The guy in this video is named Don. He says that he didn’t take his Catholic faith seriously, drifted off, and left the Church. There are a lot of Dons, Jims and Joes that we know, maybe they are members of our own family. If you know one, ask him to join us at one of our weekly Men of St. Joseph meetings.

Click here to find a meeting near you, or to inquire about starting a Men of St. Joseph chapter at your parish.

Soon after the last U.S. Presidential election, I became convinced that politics was not the answer to our cultural woes. David Warren at The Catholic Thing reached a similar conclusion and expounds upon it in his recent post, The Only Thing.

“. . . politicians have little power, and arguably none. Nor for that matter have the media any power, in and of themselves. Nor will voting change the direction of public affairs.

That kind of reminds me of former Alabama Gov. George Wallace’s quote, “There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican parties.”

To change the culture, you have to change the people who elect the politician. Politicians do whatever it takes to get the people to elect them. Just look at the Republicans, as they are now starting to take up the “gay marriage” mantra, one that belonged almost exclusively to the Democrats.

Changing Presidents won’t change the culture. To change the people, you have to evangelize to them.

“Emperors, kings, presidents, prime ministers, are so much froth. They do not even control their own destinies, as the current Washington scandals remind us. The more I consider the matter, the more I am convinced that evangelization is not the most important thing. It is the only thing that can make a difference.”

Read the full article.

A Catholic sorority recently established a chapter at Arizona State University, as described in this article in the Catholic Sun, newspaper for the Diocese of Phoenix. We hope to see them spread to other campuses, as well. 

TEMPE — The newest sorority at Arizona State University saw its first pledge class surrender themselves. These 23 young women didn’t submit to stereotypical stunts, however.

Instead, they simply entered the Valley’s oldest church and surrendered in humility at the foot of the altar. The women, who span every class year of ASU students, are the first pledge class of Mu Epsilon Theta’s Gamma Chapter. They were initiated April 20.

The 26-year-old sorority started at the University of Texas at Austin as a way to unite college women by promoting academics, leadership, community service plus moral and spiritual well-being in the Catholic tradition. This marks the third chapter for the sorority and the first out of state.

“It showed us how truly beautiful the sisterhood is by having so many actives and alumni sisters fly in and drive all the way from Texas to initiate us,” said Katie Bandy, president of the Alpha Class of the Gamma Chapter at ASU.

Bandy, a junior at the nation’s largest public university, briefly tried Greek sorority life last year. She left after the first phase of the initiation process.

“I knew it wasn’t for me and I wanted to spend more time here,” she told The Catholic Sun outside of the All Saints Catholic Newman Center.

She apparently wasn’t the only one who wanted to stay grounded in her faith at college. Some 40 women attended a meeting for the sorority in January. More than half — including two alumnae each from Xavier College Preparatory and Seton Catholic Preparatory High School in Chandler — fulfilled the service hours and other requirements necessary to become part of the charter committee and first pledge class.

Bandy said the sorority has already brought “so many girls” to the Newman Center. She said it’s important to have a common spiritual element within a sorority because it’s within that faith community that sisters can best build each other up.

“By having our faith be the foundation of our sisterhood we have created virtuous friendships that will lead women to strive for excellence and always have someone to lean on when hardships come,” Bandy said.

Her online search for such a sorority last August ultimately got her in touch with Rosa Marroquin, chairman of the sorority’s national board of directors. Then she learned that Anna Brzozowski, a missionary assigned to ASU through the Fellowship of Catholic University Students, is a Mu Epsilon Theta alumna. The snowball kept rolling.

The sorority focuses on spirituality, sisterhood and service and declares, “Our Strength is from Above” in its motto. St. Catherine Labouré, promulgator of the miraculous medal, is its patron saint.

“It was very important in my life and my decision to become a missionary,” said Brzozowski, who graduated from Texas State University last year.

“So many women desire the sisterhood, but they never find it. This is a group of women who are strong in their faith, who are going to build each other up in a Christ-like way,” Brzozoswki said.

Those are the kind of friendships Maggie Otlewski sought after graduating from Xavier last year. She loved that the members are so different yet united in faith and values.

Every ASU student who is a member of Mu Epsilon Theta attends Mass regularly and prays the rosary. Each member is also involved in a FOCUS-led Bible study. The women attended a recent sacred relics exhibit too as part of the sorority’s spirituality pillar.

The women financially support and volunteer at Maggie’s Place, a network of homes for women who are pregnant and without a system of support.

Mu Epsilon Theta is still submitting its bylaws and will be finished in the fall semester. Growth is a priority for the sorority at the national level — five chapters in five years.

An additional 15 Catholic women joined the sorority’s Beta Chapter at Texas State University last weekend. They were the 20th class to pledge their fidelity.

• Local chapter info
• National chapter info
• University of Texas at Austin chapter
• Texas State University chapter

Do you ever wonder how much good you actually do in the world? Most of us have a pretty good sense of where we struggle. But often we underestimate the moments when we are at our best.

A friend and I recently began to take a hard look at the places in life where we actually produce good in the world. It’s pretty simple, and I think you’ll find it helpful.

St. Paul teaches us (Phil. 4:8) to focus on “whatever is True, whatever is Honorable, whatever is Just, whatever is Pure, whatever is Lovely, whatever is Gracious, Excellent, and anything worthy of Praise.” So at the start of each day, we write down those eight words: True, Honorable, Just, Pure, Lovely, Gracious, Excellent, Praiseworthy. Beside each word, I write down thoughts about what I did the day before. Can I remember a moment where I did something pure? Offered something lovely? Said something gracious?

That simple exercise allows me to see just where I produced good in the world. And if I struggle to remember something in one or two areas, I know I failed to offer as much good in the world as I could have.

Best of all, those eight words start becoming a part of my whole day. I remember them when I am at work or with friends or running errands. Simply remembering the words, and knowing that I will write down my actions for the day, actually causes me to focus on doing more positive good.

True. Honorable. Just. Pure. Lovely. Gracious. Excellent. Praiseworthy. Or THJPLGEP for short!

Focus on THJPLGEP, and watch your goodness begin to grow. Then watch the people around you benefit from your new focus.

Q:    I am Catholic and have been so for 61 years.  I attended Catholic school with instruction of course of catechism daily.  I have been reading [your] Apologetics 101 each week.  I am a bit confused.  It is not clear to me in the Bible that God, Jesus ever say that you have to belong to the Catholic Church.  Jesus our savior died on the cross for everyone.  As I remember, I was taught in school by the Sisters of Mercy, that God is everywhere and you can talk to Him anywhere, you can see Him in everything you do.  You should try to live your life as He would, try your best to treat everyone as He did, in other words live as He did.  We all fall short but continue to try daily.  There are good people everywhere in this world.  I believe that when I die and go to heaven, there will be people from all walks of earth, not just Catholics.  In the beginning of your weekly articles I thought that was what you were conveying.  God is for everyone right?  As long as you believe in God, and that Jesus died for us.  I am Catholic, it is a part of me.  I have always sort of taken pride in the fact that I was taught that Our church was not exclusive but Catholic meaning everyone or All.  What exactly are you saying that if you do not try to convert others to the Catholic faith or whatever church you attend, you are lacking in your belief?

A:    I love questions like this!  This person basically disagrees with what I have written in my last few columns on the question of whether or not “God wants everyone to be Catholic.”  However, she is giving me the opportunity to clarify for her what I have said as she obviously recognizes that she may have misunderstood what I had written.  In other words, she is engaging in dialogue in a very adult and Christian manner.

She could have just as easily simply said nasty things about me to others behind my  back, written the Bishop to say that I need to be fired for what I write in my column, or sent me anonymous hate mail – all of which has happened.  But she had the Christian decency and courtesy, and the courage, to simply write me and talk to me directly about it.  Whether we end up seeing eye-to-eye or not, this person, in a very simple manner, has shown the love of Christ for me, and I respect that.

Now, to her questions, which will undoubtedly take a couple of weeks to answer fully.  First of all, let me state, dear Questioner, that even though I am indeed arguing that God wants everyone to be Catholic, that does not necessarily mean that I am arguing that every non-Catholic goes to Hell, or any such thing.  I would also argue that God wants everyone not to sin.  Does that necessarily follow, then, that I am arguing that everyone who sins goes to Hell?  No, not at all.  If that were the case, then St. Peter could go ahead and shut the gates to Heaven right now because, since Mary’s Assumption, there are none but sinners seeking entrance to Heaven.

So, even though I am arguing that God wants everyone to be Catholic, it does not necessarily follow that I am arguing that only card-carrying members of the Catholic Church go to Heaven.  It is not my place to say who goes to Hell or, for that matter, who goes to Heaven.  As St. Paul says, “It is the Lord Who judges…” (1 Cor 4:4).  What exactly, then, do I mean when I say that God wants all men to be Catholic and that we, as Catholics, should believe that?

All I am saying with that argument, is that God wants all men to know and believe the truth.  Dear Questioner, would you disagree with that?  Do you know of someone that God does not want to have the truth?  And I have good grounds for making that claim, as Jesus Himself said, “…and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”  It is truth that sets us free – free from our bondage to sin.  Is there someone that Jesus does not want set free from sin? And, to know the truth is to know Jesus, as Jesus is truth itself: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life,” (John 14:6).  Is there someone who Jesus does not want to know Him?  Jesus also tells us, “For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to bear witness to the truth,” (John 18:37).

So, Jesus Christ has made it very clear that truth is very important for salvation.  This is why Scripture tells us, in 1 Timothy 2:4, that “[God] desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”  So, I hope you will agree with me that God wants all men to know the truth.

Okay, I think we can agree that God wants all men to know the truth, but what does that have to do with God wanting everyone to be Catholic?  Well, the simple answer is, because we believe the Catholic Church has the fullness of the truth as given to us by Jesus Christ (CCC #819).  Do you believe what the Catholic Church teaches about itself or not?  If you do, and you also believe that God wants everyone to know the truth, then the logical conclusion is that God wants everyone to be Catholic.  It’s just that simple.

Furthermore, I would ask these very simple questions: Do you believe that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist – body, blood, soul, and divinity?  If you do, then who is it you believe God does not want to receive Him in the Eucharist?  But, if you don’t believe Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist, as the Church teaches, then why are you Catholic?  Why would you be a member of a Church that teaches what you believe to be a lie?

Next week: Who goes to Heaven?

Have you ever been inside a dark place and then suddenly walked outside into the bright sun? It can seriously be blinding. You’ve got to stop for a few minutes for your eyes to adjust to the light before you can see anything! Light can be just as blinding as darkness. I think the light of truth is like this sometimes. Often those whose lives are lived in darkness are turned off by the truth when it’s presented to them. In much the same way that we need to stop and adjust our eyes to the brightness, below are some tips when engaging in discussions about same sex marriage, a topical subject no doubt, so that the truth can be revealed in the full context of itself more slowly and therefore likely to be better received.

This is not a collection of valid arguments though at times it may presume some. It is rather a framework or an approach within which one would insert the necessary objections and reasons. Though there is no particular order in which these steps need to be taken (the flexibility is intentional so that it could be moulded to the flow of the discussion) there are stages within which all points should be met before proceeding to the next. These three main sections are simply; setting the stage, the discussion, and the conclusion. A bit obvious, I know, but every objection, particularly to such a lively topic, should be contextualized.

(A quick contextualization for this reflection: I had a twitter discussion with a man – I think a gay man – regarding same-sex marriage. He is the son of a famous home town sporting hero and works in the media. He is no slouch with the grey matter but his philosophy is poor. The below approach is what I used through the discussion though some points have been developed or added afterwards upon my reflection.)

Setting the stage

Understand the forum. Each forum has restrictions, not in content necessarily but in the way things can be expressed. Always prefer to meet in person rather than discuss over the internet. Tone, context and attitude are best expressed when talking rather than in a small section of words.

Remember that it’s a person that you are dealing with. They have sensibilities we need to address, and they may have hurdles to overcome. Often they are very passionate about the topic, as we may well be. We must always remember through the discussion that it’s the position they hold that we are disagreeing with; not the person (we will address more of this later on).

Define and distinguish. It is most important that if we mention a word that the meaning is understood by both parties. A word like “marriage” in the social context is fluid and needs to be pinned down, at least for the sake of the discussion. Definition lines are frequently blended as feelings dictate, at least as the social clime dictates. Keep check of emotions and stay logical: be both empathetic and sensible.

Know your objective. It is important to have in mind what you hope to achieve through the discussion (and don’t lose sight of it). You are not going to “win” total support of your point of view, but there is an objective that you might have in mind; you may or may not need to state it. A little foundational step is more important than any other step taken on the way. I chose to make my objective known to this man: “I want to present to you a point of view you may not have heard”. Another might be, “I wish to show you that not all who oppose same-sex marriage are bigots” being careful to define “bigot” too.

The discussion

Fundamental to this discussion is separation of “person” and “act”. This confuses some people but many understand that they are not their feelings, their dreams, their thoughts or even their image so why not their acts too. While all these are influenced by who we are, none of these define who we are. Once this distinction has been made progress in the discussion is easier. When doing this, try to avoid the word “you”. Even something collective such as “gay people” often has negative undertones; “people with same sex attraction” is better received and implies the church’s teaching of the recognition of personhood and the separation of their acts. And already it alludes to not having to follow through on attractions, which is part of the message they may not have heard before.

There are a number of defences for marriage. This would be the time to go through the myriad of options but rather than look at any, we will look at the way to hit what you need to for the person with whom you’re engaging for each person will respond to different points.

Try to dictate conversation by use of questions. Clarifying questions and the use of philosophy can expose the limits of their thoughts. Often through this process, the earlier definitions are challenged. Find situations where their thought may not be appropriate – for example, if marriage is only for two people who love each other, then why can’t cousins marry, or brothers, or parent and child? Questioning this exposes the limit from which they need to justify why it is unacceptable or concede that these relationships are acceptable.

Stick to one question at a time. This is a common occurrence in apologetics anyhow, but don’t get distracted by a litany of accusations; often this tactic is used for deflection, disinterest, and avoidance of the topic at hand. Until the question has been addressed, repeat it, repeat it and repeat it in as many different ways as possible. Yes it can get annoying, but tell them they haven’t answered the question, then restate it again. More clarification may be required on one or both sides as to if the objection has been satisfactorily met.

The conclusion

On the issue of homosexuality in general the Catechism of the Catholic Church is quite compassionate, some might say surprisingly so.  It reads:

“They (homosexuals) must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfil God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter.” (para. 2358)

(Feel free to read the whole section: 2357 to 2359).

Respect. Compassion. Sensitivity. Sacrifice. Difficulties. These are the things that need to be highlighted, particularly if the one standing for same-sex marriage is also anti-Catholic (even anti-religious).

Remember that every person is created with equal dignity. You do not hate the person; this is often something they are looking to confirm. Always, always, always avoid the use of the word hate. Towards the end of the discussion I was asked directly “Do I care what a persons sexuality is?” I responded, “I treat all people equally. Everyone is created in the image and likeness of God”. The leading question posed was bait. In the Twittersphere (as it has been called) a tweet can be retweeted and retweeted travelling around the world quicker than lightning (literally). I have no doubt that he was looking for something negative and condemning of all gays so he could unleash a rainbow fury on me. Needless to say he did not retweet this.

Lastly it may be helpful that same sex marriage is part of a bigger picture, and what you oppose is intercourse outside of wedlock. This bigger category includes adultery, divorce, and premarital sex. It may also be helpful (though it may be confusing) to add that the purpose of sex is procreation. Therefore we also oppose contraception, sterilization and abortion. When I mentioned this, the person I was discussing with joked “man, you must really hate society!” I understood what he meant but I corrected saying that it was sorrow I felt for society, not hate. The conversation then quickly died.

This framework allows us to engage with supporters of same-sex marriage through rational conversation and allows both sides to be heard. If through the process we can portray ourselves with clarity, the Church’s teaching with reasonable accuracy, and treat the other with dignity, both parties can walk away with integrity and respect. We can ask for more than that but we are likely not to get it. Continue praying for them and all who support same-sex marriage, but most importantly, be examples of a happy and healthy marriage, witnessing what marriage really is to your family and friends.