Is spiritual direction really for everybody?

St. Teresa and her director, St. John of the Cross

The Holy Father recently spoke these words to the students of the Teresianum in Rome: “As she has never failed to do, again today the Church continues to recommend the practice of spiritual direction, not only to all those who wish to follow the Lord up close, but to every Christian who wishes to live responsibly his baptism, that is, the new life in Christ. Everyone, in fact, and in a particular way all those who have received the divine call to a closer following, needs to be supported personally by a sure guide in doctrine and expert in the things of God. A guide can help defend oneself from facile subjectivist interpretations, making available his own supply of knowledge and experiences in following Jesus. [Spiritual direction] is a matter of establishing that same personal relationship that the Lord had with his disciples, that special bond with which he led them, following him, to embrace the will of the Father (cf. Luke 22:42), that is, to embrace the cross.” (read the full text here)

It would seem that Pope Benedict XVI believes that every Christian adult must avail himself of spiritual direction in order to reach perfection in Christ. Certainly, this would come as a surprise to many, since there are relatively few Catholic faithful (even among the most devout) who regularly engage in spiritual direction. Indeed, we must admit that, if every Catholic were to seek formal spiritual direction, there would hardly be enough priests and other spiritual persons to serve as directors! Even if every priest were as devoted as St. John Vianney, I doubt that there would be enough time for him to offer personal formal spiritual direction to each and every member of his flock.

Still, the Holy Father has spoke and we must seek to understand the meaning of his words. Are we to conclude that spiritual direction is for all Christians? What sort of direction? And how much is needed?

Did Jesus know the day and the hour of the Apocalypse?

In the midst of the recent apocalypse fiasco, it was not uncommon to hear well-meaning preachers state that “No one knows the time of the end of the world. Not even Jesus knew when the second coming would be, that’s why he said no one knows, not even the Son.” Indeed, even many Catholics have a tendency to think in this way – whether explicitly or (more often) by an implicit concession.

Thus, it may come as a surprise to many to learn that this claim (that, in his humanity, Jesus did not know the day and the hour of the Final Judgment) has been condemned by several popes as a heresy. In fact, it would be impossible to hold this view without implicitly maintaining either the heresy of Nestorius (dividing Christ into two persons, one human and the other divine) or of Arius (denying the divinity of Christ all together).

The specific heresy which claims that Jesus did not know the exact time of his second coming is called Agnoeticism – Fr. John Hardon defined the Agnoetes (those who held this heresy) as follows, “A sect of Monophysites who held that Christ was subject to positive ignorance. The leading exponent of its error was Deacon Themistios of Alexandria. He was condemned by the Church, which declared that Christ’s humanity cannot be ignorant of anything of the past or of the future. To attribute ignorance to Christ’s human nature is to profess Nestorianism (Denzinger 474-76).” (Modern Catholic Dictionary, “Agnoetes”)

Are there two personalities in Christ, a human "I" and a divine "I"?

It is popular for modern(ist) theologians to speak of two personalities in Christ. Some have gone so far as to claim that there are two persons in Christ – and, to us, it is difficult to understand how such speculation on the part of certain scholars has not yet been openly condemned as heresy.

On account of the one person of Christ, the Church prays in her Creed: I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ. This means not only that Jesus Christ alone is the Lord, but also implies that he his one. Christ the Lord is one, he is not two – thus, though he is both human and divine, Jesus is one divine person which is the person of the Eternal Word.

Still, it is common enough for these modern theologians to speculate regarding the personality of Christ, they ask: Granted that the Lord is one person; is it yet possible to claim that there are two personalities, one human and one divine? We admit that the Church has not yet pronounced on this issue; however, for reasons which will be manifest below, we argue that it is not safe for a Catholic to suppose that there are two personalities in the one person of our Savior.

How Jesus is the Way, and how he is the Truth and the Life. On the Gospel for the 5th Sunday of Easter

5^th Sunday of Easter, John 14:1-12

I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Our Savior tells St. Thomas the Apostle, I am the way, and the truth, and the life (John 14:6), but we might ponder in what sense the Lord is each of these three. Is Christ the Way in the same sense that he is the Truth and the Life? What is it about the Lord that makes him to be the Way, and what makes him to be the Truth and the Life?

The greatest Catholic biblical scholar and theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas, plumbs the depths of this mystery as he comments on this verse from St. John’s Gospel. As we consider our Savior’s words, under the guidance of the Angelic Doctor (cf. Vatican II, Optatum Totius 16), we will find who our Lord wants to be for us, and who we are called to be in him.

What John meant when he said: "I am not worthy to unfasten the sandals of his feet", or How the Old Testament is revealed in the New

He that hath the bride, is the bridegroom. (John 3:29)

Thursday in the 4^th Week of Easter, Acts 13:13-25

As John was completing his course, he would say, “What do you suppose that I am? I am not he. Behold, one is coming after me; I am not worthy to unfasten the sandals of his feet.”

At the synagogue of Antioch in Pisidia, St. Paul spoke to the Jews and those who were God-fearing, proclaiming to them the Gospel of Christ. Beginning with the exodus of the people of Israel and their entrance into the promised land, the Apostle goes on to speak of Saul and finally of David from whose line came the Christ. St. Paul places the Savior entirely within the context of his Jewish heritage as the one who has fulfilled the promises of the Law and the Prophets. In this speech we see the famous dictum at work: “The New Testament lies hidden in the Old and the Old Testament is unveiled in the New.” (CCC 129)

In the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, the Church heard St. Paul’s speech in today’s first reading. St. Paul concludes his sermon with a reference to St. John the Baptist’s words, Behold, there cometh one after me, whose shoes of his feet I am not worthy to loose (Acts 13:25, cf. John 1:27). As we consider these words more carefully, we will recognize that this is a subtle reference to the Law of Moses – and we realize that, in unexpected ways, the Old Testament often shines much light on the New.

St. John I, an Easter Pope and foundation of Ecclesial Communion

St. John I, 52nd successor to St. Peter

Pope St. John I was a great defender of the truth of the divinity of the Son of God and died on May 18^th in the prison of the Arian King Theodoric at Ravenna in 526, having served the Church as Supreme Pontiff for two years, nine months and seven days. His remains were translated to the Basilica of St. Peter in Rome on May 27^th, the day in which his feast is commemorated in the Usus Antiquior.

Additionally, this holy pontiff worked to maintain unity between the East and the West and helped to establish the current mode of calculating the date of Easter (in the Latin Church).

The Easter debate, in brief

By the time of Pope St. John I, it had already been determined that the yearly calculation of the date of Easter would be somewhat independent of the date of Jewish Passover – insofar as Easter would always fall on a Sunday, even when the Passover fell on another day. Still, there was diversity of opinion as to just how independent the Church should be from the Jewish traditions.

Were Moses, Elijah, John the Baptist, and all who came before the Lord, thieves and robbers?, on the Gospel of the 4th Sunday of Easter

4^th Sunday of Easter, John 10:1-10

All who came before me are thieves and robbers

How can it be that the Lord would declare that all others, as many as have come, are thieves and robbers (John 10:8)? Is it true that all who came before are untrue and are blind leaders of the blind? What shall we say of Abraham, Moses, and Elijah? What of John the Baptist? Were these thieves and robbers? Certainly not!

It is clear enough, especially from the context of our Lord’s words, that those others, those who came before, those whom the good Shepherd calls thieves and robbers, these are the Pharisees who bound up heavy burdens for the people but did not lift a finger themselves. The Pharisees and Sadducees and all those who come not from God but from the world, these are the hireling whose own the sheep are not, who seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and flieth. Indeed, these ones are nothing less than wolves in sheep’s clothing.

Moses and Elijah are not among these. But how can it be that all who came before are said to be thieves, while Elijah who is come (i.e. John the Baptist) is not a thief?