pardoning, purifying, sanctifying Holy Spirit!

 

Pope Leo XIII: Non-Theologian, Institutuionalist

 In an astute essay in First Things, reviewing two recent biographies of our new pope, Fr. DeSouza notes: we know nothing about the theological views of Robert Prevost, his rise in the hierarchy was entirely the doing of Pope Francis, he was the "Francis candidate" most unlike Francis temperamentally. He spent his life in in Peru and Rome, mostly in leadership of institutions. His formative years, the 1970s in the seminary, and his entire life has been in a Church in institutional decline; and he wonders "what he learned from this?"

I take a slightly different view. Leo is clearly an institutionalist, an "organization man," in the best sense. While he has lived in a Church in institutional decline, he is himself, a canon lawyer, instinctively a preserver of the institution. This is a very good thing. 

He is a man of prayer, a holy priest. Like his mentor Francis.

He is pastoral, urgent to share the love of Christ, especially with the suffering and marginalized. Like his mentor Francis.

He is not a theologian. Like his mentor Francis.

He is inclined to steady the bark of Peter; to strengthen unity; to minimize conflict and stress. Unlike his mentor Francis. 

The best Churchmen, progressive or conservative, are instinctively "catholic" in an openness, a liberality, a "live-and-let-live" acceptance of diversity. In the Archdiocese of Newark which I know, Cardinal Tobin is a ranking lieutenant of Francis but he rules here with a light hand, allowing distinct groups like the Latin Mass and the Neocatechumenate to live peacefully. Prior to him, Archbishop Meyers came here with a reputation as the second most conservative in the nation; I expected fireworks as our presbyterate could be described as moderate-liberal; there was peace. In a recent Pillar piece, Ed Conlin expressed appreciation for Cardinal McElroy of Washington D.C. who is on the far left of the American episcopacy but well received by conservative priests.

Pope Francis blatantly lacked this openness, notwithstanding his profession of openness and "synodality." He shamelessly refused the red hat to prelates of leading sees (Philadelphia) that always receive it out of personal animosity. It is clear that, by contrast, Pope Leo does have this disposition towards unity.

The Church in which Prevost came of age, the 1970s, was most significantly in catechetical crisis. Coming out of the Council, the Baltimore Catechisism and the received synthesis was discarded but nothing replaced it, until the papacy of John Paul II. Catechetically, Prevost was part of the "lost generation" in its intellectual grasp of our Catholic tradition. Our faith was passed on as a communion in prayer with God, as a worshipping community, as a fraternity of love and outreach to the suffering. But theologically most of the Church was in a fog of confusion. There were points of light. A hungry theological intellect could find its way to the Communio School or that of St. Thomas. 

But Prevost was apparently not such an intellect. He majored in college in math. Clearly bright. But not drawn to theology. He is an American: a pragmatist. His vision, just announced, for the John Paul II Institute for the Family is entirely pastoral and (shades of Francis) anti-intellectual. He wants to move away from abstraction and reform it as a practical guide and aid to family life. Depending upon who leads it, this can be a good or a bad thing. But it is a retreat from the outstanding academic tradition of that school.

It is striking: in my lifetime we had three popes (Pius XII, John XXIII, and Paul VI) with fine, clear, deep theological intellects. These were followed by John Paul and Benedict: theological geniuses, possibly the finest pope theologians in Church history, surely to be doctors of the Church. And now we have two quite mediocre theological popes.

Nevertheless, I am happy with this pope. He is modest, judicious, stable, self-effacing, gentle, open to all. He is a force for steadiness, for unity, for peace. He is endearing and charming.

We have the theology of John Paul and Benedict. It will be taught in seminaries and schools of theology for generations to come. Those hungry for the truth of the Gospel will bask in it and radiate it. Leo will steady the ship of the Church. He will call us to works of Mercy. As the legacy of John Paul and Benedict draws us into the clarity, the depth, and the profundity of Truth.

Make America Godly Again: A MAGA Vision

 Do not be so quick, dear Reader, to dismiss what follows as impossible, as sheer fantasy. ALL things are possible to God. Also: we know that Donald Trump is quite capable of change.

IMAGINE:  Donald Trump wakes up one morning, overwhelmed by how much he is loved by God. Perhaps it is the prayers of those who love him. Perhaps the intercession of Charlie Kirk in heaven or his friendship with Erika. Perhaps the unfailing affection and loyalty of Melania and his family. He is largely (but of course not completely) liberated from enslavement to narcissistic compulsions. So, he:

- Announces that he has been wrong to so many people and asks forgiveness. He starts a serious program of amends to those he has harmed, insulted, or hurt in any way.

- He forgives all who have harmed him in any way. He expresses appreciation for those who have tried to hold him accountable by indictments and impeachments. He issues presidential pardons for Comey, Bolton, James, Smith and Willis.

- He authorizes a full audit of his personal wealth in order to donate 80% to the poor and going forward to give 80% of his income annually to the needy. 

- He joins a Narcissist's Anonymous group, gets a sponsor, works the 12 steps, He finds that virtually all elected politicians in DC certify for the program.

- He joins the OCIA program to enter the Catholic church so he can confess his sins to a priest.

- He enjoys a special Synodal session of congress and hosts it at Mar Lago so Democrats and Republicans can get to know and like each other.

- He takes a 30-day prayer sabbatical from his duties, handing responsibility to JD Vance. (Is this constitutional? Possibly not. But who would have standing to contest? And if anyone did, he would be back in charge within a month anyway.)

- He does a 30-day directed retreat with a good Jesuit to consider the direction of his life after the presidency. Everything is on the table, including jail ministry at the prison in El Salvador with all the gang members, the hermitage or cloistered monastery, a Josephite (abstinent) marriage with Melania, teaching ESL to immigrants, and other.

Granted, dear Reader, the details here seem far-fetched. But you get the drift. Let's pray for something in that direction! This is, after all, November, the month of the last things: death, judgment, heaven, hell.

Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and the Rosary

Reporter Jonathan Karl, in his book Retribution reports on the final, secret meeting of Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden shortly after the disastrous debate which revealed his incompetence. The Biden family now despises Pelosi as the prime mover in ending his campaign. The meeting was in the Biden family living room and was a secret even from his staff. She delivered the bad news: widespread consensus was that he would not only lose the election but also bring down the house. The meeting was not contentious. When she finished she took out what Karl calls a rosary or also a rosary coin. I don't know of a rosary coin although a rosary ring with 10 beads is common. In any case, it turns out that Biden then took out the same rosary. It isn't clear that they prayed together, but they did show each other a rosary (or rosary coin?) That was the final meeting between the two of them. They are now, in Karl's words, "enemies forever."

This anecdote is fascinating on several levels.

These two are the incomparable icons of "Catholic" Progressivism of the last several decades. Pelosi has been arguably the most powerful woman politician in American history. She is not allowed communion in her diocese of San Francisco. Biden, the second Catholic president, disparaged the values of his faith in a number of public ways. 

Cultural Progressivism (post 1970) is itself a religion, competitive with and contradictory of Catholicism. Core beliefs: sterilized sex, deconstructed gender, abortion, superiority of technological/scientific culture over the past, and other. Biden/Pelosi are key figures in the triumph of Progressivism. But they flavored this, their core religion, with a superficial, nostalgic, sentimental Catholic piety.

They embody the stereotypical private/public binary: I wouldn't want one but I want the state to pay for everyone else's abortion, especially the poor and the black. 

How ironic that it is reported in a book entitled "retribution." Actually, the theme of the book is retribution by Trump against his enemies. (You are aware, Dear Reader) Fleckinstein is a strong advocate for the retrieval of "retribution" as a moral, cultural, religious form. One might view the aftermath of the meeting as heavenly retribution as  the Biden/Pelosi legacy was devastated by the sweeping Trump victory.

Ironic also that after these displays of piety, they now despise each other.

If they did pray (which I strongly doubt), what mysteries would they have pondered. The first are of course the Joyful: the Annunciation, the Visitation, The Nativity. These deal with the sacredness of unborn life: conception, the embrace of two pregnant cousins, the birth of Jesus (accompanied by the slaughter of the Holy Innocents.) I cannot imagine that these two crusaders for legal abortion would have prayed these foundational Catholic realities. 

Perhaps they replaced with Progressive Dogmas: contraception, abortion of the unborn through 9 months, artificial technologies of surrogacy and other, euthanasia and assisted suicide of the elderly/infirm, the contagion of legal pornography, the sacred status of homosexual and other forms of sodomy. 

These two perfectly represent the dyad of Cultural Progressivism: the passive, impotent male; the empowered, controlling, grasping female. This is resonant of Eve, jealous, manipulative, aggressive; Adam, emasculated, self-pitying, finger-pointing. It is the pathetic Ahab and his vicious, controlling wife Jezebel. It is Herod, manipulated by the incestuous Herodias to cut off the head of the prophet whom he admired.

Catholicism has always been vulnerable to syncretism, impure mixture with other religious practices. It would be hard to imagine something as depraved, as repellant to the Catholic mind as these two mutually admiring each others rosaries. We compete, respectfully, with political/cultural adversaries, for example, the Clintons and Obamas in the political arena. But the presence within our own Church of a Trojan horse, an enemy within, a betrayal by our own of our basic values presents an immense challenge.

The temptation here is a serious one: to contempt. To view a fellow Catholic, a brother and sister in Christ, with spiritual loathing. How do we renounce this temptation? Only with prayer! Prayer for our enemy. 

Lord, touch our hearts with your tender Mercy. Touch as well the hearts of our enemies, cultural progressives, especially Catholics, within the Church and in the political arena. Let your Mercy be upon us as we place our trust in You!

Election Day, November 3, 2025: End of a Temper-Manic Episode?

Like a pampered 2-year old or a raging neighborhood bully, Trump has been on a 9 month rampage, manic and furious. It is simply amazing that he got away with so much for so long. Our constitutional system, still resilient and steady, is finally restraining him.

On Tuesday, the electorate in a number of states, especially in NJ, decisively rejected the Republicans.

 On the following day, the Supreme Court heard arguments about the Trump tariffs and will almost certainly find them unconstitutional. These are a centerpiece of his diplomacy and economics. He sees this as total catastrophe. The Wall Street Journal anticipates it with joy.

With the ongoing government shutdown, Trump is calling for the "nuclear option" of doing away with the filibuster. Like a self-centered infantile, which he is psychologically, he sees only his own immediate concerns. Finally, Senate Republicans are finding some spine and defending their institutional integrity. 

We can hope that, led by moderate-conservative justices Barrett and Roberts, institutions including congressional Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and progressives, agencies including the FED and others renounce their contemptible subservience to this dictator-wannabe-narcissistic. 

This comes from a moral conservative who voted for Trump in 2024 and for the Republican ticket this week. Ciattarelli is personally prochoice and unappealing. My vote was ideological: pro-Republican and anti-Democrat in defense of fundamental Catholic realities including the life of the powerless, religious liberty, the dignity of the person, gender, sexuality, marriage, the role of science, and more.

While I was initially disappointed with the outcome, I quickly saw the positive. The pendellum had to swing back against the MAGA excesses. Precisely from a conservative viewpoint, basic institutions and protocols of respect have to be protected from the violence, the crudeness, the irrationality of MAGA. 

Is it too much to hope for a resurgence of a more based, traditional, stable conservatism?

We can always hope and pray! 

Almost Catholic...The Twilight Zone of the Catholic Church

 Almost Catholics

Charlie Kirk was seemingly on a trajectory into the Catholic Church, under the influence of his amazing, best-of-many-worlds wife, Erika. Who knew that a woman could be Evangelical and Catholic, a social activist, a mother, a gorgeous celebrity, and a prayerful theologian?  

Jordan Peterson, whose wife famously entered the Church, stands frozen at the boundary, apparently unwilling to or incapable of crossing that line of trust, even as he powerfully articulates Catholic views.

C.S. Lewis remained Anglican, apparently retaining reservations about the papacy and Marian devotion as well as some residual prejudice against Catholicism from his childhood. His teachings were resoundingly Catholic. If he were alive today, it is hard to imagine that he could resist the pull across the Tiber.

Simone Weil, brilliant philosopher-social activist-mystic, was possessed by love for the poor and by the person of Jesus Christ. She was deeply drawn to the prayer of the Church but rejected baptism out of a disgust for dogmatic and institutional dimensions of the Church.

Mother Margaret Cusack, a fiery Irish nationalist and brilliant, prodigious writer (35 books)fought the English overlords and fed the starving during the famine before converting to Catholicism.  Described as eccentric, passionate, rebellious and difficult (think Maureen O'Hara in The Quiet Man), she was an early advocate of the apparitions at Knock and claimed that the Blessed Mother spoke directly to her. After fighting with the episcopacy in Ireland, she got permission personally from the Pope to found a new order, the Sisters of St. Joseph of Peace, to house and train "friendless girls." In 1885 she opened a home (still there) in Jersey City. She again got into ecclesiastical trouble, now with Newark authorities and NYC's  Archbishop Corrigan over her support for a leftwing activist priest and over funds. She left the Catholic Church, returned to the Anglican and was buried therein.

My high school friend Frank was a Catholic priest for 25 years and an Episcopalian priest for just over that. He considers himself a Roman Catholic who has a job with the Anglicans. He says as Episcopalian he does half the work and gets twice the pay he did as Catholic. When he isn't presiding at Eucharist as a visitor he attends a Catholic mass. He, unlike myself, seems untroubled that the mass he celebrates is probably valid but illicit and therefore at least disrespectful but perhaps sacrilegious as his communicants entertain various theologies of the mass.

Another friend left the Church to be ordained a Methodist minister; then reverted to Catholicism, renouncing his ordination; then re-reverted to Methodism; then re-re-reverted to Catholicism. He is intelligent, passionate and articulate in his faith.

I graduated in 1969 from Maryknoll College Seminary with over 50 classmates after 4 years preparing to be missionary priests. Today most do not practice our faith. In large part, their children and grandchildren are minimally familiar with our faith.

If I were to honor, from my generational cohort of idealists, priests, psychologists, activists, and academics,  one figure for his service to the suffering and his prayerfulness of life it would clearly be college classmate John: ordained a missionary priest, he still happily displays a picture of himself concelebrating mass with John Paul II. He left the missionary priesthood, confronted his alcoholism, surrendered himself to the 12 steps and prayer, married, raised a son, and built a marvelous community of service to the addicted, homeless and mentally ill. He speaks with affection, gratitude and reverence of the Church as he seems to remain distant.

To summarize, we contemplate with awe the complexities, nuances, depth and boundless variety in such relationships with the Church.

A Church in Decline?

By all the numbers, our Church has been in steady, steep decline for the last six decades since the Council. There seems to be now a plateau, and even signs of a revival, certainly among young men in the USA. But numbers do not accurately disclose spiritual realities. And so, the argument here is that the reality of God and his Church in our lives is immeasurable, mysterious, dense, largely anonymous.

Not long ago, Catholics were 50% of the NJ population; now it is closer to 33%. The NONES are now more than 25% and possibly half of them are ex-Catholics. Only one in six Catholics practice their faith by weekly participation in Sunday mass. So, in NJ about one in eighteen, just over 5%, people practice our faith. Even these are largely victims of the catechetical famine that afflicted us from the Council until the pontificates of John Paul and Benedict (from 1965 through the 70s). Few understand with any depth and clarity our faith. So, integral, intelligent, passionate Catholic faith has become rare, almost a cult, found in niches like religious orders, priests, renewal movements and the Latin Mass. (For example, many Sunday mass attendees would be unpleasantly surprised by the previous essay on the structure of the spousal act.)

However, (as noted in an earlier blog essay), our experience in hospital ministry shows that while institutional loyalty has declined, there abides a immense, deep Catholic influence. Almost everyone we encounter has some connection, usually positive, with the Church. Some are influenced by marriage or a family member. Many retain practices and beliefs: devotion to Mary or the rosary, Padre Pio, St. Francis. Most at least admire the Church's solicitude for the poor and suffering. Most respect and (to some extent) emulate the ideals of marital fidelity. Even those who self-identify as agnostics or even atheists are open to prayer as they entertain some uncertainty in their "unbelief." Frequently we hear grateful mention of a happy connection with a priest, nun, devout layperson or a vibrant institution.

The Church is like other movements and communities of value: there are concentric circles of participation. At the very center, those fully dedicated: professionally or voluntarily, but wholeheartedly. Moving outward, we find decreasing intensity. At the outside circles we have nonmembers who nevertheless are influenced, and therefore participant in some degree. At least in NJ, it is like St. Patrick's Day when everyone is Irish: everyone is, however incompletely, Catholic.

Conclusion

Christ and His Church is a bright, flaming, illuminating, warming fire at the heart of creation, history, society. It reaches everything and everywhere. Even as some are moving away; others moving closer;  many strangely moving now one way and then another. The warmth and light is available everywhere to everyone. There are shadows everywhere; and in everyone. There are also black holes of sin ready to devour the willing. 

May we despise the dark and the cold. May we crave the light and the warmth. May we draw each other closer to that Fire!