Podcasts about Augustinian

Subscribe Apple | Google | Spotify | Stitcher | iHeart   Support The Daily Gardener Buy Me A Coffee   Connect for FREE! The Friday Newsletter | Daily Gardener Community   Historical Events 1772 Karl Friedrich von Gaertner, German botanist, is born. Karl Friedrich von Gaertner had a fantastic last name; Gaertner translates to mean gardener. Karl was a second-generation gardener. His dad was Joseph Gaertner, the great German botanist and horticulturist, so Karl essentially stepped in his father's footsteps. Karl's claim to fame was his work with hybrids with hybridizing plants. Along with other botanists, he laid the foundation for Gregor Mendel, who discovered the basic principles of heredity through his experiments with peas in his garden at the Augustinian monastery he lived in at Brno ("BURR-no") in the Czech Republic.   1890 Phebe Holder's poem, A Song of May, appeared in newspapers this month. In addition to her religious poems, Phebe wrote about the natural world. Gardeners delight in her poems for spring and fall. Phebe is a fabulous New England Victorian poet and gardener I love and admire. She loved the delicate plants of springtime and wrote a poem called A Song of May. What song hast thou, sweet May, for me, My listening ear what song for thee? A song of life from growing things, The life thy gentle presence brings; The tender light of budding spray. The blooming down on willow grey, The living green that earth overspreads, The creamy flowers on mossy beds. From blossoms pure with petals white As pressed from out the moonbeam's light. The fragrant lily of the vale, The violet's breath on passing gale: Anemones mid last year's*leaves, Arbutus sweet in trailing wreaths, From waving lights of forest glade The light ferns hiding neath the shade. A song of joy from wood and plain, From birds in old-time haunts again; The silvery laugh of tuneful rill O'er rocky bed, down craggy hill; Soft coming of warm dropping showers, The sighing wind in piney bowers; The music breathed by low-voiced waves, For listening, from ocean caves, A plaintive strain doth memory sing, A breathing of departed Spring: An unseen Presence in the home, A spirit voice-"The Master's come!". While hearts in tender sorrow wept O'er one beloved who silent slept, Who in the May-time long ago Passed the pearl gates of glory through. A grateful song, our God, to Thee For treasures of the earth and sea; For all the beauty Thou hast given; A dream to loving hearts, of heaven; A song of life, of joy, of love, Of trust, of faith in light adore This offering on thy shrine I lay; This song hast thou for me, sweet May.   Phebe's A Song of May recalls the flowers of spring. In the second verse, she's touching on many great spring beauties: the Lily of the Valley, violets, anemones, The Mayflower (also known as the trailing arbutus), and then, of course, ferns. In May, fern fronds cover the woodlands and understories. All of these spring plants emerge very quickly once they get growing. The ground transforms from leaf-littered - brown, drab, and dreary - to excellent with beautiful little blossoms.   1822 Thomas Hoy, English gardener, horticulturist, and botanist, died. Thomas was a dedicated gardener and head gardener for the Duke of Northumberland for over four decades - so he worked with plants his entire life. Thomas was a fellow of the Linnaean Society and liked to show his work at various plant societies And outings.  Thomas is remembered as an experienced botanist and a capable cultivator. He was very good at his job. In fact, he was so good that the botanist Robert Brown named a popular plant genus for Thomas Hoy. Can you guess what it is? Well, if you were thinking Hoya, you are correct. The Hoya is a beautiful way to be remembered and honored. I love Hoyas. I picked up a couple of variegated Hoyas over the winter, and I'm so excited to see what the flower looks like.  Overall the Hoya is a gorgeous plant named for the intelligent, thoughtful, and dedicated gardener Thomas Hoy, who died on this day when he was 72.    1867 Ralph Waldo Emerson inscribed a copy of his book, May Day, to Sophie Thoreau, the devoted sister of Henry David Thoreau. May Day is a collection of Emerson's writing and poems and includes the line, "Why chidest thou the tardy spring?" from his May Day poem. Why chidest thou the tardy Spring? The hardy bunting does not chide; The blackbirds make the maples ring With social cheer and jubilee; The redwing flutes his o-ka-lee, The robins know the melting snow; The sparrow meek, prophetic-eyed, Her nest beside the snow-drift weaves, Secure the osier yet will hide Her callow brood in mantling leaves; And thou, by science all undone, Why only must thy reason fail To see the southing of the sun?   In other words, why be upset that spring is late? Spring has everything in hand. Don't be angry about nature's timing. A library first shared this inscription with Ralph Waldo Emerson's beautiful handwriting. About a decade after receiving the book, Sophie gifted the book to her friend Mabel Loomis and inscribed the transfer in the book. If you're looking for a sentimental month of May gift or have a May birthday and want to give something unique, look for an old copy of May Day by Ralph Waldo Emerson. It's a beautiful gift.   Well, it turns out that May 1st is a great day to release a brand new gardening book, and so I thought I'd wrap up today's botanical history with three great garden books released on May 1st.   2001 The Himalayan Garden: Growing Plants from the Roof of the World by Jim Jermyn. If you're into growing mountain plants, Alpine plants, wildflowers, etc., and if you have a cold climate, you'll enjoy this book.   2015 Monet's Palate Cookbook: The Artist & His Kitchen Garden At Giverny by Aileen Bordman   2018 Herbal Medicine for Beginners: Your Guide to Healing Common Ailments with 35 Medicinal Herbs by Katja Swift     Grow That Garden Library™ Book Recommendation Emily's Fresh Kitchen by Emily Maxson This book came out in January of 2022, and the subtitle is Cook Your Way to Better Health.  I must be honest and let you know that I stumbled on this book at my local Goodwill and was immediately taken with it. I think it's fantastic. And I can't believe I missed it last year, so I'm playing catch up here. But the cover captivated me because it features a great soup - Her Roasted Butternut with Sage Soup infused with Coconut Cream. I bet it's fantastic. It sure makes for a pretty cover. And I must say that all of the pictures in this book are beautiful. I wanted to share a little bit about Emily because her story has inspired so much of her work, and she writes, After a Crohn's disease diagnosis at age 28 and over a decade of unsuccessful traditional treatment, Emily Maxson discovered the specific carbohydrate diet's positive effects and food's transformative power to improve health. She's a trained chef who poured her heart into creating delectable dishes that meet her diet's rigorous guidelines.   So the diet that she's following is the Specific Carbohydrate Diet. If you haven't heard about it, Emily is an expert. And for her, the diet has led to a healthier and happier life. Now, if you're curious about this and can't wait to get the book, head over to her website Emily's Fresh Kitchen - it's the same name as the book title. You will find incredible recipes, inspiring stories, and photos there. She does a top-notch job. I also want to share more about this Specific Carbohydrate Diet because you're probably curious. This is a primarily plant-based diet, which is great for gardeners who want to eat fresh from the garden. And here's what Emily writes about on page nine of her book. Following this diet, I cooked myself out of disease and into good health. While the diet was strict, the results were miraculous. It was such a blessing not to have to take medications or to spend time in hospitals, my gut was healthy again, and I was able to start introducing foods that were not allowed while following the diet. Today, I strive for my diet to be 80% plant-based. I focus on fiber and try to get a variety of plant foods in my diet daily, including some gluten-free whole grains.   This diet and way of life are working for her. Consequently, Emily has written a great cookbook with lots of ideas. I thought what I would do is walk you through the chapters here. First, she does a quick overview of what's in her pantry. Then, she talks about her favorite kitchen tools. I love the gadgets, and I love her tips on this. Emily has an excellent section on salads, main dishes, soups, sides, breakfast, and smoothies. That's a critical section for me because I always feel like if I can nail down what I'm having for breakfast, the rest of the day goes well. Then she shares appetizers and savory snacks, which is a good section, too. I've been looking for delicious things I can eat in the evenings. I will check this out. The next chapter covers sweets, treats, condiments, dressings, and spice blends. This is an essential tool, especially if you're going to a plant-based diet because you don't want to lose the flavor. And then drinks and cocktails. Emily is pretty thorough, and it's easy to tell that this is an entire lifestyle for her. She's mastered this, and she can use her own story as a testament to the fact that it does work; to cook your way to better health. This book is 284 pages of nutritious and flavorful dishes that will help heal your body and get you back on the road to health. You can get a copy of Emily's Fresh Kitchen: Cook Your Way to Better Health by Emily Maxson and support the show using the Amazon link in today's show notes for around $25. This is a great gift book if you're looking for an excellent garden-to-table cookbook.    Botanic Spark 1859 On this day, Calvin Fletcher, American attorney, banker, farmer, and state senator in Indianapolis, wrote these words in his diary: This a most delightful Sabbath morn and the anniversary of my leaving Westford, Massachusetts in 1817 forty two years ago. [It's] also the anniversary of my alliance to my sainted wife in 1821 thirty eight years ago to day. Both days are of great beauty & loveliness. This morn I worked my garden & retrospected on the past. Brought up the enumerable reasons for gratitude to Almighty God for the undeserved blessings have enjoyed. All nature seemed to accord to my strain of thought. Bless the Lord O! my soul & all that is within me say Amen! Mrs. F. & I went to Westly Chapel to hear E. preach from the Canticles (Solomon's Songs): "The winter is past & the time of singing of birds has come..."   Thanks for listening to The Daily Gardener And remember: For a happy, healthy life, garden every day.

AcknowledgementThank you to my colleague, Mr. Sean Maddigan, M.Ed., for his assistance in the research and formulation of many of the finer points of the atonement of Christ in this episode. Thanks, Sean!Perception of Serious Problems - Selling Indulgences?If you say the word “indulgences” to most people today, they would bring up Martin Luther. However, indulgences have been explicitly preached in Catholic theology since the 11th Century, and there have been reductions of penalties since at least the 9th Century. So, where and when does Martin Luther enter the scene?On October 31, 1517, Fr. Martin Luther an Augustinian monk and lecturer at the University in Wittenberg, Germany, issued his propositions for debate concerning the question of indulgences. The proposed debate was intended to be with Fr. Johann Tetzel, a German Dominican friar and preacher. Fr. Tetzel was an appointed papel commissioner for indulgences and was sent to his native Germany to make money to help build St. Peter's Basilica in Rome.From 1503 to 1510, Tetzel preached on indulgences and was effective in doing so. There are countless modern sources which say that Pope Julius II authorized the sale of indulgences, and that, likewise, Pope Leo X sold indulgences too and used the money to build the magnificent St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. However, the claim that indulgences, as such, were sold seems to be a myth. At one time, one of the spiritual acts that you could receive an indulgence for is contributing to a charitable cause, such as the building of a church. Charitable organizations offer incentives today to increase donations. In the 16th Century, the building fund of St. Peter's Basilica did increase as the result of Tetzel preaching indulgences. There were absolutely abuses in the practice of indulgences, to be sure! But it is important to understand what they actually are. One of the main contributing factors to knowledge of the controversy was Martin Luther's “95 Theses.” In Luther's time, and especially now, there is no end to the horribly wrong interpretations of the Catholic teaching on indulgences. I have also had a few friends ask if I'd be willing to do an episode on indulgences. So, here you go, gents!Catholic Understanding of AtonementAfter the Fall of Adam and Eve, it was fitting that the atonement or reconciliation of mankind be made by a man. However, what mere man could stand in place of all of humanity? When Jesus Christ died on the Cross, He did so as fully God and fully man. Thus, His death and resurrection were offered in our place, in His humanity, and offered perfectly, in His divinity. In the sixth Session of the Council of Trent, chapter ii, we hear:“Whence it came to pass, that the Heavenly Father, the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort (2 Corinthians 1, 3), when that blessed fullness of the time was come (Galatians 4:4) sent unto men Jesus Christ, His own Son who had been, both before the Law and during the time of the Law, to many of the holy fathers announced and promised, that He might both redeem the Jews, who were under the Law and that the Gentiles who followed not after justice might attain to justice and that all men might receive the adoption of sons. Him God had proposed as a propitiator, through faith in His blood (Romans 3:25), for our sins, and not for our sins only, but also for those of the whole world (I John ii, 2).”There are a lot of things to unpack here. God the Father sent His Son, who was foretold, to redeem the Jews and the Gentiles. This redemption brought with it adoption of each of us by God the Father, in Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit. The reconciliation or atonement (literally meaning to become “at one” with), comes through the propitiation of sins merited by Jesus' death on the Cross. The just wrath of God earned by our sin was turned away by the self-offering (the sacrifice and oblation) of our Lord Jesus on the Cross. By His wounds, we are healed, quoting the Prophet Isaiah. The Nicene Creed we profess each Sunday at Mass reminds us of this reality:“who for us men and for our salvation, came down, took flesh, was made man; and suffered…”Jesus did not come for Himself, He came to give His life as a ransom for many. We say “many” because not everyone will accept this gift, sad to say. However, this does not diminish that the gift of Christ's atonement was won for all mankind, without exception. But what is this ransom? Who was holding the souls of the fallen men? It is the Enemy, Satan.In his commentary on Psalm 95, St. Augustine puts it this way:“Men were held captive under the devil and served the demons, but they were redeemed from captivity. For they could sell themselves. The Redeemer came, and gave the price; He poured forth his blood and bought the whole world. Do you ask what He bought? See what He gave, and find what He bought. The blood of Christ is the price. How much is it worth? What but the whole world? What but all nations? (Enarration on Psalm 95, no. 5).”He goes on to explain, in a figure of speech that the Cross was like a trap for the Enemy:"The Redeemer came and the deceiver was overcome. What did our Redeemer do to our Captor? In payment for us He set the trap, His Cross, with His blood for bait. He [Satan] could indeed shed that blood; but he deserved not to drink it. By shedding the blood of One who was not his debtor, he was forced to release his debtors (Serm. cxxx, part 2).”The debt owed to Divine Justice was paid in full by Jesus Christ. Divine Justice was satisfied. But not everyone agreed with St. Augustine's reasoning. St. Anselm and Peter Abelard, for example, rejected the notion that Satan had some sort of right over man. St. Anselm held that an equal satisfaction for sin was necessary to pay the debt to Divine Justice. Abelard, though, did not hold to this strict notion of satisfaction and he argued that God could have pardoned us without requiring satisfaction. So, the Incarnation and the death of Chirst was the pure love of God. And Abelard was condemned by St. Bernard for this view because he argued the effect of the atonement was only moral influence and not any objective payment of a debt.St. Thomas Aquinas, later, agreed with Abelard in rejecting the notion that full satisfaction was necessary. He agrees with Abelard in so far as the atonement was the greatest demonstration of love, but still holds that under God's economy of salvation, the sacrifice of Christ objectively paid the debt of justice (which Abelard denied). Restoring mankind to grace was a work of God's mercy and goodness. It was fitting that Christ should die on the Cross to show the depths of God's love for us, but not absolutely necessary. Along the ages, Blessed Duns Scotus and St. Bernard of Clairvaux had differing opinions than Abelard and Aquinas.Though there is disagreement among theologians throughout the ages, what is shared among them is this. The Atonement is essentially a sacrifice and an act of love. The outward Sacrifice is the sacrament of the invisible sacrifice which comes from the heart of God. As the Catholic Encyclopedia puts it so well:“It was by this inward sacrifice of obedience unto death, by this perfect love with which He laid down his life for His friends, that Christ paid the debt to justice, and taught us by His example, and drew all things to Himself; it was by this that He wrought our Atonement and Reconciliation with God, ‘making peace through the blood of His Cross.'”Imperfect in the Old, Perfect in the NewIn the Old Covenants, the Jewish people would offer “sin-offerings” in which a cereal offering or animal was immolated, offered to God in worship, and then consumed by the priest. Likewise, we get the word scapegoat from the ancient practice of placing, so to speak, all of the sins of the town onto a goat and then releasing the goat to wander into the wilderness, presumably to die. This ancient notion of atonement was no clearer than on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. The Day of Atonement is centered upon repentance, fasting, asceticism, and the confession of sins. However, the annual nature of this event shows that it is an incomplete and imperfect atonement. Atonement is made perfect in Jesus Christ, who died once for the sins of man and then rose from the dead, to die no more. In the Holy Mass, Christ does not die again. Instead, the Cross of Christ, a propitiatory Sacrifice is renewed daily in a bloodless manner on the altar. What Is An Indulgence?What does any of this have to do with indulgences? Well, everything, really. An indulgence is classically the remission of a debt. In Roman law, it meant to be release from imprisonment or punishment. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines an indulgence as “a remission of the temporal punishment due to sin, the guilt of which has been forgiven.”So, an indulgence is not permission to sin, it is not stockpiling forgiveness for a future action, nor does it forgive sin or the guilt of sin. An indulgence presumes that God has already forgiven the person receiving it! What is being remitted is the temporal punishment due to sin.Our sins affect us, our relationship with God, and our relationship with others. Particularly egregious sins, like rape and murder, have lasting effects which cannot be put right this side of Heaven. And putting things right is in the nature of justice. God will always set things right, one way or another, though we might not see it until the end of things. Nonetheless, once someone experiences contrition, there is a deep desire, rooted in justice, to make restitution. Imagine that you are a kid playing baseball in the street. Of course, this is a bad idea. Mistakes will happen. You know this, and, yet, you wrongly believe that you are special. So, nothing bad will happen. You will hit the ball perfectly and everything will be just fine. Then… you hit the ball and it goes sailing through Mrs. Johnson's bay window. Immediately, you feel terrible about it. You did not mean for anything to be broken. You experience contrition for the wrong you have done. You knew, of course, that you should not be playing baseball in the street. What did you expect to happen?! Now, you have a choice: run away and hide or go and fess up to what you have done. You decide to go and ask for forgiveness. You ring the doorbell and Mrs. Johnson answers. You immediately apologize for breaking the window and tell her that you are truly sorry. And she forgives you! … That's it, right? That's the end of the story?... No way! You still have to make restitution. You have to pay for the window. In this example, we can see analogously, how we can be forgiven for something, but justice still demands restitution, satisfaction, and even punishment. This distinction between forgiveness and the temporal punishment due to sin seems to have gone by the wayside in Protestant theology over the last five hundred years. Really, if we look at it with fresh eyes, hopefully we can see that it is basic common sense that a wrong done demands restitution. So, why can Protestants not go there? The answer really has to do with Martin Luther. In Luther's view, we can do nothing to merit our salvation and Catholics agree we cannot merit the gift of initial justification; it is completely a gratuitous gift from God whereby we are covered by Jesus Christ. Nothing in the Lutheran view demands cooperation with grace or even the internal change brought about by Baptism, which Catholicism has always held. How, Theologically, Does an Indulgence Work?But with Baptism there is a true change, right down to the core of our being. And grace is given, but our free cooperation is necessary. God's love does not force itself upon us. This means that our good actions, united with Christ, are meritorious. Our sinful actions require restitution. The Atonement won by Jesus Christ on the Cross is superabundantly meritorious, to use the language of the Church. When we unite our actions with the Cross, they do not add to the merits of Jesus Christ, but they come into communion with them. Likewise, the forgiveness of sins is a communion with the Cross of Jesus Christ! But, in justice, our bad actions still require temporal punishment and restitution. As the 14th Session of the Council of Trent puts it:“Add to these things, that, whilst we thus, by making satisfaction, suffer for our sins, we are made conformable to Jesus Christ, who satisfied for our sins, from whom all our sufficiency is; having also thereby a most sure pledge, that if we suffer with him, we shall also be glorified with him. But neither is this satisfaction, which we discharge for our sins, so our own, as not to be through Jesus Christ. For we who can do nothing of ourselves, as of ourselves, can do all things, He cooperating, who strengthens us. Thus, man has not wherein to glory, but all our glorying is in Christ: in whom we live; in whom we merit; in whom we satisfy; bringing forth fruits worthy of penance, which from him have their efficacy; by him are offered to the Father; and through him are accepted by the Father (The Council of Trent: On the necessity and on the fruit of Satisfaction).”Some Protestants hold to the erroneous view of “penal substitution” which is a theory of the atonement that holds that God punished Jesus on the Cross. But there is one glaringly huge problem: an innocent person cannot be justly punished. Jesus took upon Himself the sufferings and death that were due to our sins, but He did not take on the just punishment for our sins.Understanding How Christ Took on Our Punishment (And What That Means)Jesus Christ took our punishment upon Himself. As St. Thomas teaches:“Now by Christ's Passion we have been delivered not only from the common sin of the whole human race, both as to its guilt and as to the debt of punishment, for which He paid the penalty on our behalf (ST III, q. 49, a. 5, co.).”When discussing the fittingness of the death of Christ, St. Thomas also mentions:“... in this way Christ by His death brought us back to life, when by His death He destroyed our death; just as he who bears another's punishment takes such punishment away (ST III, q. 50, a. 1, ad. 3).”Satisfaction means taking up a penalty voluntarily in order to restore justice. St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of taking up this voluntary penalty as someone experiencing something against the will out of charity. In the case of sin and justice, in charity this action makes up for sin because sin is voluntarily doing one's own will at the expense of charity. In other words, satisfaction derives its power from the strength of the charity of the one offering it. There is no need for Jesus to suffer the pains of Hell to save us because even one drop of His Precious Blood could have satisfied the wrath of God. The payment of Jesus, who is sinless and perfect in charity, merits not only release from punishment. By the Cross, He merits for us eternal life!When a debt is to be paid, the punishment is measured. In merit, the root of charity is measured. When one merits for another, he merits more for himself. Yet, when one satisfies for another, he does not also satisfy for himself, because the measure of punishment still covers both him and the one on whose behalf he is satisfying. In the case of Jesus, who is without sin, He has no debt to pay. He is satisfying for sinful men out of perfect charity. The punishment He bore made satisfaction for the sins of all mankind and merited more than any man is capable of: eternal life!Back to IndulgencesTemporal punishment acknowledges that the eternal punishment for sin has been taken away on the Cross, but the temporal consequences of sin still remain. These temporal effects of sin require restitution, to the ability that we are able. We ought to make amends for wrongs done. Expiation, satisfaction, amends, and reparation all mean the same thing when referring to the temporal consequences and punishment due to sin.Going back to this notion of the superabundant merits of Christ on the Cross, we can also add all of the meritorious actions of the Baptized faithful through the ages, most notably the saints. The Treasury of Merit, as it is called, is the collection of the perfect, infinite, and superabundant merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, the expansive merits of our Blessed Mother and St. Joseph, and the merits of all the just. Our Lord gave to St. Peter, and to the Apostles and their successors, the authority to apply the fruits of these merits at their discretion when He said: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Mt. 16:18-19).”Likewise, in St. John's Gospel, Jesus says to the Apostles, and their successors by extension:“And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld (Jn. 20:22-24).”When a confessor gives absolution to a penitent in the Sacrament of Penance, he is applying this forgiveness of sins which comes from God alone, through the instrument of the priest and the Church. Our guilt for sin and eternal punishment for sin are absolved, but the temporal punishment for sin remains. An indulgence is outside of the sacraments and it does not forgive sins. Instead, it applies the satisfaction of the Treasury of Merit to an individual thereby remitting their temporal punishment due to sin. In other words, by the merits of Christ and the saints, the debt of temporal restitution has been paid in full. The superabundant merits belong to God's mercy and justice, not to the Church absolutely. So, these concessions or diminishments of punishment are administered by the Church but they come from God as a free gift. There is value in what Christ has done for us. But there is also value in what Christ does through us. Either way, the primary action is God. But with our cooperation, we unite ourselves with the Sacred Action of Jesus. As St. Paul said:"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church (Col. 1:24).”What could possibly be lacking in the sufferings of Christ, except for our cooperation with His grace and our own meritorious actions? Not only do our good actions possess the value or merit, they also certainly possess the value of satisfaction.Luther Had a Couple Good Points, But a Lot of ErrorsIt must be said that Martin Luther had some great points in his 95 Theses. In fact, only 41 propositions of Luther's from the 95 Theses and his other writings up to that point, were rejected as heretical, scandalous, erroneous, seductive of simple minds, in opposition to Catholic truth, or offensive to pious ears by Pope Leo X in 1520. Let us look at the first three of the 95 Theses:* “When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, ‘Repent'' (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.* This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.* Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.”All three of these are true. Interior repentance is a reorienting of one's entire life, not just a momentary “I'll try a bit harder.” This call of our Lord to repentance does not refer to the Sacrament of Penance because it is a call which is first addressed to those who do not yet know Christ and the Gospel. And finally, interior conversion should find expression in visible signs, gestures, and penitential actions. It does seem, though, that Luther is presupposing that indulgences were being sold, with official authorization. This myth is prevalent today and it appears it was in Luther's day as well. Indulgences are drawn from the Treasury of Merit and applied freely when those seeking them fulfill the requirements with proper disposition. Luther's 95 Theses presents many theological errors in this regard. These errors are still being repeated today. For example, this 2009 article from “The New York Times” which gets it wrong from the title (the content of the article only goes from wrong to worse, by the way): “For Catholics, a Door to Absolution is Reopened.”By the way, to show just how seriously the Church took these abuses, Pope St. Pius V, in 1567, issued a decree which canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions.Seeking an IndulgenceMany Catholics think that indulgences, per se, were an abuse. They are not. And though it was a focal point in the Protestant Reformation, indulgences did not go anywhere. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church stated in the 1990s:"An indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue of the power of binding and loosing granted her by Christ Jesus, intervenes in favor of individual Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints to obtain from the Father of mercies the remission of the temporal punishment due for their sins… to spur them to works of devotion, penance, and charity" (CCC 1478).Everything that I have presented about indulgences belongs to the infallible teachings of the Church. We are not at liberty to dismiss them, diminish them, or disbelieve in them. The Council of Trent's anathema makes this clear:The Council of Trent "condemns with anathema those who say that indulgences are useless or that the Church does not have the power to grant them."The Church does not remit temporal punishment due to sin with magic or the wave of a pen. The person who suffers those temporal punishments must be disposed to repentance and faith. As Pope St. Paul VI said:"Indulgences cannot be gained without a sincere conversion of outlook and unity with God (Indulgentarium Doctrina, 11).”Before the Second Vatican Council, indulgences were said to remove a certain number of “days” from punishment. Instead, this was to show that indulgences have two types: plenary and partial. Plenary, meaning full, means that all temporal punishment due to sin that a person owed is being remitted. Whereas, a partial indulgence remits part of the temporal punishment due to sin. In order to make this clearer, Pope St. Paul VI revised the handbook of indulgences (called the Enchiridion).As we have covered, satisfaction and temporal punishment for sin are ordered towards justice on the one hand and purification on the other hand. So, the actions for which one might receive an indulgence should likewise be ordered to justice, charity, and purification. Because the justice of God has been satisfied through the merits of Christ and the saints, applied to our lives, then the “time,” so to speak, needed for purification in charity after death has been lessened. Just as a checkpoint or reminder: indulgences remit the temporal punishment due to sin, not eternal punishment. Eternal punishment is remitted fully by the Cross of Jesus Christ, the merits of which we receive in the Sacrament of Baptism. Knowing rightly what an indulgence is, how can we receive this great gift? Please forgive the following lengthy quotation, but Jimmy Akin put it concisely and excellently in his Primer on Indulgences for EWTN:“To gain any indulgence you must be a Catholic in a state of grace. You must be a Catholic in order to be under the Church's jurisdiction, and you must be in a state of grace because apart from God's grace none of your actions are fundamentally pleasing to God (meritorious). You also must have at least the habitual intention of gaining an indulgence by the act performed.To gain a partial indulgence, you must perform with a contrite heart the act to which the indulgence is attached.To gain a plenary indulgence you must perform the act with a contrite heart plus you must go to confession (one confession may suffice for several plenary indulgences), receive Holy Communion, and pray for the pope's intentions. (An Our Father and a Hail Mary said for the pope's intentions are sufficient, although you are free to substitute other prayers of your own choosing.) The final condition is that you must be free from all attachment to sin, including venial sin.Because of the extreme difficulty in meeting the final condition, plenary indulgences are rarely obtained. If you attempt to receive a plenary indulgence, but are unable to meet the last condition, a partial indulgence is received instead.”The Church offers us special indulgences, both plenary and partial, for all sorts of things. But there are a couple of partial indulgences worth mentioning here. Partial indulgences are given by the Church for: * Devoutly spending time in mental prayer, * Reading Sacred Scripture with veneration as a form of spiritual reading (this one is plenary if done for at least 30 minutes), * Devoutly signing oneself with the Sign of the Cross and saying the customary formula: “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”ConclusionIndulgences are not magic. They are a part of the infallible teaching of the Church. And they are for our spiritual well-being. We should not be wary of officially promulgated indulgences. We should be grateful to God for His superabundant mercy and His justice. Recognizing that we are sinners in need of His grace, we approach the Sacrament of Penance. Then, we do penance to seek temporal satisfaction and restitution for the consequences of our sins. All the while, we ought to seek out indulgences, because they are nothing more than being union and communion with Almighty God and striving to be more in love with Him who loved us first.Will Wright Catholic Podcast is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Will Wright Catholic Podcast at www.willwrightcatholic.com/subscribe

Dr. Dalton - The Augustinian Hoax

Merton's name was associated with Augustine's from the moment his autobiography appeared with comparisons to the Confessions on its cover. This presentation considers Merton's ongoing interactions with Augustine in published works, journals and conferences: his reliance on Augustinian distinctions between cupidity and charity, science and wisdom; his measured evaluation of Augustinian mystical teaching and formulation of just war theory; his apprecia­tive novitiate classes on De Doctrina Christiana; to his hermitage reflections on Camus' university thesis on Augustine. This topic provides a fascinating and illuminating window on the development of various aspects of Merton's own spirituality. Patrick F. O'Connell is a founding member and former president of the International Thomas Merton Society, edits the ITMS quarterly publication The Merton Seasonal and is co-author with Christine M. Bochen and William H. Shannon of The Thomas Merton Encyclopedia (Orbis, 2002). He has edited twelve volumes of Thomas Merton's monastic conferences, most recently Liturgical Feasts and Seasons (Cascade, 2022), as well as Merton's Selected Essays (Orbis, 2012), Early Essays, 1947-1952 (Cistercian, 2015) and Cistercian Fathers and Forefathers (New City, 2018), as well as Merton & Confucianism (Fons Vitae, 2021). He is professor emeritus at Gannon University, Erie, PA.

In this episode of Faith Over Breakfast, Pastor Andy and Pastor Eric discuss the topic of protests and faith with passion and thoughtfulness. They begin by discussing the recent controversy surrounding The Bridge Church in Tucson, which protested the Bookman's drag queen story hour for children. The pastors question whether this protest is an effective way to spread the message of faith and encourage listeners to reflect on their own approaches to sharing their beliefs.They then explore the concept of being missionaries in an increasingly secular culture, addressing the challenges that Christians face in a world that is moving away from traditional religious beliefs and practices. They offer innovative strategies for sharing one's faith and making it relevant in today's world.Finally, they discuss the Augustinian way of understanding politics, examining how Christians can navigate the complexities of modern politics in a way that is in line with their faith. They also discuss the role of the church in political activism and inspire listeners to work towards positive change in their communities.Throughout the episode, Pastor Andy and Pastor Eric provide insightful commentary and engage in lively discussion that is sure to provoke listeners to reflect on their own beliefs and the role of faith in today's world. Don't miss out on this fascinating episode of Faith Over Breakfast!News StoryThe Bridge ChurchLink to Andy's example a good protestBible & Bourbon with Pastor BenSome people think the Bible & Bourbon don't go together, but we disagree!Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the show"Faith Over Breakfast with Pastors Andy & Eric" is a weekly podcast where Pastors Andy and Eric come together over a imaginary delicious breakfast to talk about faith, food, sermons, culture, and more. In each episode, the pastors delve into thought-provoking topics and offer inspiring insights and practical guidance for those seeking to deepen their relationship with Jesus. With occasional guests joining the conversation, "Faith Over Breakfast with Pastors Andy & Eric" provides a unique perspective on what it means to live a life of faith in today's world. Whether you're a seasoned Christian or just starting on your faith journey, this podcast is the perfect companion for your morning routine. So join Pastors Andy and Eric each week as they explore the intersections of faith, food, and life over a delicious breakfast.Support:https://www.buzzsprout.com/97804/support

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comJames is a Roman Catholic priest, theologian and writer. His life's work has been the application of the thought of René Girard — the French theoretician of desire and violence — to the understanding of basic Christianity. He has also stood up for truthfulness about gays and lesbians in the life of the Church; and has been a good friend for many years. Among his many books are The Joy of Being Wrong, Faith Beyond Resentment: Fragments Catholic and Gay, and Jesus the Forgiving Victim — an introduction to the Christian faith. One of my current projects is a book on Christianity and its future; and James has been a big influence on my thinking. We range a lot here. For two clips of our convo — on an exasperated but loving God, and the evolutionary role of homosexuality — pop over to our YouTube page. Other topics: the deep Etonian background of James and his family; his Tory MP father; his evangelical mother who believed in conspiracy theories; young James realizing he was gay and believing God rejected him for it; Lord Montagu and the decriminalization of homosexuality in 1967; Kameny's role in the US; how childhood alienation can be a creative spark; James at age 12 falling in love with a Catholic boy; his conversion to Catholicism without becoming a reactionary; Original Sin; the depressing parts of the Old Testament; the passages of love in the New Testament; Augustinian teleology debunked by Darwin; the views of Socrates, Buddhism, Aquinas and Luther; collective guilt over slavery; Catholic vs. Protestant colonialism; James adopting a Brazilian child; the AIDS crisis; and political topics like Brexit, Trump and the coup in Peru. Browse the Dishcast archives for a discussion you might enjoy (the first 102 episodes are free in their entirety).

It's time for episode two of our deep dive into history's biggest Posters, and this week we're joined by Matt Christman, host of Chapo Trap House's 'Hell on Earth' series, to discuss perhaps the OG Poster: 16th century Augustinian monk Martin Luther. -------- This show is supported by Patreon. Sign up for as little as $5 a month to gain access to a new bonus episode every week, and our entire backlog of bonus episodes! Thats https://www.patreon.com/10kpostspodcast -------- Ten Thousand Posts is a show about how everything is posting. It's hosted by Hussein (@HKesvani), Phoebe (@PRHRoy) and produced by Devon (@Devon_onEarth).

A daily news briefing from Catholic News Agency, powered by artificial intelligence. Ask your smart speaker to play “Catholic News,” or listen every morning wherever you get podcasts. www.catholicnewsagency.com - Pope Francis addressed once again the question of whether he will resign the papacy in two conversations with Jesuit priests in Africa this month, saying he believes a Pope's ministry is for life. The pope, repeating information he had revealed in a prior interview, said that he signed a resignation letter two months after his election as pope in case he should become incapacitated. He mentioned again the letter he signed in case his health should deteriorate to a point he could not resign and pointed to the resignation letter Venerable Pope Pius XII prepared in case he should be kidnapped by Hitler. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/253663/pope-francis-i-believe-that-the-pope-s-ministry-is-for-life Two UK Catholics, one of whom is a priest, were acquitted Thursday of all charges against them after they were accused of breaking the law for praying in front of an abortion clinic. Both Father Sean Gough — a priest of the Archdiocese of Birmingham — and Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, co-director of March for Life UK, were charged with violating a local Public Spaces Protection Order that censors speech in the area around a Birmingham abortion clinic. Gough said he stood near a closed abortion clinic on Station Road in Birmingham with a sign that said “praying for free speech.” Officials criminally charged him with “intimidating service users” of the abortion clinic. He faced a second charge related to an “unborn lives matter” sticker on his parked car. The charges against both Gough and Vaughan-Spruce were eventually dropped because of insufficient evidence against them. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/253665/two-uk-catholics-acquitted-after-being-charged-for-praying-in-front-of-abortion-clinic Today, the Church celebrates the Seven Founders of the Order of Servites. These seven men were born in Florence, Italy and led lives as hermits on Monte Senario. They had a special devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary. On Friday, April 13, 1240, the hermits received a vision of Our Lady, who told them to found a new order. They accepted the wisdom of Our Lady, wrote a Rule based on Saint Augustine and the Dominican Constitutions, adopted the black habit of an Augustinian monk, and lived as mendicant friars. The men founded the Order of Servites which in 1304 received the approval of the Holy See. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/saint/seven-founders-of-the-order-of-servites-150

A key goal of eugenics in the 20th century was to eliminate genetic defects from a population. Many countries pursued this with state-led programmes of involuntary sterilisation, even murder. We unpick some of the science behind this dark history, and consider the choices and challenges opened up by the science today. In the mid-19th century, an Augustinian friar called Gregor Mendel made a breakthrough. By breeding pea plants and observing how certain traits were passed on, Mendel realised there must be units - little packets - of information determining characteristics. He had effectively discovered the gene. His insights inspired eugenicists from the 1900s onwards. If traits were passed on by specific genes, then their policies should stop people with ‘bad' genes from having children. Mendel's ideas are still used in classrooms today - to teach about traits like eye colour. But the eugenicists thought Mendel's simple explanations applied to everything - from so-called ‘feeblemindedness' to criminality and even pauperism. Today, we recognise certain genetic conditions as being passed on in a Mendelian way. Achondroplasia - which results in short stature - is one example, caused by a single genetic variant. We hear from Professor Tom Shakespeare about the condition, about his own decision to have children despite knowing the condition was heritable - and the reaction of the medical establishment. We also explore how genetics is taught in schools today - and the danger of relying on Mendel's appealingly simple but misleading account. Contributors: Dr Brian Donovan, senior research scientist at BSCS, Prof Tom Shakespeare, disability researcher at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; and Dr Christine Patch, principal staff scientist in Genomic Counselling in the Society and Ethics Research group, part of Wellcome Connecting Science.

In today's episode, I have Thomas Jay Oord back on. We are looking at St Augustine's view of divine love. Tom argues that his own kenotic view of God's love is better than Augustine's. Credits Host: R.T. Mullins (PhD, University of St Andrews) is a visiting professor of philosophy at Palm Beach Atlantic University and the University of Lucerne. Guest: Thomas Jay Oord (PhD, Claremont University) is the director of the Center for Open and Relational Theology. Music by Rockandmetal_domination – Raising-questions. rtmullins.com Support the Show: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=66431474 https://ko-fi.com/rtmullins

All the Episodes of the Heidelcast How To Subscribe To Heidelmedia On Twitter @Heidelcast How To Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button below Subscribe in Apple Podcast Subscribe directly via RSS New Way To Call The Heidelphone: Voice Memo On Your Phone The Heidelcast is available wherever podcasts are found including Spotify. Call or text the Heidelphone anytime at (760) 618-1563. Leave a message or email us us a voice memo from your phone and we may use it in a future podcast. Record it and email it to Heidelcast at heidelcast dot net. If you benefit from the Heidelcast please leave a five-star review on Apple Podcasts so that others can find it. Please do not forget to make the coffer clink (see the donate button below). RESOURCES How To Subscribe To Heidelmedia The Heidelblog Resource Page Heidelmedia Resources The Ecumenical Creeds The Reformed Confessions The Heidelberg Catechism Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008) Why I Am A Christian What Must A Christian Believe? Heidelblog Contributors Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to: Heidelberg Reformation Association 1637 E. Valley Parkway #391 Escondido CA 92027 USA The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.

Full Text of ReadingsMonday of the Second Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 311The Saint of the day is Saint Berard and CompanionsSaint Berard and Companions' Story Preaching the gospel is often dangerous work. Leaving one's homeland and adjusting to new cultures, governments and languages is difficult enough; but martyrdom caps all the other sacrifices. In 1219, with the blessing of Saint Francis, Berard left Italy with Peter, Adjute, Accurs, Odo and Vitalis to preach in Morocco. En route in Spain, Vitalis became sick and commanded the other friars to continue their mission without him. They tried preaching in Seville, then in Muslim hands, but made no converts. They went on to Morocco where they preached in the marketplace. The friars were immediately apprehended and ordered to leave the country; they refused. When they began preaching again, an exasperated sultan ordered them executed. After enduring severe beatings and declining various bribes to renounce their faith in Jesus Christ, the friars were beheaded by the sultan himself on January 16, 1220. These were the first Franciscan martyrs. When Francis heard of their deaths, he exclaimed, “Now I can truly say that I have five Friars Minor!” Their relics were brought to Portugal where they prompted a young Augustinian canon to join the Franciscans and set off for Morocco the next year. That young man was Anthony of Padua. These five martyrs were canonized in 1481. Reflection The deaths of Berard and his companions sparked a missionary vocation in Anthony of Padua and others. There have been many, many Franciscans who have responded to Francis' challenge. Proclaiming the gospel can be fatal, but that has not stopped the Franciscan men and women who even today risk their lives in many countries throughout the world. Saint of the Day, Copyright Franciscan Media

Full Text of ReadingsThursday of the First Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 308The Saint of the day is Saint Marguerite BourgeoysSaint Marguerite Bourgeoys' Story “God closes a door and then opens a window,” people sometimes say when dealing with their own disappointment or someone else's. That was certainly true in Marguerite's case. Children from European as well as Native American backgrounds in 17th-century Canada benefited from her great zeal and unshakable trust in God's providence. Born the sixth of 12 children in Troyes, France, Marguerite at the age of 20 believed that she was called to religious life. Her applications to the Carmelites and Poor Clares were unsuccessful. A priest friend suggested that perhaps God had other plans for her. In 1654, the governor of the French settlement in Canada visited his sister, an Augustinian canoness in Troyes. Marguerite belonged to a sodality connected to that convent. The governor invited her to come to Canada and start a school in Ville-Marie (eventually the city of Montreal). When she arrived, the colony numbered 200 people with a hospital and a Jesuit mission chapel. Soon after starting a school, she realized her need for coworkers. Returning to Troyes, she recruited a friend, Catherine Crolo, and two other young women. In 1667, they added classes at their school for Indian children. A second trip to France three years later resulted in six more young women and a letter from King Louis XIV, authorizing the school. The Congregation of Notre Dame was established in 1676 but its members did not make formal religious profession until 1698 when their Rule and constitutions were approved. Marguerite established a school for Indian girls in Montreal. At the age of 69, she walked from Montreal to Quebec in response to the bishop's request to establish a community of her sisters in that city. By the time she died, she was referred to as the “Mother of the Colony.” Marguerite was canonized in 1982. Reflection It's easy to become discouraged when plans that we think that God must endorse are frustrated. Marguerite was called not to be a cloistered nun but to be a foundress and an educator. God had not ignored her after all. Saint of the Day, Copyright Franciscan Media

People don't really hate the Catholic Church. They hate what they've been taught is the Church, most of which is untrue. This quote from Fulton “the quote machine” Sheen sums it up:There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing. These millions can hardly be blamed for hating Catholics because Catholics “adore statues”; because they “put the Blessed Mother on the same level with God”; because they say “indulgence is a permission to commit sin”; because the Pope “is a Fascist”; because the “Church is the defender of Capitalism.” If the Church taught or believed any one of these things it should be hated, but the fact is that the Church does not believe nor teach any one of them. It follows then that the hatred of the millions is directed against error and not against truth. As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do. If I were not a Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which did not get along well with the world; in other words, I would look for the Church which the world hates… Look for the Church that is hated by the world, as Christ was hated by the world. Look for the Church which is accused of being behind the times, as Our Lord was accused of being ignorant and never having learned. Look for the Church which men sneer at as socially inferior, as they sneered at Our Lord because He came from Nazareth. Look for the Church which is accused of having a devil, as Our Lord was accused of being possessed by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. Look for the Church which, in seasons of bigotry, men say must be destroyed in the name of God as men crucified Christ and thought they had done a service to God. Look for the Church which the world rejects because it claims it is infallible, as Pilate rejected Christ because He called Himself the Truth. Look for the Church which is rejected by the world as Our Lord was rejected by men… If then, the hatred of the Church is founded on erroneous beliefs, it follows that basic need of the day is instruction. Love depends on knowledge for we cannot aspire nor desire the unknown. (Fulton Sheen on Radio Replies)The Church that is rejected by men is a Church they rarely know or understand. The attackers have not read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is clear because most of the attacks don't even make sense once you crack the cover of that book. Thus, it's useless for me to feel offended by atheist attacks any more that it is to feel offended by Protestant attacks. Yet I do feel offended sometimes. Why? Because I fail to fully surrender to God and his Church, hence the need for daily conversion, to fight the spiritual fight, and to submit my will and intellect completely to the care of God's grace. His will, not mine, will be done. This blog is just a journal of my reasons for believing, and if I didn't feel such a need to express these words, I wouldn't do it. Jesus commanded us to tell the story of the Gospel, and that his sheep would hear his voice. Seems like a small task for me to at least tell of my reasons for faith, with the hopes that perhaps someone else will undo their own Herschel Walker trade. Now, Protestants did not make the full trade, abandoning God, but they did abandon the Mother Church, the Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ, the barque of Peter (and any other pseudonyms you like). In Luther's defense, he was living in and around a period of time when frauds like the Donation of Constantine came to light, which called for questioning, correction, and improvement, and the Church was under heavy attack from all sides. It is also under attack today, from all sides. In Luther's time, the New World had been discovered, science was advancing, and there were three concurrent Popes at one time not long before. Add a few greedy clergy using “salvation for money” schemes that would make Bernie Madoff blush, and only a match it need to start a conflagration. It's just too bad Luther's exit ended up watering down the doctrines instead of shoring it up, because he really wanted to protect doctrine in the beginning - even the Eucharist. After all, he was an Augustinian monk, and the most “Catholic” Protestant there ever was, at least in the beginning, until Zwingli and the hoards came after him. I haven't come to bash Luther as much as I have come to bash Voltaire and Jefferson and the fruit of their legacy of unbelief. I routinely bash the 19th century German scholarship that tried to elevate Biblical scholarship and instead cut the trunk out from the tree. Even though things look bleak, I have to think of Joseph, Jacob's son, in Egypt. After getting tossed in a well, then sold into slavery, then living in prison after being falsely accused of seducing a powerful man's wife, Joseph had a winning streak. When he met his brothers again, many years later, he said, “As for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good.” (Gen 50:20) All of this, all that has happened in the past 500 years is part of God's plan, even the awful parts. We just don't know how yet, but we do know that the name of the game is adhering to Christ, his words, his commandments, and imitating him, which means sticking to the doctrines and not affirming every sin that feels good or sounds good. It means saying, “No,” to the culture, to popular opinion. Slavery was once popular opinion thanks to sola scriptura. Why? Because you can make the Bible be whatever you want it to be with “scripture alone.” The Church put out anti-slavery documents and statements early on. Just like today, that doesn't mean every person adhered to the teaching. Consider how poorly the laity adhere to birth control and admonitions of greed. There were hardly any Catholics in America until the Irish came, which was around the Civil War, and guess what? They were hated, too. It's almost a guarantee. Catholicism is the punk rock of all ages, because it is always a counter-culture. But unlike punk rock, Catholicism has a shelf-life that lasts longer than a decade. All of the fad counter-cultures disappear like smoke, like figdet-spinners and rolled jeans and pet rocks, they are passing fashions that mean nothing to the next generation. But Mary and Joseph do not fade. The impact of the saints and martyrs carries on. The Gospel does not fade, even if the books and scrolls wear out over time. The printing press was not necessary for Christianity any more than the internet is now. Only Jesus and a community of believers was required: Jesus and the Mystical Body of Christ was needed. It's also quite nice that the Church has a way to settle disputes with the Bishops as time and history introduce new issues regarding faith and morals. No other Church has that capability but the one that Jesus founded on a rock named Peter, who happened to setup shop in Rome. Somehow the faith starts a new fire every few years. And the fire always irritates the culture, and oddly enough, what irritates American culture is not the same as what irritates African culture, where in America the Church is hated for it's sexual teaching on chastity, and in Africa it's appreciated for it's sexual teaching on chastity. Americans, in classic form, just assume Africans are childlike. This has not changed, folks. Progressives in America preach sermons that treat Africa as less advanced because they adhere to traditional marriage and family arrangements. The condescension toward Africa today is as bad, if not worse, than it was from the 1500s through the Enlightenment. So which nation is more lost? Is it Nigeria or Uganda? Is it America? The answer is: all of them. America is a sheep that's fallen into a gorge in need of being found. But it's not special in that sense; every nation has its sins, just like every person does. If anything feels good, it is to be counter-cultural. What teenager doesn't want to rebel? But what is odd is that obedience to God is the ultimate rebellion, but it's against sin and the world. Rebellion against God is easy, undemanding, cliche. Rebellion against the flesh and the devil? That's freedom. That is timeless. To remain fully alive, body and soul, and seek union with the Creator is a fad that never dies because at the root, we desire God like we desire food. Jesus and his Church have been the unlikely underdog from the beginning and these two still are today. God has set things up this way. Why? I don't know, but what a joy to be a part of the team that calls itself sinners, who eat and give thanks together, who receive the Eucharist, the Body of Christ. The Reformation, the Enlightenment, the German anti-Catholic culture war, French existentialism, Americanism, Marxist atheism, Postmodernism, and technocratic utopianism - these are all different versions, different ways, of rejecting God. Our desire to eat from the tree of knowledge manifests in many ways, with each generation in competition with the prior one. They are various sides of the same set of dice. In my own confused journey through the chaff of modern ideas, of all these, I find that the Enlightenment did more permanent damage than anything else. Why? Because that is what killed our idea of the soul and all things mysterious. It denies the supernatural. At the very least, the Reformation still held on to the soul and God, but the unbelievers told us there was no soul, and it's hard to argue with dead people and academic scholarship that preaches more than it teaches. The bias in academia becomes glaringly obvious as we shove off from the shore further from the 19th and 20th centuries. There is a laziness in academics now that assumes historical and textual criticism is unassailable, that tradition has nothing important to say. The Reformation's disgust with tradition led to the dumping of all capital-T “Tradition,” and if I learned anything at all from Fiddler on the Roof, it's that Tradition is valuable. The death of wonder and enchantment is the greatest tragedy of the last five hundred years of human history. Death of belief in the soul is tragic for atheists because even if you fell for the lie, you still have a soul and just need to get back in touch with God to have him pull the string and turn your light on again. You have to get your soul out of coat-check and write a bad review of the devil's bar service. Recall that the devil is allowed to tempt and test us, and it is on us to muster the courage to leave the casino. That is what God wants us to do: to ask for help, to fight for faith, goodness, and truth. If you haven't experienced soul death, or the perception of soul death (because your soul is there even if you don't believe it), consider yourself blessed. You are blessed with the gift of faith. Literally. You are in cooperation with God's grace, and he has chosen you, and you have answered. Faith is the greatest gift we can receive, but it requires surrender and action. The good news, really, the greatest news, is that soul death is not a real thing. Just as atheists mock God as a kind of Santa Claus, I mock atheists' unbelief in the soul, because the joke is actually on them. It's just not a funny joke, it's sad. You have a soul. You may not believe it. But that's because much time is spent in convincing you that God and the devil are not real. You may accept the idea of a soul, but reject God and the devil. But all three exist. Losing your sense of the soul is the greatest tragedy of a life. If you've already lost that connection, I'm sorry. Start today in earnest to get it back, beginning with the simple prayer of request: “God, help me be willing to be willing.” Or you can say, “God, I want to believe, help my unbelief.” In your de-programming from the modern cult of unbelief, that's the diet you have to start on in order to get you back on solid spiritual food. Because God has a sense of humor, if or when you reconnect with your soul, it will be the greatest awakening you can possibly have. With all spiritual physics, you have to do down to go up. You have to die to be reborn. This is how it works.The non-believers like Voltaire, Rousseau, Locke, Hume, Whitman, and Jefferson severed the soul from the body. For many years, they kind of pussy-footed around the issue, with people like Descartes still clinging to belief while he killed the soul. Then later Hume and others just came out and said, “There is no soul!” That's why we have bold atheists today just declaring it, like Yuval Harari and every middle schooler on TikTok. If there was ever a “spirit murder,” as anti-racists like to talk about today, it is not what happens in public school with white male teachers. But it did happen by white men. They are right about that. Truly, the modern scapegoat, a.k.a. White Males, performed the greatest spirit murder of all time. But I'm not talking about what modern atheists are talking about when they talk about “spirit.” I suspect that most modern people don't even know what a spirit is (to find out yourself, listen to this Lord of Spirits episode). No, the real “spirit murder” happened from the white guys of the Enlightenment. The “death of God” declarations from the 19th and 20th century all came from white Europeans and Americans and Russians, so as far as I'm concerned, a spiritual genocide happened that is still being felt across the West. But then there was a “body murder” as well, which happened in the Reformation. What do I mean by that? I'm talking about the idea of “faith alone.” When “faith alone” became the basis for salvation, the body was cut off from the soul. So we had one group deny the soul in the Enlightenment, and the Reformers kill the body with faith alone. How? What am I talking about?Because we no longer needed a body. God was all in our head and heart. We can be saved just by laying on the couch. A brain in a vat kept alive by electrodes can be saved by “faith alone.” A software program can emit a string of text that fulfills the requirements of “faith alone.” With “faith alone,” our soul doesn't have much need for this lump of fat, muscle, blood, bone and cartilage. With faith alone, religion moved out of the physical world and took up residence in the ether, the mystical mind. There is much I'd like to go into right here about the Eucharist, but briefly, let me just say that the reason Protestant churches are dying is quite different from the drop in attendance from Catholic churches. The reason Protestant churches are shrinking is because they have always just been “Four walls and a sermon,” and if there is one thing that the internet has shined a light on is that, “sermon alone” does not make a church. It makes for a show. It's just entertainment. Whereas physical Sacraments, like Confession and the Eucharist, require the body to come along. But faith alone requires no works, so why leave the house? Why bother, when you can watch the best preacher in America from your house? Literally, a brain hooked up to a computer can do all that is required of a Protestant. I'm sorry if it sounds cruel, but we're not that far away from brain-vats and wetware, so let that by my prophecy. See, a brain cannot consume the Eucharist, which is why Jesus is so amazing - no matter how we try to box him in, he always rises over us. However, let me back up from bashing the Protestants. The Reformation axe caused less damage than the Enlightenment. Again, I have not come to bury Luther, nor to praise him. To me, the loss of the soul was far more damaging, because as soon as the soul is gone, so is God, along with the devil, and so is the meaning of life. After I had moved on from Catholicism, I wandered about, but the situation felt precarious, as if I were living on a ridge, with infinitely steep sides. Along the ridge I saw a tiny table and a chair at a mysterious little two-dimensional restaurant. The menu had two options. The first option on the menu was simple. Atheism. It had some fancy garnishes, like agnosticism or positivism, but atheism was the entree. The second option was Faith Alone, but it came with a million options, none of which appealed. I could see other people at their little tables, trying to decide, and trying not to look into the Big Empty that was on both sides of the ridge. Many wanted to choose Faith Alone, but the description of it went on for miles. A scroll rolled out of the menu and dangled over the cliff edge. It wasn't clear what Faith Alone was. It seemed like it could be whatever you wanted it to be, and I never saw any food delivered to those who ordered it. Eventually, I realized that there was nothing to eat. It was a trick. There was no food. This was a two-dimensional restaurant. There was no bread at all. Everything on the Faith Alone menu was a symbol, not real food. Some people were pretending to eat from empty plates, laughing, and taking drinks from empty cups. Many ended up ordering Atheism because of the confusion, and then the waiter just came and dumped the people off their chair, over the cliff into the Big Empty. That, too, provided no food. At least falling into the abyss provided an initial thrill. But there was still no food, there was just waiting to hitting bottom and feeling lost. It took me a long time to realize that there was a second restaurant, one with art on the walls and music, even statues (again, not for worshipping!) and there was actual food, real food there. There were four walls and a sermon, but also a meal. It was three dimensional, too. Actually, it was four dimensions. Maybe five. Honestly, I don't even know how many dimensions there are yet. That's the exciting thing about it. There's just so much to discover, and it's timeless, endless, eternal. It's better than any drug. It's wholeness. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.whydidpetersink.com

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI died at 9:34 a.m. Rome time, today, Saturday, December 31st, 2022. On this special update episode of “Inside the Vatican,” veteran Vatican correspondent Gerard O'Connell joins host Colleen Dulle for a conversation on the emeritus pope's funeral arrangements, his legacy, and Gerry's memories of him. Joseph Ratzinger was elected pope and took the name Benedict XVI in 2005 after the long papacy of John Paul II. In 2013, Benedict XVI became the first pope in 600 years to resign voluntarily from his office, which made it possible for future popes to resign if they should find their mental or physical health failing or the weighty burden of office too much for them to bear. Benedict lived as an emeritus pope for almost 10 years, a period longer than he was pope.  This evening at the Vatican, Pope Francis said of his predecessor, “With emotion we remember his person so noble, so kind. And we feel in our hearts so much gratitude: gratitude to God for having given him to the Church and to the world; gratitude to him, for all the good he accomplished, and especially for his witness of faith and prayer, especially in these last years of his retired life. Only God knows the value and strength of his intercession, of his sacrifices offered for the good of the Church.” Read more on the life and legacy of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI at americamagazine.org. Links from the show: Pope Benedict XVI, defender of orthodoxy defined by historic resignation, dies at 95 Pope Benedict's theological legacy: An Augustinian at heart who influenced the course of Vatican II and beyond Pope Benedict XVI's devotion to the Eucharist: A key to understanding his life and theology Pope Francis will preside at Benedict's funeral in St. Peter's Square on Jan. 5 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael Kelly, editor, The Irish Catholic; Gina Menzies, Theologian and Fr Iggy O'Donovan, Limerick-based Augustinian priest say that when Benedict stood down in 2013 due to “frailty of body and mind” he was also overwhelmed by the scale of the clerical scandals.

A key goal of eugenics in the 20th century was to eliminate genetic defects from a population. Many countries pursued this with state-led programmes of involuntary sterilisation, even murder. We unpick some of the science behind this dark history, and consider the choices and challenges opened up by the science today. In the mid-19th century, an Augustinian friar called Gregor Mendel made a breakthrough. By breeding pea plants and observing how certain traits were passed on, Mendel realised there must be units - little packets - of information determining characteristics. He had effectively discovered the gene. His insights inspired eugenicists from the 1900s onwards. If traits were passed on by specific genes, then their policies should stop people with ‘bad' genes from having children. Mendel's ideas are still used in classrooms today - to teach about traits like eye colour. But the eugenicists thought Mendel's simple explanations applied to everything - from so-called ‘feeblemindedness' to criminality and even pauperism. Today, we recognise certain genetic conditions as being passed on in a Mendelian way. Achondroplasia - which results in short stature - is one example, caused by a single genetic variant. We hear from Professor Tom Shakespeare about the condition, about his own decision to have children despite knowing the condition was heritable - and the reaction of the medical establishment. We also explore how genetics is taught in schools today - and the danger of relying on Mendel's appealingly simple but misleading account. Contributors: Dr Brian Donovan, senior research scientist at BSCS; Professor Tom Shakespeare, disability researcher at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; and Dr Christine Patch, principal staff scientist in Genomic Counselling in the Society and Ethics Research group, part of Wellcome Connecting Science. Music: Jon Nicholls Presenter: Adam Rutherford Producer: Ilan Goodman

This weeks episode include answers to the following questions: Where in the bible verse that states Lucifer was a lead worship angel in Heaven before being casted out , & that had music instrument on him? I Love the church, but why don't feel apart of it? Why do almost all evangelical churches here in Philippines teach tithing? If by believing in God and accepting him we are promised to go to heaven, what is the importance of judgment day? Will it make a difference in how we will live in heaven and what our rewards will be? What Christian denominations publicly reject the false Augustinian doctrine of eternal hell? Quite clear in the Bible they gathered together on the first day of the week. Funny thing man wants the credit & Catholics want the credit but God is in control. Search the scriptures & the holy spirit I find it incomprehensible that the Catholic Church call a marriage invalid from the beginning after an annulment is granted. How is it invalid or is it like so many of their rules, made up as you go? How many times does the bible say He/Jesus would never leave you? My friends tell me ALL THE TIME what it feels like to feel the holy spirit living in them. How do you know if its inside you? They say its indescribable and id have to feel it for yourself. How/why? Is Invitro fertilization right with God?

This is The Briefing, a daily analysis of news and events from a Christian worldview.Part I (00:13 - 10:04) ‘American Couples Didn't Let Pandemic Isolation Go to Waste.': Fertility Rates in U.S. See First Major Decline Reversal Since 2007The Great Pandemic Baby Bump by The Atlantic (Jerusalem Demsas)Part II (10:04 - 15:51) New Dad, Does It Feel Like the Birth of Your Firstborn Child Shrank Your Brain? — Turns Out, That's Exactly What's Happened (And It's a Good Thing) Becoming A Father Shrinks Your Cerebrum by The EconomistPart III (15:51 - 18:26) How Do We Consistently Address Hard Issues From the Culture With Our Kids Without Discouraging Them? — Dr. Mohler Responds to Letters from Listeners of The BriefingPart IV (18:26 - 20:51) Should Adultery Be Illegal? What About Homosexuality? — Dr. Mohler Responds to Letters from Listeners of The BriefingPart V (20:51 - 26:11) What Do You Mean When You Refer to Yourself as Augustinian? — Dr. Mohler Responds to Letters from Listeners of The BriefingPart VI (26:11 - 28:15) What Language Did Adam and Eve Speak? — Dr. Mohler Responds to a Letter from a 9-Year-Old Listener of The Briefing Sign up to receive The Briefing in your inbox every weekday morning.Follow Dr. Mohler:Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | YouTubeFor more information on The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, go to sbts.edu.For more information on Boyce College, just go to BoyceCollege.com.To write Dr. Mohler or submit a question for The Mailbox, go here.

October 16: Saint Hedwig, Religiousc.1174–1243Optional Memorial; Liturgical Color: WhitePatron Saint of brides, widows, and SilesiaA wife and mother spreads the faith like a bishopOn every limb of the tangled branches of Saint Hedwig's family tree sits a duke, landgrave, prince, king, queen, and count. The roots of Hedwig's aristocratic tree likewise spread up and down the hills and valleys of Europe's heartland. Her uncles, aunts, brothers, sisters, nieces, and nephews occupied duchies, governed dioceses, sat on thrones, ran monasteries, and reigned over realms large and small in the medieval core of Christendom. Hedwig was born in a castle to a duke. At the age of twelve, she married a duke, Henry the Bearded of Silesia, a region straddling present day Poland, Germany, and the Czech Republic. Hedwig lived when the mortar in the walls of Europe's castles was still wet, and their moats still freshly dug. She and her kind, the early nobility of Europe, correctly understood that culture and Catholicism were synonymous. To bring the Church to a people just stepping out of the darkness of paganism was to bring hospitals, monogamy, the Mass, literacy, knowledge, schools, law, monasteries, farms, care for the poor and widows, and the hope of the Gospel. Hedwig understood this perfectly. She unapologetically promoted the faith of Jesus Christ because it was as good for the people as it was for God.Hedwig bore her husband seven children. She and Henry were a generous couple who personally cared for the sick, founded and patronized hospitals, and who promoted Catholicism through the establishment and endowment of religious houses. They established Cistercian, Augustinian, Premonstratensian, Dominican, and even very early Franciscan foundations. After their last child was born, Duke Henry and Hedwig took a mutual vow of chastity before their bishop and lived mostly apart. Henry received the tonsure and let his beard grow long. Hedwig moved close to the convent of Trebnitz, in present day Wrocław, Poland, which she and Henry had previously founded. It was the first women's religious house in Silesia and part of Henry and Hedwig's broader effort to develop Christian life and German culture throughout Central Europe.After Henry died in 1238, the widow Hedwig took the grey habit of the Cistercian nuns at Trebnitz Abbey, where her daughter Gertrude was abbess. It was likely not easy for Hedwig, the mother, to live in obedience to her very own daughter. Hedwig did not, however, take formal religious vows, because her wealth was still needed to support the monastery. But Hedwig otherwise lived the austere life of prayer, mortification, fasting, and poverty, which the monastic community itself lived. Early biographies relate that Hedwig also performed miracles, saw into the future, and had the gift of prophecy, even foretelling her own date of death.Saint Hedwig did not kiss the chains of her captivity, bleed to death as a martyr in the arena, or boycott her womb as a vowed and perpetual virgin. She was the wife of a powerful man and the mother of a large family. She walked the wide and well-traveled road of marriage and family domesticity. And it was along that path that she found holiness, carried the burdens of the Church's mission on her shoulders, and left a legacy of church building normally associated with an indefatigable bishop. This wife and mother was canonized in 1267 and is buried near her husband in the abbey church at Trebnitz, where she last closed her eyes in 1243.Saint Hedwig, your missionary fervor helped build the church in your native land. May your tireless work be an example to all the faithful to use whatever station in life they occupy as a platform to better know love, and serve God and His Church.

Outline:IntroductionRepentance Replaced by Ritual A New Form of Money-Changers Abuse of the Eucharist A Wicked and Neglectful Priesthood The Reformed Churches Preach True Repentance The Whole World? Nothing New: The Faithful are Called Heretics The Tone Police Regulative Principle of Worship Impoverished Prayer Life Eucharistic Practice and Theology Church Government Rome Is The Shepherding Movement Writ Large Peace, Peace, When There is No Peace – No Fruit, No Fruit, When There is Fruit Division Respecting Authority Must We Wait For Obstinate Clerics? Exhortations to Reformers ConclusionSaint Athanasius ChurchContra Mundum SwaggerVideo VersionFeller of Trees Blog (Transcript)

This is a Guided Discussion titled “Speaking of God: Discerning the Limits of Philosophy” led by Onsi Kamel. Onsi is the former Editor-in-Chief of Davenant Press. This talk was delivered at the 2022 National Convivium hosted at Davenant House in Landrum, SC. Onsi holds MA degrees from The University of Chicago and Princeton Theological Seminary. Onsi is a first-year Ph.D. student in philosophy and religion. His primary research interests lie in metaphysics and epistemology, the history of philosophy, historical theology, and intellectual history. His prior research has encompassed themes including theological anthropology, Augustinian conceptions of the passions and the soul, early modern and Cartesian metaphysics and physics, Protestant theology and its relation to secularity, and Western missionary endeavors in Egypt.

* The Infidel Guy: also known as atheist Reggie Finley, whose family appeared on ABC's program Wife Swap, discusses the existence of God with Bob. This debate lasted four hours. Today we air part 2. * Atheists vs. Conscience: Atheists claim that varying cultural norms disprove that God instilled a conscience in all of us mankind. However, Bob demonstrated with Reggie that atheists are themselves so influenced by Augustinian philosophy that they have a hard time acknowledging the obvious role that man's free will has in his behavior, whether individual or corporate. * Evidence for Conscience: Even the hardened criminal like the murdering leader of a drug cartel, objects if another man: steals from him, tries to murder him, bears false witness against him, or commits adultery with his woman. So that the conscience God put in our hearts, knowing the difference between right and wrong, can typically be discerned even in a sociopath like Adolph Hitler. Atheists like Reggie Finley exaggerate the degree to which human beings disagree on right and wrong. Thou protesteth too much, Reggie, claiming that God hasn't revealed to you right and wrong. * Homosexuals and Dogs: Reggie fell into a trap by using the typical liberal argument that homosexuality is defensible because some animals are homosexual. Bob then mentioned some of the horrendous behavior of animals. For example, some of them gang rape their females, some start devouring other animals while they are still alive, and some eat their own young. Thus, the argument that homosexuals behave like pigs and dogs easily backfires. This segment ended with Reggie saying, "I don't know where you're going with this." Reggie, the answer to that question is: Bob just refuted your point. Today's Resource: If you enjoyed these segments of Bob's atheism debate with Reginald Finley, you'd probably learn a lot and really have fun hearing the entire four-hour debate on our Bob Debates Atheist Reginald Finley MP3 CD or instant download. We're also throw in a bonus. On Reggie's InfidelGuy.com website, he lists 22 arguments against the existence of God. We suggested to Reggie that we could avoid a wandering discussion that gets bogged down by using his list of arguments as an outline, such that he could go through the whole list, and make all twenty-two arguments as Bob responds to each. Reggie said he would rather have the unstructured discussion, which was fine with us. However, we asked a member of Denver Bible Church who is a former atheist to role play Reginald Finley in studio to give Bob the opportunity to illustrate how a biblical worldview provides strong rebuttals to Reggie's answers! So we've included that material also for a total of six hours of apologetics training learning how to respond to an atheist!

* The Infidel Guy: also known as atheist Reggie Finley, whose family appeared on ABC's program Wife Swap, discusses the existence of God with Bob. This debate lasted four hours, and next week's BEL program airs the second segment. * Atheists vs. Conscience: Atheists claim that varying cultural norms disprove that God instilled a conscience in all of us mankind. However, Bob demonstrated with Reggie that atheists are themselves so influenced by Augustinian philosophy that they have a hard time acknowledging the obvious role that man's free will has in his behavior, whether individual or corporate. * Evidence for Conscience: Even the hardened criminal like the murdering leader of a drug cartel, objects if another man: steals from him, tries to murder him, bears false witness against him, or commits adultery with his woman. So that the conscience God put in our hearts, knowing the difference between right and wrong, can typically be discerned even in a sociopath like Adolph Hitler. Atheists like Reggie Finley exaggerate the degree to which human beings disagree on right and wrong. Thou protesteth too much, Reggie, claiming that God hasn't revealed to you right and wrong. * Homosexuals and Dogs: Reggie fell into a trap by using the typical liberal argument that homosexuality is defensible because some animals are homosexual. Bob then mentioned some of the horrendous behavior of animals. For example, some of them gang rape their females, some start devouring other animals while they are still alive, and some eat their own young. Thus, the argument that homosexuals behave like pigs and dogs easily backfires. This segment ended with Reggie saying, "I don't know where you're going with this." Reggie, the answer to that question is: Bob just refuted your point. Today's Resource: If you enjoyed these segments of Bob's atheism debate with Reginald Finley, you'd probably learn a lot and really have fun hearing the entire four-hour debate on our Bob Debates Atheist Reginald Finley MP3 CD or instant download. We're also throw in a bonus. On Reggie's InfidelGuy.com website, he lists 22 arguments against the existence of God. We suggested to Reggie that we could avoid a wandering discussion that gets bogged down by using his list of arguments as an outline, such that he could go through the whole list, and make all twenty-two arguments as Bob responds to each. Reggie said he would rather have the unstructured discussion, which was fine with us. However, we asked a member of Denver Bible Church who is a former atheist to role play Reginald Finley in studio to give Bob the opportunity to illustrate how a biblical worldview provides strong rebuttals to Reggie's answers! So we've included that material also for a total of six hours of apologetics training learning how to respond to an atheist!

Long time, no see! Matt has been very busy with his PhD work and hasn't had the time to sit down and record. We do have plans to produce more consistent content. In the meantime, enjoy, rate and review the podcast on iTunes and share this with friends. Welcome to the Reformed Classicalist. This is the audio format of Matt Marino's lectures, classes, and sermon series found on YouTube and elsewhere. Find out more, at https://www.reformedclassicalist.com

Full Text of ReadingsSaturday of the Twenty-Third Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 442All podcast readings are produced by the USCCB and are from the Catholic Lectionary, based on the New American Bible and approved for use in the United States _______________________________________The Saint of the day is Saint Thomas of VillanovaSaint Thomas was from Castile in Spain and received his surname from the town where he was raised. He received a superior education at the University of Alcala and became a popular professor of philosophy there. After joining the Augustinian friars at Salamanca, Thomas was ordained and resumed his teaching–despite a continuing absentmindedness and poor memory. He became prior and then provincial of the friars, sending the first Augustinians to the New World. He was nominated by the emperor to the archbishopric of Granada, but refused. When the see again became vacant he was pressured to accept. The money his cathedral chapter gave him to furnish his house was given to a hospital instead. His explanation to them was that “our Lord will be better served by your money being spent on the poor in the hospital. What does a poor friar like myself want with furniture?” He wore the same habit that he had received in the novitiate, mending it himself. The canons and domestics were ashamed of him, but they could not convince him to change. Several hundred poor came to Thomas's door each morning and received a meal, wine, and money. When criticized because he was at times being taken advantage of, he replied, “If there are people who refuse to work, that is for the governor and the police to deal with. My duty is to assist and relieve those who come to my door.” He took in orphans and paid his servants for every deserted child they brought to him. He encouraged the wealthy to imitate his example and be richer in mercy and charity than they were in earthly possessions. Criticized because he refused to be harsh or swift in correcting sinners, Thomas said, “Let him (the complainer) inquire whether Saint Augustine and Saint John Chrysostom used anathemas and excommunication to stop the drunkenness and blasphemy which were so common among the people under their care.” As he lay dying, Thomas commanded that all the money he possessed be distributed to the poor. His material goods were to be given to the rector of his college. Mass was being celebrated in his presence when after Communion he breathed his last, reciting the words: “Into your hands, O Lord, I commend my spirit.” In his lifetime Thomas of Villanova was already called “the almsgiver” and “the father of the poor.” He was canonized in 1658. Thomas of Villanova's liturgical feast is celebrated on September 22. Reflection The absent-minded professor is a stock comic figure. Thomas of Villanova earned even more derisive laughs with his determined shabbiness and his willingness to let the poor who flocked to his door take advantage of him. He embarrassed his peers, but Jesus was enormously pleased with him. We are often tempted to tend our image in others' eyes without paying sufficient attention to how we look to Christ. Thomas still urges us to rethink our priorities. Saint of the Day, Copyright Franciscan Media

(After a Wordle and cheating discussion) we return to Charlegmane and begin to discuss the emergence and creation of "Christendom." An important point we address is the influence of Augustinian thought on the the thought of the Middle Ages and in particular Charlemagne. Significantly we still see this shaping power of Christendom in our culture today.

Is your preacher/pastor an Augustinian Preacher. We will examine the nuances that show us that Augustine was Psychotic and deranged. 

Where in God in the midst of evil and suffering? Percolating on Faith is exploring various theodicies that attempt to answer this question. Today, they are focusing on Augustine's Theodicy and how he approached sin, suffering, and calamities.  Host: Carla LongGuest: Tony and Charmaine Chvala-Smith

Peter is a political activist, most famously as a pioneering member of ACT UP — the grassroots AIDS group that challenged and changed the federal government. He founded both the Treatment Action Group (TAG) and the educational website AIDSmeds.com. An old friend and sparring partner, he also stars in the Oscar-nominated documentary “How to Survive a Plague.” Check out his memoir, Never Silent: ACT UP and My Life in Activism.You can listen to the episode — which gets fiery at times — in the audio player above (or click the dropdown menu to add the Dishcast to your podcast feed). For two short clips of my convo with Peter — on how he and other AIDS survivors turned to meth, and Peter pushing back on my views of critical queer theory in schools — pop over to our YouTube page. There’s also a long segment on just the monkeypox stuff. If that episode isn’t gay enough for you, we just posted a transcript of the episode last year with Katie Herzog and Jamie Kirchick. Both of these Alphabet apostates were on Real Time last month — here’s Jamie:Katie appeared alongside this clapped-out old bear:Come to think of it, two more Dishcast alums were on the same episode of Real Time last month — Michael Shellenberger and Douglas Murray:Oh wait, two more in June — Cornel West and Josh Barro:We now have 20 episodes of the Dishcast transcribed (check out the whole podcast archive here):Bob Woodward & Robert Costa on the ongoing peril of TrumpBuck Angel & Helena Kerschner on living as trans and detransKatie Herzog & Jamie Kirchick on Pride and the alphabet peopleDominic Cummings on Boris, Brexit and immigrationCaitlin Flanagan on cancer, abortion and other Christmas cheerGlenn Greenwald on Bolsonaro, woke journalists and animal tortureJonathan Haidt on social media’s havocYossi Klein Halevi on the origins of ZionismFiona Hill on Russia, Trump and the American DreamJamie Kirchick on the Lavender ScareJohn McWhorter on woke racismJohn Mearsheimer on handling Russia and ChinaRoosevelt Montás on saving the humanities Michael Moynihan on Afghanistan and free speechCharles Murray on human diversityJonathan Rauch on dangers to liberalismChristopher Rufo on critical race theory in schoolsMichael Shellenberger on homeless, addiction and crimeCornel West on God and the great thinkersWesley Yang on the Successor IdeologyA Dishcast listener looks to last week’s episode and strongly dissents:I enjoyed your interview with Matthew Continetti. Unfortunately, an exchange at the end reminded me of why I had to reluctantly tune you out for years: your hero worship of Obama. I respect and admire the way you call out the failures and excesses of both sides, including those of mine (the right), which I acknowledge were glaring even before Trump. During the Obama years, however, it was hard not to cringe when I watched you tear up on Chris Matthews’s show and compare him to a father figure. I also recall you yelling at SE Cupp and aggressively pointing a finger at her on Bill Maher’s show for daring to compare the foreign policies of Obama and W Bush:It’s hard to imagine anyone with that kind of emotional response being objective, and sadly, you never were during his presidency.You argued with Continetti that Obama was a middle-of-the-road pragmatist, when nothing could be further from the truth. He came into office with the economy reeling in a banking and housing crisis, and he took the Rahm Emmanuel approach of never letting a crisis go to waste. Even before his inauguration, he begin planning to rush through major legislation on healthcare, climate, and education. These may be worthy goals, but they are not the actions of a pragmatist who wants to govern by addressing the problems of the moment. He then outsourced the stimulus bill to Pelosi, which was a pork-filled bonanza with almost nothing even remotely stimulative. He refused to incorporate any Republican ideas into the healthcare legislation and arrogantly said to McCain that “the election’s over” when McCain voiced some opposition. Obama then lied in selling the bill to the American people by saying you would be able to keep your plan and your doctor in all cases.When Obama lost his congressional majority, he resorted to gross lawlessness, taking executive actions that exceeded his constitutional authority on everything from carbon emissions to insurance company appropriations to immigration, including on measures that were recently voted down by Congress or (as Continetti noted) he previously acknowledged he lacked the constitutional authority to do. He even flouted his ability to do this — knowing the media would cover for him — by saying he had “a pen and a phone.”Obama was one of the more divisive presidents in history. Every speech followed the same obnoxious shtick of chiding Republicans for playing politics and claiming that he alone was acting in the national interest. We saw this again, even post-presidency, during the funeral of John Lewis. For once, both sides came together, and even Republicans celebrated the achievements of a genuine American hero.  But during Obama’s speech, he turned the event into a partisan tirade about voting rights, calling the filibuster a Jim Crow relic (never mind that he used as a Senator).Finally, you argued that Republicans never gave Obama a chance. Not true. When he was inaugurated, his approval ratings were among the highest on record and were even above 40 percent among Republicans. They plummeted among Republican voters because he refused to ever take their concerns seriously or acknowledge that they had any legitimate points. When he finally did something they had even slight agreement with, the Trans Pacific Partnership, most Republicans supported him, while much of his own party opposed him.I respect your objectivity and believe that you are largely back to it. But I’m hoping the next time someone you love comes along, you will remain able to see the forest from the trees. (And sorry about the War and Peace-length email. There isn’t another intellectual I’m aware of who would actually welcome a dissent like that, which is why I wish I became a subscriber sooner.)That’s a lot of political history to litigate, but if you think I was blindly supporting Obama, read “The Fierce Urgency of Whenever,” “Obama’s Marriage Cowardice,” “Obama’s New War: Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb,” “Obama’s Two New Illegal Wars,” “Is Obama A Phony On Torture?”, “Obama Is Now Covering Up Alleged Torture,” “Obama’s Gitmo Disgrace,” “Obama To The Next Generation: Screw You, Suckers,” my reaction to his townhall comments on cannabis, “Behind the Obama Implosion,” and my excoriation of his first debate against Romney, if you remember.Obama’s healthcare proposal originally came from the Heritage Foundation; it was the most conservative measure to move us to universal healthcare access available; he passed it; and it remains the law because Republicans realized it was too popular to repeal. If that’s what you call extremism, you have a different definition of the word than I do.His stimulus was — yes — insufficient to the moment. But that’s because it veered toward a fiscal prudence long abandoned by the GOP. And he put it before any other priority. The GOP still refused to give this new president in an economic crisis any support at all, and acted as if the Bush debacle had never happened.Another listener defends the former president’s record — to a point:Obama had one chance to pass health care reform — something presidents had been trying and failing to do for several decades. In reality he had a razor-thin margin, especially in the Senate. He spent months letting moderates like Max Baucus take the lead in Congress. He gave moderate Republicans like Olympia Snowe endless time to pretend to be willing to vote for a centrist bill. Remember: this was largely RomneyCare, an already moderate Republican policy idea and one which had originally come out of a conservative think tank.In the end, no matter how much Big Pharma and other healthcare lobbies had to be bribed and how much Obama compromised — no public option; no federal negotiation via Medicare to lower drug prices — the moderate Republicans had strung him along. He had to give Ben Nelson goodies to get his vote. And, overall, as much as the bill was a corporate sellout, it still — and 12 years on it’s so easy to forget this — still made massively important reforms the public was desperate for: it expanded family access for kids up to 26; it ended the rampant abuse of preexisting conditions to deny coverage; it ended retroactive rescissions in which insurance employees were tasked to comb through patient records and fine print to find pretexts for dumping patients when they needed care the most; it ended lifetime caps on coverage for things like major early childhood diseases and illnesses and catastrophic illnesses in adults; and of course it expanded access to Medicaid (most people don’t realize how stunningly low one’s income has to be to qualify). ObamaCare, flaws and all, was necessary — and a major step forward. There was no Republican compromise to be had in 2010 or ever. Remember what Mitch McConnell said his #1 priority was? Ensuring Obama was a one-term president with no major successes to campaign on. They simply wanted the legislation to crash and burn, similar to how it did in 1994. DACA and DAPA and the rest? Very very different story. And I agree with Continetti: Obama did not have that authority and he knew he didn’t. And after the Gang of Eight fell apart, his second term was all about caving to radical, often openly ethnically chauvinistic, identitarian, open borders advocates. And that’s where the Democratic Party has been stuck ever since. Executive decisions like DACA were a big part of why I soured on the Obama administration. ObamaCare, flawed as it was, was a big reason I volunteered so heavily for Obama in 2012. We’re still not close to the kind of publicly guaranteed, universal health care virtually all peer countries and allies enjoy. But we’re closer due to ObamaCare. And that’s a clear example of what Democrats can accomplish when they’re focused on passing the best bill they can pass (by the barest of margins) for the common good. For the record (see the Daily Dish links above), I also opposed the Libya war, the Iraq surge, and the DACA executive overreach. This next reader is more sympathetic to Obama on DACA:Deporting kids who have never known another country has a 19 percent approval rating. Obama begged Congress for years to do something to correct this. So is the Continetti position that Obama needed to do something that more than 80 percent of Americans don’t want because far-right extremists are holding Boehner hostage? If that is your position, then it’s fundamentally undemocratic.Another clip from last week:Yet another take on the Continetti convo:I’m a moderately liberal person, and I listen to conservative voices to hear good arguments that make me consider more deeply my innate biases. But the conservatism described by Continetti is just uninteresting. Describing the 1964 Civil Rights Act as too large an overreach? Talking about constitutionalism in the same way that Alito does — as frozen, depending upon the section, in either 1789 or 1868? Dissing Obamacare?Obamacare is a big improvement on pre-ACA insurance, and I’m glad Obama persevered after Ted Kennedy's death. Healthcare has a lot of moving parts, but finally we have an individual insurance market with plans as good as those in the employer group market. My kids have used it at various times switching between jobs and school, or even instead of a law school's highly mediocre plan. One of my biggest problems with Biden is that he hasn’t even managed to get the subsidy income limit, which was lifted by the pandemic relief bill, made permanent. My biggest problem with Biden is that I expected that he’d be able to negotiate with someone like Manchin, who’s dim but probably willing to support something. Cranking up the ACA subsidies and funding some solar panel research and LWTR reactor prototypes, with the work being done in part in West Virginia?  It can’t be that hard to cut some deal. Instead, we seem to have nothing.So, until the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs, I figured the Dems would get wiped out in '22 and '24. I figured the combination of trans-positive teaching in lower schools and race essentialism everywhere would lead to races like the Virginia governor election, where someone with a sane approach to schools would dominate. Dobbs may change all that.  From a small sample of Republican suburban voters I know, a lot of people are furious at the Court’s decision. They rightly view it as an ignorant decision that makes even pregnancy for wealthy women in red states far more dangerous than it was, since a partial miscarriage with lots of bleeding — not a rare event by any means — will now require sign-off from a hospital’s legal staff before a lifesaving D&C can be performed, by which time a pregnant woman may well be dead. And while Republicans typically don’t mind making life miserable for poor people (fun fact: a family of four has to have an income below $4,700 per year to get Medicaid in Mississippi), f*****g over the upper middle class will not go over nearly as well.Keeping with the abortion theme, another reader:This caught my eye in your most recent podcast email: “[T]he question of when human life becomes a human person is a highly debatable one.”First, thank you for stating the issue correctly! The issue is NOT when HUMAN LIFE begins. Science has answered that question definitively: at conception. It’s not a “theory,” religious or philosophical doctrine or anyone’s “opinion,” and it’s not debatable. We may not know everything that happens during conception, but no embryologist denies that it’s the beginning of human life. The term “person” is not scientific, and that’s why I avoid using it when debating abortion with non-believers. As I’ve noted before, the term “person” arose out of debates about the relations among the Three Persons of the Trinity in the run-up to the council of Nicea. Before that, the Latin term “persona” just referred to public citizenship. Slaves were not legally persons. The Christian philosophers made it into a much richer and more resonant concept, in order to explain that God could be one God but three “persons” — a way of saying that if God is Love, love is not a monism but a mode of relationality. Anyway, for purposes of modern discussion of abortion, the term “person” now means something close to what the pagan Roman meaning of “person” was: a human being legally granted rights by the state, including the right to life. In other words, some human beings are not “persons.”This distinction is morally troubling and creates issues for defenders of abortion. If it’s really up to the state to say who is or is not a “person,” why stop at the unborn? In the Roman Empire, and in later periods (including our own history, of course), slaves were not legally considered full “persons.”Is “personhood” a sliding scale, or an absolute state of being? Can you have “more” or “less” personhood? Are comatose (but stable) human beings persons, or do they lose their legal rights to life, as many seem to think? What about the conscious but mentally challenged? Do high-IQ people have more “personhood” than low-IQ people? You see where this is going, I’m sure. I’ve had many discussions about this, and there is NO criterion that denies full personhood to the unborn that cannot also be used to deny it to the already-born. I think once you hive off human rights from the status of being human, and attach them to some scientifically indefinable status like “personhood,” you go down a tricky path. Because you’re right, of course. “Personhood” is endlessly debatable, because it’s a philosophical and (ultimately) theological concept. It’s like arguing “Who has a soul, and who doesn’t?”But in our tribally inclined species, the question quickly becomes, who is “human” (i.e, like “us”) and who is “other” (i.e., not really “human”) — with the “other” not possessing the same rights. Most names of tribes for themselves translate to “the Human Beings” or “the People” — with anyone outside the tribe being less than human. (Did you ever see Little Big Man?)Of course, as a Christian I believe ALL human beings are also persons, no matter their mental state, helplessness, poverty or low social status. I also agree that all human beings are images of God. For purposes of argument with non-believers, rather than get side-tracked into personhood, I prefer to say that human rights are anchored in (inherent in) humanness, not “personhood.” This requires abortion advocates (if they have the slightest thoughtfulness or openness to engage in actual discussion) to explain how some human beings aren’t “persons” and who gets to make that determination. But any honest abortion defender who doesn’t want to deny non-contestable science must make that distinction.Here’s the difference between personhood in abortion and every other area. One person is literally inside another person’s body. In a society based on property rights, the body itself — “habeas corpus” — is central to freedom and autonomy. Another reader turns to sexuality:I was struck by one of the dissents you ran last week: “No mention of the 63 million babies who were murdered in the last 49 years, but oh how well you stand up for women and their right to have as many one-night stands as they want without consequences, guilt, or their morality even being questioned.”The second half of that sentence is so interesting. The dissenter is not only offended by potential babies not being born, but also by women having sexual fun without life-altering consequences. To the dissenter, one-night stands are an evil (at least, on the part of the woman), and going through a public pregnancy (look at her! shame!) and having babies (no career for her!) is the least punishment the female participants should deserve. The lost babies are bad, but even worse, look at what all those loose women are getting away with!I’ve always had a sneaking suspicion that some part of the opposition to abortion in this country is actually driven by people who want to bring back 1950s prudery. They see abortion as an evil precisely because it allows more sexual pleasure — and even more galling, more sexual pleasure on the part of women (because this 1950s prudery so often seems to carry 1950s misogyny along with it). Of course we know many abortion opponents are deeply moved by love for potential babies that aren’t born, but this dissenter shows there’s at least one person out there celebrating Dobbs for the renewed opportunities abortion bans will provide to scare women out of sex or, failing that, shame them and derail their careers as punishment.Another reader turns the focus to me:For some context, I am a Christian who has spent most of my life in the evangelical subculture, but I am more moved in worship by liturgical forms. I am politically anti-Trump and I am abhorred by the current state of the Republican Party, though I am a lifelong Republican. Call me David French-like.I am responding to your dissent from the conservative writer and your comment that consent between adults is the sole limiting factor in sexual behavior. You have likely been asked and answered this question many times, so just send me a link if that’s easier for you: Since you are a Christian, what role does the Bible and/or church teaching have in your understanding of human sexuality? One could argue that in addition to consent, the Bible speaks of fidelity, monogamy, love, nurture, self giving, mutual submission, and adoration in sexual relationships. How do you treat the foregoing characteristics (or others) in your sexual ethic? Does your Christian faith have any role to play in your sexual ethics?I enjoy your writing and the Dishcast, keep it up. Guest suggestions: Kevin Williamson. (He had deep dissents on gay marriage, but culturally that train has left the station, and as you know, he has the added benefit of having been fired by The Atlantic three days after hiring — an early example of cancel culture by the insulated Left). Also Jonah Goldberg.I responded to some of these points on the main page. But I’ve written much more widely on this question — and I recommend Out On A Limb for the rest. The essay “Alone Again, Naturally,” comes closest to answering. But I do not share orthodox Christianity’s Augustinian terror of the body and its pleasures. Your guest suggestions are always appreciated: dish@andrewsullivan.com. Here’s one more from a “20-year Dishhead writing for the first time”:I think Iain McGilchrist would be a great guest for the pod — and for TWO episodes, since the ideas in his recent work are so vast, complex, and far-reaching. (I encountered his earlier book on the Daily Dish.) It seems like IMcG is really working to get out his incredibly important, expansive, but very difficult project out and a couple of good conversations with you would be a great way of doing that, not to mention fascinating for us Dishcast listeners.Thanks for everything that you and Chris are doing with The Weekly Dish — trying to help us all think clearly and openly. My wife and I both appreciate having your voice in our lives each week. She especially likes the dissents!Subscribe to read them all — along with everything else on the Dish, including the View From Your Window contest. There are also gift subscriptions if you’d like to spread the Dishness to a loved one or friend — or a frenemy to debate the dissents with. Get full access to The Weekly Dish at andrewsullivan.substack.com/subscribe

July 15: Saint Bonaventure, Bishop and Doctor1221–1274Memorial; Liturgical Color: WhitePatron Saint of those with intestinal problemsHe seemed to have escaped the curse of Adam's sinThe scholarly heft of Saint Bonaventure legitimized the eccentric Saint Francis of Assisi. Saint Bonaventure was to the Franciscans what Thomas Aquinas was to the Dominicans. These contemporaries form twin summits of scholastic thought, first-rate intellectuals whose eminent writings lent their young, revolutionary religious orders credibility. Aquinas and Bonaventure received their doctorates on the very same day and are shown as equals in Raphael's Disputation of the Holy Sacrament. Both Thomas and Bonaventure were also pious, poor, humble, and holy, giving their theological work even greater weight. Saint Bonaventure was part of that huge influx of second-generation Franciscans who never knew their founder. He joined the order in 1243, received his doctorate in theology from the University of Paris, and became master of the Franciscan school at Paris in 1253. In 1257 he was elected minister general of the entire Franciscan order. He was just thirty-six years old.The pressing responsibilities of religious leadership constrained Bonaventure from total dedication to the life of the mind. He had limited time to read, write, and do research once he was elected head of his order, making the first half of his life his most prolific period of scholarship. But that scholarship was so comprehensive as to be a complete system of thought. He wrote on everything—fundamental theology, the nature of dogma, Scripture and history, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, angels, creation, the virtues—and all of it was suffused with a mature spirituality focused on the individual soul progressing toward God. With this intensely spiritual focus, Bonaventure is said to be more Augustinian in his theology than Aquinas, who is more Aristotelian. The former's goal was to love, the latter's to speculate and to know. Bonaventure's writings on dogma were influential at the Council of Trent and continue to be read.Bonaventure led his order in a period of sharp tension among Franciscans over the legacy of Saint Francis. Should the order own property directly or just use property owned by others? Should the brothers be educated and teach or remain simple and only preach? Should the brothers live in the growing cities of the medieval world or stay in the country like Francis himself? Should the brothers in Northern Europe be allowed to wear shoes or must they go barefoot like Saint Francis commanded? These, and many other questions, cleaved the body Franciscan. Many of the diverse interpretations of Francis' legacy were unresolvable, and, in the early sixteenth century, the order morphed into three entities, each embodying a particular spiritual emphasis.Saint Bonaventure navigated these sharp tensions with great skill. His erudition, great patience, and love of others sewed the diverse patches of Franciscanism into a whole cloth. He had to chastise, punish, and correct too. But he was outstanding in listening to every side before making his final decisions. That Franciscanism survived is thanks to today's saint, who has been called the Franciscans' “Second Founder.”In 1273 Bonaventure was made a cardinal bishop by the pope. Knowing of this Franciscan's humility and his refusal to accept a previous episcopal appointment, the pope inserted into his bull an order that Bonaventure could not decline the honor. Bonaventure was in the kitchen washing dishes when the papal envoys arrived with the news. Saint Bonaventure died with his boots on, while participating in and aiding the pope at the Council of Lyon in 1274. Aquinas had died on the way to the same Council. Bonaventure was buried in Lyon, canonized in 1482, and declared a Doctor of the Church in 1557. Unfortunately, his tomb was desecrated by French Protestants and revolutionaries in later centuries, and his body has been permanently lost. His first professor at Paris, Alexander of Hales, gave him a supreme compliment. He said that Bonaventure “seemed to have escaped the curse of Adam's sin.”Saint Bonaventure, you had few equals in knowledge, love, prayer, and virtue. Through your heavenly intercession, help all Catholics to progress toward union with God by the many paths you yourself walked so long before us.

July 4: Saint Elizabeth of Portugal1271–1336(Celebrated July 5 in the U.S.A.)Optional Memorial; Liturgical Color: WhitePatron Saint of widows and victims of adulteryA widowed queen embraces Sister PovertyBeautifully placed in the center of a graceful arch, behind the high altar in the Franciscan convent of Saint Clare in Coimbra, Portugal, is an impressive silver and glass sarcophagus. Circular windows cut into the upper portion of the finely wrought box allow the pilgrim to peer down into its contents. You see rumpled printed cloth. You struggle to discern what else you are looking at. But then...you see…the form of a body, covered by a shroud. It is her. You are looking at a sleeping queen, Saint Elizabeth of Portugal. Only a hand protrudes from under the cloth. It is a right hand. It is visible. It is white. It has refused decay. It is incorrupt. The rest of her body? Only God knows, and maybe the local bishop.Today's saint was also known as Elizabeth of Aragon. She was born into a royal Spanish family with a saint in its bloodline. Saint Elizabeth of Hungary was her great aunt and namesake. In a pious age, the piety of today's Saint Elizabeth stood out. She loved the Lord and all that it meant to be Catholic. She was wed to the King of Portugal at a tender age, moved to his land, and had a family with him. The holy child Elizabeth became the holy adult Elizabeth. She involved herself in matters of war, state, and politics. But she was more concerned with her own soul, the poor, and the sick.Elizabeth had the luxury of leisure due to her wealth and noble status. She could dedicate time to Mass, to prayer, and to her spiritual exercises. Her resources of time and money also allowed her to assist the poor, which she did generously, even to the annoyance of her husband, the King. It is easy to say that money doesn't matter when you have money. Only people with money, in fact, say that money is not the only thing. Money did not matter to Elizabeth, precisely because she did not lack it. She simply gave it away. And she fortified her financial generosity with her personal example of prayer, fasting, poverty, and holiness, edifying her people. She was not an advocate of social justice, but justice. She did not promote charitable giving, but living charity itself.After her husband died and her children were grown, she entered the convent of the Poor Clares, which she herself had founded in Coimbra. She took vows as a Third Order Franciscan, abandoned her royal status, and lived in obscurity with the other sisters. Coimbra had a long attachment to the Franciscans. It is the city where Fernando of Lisbon, an Augustinian, decided to become Anthony, a Franciscan, the future saint whose shrine is in Padua. Saint Elizabeth's choice to become a lay Franciscan shows just how far and wide the influence of Saint Francis of Assisi was felt, even among the upper classes. The Queen of Portugal gives away her wealth, cares for the poor and the sick, is devoted to the Sacraments, actively promotes peace in her domain and in her family, establishes a female Franciscan convent, and herself becomes a Franciscan, and all within one hundred years of Saint Francis' death. After Elizabeth had given away all that she had, she gave away herself, and then there was nothing left to give. She was a model Catholic Queen.Saint Elizabeth of Portugal, help us to see all wealth, of time or money, as a gift and an opportunity to serve the Lord and our fellow man. You promoted peace in your realm and in your family, in the spirit of Saint Francis. Help us to do the same.

A common phrase among Christianity is "The resurrection of the body." Is that a Scriptural idea or another Augustinian deception? We'll examine that in this message. 

This lecture was given on April 5, 2022 at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. For more information on upcoming events, please visit our website at www.thomisticinstitute.org. About the speaker: Dr. Chad Pecknold received his PhD from the University of Cambridge (UK) in 2005 and since 2008 he has been a Professor of Historical & Systematic Theology in the School of Theology at The Catholic University of America in Washington, DC. Pecknold has authored or edited five books, each relating the thought of St. Augustine to modern philosophical and theological reasoning, including, Transforming Postliberal Theology (2005), The Promise of Scriptural Reasoning (2006), Time, Liturgy, and the Politics of Redemption (2008), Christianity and Politics (2010) and the T&T Clark Companion to Augustine and Modern Theology (2014). He teaches in the areas of fundamental theology, Christian anthropology, and political theology. In fundamental theology he brings Augustine's rejection of skepticism and embrace of metaphysical accounts of causality to bear on modern skepticism and metaphysical agnosticism. In Christian anthropology, Pecknold focuses especially on 20th century nature-grace disputes, and the relationship between Augustinian and Thomistic distinctions between natural and supernatural orders. In political theology, Pecknold is principally concerned with close readings of Augustine's masterwork, The City of God, as a fundamental and transcendent vision that inspires, and has the power to critique and correct, the dynamics of Western civilization. Professor Pecknold is also a frequent contributor to debates in the public square. He writes weekly columns as the U.S. Contributing Editor to The Catholic Herald, one of the oldest Catholic magazines in the world, and also writes regularly for other publications, such as First Things, Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, and National Review on a range of timely topics related to the importance and impact of Church teaching on social and political questions. Professor Pecknold is frequently sought after for his opinion on current events, and has been quoted in hundreds of news outlets around the world such as The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. He has appeared as an invited guest on radio and television shows from NPR's “All Things Considered” to EWTN News Nightly offering his clear analysis and expert opinion on the Catholic Church, the papacy, and the relationship between the Church and politics in American culture. Pecknold serves on the Editorial Board of The Catholic University of America Press, and also co-edits with Fr. Thomas Joseph White, O.P., their celebrated Sacra Doctrina series. He serves as an Associate Editor for the English Edition of the international Thomistic journal of theology, Nova et Vetera. He serves as Chairman of the Academy of Catholic Theology, and has the honor of serving as a Fellow of the Institute for Human Ecology at Catholic University. Dr Pecknold is currently writing a book on a Catholic understanding of Augustine's City of God.

June 13: Saint Anthony of Padua1195–1231Memorial; Liturgical Color: WhitePatron Saint of lost articlesHe mastered the Word of GodSaint Anthony of Padua is a famous Franciscan saint especially honored at an impressive shrine in Padua, in Northern Italy. But he was not born as Anthony, was an Augustinian priest before he became a Franciscan, and was from Lisbon, Portugal, not Italy. Saint Anthony, along with Saint Bonaventure, another early Franciscan, lent theological heft to the somewhat esoteric movement founded by Saint Francis of Assisi. Saint Francis was uniquely sensitive and eccentric, unsuited to leadership, and vexed by the need to exercise authority. It was Saints Anthony and Bonaventure who gave the Franciscan Order credibility, who anchored it in sound theology, and who assured its survival and continued growth.Today's saint was baptized Fernando and grew up in a privileged environment in Lisbon. He received a superior education and entered the Augustinian Order as an adolescent. While living in the city of Coimbra, he met some Franciscan brothers who had established a poor hermitage outside of the city named in honor of Saint Anthony of the Desert. Young Father Fernando was very attracted to their simple way of life. From these friars, he also heard about the martyrdom of five Franciscan brothers at the hands of Muslims in North Africa. These martyrs' bodies were ransomed and returned for burial in Fr. Fernando's own abbey in Coimbra. Their deaths and burials were a life-changing moment for him. The Augustinian Fr. Fernando asked, and received, permission to leave and join the Franciscans. At that point he adopted a new religious name, Anthony, from the patron saint of the hermitage where he had first come to know the Franciscan Order.The newly christened Father Anthony then set out to emulate his martyr heroes. He sailed for North Africa to die for the faith or to ransom himself for Christians held captive by Muslims. But it was not to be. Anthony became gravely ill, and, on the return voyage, his ship was providentially blown off course to Sicily. From there he made his way to Central Italy, where his education, mastery of Scripture, compelling preaching skills, and holiness brought him deserving renown. Paradoxically, it was because Anthony received excellent training as an Augustinian that he became a great Franciscan. Saint Francis himself soon came to know Father Anthony, a man whose learning legitimized the under-educated Franciscans. Saint Francis had been skeptical of scholarship, even prohibiting his illiterate followers from learning how to read. Francis feared they would become too prideful and then abandon their radical simplicity and poverty. Saint Francis only reluctantly, several years after founding his Order, allowed some of his brothers to be ordained priests. He had originally relied exclusively on diocesan priests to minister to his non-ordained brothers, and he distrusted his followers who aspired to the honor of the Priesthood. The presence of Anthony, and later Bonaventure, changed all that.In time, Father Anthony became a famous preacher and teacher to Franciscan communities in Northern Italy and Southern France. His knowledge of Scripture was so formidable that Pope Gregory IX titled him the “Ark of the Testament.” In Anthony's Shrine in Padua, a reliquary holding his tongue and larynx recall his fame as a preacher. These organs had not disintegrated even long after the rest of his body had returned to dust. Saint Anthony is most often shown either holding the Child Jesus in his arms or holding a book, a lily, or all three. His intercession is invoked throughout the world for the recovery of lost items and for assistance in finding a spouse.Anthony died at the age of just thirty-five in 1231, about five years after Saint Francis had died. He was canonized less than one year later. In 1946 Saint Anthony was declared a Doctor of the Church due to the richness of his sermons and writings. He was conscious as he succumbed to death. In his last moments, the brothers surrounding his bed asked him if he saw anything. Saint Anthony said simply, “I see the Lord.”Saint Anthony of Padua, we seek your powerful intercession to have the right words on our lips to inspire the faithful and to correct and guide the ignorant. Through your example, may our words also be buttressed by our powerful witness to Christ.