Close Encounters of the Weird Kind (Jack Chick)

A reader writes:

I just read your latest in "This Rock" about your encounter with Jack Chick.  Wow.  What a weird experience that must have been.  It was weird just reading about it.  I’m impressed with how you maintained a charitable disposition.  I don’t think I could have even approached the man for fear of getting beligerent with him.  I can’t help but laugh at how the encounter must have appeared to him through his lense of paranoid narcissism (or is it narcissistic paranoia?).

I noted in my blog (http://flyfishinggalilee.blogspot.com) that the article reminded me of one of those cordial meetings in a casino (or similar setting) between James Bond and his current arch-nemesis.  You should start introducing yourself as "Akin….James Akin."  🙂

What sort of film was he releasing?  Will you be reviewing it on your website or in "This Rock?" 

Thanks. Meeting Jack Chick was a truly surreal experience. I hope folks will check out the article on it in This Rock (it will also be put on the Web . . . eventually). Chick’s film, The Light of the World, is a standard presentation of the gospel as Chick understands it (with a few dashes of anti-Catholicism thrown in). I have a standing invite to review it for DecentFilms.Com,and I’ll post a link here when it gets done.

Incidentally, since Chick is such a recluse that he doesn’t let his picture be taken, I realized that I am now one of the few people who knows what he looks like. As a result, I decided to draw a picture of him–comic book style, of course! Here ’tis:

First Things First . . .

I wanted to thank everybody who prayed for my BBC interview. I know it helped.   The interview went very well. I think that the people were a little opposed to the movie when I showed up, but after talking through their concerns I thought I sensed them warming up on the subject. We were also able to establish a rapport as a group, and I cracked them up a number of times (off camera).
I was surprised how long the interview took. They only had one camera but wanted to create the illusion of having more than one, so we basically did the whole interview three different times with different camera angles (that’s besides the pre-interview the reporter did with me before we started taping), plus some additional coverage footage of me or the host talking. The whole thing took over two hours. What they actually broadcast will be distilled down from that. All of this for what is supposed to be a 5-7 minute segment on the BBC’s Heaven and Earth Show. I wonder how long it would have taken if they wanted a full hour! Anyway, thanks again! Your prayers were much appreciated!

Sundays in Lent: Part V

A reader writes:

Lent is a time of following the Lord’s 40 days and 40 nights in the desert; a time of self-denial and penance, leading to new life at Easter. The point of this time period is to spend 40 days in spiritual discipline. If you count from Ash Wednesday to Holy Saturday (inclusive), but excluding Sundays, you arrive at 40. Again, the point is to spend 40 days of penance before Easter. That the number 40 neatly fits within the technical bounds of Lent is not, it seems to me, the point. Counting in this fashion is yet another support to the notion that Sundays, though certainly within the season of Lent, are not observed as days of penance, but rather days of celebrating the Lord’s Day.

It is true, poetically speaking, that "Lent is a time of following the Lord’s 40 days and 40 nights in the desert; a time of self-denial and penance, leading to new life at Easter." However, the Church’s law does not appear to support the claim that "The point of this time period is to spend 40 days in spiritual discipline . . . before Easter." As noted above, there are more than forty penitential days in this period, and penitential days are days of spiritual discipline. I don’t think that the Church would regard any particular number of days as "the point," but it has established more than forty in this period.

It is true that "If you count from Ash Wednesday to Holy Saturday (inclusive), but excluding Sundays, you arrive at 40," but this does not correspond to the Church’s law. One can say that "Counting in this fashion is yet another support to the notion that Sundays, though certainly within the season of Lent, are not observed as days of penance, but rather days of celebrating the Lord’s Day," but this posits a false opposition between Sunday being a day of celebration and Sunday being a day of penance. It can be, and during Lent is, both.

The Church’s law is clear that Sundays in Lent both involve the celebration of the Resurrection and the practice of penitence. The penitential practice of the Church is even reflected in the liturgy on Sundays of Lent, as illustrated by the fact that the Gloria and the Alleluia are omitted, purple vestments are worn, and special readings (e.g., this coming Sunday is the "unless you repent you also will perish" passage). It’s also worth noting that, as the General Instruction provides, "Rose may be used, where it is the practice, on Gaudete Sunday (Third Sunday of Advent) and on Laetare Sunday (Fourth Sunday of Lent)" (GIRM 346f). The standard interpretation of the use of rose vestments on Laetare Sunday is that it is a lessening of the penance that is already in place.

The decisive fact, though, is simply that the law (quoted above) provides that "The penitential days and times in the universal Church are every Friday of the whole year and the season of Lent." It doesn’t say "except Sundays."

Hope this helps!

Sundays in Lent: Part IV

A reader writes:

For whatever it may be worth…

Ash Wednesday (inclusive) through Holy Saturday (inclusive), less Sundays, would yield a count of 40 days.

So, if you’re skipping Sundays (dealt with in another post), you could say that there are 40 penitential days between Ash Wednesday and Easter. Note, though, that this little system would consider the Solemnities of Saint Joseph and the Annunciation as 2 of the 40 days – hardly days of penance in most minds.

I appreciate the effort and ingenuity involved in this solution, but it does not appear to correspond to the Church’s law. It is true that "if you’re skipping Sundays (dealt with in another post), you could say that there are 40 penitential days between Ash Wednesday and Easter," but one would be making up one’s own rules to get this total. The Church’s law is different on this point. According to the Code of Canon Law:

The penitential days and times in the universal Church are every Friday of the whole year and the season of Lent [Canon 1250].

The limits of the season of Lent are defined as follows:

"Lent runs from Ash Wednesday until the Mass of the Lord’s Supper exclusive [General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar 28].

This means, as we saw below, that Lent includes forty four days of penance. If you want to have the number of "penitential days between Ash Wednesday and Easter," then the total will be forty five because Good Friday is also a day of penance under Canon 1250. (Holy Saturday, while it is a day on which fasting is recommended, is not technically a days of penance in the law.)

Sundays in Lent: Part III

A reader writes:

The suspension of penitential practice on Sundays, I would think, is more than just one option among many. I would say that the Catholic devotional and liturgical tradition, taken as a whole, inveighs against any attempt to practice penance on the Lord’s Day.

In the Liturgy of the Hours, every Sunday of Lent begins with this reading from Lauds:

Today is holy to the Lord your God. Do not be sad, and do not weep; for today is holy to our Lord. Do not be saddened this day, for rejoicing in the Lord must be your strength! (Nehemiah 8: 9, 10).

The disposition demanded by this reading seems incompatible with normal penitential practices. Your take on the matter?

I would say that "inveighs" is too strong a term, especially when one is speaking of "any attempt to practice penance on the Lord’s Day" (see below on Sundays as days of penance). I also would say that "demands" is too strong a term for what the reading from Nehemiah is doing regarding our dispositions. The disposition described in Nehemiah is applicable to a particular historical situation, and the Liturgy of the Hours holds it up to us as something to be emulated to the extent our situation mirrors the one in which it was demanded–a mirroring which is only partial.

I would say, however, that the nature of Sunday as the day of commemorating the Resurrection of Our Lord makes it reasonable and even suitable to modify penitential practices on that day. It is certainly more reasonable to lessen penitential practices on Sunday than it would be, for example, on Monday. So if you are going to lighten up on yourself on a weekday of Lent, that would be the day to do it. However, Sundays remain days of penance, and if someone chooses to continue their Lenten penitential practice on Sundays while still celebrating it the way that the Church envisions it according to law, I cannot fault the person. I’m not going to tell someone who has decided to give up ice cream and television for Lent that they must plop themselves down in front of the tube with a bowl of Haagen-Dazs.

Sundays in Lent: Part II

Are Sundays part of Lent? This question often arises because of the custom (mentioned in Part I) of many people giving themselves a break from penance on Sundays in Lent.

The answer is yes, Sundays are part of Lent. Here is the definition of Lent from the General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar:

Lent runs from Ash Wednesday until the Mass of the Lord’s Supper exclusive [no. 28].

There’s nothing in that about Sundays not counting, so Sundays are indeed part of Lent.

Sundays in Lent: Part I

A correspondent writes:

Ok i am doing the 40 day’s of Lent. And i was jus wondering if on Sunday you had to follow your lenten schedule?? Thanks.

Since giving up something for Lent (or doing extra penitential practices beyond abstinence on Fridays and fast and abstinence on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday) is voluntary, you can decide for yourself whether you want to do something on Sundays. Many people do not do any penances on Sunday as a way of celebrating Our Lord’s Resurrection.

Hope this helps!

The Length of Lent

How many days are there in Lent? Let’s count!

Every year this question comes up. People hear about Lent being forty days long, but when they look at a calendar this clearly isn’t the case. Since we’ve just quoted the official definition of the start and stop of Lent, let’s look at a calendar and count up the days. Here is the whole of Lent for 2004:

FEBRUARY

22 23 24 25
Ash Wed.
1
26

2

27

3

28

4

29
1st Sun.
5
           

MARCH

  1

6

2

7

3

8

4

9

5

10

6

11

7
2nd Sun.
12
8

13

9

14

10

15

11

16

12

17

13

18

14
3rd Sun.
19
15

20

16

21

17

22

18

23

19

24

20

25

21
4th Sun.
26
22

27

23

28

24

29

25

30

26

31

27

32

28
5th Sun.
33
29

34

30

35

31

36

     

APRIL

        1

37

2

38

3

39

4
Palm Sun.
40
5

41

6

42

7

43

8
Holy Thur.
44
9
Good Fri.
10
Holy Sat.
11
Easter Sun.
 
12 13 14 15 16 17

In this calendar, the days of Lent are counted in red. As you can see, there are forty four of them, counting Holy Thursday as one of the days (technically, only the part of Holy Thursday before the beginning of the Mass of the Lord’s Supper is Lent; once the Mass of the Lord’s Supper begins the season becomes Triduum).

Now a couple of notes:

  • The fact that the calendar above is for 2004 does not matter. Neither does the fact that a Leap Year intervenes between Ash Wednesday and Holy Thursday. The reason is that Ash Wednesday is always a fixed number of Sundays before Holy Thursday (six Sundays, counting Palm Sunday). The particular dates of the calendar that the days of Lent fall on (Leap Year included) don’t affect the total number.
  • If you want to be persnickety, you could argue that there are only forty three days since the definition of Lent’s start and stop points reads: "Lent runs from Ash Wednesday until the Mass of the Lord’s Supper exclusive [General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar 28]. Taking the word "exclusive" to refer to both Ash Wednesday and the Mass of the Lord’s Supper would knock a day off the total. However, doing this would be an error. Ash Wednesday is the beginning of Lent. Everybody knows this. And the General Norms immediately go on to list Ash Wednesday under the heading of Lent (see no. 29). The word "exclusive" applies only to the Mass of the Lord’s Supper. What we have is simply an imperfection in the drafting of the law such that it fails to properly express the legislator’s intent (which is to include Ash Wednesday in Lent).

So there you have it. Lent under current law is more than forty days long. The number forty is thus to be taken as approximate, not literal. If you want to read more about how Lent and its "forty days" evolved, see here.

(One last note: Some have noted that there are forty days up to and including Palm Sunday. Whether that is the reason Lent is said to have forty days is ambiguous; the article linked gives a much more complicated history. In any event, since the days after Palm Sunday are now part of Lent, the season now has more than forty days regardless of how the number originated).

Sinful Thoughts?

A correspondent writes:

Hi Jimmy, I enjoy listening to your spots on Catholic Answers Live and also
seeing you on The Journey Home on EWTN.  I am currently seeking help for an Anxiety Disorder and trying to better my mental health.  One symptom of
those with high anxiety is unwanted "scary" thoughts or sudden flashes of
unusual images in your mind.  For instance, you may be washing dishes and
cleaning a sharp knife and all of a sudden you get a subconscience thought
out of nowhere that you might stab somebody, or in church you might
desicrate a cross or something.  I have no intent on doing these things, but
I’ll get a mental flash.  Is this considered sin?  Are thoughts of no intent
sinful?  Thanks for your time.

Thank you for writing and for your kind words.   It sounds as if you may be suffering from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD), which is a very common anxiety disorder, estimated to affect perhaps one in forty people.   Because it is so common, and because the thoughts it generates can be so troubling to people, I am often contacted by people who have this condition, and I’ve read up on it. In persons of faith, OCD tends to cause scrupulosity, being constantly afraid that one is in a state of mortal sin because of the thoughts. However, be assured that the thoughts OCD generates are not sins. We do not have much control over the thoughts that occur to us, and people who have OCD have a quirk in their brain chemistry that makes them more susceptible to such thoughts than others. As you point out, these are not things that you would actually do. They are therefore what psychologists term ego dystonic thoughts, contrary to one’s beliefs and values. As a result, there is not the kind of cooperation of the will needed to make them sinful. In fact, you should not confess these thoughts in the confessional, as focusing on them will tend to reinforce them and exacerbate the condition. You should simply do your best to ignore them. The more you can relax and ignore them, the better you will get.   I don’t know if you have yet engaged in a course of treatment for the condition, but I should mention that OCD is very treatable. It appears related to a deficiency of the neurotransmitter serotonin in the brain, and there is a class of drugs known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) that effectively increase the amount of serotonin in the brain and bring a great deal of relief to people with this condition. Also, certain nutritional supplements that can increase serotonin levels (e.g., 5-HTP) may help, though these should not be used if one is already on SSRIs without a doctor’s supervision. If you would like to read more about nutritional supplements that might help, I recommend the book Dr. Atkins Vita-Nutrient Solution, by Dr. Robert Atkins in addition to the 5-HTP book already linked.   Hope this helps, and God bless you!

Still Yet More on Tattoos

A third reader writes:

I’m pretty sure real tatooing (as opposed to simple outside coloration such as with magic market) could well be considered a sin against the fifth commandment, since it’s an attack on your own body. As are the multiple piercings one sees these days. Anytime you willingly violate the body’s natural boundaries (skin) for non-life-saving reasons, you’re in trouble.

You seem to be taking a position that goes beyond what the Church does. The argument you use would prohibit even the piercing of ears, and the Church does not condemn that practice.

While some reason would seem to be needed to break the skin, the Church does not seem to envision it as being a grave reason like the need to save a life. Indeed, many surgeries are performed that involve breaking the skin but are for much lesser goals than saving a life.

I suspect that you probably meant "for therapeutic reasons," but the Church does not seems to require that criterion (it does for mutilation, but as noted above, tattoos do not impair body function and so are not mutilation). Things like ear piercing or tattooing can play cultural functions in some societies, and those can be important reasons as well.

Since the function of the skin is to protect the body, it would seem that the skin can be pierced as long as there is some good to be achieved that is proportionate to the risk of infection given the precautions that are being taken against infection in a particular cause. If a man decides that he’s going to make a statement about his devotion to the Blessed Virgin by having a tattoo of Our Lady of Guadalupe put on his arm then he may be able to arrange it so that the risk of infection is low enough to be counterbalanced by the good to be achieved by his making the statement.

If you can cite any current Magisterial documents to the contrary, though, I’d love to see them. Hope this helps!