Tag: Archbishop Fulton Sheen

Guerrilla Marketing & Christian Compliance

There is no love without sacrifice. But in a political system, sacrifice without love becomes a distorted perversion of the sacred, used by the few to control the many. We may not promote the common good to the detriment of human dignity.


“The path to happiness was self-sacrifice and suppression of the individual for the good of the collective.”— Barbara Demick in her book, Nothing to Envy, speaking to the propaganda of North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-il

A few years ago I read a book called Nothing to Envy by Barbara Demick, a journalist who chronicled in minute detail the day-to-day lives of six North Korean citizens who eventually escaped communism and defected to find freedom in South Korea. It wasn’t so much the challenging lives these characters led that caught my eye — although they did — but rather the never-ending state-led propaganda (i.e. Marketing) that accosted North Korean citizens on a daily basis.

North Koreans have no access to outside media. They enjoy only state-run media, state-run entertainment and state-run news. Subjects in this book commented about how controlled was the narrative on any given subject, and through any given medium. North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-il, believed that movies, for example, were critical for instilling loyalty to his regime. He believed that “revolutionary art and literature are extremely effective means for inspiring people to work for the tasks of the revolution.” Under his direction, film was used to that end. Demick explains that movie themes always ran along the following lines: “The path to happiness was self-sacrifice and suppression of the individual for the good of the collective.” In communist North Korea, pretty much every message from every outlet served to promote this message. Whatever the medium, the regime sought always to increase love for Kim and allegiance to whatever the state determined was in the interest of “the common good.” 

Enter the United States, 2020-2021. 

What we’ve been watching in the United States over the past year can be likened to tactics used in North Korea. Those in the marketing business call it Guerrilla Marketing. Yes, the term is derived from Guerrilla Warfare. When you think Guerrilla Marketing, think ambush, attack, sabotage, only think in terms of ad campaigns. Often guerrilla marketing campaigns use a variety of techniques to attract attention and action, “attacking” the would-be consumer from all angles, and employing most often an attempt to connect emotionally with clients, a tactic which exponentially increases the likelihood of buy-in or acceptance. When marketing shuts down debate and is completely one-sided, at times even misleading, it is called propaganda. When you combine guerrilla marketing with propaganda, you have a dangerous, if effective, combination. 

Mask Matters

If you paid any attention to the promotion of masks, you noticed guerrilla marketing style tactics used again and again. Mask mania was everywhere (and it continues). It seemed all of Hollywood joined the bandwagon to encourage the wearing of masks, from Wonder Woman to Harry Potter, from Kathryn Bigelow to Morgan Freeman and Paul Rudd. Matthew McConaughey even made a PSA about how to make your own mask in a pinch. In addition to PSAs, there were signs everywhere. Posters in stores, ads on social media, billboards — even digital billboards — shouting boldly above our nation’s highways.  With the cooperation of virtually every available outlet as well as industry and government, this was guerrilla marketing at its finest. 

Please note that not one of these ads provided “science” to help educate the public. They may have used the words, “Listen to the Science,” but not one of them provided any data for us to examine. There was nothing for us to consider, to evaluate. No reason to engage our “reason.” Instead, each and every one of these ads sought an emotional response. Each pointed to a “responsibility” toward our fellow man. Some were inspirational, some were guilt-ridden, and some even employed bullying techniques intended to isolate those who may have been tempted to opt out.

One of the most blatant bullying offenders was CNNs, This is a Mask PSA. While showing dozens of masks in all shapes, sizes and colors, the ad had only one line:

“ A mask can say a lot about the person who wears it; but even more about the person who doesn’t.” 

– CNN’s PSA: This is a Mask

The last mask featured in the ad, just before the narrator ends this sentence, says “Greater Good.” 

 Not surprisingly, the pressure worked. According to a National Geographic survey, by October 2020, 92% of people surveyed said they wore a mask when leaving home. Never mind that cases went up shortly after that survey. Never mind that states that did not mandate masks appear to have lower transmission rates than those who went all-out on mandates. Never mind that until last year, every study ever done regarding masks and respiratory spread found no evidence that masks actually stopped transmission. Never mind a recent study in China that followed 300 people who were Covid-positive but asymptomatic and found that of the more than 1100 people they contact-traced through these cases, not one of them ended up testing positive though that contact. The bottom line is that the science is not final regarding masks. In fact, if actual studies (as opposed to anecdotal stories) lean in any direction at all, it is against their effectiveness.

But no matter. The marketing was never about facts. It was all about emotion. It was about self-sacrifice. It was about social responsibility.

Vaccine Valor

In case you haven’t noticed, the same type of campaign is now in full swing for the Covid-19 vaccine. Again. No science. No facts. Just emotion. And this time, they’ve added incentives.

State and local governments are pushing, military is promoting,  news outlets are advocating. Health care workers have produced entertaining PSAs, celebrities like Willie Nelson and Dolly Parton have written songs they hope will sway us. Other celebrities have been posing for pictures as they receive their vaccines – and then posting them all over social media. All four living ex-presidents participated in a PSA promoting the vaccine. There is also a giant collaborative campaign between corporations, media companies and faith communities to “educate” people about the vaccine. (Note their campaign is called “It’s up to You,” clearly implying that the future hangs in the balance unless we get the vaccine.) Priests and preachers from coast to coast are “preaching the gospel of the Covid-19 vaccine.” Even Pope Francis has suggested that people have a “moral obligation” to take it.  In an interview, he stated, “It’s a moral choice because it is about your life but also the lives of others.” 

And if all the ads and the social pressure don’t work, there are other campaigns to reward us with perks, if only we’ll be “good” citizens. And on the flip-side, they’re willing to punish us if we won’t (think China’s appalling, ‘social credit score”).

Again – science? There’s no need for science when you have the government, every media outlet and the entertainment industry all promoting your product. Unlike those of other vaccines, this promotion has dispensed with the idea of a rational, thought-provoking discussion between me and my doctor about pros and cons of the vaccine and risk vs. reward for my family. This is more akin to Nike’s Just Do It campaign.

Everywhere we look, they are playing on our emotions. And now, we have — as we did with the masks —  a PR campaign telling us that our getting the vaccine is a sacrifice that we should be willing to make for the common good. Don’t ask how a medication that is injected into MY body is going to help you. Don’t ask why my getting the vaccine should matter if you have it and are protected.

Just don’t ask questions. It’s not about facts. It’s about emotion. It’s about our being willing to sacrifice for “the common good.” 

The Cross Without Christ – Recipe for Disaster

All this pressure to self-sacrifice? It sounds great. Really it does. Especially if you don’t listen too closely. If you don’t analyze. But in fact, these campaigns are very deceptive. 

This obligation to our fellow man is very similar to what they promote in North Korea (and China, and Cuba and Venezuela, etc.). But sadly, when Christianity becomes all about humanitarianism, it ceases to be about the salvation of souls. There is grave danger in that idea. It is a danger that seeks to separate God from the equation by dispensing with the spiritual in favor of the material. This is what Archbishop Fulton Sheen called A Cross Without Christ. 

A pursuit of the “common good” is something the Catholic Church has always promoted. But these words have become twisted in the public square. They have been used as a tool for manipulation, so much so that the words have become a lie that serves to distract Christians from what is most important. This lie feeds on our compassionate nature, our ordained call to serve, to love our neighbor, and to ensure that justice is accomplished for those most in need. But in fact, to the extent that this pressure to comply is forcefully applied, it can undermine our compassion, inhibit our service, remove the natural relationship we have with our neighbor and destroy the very outcome of justice it professes to serve. 

Christ gave us two great Commandments. The First is to “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind…and a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:37-39). Our love for neighbor stems directly from our love for God. It should speak always to the dignity of every human person. Love of neighbor should recognize that each soul is made in the image and likeness of God, equipped with both reason and free will. These are two characteristics that separate us from animals. And yet we are being asked to set both aside, to pay homage to the Gospel of Covid-19. 

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church,


God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. “God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might, of his own accord, seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to Him. (GS 17; Sir 15:14).” (CCC 1730)

In Life of Christ, Archbishop Sheen addresses the danger inherent in any approach that neglects those important truths:


Communism has chosen the Cross in the sense that it has brought back to an egotistic world a sense of discipline, self-abnegation, surrender, hard work, study, and dedication to supra-individual goals. But the Cross without Christ is a sacrifice without love. Hence, Communism has produced a society that is authoritarian, cruel, oppressive of human freedom, filled with concentration camps, firing squads, and brain-washings. — Life of Christ, p. xxv.

Cleaving to God is the path whereby we can obtain the grace that allows us to love enough to sacrifice our own wants, our own needs, our own desires for the good of another. 

There is no love without sacrifice. But in a political system, sacrifice without love becomes a distorted perversion of the sacred, used by the few to control the many. As Christians, we may not promote the common good to the detriment of human dignity.

This flagrant and no-holds-barred use of guerrilla marketing and manipulation to pressure us to act is an affront to our dignity as human persons. The social pressure to conform is akin to campaigns history has shown to cause the most dangerous form of division and isolation. This kind of pressure should be intolerable to all. If vaccines and masks are for the betterment of society, open the gates to allow a fruitful and meaningful discussion. One that celebrates actual science, bans propaganda and respects the need for each and every one of us to resort to both our God-given ability to reason and to our own free will in order to make appropriate decisions regarding our health and the health of our families. 

(Thanks for reading my post! If you liked it, please check out my new book, The Lost Art of Sacrifice, published by Sophia Institute Press!)

Socialism: Cunning Seductress for Catholics but a Deadly Plague on the Body of Christ

Before the cheerleaders of this dangerous ideology take another step, we need to look them in the eye and denounce their ideas for the evils that they represent.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is socialism.jpg

Last Tuesday for the first time in the history of these United States, a president stood before both houses of Congress and declared, “The United States will never be a socialist country.” This was a monumental moment. As recently as three years ago, that would have been like saying, “A springer spaniel will never be president.” It would have been so ridiculous that no one would have thought it worth mentioning. That just goes to show you how fast things are moving to the left. The pace of this drive toward central control is almost mind-blowing.

But is it really? There has been a drum beat in this country that has consistently pounded the words universal health care, income equality, social justice, economic security and more, a persistent pounding against the backdrop of all public discussion that first resonated in the halls of discourse and moved on to the public square. So constant and so echoed are these terms that they have come to represent ends in themselves, mantras of moral absolutes which actually lower the dignity of man to a mere material being — one that can be adequately served by shifting a decimal point or passing a bill. 

And who are the drum majors behind this movement? Given that socialists proclaim compassion, promise to answer domestic problems with financial commitments, and appeal to the Catholic desire to love our neighbor by pledging to “lift up the poor” and by promoting “social justice” and the “common good,”  it shouldn’t be a surprise that many of the band leaders have been Catholics. Of course, there is the old guard of Catholics, like Andrew Cuomo, Joe Biden, and probably the most powerful woman in America – Nancy Pelosi – and so many others who have used their public pulpits to seduce the hearts and minds of poorly catechized Catholics into following the pied piper issues of human rights, economic ‘fairness’ and ‘affordable’ education, universal healthcare and more – which really means expanding the government by exponential numbers. At this moment nearly 1/3 of Congress is Catholic. (141 House/22 Senate) Imagine how those souls could work together to build up the Body of Christ!

But not only do more than half of the Catholics in Congress tout a socialist agenda, recently they seem to have made a decision to proudly bear the standard of socialism. Those on the left have found a new, fresh young face with radical ideas to offer as a mouthpiece for the future. Oh. And by the way – she’s a Catholic.

Like many radicals before her, Freshman US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) was inspired to run for public office by her Catholic faith, sharing that she was raised to serve the less fortunate. She claims that now she is merely taking that sentiment to the public square. She comes by her misguided ideas honestly. The Democratic Socialists of America, of which she is a proud member, was started by a once devout Catholic — Michael Harrington —  who left Princeton to join Dorothy Day’s Catholic Worker Movement. Eventually he left the Catholic Church (Perhaps he realized Catholicism and socialism don’t mix?); but it was his commitment to Catholic social teaching that first inspired him.

Last week AOC ushered out her Green New Deal to the praise and adulation of the media (and her three million Twitter followers). Never mind the fact that actually passing this deal — or virtually anything on her agenda – would be a tipping point toward socialism from which we might never be able to recover. According to the Green New Deal, Cortez wants to extend the public dole for — among other things — “guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States.” Notice the word all. Just read this statement closely, and you will see the utopian ideas that lie beneath the surface of this massive government overhaul of the economy and our freedoms.

Young adults that have been indoctrinated through the education system and have been groomed to think in terms of punchy one-liners, banners and headlines have been flocking to join the band. That constant thumping, ever pressing drumbeat reverberating through the chambers of media and in the halls of education throughout this country has had a powerful effect. In 2017 the Victims of Communism conducted their second annual survey on American attitudes toward socialism and learned that over half (51%) of Millennials would prefer socialism or communism to capitalism (even though most don’t really know what socialism means). Not just the terms but the ideas are gaining ground. A poll released this past week shows that Americans (not just Millennials) favor increasing domestic spending and increasing taxes on the rich more than they favor lowering taxes on everyone. By domestic spending they mean increasing the size of the government safety net – healthcare for all, education for all, affordable housing and so on.

Unfortunately, many Catholics seem to be so caught up on the feel-good, emotional advocacy of the left that they cannot see the inherent dangers of the socialist agenda. To many generous hearts,  the hype sounds deceptively attractive. Sure we want to take care of every American. This is exactly what Christ meant when he said we should love our neighbor. Based on the big hearted extension of handouts to all, one might think the Catholic Church would be inherently supportive of such proposals. But one would be wrong. 

Socialism is NOT in line with Catholic teaching. 

Pope Leo XIII condemned socialism as far back as 1878 when he called it “the deadly plague that is creeping into the very fibers of human society and leading it on to the verge of destruction…”  In Quod Apostolici Muneris (On Socialism), he explains what is so deadly about these ideas on several levels.

First of all, this massive plan for the redistribution of wealth to pay for universal health care, education, a guaranteed income and more is thievery and it is wrong.

In response to the notion of taking from the rich and giving to the poor, Leo XIII said,

…while the socialists would destroy the “right” of property, alleging it to be a human invention altogether opposed to the inborn equality of man, and, claiming a community of goods, argue that property should not be peaceably endured, and that the property and privileges of the rich might be rightly invaded, the Church, with much greater wisdom and good sense, recognizes the inequality among men, who are born with different powers of body and mind, inequality in actual possession, also, and holds that the right of property and of ownership, which springs from nature itself, must not be touched and stands inviolate.

For she knows that stealing and robbery were forbidden in so special a manner by God, the Author and Defender of right, that He would not allow man even to desire what belonged to another, and that thieves and despoilers, no less than adulterers and idolaters, are shut out from the Kingdom of Heaven. (#9)

Does it matter whether the rich have millions or even billions? No. stealing and coveting are forbidden by the 7th and 10th Commandments. And man has the right to the fruits of his labor. Certainly he is compelled to share. But this proscription comes from his God, and should not come from the government. Man will be held to account by His Creator, should he refuse to open his heart and his checkbook to serve those less fortunate.  

Rather than apply (or extend) the Robin Hood philosophy of stealing from the rich to give to the poor, the Church desires, as Christ desires, that the human soul give from the heart. We are all called to sacrifice. And this gesture to care for those in need is one that should be extended in love and not compelled by the government. Given the chance, throughout history Americans have done an amazing job of serving the poor, both body and soul, performing corporal works of mercy with a gracious hand and a discerning eye, having such close contact as to evaluate the fruits of such service – whether their generosity is helping to lift a man from the depths or enabling him to wallow in misery by his own choice. When it comes to works of mercy, the Catholic Church has been at the forefront of the action. By no means has the Church ever abandoned the poor, but rather has extended in love the beautiful gifts offered by the Body of Christ. She knows that while God has commissioned His people with the Two Great Commandments, He has also given them free will. And in order for Him to truly love, His gift must be offered freely:

But not the less on this account does our holy Mother not neglect the care of the poor or omit to provide for their necessities; but rather, drawing them to her with a mother’s embrace, and knowing that they bear the person of Christ Himself, who regards the smallest gift to the poor as a benefit conferred on Himself, holds them in great honor. She does all she can to help them; she provides homes and hospitals where they may be received, nourished, and cared for all the world over and watches over these. She is constantly pressing on the rich that most grave precept to give what remains to the poor; and she holds over their heads the divine sentence that unless they succor the needy they will be repaid by eternal torments.

There is great danger both to the souls of those in need and to the souls of those with means, should the government step in and demand that all men be made equal. The Church has been shouting this from the rooftops; but somewhere along the line, our obligation to the poor has been reduced to an economic obligation, and his soul has been forgotten. Likewise with the giver. His gift has been reduced to a mere economic transaction. There is no relationship between the two. Their eyes do not meet; their souls do not connect. As a result, each suffers greatly. This material driven world has demeaned man by reducing him to a mere material being. Headlines and taglines and hapless phrases have lost the notion of our fallen nature, of the soul, of our need for affiliation, bonding, freedom — our need to be touched by the hand of God through His Body, the Church.

Second, closely tied to the above, the desire to ensure equality among all types of people – whether in terms of economics, gender, age, education, income, etc. – is immoral. It completely dispenses with the Body of Christ, by trying to make everyone the same, rather than celebrating and valuing our differences. As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. (1 Cor. 12:20)

When it comes to a desire to place everyone on equal footing, the Church would argue that socialists, 

“stealing the very Gospel itself with a view to deceive more easily the unwary, have been accustomed to distort it so as to suit their own purposes…” 

Not only are they wrong, but, Pope Leo XIII emphasizes, 

“…nevertheless so great is the difference between their depraved teachings and the most pure doctrine of Christ that none greater could exist: ‘for what participation hath justice with injustice or what fellowship hath light with darkness?’” (#5)

For socialists also attempt to take the notion of equality and stand it on its head. Rather than recognize that the equality of men rests in the their shared inherited nature, through which all are created in the image and likeness of God and will be judged according to the same law regardless of their status in life, socialists attempt to call all men equal by nature, denying inequality when it comes to authority, power or rights. 

Their habit, as we have so intimated, is always to maintain that nature has made all men equal, and that, therefore, neither honor nor respect is due to majesty, nor obedience to laws, unless, perhaps, to those sanctioned by their own good pleasure. (#5)

You may think this is untrue. That socialism is not about rejection of authority, only about promoting and ensuring equality; but in effect, it is. For in promoting equality, any differentiation based on uniqueness, authority or power is rejected. According to Jeff Stein, formerly of VOX and now a reporter for the Washington Post and supporter of socialism, 

“Socialism is about democratizing the family to get rid of patriarchal relations; democratizing the political sphere to get genuine participatory democracy; democratizing the schools by challenging the hierarchical relationship between the teachers of the school and the students of the school,” said Jared Abbott, a member of the DSA’s national steering committee. “Socialism is the democratization of all areas of life, including but not limited to the economy.”

These ideas have been seeping into the culture for years, with virtually every television show, movie, article, book,  upending relationships in the most precious institution in all of society — the family. Think about it. When is the last time you saw a television show where a father actually knew more than his children or was in any way a hero to his wife? Even in commercials, fathers are fools and mothers have all the power and authority. How many of us have been permanently affected by this constant beating of the “equality” drum?

This play on the idea of “equality” runs absolutely contrary to the Gospel. As Quod Apostolici Muneris explains,

But, on the contrary, in accordance with the teaching of the Gospel, the equality of men consists in this: that all, having inherited the same nature, are called to the same most high dignity of the sons of God, and that, as one and the same end is set before all, each one is to be judged by the same law and will receive punishment or reward according to his deserts. The inequality of rights and of power proceeds from the very Author of nature, ‘from whom all paternity in heaven and earth is named.’ 

For keep in mind,

…even in the kingdom of heaven He hath willed that the choirs of angels be distinct and some subject to others, and also in the Church has instituted various orders and a diversity of offices, so that all are not apostles or doctors or pastors, so also has he appointed that there should be various orders in civil society, differing in dignity, rights, and power, whereby the State, like the Church, should be one body, consisting of many members, some nobler than others, but all necessary to each other and solicitous for the common good.

Socialists have long been promoting a paradigm. And their first fully indoctrinated generation is now of age. If they get their way, they will compel a complete overhaul of the most critical institutions.Unless we come to realize the inherent dangers in socialistic thought and the disastrous results these policies would produce, we are bound to destroy what we value most:

…you know that the foundation of this society rests first of all in the indissoluble union of man and wife according to the necessity of natural law, and is completed in the mutual rights and duties of parents and children… You know also that the doctrines of socialism strive almost completely to dissolve this union; since, that stability which is imparted to it by religious wedlock being lost, it follows that the power of the father over his own children, and the duties of the children toward their parents, must be greatly weakened. But the Church, on the contrary, teaches that ‘marriage, honorable in all,’ which God himself instituted in the very beginning of the world, and made indissoluble for the propagation and preservation of the human species, has become still more binding and more holy through Christ, who raised it to the dignity of a sacrament, and chose to use it as the figure of His own union with the Church.

Socialism promises an end to all social ills. It plays on class envy and identity politics to promote scapegoats and division. This division allows for some to capitalize on the fruits of others, to deny authority and destroy boundaries. Archbishop Fulton Sheen shares some wise insight that you may find interesting. He said that pre-communist Russians were prophetic, believing that  

…the Antichrist would “come disguised as the Great Humanitarian; he will talk peace, prosperity and plenty not as means to lead us to God, but as ends in themselves…he will be so broad-minded as to identify tolerance with indifference to right and wrong, truth and error; he will spread the lie that men will never be better until they make society better and thus have selfishness to provide fuel for the next revolution…he will increase love for love and decrease love for person; he will invoke religion to destroy religion…his mission, he will say, will be to liberate men from the servitudes of superstition and Fascism, which he will never define…He will tempt Christians with the same three temptations with which he tempted Christ. The temptation to turn stones into bread as an earthly Messias will become the temptation to sell freedom for security, making bread a political weapon which only those who think his way may eat. The temptation to work a miracle by recklessly throwing himself from a steeple will become a plea to desert the lofty pinnacles of truth where faith and reason reign, for those lower depths where the masses live on slogans and propaganda…the temptation to have a new religion to destroy a religion or a politics which is religion — one that renders unto Caesar even the things that are God’s. (Communism and the Conscience of the West, p. 24)

In her motherly love, the Church calls for a halt to this ever-pounding drumbeat that simplifies the needs of men – those with and without means — before we meet the same demise that plagues every country that attempts to direct and plan for human success. Catholics must know that this is not humanitarianism. Socialism is evil. It is never coercion, but rather freedom that allows the pursuit of true happiness. Freedom to find common ground with our neighbor. Freedom to appreciate how our unique gifts can serve the Body of Christ and to use them appropriately. But ultimately, we must have the freedom to make our own way, freedom to distribute the spoils of our labor as we are called by God, freedom to serve and the freedom to love.

There are so many serious reasons popes have denounced socialism that all their rationale could not possibly fit into the length of one post. In this space I’ve had room to cover only two points. But please think about them. And consider sharing them with fellow parishioners over doughnuts after Mass this Sunday. Before the cheerleaders of this dangerous ideology take another step, we need to look them in the eye and denounce their ideas for the evils that they represent. Like President Trump, Catholics need to make a declaration. They must stand with the Body of Christ and say NO. Catholics will never be socialists.

Image: Adrian Lyttelton: Italian Culture and Society in the Age of Stile Floreale

11 Inspirational Quotes about Sacrifice

We are called to give everything, without holding back. Sometimes it’s hard to comprehend the lengths to which we are asked to extend ourselves. Perhaps the quotes below will help to inspire you to desire the love that He desires for you; if not, perhaps at the very least they will provoke a deeper reflection of your Christian vocation.

We have entered the second week of Lent. Most of us are hopefully at least ankle-deep in Lenten devotions, carving time out of daily schedules for prayer, fasting and almsgiving. jesus carrying crossJust in case you need a little motivation, perhaps you could be inspired by Christ’s Summons to His would-be followers:

If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and pick up his cross and  follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world and forfeits his life? — Matthew 16: 24-26

Christ does not mince words here. We can slice and dice this quote all we want; but as Christians, we are called to love with a special kind of devotion. We are called to give everything, without holding back. Sometimes it’s hard to comprehend the lengths to which we are asked to extend ourselves. Perhaps the quotes below will help to inspire you to desire the love that He desires for you; if not, perhaps at the very least they will provoke a deeper reflection of your Christian vocation:

  1. The sacrifice the good Lord wants of us is to die to ourselves. – St. Charles of Sezze

  2. A sacrifice to be real must hurt, and must empty ourselves. Give yourself fully to God. He will use you to accomplish great things on the condition that you believe much more in His love than in your weakness. — Saint Teresa of Calcutta

  3. He gave Himself wholly to you: He left nothing for Himself. – Saint John Chrysostom

  4. There is no place for selfishness-and no place for fear! Do not be afraid, then, when love makes demands. Do no be afraid when love requires sacrifice. — Pope John Paul II

  5. The day men forget that love is synonymous with sacrifice, that day they will ask what selfish sort of woman it must have been who ruthlessly extracted tribute in the form of flowers, or what an avaricious creature she must have been who demanded solid gold in the form of a ring, just as they will ask what cruel kind of God is it who asks for sacrifice and self-denial. — Archbishop Fulton Sheen

  6. In the cross alone do we find the soul’s eternal salvation and hope of everlasting life. Take up your cross, therefore, and follow Jesus and you will pass into unending life. — Thomas A’ Kempis

  7. The more intense the love, the less we think of a sacrifice involved to secure what we love. — Archbishop Fulton Sheen

  8. I have found the paradox, that if you love until it hurts, there can be no more hurt, only more love. — Saint Teresa of Calcutta

  9. I have seen clearly what I can do in my own corner of life. Above all, to work on myself, to try to develop in myself all the instincts God has given me; to strengthen my will by regular work; to elevate my soul unceasingly by sacrifice and the acceptance of my usual sufferings, and by a constant and tender sympathy for all who approach me. — Elisabeth Leseur

  10. Love is the soul of sacrifice. — Archbishop Fulton Sheen

  11. It is right to offer sacrifice to God as a sign of adoration and gratitude, supplication and communion: “Every action done so as to cling to God in communion of holiness, and thus achieve blessedness, is a true sacrifice.” — CCC  #2099 (quoting St. Augustine)

Tolstoy’s Warped View of Authority Served to Destroy in Russia the Institution He Held Most Dear – The Family. Are We Doing the Same?

The authority of the Church is necessary. It is that familial authority that secures the foundations of civilization. It reinforces the sanctity of sacred institutions such as marriage and family. This is the authority that, in love, could have protected Tolstoy’s beloved Russia.

Summer Reading

Given that even writing was on the back burner for a few months in favor of a demanding summer, I was a little surprised when I picked up Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina 120px-Leo_Tolstoy,_portraitfor my summer reading. Maybe it was the relentless drumming of Russia, Russia, Russia over the airwaves every time I turned around. Or perhaps at a more subtle level it was the constant reference to socialism as a possible solution to our own country’s woes [Socialism, according to Archbishop Fulton Sheen is a “wet nurse to Communism” – Capitalism and Socialism Or Capitalism and Communism are Related?]. Or maybe I just really needed the intellectual stimulation that a classic would offer. Whatever the case, for a while I was basking in the sunlight and fragrance that only the most poetic language and intriguing ideas can offer. This man addresses issues that weigh on the soul of every human being. Family life, love, humanity and love of country. At some point I began to feel I’d found a kindred spirit in Tolstoy. Given the depth with which I was moved by his pointed defenses of the family, his patriotism and his romantic notion of traditional values and the idyllic lifestyle of the Russian farmer, I wasn’t exactly surprised by my infatuation. The more steeped I became in high society Russia, the more I began to wonder about the views of this man so driven to warn the world about the dangers he recognized in his own time – dangers that appear not so different from those I see in ours.

A Man who Cherished the Family

I began my research by turning back to the Introduction – something I am often loathe to do when it comes to classic fiction (In my experience, reading introductions takes away from the freshness of a novel). But in this case it was different. Reading the introduction made me all the more interested in Tolstoy and his writing. He witnessed tumult in his time as I do in ours, harboring great concerns about the direction of his beloved Russia. And he took to the pen to illustrate in a beautifully intimate way what he recognized as grave threats to a great country.

Anna Karenina was published only 40 years before the Russian Revolution of 1917. There are references throughout the book to communist ideology and to a distinct move toward nihilism in the way of sexual freedom and away from the traditional values associated with family life.

I was especially moved by these words in the Intro:

To publish such a book in the 1870s was an act of defiance, and Tolstoy meant it as one. By then the family novel was hopelessly out of fashion. The satirist Saltykov-Shchedrin noted at the time that the family, ‘that warm and cosy element…which once gave the novel its content, has vanished from sight…The novel of contemporary man finds its resolution in the street, on the public way, anywhere but in the home.’ The radical intelligentsia had been attacking the ‘institution’ of the family for more than a decade. Newspapers, pamphlets, ideological novel-tracts like N.G. Chernyshevsky’s “What Is to Be Done?”, advocated sexual freedom, communal living and the communal raising of children. Questions of women’s education, women’s enfranchisement, the role of women in public life, were hotly debated in the press. On all these matters, Tolstoy held conservative views. For him…family happiness was the highest human ideal. As Nabokov observed in his lecture notes on Anna Karenina, ‘Tolstoy considers that two married people with children are tied together by divine law forever.’ An intentional anachronism, his novel was meant as a challenge, both artistic and ideological, to the ideas of the Russian nihilists. — Penguin Classics Deluxe Edition, p. ix (emphasis mine)

For his heroic defense of this foundational institution, I fell in love with Tolstoy.

But then I began to dig a little deeper.

A Man Who Misunderstood the Word Authority

I decided to Google Tolstoy and Religion, just to see where he stood with respect to the Church. After all, he shared with the Catholic Church a rather sacred view of family life. I wondered whether he was strongly convicted by Church teaching.

Apparently not.

Rather than find a great conversion story in his bio, I found that Tolstoy was actually excommunicated from the Russian Orthodox Church in 1901 for his vocal rejection of traditional Christianity. He responded to his excommunication with a rather revealing entry in his diary:

“A conversion about divinity has suggested to me a great idea…the founding of a new religion…the religion of Christianity but purged of dogmatics and mysticism; a practical religion not promising future bliss, but giving bliss on earth.” 

It turns out that his rejection of organized religion influenced huge numbers of people, including other writers, philosophers, critics and public voices; this growing rejection of authority grew into a crescendo of “intelligentsia” who rejected any and all authority in Russia, which ultimately led to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, out of which – ironically enough – came a despotic authoritarianism the likes of which no Russian ever could have imagined. Communist rule resulted in the deaths of over 20 million Russian citizens (Soviet citizens) and over 5 million Ukrainians.

In the August 1917 issue of The Catholic World, a theologian called out Tolstoy for his great responsibility in the promotion of what was ultimately an evil that worked to destroy all that Tolstoy, himself, held dear:

He devoted the last years of his life to a ruthless war against Christianity. By terms he strove to deform the content and the teaching of the Gospels, to sneer at and repudiate the fundamental theses of Christian dogmatics; to launch the most violent invective against the clergy; to nullify or deny the supernatural and moral influence of the sacraments of Christian life. The religion of Tolstoy effaces all the characteristic features of Christian revelation. Under the pen of Tolstoy and his disciples Christianity was stripped of its supernatural brilliancy…Tolstoy and his school promoted a radical socialism with mystical anarchistic tendencies and imbued with a hatred against historical Christianity.

According to one report I read, even Dostoyevsky, his contemporary and another of my favorite authors, accused Tolstoy of “promoting, in effect, a Christianity without Christ.”

I must admit that I was shocked and devastatingly disappointed to find that Tolstoy, who considered the family to be a sacred institution, was complicit in its destruction in Russia. And we should take this opportunity to learn from his serious mistake.

Like the misguided Ayn Rand, who fled from the destructive authoritarianism of communism a generation later, Tolstoy threw all authority into the same pot, rather than distinguish between the good and the bad. He believed the authority offered by the Church was as destructive as that offered by czar. But according to Archbishop Fulton Sheen,

Authoritarianism is based on force, and therefore is physical, but authority is founded on reverence and love, and therefore is moral. – Life is Worth Living, 5th Series

The authority of the Church is necessary. It is that familial authority that secures the foundations of civilization. It reinforces the sanctity of sacred institutions such as marriage and family. This is the authority that, in love, could have protected Tolstoy’s beloved Russia.

This confusion remains in effect today, perhaps as a result of Tolstoy, Rand and other well-known writers, speakers and media representatives. Sheen addressed the confusion, which is no doubt worse, today, then when these thoughts were shared:

There is nothing more misunderstood by the modern mind than the authority of the Church. Just as soon as one mentions the authority of the Vicar of Christ there are visions of slavery, intellectual servitude, mental chains, tyrannical obedience, and blind service on the part of those who, it is said, are forbidden to think for themselves. That is positively untrue. Why has the world been so reluctant to accept the authority of the Father’s house? Why has it so often identified the Catholic Church with intellectual slaver?  The answer is, because the world has forgotten the meaning of liberty. – Communism and the Conscience of the West, 1948

In these days where Russia is so often in the news, perhaps we should acknowledge that, while we may stand in solidarity against the government that came to power in Russia in 1917, Americans may hold in common the threshold of a Russian people that sought to eradicate authority and thereby nearly suffocated beneath it.

This is where the West sits today. In a world that is increasingly hostile toward the idea of an organized Church. Of anything that resembles a moral authority, for authority has become a dirty word in the West. And yet, Christ, who is Christianity, exhorted us to submit to the Church. His Church.

We need His Church. Yes, she is made up of faulty human beings. Yes, some of her representatives have done horrible things. But that is exactly why we need her. Because horrible things are being done by people in every institution. Yet, unlike those institutions – which are also made up of sinners – from the beginning we were promised that The Holy Spirit would be with us forever, guiding the Church in all her work (John 14:16). That God, the Son, would never leave Her (Matthew 28: 18-20). Most importantly, we have been assured that the gates of Hell would never prevail against His Church (Matthew 16:18).

It is critical that we understand this. As we stand here today, Americans share a lot in common with the Russians of Tolstoy’s time. The gates of hell are fast encroaching upon the institutions and values we hold most dear. How much have we already lost in the name of individual “freedom”? Are we going to follow Russia’s path? Will we make Tolstoy’s mistake? Are we confusing the authority of the Church with the authority of a rogue government? Like Tolstoy and Rand, will we ideologically lump them both together and toss them both out? If so, where will Americans sit in 50 years? Will history repeat itself in an ultimate display of irony, the likes of which the world has never seen?

We may want to think twice about how we’re addressing our nation’s greatest problems; because in the grand scheme of things, the Church may be our only safe haven from – nay, our only defense against – a culture that seems hell-bent on pursuing “freedom” (ahem. license) at all costs. At the rate we’re going, it’s only a matter of time before our most sacred institutions are destroyed as well.

The gravest danger to American democracy…is not from the outside; it is from the inside — the hearts of citizens in whom the light of faith has gone out. Keep God as the origin of authority and you keep the ethical character of authority; reject Him and the authority becomes power subject to no law except its own. — Archbishop Fulton Sheen, Whence Come Wars, p. 64

 

 

Bibliography:
Leo Tolstoy and the Catholic Church, Fellowship of Cathoic Scholars Quarterly, Spring 2007
Anna Karenina, Introduction, Penguin Classics Deluxe Edition, 2000

Is Your Marriage Lacking a Certain Chemical Element?

Do you watch all the ads with the lovey dovey smiles and the flirtatious eyes, and try to remember what that felt like? Do you recall the giddiness of being young fresh and so in love that even folding socks together was fun?

Valentine’s Day is upon us again.

Do you watch all the ads with the lovey dovey smiles and the flirtatious eyes, and try to remember what that felt like? Do you recall the giddiness of being young and marriage paintingfresh and so in love that even folding socks together was fun? Where even an accidental touch was electrifying and you called your love 100 times a day just to hear his voice?

If we’re not careful, love can become like a favorite shirt thoughtlessly tossed into the bottom of a drawer. Over time we tend to pile other things on top of it, passing it over from day to day without even thinking until some random thought, word or action sparks a reminder, and we realize that something very special is missing.

When I was in my early twenties, I began a cross-stitch project that I was sure would be a permanent focal point on my wall. It was a huge, colorful piece of country folk art, and it would have been beautiful. Today, six kids and fifty million ideas later, that piece of art has long been abandoned to the wasteland of forgotten projects.

Recently, my daughters and I were digging through my sewing box to find notions for their latest crafts. Sure enough, they found that old piece of material with the beautiful, but unfinished cross-section of a town, all neatly stitched in bright, bold colors. The finished portion would probably fill a 9×13 frame. They were awestruck. “Mom! This was sooo beautiful! Why would you leave it in a box?! Why don’t you finish it? How could you just put this down and walk away?”

How to explain that things came up? That I was too busy holding babies, doing laundry and feeding kids? And as time passed, my obligations only became greater, running kids from here to there. Other goals. Other plans. I never intended to set it aside for good. In the beginning, I only put it away during a busy time in my life. But then along came something else. And pretty soon, it was relegated to an old sewing box as I focused on making new curtains, pillows and bedspreads for our first house. And then along came the children and there were the sports and the play dates and school. There was always something that kept me from picking up that project.

And now?

I’m no longer interested.

Sadly, many marriages end up in the predicament. Sometimes we cast them aside, with every intention of getting back to them “later,” when life calms down. But then things don’t calm down, and our marriage becomes faded and dingy, lacking the bright color and excitement it once had.

Has our love dwindled?

No.

It’s there; but it might be a little lethargic, perhaps suffering from a lack of oxygen.

It might do us good to breathe a little life back into our marriages – both body and soul.

While challenges in marriage can be complicated, the action of loving is not. Love is a verb. And we must take steps to love our spouses, no matter the condition of our relationship. A simple love offering can go a long way toward reviving that spark. Take some time this week to spend some special time together, sans distractions. And make that a habit. Talk. Listen. Pray together. Attend adoration together. And more than anything else, recognize the privilege you’ve been given by virtue of your sacred union.

There is no magic pill that will liven a marriage relationship. Love takes time. It takes sacrifice. And it takes commitment. Here are just six thoughts to keep in mind regarding this amazing sacrament that is marriage on this very special day. Perhaps contemplating the profound nature of your relationship will help to ignite the flame of desire and spark the passion of commitment:

  1. You have been chosen and called, therefore, as husbands and wives to be for one another the living experiential sign and expression of God’s love by sharing with each other the gifts of uncompromising love, unconditional acceptance, ceaseless dedication, total fidelity, and untiring service. These are the signs of God’s love, and this is what makes God present in the Sacrament of Matrimony. — Dietrich von Hildebrand, Marriage: the Mystery of Faithful Love

  2. How can I ever express the happiness of the marriage that is joined together by the church, strengthened by an offering, sealed by a blessing, announced by angels and ratified by the Father?!!! How wonderful the bond between two believers, with a single hope, a single desire, a single observance, a single service! They are both brethren and both fellow servants; there is no separation between them in spirit or flesh. In fact, they are truly two in one flesh, and where the flesh is one, one is the spirit. — Tertullian, quoted in Familiaris Consortio, by Pope John Paul II

  3. The basic error of mankind has been to assume that only two are needed for love; you and me, or society and me, or humanity and me. Really it takes three: self, other selves, and God; you, and me, and God. Love of self without love of God is selfishness; love of neighbor without love of God embraces only those who are pleasing to us, not those who are hateful…Duality in love is extinction through the exhaustion of self-giving. Love is triune or it dies. —Archbishop Fulton Sheen, Three to Get Married, p. 43

  4. In spousal love, the body of the beloved assumes a unique charm as the vessel of this person’s soul, and also as embodying in a unique way the general charm and attraction which femininity has for man, or virility has for woman. Spousal love aspires to the bodily union as a specific fulfillment of the total union, as a unique, deep, mutual self-donation. — Dietrich von Hildebrand, Man and Woman: Love and the Meaning of Intimacy, p. 47

  5. Romance is almost sure to die; love, however, does not have to die with it. Love is meant to mature, and it can do so if that readiness for sacrifice implied in the original self-giving of marital consent is alive or can be activiated. The idea that true love is prepared for sacrifice strikes a chord that perhaps our preaching needs to touch on more. As Pope John Paul II says, “It’s natural for the human heart to accept demands, even difficult ones, in the name of love for an ideal, and above all in the name of love for a person.— Cormac Burke, Covenanted Happiness, pg. 24

  6. Matrimony crushes selfishness, first of all, because it merges individuals into a corporate life in which neither lives for self but for the other; it crushes selfishness also because the very permanence of marriage is destructive of those fleeting infatuations, which are born with the moment and die with it; it destroys selfishness, furthermore, because the mutual love of husband and wife takes them out of themselves into the incarnation of their mutual love, their other selves, their children; and finally it narrows selfishness because the rearing of children demands sacrifice, without which, like unwatered flowers, they wilt and die.— Archbishop Fulton Sheen, The Cross and the Beatitudes, p. 41-42

  7. Do not forget that true love sets no conditions. It does not calculate or complain, but simply loves. – Saint John Paul II, Jubilee of Youth

Lent – Where the Body Meets the Soul

Have you given anything up this Lent?

It seems everywhere I turn this year, I have found recommendations about “doing” things for Lent. I’ve seen flyers taped to church doors, I’ve received videos from Catholic chocolateapostolates, and I’ve heard discussions via Catholic radio. They don’t suggest that we not attempt a physical discipline; but while they encourage us to engage in spiritual reading, help the poor, perform the corporal and spiritual works for mercy or spend more time in prayer, they say virtually nothing about restraining our appetites in any way.

This “do something positive” trend seems to have increased in recent years. But while  the above suggestions are all laudable activities, we should remind ourselves that the saints would not have separated living out their faith in a positive way from disciplining themselves via abstinence, fasting and mortification. In fact, they considered the spiritual life to be deeply connected with the physical. They recognized that when we lack discipline in our physical lives, our spiritual lives suffer.

Here are just a few comments from the saints on physical discipline (or a lack thereof) and its relationship with the soul:

Do you not know that fasting can master concupiscence, lift up the soul, confirm it in the paths of virtue, and prepare a fine reward for the Christian? -Saint Hedwig of Silesia

Irrational feeding darkens the soul and makes it unfit for spiritual experiences. – St. Thomas Aquinas

As long as a single passion reigns in our hearts, though all the others should have been overcome, the soul will never enjoy peace. – St. Joseph Calasanctius

It is almost certain that excess in eating is the cause of almost all the diseases of the body, but its effects on the soul are even more disastrous. – St. Alphonsus Liguori

The more we indulge ourselves in soft living and pampered bodies, the more rebellious they will become against the spirit. – St. Rita of Cascia

Yes, of course we should engage in activities that help others or increase our spiritual knowledge and time with Christ. But we shouldn’t allow those things to excuse us from taming our passions and appetites.

Unfortunately, many times we allow our sacrifices to become ends in themselves. Perhaps this explains the “upswing” in recommendations for other Lenten activities. After all, things like prayer, spiritual reading, or even practicing works of mercy  directly impact our relationship with The Lord, whereas giving up cake could seem like a random and inconsequential activity. But the fact is that our faith is not either…or; it should be both…and.

We will not have a fruitful Lent just because we declare that we are “giving up _____.” Rather we should remember that those physical sacrifices are not ends in themselves. The end of all discipline must be love. We give up chocolate, – or whatever else – to remind ourselves that this world is fleeting. It is an expression of love that we lavish on Our Lord, passionately declaring that this television set, this candy bar, this ice cream, this cake, these cookies – any and all things which we enjoy in this life – are but nothing compared to Him.

This is the time of year when, as individuals united with the entire Church, we encourage ourselves to walk through the fires of discipline and denial for Our Beloved! This is our time in the desert. This is when, by God’s grace, we face the temptation of X, and we declare,

Man should not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the Father’s mouth. – Matthew 4:4.

It is when we look over all creation and remind ourselves,

You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve. – Matthew 4:10

There is great power in knowing that by Gods’ grace we can be in control. That our appetites do not rule us. Provided we always keep in mind the ultimate end of self-control:

The purpose of asceticism, self-denial and mortification is the growth in charity or love of God. Christian self-denial is not based on the idea that the world, or the flesh are intrinsically wicked, but on the conviction that God is intrinsically good. – Archbishop Fulton Sheen

We release the chains of this world so we can bind ourselves more closely to Christ. Doing so will help us to live our faith more fully. God’s grace helps us to feed the hungry, clothe the naked or visit the imprisoned. And that grace flows abundantly when one of His children demonstrates a commitment to God, the Father, in heaven over the material gods of the earth.

So – What have you given up this Lent? There’s still time…

 

Note: If you like what you just read, please click the “follow” button to receive thought-provoking and action-oriented bi-weekly posts promoting the virtue of sacrifice. 

%d bloggers like this: