The Devil beware Father Gabriele Amorth

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/the-devil-beware-father-gabriele-amorth/2014/05/12/e079aa76-38b3-4c00-8296-e5b74a5982a5_story.html

By Anthony Faiola, Published: May 12

by Anthony Faiola

ROME — The den of the Catholic Church’s best-known exorcist is an unassuming place, a small third-floor room in a home for aging priests hidden in an obscure corner of southern Rome. I walk down the hospital-like hallway on my way to meet him, and the priest anticipates my knock before it happens. The door swings open, and there he is.

The Rev. Gabriele Amorth, 89, peers up with goldfish eyes through his Hubble-telescope glasses.

“Enter,” says the diminutive priest.

I obey.

The room is stark, outfitted with a hospital bed and numerous images of Jesus and the Virgin Mary. Then there are the mementos, which Amorth began collecting after he was appointed an exorcist back in the 1980s. He has conducted thousands of spiritual cleansings since then, keeping just a few of the bits and bobs he likes to call “the stuff that gets spewed from mouths.” Nails. Keys. Chains. Plastic figurines.

(Read: A modern pope gets old school on the Devil)

“What seems to be spit turns out to be a nail,” he said with a seen-it-all tone. “I don’t give it much importance.”

His services, though in great demand, are not always needed.

“Most times there’s no actual diabolical presence, and my job lies in suggesting [to] those that come to me to live a life of faith and prayer,” he said. “And this is enough to assuage the fears of those afraid of the Devil’s ills.”

But other times, he said, “there really is a diabolical influence.”

Twice, Amorth said, he saw possessed victims levitate. “We try to keep the person in the armchair,” he said, adding that demons “do it just to show off.”

An hour later, he invites me and an Italian colleague to witness an exorcism ourselves.

His exorcism room is a retrofitted, white-tiled kitchen on the first floor of the residence, decorated with more images of Jesus and Mary. A large statue of the Virgin, to which Amorth’s eyes constantly dart, sits in one corner of the room. When we enter, he is donning a black cassock draped in a purple stole vestment and is consoling a 40-something Neapolitan housewife. Her hair is well-coiffed, and her sparkly sneakers and Bulgari sunglasses say soccer mom more than demonic host. In fact, the woman, who gives her name only as Antonella, seems perfectly normal at first.

That will change.

Unlike the speedy rituals shown in the movies, real exorcisms are more of a slow burn, often involving years of repeated rites before the big cleanse. Antonella, who drove up to Rome from Naples with her husband, Michele, for her latest exorcism, claims to have been possessed by multiple demons for the better part of 17 years.

Both she and Michele blame the affliction on a curse by a Devil-worshiping childless friend who they say envied Antonella’s fecundity as a mother of two. They knew something was wrong, they said, when Antonella began throwing violent fits after receiving the Eucharist at Mass and going into trances in which she spoke Aramaic and German — languages she said she has never studied. It would typically take three grown men to subdue her, the couple said.

After four years of exorcisms with Amorth, however, her fits have become progressively less violent. She says she has begun to view the process as a long-term treatment of a terrible disease.

“But one of the soul,” she said.

After a round of praying, Amorth, aided by three assistants, finally launches his spiritual attack.

He begins chanting in Latin, commanding the presumed devils inside Antonella to reveal themselves. Several minutes pass before Antonella reacts. She begins choking, coughing up phlegm. She moans and rocks back and forth. As if in pain, she demands that the chanting stop.

Amorth refuses, shouting, “Tell me your name!”

Antonella writhes in her seat, hissing, “No! No!” She shakes her head, her eyes rolling to the back of their sockets. In an altered voice, she says, “I will not!”

“Tell me your name!” Amorth repeats, until finally she spits out a name: Asmodeus, a demon from scriptural lore.

“How many are you?” the priest demands, repeating the question as Antonella grunts and shakes her head violently.

Finally, she responds defiantly: “We are five!”

Amorth begins making the sign of the cross on her forehead, prompting her to recoil. The chanting and blessings go on for several more minutes before Antonella calms down. Ten minutes later, she comes around as if from a dream. She opens her eyes and slumps in her chair.

After his bout with the demons, Amorth simply shrugs.

“That,” he says, “was a light one.”

Purgatory on Earth

New Oxford Review

Christopher Gawley is an attorney in the New York City area. His academic articles have been published in The South Dakota Law Review, The Capitol University Law Review, and The George Washington Law Review. He regularly writes book reviews and other articles for The Remnant. The Idiot. By Fyodor Dostoyevsky.

“Temporal punishments are suffered by some in this life only, by some after death, by some both here and hereafter, but all of them before that last and strictest judgment. But not all who suffer temporal punishments after death will come to eternal punishments, which are to follow after that judgment.” — St. Augustine 



Sin scars. God’s law written on our hearts testifies that sin — even forgiven sin — has real consequences. The wounds sin leaves on a soul require satisfaction, whether by penance in this life or purgation in the next. Though the concept of Purgatory has been attacked by Protestant “reformers” and Eastern schismatics for centuries, it is an infallible dogma of Holy Mother Church. Scripture and Tradition testify to the reality of Purgatory. It is not a marginal teaching; it reflects divine truth and informs the spirituality central to an authentically Catholic life.

A reminder of Purgatory may seem an inapposite introduction to a work by legendary novelist Fyodor Dostoyevsky. But in one of the more remarkable literary and religious ironies, Dostoyevsky’s novel The Idiot is in fact a purgatorial story. Undoubtedly, The Idiot is a biting critique of the Russian aristocracy written fifty years before its destruction in the final Bolshevik conflagration. But Dostoyevsky is always a philosopher before he is a social commentator, and The Idiot is a profound testament to the power of purgatorial justice and mercy — something so ingrained in our nature that even Dostoyevsky, a lifelong anti-Catholic, uses purgation as the book’s primary theme without ever connecting it to its dogmatic equivalent.

Set in St. Petersburg in the 1860s, the novel is centered on a guileless “idiot,” Prince Lev Nikolayevich Myshkin. Rather than what we think of as a conventional idiot, Prince Myshkin is a sweet and loving soul. Dostoyevsky’s description of him is more a commentary on those around him than on the Prince himself. In keeping with another New Testament principle, Dostoyevsky’s naïve Myshkin is a foil to the sophisticated and intellectual society that surrounds him: “But the foolish things of the world hath God chosen, that he may confound the wise; and the weak things of the world hath God chosen, that he may confound the strong” (1 Cor. 1:27).

The novel begins on a train — a metaphoric introduction suggesting that the story we are about to read is one that involves journey and change. Myshkin is a threadbare traveler returning to Russia after years of treatment in Switzerland for his “idiotic” condition — epilepsy. Dostoyevsky, himself an epileptic, often employed this condition as an important character trait in his novels, and the same is true of The Idiot.

What strikes the reader almost immediately about Prince Myshkin is his child-like innocence. He is returning to Russia in his late twenties with no family, no funds, and no clue as to how he will support himself. On the train ride he meets Parfyon Semyonovich Rogozhin, who serves throughout the novel as Myshkin’s rival and principal antagonist. Also in his late twenties, Rogozhin, the boorish and hotheaded son of a wealthy merchant, is returning home from a short self-imposed exile following his father’s death. Dostoyevsky creates in the juxtaposition of Myshkin and Rogozhin a rich depiction of the fall of man — Myshkin representing Adam before the Fall, graced with preternatural gifts, and Rogozhin representing Adam after the Fall, fleshly to the core. On their trip, Rogozhin recounts his arguments with his family and his infatuation with Nastassya Filippovna. The two young men part in St. Petersburg with Rogozhin’s impulsive invitation that Myshkin stay with him at his home.

Once in St. Petersburg, Myshkin makes his way to the aristocratic Yepanchin home, headed by a retired general and father of three daughters of marriageable age. The general’s wife’s family is of honorable and ancient Russian lineage, of whom the Prince is a possible distant relative. Myshkin’s decision to visit the Yepanchins is based upon this tenuous connection; he has come to inquire whether they, as successful and experienced people, can provide him with some guidance as to what he should do now that he has returned to his native country.

The Yepanchin family is introduced as a microcosm of the Russian aristocracy: a “respected” family filled with duplicity, fixated on social scheming, and racked by boredom. Accordingly, in a fit of psychological projection, they view the Prince’s visit with considerable suspicion: After all, he cannot simply want their advice — he must be scheming for something else. While making the acquaintance of the Yepanchins, Myshkin sees a portrait of Nastassya Filippovna and is immediately overcome by her great beauty.

Nastassya Filippovna is connected to the Yepanchins through the general’s friend, the debauched Afanassy Ivanovich Totsky, Nastassya’s foster-father who adopted her as a young girl and later seduced her. Totsky and Gen. Yepanchin plot to marry Nastassya off to the general’s assistant, Gavrila (“Ganya”) Ardalyonovich Ivolgin, also in his late twenties. Though Ganya loves the general’s youngest daughter, Aglaya, he has agreed to marry Nastassya, whom he despises, in exchange for a payment of 75,000 rubles from Totsky.

We are thus introduced to Nastassya on the eve of announcing her decision whether or not she will marry Ganya. At a cocktail party to mark the occasion, Nastassya publicly asks Myshkin whether she should marry Ganya. He advises her to say no, and so she does. At that point, Rogozhin and his rowdy cohort crash the party. He announces that he will give Nastassya 100,000 rubles if she will leave with him that night. Myshkin then offers his hand to Nastassya and announces that he has just inherited a fortune. Nastassya is touched by Myshkin’s offer but deems herself too debauched for the innocent Prince. She leaves with the insolent Rogozhin.

Over the next several months, Myshkin and Rogozhin trade Nastassya back and forth as she cannot make up her mind between them. Rogozhin’s “love” for Nastassya is all-consuming — it is a type of burning obsession that destroys rather than edifies. Over the course of the book, it is clear that Rogozhin both loves and hates Myshkin, and a strange, foreboding friendship develops between them. He even plans to stab Myshkin but is thwarted by the latter’s sudden epileptic fit.

All the while the guileless Myshkin is hounded by charlatans masquerading as creditors of his newfound estate; he chooses to diminish his inheritance by paying the spurious claims rather than dishonoring the dishonorable by challenging their dubious veracity.

In the midst of his pursuit of the fickle Nastassya, Myshkin begins to fall in love with the capricious Aglaya, who feels the same but openly mocks him and pretends away her love for him. Her family sees through the spoiled girl’s charade and begins to treat Myshkin as her fiancé. Her love for him comes out into the open, paradoxically, after he embarrasses himself at a party thrown for him and Aglaya, at which he interacts clumsily with the haughty guests and breaks an ancient Chinese vase. His night culminates in another epileptic fit.

During their courtship of sorts, Aglaya receives letters from Nastassya in which she implores Aglaya to marry the Prince. After his disastrous introduction to the aristocracy, and as if to spite them, Aglaya forces the issue between Myshkin and Nastassya. The women want the Prince to decide between them. Even though he loves Aglaya in the romantic sense of the term, his compassion for the wounded Nastassya prompts him to pause, albeit for a moment. This pause is enough to convince Aglaya to flee the Prince, and, in turn, Nastassya agrees to marry him.

But the marriage does not take place: Nastassya leaves him at the altar and runs off again with Rogozhin. Myshkin follows them to St. Petersburg only to find that Rogozhin has stabbed her to death. The book ends with a vigil over her dead body, after which the surviving main characters leave Russia: Rogozhin to Siberia, Aglaya to Poland with a deceitful nobleman, and Myshkin to Switzerland. The ending for the book’s central characters is a metaphor of sorts for Russia’s inability to retain her young citizens.

As any Dostoyevsky fan knows, there are certain characters and dualities that are repeated in his works, and The Idiot is no exception. The spoiled aristocratic beauty is contrasted to the lower-class woman-child of suspect morals. The innocent soul who radiates goodness is contrasted to the boorish man of depravity. There are licentious men, superficial middle-aged pseudo-intellectuals, sickly boys, and, of course, villainous Poles. Dostoyevsky uses certain motifs over and over again: Catholic bashing, epilepsy, murder, and grinding poverty. But the gift that separates Dostoyevsky from other writers is his ability to reinvest these same types and motifs in characters and situations that are as fresh and compelling as the first time one reads them.

But why is this story one of purgation? It is because Myshkin cannot have Nastassya: She persists in sin and, in some measure, disqualifies herself from a relationship with a pure soul like Myshkin. Her senseless fleeing from him, over and over again, is not as senseless as it seems, and to whom she flees says much. Nastassya knows she cannot have Myshkin — her sins have defiled her. She flees from that which she desires most because nature, as it were, compels her to do so. As for Myshkin, his love for her is twofold: It is both a self-sacrificing love that seeks to heal and an aesthetic infatuation. But make no mistake, Myshkin’s hesitation at the novel’s climax underscores the fact that his love for Nastassya is profound and consuming. But it is a love that cannot be — the scarring on her soul prevents it.

Another central theme in The Idiot is that of “attraction,” in this case, the compulsion toward searing beauty. Nastassya is one of those rare beauties whose mere presence radically changes men; she is the type of woman for whom men will throw everything away in order to pursue, as if hypnotized. Dostoyevsky captures the deleterious effect such objectification has on a young woman.

The Idiot also treats the relationship between wealth and charity. We catch a glimpse of the death throes of an ossified aristocratic culture that has forgotten that it owes service to the greater good. The Yepanchins are emblematic of the inward rot of the Russian aristocracy — with its overweening self-interest and smug self-satisfaction. This is a theme that Dostoyevsky and the other great writers of Russia’s Golden Age explore in near-prophetic fashion. In some ways, the demise of the Russian aristocracy some fifty years after Dostoyevsky finished The Idiot was anti-climactic; it was already long since dead. But for Dostoyevsky, a renewed aristocracy was not the cure for Russia’s ills (nor were the revolutionaries). Rather, what Russia needed then — and needs now — is to return to its authentic Christian roots.

The Key to Counsel Is Prayer

Pope at General Audience: The Key to Counsel Is Prayer

'Squeeze It In,' Whether You Are on the Bus or the Street

VATICAN CITY, May 07, 2014 (Zenit.org) - Pope Francis has continued his catechesis on the gifts of the Holy Spirit, this week discussing the third gift, counsel. During today’s General audience, the Pontiff told those gathered in St. Peter’s Square how prayer is needed for counsel.

Relating to those present, he said, “We know how important it is, in the most difficult moments, to be able to count on the suggestions of wise persons who love us.”
Yet, the Pope added how the faithful must not forget that we can count on the one who is wisest. Through the gift of counsel, he said, “it is God Himself, with his Spirit, who illumines our heart, to make us understand the right way to speak and to behave and the way to follow.”
Counsel, therefore, is the gift with which the “Holy Spirit renders our conscience capable of making a concrete choice in communion with God, according to the logic of Jesus and of his Gospel,” said Pope Francis.
Francis explained that the Spirit helps us “not to fall prey to egoism or our own way of seeing things” since he “makes us grow interiorly … grow positively ... and grow in the community.” In short, he said he “helps us to grow” and “to live in community.”

The essential condition to preserve this gift is prayer, the Pontiff stressed.

“We always come back to the same subject: prayer! But prayer is so important. To pray with the prayers that we all know from childhood, but also to pray with our own words. To pray to the Lord: ‘Lord, help me, counsel me, what must I do now?’"

With prayer, he said, “we make room for the Spirit to come to help us at that moment. To counsel us on what we must all do. Prayer, never forget prayer! Never!”

Inviting those present to pray whenever you can ‘squeeze it in,’ the Pontiff reminded them that, “No one, no one is aware when we pray on the bus, on the street: we pray in silence with our heart.” Therefore, “let us take advantage of these moments to pray, to pray that the Spirit will give us this gift of counsel,” he said.

“But," he asked, "how does this gift act in us?”

Giving the response, he explained: “The moment we receive him and host him in our heart, the Holy Spirit begins immediately to make us sensitive to his voice and to direct our thoughts, sentiments and intentions according to God’s heart.”
This “intimacy” with God and listening to his Word, he said, “little by little,” allows us to “put aside our personal logic, dictated most often by our closures, our prejudices and our ambitions,” adding that we instead “learn to ask the Lord: what is your desire? What is your will? What pleases you?”

Stating the effect of asking these questions, he said it's “a profound attunement [which] matures in us.” When we ask, we can start to see the truth of the words in Matthew’s Gospel: “‘When they deliver you up, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say; for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.’”

“Although the Spirit is the one who counsels us, we must make room for the Spirit, so he can counsel us," said Francis, adding that “to make room is to pray, to pray so that He will come and help us always.”

Closing, the 77-year-old Pontiff invited the faithful to pray these words from Psalm 16: “‘I bless the Lord who gives me counsel; in the night also my heart instructs me. I keep the Lord always before me; because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.'"

“May the Spirit always be able to infuse this certainty in our heart and thus fill us with his consolation and his peace! Ask always for the gift of counsel.” (D.C.L.)

***

On Zenit's Web page:

Full Translation: http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/on-the-gift-of-counsel

POPE FRANCIS gets old school on the Devil

A modern pope gets old school on the Devil

By Anthony Faiola, 

Published: May 10

VATICAN CITY — A darling of liberal Catholics and an advocate of inclusion and forgiveness, Pope Francis is hardly known for fire and brimstone.

Yet, in his words and deeds, the new pope is locked in an epic battle with the oldest enemy of God and creation:

The Devil.

After his little more than a year atop the Throne of St. Peter, Francis’s teachings on Satan are already regarded as the most old school of any pope since at least Paul VI, whose papacy in the 1960s and 1970s fully embraced the notion of hellish forces plotting to deliver mankind unto damnation.

Largely under the radar, theologians and Vatican insiders say, Francis has not only dwelled far more on Satan in sermons and speeches than his recent predecessors have, but also sought to rekindle the Devil’s image as a supernatural entity with the forces­ of evil at his beck and call.

Last year, for instance, Francis laid hands on a man in a wheelchair who claimed to be possessed by demons, in what many saw as an impromptu act of cleansing. A few months later, he praised a group long viewed by some as the crazy uncles of the Roman Catholic Church — the International Association of Exorcists — for “helping people who suffer and are in need of liberation.”

“ ‘But Father, how old-fashioned you are to speak about the Devil in the 21st century,’ ” Francis, quoting those who have noted his frequent mentions of the Devil, said last month while presiding over Mass at the Vatican’s chapel in St. Martha’s House. He warned those gathered on that chilly morning to be vigilant and not be fooled by the hidden face of Satan in the modern world. “Look out because the Devil is present,” he said.

Since its foundation, the church has taught the existence of the Devil. But in recent decades, progressive priests and bishops, particularly in the United States and Western Europe, have tended to couch Satan in more allegorical terms. Evil became less the wicked plan of the master of hell than the nasty byproduct of humanity’s free will. Even Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, a lofty German theologian, often painted evil with a broad brush.

Enter the plain-talking first pope from Latin America, where mystical views of Satan still hold sway in broad areas of the region. During his time as cardinal of Buenos Aires before rising to the papacy, Francis was known for stark warnings against “the tempter” and “the father of lies.” Now, his focus on the Devil is raising eyebrows even within the normally unquestioning walls of Vatican City.

“Pope Francis never stops talking about the Devil; it’s constant,” said one senior bishop in Vatican City who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to speak freely. “Had Pope Benedict done this, the media would have clobbered him.”

Yet, as with so many of his actions, Francis may simply be correctly reading the winds of the Catholic Church.

Rising demand for exorcists

Although it is difficult to measure, Vatican officials talk about a resurgence of mystical rites in the church, including exorcism — or the alleged act of evicting demons from a living host. Cardinals in Milan; Turin, Italy; and Madrid, for instance, recently moved to expand the number of exorcists in their dioceses to cope with what they have categorized as surging demand.

But by focusing on old-school interpretations of the Devil, some progressive theologians complain, the pope is undermining his reputation as a leader who in so many other ways appears to be more in step with modern society than his predecessor.

“He is opening the door to superstition,” said Vito Mancuso, a Catholic theologian and writer.

Among the things lurking behind that door is the alleged gateway to hell guarded by the small cluster of officially anointed exorcists of the Roman Catholic Church.

By most accounts, the ranks of official exorcists number between 500 and 600 in a global church of more than 1 billion Catholics, with the vast majority operating in Latin America and Eastern Europe. This week, at the ninth and largest Vatican-sanctioned convention on exorcism, attendees gushed about the fresh recognition being afforded the field.

Almost 200 delegates — most of them priests and nuns — from more than two dozen nations talked about how Satanic cults are spreading like wildfire in the age of the Internet.

The new pope, exorcists say, has become their champion in the face of modern skeptics, many of them within the Catholic faith. Officially, those claiming to be possessed must first undergo psychiatric evaluations. But exorcists say that liberal Catholic bishops have often rejected their services even after such due diligence.

“The sad truth is that there are many bishops and priests in our church who do not really believe in the Devil,” said the Rev. Gabriele Amorth, the 89-year-old priest who is perhaps the closest thing the church has to a Hollywood-style exorcist. “I believe Pope Francis is speaking to them. Because when you don’t believe, the Devil wins.”

During the conference, the Rev. Cesar Truqui, an exorcist based in Switzerland, recounted one experience he had aboard a Swissair flight. “Two lesbians,” he said, had sat behind him on the plane. Soon afterward, he said, he felt Satan’s presence. As he silently sought to repel the evil spirit through prayer, one of the women, he said, began growling demonically and threw chocolates at his head.

Asked how he knew the woman was possessed, he said that “once you hear a Satanic growl, you never forget it. It’s like smelling Margherita pizza for the first time. It’s something you never forget.”

From his small room in a south Rome rectory fitted with a hospital bed, Amorth praised Francis for so fully embracing the biblical notion of the Devil as the personified overlord of hell.

Unlike in the movies, he said, the process of driving demons out typically takes multiple sessions over many years.

An exorcist in action

In a rare glimpse of an official exorcism last week, in a white-tiled room outfitted with images of Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary, Amorth wrapped his purple sash around a Neapolitan housewife in her 40s who said she was afflicted by multiple demons. He then began chanting in Latin, commanding the devils inside her to reveal themselves.

“Tell me your name!” he demanded.

“No, no,” hissed the woman, shaking her head and speaking in an altered voice as her eyes rolled to the back of her head. “I will not!”

“Tell me your name!” he kept repeating, until finally she spat out, “Asmodeus,” the name of an ancient demon and hellish spokesman.

“How many are you?” he yelled, repeating the question as she grunted and shook her head violently.

Finally, she defiantly said, “We are five!”

After his bout with the demons, the diminutive Amorth simply shrugged.

“That,” he said, “was a light one.”

Following the session, the woman and her husband, who gave their names only as Antonella and Michele, said they had been going through a living hell for years. They had begged bishops to authorize an exorcism when Antonella began having uncontrollable fits after receiving Holy Communion and became violent around religious prayers. But they were repeatedly denied.

It was only after they were referred to Amorth and began sessions four years ago, Antonella said, that her condition finally began to improve.

“The Devil exists, and thanks to this treatment, I have gotten back my faith,” she said. “I think Pope Francis is telling us it’s okay to believe.”

Stefano Pitrelli contributed to this report.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/a-modern-pope-gets-old-school-on-the-devil/2014/05/10/f56a9354-1b93-4662-abbb-d877e49f15ea_print.html

Blessed Are the Simple-Hearted

“Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.” (Mt. 5:8)

The intellectual Christian – the Christian who has reduced faith in Jesus Christ to rational belief in Christian theology and not in attaining through grace the likeness of the Teacher – will often condemn other Christians as being simple-minded. The truth of the matter is the “simple-minded” Christian – if he or she is in fact a sincere disciple of Jesus Christ – is not simple-minded but simple-hearted, i.e., humble, open and cooperative with the Holy Spirit that leads such souls into all truth. (Cf. Jn. 16:13)

Anyone who has spent any time with children know very well that they are not simple-minded, as their brains are soaking in every bit of life’s data like a sponge. Their minds are overflowing with intricate analyses and endless questions of “What?” and especially “Why?” Yet, amidst such complexity due to their intellectual development is a profound simplicity due to their simple-heartedness. This is the childlike quality Jesus wishes his followers to reacquire, “for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” (Mt. 19:14)

The Christian, if he or she wishes to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ in word and deed – especially as an occupation or apostolate – must be careful not to do so with earthly wisdom but with “God’s wisdom”. God’s wisdom is a mystery – a “hidden wisdom” (cf. 1 Cor. 2:7) – that is not comprehended with the rational mind but with a loving heart. “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight,” (1 Cor. 3:19) and even if we have the ability to understand all mysteries and all knowledge but have not love, we are nothing. (Cf. 1 Cor. 13:2)

The primary difference between the teaching of earthly and human wisdom as opposed to heavenly and divine wisdom is found in the heart of the person preaching and the spirit they instill into the hearts of others. The contrast is revealed by the teacher’s intention and objective – something they may not even be consciously aware of. This modern edition of the scribe and Pharisee will most likely boast it is simply their evangelical missionary spirit or duty from the Great Commission to save people from the error that will lead them to hell or their crusader-like chivalry to defend the reputation of Christ and his Church, but this is not always or even often the case.

This is the key that unlocks the door of secret motives and hidden agendas, unbridled passions and the unseen warfare: “Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. Such ‘wisdom’ does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, and demonic. For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice. But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.” (Jas. 3:13-17)

Here we see two primary attributes of the false teacher: bitter envy and selfish ambition. These are not merely personal quirks or human imperfections but are actually fruits of the “unspiritual” and the “demonic.” (Jas. 3:15)

It was through pride and envy that Lucifer fell like lightening – a jealousy of God’s only begotten Son, who would sit on the throne of glory – and the resentment of the Father’s benevolent love on his creation – especially man, who is created in God’s image. “With envy against the Son of God, that day. Honored by his great Father, and proclaimed. Messiah King anointed, could not bear. Through pride that sight, and thought himself impaired.” (John Milton, Paradise Lost, V, 662-665)

This fall of the angels from heaven is what led to the fall of man in the garden. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says: “Behind the disobedient choice of our first parents lurks a seductive voice, opposed to God, which makes them fall into death out of envy. Scripture and the Church’s Tradition see in this being a fallen angel, called “Satan” or the “devil”. (No. 391)

The word “Satan” and “devil” mean: one who opposes or resists; to annoy, torment or harass; an adversary; an accuser; a slanderer. Do we not see these same attributes in the countless self-appointed prophetic watchdogs, blogger apologists and “new evangelists” or even in the comments from their readers, critics and trolls? Do we not encounter these even among our family members and friends, co-workers and even fellow Christian believers? In all honesty, do we not at times possess them ourselves?

Bitter envy is often rooted in the false teacher’s insecurity of his own faith and salvation. He must convert other people to his position in order to confirm the belief to himself and to assure himself of the salvation he will receive simply through correct belief, good behavior or (the right) church membership.

Even worse, it is often accompanied by the fear that God would reward equally or (God forbid!) more lavishly those who know less, believe differently or (truth be known) that they be rewarded at all! (Cf. Mt. 20:1-16) In fact, this feigned love quickly turns to vengeance – with all kinds of condemnations and name calling: “heretic”, “apostate”, “schismatic” etc. – when the potential convert doesn’t fall on their knees crying, “What must I do to be as enlightened and as spiritual as YOU?”

Selfish-ambition is often rooted in the false teacher’s egoism, the necessity to feel superior to others, and the passion to turn their faith into material gain, power, vainglory or some other end other than a response to God’s love in the form of obedience to his will. Christian careerism is as old as the faith itself, and it is not only pursued by those who seek to avoid hard work or those who sincerely wish to earn an honest living fulfilling the calling they have received from the Holy Spirit. “Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.” (1 Cor. 9:14)

A more common form of selfish-ambition or careerism is the presumption that conversion to Christ entitles the Christian to all the treasures and pleasures of this world – in fact, proof of God’s favor and predetermined salvation – or simply that people will always agree with them or change their beliefs accordingly, that things will always go their way or should, and that the entire world will accommodate their every whim and fancy as some form of congratulations for signing up for the Jesus Christ fan club. In fact, they consider themselves well on their way to becoming president.

This attempted shortcut or fast-track to salvation is a personal reenactment of the fall and perpetuation of the ancestral sin, where the Christian refuses to attain through testing, struggle and cooperation with God’s grace the deification of his soul but merely wishes it to be granted passively through some sort of transfusion or apparition or (for some) a spiritual diploma for good works or academic learning. The reality is that this is a severe lack of spiritual maturity, sincerity of faith, ignorance of the Gospel or simply put – sin.

“What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you? You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight. You do not have because you do not ask God. When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.” (Jas. 4:1-3)

So how do we become simple-hearted in order to avoid bitter envy and selfish ambition and the “conceit of human wisdom” (The Ladder of Divine Ascent)? Well, there is no manual for the Christian life. If there were a type of 7 Easy Steps… or Hitchhiker’s Guide to Heaven, the temptation would again be to equate knowing the manual without living it or embodying it externally without sufficient interior conversion.

The Gospel is summarized in the Beatitudes (cf. Mt. 5:3-10) and the Law and Prophets in the commandments to love God and to love others (cf. Mt. 22:37-40) – even one’s enemies. In short, we must become love, as God is love. (Cf. 1 Jn. 4:16) Sometimes we have not simply because we ask not (Cf. Jas. 4:2) but “this is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. (1 Jn. 5:14)

In other words, if we truly want the simple-heartedness of the child, all we have to do pray with the willingness to do whatever our divine Teacher tells us (cf. Jn. 2:5), and he will give us the kingdom. “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.” (Mt. 11:25)

And then, after we have acquired this childlike heart (even in the smallest measure) our humble and simple preaching of conversation and lifestyle, blogging or apologetics, service to the needy or whatever the apostolate we are called to, will be better received, and it will produce a “harvest of righteousness” (Jas. 3:18)  “One should preach not from one’s rational mind but rather from the heart. Only that which is from the heart can touch another heart.” (Elder Thaddeus of Vitovnica)

Editor’s note: This article first appeared on MONKROCK and is republished here with kind permission. 

image: De Visu / Shutterstock.com

Kevin Clay is the owner of MONKROCK - a lifestyle brand and fashion company he founded in 2002. With its motto “You don’t have to be a monk to live like one,” products range from clothing and coffee to sacramentals and rock-n-roll music. Kevin is also a new monastic community founder, writer, musician, producer and consultant for The Heaven or Hell studio in Nashville, TN, where he lives with his wife (Operations Manager of MONKROCK) and their five children

Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill: Conflict and Context

Men carry signs in Kampala, Uganda, Feb. 24, as they celebrate a new anti-homosexuality law. (CNS photo)

While many in the United States and elsewhere have been troubled by the passage of harsh new laws against homosexual behavior in Uganda, hundreds of Ugandans gathered in Kampala on March 31 for a five-hour long parade to celebrate the recently signed “Anti-Homosexuality Bill.”  Called the “National Thanksgiving Service Celebrating the Passing of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill,” the festivities—replete with performances by fire jugglers, acrobats, and schoolchildren—were organized by the Inter-Religious Council of Uganda, an ecumenical religious organization promoting the new law.    

GLAAD, the premier lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender media advocacy organization in the United States, called the parade a “chilling celebration.” American gay advocacy organizations and their allies had been proactive in attempting to block the new law; for several months before the law’s passage, the Obama administration tried to prevent Uganda’s president from extending his country’s long-standing anti-sodomy laws to add legislation that criminalizes and punishes “the promotion or recognition of same-sex relationships” with a 14-year prison sentence, adding  even harsher penalties—including life in prison—for engaging in homosexual behavior with minors, or spreading the AIDS virus knowingly. Warning that the new law would “reflect poorly on Uganda’s commitment to protecting the human rights of its people,” President Obama concluded that the law would “mark a serious setback for all those around the world who share a commitment to freedom, justice, and equal rights.” 

But, the people of Uganda and their leaders present at the March 31 event dismissed President Obama’s concerns—taunting him with signs reading, “Obama, We Want Trade Not Homosexuality.” Some carried banners that said, “Stop AIDS with Abstinence Pride,” and “Stop AIDS, Be Faithful in Marriage.”  According to press reports, “Speakers paid tribute to President Yoweri Museveni, the official guest of honor, and linked Uganda’s fight against homosexuality with shedding its colonial past in an event that had the feeling of a campaign rally.”

Survey data indicate that Uganda’s new law reflects the will of the Ugandan people. The law’s passage was driven by concerns about morality, as 40 percent of the population in Uganda is Roman Catholic and the Protestant Evangelicals are also strong presence there. According to an editorial in America, the Uganda Joint Christian Council, which includes Catholic, Anglican, and Orthodox bishops, expressed strong support for the Anti-Homosexuality Bill.

A Pew Research Center poll revealed that eight out of ten Ugandans described homosexual behavior as “morally wrong.” Currently, 38 African counties—about 70 percent of the continent—have laws against homosexual behavior, and concerns about morality continue to drive such legislation.

Beyond these concerns about morality, banners calling for abstinence to end AIDS point to yet another reason for the broad popular support for the new laws in Uganda—the increase in AIDS cases in the country. A 2012 New York Times article on the resurgence of AIDS in the country, “Uganda’s AIDS Success Story Comes Undone,” reports on alarming data from the Crane Survey, a collaborative study designed by Makerere University School of Public Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Ministry of Health in Uganda.  Designed to assess high-risk behaviors among groups of Ugandans, the Crane Survey investigated the sexual practices of men who have sex with men, male and female sex workers, and the partners and clients of sex workers.

Polling 3,000 individuals who were identified as “high risk” (94 percent of the respondents were Ugandan nationals) about their sexual behavior, the Crane Survey identified 306 male respondents who reported having engaged in sex with men in the three months prior to the survey.  Almost one-third (31 percent) of these men had been married to women, and 20 percent were currently married to women. Sixteen percent of these men were living with and having sex with female sex partners during the period they were engaging in sexual behavior with men. Twenty-nine percent had fathered children. 

Demonstrating a much higher incidence of bisexual behavior than occurs among men who have sex with other men in this country, the Crane Survey revealed that more than one-third of all Ugandan men who have sex with men indicate that they are bisexual (37 percent). Half claim they are homosexual (50 percent). Nineteen percent claim that they are attracted to mostly/only women, 12 percent claim to be attracted to both men and women, and 70 percent say that they are attracted to mostly/only men—but many of them still engage in sexual relations with women.  

High-risk behaviors—including putting women at risk for AIDS—were identified within the population of 306 men who had sex with men in the past three months.  Identifying the median rates of high-risk behavior, the Crane Survey revealed that in the three months preceding the survey, men who had sex with men had bought sex from two men and had two male commercial-sex clients, two casual sex partners who were male, and four steady male sex partners. Median numbers of female sex partners by partner type were also measured. In the three months preceding the survey, men who had sex with men had also bought sex from one woman and had zero female commercial clients, no casual sex partners, and one female steady sex partner.  The median number of all male and female sex partners for the 306 males who had sex with males during the three months preceding the survey was 12. 

It should not be surprising that AIDS infection rates in Uganda have been steadily rising—especially among women. The Ugandan Daily Monitor reported that, according to Uganda’s UNAIDS country coordinator, Musa Bungudu, “Uganda is the only country in Eastern and Southern Africa with rising HIV/AIDS infection rates.  According to the 2011 National HIV Indicator Survey, the prevalence rates among Ugandans between the ages of 15 to 19 are going up.  It now stands at 7.3 percent, and even higher in women at 8.3 percent, up from 6.4 percent in the 2004-2005 survey.” The Daily Monitor also reports that Dr. Kihumuro Apuuli, director of Uganda’s AIDS Commission, believes that if new infections continue to rise “the HIV burden is projected to increase by more than 700,000 over the next five years,” and about 25,000 babies will be born with the AIDS infection each year.

In his address following the signing ceremony for the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, President Museveni accused unnamed “arrogant and careless Western groups” of seeking to recruit young Ugandan children into homosexuality. “There’s now an attempt at social imperialism, to impose social values,” he said. “We’re sorry to see that you (the West) live the way you live, but we keep quiet about it.”  

Believing our nation’s tolerance and growing acceptance of homosexual relationships should be exported, the Obama administration continues to attempt to impose its now-broadened definition of the family throughout the world.  Most recently, the United Nations delegation from the United States lobbied to replace the traditional definition of the family contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with one that recognizes “diverse forms of the family.”  According to Stefano Gennarini of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-Fam), an organization dedicated to defending life and family by preserving international law, the United States delegation to the United Nations has asked to replace the traditional definition of family contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with a lengthy new description of families that have “diverse forms and functions.”

Gennarini points out that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has “almost sacred status” at the United Nations. It is regarded, “together with the United Nations Charter, as a founding document of the new world order set in place after World War II.”  Article 16 of the declaration identifies the family as the “natural and fundamental group unit of society” and states that it “is entitled to protection by society and the State.”  Article 16 also mandates that “men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality, or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family.”

This was not the first time that the United States has attempted to impose its views on same-sex marriage at the United Nations.  But it was the first time it attempted to exclude the traditional language from the declaration.  The UN General Assembly has rejected the notion of “various forms of the family” at its last two sessions—despite the heavy lobbying by the United States delegation. 

It is likely that this lobbying will continue—even though Article 16 and its definition of the family are reflected in the constitutions of more than 100 countries. For example, Bolivia’s constitution mandates that the “State recognizes and protects the family as the fundamental nucleus of society…. The marriage between a man and a woman is formed by legal bond.”  In Brazil, the constitution states “the stable union between a man and a woman is recognized as a family entity, and the law shall facilitate the conversion of such entity into marriage.”  In Bulgaria, the constitution demands that “Matrimony shall be a voluntary union between a man and a woman.”  In Cuba, the constitution identifies marriage as the “voluntary established union between a man and a woman.” These are just a few examples.  

It is likely that the United States will continue its campaign to redefine the family at the United Nations to include same-sex marriage.  It is also likely that the US will join other European nations like Norway, the Netherlands, and Denmark in withdrawing aid to the Ugandan people until that country’s government begins to move away from what these nations see as draconian laws that unfairly target the homosexual community.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explicitly states that gay men and women “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity” and that “unjust discrimination” in their regard must be avoided. To some in the Church, the harsh legislation passed in Uganda seems unjust and discriminatory. For example, the editors of America titled their article about the law “When the Law is a Crime.” On the other hand, many religious leaders in Uganda, including some (but not all) Catholic bishops, believe the people of Uganda have the right to endorse legislation they think will help promote morality and prevent the spread of AIDS, as well as protect marriage as a bond between one man and one woman. The severity of the legislative measures apparently reflects, justly or unjustly, the severity of the situation in Uganda—a situation that will undoubtedly be the source of further controversy and tension for quite some time.

Miracles Attributed to Popes John Xlll and John Paul ll Intercession

Healed Woman, Witness Recount Miracles Leading to Sunday's Canonizations

Sunrise, Jupiter Island, Fl.-- April 27, 2014

Popes John XXIII and John Paul II Recognized as Intercessors

By Deborah Castellano Lubov

VATICAN CITY, April 24, 2014 (Zenit.org) - The subject of a miracle attributed to the intercession of Blessed John Paul II, and the witness of a miracle attributed to the intercession of John XXIII, gave their testimonies today at the Vatican.
John XXIII:
Daughter of Charity Sister Adele Labianca, director of the Umberto I di Fasano Hospital in Brindisi in Southern Italy, cared for the beneficiary of a miracle attributed to John XXIII.
Sister Caterina Capitani was sick from stomach cancer in 1966.
After numerous hospitalizations and surgeries, Sister Capitini knew she was dying, said her fellow sister from Napoli. Her situation worsened daily, yet the sisters persisted in their prayer.
Inexplicably her condition suddenly disappeared.
She described how Sister Capitini described a miraculous encounter: One night, she saw John XXII in her room. Originally scared and in disbelief, she soon felt peace. She realized he was there to heal her, responding to the prayers of her and her sisters. She was alone in the room, felt his hand over her, saw him smiling and heard him say: "I heard many prayers from the sisters, especially from one in particular."
She said her fellow sister’s response was, “'I must admit I am that sister.'” He responded, “‘'You are ok and have nothing more to worry about.''”
“Nothing could stop her enthusiasm,” her fellow sister reflected. Her face was “transfigured" and she had a lifelong devotion to John XIII, visiting his tomb hundreds of times.
She left a legacy of abandonment of God to the Sisters of Charity and to God’s people.
John Paul II:
Floribeth Mora Díaz experienced a miracle attributed to the intercession of John Paul II.
She was diagnosed with terminal cancer and the doctors gave her one month to live.
She was watching John Paul II"s beatification at 2AM Costa Rica time and said during that ceremony, she felt "moved" as she saw the reliquary containing John Paul II's relic.
"Following that ceremony, several hours later," she added, "I woke and I felt a deep sense of hope and healing. I walked and saw a magazine with a picture of John Paul II, with his arms opened wide and heard his voice say to me ‘Get up and do not be afraid.'”
“Little by little I noticed something had changed in me.”
At that moment, she felt better, she was able to get out of bed, after having been bedridden for some time.
That’s when she walked into the kitchen, saw her husband, and told him what happened.
The doctors said it was a miracle, attributing it to "John Paul II's intercession," she said.