One thing I think OCIA would be well-advised to take into account in shepherding souls through the process of conversion to the Faith is the question, “Are you seeking to become a disciple of Jesus Christ, lay down all your agendas, and obey him as such, or are you looking for him to be your mascot and bless some diagram you have about how the Catholic Church is supposed to be the Religious Arm of Western Civilization or your social reform project?”
If it’s the latter, then the person is not undergoing conversion, they are simply looking to cannibalize the Faith and use it to accessorize a purely earthly project which still takes priority over the will of Christ. This applies to both MAGA and liberal attempts to co-opt the Faith, but in this hour, it applies overwhelmingly to the MAGA attempt to co-opt the Faith.
So, for instance, when the extremely public Catholic Vice President of the United States lets the world know he is following Nazis on social media, that is not an accident. It’s a signal, not least to other Catholics, of his contempt for the Faith and his will to use it as a means to satanic power, not to obey it. If you take him seriously as a disciple of Christ instead of an antichrist enemy, you are a fool.
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits. (Mt 7:15–20)
“[W]e do want, and want very much, to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but failing that, as a means to anything – even to social justice [or MAGA secular messianic conquest of liberalism-MS]. The thing to do is to get a man at first to value social justice [or MAGA secular messianic conquest of liberalism-MS] as a thing which the Enemy demands, and then work him on to the stage at which he values Christianity because it may produce social justice [or MAGA secular messianic conquest of liberalism-MS]. For the Enemy will not be used as a convenience. Men or nations who think they can revive the Faith in order to make a good society might just as well think they can use the stairs to Heaven as a short cut to the nearest chemist’s shop” – Uncle Screwtape
Advertisement
5 Responses
It’s annoying when recent converts try to be more Catholic than the Pope.
I was involved in OCIA over many years, both as a sponsor for someone entering the Church (twice) and as a guest presenter in many parishes when the OCIA curriculum called for instruction in the Church’s teaching on charity and justice. I have seen so many drift away in the years after full reception. I have seen parish-based team members with deep devotion but whose politics were so antithetical to the example of Jesus. More than anything, though, I have seen adults with a look and an affect of being unmoored and adrift, searching for a safe harbor, unsure about what they were getting into.
This reflects something that’s been on my mind for a while.
Over time, I’ve come to think that there is a large segment of Christians who don’t actually believe in God. I’m not saying that they’re atheists, but I don’t think they conceptualize God as an actual person; it’s more like they’ve bought into a system of sorts, where they can use its rules and exploit its loopholes to their own advantage.
Ironically enough, I often feel like I have a more honest relationship with the Catholic Church as an outsider than many of these professed Catholics do; its like their outward piety is a thinly-veiled mask to cover up their utter and complete depravity.
If right-wing Catholicism were the only source I had for what the Catholic Church was supposed to be and what it stood for, I would be forced to conclude that it was an enterprise spawned from the deepest pits of Hell, that deserved to be burned to ground for the sake of everything that is good in this world.
Thankfully, there are blogs like yours and others, which I wouldn’t even say are “progressive” because its not even about politics. Its more like there being other “normal” commentators out there, who are not playing this game of “gotcha by the rules, so now I can engage in complete sociopathy”.
Sorry for the length, but these are thoughts I have often while reading and considering related topics:
“…or are you looking for him to be your mascot and bless some diagram you have about how the Catholic Church is supposed to be the Religious Arm of Western Civilization or your social reform project?”
Yes, and all the other ways we fail to put God at the center, too. As you said – MAGA or liberal, and also licentious or scrupulous, lustful or puritanical, foolish or sophist, etc. Not diminish how big of a current problem elevating MAGA over God is, but to emphasize there is much that OCIA needs to cover, and it has to start with the foundational elements. It seems like a non-trivial percentage come through it with a hazy impression even of the parts that are black and white, such as the precepts of the Church.
Prudence in political matters is more challenging, and this is nothing new. I see parallels in politics today and how a quip about a “troublesome priest” led others to martyr St. Thomas Beckett’s, with even a cleric joining in the violence. Similarly, since this is where I am in the Bible in a year podcast, how after King Saul died, Jo’ab thought he could score political points with King David by murdering Saul’s cousin Abner, eliminating one of David’s former rivals and settling a personal score. Jo’ab had done what was right in his own eyes, confident he had picked the right side. In contrast, David had refrained from challenging Saul’s family for rule of Israel until he had asked the Lord what he should do, and received an answer.
One clear element is the common human tendency to overly commit to decisions. It’s one thing to support a political candidate with major flaws, because you believe they at least have some good ideas, while any other viable candidates also have major flaws, and seem like they have fewer good ideas. It’s another thing to then give in to the temptation, which I know I have experienced often, to perceive criticisms of that candidate as criticisms of you personally, and end up defending their flaws for the sake of defending your prior decision, rather than acknowledging the flaws, differentiating from the good things you want to defend, and still calling on the politician correct their flaws and uphold the good promises they made.
How we address these things with others matters: demonizing those who believe they made a reasonable prudential judgement, or even those who outright believe they picked the best candidate almost never works. As far as I have seen, it instead usually makes it worse, because the normal human defense mechanism against attacks is to create distance or barriers, making them even less willing to consider the points that need to be made.
The form that is the biggest challenge for me personally is when others don’t merely disagree with my prudential judgement, but refuse to forgive me for it. I do get things wrong sometimes. Sometimes (often) another person’s assertion that I was wrong does not address my reasons for the decision, so it doesn’t change my judgement. Sometimes it does change my judgement, and that is the worst of all, because we now agree, and I regret it, but they still insist on condemning me. At those times, it is very hard to resist the temptation to distance myself from them by reverting back to my incorrect judgement.
So injecting heated sermons into OCIA classes to the effect that anyone present who might have voted for a candidate who later enacts a policy of summary execution of suspects of non-violent crimes is morally culpable as an accomplice to murder and going to hell if they don’t repent is likely to have the same effect as heated sermons about not saving yourself for marriage is a stain on ones purity that can’t be undone and will send them to hell if they don’t repent: If they aren’t really committed to joining the Church, they’ll drop out of OCIA and be further away from its teachings; or if they are committed, they might turn out like Jo’ab and want to rid the Church of their adversaries.
I will admit, there’s no perfect option, because some people are naturally more prone to feel attacked and fight or fly. Some are more prone to deafness to their faults, and won’t recognize the point of important teachings unless it is made clear with (charitable) bluntness.
Notice that the ones who visited the baby Jesus were the “magi”, not the “maga”.