15 words or less film review (full review to follow soon)
A worthy follow-up to the best Godzilla movie. Thoughtful, emotional, and powerful.
ReasonForOurHope
Friday, November 6, 2026
Monday, November 2, 2026
New Evangelizers Post: It's Okay to Mourn
I have a new article up at NewEvangelizers.com.
Today is the Feast of All Souls.
On this day we remember those who have gone before us in death, especially the poor souls in Purgatory. This Feast follows the Feast of All Saints to remind us of the hope that we have in our Heavenly homeland.
But this day can be very complicated, especially if we remember those we love who have died. And the older I get, the longer that list becomes. Remembering them and remembering how much I miss them is not at all a pleasant experience. I miss my grandfather’s smile. I miss how my friend and I would argue about comic books. I miss my mother’s laugh. But now those things are absent from this world.
In many ways, it feels like I am still mourning.
Don’t get me wrong, time has brought its own measure of healing to all of these losses. But they are still losses and I feel them as such.
St. Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 4:13 “We do not want you to be unaware, brothers, about those who have fallen asleep, so that you may not grieve like the rest, who have no hope.” And indeed I have encountered those with amazing faith who greet the death of a loved one with complete trust in the Lord. These saintly people rejoice in their loved one’s entrance into Paradise and live in the hope of being reunited. This is an excellent witness and one that all of us should strive to emulate.
But for those of us who are not as saintly, it can be much more challenging. CS Lewis read this verse from St. Paul after the death of his beloved wife Joy and wrote “It astonishes me, the way we are invited to apply to ourselves words so obviously addressed to our betters. What St. Paul says can comfort only those who love God better than the dead, and the dead better than themselves. If a mother is mourning not for what she has lost but for what her dead child has lost, it is a comfort to believe that the child has not lost the end for which it was created. And it is a comfort to believe that she herself, in losing her chief or only natural happiness, has not lost a greater thing, that she may still hope to 'glorify God and enjoy Him forever.' “
What Lewis is getting at is that the saintly ones are focused on the loved one. But for the rest of us, we are also grieving for our own loss. St. Augustine found himself in this dilemma when a friend of his died and he was heartbroken. He wrote “Miserable I was, and miserable is every soul fettered by the friendship of perishable things — he is torn to pieces when he loses them, and then is sensible of the misery which he had before ever he lost them.” (Confessions IV.6)
Lewis commented on this section in The Four Loves when he wrote “Of course this is excellent sense. Don’t put your goods in a leaky vessel…I think that this passage in the Confessions is less a part of St. Augustine’s Christendom than a hangover from the high-minded Pagan philosophies in which he grew up. It is closer to Stoic ‘apathy’ or neo-Platonic mysticism than to charity. We follow One who wept over Jerusalem and at the grave of Lazarus, and, loving all, yet had one disciple whom, in a special sense, he ‘loved’…There is no escape along the lines St. Augustine suggests. Nor along any other lines. There is no safe investment. To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly be broken.”
In other words, loving others means that we are vulnerable to pain and loss. It is true that we should strive to live the words of St. Paul and focus on the happiness of those who have gone before us. That is why today especially it is a wonderful act of charity to pray for the souls in Purgatory, so that their purgation may come to a swift end and they may finally know eternal rest.
But the pain we feel now, the pain we still feel after many years is a sign of the love that we still have. The loss that we’ve experienced leaves scars on our hearts. A priest once said to me that people think scars are ugly, but they are not. Scars are beautiful. They are beautiful because they show us where we were wounded and have been healed. The grief we still feel is not a sign that we have not healed, but that we are healed or healing.
On this day we remember those who have gone before us in death, especially the poor souls in Purgatory. This Feast follows the Feast of All Saints to remind us of the hope that we have in our Heavenly homeland.
But this day can be very complicated, especially if we remember those we love who have died. And the older I get, the longer that list becomes. Remembering them and remembering how much I miss them is not at all a pleasant experience. I miss my grandfather’s smile. I miss how my friend and I would argue about comic books. I miss my mother’s laugh. But now those things are absent from this world.
In many ways, it feels like I am still mourning.
Don’t get me wrong, time has brought its own measure of healing to all of these losses. But they are still losses and I feel them as such.
St. Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 4:13 “We do not want you to be unaware, brothers, about those who have fallen asleep, so that you may not grieve like the rest, who have no hope.” And indeed I have encountered those with amazing faith who greet the death of a loved one with complete trust in the Lord. These saintly people rejoice in their loved one’s entrance into Paradise and live in the hope of being reunited. This is an excellent witness and one that all of us should strive to emulate.
But for those of us who are not as saintly, it can be much more challenging. CS Lewis read this verse from St. Paul after the death of his beloved wife Joy and wrote “It astonishes me, the way we are invited to apply to ourselves words so obviously addressed to our betters. What St. Paul says can comfort only those who love God better than the dead, and the dead better than themselves. If a mother is mourning not for what she has lost but for what her dead child has lost, it is a comfort to believe that the child has not lost the end for which it was created. And it is a comfort to believe that she herself, in losing her chief or only natural happiness, has not lost a greater thing, that she may still hope to 'glorify God and enjoy Him forever.' “
What Lewis is getting at is that the saintly ones are focused on the loved one. But for the rest of us, we are also grieving for our own loss. St. Augustine found himself in this dilemma when a friend of his died and he was heartbroken. He wrote “Miserable I was, and miserable is every soul fettered by the friendship of perishable things — he is torn to pieces when he loses them, and then is sensible of the misery which he had before ever he lost them.” (Confessions IV.6)
Lewis commented on this section in The Four Loves when he wrote “Of course this is excellent sense. Don’t put your goods in a leaky vessel…I think that this passage in the Confessions is less a part of St. Augustine’s Christendom than a hangover from the high-minded Pagan philosophies in which he grew up. It is closer to Stoic ‘apathy’ or neo-Platonic mysticism than to charity. We follow One who wept over Jerusalem and at the grave of Lazarus, and, loving all, yet had one disciple whom, in a special sense, he ‘loved’…There is no escape along the lines St. Augustine suggests. Nor along any other lines. There is no safe investment. To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly be broken.”
In other words, loving others means that we are vulnerable to pain and loss. It is true that we should strive to live the words of St. Paul and focus on the happiness of those who have gone before us. That is why today especially it is a wonderful act of charity to pray for the souls in Purgatory, so that their purgation may come to a swift end and they may finally know eternal rest.
But the pain we feel now, the pain we still feel after many years is a sign of the love that we still have. The loss that we’ve experienced leaves scars on our hearts. A priest once said to me that people think scars are ugly, but they are not. Scars are beautiful. They are beautiful because they show us where we were wounded and have been healed. The grief we still feel is not a sign that we have not healed, but that we are healed or healing.
Sunday, November 1, 2026
All Saints Day 2026
The saints have been great friends to me throughout my life. Today, we are reminded that our destiny is not of this world but of the next. Failure, humiliation, loss, and suffering in this life are nothing compared to the glories that await the blessed.
It is so much easier to say it than to believe.
That is why we need the saints. We need the concrete examples of holiness in this fallen world to help us remember that this world is not our home.
So today, I would like to share with you the litany of saints that my wife and I pray every day. I am leaving out those who are not canonized or in the process. There are many whose intercession I seek, like my mom and my grandparents, trusting that the love we still share will be strengthened through prayer. But here are the saints that we turn to each day.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.
St. Joseph, pray for us.
St. Gerard Majella, pray for us.
St. Padre Pio, pray for us.
Servant of God Lucia de Jesus Rosa dos Santos, pray for us.
Sts. Jacinta and Francesco Marto, pray for us.
Sts. Anne and Joachim, pray for us.
Sts. Elizabeth, Zechariah, and John the Baptist, pray for us.
Abraham, Sarah, Hannah and Rachel of the Old Testament, pray for us.
St. Gianna, pray for us.
Pope St. John Paul the Great, pray for us.
St. Teresa of Calcutta, pray for us.
St. Teresa of the Little Flower, pray for us.
St. Teresa of Avila, pray for us.
St. Catherine of Sienna, pray for us.
Bl. Miguel Pro, pray for us.
St. Carlo Acuits, pray for us.
St. Pierre Giorgio Frassati, pray for us.
Bl. Nicholas Steno, pray for us.
Bl. Michael McGivney, pray for us.
St. Theresa Benedicta of the Cross, pray for us.
St. Maxamillian Kolbe, pray for us.
St. Thomas Aquinas, pray for us.
St. Augustine, pray for us.
St. Maria Goretti, pray for us.
St. Joan of Arc, pray for us.
St. Francis of Assisi, pray for us.
St. Clare of Assisi, pray for us.
St. Anthony of Padua, pray for us.
St. Ignatius of Loyola, pray for us.
St. Dominic, pray for us.
St. Benedict, pray for us.
St. Philip Neri, pray for us.
St. Bartholomew, pray for us.
St. Andrew, pray for us.
St. Philip, pray for us.
St. Peter, pray for us.
St. John, pray for us.
St. James the Greater, pray for us.
St. James the Lesser, pray for us.
St. Jude Thaddeus, pray for us.
St. Simon, pray for us.
St. Matthew, pray for us.
St. Matthias, pray for us.
St. Mary Magdalene, pray for us.
St. Patrick, pray for us.
St. Peregrine, pray for us.
St. Paul, pray for us.
St. Stephen, pray for us.
Sts. Cosmos and Damian, pray for us.
St. William of Rochester, pray for us.
St. Faustina Kowalska, pray for us.
St. Raphael, pray for us.
St. Gabriel, pray for us.
St. Michael, pray for us.
All holy saints and angels, pray for us.
Thursday, October 29, 2026
Film Review: Street Fighter (2026)
Sexuality/Nudity Mature
Violence Mature
Vulgarity Acceptable
Anti-Catholic Philosophy Mature
Why are video games so difficult to adapt into movies?
It seems like it should be an easy thing to do. Granted, some movies and shows lend themselves to a clear narrative like The Last of Us. But so many of these games have such clear, distinct, and vivid characters with strong motivations and arcs.
And yet, I would imagine most of us could name more bad video game adaptations than good ones.
I was thinking of this when I was watching the most recent adaptation of Street Fighter.
The movie centers around Ken (Noah Centineo) who has a love/hate relationship with his best friend Ryu (Andrew Koji). Ryu wins a great tournament by unleashing some evil energy, but then leaves the fighting scene. Ken devolves into an MTV party celebrity. The dictator M. Bison (David Dastmalchian) arranges a tournament to lure Ryu out of hiding. Ken takes up the invitation to come out of Ryu’s shadow. Meanwhile Chun-Li (Callina Liang) is undercover trying to take Bison down from the inside.
When I was directing theater, one of the best insights into the process I read was that casting is 90% of the job. I found that part of the process the most stressful, because it turns out that this principle is true. I knew if I cast the right people, the production would be great. But if I miscast anyone, it would drag down the entire show. And Street Fighter is a mixed bag in this area. Koji is excellent as Ryu, the brooding, pessimistic hero who is trying to turn from his violent ways. Liang is also excellent as Chun-Li, projecting strength and femininity. Vidyut Jammwal embodied the character of Dhalsim in the little screen time that he had, showing off his amazing physicality. And Hirooki Goto had one of the best turns in the movie as E. Honda where he portrayed him with humor and honor.
But the rest of the casting brings down the movie. Dastmalchian is horribly miscast as M. Bison. In the original live-action film, Raoul Julia was literally dying and frail, but he projected supreme power. Dastmalchian is a fine actor, but he never projects the menace necessary for the character. Centineo also cannot carry the movie on his shoulders. Something about his Ken felt very artificial. Perhaps that was part of the character choice, but it then doesn’t translate to the sincerity necessary for the character.
The movie doesn’t know what it wants to be. It is ostensibly a fighting tournament movie, but most of the most important fights are outside of the tournament. And even the important tournament fights are overlooked. Vega (Orville Peck) and Guille (Cody Rhodes) have a fight that we NEVER see, but it is only mentioned in the aftermath. I have no idea why you would skip something like this, except for budget reasons.
And they must have had budget problems. The prologue to the movie is animated and it is not short. And the flashbacks are also all animated. It’s like they ran out of money to film these scenes but realized they were needed for character background.
But the real problem is that the movie cannot fully commit to itself. When I saw the trailer, I was interested because it reminded me of Netflix’s adaptation of One Piece. On that show, the production design is insanely over-the-top and cartoonish, where you will have characters who hide machine guns in their powdered wigs and they fight with swords in their mouths. But on that show, the characters fully commit to the reality of this world so that no matter how flamboyant they are, I believe their motivations and the stakes involved. Street Fighter wants to have the look of One Piece but feels embarrassed by it. Comedians Andrew Schulz and Eric Andre feature prominently, always pointing out the silliness of the events of the film. Comic relief can help with a strange premise the way Wolverine did in the first X-Men movie, but the humor seemed to be more at the expense of the film. The humor also boarders on perverse sometimes, portraying most of the side characters are creepy weirdos. But the real problem is that the humor destroys any drama.
You can see this particularly in the final scene of the movie, which I found utterly baffling. The penultimate scene sets up a chase where our heroes have to chase after the villains and our disaster will occur. The final scene finds them sitting by a country road hitch-hiking. The entire scene felt like something out of a sketch comedy show with no sense of immediacy, danger, or importance.
The entire movie feels like a big bright balloon that slowly deflates so that all you’re left with is the empty husk of something that once bounced with life.
Sunday, October 25, 2026
Film Flash: You Can See Everything
15 words or less film review (full review to follow soon)
The most interesting film this year that is sure to inspire debate in the viewers
Monday, October 19, 2026
New Evangelizers Post: The Sacrifice of the Mass
I have a new article up at NewEvangelizers.com.
Some people express confusion about the Mass when we say that it is a sacrifice. They ask “If this was the case, then wouldn’t we be sacrificing Jesus over and over?” It is a good question, and I am glad to address it here.
To be clear, the Council of Trent in Chapter VIII on its decrees on the Eucharist stated that the Eucharist is a true and real sacrifice (Canon 1) and that it is a “propitiatory” sacrifice, meaning that it brings reconciliation to God (Canon 2).
I am a philosopher by training. I like to always refer to the Father of Philosophy: Socrates. And whenever Socrates struggled with a problem, he would always go back to defining our terms. What is it we are actually talking about? In this case, I think we need to define the word “sacrifice.”
Pope Benedict XVI wrote a book before he was pope called The Spirit of the Liturgy. He addresses our common understanding of sacrifice as “something to do with destruction.” (pg. 41) We often think of sacrifice as giving something up, like our Lenten sacrifices of candy or social media. These are indulgences that hurt to lay aside. Sometimes we think of sacrifice in terms of life. Many ancient religions would kill an animal or even a human being as an act of sacrifice to their gods. But that is not the real meaning of “sacrifice.” Pope Benedict XVI understands the heart of sacrifice is union with God. What God wants is not some external gift: He wants me.
Even thinking about our Lenten sacrifices, what good does it do to give up candy or social media, if it does not draw us closer to God? Because that is the entire point of those sacrifices: to be brought more and more into union with God by letting go of the things that keep us away. It is the same with the sacrifice of the Mass. The sacrifice of Jesus is meant to bring us into union with Him. Pope Benedict writes, “Belonging to God has nothing to do with destruction… [i]t means emerging from the state of separation… of existing only for oneself in oneself.” (pg 42) In other words, the sacrifice of Jesus draws us out of our selfish separation from God and into union with Him through Jesus.
Christ on the Cross is an act of true sacrifice because it is an act of true love. Love is a gift of the self that God wants. Pope Benedict writes, “Such sacrifice has nothing to do with destruction. It is an act of new creation, the restoration of creation to its true identity.” (pg 48) In other words, this view of sacrifice is not about death or killing. Therefore we are not “re-killing” Jesus at the Mass. This view of sacrifice is about transforming us, which is something that should happen at the Mass.
To be clear, the Council of Trent in Chapter VIII on its decrees on the Eucharist stated that the Eucharist is a true and real sacrifice (Canon 1) and that it is a “propitiatory” sacrifice, meaning that it brings reconciliation to God (Canon 2).
I am a philosopher by training. I like to always refer to the Father of Philosophy: Socrates. And whenever Socrates struggled with a problem, he would always go back to defining our terms. What is it we are actually talking about? In this case, I think we need to define the word “sacrifice.”
Pope Benedict XVI wrote a book before he was pope called The Spirit of the Liturgy. He addresses our common understanding of sacrifice as “something to do with destruction.” (pg. 41) We often think of sacrifice as giving something up, like our Lenten sacrifices of candy or social media. These are indulgences that hurt to lay aside. Sometimes we think of sacrifice in terms of life. Many ancient religions would kill an animal or even a human being as an act of sacrifice to their gods. But that is not the real meaning of “sacrifice.” Pope Benedict XVI understands the heart of sacrifice is union with God. What God wants is not some external gift: He wants me.
Even thinking about our Lenten sacrifices, what good does it do to give up candy or social media, if it does not draw us closer to God? Because that is the entire point of those sacrifices: to be brought more and more into union with God by letting go of the things that keep us away. It is the same with the sacrifice of the Mass. The sacrifice of Jesus is meant to bring us into union with Him. Pope Benedict writes, “Belonging to God has nothing to do with destruction… [i]t means emerging from the state of separation… of existing only for oneself in oneself.” (pg 42) In other words, the sacrifice of Jesus draws us out of our selfish separation from God and into union with Him through Jesus.
Christ on the Cross is an act of true sacrifice because it is an act of true love. Love is a gift of the self that God wants. Pope Benedict writes, “Such sacrifice has nothing to do with destruction. It is an act of new creation, the restoration of creation to its true identity.” (pg 48) In other words, this view of sacrifice is not about death or killing. Therefore we are not “re-killing” Jesus at the Mass. This view of sacrifice is about transforming us, which is something that should happen at the Mass.
Pope Benedict makes the distinction between two types of sacrifices: representation and replacement. In representation, there is something of the one who sacrifices in the gift. Pope Benedict points to Abraham sacrificing the ram or the Passover sacrifice of Exodus (pg. 52-53). There is something of the one who sacrifices in the offering. But with the replacement image, the sacrifice is done in place of the giver, literally a scapegoat. Someone else pays so that I do not have to. This is why God, in the Old Testament, kept rejecting Israel’s sacrifices: because they were more like economic transactions than tokens of love. If you take out the trash at home so you can guilt your wife into doing the dishes, your sacrifice is not done out of love, but rather it is a transaction. But if you take the trash out seeking nothing in return, and only do it because you love your wife and want to be closer to her. This is the representational sacrifice. This is the sacrifice of Christ at the Mass.
Sunday, October 18, 2026
Film Flash: Street Fighter (2026)
15 words or less film review (full review to follow soon)
Movie that's dumb and fun but gets less fun and more dumb as it goes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)