Christus Rex 2019

My college housemate recommended an article in Harper's Magazine. This was years ago when I was in college. It haunts me still to this day. More than tension, what stays with me was a challenge. The story centers around a paint factory owner. One day, he walks out. It was mid-sentence to his secretary. He quit the paint factory. The rest of the article explores this idea: the necessity of the inner life. This factory owner would go on to explain his actions. He claimed to only ‘act’ crazy. It was a show for the benefit of others. He owned a successful business. Why would anyone want to leave that life of success? Answer: Because they're crazy. That magazine piece was old. Slouka wrote it at the turn of the century. It resurfaced in the past few weeks. There's this show that also deconstructs "crazy." (Disclaimer: This show is not for everyone. My endorsement is not of the characters' morality. Rather, it's the honesty which they portray how they inevitably fail. Plus, it's musical comedy.) Central to the plot is one question: How can I be happy? The show presents the consequences of that pursuit. What are the many ways we grasp at happiness? In a broken world, it is often destructive. This has St. Augustine written all over it.

[Q]uia fecisti nos ad Te Domine, et inquietum cor nostrum in Te.

This is my long way of an explanation. My original plan was to update every other week. That's what Ignatius asked his brothers. I'm a week off. There are a few reasons for this. First, it's about my catechism project. Circumstances made it clear that i won't meet my deadline. That is, my arbitrary self-imposed deadline. This frustrated me because it felt like defeat. My motivation plummeted. On NET you give 110% 24/7. It's still muscle memory to perform that way. This seems crazy: feel guilty that I don't do NET missionary work when I'm not a NET missionary. It’s wasteful not to continue to use those skills. The witness of saints helped me put this into perspective. Many Old Testament figures had opportunity to feel like failures. They never saw the fruit of their work. That is, they never saw them while alive. The saints are no exception. Thus, I might not be crazy wasteful. In fact, what if it's the opposite? Maybe it's this expectation of successful productivity that's crazy.

There is still room for healthy skepticism. It may yet be my lack of effort to blame. Though, there are signs in my favor. First, there are no catechisms to buy. The Australian publisher pulled all of their copies. It turns out, they will print a new edition. They won't be available for another few months. It didn't matter if I funded the project. The books wouldn't be available for me to buy anyway.

Then, the kicker is this glory story. We established that I didn't get any traction. Nobody wanted in on the catechisms. But before that revelation, I gushed. I talked to anyone and everyone about the catechism. This included one night with a NET alum's family. It turned out to be a mini-retreat. The night even had small group discussion. There was even a taste of praise and worship. The glory story was what the father related to me. A few weeks go by after the 'retreat'. The father explains my impact on the youngest son. After that night, the son wouldn't put down his catechism. Mind you, he was too young to read it. But it seems he held on to that green monster. He goes up to his mother. 'Where does it say about pro-life?' She of course obliges him. (It's CCC 2271 - 72.) That was special for me. It proved to me that I can still evangelize. The only way to describe that was joy. It's incredible to smudge my spiritual fingerprints everywhere. Our faith is smart. Now that young man has answers. Fides quaerens intellectum.

Just what answers does the catechism hold? This is where we call back to my original premise. The catechism is beautiful in its organization. (The logistics alone to write make this a near miracle.) There are two 'tables' to the dimensions of the faith. The first is what God does. That is, in particular, what He does for us. In a phrase Bishop Baron uses fondly: It's the theo-drama which is in opposition to the ego-drama. It's God's story vs my story. Life deems me 'crazy' if the main actor is me.

But God sings creation into existence. Things don't make sense without him. When you forget what God is about, you're lost. Your actions look ridiculous. You're crazy. But God's song is so much more beautiful. The creed is like the melody of the song. There are many layers to a song. That includes harmony and percussion. At the core, though, is the melody. The creed systematizes the universals of our belief. Its power lies in the development of doctrine. You can embellish melody to your heart's content. The same is true of doctrine. Its the church's duty to cut what's out of tune. And God's song reveals something incredible. The singer wants his song to sing. That may sound non-sensical. But it makes about as much sense as Isiah. "Your builder wants to marry you." (Is 62:5) This has direct consequences on our human dignity. Here, the catechism presents my favorite line of tradition.

[Man] is "the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake."

CCC 356

Divine revelation never tires of this story. God is the love of a trinity of persons. Out of that love He creates man. God calls all humanity into that communion of love. He provides everything to facilitate that communion. That grace is the gift of the sacraments to us. The singer gives his song musical instruments. All sacraments sweep us into this divine life. That's where frustrations often lie. Life doesn't make sense and we're crazy. That's only when we forget the singer and the song. God is the principle actor. "It is not you who loved me, but I who loved you." (1 Jn 4:10)

So, what's our response? Is our only purpose to receive? It's easy to perceive that our actions don't matter. What part do we play in this song? What is the second table of the catechism? The short answer is freedom. The fuller exploration is for another post.

In Christ's peace,

jp