Our Lord who was dead is alive!

Really. Either anyone who believes this is a fool, for such a thing is hardly imaginable ... or this hardly-unimaginable thing is the most unimaginably wonderful thing to have ever happened in human history and the answer to the deepest secret hope of every human heart, and he who dismisses this by turning his back on it as a myth is depriving himself of the only treasure worth seeking in life. He is risen! Witnesses saw Him, touched Him, ate with Him; and they went to their martyrdom refusing to change their "story" (though they could have thus saved their lives) because the knew it was true.

Happy Easter!

The controversial founding of Columbus Day

"One may not think of the month of daylight savings time, breast cancer awareness, and Oktoberfest as particularly controversial, but beneath the surface of several Catholic holidays in October are truths and memories that bring a maelstrom of protest from the modern world," writes Michael P. Foley in "The Controversial Holidays of October" (Latin Mass magazine, Summer 2009). In a previous article, Foley already discussed one of these: the Feast of the Holy Rosary's commemoration of the defeat of the Turks at Lepanto (October 7). In the current issue, he turns to two more "October surprises" -- Columbus Day (October 12 or the second Monday in October) and All Hallows' Eve (October 31).¹ Here we limit our attention to Columbus Day:

I should probably be given the stake for discussing a secular holiday in a column on the liturgical year, but Columbus Day merits our attention for several reasons. First the holiday owes its existence to the efforts of U.S. Catholic citizens, particularly the Knights of Columbus. In the 1900s the Knights lobbied state legislatures throughout the country to make the anniversary of America's discovery a holiday; not only did most states acquiesce, but the federal government eventually did as well, first as a national holiday in 1937 and then as a legal holiday (on which banks close) in 1971. Though they were instituted as a fraternal benefits organization, the Knights of Columbus were also keen to dispel anti-Catholic prejudice in the United States. One way to meet this goal was to emphasize America's debt to Catholic figures, starting with its papist discoverer. Not coincidentally, this fraternity, founded by an Irish priest, was named not after Saint Patrick but after the daring Italian who reached the shores of our hemisphere on a Spanish ship.

The Knights' strategy of claiming Columbus as a most Catholic of heroes was also a well-aimed counterattack. American historians had tried mightily to turn the famous seafarer into an Enlightenment figure, a secular saint championing scientific progress in the face of a superstitious Church still clinging to outdated ideas of a "flat earth." As it turns out, Columbus had nothing to do with the flat-earth debate; the story was invented out of whole cloth by Washington Irving in 1828 and later used as anti-Catholic propaganda to "prove" that that clerical religion was inherently hostile to rational inquiry.² Queen Isabella's geographical advisers knew the globe was globular; they rejected Columbus' proposal because they had a much more accurate grasp of it's massive circumference, rightly concluding that his plan to reach China via a western route in a matter of weeks was unsound.

Given the prevalence of the anti-Catholic flat-earth myth, it is not surprising that Pope Leo XIII celebrated the four hundredth anniversary of Columbus' maiden voyage with these stirring (and perhaps overly generous) remarks:

But there is, besides, another reason, a unique one, why We consider that this immortal achievement should be recalled by Us with memorial words. For Columbus is ours; since if a little consideration be given to the particular reason of his design in exploring the mare tenebrosum ... it is indubitable that the Catholic faith was [his] strongest motive ... so that for this reason also the whole human race owes not a little to the Church.³

Take that, Know Nothings!

Pall Over the Holiday

Ironically, after winning the battle for Columbus Day, many Catholics today would prefer not to be associated with either the man or his holiday. While most Latin American countries commemorate the date of Columbus' discovery as the Día de la Raza (the Day of the Race, that is, the day the races met), Hugo Chávez's Venezuela observes observes Día de la Resistencia Indigena (Day of Indigenous Resistance). Similarly, Ward Churchill, the Colorado professor who made headlines for calling the victims of September 11 "little Eichmans,"⁴ has led the American Indian Movement's protests against the Columbus Day in Denver.

What Chavez and Churchill, in their characteristically understated ways, are alluding to the bleak events that followed Columbus' discovery. Despite the friendliness of the natives, Columbus' men initiated hostilities with them that culminated in a massacre, while Columbus himself enslaved a thousand Indians and instituted the repartimiento system that led to the serfdom of countless others for years to come. Combined with a wave of unintentionally imported diseases the local immune system had never encountered before, such treatment quickly decimated the Native American population.

Assessing Columbus

What, then, should we make of Columbus in light of his spotty record? I suggest five things.

First, it is clear that Columbus was not a good administrator on the land, and his incompetence led to cruelty. In fairness, however, before his undisciplined men destroyed relations with the native Taino or Arawaks, his goal was to protect them from the cannibalistic Caribs (one of the most savage peoples in the Americas) who were fast advancing. Indeed the Caribs remind us that the first step in assessing the Columbian legacy is overcoming any assumption that either side in the conflict has a monopoly on evil.

Second, it is important to remember that many of Columbus' contemporaries also deplored his deeds. Queen Isabel certainly did, which is why Columbus' third return to Spain was in chains, and Spanish law, thanks in large part to the Church's teaching about the full humanity of Native Americans, consistently condemned the actions of rapacious colonists. This is significant, for no other civilization has shown such a capacity for healthy self-criticism as the Christian. Indeed, the shrill condemnations of a Chavez or a Churchill are possible only because of the tradition of public self-examination first developed in Catholic societies.

Third, despite tragic costs, the benefits of European contract with the New World did far more good than harm. This is particularly true in the realm of evangelization. Columbus' genuine zeal to convert all peoples to Christianity should be commended rather than condemned. To depict all New World conversions as forced and foreign is, ironically, to patronize people of color, who were and are every bit as capable of seeing the beauty, truth, and goodness of the Gospel as their unwashed invaders.

Fourth, despite his flaws Columbus was a devout Catholic who, as Pope Leo XIII noted, was motivated by his Faith. His favorite prayers was Jesus cum Maria sit nobis in via -- "may Jesus, along with Mary, be with us on the way."⁵ Columbus chose to depart into the unknown the morning after August 2, the feast of Our Lady of the Angels, so that his men could celebrate this Marian feast with their families; he even made sure that they received confession and Holy Communion in order to obtain the plenary indulgence available that day.⁶ Columbus' prayers were apparently answered: his tiny fleet reached land on October 12, the day after the Feast of the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin.

Finally, Columbus Day praises not Columbus' explorations on land but his exploits at sea. We know that a single-minded man convinced the monarchs of Spain to fund an extremely hazardous journey with little likelihood of return, and that he pulled it off, not once but four times. We know that he was exceptionally courageous and resourceful, and we know that he was an outstanding seaman. There is nothing wrong with raising a glass to genuine courage and persistence, as long as one does not go on to use these to excuse other crimes and misdemeanors. I wonder if much of the animus against Columbus today really springs from a contemporary disdain for honor that would like to purge manhood of its chivalry and daring. As the historian William Carroll notes, "It is right to criticize the failings [of heroes], but wrong to deny their greatness and the inspiration they can give."⁷

And if there is any note of sorrow or regret to be struck on this otherwise celebratory occasion, it should not be fore the exceptional evil of the white man or the Catholic faith but for the universal darkness in man's heart so aptly explained by the doctrine of original sin. Yet, thanks be to God, this spiritual blight is never allowed to dwarf the triumph of the Cross, which providentially uses both vessels of honor and dishonor to meet its goals.

What to Do

How should one celebrate Columbus Day? In 1892 Pope Leo decreed that the four hundredth anniversary of Columbus' discovery should be marked with a Solemn High Mass of the Most Holy Trinity either on October 12 or on the following Sunday.⁸ (This was mandatory for Spain, Italy, and the two Americas, and recommended for the rest of the world, since "it is fitting that an even from which all have derived benefit should be piously and gratefully commemorated by all"). Certainly Mass would be a good idea today as well, along with a fervent prayer for the spiritual future of both the Old and New Worlds. And all of the documents I have cited are worth reading for more information on Christopher Columbus.

Perhaps one could even enjoy these readings with one of the items rumored to have returned with Columbus on his first voyage: tobacco. I would recommend a pipe for the occasion, as a cigarette is far too lowly a thing for honoring either the noble savage or the noble explorer. As for food, one could turn to any of the nationalities involved: American, Italian, Spanish, or even Caribbean. And for the little ones, miniature Niñas, Santa Marias, and Pintas can be made out of walnut shells, toothpick masts, and paper sails and used to adorn a cake or have a race in the bathtub.(To be continued ...)

Notes

1. "The Feast of Our Fearsome Lady," TLM 16:4 (Fall 2007), pp. 60-61. [back]


2. For the fascinating history of this myth, see Burton Russell, Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians(New York: Praeger, 1991). [back]


3. Quarto Abeunte Saeculo (1892), 2, italics added. [back]


4. He has also been sanctioned by his university for repeated acts of "serious research misconduct." [back]


5. For more on Columbus' fascinating Catholicism, see Fr. John Hardon's lectures on Columbus at http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Christopher_Columbus.htm. [back]


6. The indulgence of the Portiuncula. [back]


7. "Honoring Chrisopher Columbus," http://www.ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/COLUMBUS.HTM [back]


8. Quarto Abeunte Saeculo (1892), 9. [back]

[Michael P. Foley is associate professor of patristics at Baylor University. He is author of Wedding Rites: A Complete Guide to Traditional Vows, Music, Ceremonies, Blessings, and Interfaith Services(Eerdmans, 2008) and Why Do Catholics Eat Fish on Friday?: The Catholic Origin to Just About Everything(Palgrave Macmillan, 2005). Our present post was excerpted from Dr. Foley's article, "The Controversial Holidays of October," Latin Mass: The Journal of Catholic Culture and Tradition Vol. 18, No. 3 (Summer 2009), pp. 36-39, and is reproduced here by kind permission of Latin Mass, 391 E. Virginia Terrace, Santa Paula, CA 93060.]

Related

New Catholic offers has posted a copy of Leo XIII's encyclical on the Columbus quadricentennial, Quarto abeunte saeculo highlighting those parts of the text of special interest at "COLUMBUS NOSTER EST" (Rorate Caeli, October 12, 2009).

Memorial Day 2009

In Circumcisione Domini et Octav Nativitatis

Today is the Octave Day of Christmas -- the Eighth Day of Christmas -- which now marks the Solemnity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God. It used to commemorate the Feast of the Circumcision of Our Lord and bore the title In Circumcisione Domini et Octav Nativitatis. It represented Jesus, the "Giver of the Law," as consenting to submit to the Law of Moses, and also as spilling His blood for the first time for the sake of mankind. Thus, it demonstrated not only the obedience of Jesus, but forshadowed His Crucifixion.

The eighth day following His birth, Jesus was circumcised according to the Law of Moses. On this occasion, He was given the name Jesus, which the Archangel Gabriel had announced to the Virgin Mary. Circumcision was the Old Covenant proto-type of baptism in the New Covenant. In fulfilling the Old Testament Law, Jesus also replaced it with Baptism in His Church as was proclaimed by the Apostle Paul: "For neither does circumcision mean anything, nor does uncircumcision, but only a new creation" (Galatians 6:15).

Note that the Mother of God is not eclipsed in the traditional commemoration of the Circumcision of Our Lord. As John J. Tierney said in his article on the "Feast of the Circumcision" in the Catholic Encyclopedia exactly a hundred years ago in 1908:

It is to be noted also that the Blessed Virgin Mary was not forgotten in the festivities of the holy season, and the Mass in her honour was sometimes said on this day. Today, also, while in both Missal and Breviary the feast bears the title In Circumcisione Domini et Octav Nativitatis, the prayers have special reference to the Blessed Virgin, and in the Office, the responses and antiphons set forth her privileges and extol her wonderful prerogatives. The psalms for Vespers are those appointed for her feasts, and the antiphons and hymn of Lauds keep her constantly in view.

Happy Independence Day!

BILL HAS A 'DREAM'

Remembering the Circumcision of Our Lord

Today is the Octave Day of Christmas -- the Eighth Day of Christmas -- which now marks the Solemnity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God. It used to commemorate the Feast of the Circumcision of Our Lord and bore the title In Circumcisione Domini et Octav Nativitatis. It represented Jesus, the "Giver of the Law," as consenting to submit to the Law of Moses, and also as spilling His blood for the first time for the sake of mankind. Thus, it demonstrated not only the obedience of Jesus, but forshadowed His Crucifixion.

The eighth day following His birth, Jesus was presented in the Temple and circumcised according to the Law of Moses. On this occasion, He was given the name Jesus, which the Archangel Gabriel had announced to the Virgin Mary. Circumcision was the Old Covenant proto-type of baptism in the New Covenant. In fulfilling the Old Testament Law, Jesus also replaced it with Baptism in His Church as was proclaimed by the Apostle Paul: "For neither does circumcision mean anything, nor does uncircumcision, but only a new creation" (Galatians 6:15).

Note that the Mother of God was never eclipsed in the traditional commemoration of the Circumcision of Our Lord. As John J. Tierney wrote in his article on "Feast of the Circumcision" in the Catholic Encyclopedia exactly a hundred years ago in 1908:

It is to be noted also that the Blessed Virgin Mary was not forgotten in the festivities of the holy season, and the Mass in her honour was sometimes said on this day. Today, also, while in both Missal and Breviary the feast bears the title In Circumcisione Domini et Octav Nativitatis, the prayers have special reference to the Blessed Virgin, and in the Office, the responses and antiphons set forth her privileges and extol her wonderful prerogatives. The psalms for Vespers are those appointed for her feasts, and the antiphons and hymn of Lauds keep her constantly in view.

Note also, however, that the Circumcision of Our Lord has all but disappeared from discourse surrounding the Solemnity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God. We ought to try and remedy that.

Best wishes for a happy new year!

• Kul 'am wa antum bikhair (Arabic)
• San nin faailok! (Cantonese)
• Stastny Novy Rok (Czech)
• Gelukkig Nieuwjaar! (Dutch)
• Ein Gleuckliches neues Jahr! (German)
• Blian nua faoi mhaise duit! (Gaelic)
• Sal-e no mubarak! (Farsi)
• Onnellista uutta vuotta! (Finnish)
• Zalig Nieuw Jaar! (Flemish)
• Bonne Annee! (French)
• Shana tova! (Hebrew)
• Felice Anno Nuovo! (Italian)
• Shinnen omedeto goziamasu! (Japanese)
• Bonum annum ingrediaris! (Latin)
• Linksmu Nauju Metu! (Lithuanian)
• Selamat Tahun baru! (Malayan)
• Kong He Xin Xi! (Mandarin)
• Szczesliwego Nowego Roku! (Polish)
• Feliz Ano Novo! (Portuguese)
• La Multi Ani! (Romanian)
• S Novym Godom! (Russian)
• Srechna Nova Godina! (Serbian)
• Srechno Novo Leto! (Slovenian)
• Feliz Ano Nuevo! (Spanish)
• Masaganang Bagong taon! (Tagalog)
• Yeni Yiliniz Kutlu Olsun! (Turkish)
• Chuc Mung nam moi! (Vietnamese)
• Blwyddyn Newydd Dda! (Welsh)

Christmas reflection

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host, praising God, and saying,

Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace, good will toward men.

And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another,

Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pas, which the Lord hath made known unto us.

And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph and the babe lying in a manger. And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child. And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds. But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them. (The Gospel According to Luke, Chapter Two, Verses 13-20)

Here we are again, on the first day of the Christmas season. It has become something of a Christmas tradition for me to engage the following text from C.S. Lewis in connection with the above quoted Scriptures. The reason will be obvious.

Nearly every Christmas, it seems, NEWSWEEK or TIME or some television special will featre the "latest scholarship" concerning the "authenticity" of the Christmas story. The scholarly authorities cited are consistently and incorrigibly one-sided, usually including scholars like John Dominic Crossan who dissent from Church teaching, or more ostensibly mainline scholars like Raymond E. Brown (now deceased) who have been quite thoroughly corrupted by the Humean philosophical presuppositions of the historical-criticism of the biblical narrative. This year we've seen the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, call the Christmas story a 'legend' ("Archbishop says nativity 'a legend,'" London Telegraph, December 12, 2007). The upshot is always the conclusion, or at least the suggestion, that the Gospel writers are unreliable and not to be trusted, and certainly not to be taken at face value. Just how ludicrous this all is can be seen by almost anyone with a bit of intelligence and familiarity with literature, mythology, and history. One of the best examples of a powerful antedote to this kind of foolishness is a little essay by C.S. Lewis entitled "Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism," which is available in a collection of essays by Lewis entitled Christian Reflections (1967; reprinted by Eerdmans, 1994). The following are some excerpts from Lewis' essay, which begins on p. 152 and contains four objections (or "bleats") about modern New Testament scholarship:

1. [If a scholar] tells me that something in a Gospel is legend or romance, I want to know how many legends and romances he has read, how well his palate is trained in detecting them by the flavour...

I have been reading poems, romances, vision-literature, legends, myths all my life. I know what they are like. I know that not one [of the stories in the Gospel of John, for example] is like this... Either this is reportage - though it may no doubt contain errors - pretty close up to the facts; nearly as close as Boswell. Or else, some unknown writer in the second century, without known predecessors or successors, suddenly anticipated the whole technique of modern, novelistic, realistic narrative...

2. All theology of the liberal type involves at some point - and often involves throughout - the claim that the real behaviour and purpose and teaching of Christ came very rapidly to be misunderstood and misrepresented by his followers, and has been recovered or exhumed only by modern scholars... The idea that any... writer should be opaque to those who lived in the same culture, spoke the same language, shared the same habitual imagery and unconscious assumptions, and yet be transparent to those who have none of these advantages, is in my opinion preposterous. There is an a priori improbability in it which almost no argument and no evidence could counterbalance.

3. Thirdly, I find in these theologians a constant use of the principle that the miraculous does not occur... This is a purely philosophical question. Scholars, as scholars, speak on it with no more authority than anyone else. The canon 'if miraculous, unhistorical' is one they bring to their study of the texts, not one they have learned from it. If one is speaking of authority, the united authority of all the Biblical critics in the world counts here for nothing.

4. My fourth bleat is my loudest and longest. Reviewers [of my own books, and of books by friends whose real history I knew] both friendly and hostile... will tell you what public events had directed the author's mind to this or that, what other authors influenced him, what his over-all intention was, what sort of audience he principally addressed, why - and when - he did everything... My impression is that in the whole of my experience not one of these guesses has on any one point been right; the method shows a record of 100 per cent failure.

The 'assured results of modern scholarship', as to the way in which an old book was written, are 'assured', we may conclude, only because those who knew the facts are dead and can't blow the gaff... The Biblical critics, whatever reconstructions they devise, can never be crudely proved wrong. St. Mark is dead. When they meet St. Peter there will be more pressing matters to discuss.

However... we are not fundamentalists... Of course we agree that passages almost verbally identical cannot be independent. It is as we glide away from this into reconstructions of a subtler and more ambitious kind that our faith in the method wavers... The sort of statement that arouses our deepest scepticism is the statement that something in a Gospel cannot be historical because it shows a theology or an ecclesiology too developed for so early a date...

Such are the reactions of one bleating layman... Once the layman was anxious to hide the fact that he believed so much less than the Vicar; he now tends to hide the fact that he believes so much more...

For further reading:

• C.S. Lewis, Christian Reflections, edited by Walter Hooper.
• If you're interested in reading the relevant chapter from Lewis's book online, click on: "Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism"
• "Urbi et Orbi Message of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI: Christmas 2007"

Merry Christmas everyone!

Surprise: Pope takes curia to Brazil for Christmas

As Sandro Magister observes in a post, "Surprise: The Pope Takes the Curia to Brazil" (www.chiesa, December 24, 2007), Benedict XVI, in a surprise move, dedicated almost all of his pre-Christmas address to the Roman curia three days ago to a reflection on the purposes of his trip to Brazil from May 9-14 of this year. Those purposes were to bring the Church back to a stance of mission and to proclaim Jesus to all the peoples of the earth. Including the Muslims. An excerpt, in which the Pope again insisted on this missionary effort, citing the "Doctrinal Note on some aspects of evangelization" released on December 14 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, states:

"The document proposes, in effect, to remind all Christians – in a situation in which it is often no longer clear even to many of the faithful what the reason for evangelization is – that the reception of the Good News in faith itself urges the communication of the salvation received as a gift. [...] Nothing is more beautiful, urgent, and important than freely giving back to men what we have freely received from God! Nothing can exempt or relieve us of this onerous and fascinating commitment. The joy of Christmas, which we can already taste in anticipation, while it fills us with hope, drives us at the same time to proclaim to all the presence of God among us." (emphasis added)

Merry Christmas! Ummm . . . Ever thought about becoming a Catholic?

Pertinaciously yours,
Pertinacious Papist