The Quintessential Question of our Faith



Dear Theophilus,

In this past week’s Gospel reading (Lk 9:18-24), Christ asks the quintessential question of our faith:

“Who do you say that I am?” (Lk 9:20)

Our entire faith hinges on how we answer this very pointed question.

If, like Peter, we answer: “The Christ of God.” (Lk 0:20), then everything else should fall neatly into place. There can be no further questioning of our faith. There certainly should be no further questioning of what we believe in or how we act morally and theologically.

Christ is asking us to either accept him for all that he is, or to reject him.

It’s on this question that the arguments of our Christian brethren that feel they can pick and choose Christ’s teachings that are relevant to them begin to fall apart. For, if they cannot accept all that Christ teaches, then how can they consider him to be The Christ of God?

How can we not consider the Eucharist to be the source and summit of our faith when Christ told us “I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” (Jn 6:51) if he is not The Christ of God?

If Jesus is truly The Christ of God, then how can we not consider the teaching of the Catholic Church to be divinely inspired when, appearing to the disciples after the Resurrection, Jesus said to them “’Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.’ When he had said this, he breathed on them, (Jn 20:21-22) a commissioning that continues to this day in the conferring of the sacrament of priesthood. A priesthood in the Catholic Church commissioned when Christ said: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.” (Mt. 16:18)

The teachings simply fall into place once we truly understand what it means to answer Christ’s question like Peter did at his institution as the fist Pope: “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” (Mt. 16:16)

The list of what becomes indisputable when we answer this question, Who do you say that I am? is too lengthy to discuss in a blog post, there are 2865 paragraphs in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It’s all there, and if Jesus is The Christ of God, then each of those paragraphs makes perfect sense.

As Fr. Robert Barron puts it so well (as he always does) in his Catholicism Series, if we do not answer like Peter, then there is very little to differentiate Christianity from the other world religions. If Jesus is not The Christ of God, then he is little more than a prophet, like Elijah or Mohammed, who have had (or claimed to have had) a revelation from God. If Jesus is not The Messiah, the Son of the living God, then he is little more than a new Buddha who has fond another path towards enlightenment. If Jesus is not The Christ of God, then could he be the next incarnation of Vishnu, come to teach us how to attain Moksha?

This is the quintessential question of our faith. How you answer it forms the core of what you believe and compels you how to act on those beliefs. So,…

Who do you say that He is?

The Flesh of the Son of Man



Dear Theophilus,

Last Sunday’s Gospel and homily by Fr. Charles got me to thinking about the words of Fulton Sheen in his book Life of Christ. With his usual great insight, Fulton Sheen teaches us that if we are to truly listen to what Christ has to say in the Gospels, then we can really only draw one of three conclusions:

1. Christ was telling the truth;
2. Christ was a liar; or
3. Christ was a madman.

I’ve used this teaching in my World Religions while juxtaposing the religions of the world to Catholicism. I told my students that it was possible for anybody to start a religion. In fact, I told them that that morning I had decided to start a new religion called LeBlancism and that I was god. I then told them that they had to take this as truth because I am not a liar and that I am definitely not a madman (to which a voice from the back of the class chimed in to everyone’s amusement: “That’s a matter of perspective, sir.”)

To understand how Fulton Sheen’s three conclusions relate to Christ, we need to revisit the Gospel reading for the 20^th Sunday in Ordinary Time:

Jesus said to the people: “I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

The people then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

So Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day; for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in them.

“Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.” (Jn 6:51-58)

Jesus did not back down from this statement. He did not soften it by saying he was talking metaphorically or symbolically. He steadfastly repeated that salvation is to be had by eating His flesh and drinking His blood. In his Catholicism series, Fr. Robert Barron points out something that makes this statement even harder to swallow (pardon the pun); that if we return to the original Greek of John’s Gospel Jesus does not use the verb phagein (to eat) but instead he uses the verb trogein (to gnaw or devour), indicating the way we should approach the Eucharist. Since the Eucharist is the life giving bread of Christ’s flesh, we must devour it, relishing the sustenance it brings to our souls.

Keeping this in mind, it’s not surprising that many fell away from Jesus, refusing to follow him because they saw him as either a liar or a madman. The emphasis Christ put on this Eucharistic teaching, however, tells us that this cannot be a question of perspective – that there is only one conclusion that we can draw from Christ’s words:

He was telling the Truth!

The Catholicism Project

Dear Theophilus,

I was recently a part of a team that was entrusted with the task of preparing the faith formation day for the staff of a catholic high school. Knowing that many of my colleagues lack an understanding of what our Catholic faith really is all about, I pushed hard to have Fr. Robert Barron’s new DVD series, The Catholicism Project, included as part of the day.

Here is the trailer:

I was both excited and frightened when I pressed play on the first section of this monumental 10 part series called Amazed and Afraid. In this 50 minute presentation, Fr. Barron delves into the foundation of the Catholic faith: the Word become incarnate in the form of Jesus Christ. I was afraid of the reaction such a strong presentation would create amongst some very liberal minded catholic educators. To my pleasant surprise, there was applause at the end of the movie.

In fact, many people came forward wanting to know more about the series, if the school had a copy, and where they could purchase their own (you can buy it here). A number of people even commented that this was the kind of catechism that they were looking for; not only teaching them the basis of our faith, but in doing it in such a wonderfully dynamic way.

If you haven’t already seen The Catholicism Project, make plans to do so. If your parish isn’t planning on showing it, the series is currently airing on EWTN and Salt + Light.

Heeding the Call - Updated

Dear Theophilus,

I had mentioned that I had hesitated a long time before starting this blog. Although I gained the courage to start through prayer and meditation, the catalyst to start came with my coming across three different quotes that urged me in the same direction.

To put them in chronological order:

“When the Church does not speak, others will speak instead.” Blessed Cardinal Newman – Loss and Gain (1848).

“Today, the Catholic story is being told in the media, but it’s being told by the wrong people in the wrong way.” Fr. Robert Barron – Catholicism (2011).

“Identify new ways of evangelization with missionary audacity” Benedict XVI’s address to the Council of European Bishops Conferences (Oct. 2011)

Reading the first two quotes, I was ready to let those more in the know, closer to the Church, closer to Rome, tell the story. Surely whatever I have to add to the telling of the Catholicism story would be negligible in comparison to these great thinkers. Then I heard of Benedict’s call for “new ways of evangelization with missionary audacity.” What intrigued me the most was the Bishops Conference’s interpretation of these new ways of evangelization to include new technology such as the internet. I began to believe that I could add to the discussion, that I have something to tell in this wondrous story.

Are we all called to evangelize – to tell the story of Christ through the Catholic Church? The answer is an emphatic “Yes!” Are we all called to do it in the same way? “No,” to each their own special way of spreading the Good News. But we need to remember that if we do not speak for the Church, who will? And will they get the story right?


**Post Scriptum**

Dear Theophilus,

A friend asked me to clarify for you exactly who are the wrong people telling our Catholic story, as well as who are the right people to tell it. I hope that this helps you to better understand.

The wrong people Fr. Barron writes about and that are implied by Cardinal Newman's question are non-Catholics - most notably in the American media. It is the responsability, and duty, of Catholics (lay and clerical alike, who make up 'The Church') to learn, practice and preach their faith, thus modelling and telling the Catholic story.

There is no mistake to infer that the narrative is to be told by a chosen people. The mistake is mine in not stating more clearly that Fr. Barron and Cardinal Newman refer to the Church in its entirety, and that we should all be standing up to explain what exactly it means to be Catholic.

The Similarities of Fr. Barron and Cardinal Newman

Dear Theophilus,

As this blog develops, you will probably notice that much of what I have to write about are the books that I’m currently reading to deepen my knowledge and faith of our Lord. By putting my thoughts down in writing, I hope to meditate more on scripture and the wise thoughts of others.

Two books that I have read recently are Fr. Robert Barron’s Catholicism (based on the script from his recently released 10 part dvd series with the same name), and a selection of Sayings from the works of Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman. Although Cardinal Newman began his Catholic ministry 164 years ago, and his Catholic writing dates between 1845 and 1885, I was surprised to find a number of similarities between Blessed Newman and Fr. Barron’s book which was published this fall.

I imagine that I will return a number of times to both writers, but I wanted to write about their thoughts on Hell, as this past Sunday’s Gospel reading (Mt. 25:1-13) echoes what both men have to say.

In his Parochial and Plain Sermons, Blessed Cardinal Newman states “Heaven would be hell to an irreligious man.” In Catholicism Fr. Barron writes that “Hell burns with the fire of God’s Love.” It’s not what both men say that jumped out at me right away, but rather the similarities in how both men explained their versions of hell. Both Cardinal Newman and Fr. Barron describe hell as an inability on unpreparedness on a human’s part to be exposed to and accepting of God’s love. Fr. Barron likens the searing pain on an unreceptive soul to being like the pain one feels leaving a darkened movie theatre into a bright summer afternoon, eyes unaccustomed to the bright light. Cardinal Newman describes the plight of an irreligious man in Heaven as being much like that of somebody who is at a party where they have absolutely nothing in common with the other guests, wishing they had prepared themselves to be able to relate to their companions.

Reading this, one couldn’t be blamed for falling into the heresy of Universalism – the notion that everybody makes it to Heaven whether they have led good or evil lives, and that some are better suited to accept God’s love than others. We need to remember, however, that Jesus tells us about the chasm that separates Heaven from hell in the parable of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31). When we go back to Cardinal Newman’s writing we see that he said that “Heaven would be like hell to an irreligious man” and not that it is. Also, Fr. Barron tells us that “Hell burns with the fire of God’s love” but does not incorporate hell into Heaven.

How does this relate to this week’s Gospel, the parable of the Wise and Foolish Bridesmaids (or the 10 Virgins) (Mt. 25:1-13)? It is the sense of preparedness that is needed to be ready for the coming of God’s kingdom. The Gospel fittingly ends with the line: “for you know neither the day nor the hour,” a reminder to us that we must be continually preparing our hearts to accept God’s love. And what is hell, if not the absence of God’s love from our eternal lives. If we do not prepare ourselves accordingly, we will be like the bridesmaids without oil, left in the dark, shut out from the warmth of God’s love. When we do find our way into God’s presence, will we be burned by the radiance of His love or destined to the awkwardness of having noting in common with those we meet in eternal life?