The Devil's Advocate

Learning from those who oppose us

05/15/2019

Acts of the Apostles 15:1-6 Some who had come down from Judea were instructing the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised according to the Mosaic practice, you cannot be saved." Because there arose no little dissension and debate by Paul and Barnabas with them, it was decided that Paul, Barnabas, and some of the others should go up to Jerusalem to the Apostles and presbyters about this question. They were sent on their journey by the Church, and passed through Phoenicia and Samaria telling of the conversion of the Gentiles, and brought great joy to all the brethren. When they arrived in Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the Church, as well as by the Apostles and the presbyters, and they reported what God had done with them. But some from the party of the Pharisees who had become believers stood up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and direct them to observe the Mosaic law." The Apostles and the presbyters met together to see about this matter.

Have you heard the expression “the devil’s advocate”? Put simply, it refers to the person who takes the opposing side in an argument, and tries to tell you why you are wrong. In a sense, my work in the marriage tribunal with annulments is that of a devil’s advocate, although I’m sure I’ve been called a lot worse. Why? I come up with all the reasons why someone should not be granted an annulment. Crazy, right? The technical term for my role is “defensor vinculi” (the defender of the bond of marriage). The purpose of the defender (or the devil’s advocate) is to make sure the judge (Fr. Greg) respects the rights of people and the rules of the process, that he doesn’t cut corners, or compromise Catholic teaching. In other words, the devil’s advocate is a good thing, even though it doesn’t sound very good.

Did you know the Church uses devil’s advocates in the canonization of saints? For instance, when Mother Teresa was being canonized the pope invited Christopher Hitchens to testify against her life and work. In case you don’t know, Hitchens was an out-spoken atheist and strident critic of Mother Teresa. But the Church wanted to hear all sides of the argument, even the opposing side by the devil’s advocate, before canonizing St. Teresa of Calcutta. In the beatification process of Blessed Stanley Rother from Oklahoma City, Bishop Edward Weisenberger was the one who played that part. In other words, the devil’s advocate sounds like something horrible, but it actually helps the Church become more holy.

In Acts 15 we see who plays the part of the devil’s advocate in the first council of the Church in Jerusalem. As Paul and Barnabas enjoy tremendous success evangelizing Greeks and non-Jews to the faith, some Jewish converts complained that the new Christians should also be circumcised as the Jews had. We read: “But some from the party of the Pharisees who had become believers stood up and said, ‘It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to observe the Mosaic law’.” Just like I remind Fr. Greg at the Tribunal not to take short-cuts, so the Jewish Christians did not want the Gentile Christians to take any short-cuts. They wanted them to take the “same cut” as they had received in circumcision (pun intended). You know, you have to love the holy humor of the holy bible. But notice, thanks to the devil’s advocates in Acts 15, the Church was compelled to convene the Council of Jerusalem, and define and refine Church teaching and practice. Over the course of 2,000 years, the Church has convened 21 ecumenical councils, and virtually every one had to respond to some heretic or heresy, which, ironically, helped the Church to become more holy. The devil’s advocate, therefore, may sound like a bad thing, but is can actually be a very good thing.

May I share with you some of the devil’s advocates in my own life? You can find them sitting on my bookshelf in the rectory in my bedroom. You might be surprised to see Deepak Chopra’s book, Reinventing the Body, Resurrecting the Soul. Chopra doesn’t believe in Catholicism, or Christianity or maybe even in God. He concluded his book saying: “Then the only answer to ‘Who made me?’ is “I made myself’?” (Reinventing, 276). But reading that book – which millions of people have read, too, by the way – made me look deeper at my faith and not settle for superficial answers. Chopra didn’t let me take short-cuts. You might be shocked to find On Language by Noam Chomsky, a brilliant linguist, but also a left-leaning political activist. Chomsky doesn’t let me take short-cuts in my political views.

You might wonder why I have dog-eared the atheist philosopher, Frederick Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra. You might feel like burning the book The God Delusion by the Oxford philosopher Richard Dawkins. You will also stumble over the late Stephen Hawkins’ The Universe in a Nutshell, who had nothing nice to say about religion. Yet he is probably the most widely respected theoretical astrophysicist of modern times. These authors do not allow me any short-cuts when I think about philosophy, religion or science. They are the devil’s advocates who hold my feet to the fire, and thereby have made me a better Christian, a better Catholic, and a better clergyman.

Folks, who are the devil’s advocates in your life? These are the people who oppose you and try to tell you why you are wrong. We may be tempted to ignore them or write them off as crazy people. But don’t. Some things they say may make us wince; but some things they say may make us wise.

Praised be Jesus Christ!