Living in the end times does not give us a pass

By Dr. Jeff Mirus ( bio - articles - email ) | Apr 04, 2025

Even before he became Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger had a remarkable insight into the spiritual crisis of the modern world:

Creation is defined as dependence, origin ab alio [from another]. Its place is taken by the category of self-creation, which is accomplished through work. Since creation equals dependence, and dependence is the antithesis of freedom, the doctrine of creation is opposed.¹

Indeed, it ought to be clear by now that a fundamental rejection of our status as creatures lies at the root of a great many human problems and discontents, as well as misguided solutions. A primary example is transgenderism. Perhaps above all other faults, contemporary transgenderism is a radical denial of the profound reality that we are creatures—that we owe our very being and personal identity to a Divine Creator.

But it is not just those who have tried to change their genders who give evidence of this radical denial. The same is true of all who espouse and defend the same mindset—a radical rejection of our identity as “creatures”, that we were created by and for Another. Clearly, any rejection of the natural law and any refusal to conform oneself to God’s will—or, indeed, any refusal to take the question of God seriously—puts us in precisely the same camp. It should be no surprise, then, that a huge proportion of what we might call our most persistent human dysfunctions arise from the fundamental ingratitude implicit in human pride.

Denial as a sign of transcendence

Even a recognition of our capacity for such denial is a proof that we humans really do possess some form of “transcendence”. Pride itself is an immaterial—in other words, a spiritual—quality. Indeed, the very fact that we are capable of rebelling against our own bodily nature is proof that we also have a spiritual nature—in other words, a nature which mysteriously transcends mere materiality. To even think about altering our own given nature demonstrates this spiritual capacity, whether we call it “intellect” or “free will” or “soul”. Even this small glimmer of insight should be sufficient to convince us that, unlike any other material being we know about, we are also spiritual beings; and since we have not always existed, we must necessarily be created beings.

We ought, of course, to realize this through our preoccupation with the problem of death and our constant effort, in many different forms, to escape that fate. It is no great wonder that some of us even dream of improving upon humanity either through eugenics or through the creation of super-intelligent robotic machines which will not have to deal with the messiness of death. The very fact that we can reflect on these sorts of problems proves that, though we are obviously material bodily beings, we also have a spiritual nature.

This is the whole reason we have such trouble understanding how the problem of death has entered into the picture. Death is inescapable for material beings but spiritual death (short of annihilation by a superior spiritual power) makes no sense, for spirit is not subject to deterioration. It does not wear out. This explains why we humans have left evidence from the first that we believe that only the body dies: The spirit does not “run out” of life, and so—again absent annihilation by a higher power—all persons must exist in some other form after death.

But somewhere along the way, a great many of us have outsmarted ourselves. We decided that we were such super-achievers, with such a magnificent control over nature, that we could pretend that we are completely above nature, not subject to the limitations common to all created beings, and so free to reinvent ourselves in any way we wish. This is called living in denial, and the first rule of living in denial is that only spiritual beings can do it. The second rule is that living in denial is the greatest waste of time and energy that can possibly be conceived.

Does anybody care?

A question that has been raised in a recent book by Fr. Donald Haggerty² is whether “anybody cares” about these sorts of questions in our world today. Fr. Haggerty wonders whether the vast indifference to spiritual questions in our world could possibly be a sign of the end times: “But when the Son of Man returns, will He find faith on earth?” (Lk 18:8). He understands (and cautions) that such speculation is useless. In my own opinion, this is largely a feature of a morally exhausted West which has become so accustomed to wealth, technology and power that our materialistic culture has become a box outside of which it is difficult to think.

Throughout Christian history it has seemed as if a huge proportion of people really do not care about these issues. While it is a fair question why Christian practice comes and goes in various periods and places, it has probably always seemed that the world “as a whole” does not care much about the message of Christ. Even where the Church has been strong, the “Churchy” conformity of a culture has not necessarily meant that the majority of people had really internalized a living Faith in Christ. If they had, it would be far more surprising that subsequent generations had not been raised with a strong faith, and that it has been so easy for so many large majorities over time to slip away from anything more than whatever outward conformity their dominant culture seems to expect. And, of course, when enough people slip away, then an official and widely proclaimed anti-conformity eventually becomes the new conformity.

I not mean to suggest that Fr. Haggerty believes the end times are upon us. His goal is to take the signs of the times seriously and propose an appropriate Christian response. For me the issue is to find more effective ways of evangelizing among Christians no longer used to evangelizing. Moreover, we must also understand that—while we should certainly engage in evangelization—some periods and places do seem to be largely impervious to the Gospel until there have been a good many martyrs. As Tertullian put it about 1800 years ago, the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church. Our Lord put this another way: “For here the saying holds true, ‘One sows and another reaps.’”

Prudence and risk

The conclusion to be drawn is that, in addition to the grace-of-outcome which is partially dependent upon Our Lord’s particular will in each circumstance (and obviously very dependent on the sort of ground on which the seed falls), it requires a deliberately prayerful cultivation of both courage and prudence to evangelize successfully. Westerners today are pretty green when it comes to this task. We Catholics are children of a lost culture in which it seemed (incorrectly) that evangelization was no longer necessary. But now that the culture has shifted to open hostility to Christ, a lack of courage causes us to turn prudence into cowardice. The question today seems to be this: What small scraps of Gospel-compatible ideas can we express without annoying others?

The example of Pope Francis in this matter is only one step above that of secularized Catholic leaders who reduce the faith to pallid comments on those (few remaining) moral values on which everyone can still agree. The Pope, at least, still emphasizes the importance of prayer and particular devotions for those who appreciate them. But we live in an era in which, even in the Church, prudence is thought to consist primarily in not casting pearls before swine—in the sense that we cannot say very much about the Triumph of the Cross lest the swine should overhear it, and trouble should result. The point of Our Lord’s advice was a bit different: “And wherever they do not receive you…shake off the dust from your feet as a testimony against them” (Lk 9:4-5).

The point is that, whether the end is upon us or not, every Catholic is obliged by his or her baptismal character to live as “priest, prophet and king”. This means prayerfully seeking and testing how we can best serve others in Christ, which cannot be done without bearing witness to Who Christ is. He is, after all, the Father’s greatest gift to us. Evangelization must inescapably involve an invitation to live ever more in Christ—if possible, both formally and materially, which is to say sacramentally.

Some of us may not be particularly good at forming widespread warm relationships with others, so as to have a direct personal influence on their conversion and spiritual growth. Some of us, after all, write articles, post them online, and call it a day. But my point is that we all have to do something, and none of us has the right to alter the goal which Christ Himself established when he said: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:18-20).

Conclusion

If we are still unconvinced that “prudence” and “the conditions on the ground” and “the times in which we live” do not give us a free pass to do nothing, we must consider Paul’s letter to Titus:

For the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men, training us to renounce irreligion and worldly passions, and to live sober, upright, and godly lives in this world, awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all iniquity and to purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds. Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you. [Tit 2:11-15]

We must take our baptismal promises seriously. We must find ways to bear witness to Christ, either more generally through various apostolates or in the circles of our families, friends and acquaintances. In these less formal situations, of course, a great deal depends on our good example, both in word and deed. What other opportunities might we already have for witness? And what new opportunities can we create? By the way, there is no evidence that St. Francis ever said, “Preach the gospel at all times, and if necessary use words.” It will be necessary to use words, but good example is the first step, since example prompts questions…and comments. St. Peter himself said that we must not be put off by what we may consider the risks:

Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is right? But even if you do suffer for righteousness’ sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence; and keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. For it is better to suffer for doing right, if that should be God’s will, than for doing wrong. [1 Pet 3:13-17]

The times in which we live, whether they be the end times or not, are completely irrelevant to whether we actively love God as our greatest possible Treasure—and actively love our neighbors as ourselves.

---

¹Quoted in Fr. John Nepil, To Heights and unto Depths: Letters from the Colorado Trail (see my brief review)

²Father Donald Haggerty, The Hour of Testing: Spiritual Depth and Insight in a Time of Ecclesial Uncertainty: Ignatius Press, 2025.