Per Christum

In many circles, academic and ecclesiastical, eisegesis is bad news. You are always told not to do it, and when you do, you are condemned. So what is eisegesis? It is reading your personal interpretations into the Biblical text. The “correct” way to read Scripture, say some, is using exegesis, which is bringing out the supposed “clear” meaning of the text or the intention of the author. I often find that nobody really does eisegesis, if you ask them at least. Exegesis is what you do with Scripture; eisegesis is what your opponent does.

I bring this up because I was in a conversation last night where a non-Catholic accused Catholics of being eisegetes for “finding” Mary in the Old Testament. Mary, according to “sound exegetical principles” is not in the Old Testament, he reasoned, therefore we have no right to use Old Testament Scriptures to back up “clearly unbiblical ideas” like Mary’s assumption and queenship.

At this point, I realized that I had a grave confession to make: I have no problem using eisegesis (there goes any chance of me getting into a Biblical Studies PhD program!). The thing is that I believe everyone is an eisegete. From the Baptists who claim to “just follow Scripture” to the United Church of Christ scholar who claims the same thing: every last one of us uses eisegesis. Can we ever approach Scripture totally objectively? Is there even an “objective” meaning (from a purely scholarly standpoint) to the text, since both the Old and New Testaments were written for living, religious communities, and the texts were intended for these communities only. So can a scholar in the 21st century really objectively find the meaning of the text? Maybe, Maybe not. Also, even the most objective researcher has biases that will, even subconsciously, be read into the text.

Additionally, we Christians are the original eisegetes: we read Jesus into the Old Testament. I hate to break it to everybody, but Jesus isn’t in the Old Testament if you strictly exegete the text, otherwise every Jew would have accepted Jesus as the Messiah, because his name and location would have been clearly spelled out. Basically we have to read Jesus into the Old Testament. The Church has consistently found Jesus (and Mary and all sorts of New Testament concepts) in the text where Jewish exegetes did not find him. My response to all of this: good! We Christians believe that Jesus is the interpretive lens through which we are to read Scripture. So yes, we are interpreting Scripture though a very biased lens, but if it is the right lens, then we are safe. We are truly eisegetes, by modern academic and certain Protestant standards, but what is wrong with that? If Jesus himself truly is the Word (logos), then it makes perfect sense that the Old Testament be read typologically to find Jesus there. From our standpoint, Jesus is there, and thus we find him everywhere we can, whether his presence is clear to all modern “exegetes” or not.

Now, I am not saying all interpretations are right, or that eisegesis itself is a divinely inspired concept or anything. There are limits to eisegesis, and the community that produced the texts, the Church, sets various limits on how its own documents may be read. So while we are obvious eisegetes by modern academic standards, as Catholics we are not permitted to “read into” Scripture anything that contradicts Apostolic Truth. In other words, we find Jesus in the Old Testament because he is truly there. So maybe (and I am thinking out loud here) Catholics tend to operate outside the strict modern categories of exegesis and eisegesis when reading, interpreting, and preaching Scripture. This is because we believe that we truly are finding the actual meaning of the texts when we read them with the Apostolic Church in light of the person of Christ. However, this seems like eisegesis from the perspective of non-Catholics, when it is really a sort of “Apostolic exegesis.”

Ultimately, the idea that we can use exegesis to neutrally find the objective truth of the Bible has led to various contradictory readings of Scripture. This means that the Jehovah’s Witnesses are “just using sound exegesis” when they conclude Jesus is Michael the Archangel, and so is the Jesus Seminar, when they conclude Jesus was just a good man. In fact, unchecked exegesis has certainly contributed to the myriad Christian denominations we now have.

So, I stand by my beliefs: I am an unrepentant eisegete! I read Scripture with the community that wrote it, through the lens of the Word of God. I find all sorts of Apostolic Truths in Scripture. Biased? yes. Right? I hope.

Note: this post was edited/updated for clarity.

Can Christians drink alcohol? Should Christians drink alcohol? For many, these are important questions.

Today I was in the Post Office, and a friend of mine who works there asked me what I thought about drinking. He was reading a book about “character” that argues that Christians should not drink alcohol, and that nobody who drinks should ever be a preacher. Just for the record, my friend does drink alcohol, even though he was required to sign a statement when he joined his church that he would not drink or smoke. I could tell he was troubled by what he read, so he asked for my opinion, so I gave it. I thought I would write a little bit about how we should respond to those Christians who believe any consumption of alcohol is sinful.

In answer to my friend, I said that there is one very important Christian preacher/proclaimer who would be disqualified based on these standards, and that is God-incarnate himself, JESUS! I couldn’t believe it. This author, and those who say Christians should not drink period, are greater than their master. Jesus drank and turned water into wine, yet this author has the guts to say that drinking alcohol renders one essentially non-Christian.

In the area where I live, most evangelical Protestants would never believe there is such thing as a mortal sin, but if there were one, consuming alcohol would probably be it. I remember growing up thinking that Christians didn’t drink alcohol at all, and feeling saddened when I saw people I knew from church drinking. Even recently, a family member was telling me that Christians shouldn’t drink period, and I said, “well, Jesus drank and turned water into wine,” and the response was “that isn’t a very good argument.” I laughed inside thinking, “You mean we are better than Jesus on this issue?” In this case the American Protestant cultural sin of drinking has been transformed into a Christian sin. Supposed “bible believers” and biblical literalists overlook the obvious positive Biblical references to alcohol consumption, to the point that many won’t even use wine in communion. European conservative Protestants don’t see what the fuss is about, showing that this extreme tea-totalering is a recent (19th century on) American phenomenon. Even the early Puritans got tipsy at their ordinations!

You don’t believe me? Check out this Code of Conduct at Liberty University. Drinking alcohol gets you 30 hours of community service time and a 500 dollar fine. In terms of severity of punishment, consuming alcohol is more criminal at Liberty than racial harrassment and threatening bodily harm, all of which will only get you 18 hours of community service and a 250 dollar fine. Fortunately if Jesus goes to Liberty and decides to perform the miracle at Cana, he can always find some money in the mouths of local fishes to pay his 500 dollar fine.

Let me be clear: drunkenness is a sin, and being actively involved in the “party culture” is like being involved in a perpetual near occasion of sin. Catholics (despite the stereotypes many have about our views of alcohol) believe that alcohol has many bad effects. If you are hanging out in bars every weekend, acting promiscuously, neglecting your family, and so forth, then you should probably stop drinking, or else cut down drastically. If you are an alcoholic or abusing alcohol, then yes, you should stop drinking period. However, despite the severe cases, only about 10% of all people abuse alcohol, according to the stats I got in college. In other words, for morally responsible Christians, there is no reason to deny yourself that occasional glass of wine or bottle of beer.

While I believe the Biblical evidence against alcohol itself being sinful is overwhelming, there are some common arguments that some American Protestants use in favor of making alcohol a sin.

First, they say that drinking alcohol may cause a brother who can’t handle alcohol to stumble. Therefore it is best to avoid drinking, lest you help tempt another Christian. However, how many Christians stop eating steaks because it may cause a gluttonous brother to stumble? How many Christians remove the TV from the house, because it may cause a slothful brother to stumble? How many Christians quit going to R-rated movies when so many Christians are addicted to obscene images? It seems to me that alcohol gets singled out here.

Second, many say that consuming alcohol is unhealthy, and we should treat our bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit. Actually, according to scientific studies, alcohol in moderation is healthy. Drinking in moderation is even healthier than totally avoiding alcohol. Thus drinking in moderation is actually better for our body-temples than total abstinence. Another problem is that many Christians who use the “our bodies are temples” argument don’t practice this principle consistently. How many Christians have stopped eating red meat, fried foods, and white sugar because these foods are unhealthy? Hearing a Christian say drinking is unhealthy while he is finishing his 5th plate at an all-you-can-eat buffet is a bit contradictory.

Third, many say that Jesus didn’t really drink wine. Some say the Greek word oinos means not wine, but grape juice. I have yet to encounter a scholar who agrees with this. Either way, these folks have obviously not lived in the Mediterranean region, because grape juice wouldn’t last a day in the warm weather. Plus, why would Paul say in his Letter to the Ephesians that we should not get drunk on oinos if oinos simply means grape juice? Admittedly, the anti-alcohol forces correctly say that Jesus probably used watered-down wine, rather than the full-power stuff. Of course, he still used wine, whether full-strength or not.

Fourth, many say Jesus and his followers had to drink wine, because the water was dirty. Now that we have clean water, they say, we have no need to drink alcohol. However, I always ask, “why didn’t Jesus just turn the water at Cana into clean water?” Instead, he turned water into wine. In fact, at Cana, the good wine had all been drunk, showing that this was one good party, because the guests were already tapping the bad stuff. Jesus didn’t overturn tables or bust up a bunch of wine jars, but instead made the guests more and better-quality wine. While he didn’t make green beer or the regular brown beer (pictured on the left), he certainly showed that social drinking is not evil.

Basically, the total ban on alcohol practiced in some American churches is not biblical, nor historically Christian, but a ban resulting from 19th and 20th century American cultural moralism. This being said, we must always remember that alcohol does cause problems, and those who abuse alcohol or who are alcohol dependent should get help. Plus, just as we don’t like folks telling us we can’t drink in moderation, we must be sensitive to those who have chosen to completely abstain, and we should never put pressure on someone to drink alcohol. The Church only tolerates alcohol insofar as it is not used sinfully, and whether someone drinks is up to the person (a person could even just receive the host at communion). Whatever your personal views on alcohol, don’t make using alcohol in moderation a sin, and if you want to be “greater” than your Master, take it up with your Master. Just remember: he is God, you aren’t.

Let me leave you with a verse from Deuteronomy 14:26:

You may spend the money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen, or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, or whatever your heart desires; and there you shall eat in the presence of the LORD your God and rejoice, you and your household.

Today is the Feast of the Annunciation, when the angel announced to Mary that she would conceive Jesus, and she conceived Jesus by the Holy Spirit at that moment. Here is an Eastern prayer for the Annunciation Feast, complete with icon:

Lord who came down from heaven
and stayed in the womb of St. Mary,
after making the annunciation
to her through his head of angels, is blessed.
The Lord is blessed whom the heaven and earth,
Angels and mankind are praising always.
Oh Lord let the intercession of your mother
be a fort for us all.

Peace be unto thee,
Mother of the Sun of righteousness.
Peace be unto thee,
the palace of holiness,
Peace be unto thee
the ship full of blessings,
the fruit of your virginity is blessed,
Holy Mother please pray for us,
so that we would also
be holy like you in our lives.
Lord have mercy upon us.

Lord Jesus,
who was kind enough
to take the presence in humble virgin,
kindly live in us
and redeem us from
the strong bondages of sins and death.
Lord make us good and worthy divine homes,
so that you could stay in us.

Lord who had been kind enough
to take the human body from the virgin,
unite us all in your peace.
Unite us all with your grace.
Fill your love in us
so that we could share the love
with you and among us all.
Make us worthy to praise thee
with your blessed Mother and all the saints.

Holy virgin Mother, you are blessed,
By thy prayers
let the Holy church and her children
be saved from all sorts of calamities
and let all the departed get forgiveness for their sins.
Amen.

From Annunciation Prayers and Collects

Argent, over at Argent by the Tiber, shares some of the reasons why she became Catholic a year ago. The story is worth checking out. It is simply titled Conversion. She has been featured over at Pontifications. Here is an excerpt from her story I think is relevant:

The turmoil within the Anglican Communion and the depressing dead-end political fights which shoved Truth to the side left me in despair over where I should go. Over and over I asked myself that if Jesus prayed that ‘they would be one’ as He and the Father are one, why, oh why were all these churches fracturing? And why was I considering going to yet another branch-of-a-branch-of-a-branch that had split off from the trunk? Lord, to whom shall I go? Going to another off-shoot must surely be offensive, must give lie to the prayer that Christ prayed for his disciples.

I think this gets at the failure of American religion, and really the failure of individualism and “reading the Bible for yourself.” Does the Christian world really need another small continuing Anglican church? What about another break-off of a break-off Presbyterian group? What about another non-denominational church that grew out of a bible study? Maybe this division is inevitable, and I admire folks of all churches who stand up for the truth even while their national churches embrace heresy, but many of us don’t have to like all the division. Jesus doesn’t like division either. I am glad to see that Argent finally has found a home. It is always nice to be home.

Congratulations on your anniversary Argent! Stop by and tell her congrats yourself.

Jason’s recent post here, Community and Togetherness…Separation and Grief, is relevant to the topic, and I highly recommend his post.

I ran across the conversion story of William J. Cork, a former Lutheran Pastor (with a Seventh Day Adventist background) tonight and found a couple passages I wanted to share.

As I would articulate it in years to come, having been raised in a legalistic and sectarian environment, I had two critical issues: the Gospel and the church. I liked what Ford and Brinsmead [controversalists within the SDA--J] were saying about the Gospel’s message of unconditional forgiveness, but I didn’t think forming a splinter movement of a splinter movement was the answer. My study of the church’s history opened to me the continuity of the faith of the ages; experiences with other Christians led me to seek out new and wider forms of fellowship. The Gospel, I came to believe, must create a community of faith in continuity with the preaching of the Apostles. It must draw us toward other believers, not away from them. [emphasis mine--J]

Even though Mr. Cork eventually left the SDA denomination and became a Lutheran chaplin and pastor before finally entering the Catholic Church, his wife remains an Adventist.

Joy found herself pulled between me and her parents; my own father had joined the Adventist church not long before. In such emotionally charged surroundings, Joy was not about to even consider leaving; when her brother formally left, it was a second blow to her family. She has remained an Adventist to this day. Our marriage could have been shattered at that time had it not been for one of my professors, to whom I went for counseling. He helped me see that one who undergoes a conversion experience goes through the same sort of grief process as one who is watching a loved one die — and the convert’s family and friends go through a parallel process. There will be anger, and denial, and depression, he warned. And so there was. [emphasis mine, again--J]

I enjoyed the rest of his story as well. Looks like he’s also done a fair bit of other writing about the Faith on his site. I don’t why I haven’t heard of him before now, unless I have and forgotten.

Today is the Feast of Saint Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus. I wish everyone a blessed feast day. Here is a prayer for today’s feast:

God our Father,
Creator and Ruler of the universe,
in every age you call man
to develop and use his gifts for the good of others.
With St. Joseph as our example and guide,
help us to do the work you have asked
and come to the rewards you have promised.
We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
from New Saint Joseph Weekday Missal.

Appears in Prayers and Collects for the Feast of St. Joseph

I do not jump on band wagons but I am making an exception and asking you to jump on with me. Regarding the movie, you know, THE movie, other than shame on little Ronnie who has not only lost his hair but his mind and maybe his soul along with Dan Brown, the best thing I can say is to quote the following verbatim from Barbara N.

I made these free rss style buttons to help you promote THE DAVINCI OUTREACH. Please take a button for your own site. They link to http://www.davinciantidote.com/ To get the code, click here or go to the mirror post here and continue reading. I am supplying the bandwidth as a gift via my personal website onionboy.ca

I have e-mailed our priest the link for the Outreach and will pray that our parish will get involved.

I am Patrick, a sinner, most unlearned, the least of all the faithful, and utterly despised by many. My father was Calpornius, a deacon, son of Potitus, a priest, of the village Bannavem Taburniæ; he had a country seat nearby, and there I was taken captive.

I was then about sixteen years of age. I did not know the true God. I was taken into captivity to Ireland with many thousands of people—and deservedly so, because we turned away from God, and did not keep His commandments, and did not obey our priests, who used to remind us of our salvation. And the Lord brought over us the wrath of his anger and scattered us among many nations, even unto the utmost part of the earth, where now my littleness is placed among strangers.

And there the Lord opened the sense of my unbelief that I might at last remember my sins and be converted with all my heart to the Lord my God, who had regard for my abjection, and mercy on my youth and ignorance, and watched over me before I knew Him, and before I was able to distinguish between good and evil, and guarded me, and comforted me as would a father his son.

Hence I cannot be silent—nor, indeed, is it expedient—about the great benefits and the great grace which the Lord has deigned to bestow upon me in the land of my captivity; for this we can give to God in return after having been chastened by Him, to exalt and praise His wonders before every nation that is anywhere under the heaven.

Because there is no other God, nor ever was, nor will be, than God the Father unbegotten, without beginning, from whom is all beginning, the Lord of the universe, as we have been taught; and His Son Jesus Christ, whom we declare to have always been with the Father, spiritually and ineffably begotten by the Father before the beginning of the world, before all beginning; and by him are made all things visible and invisible.

He was made man, and, having defeated death, was received into heaven by the Father; and He hath given Him all power over all names in heaven, on earth, under the earth. Every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord and God, in whom we believe, and whose advent we expect soon to be. He is judge of the living and of the dead, who will render every man according to his deeds; and He has poured forth upon us abundantly the Holy Spirit, the gift and pledge of immortality. Who makes those who believe and obey, sons of God and joint heirs with Christ; and Him do we confess and adore, one God in the Trinity of the Holy Name.

–St. Patrick, Patron Saint of Ireland

I read the rest, and I didn’t find anything about green beer or corned beef.

Seriously, though, I think celebrating our older brothers and sisters in the faith who have, by God’s grace, been rewarded with their place around the throne is wonderful (we don’t call them Feast Days for nothing), but it saddens me when the memory of a Saint of such seeming humility and courage gets swallowed up by revelry, drunkeness and ethnic pride.

The irony here is that St. Patrick came to save a land from paganism and now his feast day is full of its hallmarks.

St. Patrick, pray for us…green beer and all.

Here is an excerpt from The First Apology of Saint Justin, which we are reading this week as a part of the Church Fathers Lenten Reading Plan:

And when Socrates endeavoured, by true reason and examination, to bring these things to light, and deliver men from the demons, then the demons themselves, by means of men who rejoiced in iniquity, compassed his death, as an atheist and a profane person, on the charge that “he was introducing new divinities;” and in our case they display a similar activity. For not only among the Greeks did reason(Logos) prevail to condemn these things through Socrates, but also among the Barbarians were they condemned by Reason (or the Word, the Logos) Himself, who took shape, and became man, and was called Jesus Christ;

Perhaps this sounds shocking to modern Christian ears. However, we Catholics believe that anything true in other religions is not to be condemned, because Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, and wherever there is truth anywhere, we can connect this to Jesus in some fashion. For St. Justin, Jesus is the Logos, and as the Logos (the architect of the universe, the universal Reason) anything divinely reasonable can be connected to Christ’s activity, even if Christ is unknown to the person acting reasonably. I say “divinely reasonable” because Justin does not mean mere logic or common-sense here, but acting in accord with divine justice and truth. Thus for Justin, Socrates and Plato may be said to be “Christians before Christ” because they (in their own limited way) submitted to Divine Reason, which is Christ. This does not mean that we excuse some of their behaviors or opinions that contradict Christian Teaching. Rather we mean that they, in a limited way, embraced the Logos while most around them did not.

Is this teaching dangerous liberalism? Is this universalism? Hardly. Third-century writer and theologian Origen was officially condemned for his universalism at the 5th ecumenical council, whereas Justin has never been official accused of universalism. Plus, Justin admits that most of Socrates’ detractors “rejoiced in iniquity” and were influenced by pagan gods, rightly demons rather than gods. In other words, among those in Athens, only a few could be said to be following Reason; thus all ways were not equally true. Justin and the Catholic Church do not teach that all ways are True, or that every path is as good as the next.

As to how this relates to salvation, we teach that those who have never been taught about Christ, yet who live according to Divine Reason, may have the chance to be saved. Those who openly reject Divine Reason will suffer a different fate. Ultimately it is up to God of course, since we humans have no way of knowing to what extent a person embraced divine Reason in relation to his/her situation or ignorance.

Also, the Catholic position is actually rather conservative because it assumes that Christian Truth is universal. If the truth of “thou shalt not steal” is only true when Christians obey or embrace it, then this truth is not universal at all, but only true some of the time. However, if we follow St. Justin, “thou shalt not steal” is true whenever anybody embraces the truth of the commandment. Thus, the truth of Christianity is so universal that it even passes beyond the borders of the Church, although in a more limited way than within the Church.

All of this seems reasonable to me, even divinely reasonable. What do you think? Note: If I have misunderstood or mischaracterized this nuanced Catholic belief, please let me know.

I was listening to Michael Barber’s “Reasons for Faith” on EWTN radio today, and he read an entry from “Swept Over”, the blog of Scott Lyons, a Protestant who sounds like a “doomed” man to me. Read this excerpt and be the judge:

Let me share with you the true riches of the Catholic Church. It is not found in her history, and it is not in her unity or charity (or even her hats). I do not find it in her strong moral stand within our culture or in her unrelenting grasp of right. It is not that she has given us the Scriptures or that she is, after two millennia, thoroughly orthodox. Don’t misread me - there are riches here. But her true riches are, unquestioningly for me, in her Mass.

Many of the riches in the Catholic Church I can explore as a Protestant. In many cases, I can even make them my own. But the Mass is wholly different, wholly other. It has its liturgies (the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist) that must be performed. And though the priest plays an essential role in the Mass, it is not about the priest. Or the music. Or the homily (sermonette). The Mass is a celebration of the Eucharist. And the Eucharist - and here lies the scandalon, the stumbling stone - is Christ.

…The Eucharist, therefore, celebrated as such, is either the greatest good or it is foul evil. I don’t know that there is a middle way.

And therein is my great struggle with Catholicism. It is the most profound and life-changing news I have ever received as a believer - that I can touch and experience and feast upon our Lord. And it is the most terrifying.

What am I to do with this Sacrament?

How many of you converts does this sound familar to? Perhaps from the days when it began to echo inside your own skull?

You can read the rest here. It’s worth a look.

I’ll definately keep an eye on Scott’s blog and pray he’ll know what do to with the Sacrament when the time comes.

I just finished updating the Church Fathers Lenten Reading Plan slightly. You’ll notice that the plan is now outlined in table form, with the days in Lent, the readings, and the actual calendar date the reading is scheduled for. This makes it more convenient to know what’s going on. And to modify a phrase from old G.I. Joe episodes, “Knowing what’s going on is half the battle.”

Ignatius press has just released The Ignatius Bible: Revised Standard Version: Second Catholic Edition. It is praised as:

A completely new typeset and designed edition of the popular Ignatius Revised Standard Version Bible, with minor revisions to some of the archaic language used in the first edition. This revised version is a contemporary English translation without dumbing-down the text. This second edition of the RSV doesn’t put the biblical text through a filter to make it acceptable to current tastes and prejudices, and it retains the beauty of the RSV language that has made it such a joy to read and reflect on the Word of God. Now the only Catholic Bible in standard English is even more beautiful in word and design!

In other words, this new RSV edition conforms to Catholic standards of translation and scholarship. While the original RSV-CE was great, this edition seems to be even better. No inclusive language, no “you can’t find Christ in the Old Testament” assumptions, no “radical higher critical scholarship outweighs 2000 years of tradition” translation principles, and so forth. I have mine on order from Amazon. Currently the cost of the hardbound is around 18.00 at Amazon, a great discount off the 29.99 retail price.

One of the goals of our “Building Bridges” room on Paltalk is fostering charitable ecumenical fellowship and discussion. That being the case, most nights we end up chatting with Christians of many different stripes (I would say creeds and confessions, but not all us have those!)

Where two or three different brands of Christians are gathered together, you can almost bet that it’s only a matter of time before somebody brings up “the essentials” and how we should just agree on those and call it a night. Now, other folks more able than I have written about the difficulty of getting a bunch of autonomous factions to agree on just what “the essentials” are, so I won’t go there. Instead, I’ll just share something that came to mind as I was thinking on this topic tonight.

I think we’ve been given a short list of essentials from the One all us Christians call Lord and God and Savior.

“Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:19-20)

What did Christ command the Apostles to teach? He told them to teach these disciples they were making and baptizing to observe ALL that He commanded. That’s “A” double “L.”

So, did Jesus mean for this ALL to be whittled down to a few nebulous “essentials” after the Apostles had gone to their reward? Was it only the chosen few who lived in the Apostolic age that received the full, uncut teaching while the rest of us have to make do with the little bit we can all agree on?

From his promise to be with them “until the end of the age”, I don’t think so. I think it points to their ministry surviving them in the words of the New Testament, the Sacred Tradition and their successors, the Bishops.

What do I think “the essentials” are? Observing all that Jesus commanded the Apostles. How do I think we can know what that is? By Scripture and Tradition, guided by the Magisterium.

I was made aware earlier tonight of a play that will be staged in St. Francis De Sales Catholic Church in Salisbury, Maryland next Sunday. It’s called “Fool’s Mass” and depicts a gang of “village idiots” who try to celebrate Christmas Mass after the death of their Priest. It was created by the experimental theatre troupe called Dzieci.

They are apparently performing it IN the sanctuary, ON the altar.

You can see pictures from past performances here, here and here. Now, to my eyes it looks a bit grotesque and dark, but that doesn’t mean that it is evil. Life is grotesque and dark sometimes. I cannot judge the play as I have never read it nor seen it performed. Apparently, the troupe does work with the mentally ill, so I don’t think they are trying to be exploitative. I don’t know what the motives of the troupe are in respect to a possible parody of the Mass or the Catholic Faith.

My issue is that they are doing this in a real Catholic Church on a real Catholic altar. This upsets me. Build a stage if you want to do a play. It just doesn’t seem right to bring buffoonery and the theatre of the absurd before the altar that represents Our Lord and where that Most Holy sacrifice is offered. This is beyond bad liturgical music.

I love theatre, creativity and the arts, but this just beyond the pale in my estimation.

Am I over-reacting? From what I hear, some of the parishioners share my dismay. Should our altars be used as props? What could or would you do if this happened at your parish?

More info:
Article on the play
St. Francis De Sales Catholic Church

The chatters in our “Catholics Building Bridges” room on Pal-Talk discuss “The Didache“, possibly the oldest extant Christian document outside of the New Testament. This is the first in a series of Podcasts related to our “Church Fathers Lenten Reading Plan.”

Episode 4 (3-1-06): Lenten Discussion: the Didache (18.5 Mb, 46:25)

(Feel free to check our other episodes and subscribe to our feed on The Ancient and Future Podcast page.)