วีดีโอ

@hunterhall1575, What an odd thing to say! The world and its history are so full of interesting things, things that might seem strange at first, but which could lead us into a far deeper and more exciting culture and life, if only we could approach them with less mockery and more curiosity.

@johnhervatin4793, that is a very big claim! I suppose the truth of it depends on what you mean by theology. In the Catholic Church, theology is understood as an exercise of reason open to the widest and deepest questions of existence. As such, it most definitely contributes to our knowledge of the natural world. For example, the scientist ASSUMES in his or her investigations that the natural world is ordered and intelligible (that is why scientists expect there to be answers to their questions). But this assumption is taken for granted by science, rather than justified by it. It belongs to some other mode of reason -- a wider and deeper one, like philosophy and theology -- to consider it. Have you ever wondered why the universe is rationally ordered? Einstein considered this something of a miracle: "The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility…The fact that it is comprehensible is a miracle." Have you ever wondered why the world is comprehensible? And have you ever marveled at the way our mind can mirror this comprehensibility? Do you think science -- which assumes these things to be true at the outset -- could alone offer an account of such marvelous truths? You might appreciate this little passage from a theologian I admire very much: "[M]odern scientific reason with its intrinsically Platonic element bears within itself a question which points beyond itself and beyond the possibilities of its methodology. Modern scientific reason quite simply has to accept the rational structure of matter and the correspondence between our spirit and the prevailing rational structures of nature as a given, on which its methodology has to be based. Yet the question why this has to be so is a real question, and one which has to be remanded by the natural sciences to other modes and planes of thought - to philosophy and theology." Take care! -FJ

Wow, @RichardStevenWalz! I'm glad you are passionate about the topic. I enjoy opportunities to engage with passionate people, but I must say I especially enjoy them when no one resorts to name calling. 🙂In any event, your objection puzzles me, since I don't think I denied "random mutation" in my talk. Personally, I see no problem accepting random mutation and natural selection in evolutionary theory. The modern synthesis of evolution, in fact, bases itself heavily on Mendelian genetics, and it was a Catholic monk who put the "Mendel" in Mendelian genetics. So, far from denying the truth of random mutation, I'm actually quite proud of the Catholic contribution to the theory. Thus, I'm puzzled by your comment. Were you thinking about the point I made, or rather the point I related from some other authority, about epigenetics? In that case, there is no denial that genes can mutate on account of causes unrelated to the behavior of the organism ("random mutation"). The point is that genes can be diversely EXPRESSED according to the behavior of the organism. That seems to me to be an uncontroversial point. I hope that clarifies the issue for you! I wish you well. -FJ

@@fr.johnbayer1905 The point of mutations all being random in position and value in the genome is that it precludes ANY and ALL design by any intelligent agent, since random code can never improve a design unless by absolute accident!!

@@RichardStevenWalz I'm still not sure what point in my talk you are commenting on. But if your comment concerns an "intelligent agent" in the composition of the genome, then I think I agree with you. At least I've not heard of any evidence for little elves or sprites (or other creaturely craftsmen) tinkering around during cell division to alter the genome! 🙂Of course, the absence of such evidence does not justify the refusal to recognize the manifest intelligibility that shoots through the entire natural order. Cell division, and the altering of the genome, take place according to processes that can be rationally or intelligently investigated. Indeed, all of creation stands open -- marvelously -- to the gaze of reason, such that we are rightly convinced, I believe, that the ultimate origin and guide of all creation is intelligent. We can still speak of "random" processes, even if we insist upon the ultimately intelligible character of nature; after all, a card can be dealt "randomly" (i.e., without the dealer having any ability to predict what card will be dealt), even as the specific card that is dealt is obviously not magically or arbitrarily determined but rather clearly the result of intelligible (even if unknown) processes, such as the human choices and the physics that were involved in shuffling the deck. I hope that makes sense! - FJ

@@fr.johnbayer1905 No, NO GOD makes any sense at all, in light of what we geneticists know now about Evolutionary genetics. You assume wrongly! The only "intelligence" involved is random mutation and natural selection of that which survives, the rest get eaten!

@@RichardStevenWalz The way you are engaging me seems very dogmatic (lots of assertions and exclamation points). Perhaps we could engage in more of a dialogue if I asked you a question: Would you agree that intelligence is shot through the whole universe? That there are, in principle, rational explanations for all that happens (even if we might not be able to know them concretely, given our limitations)? - FJ

@polemeros, Lol, some monks might agree with you! But at the end of the day, a monk who is too concerned about the aesthetics of his clothing probably has bigger problems. The collar is an evolution that took place a couple hundred years ago in Hungary and Austria, and in some monasteries it has already evolved away. In my own monastery, there is some affection for it still, since it is the very habit that members of our congregation were prohibited from wearing under Communism. It might not be the most elegant or "monastic" looking piece of clothing, but at least for now we wear it with pride (especially the older members who lived under Communism in Hungary). But at the end of the day, whether the collar goes or stays, cucullus non facit monachum! God bless! - FJ

@minui8758, Yeah, I think you're right. It is a phrase that can be misunderstood. My hope is that it leads people to become more alert to the way God relates to us. Scripture and the saints often have provocative ways of putting things. Sometimes, I think we're too afraid of being misunderstood or challenged, and so we resort to very abstract, common or "safe" ways of saying things -- ways that are less meaningful to people and therefore less likely to be censured. I'm sure I'll make plenty of mistakes, but hopefully generous viewers and readers will catch what I'm trying to say! God bless! - FJ

@@fr.johnbayer1905 of course Scripture tells us our land shall be called married, there’s the whole church as bride of Christ and Christ as bridegroom imagery, and then there’s the Song of Songs. It comes a lot closer to an accurate description of my more fruitful periods of mental prayer than other metaphors have

@bayreuth79 I think that's right, especially if we are considering the origin of the word in Greek philosophy. But with Scripture I think we should also recognize a relational character to sin: sin is now disobedience. If I "miss the mark" in archery, I shouldn't feel guilty. After all, it's not like I'm trying to miss the mark -- I'm just a poor archer. But if I "sin" in Scripture I've offended someone to whom I owe my love and obedience. To miss the mark here is to turn away from a friend. So, I think there is a development in the idea beyond what the Greeks considered. Nevertheless, the Biblical idea certainly still contains a similar insight as the Greek: to sin is to disobey God, and at the same to miss the mark on what will make us truly happy, what will make us most excellent, what is the "bullseye" on our humanity.

@@fr.johnbayer1905 Yes; there is a relational dimension to sin but I would argue that ignorance is always antecedent to the disobedience and the offending of God you mentioned. What is disobedience other than a form of ignorance? It is irrational and the apex of foolishness to disobey God (since he is the fount of all truth, goodness and beauty) and yet we disobey him all the time. Why? I suspect it can only be (in the final analysis) because of ignorance. "The truth shall set you free".

Well, what did you think about the short video? Did you catch the reason stated there for Catholic faith in the Eucharist? Simply put, it is faith in the words of Jesus. I hope that helps you understand why a Catholic (who wants always to take seriously the words of Jesus) believes in the Eucharist. If you want a more elaborate answer, try these pages from Catholic Answers: www.catholic.com/tract/eucharist and www.catholic.com/tract/christ-in-the-eucharist. God bless, -FJ

@FenrirStrange, well that wasn't exactly what I was suggesting. :-) To judge by your comments, you might enjoy this video by Bishop Barron. It's about why he liked to read Christopher Hitchens, who used to make similar claims as you did in your comments. Give it a shot, as it's less than 10 minutes. th-cam.com/video/vW8yBnpN48w/w-d-xo.html

@kimberlyzeeman7473 Well said! Thank you for your kind words. Please pray for all monks and nuns: may we fulfill our vocations and indeed live "upright, truthful, whole, and holy lives" for the good of everyone in the Church and in the world.

Absolutely! Please be assured of my prayers for you and your community. I spent a year of discernment with Benedictine Sisters and instead the Lord Jesus called me to Himself and I was Consecrated as a Virgin Living in the World four years ago tomorrow (on the Memorial of the Queenship of Mary.) But I carry the monastic tradition close to my heart and cannot imagine a day without the Divine Office and Lectio. I found the website of Our Lady of Dallas and took note of your gentlemen in formation. I will include them in my daily prayers and will pray for more holy vocations to your monastery. God bless you and keep you!

@DavidFlockhart, regardless of the "day and age," I suspect the relevance of the discussion will depend on the person. If I weren't on a journey, I'd find a compass irrelevant. Hopefully, the wisdom expressed by Bishop Varden can orient at least some of those trying to find their way to God! If it doesn't help you, then I hope you find what will! God bless!

I can agree at some level. It has nothing to say to consumerism and cheap superficial distractions except stop. However that’s more an indictment of this “evil and adulterous generation” than it is of the subjects addressed in the video

Protestants have no doctrines Protestants have no unity Protestants have no history Protestants have no power Protestants have no authority Protestants have no sacraments

@nigelhard1519, I've only seen the first half of Pasolini's film and so don't think I am able to take a definitive position. But from what I remember I thought his presentation of Jesus was a bit one-dimensional. The portrayal of Jesus seemed designed to overawe the disciples, like Zeus with lightning bolts (so to speak), rather than draw them into a transcendent relationship (e.g., I remember him shouting most of the time, even during moments that should have been calm or tender, at least in my imagination of the Gospel). But that's just a quick impression based on what I remember. Others have different (and probably more informed) opinions, I'm sure!

@@fr.johnbayer1905 Yes, I suppose you have a point. But I have always found the film moving in a non-sentimental way. I wish your community all the best. For the moment, my personal problem (if it is a problem) is that I can appreciate religious discussions from the outside, that is I find them facscinating and I can recognise the value of 'good' people and the monastic life (very well explained by Bishop Varden in the discussion). But I remain cold hearted and distanced in a way. I suppose that is a classic lack of faith? I suspect you may have something to say on that! Many thanks for your time.

@nigelhard1519, If I follow you correctly, then I wouldn't necessarily jump to the conclusion that you are experiencing a lack of faith. The absence of emotion is not the same thing as the absence of faith; an act of faith is an act of the will; it is an act of the will to assent to the object of the intellect. We may or may not feel very much when we recognize or affirm the truth of the faith. However, I think that when we are fully purified and conformed to Christ, we will indeed feel the truth of the faith; that is, we will respond "integrally" or with the "wholeness" of our humanity (which includes our emotions). But in this pilgrim life, so much is obscured from our vision. But we can work for a more integral understanding of the faith. If we want a deeper or more integral apprehension of the truth of faith, we can cultivate what John Henry Newman called a "real apprehension" and seek to encounter the faith in a more concrete and living way -- through works of mercy, art, life, liturgy, etc. If our experience of faith is only "notional" then it will feel a bit like math: we might be convinced, but not terribly moved. But if our faith is rooted in a "real" apprehension, then it will make an impression upon our imagination and affectivity, and that could issue in a rich emotional life. I hope that helps! I have a few videos about Newman on this channel, if you're interested for more.

​@@fr.johnbayer1905 Magnificent answer. Thank you. I'll look at what you say about Newman. Years ago I read a few pages of his Idea of a University (I think), maybe something else, and was most impressed.

@nigelhard1519, I'm glad you enjoyed Bishop Varden! He strikes me the same way: human, inspiring and interesting. As for the comments section, I'm hoping what's happening is less "infighting" and more sincere engagement in a spirit of charity (which can at times be challenging). For my part, that is the goal! We must labor for love!

@frederickanderson1860, Well, whether we do or don't know anything about human nature, I suppose each will have to judge for himself! But you might like to know that Jesus did indeed regularly retreat into solitude and silence (cf. Luke 5:16). For what it's worth, many have experienced the power of solitude to reveal the human heart. Of course, those who know the human heart will know that we are meant for communion -- and thus an individualist isolationism would not be right to cultivate (but that's not the same thing as solitude and silence, I think). In that regard, you might like what Bishop Varden says about monks engaging with the world (check out the section toward the end titled "Engaging the World"). God bless!

@@fr.johnbayer1905 in all religions you have similar the monks solitude and no part in the worldly temptations, the mystics whose total subjective isolation gave them some strange visions. Those who renounce the flesh and women ,this is not confined to just Christianity. John the baptist was liken to Elijah,but he was prophesied in scripture for his mission.the disciples had to wait 40 days l believe for the promised holy spirit on Pentecost,they became bold and open regards Jesus who was crucified had risen,if as Paul says he has not risen then it's all in vain!!!. Preach christ risen is the message not gained by silence or solitude.

@@frederickanderson1860 It seems to me that these monks do not remain in silence or solitude but engage with the world: see the last few minutes of the discussion.

@@nigelhard1519 l doubt they can communicate to people outside of their own perception of the world. Birds of a feather flock together.

@@frederickanderson1860 I think they can communicate to anyone of goodwill, lay or otherwise. The key is 'good will'.

@dylanfluet8205, I would recommend Louis Bouyer, "The Meaning of the Monastic Life" and Columba Marmion, "Christ the Ideal of the Monk". Those are two books by very reliable authors!

One of the best I ever read was Casey’s ‘Strangers to the City’

I agree. This stuff has no resonance for me. Let us look honestly at the world. Changing demographics, cost of living. My heart finds rest in reading scripture, there is God seeking us out. Loving us

@1900trent I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the interview! It's true, these words cannot replace personal conversation with Christ. And you are right, Jesus must be the center of all our prayer and life. Still, I hope many people will profit from the video as an effort simply to discuss monastic theology and life. I know that many people are longing for intellectually stimulating discussions of the faith. Hopefully, this video can help to satisfy that longing in those who experience it. God bless!

I thoroughly enjoyed this. Fantastic! Delightful to listen to thought provoking dialogue that addresses the most important thing in all our lives. So grateful for intellects like these 2 who have studied for years and can take my faith walk to a deeper place. 🙏 God bless you both!

It seems to me the whole conversation was infused with Christ beginning to end.​@@fr.johnbayer1905

But there is nothing academic or distant, for example, about the reference to the man with the scars on his back....(25 minutes in).

Sarum collect for purity