Howdy, Folks!

Welcome to JimmyAkin.com, the new home of JimmyAkin.org!

For some time I’ve been working on this upgrade of my site, and–in fact–I’m still putting some of the final pieces in place, but I am at a point where it makes sense to publicly launch it. Think of this as the shakedown cruise phase, before the grand opening (if I may mix metaphors).

I hope you like the new site! It contains all the back content from my blog, JimmyAkin.org (although I still have to get the most recent comments imported). When finished,it will have all the content of my former web site, (the original, 1990s version of JimmyAkin.com), which you can still reach by clicking here.

I’m also planning on adding new functionality, which the new, WordPress environment will allow me to do in a way that my former, TypePad site would not.

Thanks to all who have suggested moving to WordPress. I’m glad that I have, and I see lots of potential with WordPress.

BTW, if you haven’t yet joined, let me give a plug for the Secret Information Club. The form to join with is in the right hand margin, or you can go to www.SecretInfoClub.com.

Your pal,

–Jimmy Akin

The Church Year: Jan. 9, 2012

This year, January 9 is a Monday in Christmas. The liturgical color is white.

In the Ordinary Form, this is the Baptism of the Lord.

 

Saints & Celebrations:

Today, January 9, there is no special fixed liturgical day in the Ordinary Form.

There is no special fixed liturgical day in the Extraordinary Form.

For information about other saints, blesseds, and feasts celebrated today, you can click here.

 

Readings:

To see today’s readings in the Ordinary Form, you can click here.

Or you can click play to listen to them:

 

Devotional Information:

According to the Holy See’s Directory on Popular Piety:

The Feast of the Baptism of the Lord

119. Closely connected with the salvific events of the Epiphany are the mysteries of the Baptism of the Lord and the manifestation of his glory at the marriage feast of Cana.

Christmastide closes with the Baptism of the Lord. Only in recent times has the feast been rehabilitated, and hence has not given rise to any particular displays of popular piety. However, the feast presents an excellent opportunity for the faithful to be reminded of their rebirth as children of God in Baptism. The rite of asperges could be opportunely used at all Masses on this day, and homilies could well concentrate on the symbols associated with Baptism.

The Church Year: Jan. 9, 2012

09This year, January 9 is a Monday in Christmas. The liturgical color is white.

In the Ordinary Form, this is the Baptism of the Lord.

 

Saints & Celebrations:

Today, January 9, there is no special fixed liturgical day in the Ordinary Form.

There is no special fixed liturgical day in the Extraordinary Form.

For information about other saints, blesseds, and feasts celebrated today, you can click here.

 

Readings:

To see today's readings in the Ordinary Form, you can click here.

Or you can click play to listen to them:

 

Devotional Information:

According to the Holy See's Directory on Popular Piety:

The Feast of the Baptism of the Lord

119. Closely connected with the salvific events of the Epiphany are the mysteries of the Baptism of the Lord and the manifestation of his glory at the marriage feast of Cana.

Christmastide closes with the Baptism of the Lord. Only in recent times has the feast been rehabilitated, and hence has not given rise to any particular displays of popular piety. However, the feast presents an excellent opportunity for the faithful to be reminded of their rebirth as children of God in Baptism. The rite of asperges could be opportunely used at all Masses on this day, and homilies could well concentrate on the symbols associated with Baptism.

 

Secret Information Share: Purgatory

You can share this communique from the Jimmy Akin Secret Information Club of Facebook or Twitter by copying this address: http://www.jimmyakin.org/secret-information-share-purgatory.html 

Not a member of the Secret Information Club Yet? Click here to join!

 

 

 

Everyone will end up in either heaven or hell. But many who die in God’s friendship are still entangled with sin in some way at the time of their deaths. God will purify these people. They will experience the final purification that the Church calls “purgatory.” Here are seven things Pope Benedict wants you to know about it.

 

Add Me To Your Address Book!

To help ensure that you receive all email messages consistently in your inbox with images displayed, please add this address to your address book or contacts list: jimmy@secretinfoclub.com.


Share with Friends!

Secret clubs are even more fun when your friends are part of them! Forward this email to friends or encourage them to sign up at secretinfoclub.com!


Join the Club!

Not a member of Jimmy’s Secret Info Club yet? Join now and get in on all the secret information action. Sign up here!


The Fathers Know BestGet Your Copy!


Mass RevisionGet Your Copy!


The Salvation ControversyGet Your Copy!

 
#1

Jewish Roots

“This early Jewish idea of an intermediate state [between our death and resurrection] includes the view that these souls are not simply in a sort of temporary custody but, as the parable of the rich man illustrates, are already being punished or are experiencing a provisional form of bliss. There is also the idea that this state can involve purification and healing which mature the soul for communion with God. The early Church took up these concepts, and in the western church they gradually developed into the doctrine of purgatory.”

 
#2

Who Needs Purifying?

“With death, our life-choice becomes definitive–our life stands before the Judge. Our choice, which in the course of an entire life takes on a certain shape, can have a variety of forms.”

While some may be totally closed in on themselves in selfishness and evil and while others may be totally open to God, “for the great majority of people–we may suppose–there remains in the depths of their being an ultimate interior openness to truth, to love, to God. In the concrete choices of life, however, it is covered over by ever new compromises with evil–much filth covers purity, but the thirst for purity remains, and it still constantly re-emerges from all that is base and remains present in the soul.”

 
#3

Scriptural Basis

St. Paul “begins by saying that Christian life is built upon a common foundation: Jesus Christ. This foundation endures. If we have stood firm on this foundation and built our life upon it, we know that it cannot be taken away from us even in death.

“Then Paul continues: ‘Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw–each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire’ (1 Cor. 3:12-15).

“In this text, it is in any case evident that our salvation can take different forms, that some of what is built may be burned down, that in order to be saved we personally have to pass through ‘fire’ so as to become fully open to receiving God and able to take our place at the table of the eternal marriage-feast.”

 
4

What Purgatory’s Fire Might Be

St. Paul uses “images which in some way try to express the invisible, without it being possible for us to conceptualize these images–simply because we can neither see into the world beyond death nor do we have any experience of it.”

“Some recent theologians are of the opinion that the fire which both burns and saves is Christ himself, the Judge and Savior. The encounter with him is the decisive act of judgment. Before his gaze all falsehood melts away. This encounter with him, as it burns us, transforms and frees us, allowing us to become truly ourselves. All that we build during our lives can prove to be mere straw, pure bluster, and it collapses. Yet in the pain of this encounter, when the impurity and sickness of our lives become evident to us, there lies salvation.”

 
#5

Will It Hurt?

“His gaze, the touch of his heart, heals us through an undeniably painful transformation ‘as through fire.’ But it is a blessed pain, in which the holy power of his love sears through us like a flame, enabling us to become totally ourselves and thus totally of God. In this way the interrelation between justice and grace also becomes clear: The way we live our lives is not immaterial, but our defilement does not stain us forever if we have at least continued to reach out towards Christ, towards truth, and towards love. Indeed, it has already been burned away through Christ’s Passion. At the moment of judgment we experience and we absorb the overwhelming power of his love over all the evil in the world and in ourselves. The pain of love becomes our salvation and our joy.”

 
#6

Helping Those Being Purified

“Early Jewish thought includes the idea that one can help the deceased in their intermediate state through prayer (see, for example, 2 Macc. 12:38-45; first century B.C.). The equivalent practice was readily adopted by Christians and is common to the Eastern and Western Church.”

“The souls of the departed can, however, receive ‘solace and refreshment’ through the Eucharist, prayer, and almsgiving. The belief that love can reach into the afterlife, that reciprocal giving and receiving is possible, in which our affection for one another continues beyond the limits of death–this has been a fundamental conviction of Christianity throughout the ages and it remains a source of comfort today. Who would not feel the need to convey to their departed loved ones a sign of kindness, a gesture of gratitude, or even a request for pardon?”

“In the interconnectedness of Being, my gratitude to the other–my prayer for him–can play a small part in his purification. And for that there is no need to convert earthly time into God’s time: in the communion of souls simple terrestrial time is superseded. It is never too late to touch the heart of another, nor is it ever in vain.”

 
#7

Learning More

The above quotations are taken from Pope Benedict’s encyclical on Christian hope, Spe Salvi. There are more things he would like you to know about purgatory, though, so be sure to check out sections 45-48 of the document.

You can read it online here.

Also, if I may make my own small contribution to the discussion, I’ve written a book that deals with the subject of salvation more broadly and which goes into greater detail on the scriptural underpinnings of the Church’s teaching on purgatory, indulgences, etc. The book is called The Salvation Controversy, and I hope you’ll get a copy.

ORDER YOUR COPY OF THE SALVATION CONTROVERSY TODAY!

 

Pope Benedict’s Big Surprise! (Hint: About St. Paul)

Your pal,

Jimmy Akin, Secret Info Club Poobah

 

Just 2 Days Left! (I Can Still Save You $100 Or More!)

Eurodam-sm Here's the deal: Catholic Answers is currently planning it cruise for May 11-21 of next year.

It's going to go all kinds of interesting places: Italy, Spain, Portugal, etc. There will be a pre-event in Rome, and the trip itself will feature a visit to Fatima.

Now the money part: If you register for the cruise by October 28, I can save you $100 per person. (So if you take two people, I can save you $200; three people, $300; etc.)

Just put the super-secret code “Jimmy” in the “Special Request and Notes” section of your online application.

This exciting, faith-building experience would be a nice Christmas gift for you and your spouse, others in your family, or just yourself!

But remember, there's a time limit on this one, so register by October 28th so I can get you the discount!

More info here: www.CatholicAnswersCruise.com

Only 4 Days Left! (But I Can Still Save You $100 Or More!)

Eurodam-sm Here's the deal: Catholic Answers is currently planning it cruise for May 11-21 of next year.

It's going to go all kinds of interesting places: Italy, Spain, Portugal, etc. There will be a pre-event in Rome, and the trip itself will feature a visit to Fatima.

Now the money part: If you register for the cruise by October 28, I can save you $100 per person. (So if you take two people, I can save you $200; three people, $300; etc.)

Just put the super-secret code “Jimmy” in the “Special Request and Notes” section of your online application.

This exciting, faith-building experience would be a nice Christmas gift for you and your spouse, others in your family, or just yourself!

But remember, there's a time limit on this one, so register by October 28th so I can get you the discount!

More info here: www.CatholicAnswersCruise.com

Why Is Chuck Colson Sweeping Mormonism Under the Rug?

ColsonI have a lot of respect for Chuck Colson. I have ever since I was an Evangelical and learned of his work with Prison Fellowship. I listened to his radio appearances, read his writings, and admired his sincere conversion to Christ following the events of Watergate.

To my mind, he’s a good guy.

But I flat out disagree with a recent opinion piece he wrote.

Here’s what he has to say:

Presidential Religion: Enough, Already!

A few days ago I was on the air with Los Angeles’s outstanding drive-time host, Frank Pastore – a keen worldview thinker. Frank told me his phone lines have been burning up over the comments made by a prominent evangelical pastor who said that presidential candidate Mitt Romney belongs to a cult.

Should Christians vote for a Mormon? Is Mormonism a cult? Let me say right off: These questions are an enormous distraction in an important presidential campaign. The secular media is using the pastor’s comments to paint evangelicals as bigots. The Chicago Tribune is calling this “hate speech.”

I want to say this to every Christian listening to my voice: Let’s stop criticizing candidates for their religious convictions.

Where to begin with this?

I heard about the remarks that the pastor made regarding Mormonism being a cult, and I agree with Colson that this is not helpful.

But the idea that we should stop criticizing political candidates for their religious convictions? What is Colson thinking?

Suppose a candidate was a Quaker of a particularly traditional sort and a complete pacifist. He might say, “This is my sincere religious conviction,” but we would rightly criticize the idea of electing a commander in chief who was fundamentally morally opposed to the use of military force. Or name any number of other issues that a person might claim to hold as a religious conviction that would have an impact on American society should he be elected. Whether he is to be praised or criticized for that is something that not only could but should be part of political discussions.

“But,” Colson might object, “that’s not the same as talking about his basic religious affiliation.”

True, but one’s basic religious affiliation is a guide to more particular views—or at least it should be. And if it’s not, if a politician says, “I belong to this group, but I reject its fundamental teachings” then that tells us that the politician is a hypocrite, which itself tells us something about his worthiness for office. (Yes, I know it’s tempting to say, “They’re all hypocrites,” but there are degrees of hypocrisy, and the more brazen a hypocrite is, the more that says.)

But before we get too far down the road, let’s hear from Colson again:

And let me make a few things, as my former boss used to say, perfectly clear.

First, there is no religious test for public office. If you don’t believe me, check out the Constitution of the United States, Article VI, Paragraph 3. The public statements of some evangelicals that they wouldn’t vote for Romney because of his Mormonism would cause the Founding Fathers to spin in their graves.

I admire that Colson is willing to make a Nixon reference (“my former boss”) in this context. That’s a bit gutsy. But what he follows it with is complete nonsense, and—having worked as much in government and politics as he has—Colson ought to know better.

It’s true that the Constitution provides that there is not to be any religious test for public office. What that means is this: The government cannot declare you to ineligible for office on the basis of your religion.

This says nothing about whether voters may take your religion into account when determining how they would cast their votes.

Voters can take into account whatever they want in determining how to vote. That is a fundamental democratic right that the Founders wanted to protect. They would be spinning in their graves at the idea that voters should not be free to vote however they want, including according to the moral and religious values they may have.

So what’s with Colson sounding like a 1980s liberal saying that voters must not vote their faith? Back then the pretext for this claim was “separation of Church and State” (a phrase that nowhere appears in the Constitution). Colson’s “there is no religious test” is no different. Both are gross misunderstandings that discourage voters from voting their faith.

Second, as voters we are to choose the most competent people to be God’s magistrates to do justice, restrain evil, and preserve order. That’s what the Bible calls for. And in our country, where we have the precious liberty of choosing our leaders, we are responsible for picking competent men and women. See Jethro’s advice to Moses in Exodus 18. While choosing men to help him judge the people, Moses was to select first of all competent men. Those men were also to be godly – that is, men of good moral standing and character.

Here I think Colson’s Evangelical tie to sola scriptura is hindering his thought a little. The Bible doesn’t “call for” us to elect any particular sort of people to political office—not in any direct way. It doesn’t say anything about electing people to political office one way or another, because the Bible was written in a context that did not include modern representative democracies.

That’s not to say that there are not moral principles that are to be applied in electing officials. There most definitely are, and these are in various way and to varying degrees expressed and reflected in Scripture, but Colson overclaims what the Bible actually says regarding the popular vote.

He’s right, though, that we are “to choose the most competent people to be God’s magistrates to do justice, restrain evil, and preserve order,” but technical competence is not enough. Elected officials also must not have a corrosive effect on society in other ways.

Colson’s appeal to Jethro’s advice to Moses in picking assistant judges is also odd. Colson summarizes that these assistants “were also to be godly—that is, men of good moral standing and character.”

This flattens out the definition of what “godly” means. The text of Exodus 18 says that they are to be “men who fear God.” The true God, that is. Not goat idols or other pagan conceptions of divinities that were around in their day. These men were not to be polytheists.

Yet Mormonism’s polytheism is precisely what Colson is asking us to overlook in this case.

What effect would it have had if Moses had chosen the worshippers of goat idols to assist him in his judging duties—however otherwise of “good moral standing and character” they were?

It would have a corrosive effect on the faith of the children of Israel and would have further damaged their relationship with the true God.

Third, let me answer the question that is causing so much angst. Is the Mormon faith Christian? No. It is not. There are significant and un-reconciled doctrinal differences between Mormonism and Christianity, like the sole sufficiency of Christ and the exclusivity of the Bible.

For me to say there are such differences is not “hate speech.” To deny that there are differences would be disrespectful of the truth claims made by Mormons and degrades my own truth claims. No one in good conscience can do that.

Okay, good for Colson that he recognizes Mormons (or “the Mormon faith”) is not Christian. And while he’s right that they do not acknowledge “the sole sufficiency of Christ” or “the exclusivity of the Bible” (awkward phrases Colson is using to avoid rejecting Catholics as Christians—he’s prepared to say that we recognize Christ’s sufficiency and the Bible’s uniqueness in a way that Mormons do not), he’s missing the big one.

Chuck: Mormons are polytheists. They believe that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are three different gods, that there are countless other gods besides, and that somewhere there is a “God the Mother” with whom the Father celestio-biologically reproduced Jesus.

Further, they believe that we are the same species as the gods and that by being a good Mormon you can grow up to be a divinity with your own planet of billions of people worshipping you.

Worse, they claim that actual Christianity is a false and degraded, apostate Christianity. That they are the true, restored Christianity.

They are therefore polytheists of a type that goes way beyond ancient paganism. Back then apotheosis was reserved for the emperor or the pharaoh, but more importantly polytheists did not claim to be Christians, much less to be the only true expression of Christianity with actual Christianity being a theological perversion.

Mormonism thus subverts the core doctrine of Christianity (the doctrine of God), passes off true Christianity as a counterfeit, and holds itself out to the public to be the genuine article.

Having said that, there may be no other group of people I appreciate more as co-belligerents than the Mormons. They are stalwarts on life, traditional marriage, and religious liberty issues.

So let them be co-belligerents. That doesn’t mean making one of them commander in chief, or that it’s wrong or a “distraction” to question whether it’s wise to make one commander in chief.

To sum up, I’m with Luther, who reportedly said that he would rather be governed by a competent Turk than an incompetent Christian.

Now I’ve never publicly endorsed a candidate, and I’m not doing it now. But I would personally vote for a competent nonbeliever who would protect life, liberty, and marriage, before I would vote for an incompetent Christian—or even a competent one—who would not stand for those overriding moral issues.

Our ultimate decision has to be based on what Augustine taught. We must live obediently in the City of Man as the best of citizens, doing our civic duty, which includes voting responsibly, as a reflection of our primary citizenship in the City of God.

Where does this leave us? Come on: Stop talking about the candidates’ religion. It’s distracting and it marginalizes Christianity in the public debate. Let’s continue instead to work to advance the Kingdom of God and pick, to the best of our ability, a candidate of competence and sound character who will preserve order and promote justice in our land.

I appreciate that Mormons share many social and moral values that make it possible for us to stand with them on many issues, such as abortion, marriage, and others. And I’m happy to work with them on that basis.

But there are other candidates who also share those values, and some of those other candidates would not have the corrosive effect on American religious life that an election of a Mormon to the highest office in the land would.

Remember: Mormonism is a faith that rejects the central doctrine of the Christian faith while passing itself off as the true Christian faith, to the exclusion of all actual Christians.

Electing a Mormon president would further confuse and already deeply confused American public about what Christianity is. It would do enormous disservice to the cause of Christ in America, and that must be added to the scales in weighing other issues, whether they are abortion, marriage, taxes, the economy, or whatever else.

If you don’t believe me about the mainstreamizing effect electing a Mormon would have, look at what has happened to the social situation of Catholics since 1960, when John Kennedy was elected. Catholics are vastly more socially and politically accepted now than they were then. Electing a Catholic president had an effect on how Americans perceived Catholics. There are vastly fewer Americans today who claim that Catholics aren’t Christians than there were in 1960. The difference is that Catholics are Christians, together with their Protestant brethren.

Mormons are not, and it does neither them nor the American public a favor to offer the legitimization that comes with the presidency.

Public opinion is impacted by the law. Making abortion legal made people look more favorably on abortion than they did before.

It is also impacted by who gets elected. People rally around their leaders, and if a Mormon were elected president it would confer a new legitimacy on Mormonism that would even further confuse the American public about what Christianity is.

That’s not a “distraction” from the political debate. It’s an item that must be part of it.

What do you think?

PODCAST 016 Confessing Sins You Meant to Commit but Didn’t; Tattoos for a Purpose; the Rapture

Click Play to listen . . .

or you can . . .

Subscribe_with_itunes
CLICK HERE! 

. . . or subscribe another way (one of many ways!) at jimmyakinpodcast.com.

 

SHOW NOTES:

 

JIMMY AKIN PODCAST EPISODE 016 (10/16/11)

www.CatholicAnswersGala.com (register by Oct. 19 and be automatically entered to win a FREE iPad 2 loaded with Catholic Answers audio and video).

www.CatholicAnswersCruise.com (register by Oct. 28 and put the secret code “Jimmy” in the Special Requests and Notes section of your online application and save $100 *per person*).

 

* ANONYMOUS ASKS ABOUT CONFESSING SINS YOU MEANT TO COMMIT BUT DIDN’T

* BOB FROM FLINT ASKS ABOUT GETTING A TATTOO FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE

* JACK FROM ARDMORE ASKS ABOUT THE RAPTURE

 

WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION? WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO ASK?

Call me at 512-222-3389!

jimmyakinpodcast@gmail.com

www.jimmyakinpodcast.com

 

Today’s Music: Eine Kline Nachtmusik (JewelBeat.Com) 

Copyright © 2011 by Jimmy Akin

  JimmyAkinWeb600-3