|
D r a g n e t
SOME OF THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME
|
|
|
|
Frederick Lenz, R.I.P. Probably you don't recall his name. He died in April at the age of 48. His body was found about sixty feet offshore in the waters of Conscience Bay (ironic name!), Long Island. If his claims about himself prove true, he will be back again-and again and again. He had told his followers that he was one of only "twelve enlightened beings on Earth" and that he had lived several lives-the most recent, as it turned out, as leader of a cult movement, though he rejected that appellation.
In the early 1980s Lenz founded a meditation group in San Diego. He named it Lakshmi, after a Hindu deity, and he called himself Atmananda. In later repackagings of himself he used the names Zen Master Rama and Rama Dr. Frederick Lenz. The meditation group flourished-it was the season for such things, and the New Age movement was at its height-and Lenz expanded his operation into the Los Angeles and San Francisco Bay areas. By 1984 he had moved his headquarters to Malibu. Three years later he transferred it to Connecticut, then to Long Island.
Lenz, who had received a Ph.D. in English literature from the State University of New York at Stony Brook, wrote two novels. Surfing the Himalayas was about an America snowboarder who runs into (literally) a Buddhist monk and becomes his spiritual apprentice. The book rose to number eleven on the Publishers' Weekly list of bestsellers, and its first paperback printing was 125,000 copies. The sequel was Snowboarding to Nirvana. Lenz also wrote Lifetimes: True Accounts of Reincarnation and Total Relaxation: The Complete Program for Overcoming Worry, Stress, Tension, and Fatigue. He engaged in the guru shtick for more than twenty years but recently had turned to the more lucrative area of computers.
Lenz spent much time tweaking his self-promoting web site, www.fredericklenz.com, where visitors could read about his exploits as an author, educator (so proud was he of his undergraduate work that he included an image of his Phi Beta Kappa key), music producer (only "New Age" style), athlete (snowboarder, diver, martial arts), and computer programmer (he claimed to program in about as many areas as does Microsoft). He also described himself as a philanthropist. Among the beneficiaries of his largesse: the ACLU, the National Museum of Women and the Arts, Amnesty International, B'nai B'rith, the Cousteau Society, and-his favorite-National Public Radio.
Responding indirectly to charges that he led a cult, at his web site Lenz said, "I understand that a few of my former students have even become millionaires. More importantly, the vast majority of the students I have taught have become self-sufficient and confident individuals who enjoy their lives. Nevertheless, it is inevitable that, in the process of teaching an Asian religion in a Western country, many of the teachings will seem strange or unusual-in the same way that Christianity and Judaism may seem strange and unusual to people from the Far East. Although it is regrettable, it is understandable that over the years my teaching-of what is perceived to be a complex and foreign-sounding religious philosophy-has become the target for people's prejudice and religious intolerance."
Shortly after Lenz's death, a woman who had been his student wrote, in an Internet discussion group, "About six years ago, I studied with Frederick Lenz a.k.a. 'Rama.' During this time (which was only about a year), I attended all of his seminars, outings, listened to all of his tapes, meditated, exercised, took Aikido classes, went to a technical school for computer programming. I was a model student. I did any and everything he 'suggested.' Soon, I kept having to give him more and more money. It was explained that the money was a tool used to 'spread the dharma' and that (in a nutshell) the more expensive and finer something was, the more it was better at helping one to attain increased 'awareness.' He addressed the so-called media attacks against him and denied the accusations of drug-induced rape and abuse by former female students. Eventually, it grew increasingly more difficult for me to accept that it was all a conspiracy by those 'vindictive' women to bring him down. Something just didn't feel right, and I ceased my activities with the group." Not having learned her lesson, she said she turned her attention to other New Age groups.
Over the years Lenz had found himself the object of many investigative stories in newspapers. He didn't seem to mind the publicity. He retained a following for two decades-a long time in New Age circles-and never seemed at a loss for ready cash. He was eminently qualified to be the poster child for the You Can Fool Some of the People All the Time movement.
A predictable poll: A telephone survey of 701 post-baby boom Catholics revealed that only 65 percent believe that "God is present in the sacraments," with 58 percent saying "Christ is really present in the Eucharist." A bit fewer than half said it is necessary to have a pope, with ever fewer saying it is necessary to have a regular daily prayer life. Still lower, at 37 percent, was the importance of attending Mass weekly. Only a quarter believe that priests should be celibate, and only one out of six say that only men should be priests. It is not surprising, then, that 48 percent said that in the main beliefs there is no difference between Catholicism and Protestantism.
The survey was conducted by Dean Hoge of Catholic University of America, along with professors from two other schools. Princeton Survey Research Associates conducted the interviews of Catholics ages 20 to 39. Not having seen the questions, we can't say whether they were written in such as way as to produce useful results (many times questions used in polls are biased, designed to elicit certain responses), but the results don't seem much different from what would have been expected. Today's Catholics are informed less by the teaching of the Church than by the secular media. Sit them down for a few hours of intensive discussion, and they likely will come to a much higher acceptance of Catholic beliefs.
They don't like priestly celibacy? They see no reason to avoid contraception? They don't care whether "God is present in the sacraments"? Not surprising, if they've never been told the whys of the Catholic faith. They know the Church opposes contraception-but that's all they know. Not one in a hundred could give a coherent reason why the Church has such a teaching. If they never have heard the reason, it's not surprising that they don't embrace the teaching.
Thus the survey is both good and bad news-bad in the sense of the non-acceptance of Catholic doctrines and morals, but good in the sense that these folks (and Catholics older and younger than they) are fertile ground for instruction and conversion.
On his flight to Nigeria, Pope John Paul II called Pope Pius XII "a great pope." When asked about his predecessor's work in opposition to the Nazi persecution of the Jews, John Paul said, "One must read Fr. Blet." Pierre Blet, a French Jesuit, is the sole survivor of a four-man team of historians commission by Pope Paul VI to search Vatican archives and produce an exhaustive report on the Church's actions during the Holocaust. They produced a thirteen-volume study. In March Blet wrote an article in defense of Pius XII for the Jesuit magazine Civilta Cattolica. He said criticism of that pope is completely refuted by the facts. "Every piece" of evidence shows the "pure and simple" fact that Pius XII did his best to protect Jews. The "legend" of an ineffective Church reaction can't withstand the evidence, which, he said, shows "the inanity of the attacks directed against his memory." Blet said there is "no evidence" to support the widespread perception that Pius XII, who under Pius XI had served as papal nuncio to Germany, was particular fond of German culture.
In the January issue of its newsletter to supporters, the Christian Research Institute-producer of the "Bible Answer Man" radio program-tackled the issue of divorce and remarriage in its question-and-answer column. Radio host and CRI president Hank Hanegraaff responded to this question: "I have recently remarried after being divorced and have been told that I am now living in adultery. Should I divorce my current husband?"
Hanegraaff's reply: "You should stay married. Our scriptural research indicates that in the case of a divorce, if one of the divorcees has remarried another person, it is not biblical for the remarried spouse to divorce the new spouse in order to return to the first. The reason is because Scripture sees the subsequent marriage as an actual marriage. Since God hates divorce (Mal. 2:16), he would hate the second divorce as well, which would only multiply the wrongs, not make them better."
Hanegraaff goes on to say that adultery is not "an ongoing state or condition." "Certainly it is wrongful to divorce and marry another, but doing so amounts to committing a single act of adultery (not establishing an ongoing state)." If you repent of that single act, your adultery is forgiven and you can remain married to the second spouse.
Let's think this through. Under Hanegraaff's view, the questioner committed adultery when, after getting a civil divorce, she "married" another man. We can agree with this. But why would the second relationship be considered adulterous? Hanegraaff doesn't say, but it must be because the first marriage remains valid, despite the civil decree of divorce. One can commit divorce only by having sexual relations with someone other than one's true spouse. But Hanegraaff says that adultery is not "an ongoing state or condition, which can be repented of only through a subsequent divorce." Adultery can be repent of (something Catholics agree with), and then, says Hanegraaff, that fixes the problem. It "must be repented of without divorcing the second spouse."
Whoa! What does this imply? If the attempted second marriage amounted to adultery, repenting of that adultery doesn't change the status of that marriage, which is dependent upon the status of the original marriage. If the original marriage remained valid, despite the civil divorce, at the time of the attempted second marriage, then repenting of the act of adultery couldn't change the status of the original marriage. Repenting can't make that earlier marriage collapse into nothingness. It can't make effective what the civil law itself was unable to effect, the ending of a valid marriage. And that means that the second relationship remains an adulterous one-contrary to Hanegraaff, it must be an "ongoing state or condition," so long as the parties remain together and act as husband and wife.
On the other hand, if the civil divorce really ended the first marriage-this is the standard Protestant position-then no there is no adultery on the occasion of the subsequent marriage. The parties to that marriage are free to marry because, through divorce, one or both were freed from prior marital commitments. But Hanegraaff, to his credit, doesn't see how this squares with Scripture. He knows that Scripture says that one who attempts to remarry after a divorce commits adultery. He takes Scripture seriously. He rejects the most popular Protestant position. But he is forced to use convoluted thinking and ends up at the same place, the approval of divorce followed by remarriage. He engages in wishful thinking when he says "Scripture sees the subsequent marriage as an actual marriage." There is not a thing in Scripture to suggest that.
A tiny acknowledgement. In its newsletter, Christians Evangelizing Catholics, the organization founded by Bill Jackson, responded to a question about Catholic teaching on whether the moral unworthiness of a priest affects the validity of the sacraments that he administers. (Answer: No, it doesn't.) Jackson said that the issue of the unworthiness of the priest "was settled by the Roman Catholic Church in the Donatist controversy years ago." Donatism arose and largely was defeated in the fourth century. It's good to know that at least one anti-Catholic organization admits that the Catholic Church goes back at least that far.
As a politician, you can make a few religious noises, provided they aren't Catholic. When Dan Lungren, Attorney General for California and candidate for governor, cited his Catholic beliefs in his announcement speech, he caused a stink. "If we are to be a successful people," he said, "we have to be a religious people as well. . . . Separation of church and state doesn't mean separation of public debate and religious values. . . . I'm a Catholic. I believe in penance and redemption."
This was just too much for opposing candidates to bear. A spokesman for one of Lungren's Democratic opponents, Al Checchi, said the Attorney General's remarks were alarming and inappropriate. Elena Stern said Lungren "is trying to mask his extremism in religion." Kam Kuwata, the mouthpiece for another Democratic candidate, Jane Harmon, said he felt "a little queasy" about Lungren's remarks. He accused the Republican of coming "dangerously close to saying we need to have a state religion." (Now there's an idea!)
"Liturgy as Prophecy" was the title of a "conference study week" held in Phoenix in January. We received the promotional brochure but weren't inclined to attend. There didn't seem to be much reason to spend a week listening to speakers such as Nathan Mitchell, who was scheduled to explain, in a talk called "People and the Role of Prophecy," why "never again will [the community's] voice of freedom be silenced by authoritarianism and legalism." Presumably he wasn't going to refer to highhandedness by liturgical experts. And then there was Fr. Vernon Meyer's talk on "Proclaiming the Prophetic Word," which he defined as "an announcement that the continuing structures and systems of oppression have enslaved us again." Sounded too depressing.
Call to Action is on the defensive, and leaders Sheila and Dan Daley don't like it one bit. Recently they sent out a letter to pastors, complaining about "harsh condemnations of Call to Action by spokespersons for archconservative Catholic advocacy groups." No groups were named, but, reading between the lines, it seems CTA has been taking hits, as the saying goes.
The radical group claims 18,000 members (actually not large for a national Catholic organization) and says that between 3,000 and 5,000 people attend its annual conferences. Of those, a third are Church employees. The average age of CTS members - or at least of conference attendees - seems to be late middle age. The group's annual budget is about a million dollars, with half of that spent on conference expenses.
CTA members endorse the ordination of women and married men and want to see Humanae Vitae recinded. They claim to be "led by the Holy Spirit to ask questions in the spirit of St. Paul, St. Theresa [sic] of Avila, St. Ignatius Loyola, St. Catherine of Siena, Pope John XXIII, and many others of good faith and will." They seem unconcerned that not a single sentence in the writings of any of these worthies supports any of CTA's distinctive goals. But no matter. The letter from the Daleys indicates that CTA is on the decline, and that is a sign of hope.
|
