Unsettled Christianity

One blog to rule them all, One blog to find them, One blog to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
September 14th, 2011

Catholicism: A Journey to the Heart of the Faith (Review Part 3)

This will be my third and final post on Catholicism: A Journey to the Heart of the Faith by Fr. Robert Barron from Image Catholic Books.  For more on the author visit here and for an overview of the contents here.  Thanks again to Image Catholic for sending along a copy.

Let’s start with the good.  First, the book is good, solid Catholic theology.  Some readers of this blog will see that for the better, others for the worse.  Fr. Barron is faithful to the traditions of the Church; however, he is faithful to those traditions in a way that appreciates the concept of the development of Christian doctrine.  Thus, he has a section on the Catholic Church’s teaching on hell, but in this section he references the work of Hans Urs von Balthasar.  This makes for a nuanced presentation that I found appealing.

In addition, Barron does a fantastic job of bringing in insights from the realms of art, architecture and literature.  As I mentioned in the previous post on the contents, he includes a significant number of pictures, many of which are in color.  This makes for a visually stimulating presentation.  The focus on art also brings in the theological perspective of ordinary people.  Text often cannot speak to the faith of ordinary people down through the centuries the same way that a cathedral can.  Further, we live in a time when it can seem difficult to find strong generalists.  Barron’s ability to draw upon all of these fields of study is a monumental accomplishment.

In terms of critique, I would offer one, and I think this could prove problematic for the book enjoying widespread success, though I think the media attention might help temper this.  While Fr. Barron through his focus on the arts brings in the perspective of ordinary people, he sometimes fails to write in the language of ordinary people.  I admit up front that this is the pot calling the kettle black.  Sometimes as I’m teaching in my parish some of the parishioners I love dearly give me a look that says “you’re not teaching your graduate students right now.”  In addition, I’ve been critiqued on this in my own writing, so I offer this critique with all requisite humility.

From chapter one, I’ll cite a couple of sentences that are representative and demonstrate what I’m talking about:

What I propose to do in this book is to take you on a guided exploration of the Catholic world, but not in the manner of a docent, for I am not interested in showing you the artifacts of Catholicism as though they were dusty objets d’art in a museum of culture.  I want to function rather as a mystagogue …

I’m not sure of the intended audience of the book, but I assume from the broad title that Fr. Barron hopes that he will reach a broad audience.  Yet if I were to use the terms “docent,” “objets d’art” and “mystagogue” that closely together in my parish context, I’d likely get mentally shut down.  This is true though I work in a very highly educated Catholic parish about two blocks off of a university campus.

With all of that said, this is a very good book.  It will nourish Catholics looking for good, solid theology and will appeal to the more artistically inclined among us.  Yet I’m not sure if this book will go over terribly well at the popular level.  This is to say nothing of the DVD version.  I have heard very good things about the media production already.  So, the different format may go even further to eliminating the negative that I discussed above.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Books, Doctrine, Theology | 8 Comments »

September 13th, 2011

Catholicism: A Journey to the Heart of the Faith (Review Part 2)

This is the second post in my series on Robert Barron’s new book Catholicism: A Journey to the Heart of the Faith from Image Catholic Books.  I finished reading it last week, but with the start of the academic year, I’m just getting to write my review. I hope that some of you were able to check out the livestream with Fr. Barron. Here I’ll give a general overview of the contents.

Barron does something fresh in not following the course of the creed as does the Catechism of the Catholic Church and other introductions to Catholicism based on it.  For example, chapter two is about Jesus and chapter three about God.   In introductions that follow the creed, it’s God then Jesus.  There is something to say about getting right to Jesus in the Introductory chapter entitled “The Catholic Thing.”  Barron starts the book as follows:

What is the Catholic thing? What makes Catholicism, among all of the competing philosophies, ideologies, and religions of the world, distinctive? I stand with Blessed John Henry Newman who said that the great principle of Catholicism is the Incarnation, the enfleshment of God …

Following upon this, the chapters are connected, but topical.  He includes chapters on revelation, the teachings of Jesus, the mystery of God, Mary, Peter and Paul, the Church, Eucharist, communion of saints, prayer and last things.  He bookends these chapters with an introduction and a “coda.”

One another unique element of the contents that many people will enjoy is the pictures.  Barron includes black and white images throughout the chapters.  He also includes a beautiful set of color images in the middle of the book.  This is certainly a strong point that I will talk about in my personal reflections on the book.  One of Barron’s main points is that one cannot simply study Catholicism from a book, one must also “read” the art and architecture of the Church down through the centuries.  This is too often lost in many introductions to Catholicism.  I can imagine that the DVD media presentation would be even more stunning.

In my next post, I’ll give my personal reflections on the book.  In the meantime, I would mention that it got a very nice blurb on the back cover from a fellow biblioblogger with whom I teach.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Books, Doctrine, Theology | 4 Comments »

September 6th, 2011

Livestream With Fr. Robert Barron, Author of Catholicism

I normally write  a post on the author of a book that I am reviewing, but this time I’m going to encourage you to interact with the author himself.  Image Catholic Books is hosting a livestream with Fr. Robert Barron, the author of Catholicism: A Journey to the Heart of the Faith.  The book releases today and accompanies the recent PBS series that Fr. Barron has put together.

Here is the write up about Fr. Barron from his website:

Father Robert Barron is an acclaimed author, speaker, and theologian. He is the Francis Cardinal George Professor of Faith and Culture at Mundelein Seminary near Chicago and also is the founder of Word On Fire (www.WordOnFire.org).

Fr. Barron is the creator and host of CATHOLICISM, a groundbreaking ten-part documentary series and study program about the Catholic Faith (Fall, 2011). He is a passionate student of art, architecture, music and history, which he calls upon throughout his global travels in the making of the documentary.

Word On Fire programs are broadcast regularly on WGN America, Relevant Radio, CatholicTV, EWTN, the popular Word on Fire YouTube Channel, and the Word on Fire website, which offers daily blogs, articles, commentaries, and over ten years of weekly sermon podcasts. Father Barron is the first priest to have a national show on a secular television network since the 1950s.

Father Barron received his Masters Degree in Philosophy from the Catholic University of America in Washington DC in 1982 and his doctorate in Sacred Theology from the Institut Catholique in 1992.  He was ordained to the priesthood in 1986 and has been a professor of systematic theology at University of St. Mary of the Lake/Mundelein Seminary since 1992. He was visiting professor at the University of Notre Dame in 2002 and at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in 2007.  He was also twice scholar in residence at the Pontifical North American College at the Vatican.

In addition, Fr. Barron lectures extensively in the United States and abroad, including the Pontifical North American College at the Vatican and the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome. Cardinal George calls Fr. Barron “one of the Church’s best messengers.”

Since 1992, Fr. Barron has taught Systematic Theology at the nation’s largest Catholic seminary, The University of St. Mary of the Lake/Mundelein Seminary in Mundelein, Illinois. He was a visiting professor at the University of Notre Dame in 2002. Fr. Barron received a Master’s Degree in Philosophy from the Catholic University of America in 1982. He received a doctorate in Sacred Theology from the Institut Catholique de Paris in 1992. Fr. Barron was baptized at Queen of All Saints Basilica in Chicago and grew up at St. John of the Cross parish in Western Springs, Illinois.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Books, Doctrine, Other Posts, Theology | 1 Comment »

August 26th, 2011

In the Mail – Catholicism by Fr. Robert Barron

Now here is another book from Image Catholic Books that I am super excited about along with all of the related media.  In fact, a lot of people are very excited about it.  Fr. Robert Barron is going to be doing a livestream on the evening of the book’s release.  But, I’ll remind you all of that when it gets a little closer to time.

Thanks again for Image sending me an advance copy.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Books, Doctrine, Other Posts, Theology | No Comments »

August 16th, 2011

I Couldn’t Be A Non-Catholic Scholar Even When I Wanted To

I literally laughed out loud after reading C. Michael Patton’s part 2 on Roman Catholicism.  I’m not trying to be a jerk.  I’m sure that Patton is a nice enough person, who does seem to have interacted with at least some streams of Cahtolicism, as evidenced by his second post.   Some people whose blogs I read and thoroughly enjoy confess to appreciating Patton’s writing, though being surprised by this particular set of posts.  I laughed because of my own life experience as a Roman Catholic.

The part I found a bit amusing was his discussion of being “kicked out” of the Catholic Church, or being a “true” Catholic (and by the way, I think he is misusing the word “apostasy,” which according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church [2089] is a “total repudiation of the Christian faith”; I doubt that’s where the Catholics he is referring to are).  As many readers of this blog know, I am a revert to the Catholic Church.  I grew up Catholic, left, and returned.  In the time that I spent away from the Church, I actually went so far as to be ordained a Southern Baptist minister.  I was “baptized” (I’ll explain those quotation marks in a bit) in Baptist Church and married in a Baptist Church.

Upon returning to the Church, however, I was surprised to find out that my marriage was invalid … yes, that’s right invalid.  The Church considered it invalid in the sense that it was not sacramental.  I literally could have gotten divorced and gotten a quick annulment at that point (Thankfully my wife didn’t seize on her last opportunity for freedom :) as we had our marriage convalidated shortly after I returned to the Church and she started the RCIA process).  And why was my marriage invalid?  “Lack of Canonical Form.”  In other words, I had not, as a Roman Catholic, obeyed the canonical requirement of being married in a Catholic Church witnessed by a priest or deacon (or with a dispensation from the bishop of my archdiocese outside of the Church).

But, wait a second … I was an ordained Southern Baptist minister not a Roman Catholic.  Well, as it turns out, a person is Roman Catholic by virtue of their baptism.  I discussed this with my instructor when trained to be an advocate for annulment cases.  I knew this from the Catechism (paragraph 1280) at that point: “Baptism imprints on the soul an indelible spiritual sign, the character, which consecrates the baptized person for Christian worship. Because of the character Baptism cannot be repeated.”   But, he put it a bit more eloquently; he said something to the effect: “you may have gotten wet, but you didn’t get baptized again.”  Baptism is an indelible mark, and not even becoming an ordained Southern Baptist could remove it.

Now, at the same time I was a Southern Baptist minister, I was also getting my MA in Old Testament and Hebrew language and starting my doctoral program in Biblical Languages (which praise and glory to God I just finished).  I get my years mixed up, but I believe I gave my first SBL presentation and wrote a peer-reviewed journal article before returning to the Church (though these did not deal with theology, I obviously dealt with theology in local church settings).  It’s possible my papers and publication came a little after, but regardless of the time frame there is a sense in which I was a scholar before returning to the Catholic Church.

So, this presents an interesting situation.  While I was a Southern Baptist, I was still, according to the Church, a Roman Catholic bound by canon law with with regard to my marriage, so much so that I could have had a short form annulment.  And, I was also a scholar in the area of Biblical Studies and Biblical Languages.  Ironically, I believe there is some real sense in which I could have been considered a Catholic biblical scholar when I was a Southern Baptist minister, at least in the eyes of the Catholic Church.  Otherwise the Church holding me responsible for canon law wouldn’t make a great deal of sense.  Again, baptism is indelible.

Now, would I have been a Catholic scholar faithful to the Magisterium of the Church?  Of course not.  Would I have been a scholar with a mandate from a bishop to teach Catholic theology?  Of course not.  But, a Catholic is Catholic by virtue of their baptism, not because of agreement to doctrinal formulations.  Of course, the Church would hope that faithfulness to Magisterial teaching would follow upon baptism, otherwise there might not be that much point in remaining Catholic.  And, there are ways of being excommunicated or even excommunicating oneself.  I suppose even I could have pleaded for excommunication.  But, I don’t imagine that this is where the majority of Catholics who disagree end up.

Now, am I advocating departing from the Magisterium of the Church?  No.  I consider myself to be faithful to the Magisterium of the church.  Though I struggle with some doctrinal issues, I seek to handle them in accord with the document I cited in my previous post.  I’m only saying that Catholic theology is sacramental.  A Catholic can be a good scholar or a bad scholar (or great, or horrible, or aberrant, or sinful … and anywhere else on that spectrum) in relation to the Magisterium.  But, he or she cannot be a non-Catholic scholar, or a fake Catholic scholar, or a “not true (in the sense of identity)” Catholic scholar in relation to the Magisterium.

At least, this is what I read into my experience as it relates to the Church’s teaching.  I could be wrong.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Baptism, Doctrine, Theology | 11 Comments »

August 14th, 2011

Misunderstanding Roman Catholicism … Again

Well apparently someone else thinks he understands Roman Catholicism without reading Church documents. If he had taken time to read even this one document, he wouldn’t sound so off-base. It is on the Vatican website, no less. For another helpful interaction with this issue, see Raymond Brown’s (a pope appointed member of the Pontifical Biblical Commission more than once) wonderful book The Critical Meaning of the Bible. The document explains how theologians should handle matters in which they disagree with the Magisterium. For those who might not like to read the whole thing, I’ll summarize a few points:

1. Theologians who disagree with the Magisterium should not present their views as unarguable conclusions. In other words, they admit to the fact that they could possibly be wrong and the Magisterium right.

2. Disagreements must be based on argumentation that seems well-founded to the theologian. In other words, theologians cannot reject the teaching of the Magisterium simply because it doesn’t suit them.

3. Theologians should make sure that they truly understand the teaching of the Magisterium. In other words, they are not disagreeing with a misunderstanding of the teachings of the Magisterium.

4. Theologians should address disagreements in the proper context, i.e. within the Church and not within the mass media.

5. If the disagreement persists (and yes, the document does allow for the fact that a disagreement can genuinely persist), the theologian remains open to the teaching of the Magisterium, though they may not accept it.

Perhaps this is not pure unbridled freedom of Protestant scholarship (*chortle*), but at least for me as a Roman Catholic, I find it helpful that there is official Church teaching on how to handle disagreements, rather than approach I’ve seen some Protestants in my area use of simply starting a new church. There are other important points in this document. But, this may suffice to show that the person who wrote the post I linked to has a very weak and inaccurate understanding of the function of the Magisterium – “For example, if a Roman Catholic is interpreting the Scriptures, he must come to conclusions that are in line with what Rome has already said about the subject.” Well, not according to this document on the Vatican website (overseen by Joseph Ratzinger back in the 1990s).

PS – This is not even to mention the fact that the Church doesn’t emphatically define every single solitary doctrinal issue, e.g. priestly celibacy in the Latin Rite and married priests at the parish level in the Eastern Rite.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Church Government, Doctrine | 84 Comments »

August 3rd, 2011

Saints Preserved – Personal Thoughts

This is the third and final installment of my review of Saints Preserved: An Encyclopedia of Relics by Thomas J. Craughwell from Image Catholic Books (an imprint of Random House).  In this post, I’ll include some of my personal thoughts.

First, I can see how this book may prove very beneficial for me in the parish setting in which I work.  One of my responsibilities in my parish is to help with the RCIA program.  RCIA is the process through which either an unbaptized person or person baptized in another Christian tradition becomes Catholic.  Both of these groups of people must receive the sacrament of confirmation.  As a part of that sacrament they choose saint names as confirmation names.  Saints Preserved is a book that I know I can provide as a resource for those choosing their saint names in this process because it contains large quantities of valuable information about the saints.

Second, I think Saints Preserved may prove a valuable resource for Catholic travelers.  The book points out important shrines and relics in different areas of the globe.  These might be places that Catholic travelers would like to visit if they are on vacation or even can squeeze in on a business trip.  One addition that might have been helpful in this regard would have been an index by regions in the back of the book.  However, I think it would be easy enough to Google “Catholic Saints Region-X” and look in this encyclopedia to see if there might be shrines in a particular place.

Third, from a brief Amazon search and a perusal of some of the reviews at the beginning of the book, this text does appear to be one of a kind.  If you have an interest in relics, this is the book for you, not least of all because there are no other comprehensive encyclopedic or dictionary type resources you can consult.  That’s not to say that the author didn’t do an excellent job, only to say, even if he didn’t you’d still need to buy this book.

Finally, I’ll close with my one qualm with the book.  The text lacks some details in terms of controversies surrounding relics.  I realize that relics are a mostly part of the personal piety of a lot of Catholics.  But, from my own standpoint, I’m very interested in some of the information regarding those controversies.  The easiest example would be the entry on the Shroud of Turin.  Craughwell does make mention of the controversies surrounding the shroud, but states “The tests, results, and debate are too lengthy and complex to summarize here.”  I would have appreciated even a footnote/endnote leading to said tests, results, and debates.  As it stands, there is a bibliography at the end but not much notation throughout.

All in all, my main criticism doesn’t detract from the fact that I would recommend the book.  I realize that the things I’m interested in may not have been within the scope of the book and may not interest most people who would potentially buy this book.  Overall, it’s a great resource for Catholics and non-Catholics alike who want to learn about relics.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Books, Theology | 3 Comments »

July 25th, 2011

Fear of Catholicism and the New Testament Use of the Old Testament

This morning I was reading in Three Views on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament.  I read Kaiser’s chapter on the single referent view.  It seemed that part of his problem with the sensus plenior approach was that it was formulated by Catholic scholars and that it only would only work within a Catholic context.  He states:

Since (Raymond) Brown takes it (meaning) out of the hands of the human authors who stood in the counsel of God, the question is: In whose hands now does the final court of appeal rest for discovering the authoritative meaning of a biblical text?  Roman Catholic scholars, of course, can fall back on the magisterium of the church, to the ecclesial tradition.  But to what can Protestants appeal that matches such additional grounds of appeal?

I wondered if maybe I was reading a bit much into this to take offense, but it’s almost as if he’s saying that something like the sensus plenior approach couldn’t possibly be correct because it emerged in a Catholic context and could only work in a Catholic context.  But, I was glad to see I was not alone because Peter Enns calls him out for this in his response to Kaiser’s essay.  He states:

Kaiser’s discussion of sensus plenior is likewise problematic.  By citing Roman Catholic scholar Raymond Brown, Kaiser seems to be using guilt by association to undermine sensus plenior.  Brown is able to take meaning “out of the hands of human authors who stood in the counsel of God” because Brown’s Catholicism has an ecclesiastical tradition that allows him to treat scripture so shabbily.  I am no Catholic, but I was a bit offended by such a caricature, since Protestant scholarship owes so much to the careful nuanced work of Roman Catholic scholars.  Moreover, it is somewhat beside the point to portray Roman Catholics as manipulating the meaning of scripture so casually.  The real hermeneutical issues before, generated as they are by the NT evidence itself, will not be settled by such rhetoric.

Kudos to Peter Enns (who actually has an excerpt from Divino Afflante Spiritu on his blog).  I’m quite certain I could not have said that better myself.  I have appreciated the work of Enns for quite some time on account of this kind of clarity of thought.  I’m not saying that I personally agree with the sensus plenior approach, but it really doesn’t matter one way or another where it came from or in what context it might work.  What matters is how the NT authors themselves actually treated the Old Testament.  In fact, I think this is the gist of Enns’ critique of Kaiser, namely he doesn’t really deal with the raw data of the New Testament.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in New Testament, Old Testament, Theology | 8 Comments »

July 25th, 2011

Saints Preserved – Contents

This is the second installment of my review of Saints Preserved: An Encyclopedia of Relics by Thomas J. Craughwell from Image Catholic Books (an imprint of Random House).  Here I will give an overview of the contents.

The book is a basic encyclopedia.  So rather than chapters it has entries, arranged for the most part in alphabetical order.  There are some sub-entries for martyrs in certain areas and some other topics that don’t necessarily fit within the alphabetical layout.  But, for “major” saints one would locate them alphabetically.  The entries range from the names of saints to important sets of relics like the Aachen relics.

In addition to the the entries, there is also a helpful introduction that gives some background on relics as well as a bibliography for those who want to learn more.  The introduction covers the reasoning behind relics as well as covering the classifications of relics (i.e. first class, second class and third class).  For example, Craughwell notes Biblical background for relics like the story in 2 Kings where a man comes back to life after touching the bones of Elisha 13.  He also notes the caution that St. Jerome gives regarding the use of relics.

The entries on saints generally contain two different kinds of information.  They first contain information on the life of the saint in question.  Often this consists of giving some particulars of the saint’s life, such as when they lived, where they were from or where they ministered, worked, etc.  In addition, there is often information concerning why a particular person was considered a saint.

Second, the entries discuss the relics associated with the saint.  One can find out what the relics are and where they are kept, so that an interested person might visit them if they so had the inclination.  The matter of of piety aside, many of these relics I find entertaining just as a sheer matter of interest.

Below, I’ve excerpted from the entry on St. Dominic (not least because I belong to Dominican parish) to give a feel for what the entries look like:

Saint Dominic (1170-1221). On August 6, 1221, Dominic died in the Dominican priory of San Nicolo delle Vigne in Blogna, Italy; he was buried behind the high altar of the priory church.  In 1228 San Nicolo was greatly expanded and rededicated as San Domenico.  At that time the saint’s relics were moved to a marble sarcophagus in the main body of the church where pilgrims would have access to it. In 1264 the Dominicans wanted a more impressive monument for their founder.  Work on this shrine, known as the Arca di San Domenico, took nearly three centuries and involved some of the greatest artists of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, including Nicola Pisano and Michelangelo.  The saint’s bones rest inside a marble sarcophagus carved by Pisano.  Behind the tomb, in a golden octagonal reliquary, is the skull of the saint.

It was a crisis in the Catholic Church that set the direction of Dominic’s life.  In 1203 he accompanied his bishop on a journey from their home in Osma, Spain, to southern France.  There he witnessed the animosity between Catholics and Cathars, who were confusing many of the Catholic faithful and tearing the Church apart.

….

To read more, you’ll have to buy the book.  But, stay tuned as I post my own personal reflections later in the week ….

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Books, Other Posts, Theology | No Comments »

July 20th, 2011

Saints Preserved Author Interview – Thomas Craughwell

I would like to once again thank  Image Catholic Books (an imprint of Random House) for sending along a copy of Saints Preserved: An Encyclopedia of Relics by Thomas J. Craughwell.  As per my normal format for book reviews, I will be posting on the author and contents then end with my personal thoughts.  Yet this go round I have the privilege of posting a blog interview with the author for the first part of the review.

Thomas Craughwell has written a considerable number of books on a variety of topics.  The interview questions deal more with Saints Preserved.  Yet if you would like to learn more about Tom, you can check out his personal webpage: http://tomcraughwell.com/

I would like to personally thank Tom for being so generous with his time in answering my questions.

 

1. In reviewing your publication record, I noticed that you have published on a pretty wide variety of topics, ranging from Abraham Lincoln to topics related to the Bible.  How do you choose the projects that you are going to work on at any given time?  Is it just what interests you at the moment?  Or, do you get requests from your publisher, etc.?

I’ve been self-employed as a writer for 19 years, and if there is anything I’ve learned it’s that specialization is the high road to bankruptcy. If it’s not immoral or illegal, I’ll write about it. In many cases publishers have come to me with a book idea and asked me to write it. But there are also cases when I’ve approached publishers, either directly or through my agent. My favorite book, Stealing Lincoln’s Body, is an example of a book I shopped around. It was published by Harvard University Press.

 

2. In a similar vein, why relics?  I know that you have written for a number of Catholic outlets.  Do relics play a significant role in your personal piety?  Or was this more of a matter of interest?

It’s both. Since I was a kid I’ve loved the stories of the saints. For the last 30 years or so I’ve been studying the saints and the history of devotion to the saints, which leads to studying shrines and relics. It’s not just an academic interest—I like visiting shrines. I’ve prayed at some of the major shrines here in the United States, and when I’ve been in Europe I’ve made a point of going to pray at the tombs of some of my favorite saints, such as St. Thomas More in London and St. Aloysius Gonzaga in Rome.

 

3. What are two or three of the most interesting things that you personally learned about relics in writing this book?

I had heard of the Spanish nun Egeria, who about the year 382 made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land and wrote an account of it. I looked up her work and found that she described in detail how the relics of True Cross and the Titulus (the board on which Pontius Pilate had written “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews”) were brought out for veneration on Good Friday in Jerusalem.
Related to this was my discovery of a Frenchman, Rohault de Fleury, who was independently wealthy and had lots of time on his hands. In the 1860s he set about tracking down every fragment of the True Cross he could find and measuring it, or having it measured for him. His purpose was to discover if the old punch line was true, that there are enough purported fragments of the Cross to build a battleship. Once he had all his data, he estimated the number up by a factor of ten to account for lost or destroyed fragments. Fleury found that taken together, there were not enough fragments to build a cross large enough to crucify a man.
By the way, I also tracked down who was the first to make that claim about enough relics to build a boat—it was Erasmus.

 

4. This blog probably has more Protestant readers than Catholic ones.  How would you briefly explain to someone from a Protestant tradition the Catholic practice of venerating relics?

Reverence for the remains and belongings of saints is rooted in Sacred Scripture, which records the wonders God wrought through relics. In 2 Kings 13:20-21 we read of a dead man being restored to life after his corpse touched the bones of the prophet Elisha. In Mark’s gospel we find the story of a woman who suffered from a hemorrhage for twelve years and was cured when she touched the hem of Christ’s garment (Mark 5:25-34). And the Acts of the Apostles recounts how Christians touched handkerchiefs and other cloths to the body of St. Paul; when these cloths were given to the sick or the possessed, “diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them” (Acts 19:11-12).
Even in times of persecution the early Christians made an earnest effort to recover the remains of the martyrs so they could be given a proper burial and their martyrdom commemorated annually with Mass celebrated at their tombs. A letter from about the year 156 A.D. describes the martyrdom of the elderly bishop of Smyrna, St. Polycarp. His body had been burned, but the Christians of Smyrna searched among the ashes for any trace of the saint that had not been consumed by the flames. “We took up his bones,” the anonymous author of the letter wrote, “which are more valuable than precious stones and finer than refined gold, and laid them in a suitable place, where the Lord will permit us to gather ourselves together, as we are able, in gladness and joy, and to celebrate the birthday of his martyrdom.”
In the fourth century St. Jerome, in his letter to Riparius, explained the proper veneration of saints and relics, “We do not worship, we do not adore [saints], for fear that we should bow down to the creature rather than to the Creator, but we venerate the relics of the martyrs in order the better to adore Him whose martyrs they are.”
The Catholic and Orthodox Churches are careful to preserve the relics of the saints in the same way that museum curators take care to preserve Abraham Lincoln’s top hat, or George Washington’s sword. These are physical links to people we admire and revere, perhaps even love.
The Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that no one should feel uneasy visiting a shrine or venerating a relic. In many respects it is similar to visiting the grave of a beloved member of the family, or cherishing a family heirloom—but on a much higher level. The shrine or relic is a physical link with someone who was so faithful to God in this life that he or she is now glorified in the Kingdom of God forever and offered to the faithful here on earth as a model of holiness.

 

5. Do you have any other writing projects currently in the works?

Yes. Harvard has given me a contract for another book, this time on the first plot to assassinate Lincoln in 1861, as he passed through Baltimore en route to his first inauguration. And down the road I’ll publish a book on the rediscovery of St. Peter’s bones and tomb in 1939.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Books, Other Posts, Theology | 2 Comments »

June 27th, 2011

In the Mail – Saints Preserved

Thanks to Image Catholic Books (an imprint of Random House) for sending along a pre-release copy of Saints Preserved: An Encyclopedia of Relics by Thomas J. Craughwell.

Since I have returned to the Catholic Church I have remained relatively Baptist in my day to day piety.  I read a lot of scripture in my devotional time.  A book on saints and relics should then prove an interesting experience for me. At any rate here’s a short review from the front matter of the book that I thought was interesting:

Relics are an often misunderstood part of the Catholic devotional life. Derided as either superstitious or just plain ‘gross,’ they are in fact an important reminder of the physicality of the saints. The saints were not mythical creatures or legendary personages, but flesh-and-blood men and women who walked the earth, ate and drank, wore clothes, wrote letters, and lived entirely human lives. Thomas Craughwell’s new book provides readers with a comprehensive guide to the most important relics in the church and where they can be found, and venerated. His book is simply one of a kind.” —James Martin, SJ, author of My Life with the Saints and The Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Books, Theology | No Comments »

« Older Entries