Carl E. Olson's Blog, page 54
February 28, 2015
The Book Somebody Doesn't Want Cardinals to Read
and the missing books.
Did someone steal books from the Synod fathers' mailboxes?
------------------------
There've been major news stories reporting the allegation that someone in connection with last fall's Extraordinary Synod of Bishops removed copies of an important Ignatius Press book on marriage, civil remarriage, and Holy Communion
from some mailboxes of the Synod participants.
True?
------------------------
If so, what was it somebody didn't want the Synod Fathers to read?
-----------------------
Read it for yourself .
Remaining in the Truth
of Christ
Edited by Robert Dodaro, O.S.A Softcover, 330 pages
Featuring essays by five Cardinals of the Catholic Church and four other scholars.
Read a sample.
Also available as an eBook .
$24.95
Save 20%* when you order your copy with the code RTC2015 at checkout.
For other great titles on the topics of marriage, family and the Extraordinary Synod visit
www.ignatius.com/promotions/marriage-family/
*This offer is valid online only from February 28, 2015 until March 8, 2015 midnight EST.
Website
YouTube
Copyright © 2015 Ignatius Press, All rights reserved.
Share
Tweet
Forward
Fathers, Sons, and Sacrifices: On the Second Sunday of Lent
Detail from "Abraham's Sacrifice" (1655) by Rembrandt [WikiArt.org]
A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for Sunday, March 1, 2015, Second Sunday of Lent | Carl E. Olson
Readings:
• Gen 22:1-2, 9A, 10-13, 15-18
• Psa 116:10, 15, 16-17, 18-19
• Rom 8:31b-34
• Mk 9:2-10
“God put Abraham to the test.”
Why? That is the natural question to ask when we hear the first line of today’s readings. What, exactly, was God trying to show Abraham? And why did it require such extreme, seemingly cruel, measures?
Notice when God told Abraham to take Isaac to be offered as a holocaust, or sacrifice, he described the patriarch’s son as the one “you love”. We are mindful that Isaac represented, in a most concrete and living form, the faithful promise of God to provide Abraham with an heir (Gen 17). When the ninety-nine-year-old Abraham was told he and Sarai would have a son, he laughed aloud. But God said the miraculously conceived son would be blessed, for “he shall give rise to nations, and rulers of people shall issue from him” (Gen 17:16).
So why would God then tell Abraham to sacrifice his son, who personified the covenantal blessings of offspring, land, influence, and, eventually, a nation?
The third-century theologian Origen wrote at length about this remarkable test. He suggested God described Isaac as beloved so that “by awaking memories of love the paternal right hand might be slowed in slaying his son and the total warfare of the flesh might fight against the faith of the soul.”
In other words, God not only tested Abraham, he intentionally intensified the test by accentuating the great love of the father for his son. This reminder, Origen further noted, “also produces hopelessness in the promises that were made…”
Rather than making sense of the test, this appears to make it even more irrational, even cold-blooded. Within Judaism, this story is known as the “Akedah”, or “binding”, the greatest (and, according to Jewish tradition, the tenth) test faced by Abraham. But, of course, if Abraham had no love for his son, the test would not have been so harrowing. After all, the sacrificing of children was hardly unusual within the ancient near Eastern world; in fact, it was a normal part of some pagan religions.
The horror of the approaching sacrifice was not so much in the command to kill one’s son, argued Fr. Hans Urs von Balthasar, “rather, the horror lies in the fact that this son was miraculously given by God and destined to imitate and accomplish the divine promises.” It’s as if God turned his back on his promises, plunging Abraham into a darkness no mortal could hope to withstand alone.
And that, paradoxically, begins to shed a little light upon what is, without a doubt, one of the most perplexing narratives in Scripture. By stepping into the darkness of God’s will, Abraham cast himself into the light of God’s perfect mercy and love. The test was not meant to prove God can do whatever he desires, but that God desires to do whatever he can for man, who is the pinnacle of his creation.
Yet God’s grace must be met by man’s faith; that is, God’s “Yes” to man must be accepted by man’s “yes” to God. “I know now,” said God’s messenger to Abraham, “how devoted you are to God, since you did not withhold from me your own beloved son.” That devotion—or, better, “fear of God”—refers specifically to a free and active obedience to God’s will. It is the emphatic “yes!” uttered and lived in faith.
With that in mind, we can better appreciate St. Paul’s explanation to the Christians in Rome that God “did not spare his own Son but handed him over for us all…” That gift is even more mysterious and confounding than what was asked of Abraham. And Jesus, who is called “my beloved Son” by the Father at the Transfiguration, was not a bewildered young man, but the Incarnate Word who in free and active obedience accepted and carried out the will of his Father.
If the Father freely gave his Son for us, and the Son freely gave his life for us, what will we freely give to God?
(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the March 4, 2012 edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)
February 27, 2015
New from Ignatius Press: "The Wife of Pilate and Other Stories" by Gertrud von le Fort
Now available:
The Wife of Pilate and Other Stories
by Gertrud von le Fort
These three novellas from the acclaimed German writer Gertrud von le Fort, newly translated for the first time into English for this volume, are from her later works of historical fiction, in which she displays her mastery as a dramatist of ideas.
The Wife of Pilate imagines the slow, arduous transformation of an aristocratic woman, who is mentioned in the New Testament, from a pagan into a Christian saint, as she is now honored in the Byzantine Church.
Plus Ultra takes us into the high politics of early 16th century Europe, and into the soul of a lonely young lady at court who knows she has attracted the intoxicating but dangerous attention of the Emperor Charles V himself.
At the Gate of Heaven takes the clash between astronomical discoveries and the Roman Inquisition trial of Galileo as the backdrop for harrowing reflections about man’s place in the cosmos.
In these novellas von le Fort vividly recreates scenes from distant places in bygone eras. Even more memorable are her lyrical portrayals of conflicts in the souls and minds of powerful people. These are thought-provoking stories by a keen observer of humanity.
Gertrud von le Fort (1876-1971) was a German novelist and essayist. A convert to Catholicism, she attended the universities of Heidelberg, Berlin and Marburg. She was a prolific writer whose poetry and novels, which have been translated into many languages, won her acclaim throughout Europe. She also wrote Song at the Scaffold and The Eternal Woman.
Praise for The Wife of Pilate and Other Stories:
"A book to be treasured. The times and places are beautifully and accurately evoked, and the stories are gripping to read."
- Lucy Beckett, Author, Postcard from the Volcano
"von le Fort's serene and probing intellect examines with absolute honesty the dilemmas of our human striving for authentic faith and love during times of peril and confusion. There is clear light here, a profound, though unsentimental, confidence in the triumph of Christ as Lord of History."
- Michael O'Brien, Author, Father Elijah: An Apocalypse
"von le Fort offers rich historical fiction and deeply spiritual reflections in stories that remain relevant to this day. At the Gate of Heaven is a particularly prophetic tale this age would do well to ponder."
- Michael Richard, Author, Tobit's Dog
"Gertrud von le Fort masters the challenge of bringing to life relatable characters as well as conveying the outlook of bygone eras."
- Roger Thomas, Author, The Accidental Marriage
St. Gregory of Narek: Was the New Doctor of the Church a Catholic?
Left: Icon of St. Gregory of Narek Matenadaran, in Yerevan, Armenia. Right: The 10th century Armenian monastery of Narekavank (now destroyed), Lake Van, Vaspurakan (modern Turkey). (Photos: Wikipedia.org)
St. Gregory of Narek: Was the New Doctor of the Church a Catholic? | Dr. R. Jared Staudt | CWR
St. Gregory is the first Doctor of the Church to have lived outside direct communion with the Bishop of Rome.
On February 21, Pope Francis announced his decision to make St. Gregory of Narek (950-1003) a Doctor of the Church. Once again, Pope Francis has caught us off guard and now many people are scrambling to figure out who St. Gregory was and what the implications of the new honor bestowed upon him are. One key question that is arising is: was St. Gregory a Catholic?
The short answer to this question seems to be no. He was a member of the Armenian Apostolic Church, which is a non-Chalcedonian Church (sometimes referred to somewhat pejoratively as a Monophysite Church), because of its rejection of the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon.
However, the relationship of the Armenian Apostolic Church to the Catholic Church is long and complicated. I would like to provide a brief overview to help us consider the implications of the new Armenian Doctor of the Church.
This is only a short overview of the relations between these churches, and I hope the reader will be encouraged to explore the issue further and also to discover the writings of St. Gregory of Narek.
Armenia: The first Christian nation
Armenians recognize St. Jude Thaddeus and St. Bartholomew as the first evangelizers of their nation. The territory of Armenia once stretched from the Ural Mountains southward across modern Turkey and even to northern Lebanon. Its first kingdom was established in the sixth century BC and remained mostly independent, even amidst the regional power struggle between Rome and the Persian Empire.
In about the year 301 Tiridates III, the king of Arsacid Armenia, proclaimed Christianity the official religion of his state, making Armenia the first Christian nation. According to the oldest accounts, Tiridates had imprisoned St. Gregory the Illuminator for the faith for 13 years before being healed by him. He then appointed Gregory as Catholicos, or head, of the Armenian Church. Following the adoption of Christianity, the Church forged the first Armenian alphabet, which was used for a translation of Scripture and for the Armenian liturgy.
The rejection of Chalcedon and initial reunion
For about 450 years, from 428 to 885 AD, Armenia lost independence to the Byzantine Empire and later to Islamic conquest.
What Does Authority Have to Do with Religion?
The Creation of the Animals, by Raphael (1518-19).
What Does Authority Have to Do with Religion? | Fr. John Michael McDermott, S.J. | Homiletic & Pastoral Review
“Authority” is generally used as a derogatory term in our world. Nazism gave the word a bad name as German officials, one after another, at the Nuremburg war trials sought to excuse themselves by claiming that they were just obeying a higher authority. All totalitarian systems, fascist or communist, were derided as authoritarian. Actually the attack on authority has deeper roots. Before time began, Satan revolted against God’s authority and fell into misery. In more proximate history, the Enlightenment saw itself as a revolt against tradition, in favor of reason. All affirmations of truth were to be judged before the bar of reason. Kant summarized the Enlightenment position by dismissing authority as a condition of earlier, benighted humanity not yet come of age.1 Modern man intends to think for himself. Before Kant, the battle of the books between ancients and moderns had been fought with the moderns and Newtonian science carrying the day. Before that contest, authority suffered a debilitating defeat when Luther and his cohorts rejected ecclesial authority. But at least they respected the Bible as God’s authoritative word. Post-Enlightenment Scriptural exegesis, however, invented the historical-critical method, by which experts sought to go behind the Bible to tell modern readers how it was composed in answer to the needs of various first-century audiences, opening the way for an aggiornamento, whereby they would adapt God’s word to whatever audiences they thought needed the intellectual upgrade. God’s word was reduced to kerygma, the event of proclamation, which became quite protean since an event, as Plato (Timaeus 28a) and Aristotle (De interpretatione 9, 19a 35-b 3) noted long ago, is not subject to the law of contradiction. Needless to say, in the process of modern exegesis, God’s eternal word has suffered a loss of authenticity, and, it scarcely needs mentioning, authority. No wonder that Karl Barth excoriated it: in seeking to go behind God’s word, modern exegesis undermines it.2
An unprejudiced reading of the Bible reveals that it rests upon authority. Moses spoke with God, and then on his behalf, when he received and delivered the Ten Commandments from Sinai. The prophets constantly reiterated the phrases, “Thus says the Lord” and “Oracle of the Lord.” Serious repercussions were threatened if God’s word, articulated through their minds and mouths, was not obeyed. The New Testament is likewise replete with appeals to authority. From his mission’s initiation, Jesus spoke with authority, not like the scribes, and cast out demons (Mk 1:22-27). His Father thundered from heaven, “This is my beloved Son, listen to him” (Mk 9:76). In fact, when the high priests confronted Jesus after his purification of the temple, they sought his authority. In Jewish religion, nothing higher counts in the final analysis: is your authority from heaven or from men (Mk 11:27-30). In the final analysis, authority counts over all else. Nothing higher than God’s word can be imagined by Jews. As God’s only Son (Mk 12:6), indeed his Word (Jn 1:1-14), Jesus communicated authority to the Twelve, sending them out to “preach and have authority to cast out demons” (Mk 3:14-15; 6:7.12). This continuation of his mission Jesus confirmed after his resurrection: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go forth and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you. And, behold, I am with you all days until the consummation of the age” (Mt 28:18-20). St. Paul insisted that, though he was least of the Apostles, he enjoyed apostolic authority and should be heeded and obeyed when communicating the Lord’s words (1 Cor. 9:1-2, 15-19; 15:9; Gal. 1:1-9). Moreover, he presupposed that his successors would also act and teach with authority (1 Tm 4:11-16; 5:7; 2 Tm 4:1-5; Ti 1:9-11; 2:1, 15; 3:1). Authority is so well attested in the New Testament that only spiritual blindness can overlook it.
Authority belongs inherently to historical religions, even if other religions have authority figures.
February 26, 2015
A Message in Blood: ISIS and the Meaning of the Cross
(Photos: CNS)
A Message in Blood: ISIS and the Meaning of the Cross | Fr. Robert Barron | CWR
When Christians boldly hold up an image of the humiliated, tortured Jesus to the world, they are saying: "We are not afraid.”
Last week, the attention of the world was riveted to a deserted beach in northern Libya, where a group of twenty one Coptic Christians were brutally beheaded by masked operatives of the ISIS movement. In the wake of the executions, ISIS released a gruesome video entitled “A Message in Blood to the Nation of the Cross.”
I suppose that for the ISIS murderers the reference to “the Nation of the Cross” had little sense beyond a generic designation for Christianity. Sadly for most Christians, too, the cross has become little more than an anodyne, a harmless symbol, a pious decoration. I would like to take the awful event on that Libyan beach, as well as the ISIS message concerning it, as an occasion to reflect on the still startling distinctiveness of the cross.
In the time of Jesus, the cross was a brutal and very effective sign of Roman power. Imperial authorities effectively said, “If you cross us (pun intended), we will affix you to a dreadful instrument of torture and leave you to writhe in agonizing, literally excruciating (ex cruce, from the cross) pain until you die. Then we will make sure that your body hangs on that gibbet until it is eaten away by scavenging animals.”
The cross was, basically, state-sponsored terrorism, and it did indeed terrify people.
Reports: Card. Baldisseri ordered interception of copies of book mailed to Synod participants
Italian Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, general secretary of the Synod of Bishops (left), talks with Pope Francis during the morning session on the final day of the extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the family at the Vatican Oct. 18. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)
Carl E. Olson | CWR blog
The head of secretariat of the synod of bishops was reportedly "furious" about "Remaining in the Truth of Christ," which includes chapters by Cardinals Burke and Brandmüller
Both Kath.net and Edward Pentin are reporting that Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, head of secretariat of the synod of bishops, ordered the interception of over a hundred copies of the book Remaining in the Truth of Christ, which had been mailed to participants in last October’s Extraordinary Synod.
The book, which consists of essays by five Cardinals—including Cardinals Burke and Brandmüller—and four other scholars, was written in response to Cardinal Walter Kasper’s book The Gospel of the Family, and defends the Church’s teaching that Catholics who have been divorced and civilly remarried cannot receive Holy Communion. It was edited by Fr. Robert Dodaro, OSA, who was interviewed about it by CWR last September.
Pentin reports:
Reliable and high level sources allege the head of secretariat of the synod of bishops, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, ordered they be intercepted because they would “interfere with the synod.”
A source told me that Baldisseri was “furious” the book had been mailed to the participants and ordered staff at the Vatican post office to ensure they did not reach the Paul VI Hall.
Kath.net reports that around 200 copies of the book were mailed, but only a few apparently made it into the hands of the proper recipients, a report that has also been confirmed by Fr. Joseph Fessio, SJ, of Ignatius Press. Pentin states that the books were mailed through "the proper channels within the Italian and Vatican postal systems", but that Baldisseri claimed they were mailed "irregularly," and so the interception of the books was legitimate.
In other words, Baldisseri has apparently admitted that the books were taken; the dispute is over why they were taken. Pentin further reports that the books were apparently destroyed after being taken.
Three months ago, Fr. Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, said he knew nothing about allegations regarding the stolen/intercepted/confiscated books, and dismissed the sources for the allegations as not being “serious and objective." Pentin, a veteran and respected Vatican reporter who recorded a controversial interview with Kasper during the Synod, concludes his report by stating that since December, "the allegations have become more widely known and have been corroborated at the highest levels of the church."
What to make of this? First, as Fr. Z notes, these allegations involve a serious crime:
February 24, 2015
Making Sense of Pope Francis
"The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope" (Henry Holt, 2014) was written by British journalist Austin Ivereigh (Photo: commons.wikimedia.org)
Making Sense of Pope Francis | Carrie Gress, Ph.D. | Catholic World Report
Austen Ivereigh’s The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope offers many insights into Francis, but does have a serious weakness
“Who can figure this pope out?” was the question raised by friends at a recent lunch. The nine of us spent a lot of time voicing fear, concern, confusion, and speculating about what he is up to. (And as mothers to a collective 62 children, we had to discuss the pope’s “rabbit” quote.) A quick look around the blogosphere makes it clear we are not the only ones having this discussion.
Pope Francis is quite a mystery. After the long pontificate of John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI was a familiar successor. We knew who he was—or at least a little bit, if not his whole life story. And though Benedict brought his own ideas to the papacy, widespread confusion about the future of the Church didn’t set in.
When the former Cardinal Bergoglio stepped out to face the world as Pope Francis, he was a complete unknown. It took the news service I was watching several minutes to announce who the new pope was even after his name had been announced from the loggia. Resources are slim when trying to get a clear picture of this man who became pope.
Austen Ivereigh has done a great service for the Church universal in writing The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of Radical Pope, (Henry Holt, 2014). Ivereigh unfolds the life of Pope Francis, revealing how his life in Argentina has prepared him, in much the same way Karol Wojtyla was prepared by Krakow, to be the leader of the Church for our times.
Major themes
The book brings to light several major themes in the life of Jorge Bergoglio that are crucial to understanding this pope and his papacy.
He is a son of Ignatius: Ivereigh makes clear that Bergoglio, through and through, is a Jesuit with the heart of St. Ignatius. His seminary formation, which took place before the chaos of Vatican II, instilled in him the deep treasury of Ignatian prayer and the discernment of spirits, which he has used as a guide throughout his life. Even today, the Argentine pope gets up at 4:00 am to pray and prepare for the day.
After Vatican II, the Jesuit Order in Argentina attempted to scuttle much of its theological traditions and practices (along with many other segments of the Church). Bergoglio, as provincial (who faced the added drama of Liberation Theology that affected so much of South and Central America), was able to hold onto many of the Society of Jesus’s treasures, ensuring that the province not only remained intact theologically, despite a percentage of Jesuits who disagreed with him among the ranks, but flourished under his leadership.
One Argentine leader speaking of Bergoglio, quoted in The Great Reformer, said: “Bergoglio was completely different from the Third World priests. … While they went into politics to make up for what was lacking in their faith, he stayed close to his faith and from there sought to enrich politics. He said what mattered was not ideology but witness.” (105)
Bergoglio expanded the Jesuits’ ministry to the poor, while also increasing the number of seminarians and priests who entered the society. Meanwhile, other provinces that abandoned the older traditions and teachings of St. Ignatius saw their ministries and numbers decimated.
Francis has the heart of Saint Francis:
February 23, 2015
Stephen Fry, Job, and the Cross of Jesus
Left: Detail from "Job and His Friends" (1869) by Ilya Repin [WikiArt.org]; right: British comedian and actor Stephen Fry [YouTube]
Stephen Fry, Job, and the Cross of Jesus | Fr. Robert Barron | CWR blog
The objection to God's existence and goodness uttered recently by the British writer, actor, and comedian is nothing new to Christians
The British writer, actor, and comedian Stephen Fry is featured in a YouTube video which has gone viral: over 5 million views as of this moment. As you may know, Fry is, like his British counterparts Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, a fairly ferocious atheist, who has made a name for himself in recent years as a very public debunker of all things religious. In the video in question, he articulates precisely what he would say to God if, upon arriving at the pearly gates, he discovered that he was mistaken in his atheism. Fry says that he would ask God why he made a universe in which children get bone cancer, a universe in which human beings suffer horrifically and without justification.
If such a monstrous, self-absorbed, and stupid God exists, Fry insists, he would decidedly not want to spend eternity with him. Now there is much more to Fry’s rant—it goes on for several minutes—but you get the drift.
To those who feel that Stephen Fry has delivered a devastating blow to religious belief, let me say simply this: this objection is nothing new to Christians. St. Paul, Origen, Augustine, C.S. Lewis, G.K. Chesterton and many, many other Christian theologians up and down the centuries have dealt with it.
In fact, one of the pithiest expressions of the problem was formulated by St. Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century.
February 22, 2015
The First Sunday of Lent: Deluges and Deserts, Sin and Salvation
Detail from "Temptation of Christ" (1872) by Vasily Surikov (WikiArt.org)
A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for Sunday, February 22, 2015, the First Sunday of Lent | Carl E. Olson
Readings:
Gn 9:8-15
Ps 25:4-5, 6-7, 8-9
1 Pt 3:18-22
Mk 1:12-15
Lent is a season of challenges and extremes, a dramatic confluence of opposites. As evidence, I offer Exhibit A: today’s readings, which contain stories about deluges and deserts, sin and salvation, and water that destroys—and saves. All of it is heady stuff, certainly, but it is aimed at the heart, meant to help us embrace more tightly and cherish more deeply the eternal purpose of our lives.
What does the story of the flood and Noah’s ark have to do with Jesus being tempted in the desert? The first connection is sin. The flood was necessary because “In the eyes of God the earth was corrupt and full of lawlessness” (Gen 6:11). Seeing the corruption and depravity of man, God told Noah, “I have decided to put an end to all mortals on earth; the earth is full of lawlessness because of them. So I will destroy them and all life on earth” (Gen 6:13). Although Jesus was sinless, he saw and felt the effects of sin. After being baptized, he went into the desert to directly confront the temptations of Satan, the Evil One responsible for bringing sin and death into the world.
This brings us to the second connection, which is a time of trial. The destruction of wickedness on earth, God told Noah, would require forty days and nights of rain (Gen 7:4, 12). That number, in both the Old and New Testaments, is closely connected with times of trial, hardship, and punishment, including the forty years the Israelites spent in the wilderness after the Exodus, made necessary by their sin and rebellion (Num 14:26-35).
The forty days spent by Jesus in the desert was a reenactment of those forty years. But while the people had failed to obey the word of God, Jesus obeyed completely. Whereas they had continually complained, Jesus complied with humility. And while Moses was not allowed to enter the Promised Land, Jesus ushered in the Kingdom of God.
The third connection is covenant. Following the flood, as we hear in today’s Old Testament reading, God told Noah that he was establishing a covenant “between me and you” and “between me and the earth.” This was one of several covenants, each of them an invitation from the loving Creator for man to enter into “intimate communion” with him (Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars 54-73). The new and everlasting covenant, the perfect culmination of this plan of salvation, was established by the life, death, and resurrection of the God-man.
Finally, there is the connection of water and baptism. In the time of Noah, sinful men were destroyed by water even while the righteous man (and his family) was saved by that same water. In baptism, as today’s epistle explains, the flesh—that is, the old man—is put to death, while a new man emerges from the sacramental waters. “For Christ, being the first-born of every creature,” wrote Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, “became again the chief of another race regenerated by Himself through water, and faith, and wood, containing the mystery of the cross; even as Noah was saved by wood when he rode over the waters with his household.”
Jesus, after being baptized—and thus preparing the waters of the world for our baptisms—faced the Tempter and then announced the Kingdom of God. In doing so, he proclaimed, in word and deed, that sin and wickedness would be dealt a fatal blow, which was soon delivered through his own suffering, death, and triumphant emergence from the tomb.
During his time in the desert, Jesus prayed and fasted. Pope Benedict XVI, in his [2009] message for Lent, reminded us that the true fast is “directed to eating the ‘true food’, which is to do the Father’s will (cf. Jn 4:34).” Noah was saved because he chose holiness over earthly pleasures. Jesus brought salvation by choosing the Father’s will over the devil’s lies. The challenge of Lent is to choose holiness and hunger for the true food.
(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the March 1, 2009, edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)
Carl E. Olson's Blog
- Carl E. Olson's profile
- 20 followers
