Lay Mystagogues

All Too Soon, The Clock Will Strike Midnight

2012-01-22T01:28:00.005-06:00

A little over two years ago, my wife and I thought it would be good if each of us made moments of one-on-one time with each of our kids. Not just chance moments, but actual dates away from the home, doing something that would entertain that child and give him or her the chance to talk about whatever they want. The kids weren’t short on time with the parents – my wife homeschools and I was in between jobs. But there’s always competition for that solo attention, and that was a need that we weren’t fulfilling to our satisfaction.

I liked the idea so much that a made a date with my eldest child and only daughter. She was six at the time. We went to a donut shop first, and then a nearby neighborhood park. I don’t remember much about the date. I don’t think I even brought the camera. She liked the donuts (six-year-olds aren’t that picky) and enjoyed climbing on the slide/swing/fortress structure. She had a good time, we did talk, and that was about it.

That was the last date I had with her or any of the kids until last night. Two years. So much for great ideas and good intentions.

Much has happened since then. I have a job that requires weekend work quite often. Many 12 and sometimes 16 hour days. On top of all the hours, there has been tedious projects on the home front. I, of course, have left the blog fallow. No time to blog to oblivion when I don’t have time for much else.

I’m just not the best manager of time here at home. It’s a deadly trait – expecting time to stand still.

She is eight now. She’s not a “swings and slides” kind of girl anymore, though she still likes donuts. We go to confession together, we go to the communion rail together, and she has no trouble making conversation these days. In two years she’s changed.

I’d like to take credit for re-initiating last night’s one-on-one time, but I can’t. It was thrust upon me. There was a Daddy-Daughter dance on the calendar, and there wasn’t any question about going. She had this event set in her heart months before the big day.

And I made it as special as I could. I put on my best suit and she put on her new Christmas dress. I gave her a locket. We had dinner for two at Pizza Hut – her choice. And we also hit Dairy Queen after the dance. We had a blast.

Neither of us can dance, but after that experience I’m resolved to change that. I’m not quite sure how, but dancing is something that should be passed down through the family. It wasn’t in mine, and my wife had scant more exposure in her family. But really, that didn’t matter. She would stumble along as best she could, then light up like a Christmas tree every time I gave her a twirl.

I was concerned that the music would be in poor taste, but that fear was unfounded. It was mostly popular/dancy kind of stuff with some throwback tunes, and much of it I had a vague sense of familiarity (“two steps to the left now bring it on down, yo!”). Nothing lyrically inappropriate. Looking around the room, I think I had the inside track for the squarest father title. She didn’t mind at all. My daughter, she’s pretty square, too. (I hope there’s no video of us doing the bunny hop or the chicken dance – that would haunt us the rest of our lives, I’m sure)

She stayed close to me the entire time. No chance to have those small-talk conversations with other square dads. And she was not at all interested in socializing with her peers. She was locked to my side the entire night, save one trip to the bathroom. She gloried in being with me and trying to do this dancing stuff.

Why did I wait two years for this?

I remember three dances most from last night. The last dance was to The Load Down – not exactly what you’d expect at a dance like this, but it shines, as it always did for Jackson Browne, when it’s the last song of the night. It’s a piece that belongs with that handful of songs which always makes you stop scanning the radio dial. As it started with just Browne and his keyboard, I leisurely got her coat on and we gathered our stuff to leave, but then took her back out to the floor just in time for the percussion to begin, and we finished dancing out the door as the song faded.

We danced to one of my mom’s all-time favorites, Sweet Caroline. The DJ encouraged us to sing out our daughter’s name in place of “Caroline”, which delighted Sweet Kathleen to no end.

And then there was Cinderella by Steven Curtis Champman. This one falls into the “vaguely familiar” category. I’d heard it before, but never listened to it. But when you’re dancing with your daughter to that song, it’s impossible to miss what it’s about. I doubt she realized what the song was about – she just enjoyed the dance and liked hearing “Cinderella” in the song. Me – I was welling-up, and convicted in my heart.

I can’t go back to that jungle-gym and start again, bring a camera this time, and making two years of dates in my planner for my daughter and sons. That window has passed. What I can do, and what I’m resolved to do, is face time head-on, embracing it, and doing what is right for my state in life. Today, Lord, please! Today and not two years from now.

My Lord – thank you for the gift of time, and thank you for the broken heart to remind me of how to best use the gift.

O all ye that pass by the way, attend, and see if there be any sorrow like to my sorrow

2010-04-03T09:20:00.004-05:00

So, you ask, what happened to the mid-Lent seminar?

Well, I’ll explain that later. For now, it’s Holy Saturday, and Eman the Ezrahite will guest blog. Happy Easter, all!

O Lord, the God of my salvation: I have cried in the day, and in the night before thee. Let my prayer come in before thee: incline thy ear to my petition. For my soul is filled with evils: and my life hath drawn nigh to hell.I am counted among them that go down to the pit: I am become as a man without help,
Free among the dead. Like the slain sleeping in the sepulchres, whom thou rememberest no more: and they are cast off from thy hand. They have laid me in the lower pit: in the dark places, and in the shadow of death. Thy wrath is strong over me: and all thy waves thou hast brought in upon me. Thou hast put away my acquaintance far from me: they have set me an abomination to themselves. I was delivered up, and came not forth: My eyes languished through poverty. All the day I cried to thee, O Lord: I stretched out my hands to thee.
Wilt thou shew wonders to the dead? or shall physicians raise to life, and give praise to thee? Shall any one in the sepulchre declare thy mercy: and thy truth in destruction? Shall thy wonders be known in the dark; and thy justice in the land of forgetfulness? But I, O Lord, have cried to thee: and in the morning my prayer shall prevent thee. Lord, why castest thou off my prayer: why turnest thou away thy face from me?
I am poor, and in labours from my youth: and being exalted have been humbled and troubled. Thy wrath hath come upon me: and thy terrors have troubled me. They have come round about me like water all the day: they have compassed me about together. Friend and neighbour thou hast put far from me: and my acquaintance, because of misery. (Psalm 88[87])

The First Precept

2010-03-09T16:12:00.002-06:00

Parochial Mass
“The parish is established to provide the parishioners with the helps of religion, especially with Mass. The parochial Mass is celebrated for their welfare on all Sundays and holidays of obligation, even when suppressed. The parish priest is not obliged to say it personally; but if he does not, he must offer his own Mass for that intention. Parishioners now fulfil their duty by assisting at Mass in any church; but formerly they had at least to hear a Mass in the parish church (ch. "Vices", 2, "De treuga et pace" in "Extrav. Comm." of Sixtus IV, n 1478)”. [New Advent, my emphasis]

One of the things that motivates me to blog is that our God has offered us INFINITE grace, yet we can only catch so much. And despite our finite capacity to receive grace, it is still amazing to me that the laity, and even some religious, will not place it as a priority to capture more of the grace that is offered. Often we do so little, usually out of ignorance, but sometimes out of a lack of motivation.

As astonished as I am, at the same time, I understand this problem personally. As I blog about this, I am in no position to demonstrate an example of someone capturing this grace. I’m only sounding the alarm. I’m not in fact realizing this in my own life.

I blogged earlier on Father Schnipple’s excellent article, Jesus the New Passover. I quoted this line before, but my focus was on the prefigurement of the cross. I want to now point to this final two lines of the quote, which say so much.

“Each of these lambs, by the thousands, would be carried out of the Temple
and to the homes of the people in and around Jerusalem. ‘Crucified lambs’ were
being offered for the people.”

The sacrifice was, in a sense, completed at the temple, when the High Priest partook, or consumed, the sacrifice that was, “offered for the people.” But in another sense, participation in the sacrifice was extended to the people, as the lambs were delivered to them by acolytes of the temple, from the temple altar to their home liturgical celebrations. Thanks to this insight, we can see with clarity the prefigurement of our Parochial Mass, offered, “for [the parishoners’] welfare on all Sundays…”

Mother Church, in Her wisdom, requires us to “hear” or “assist” at this mass if we are reasonably able to do so. I think the “pain of mortal sin” component is to negatively motivate us to do what we might decline to do in the positive sense, which is to participate in the perfect sacrifice that offers us a flood sanctifying grace, the Life and Love of the Trinity, and makes reconciliation with God the Father possible, for ourselves and for the whole world. Who in their right mind would fail to take part in that? No names now, that was rhetorical.

Those of us not called as priests have to realize that though our participation may not be essential for the sacrifice, it is essential for us and for those whom, for any reason, are not there. Not just to be in good standing, but to be true disciples. Do we realize this?

The human soul has a great capacity to compartmentalize our knowledge, and thus deprive our will from the realization of this great gift. Without that motivation, all too often take the Woody Allen approach of just showing up. We can also alter what the motivation should be, and as a result, we end up at mass to see our friends, sing familiar, catchy tunes, and leave with the warm and fuzzy that we’ve done our duty. This mass, if it’s all it’s cracked-up to be, should be something more than this. Shouldn’t it be?

Well, it’s your lucky day. I’ve spent countless minutes researching the best methods to improved participation at the mass, and I’m going to deliver to you that results of that thorough investigation. Let’s play Twenty Questions. Just take the following survey, and take note of any questions you answer in the negative:

· Do we often study ahead of time, even during the week before, the readings, Introit, Collect, Preface, Communion Antiphon, and Closing so as to more perfectly join in the prayers and mysteries during mass?

· Are we striving for proper etiquette and decorum while present in the nave?

· Do we bring our mass intentions with us, confident of Divine Assistance?

· Are we spending time in meditation, realizing His Real Presence in the tabernacle?

· Do we watch Father’s approach to the altar, aware that it is only he who can “dwell in thy tabernacle” or “rest on thy holy hill” with the rod of God in his hand?

· Are we praying or singing the Ordinaries and responses with conviction?

· Do we often listen carefully to God’s Word and the Homily, open to His voice?

· Do we recall our Mass intention during the Collect and the Offertory, so as to place them properly in the context of the Mass?

· Are we offering ourselves along with the gifts at the Offertory, not allowing the envelopes and sing-a-longs to become a distraction?

· Do we joyfully await His appearance on the altar?

· Are we following the spirit of the Eucharistic prayer, from the Sursum Corda through the Final Doxology? Not hanging on every word, but offering prayers for the Church, for the living, for communion with the saints, for the acceptance and blessing of the offering, for the etc., at the appropriate time?

· Is He adored by us when He arrives on the altar?

· How often do we humble ourselves, convicted in our sinfulness and in awe of His majesty and mercy, as we await communion?

· Is there fervor in our approach to receive?

· If we receive, do we praise Him and express our thanks?

· If we don’t receive, do we make a spiritual communion?

· As we kneel after communion, do we ask Him for a virtue to combat our sinfulness?

· Do we receive, with joyful gratitude, the final blessing?

· Are we taking our time leaving, making sure our Lord is consoled by our appreciation for His presence and sacrifice?

· Do we reflect on the mass in the hours and days afterward to better embody the gift we’ve been given.

So, how’d you do? Give yourself a point for each positive answer and see how you rate:

0 – Menace to Society – Please read Rev 13:5-8 and see if you qualify.
1-2 – Poser – But a strong candidate for a diocesan or parish staff position.
3-4 – CafeCat – I’m surprised you took the test. The picture of Jesus didn’t scare you away?
5-6 – Progressive – “We have been sung throughout all of hist'ry…”
7-9 - Fair Weather – I’d recommend starting a blog and pretending to know something about your faith.
10-11 – Average – Good job! This still would have been an F back in school.
12-13 - RadTrad – Please stop scowling every time we sing that fun, Gnostic hymn.
14-16 – Showoff – Your piety annoys us. Thanks for making the rest of us look bad!
17-19 – Cheater – You are going to Hell.
20 – Our Lady! – Or you can’t follow directions. Start over and read more carefully.

I wrote of our compartmentalized knowledge. We can’t repeatedly recite the Creed without knowing a great deal of our faith. Yet it is so easy and tempting to avoid any deep realization of what we know. So tempting and common is this compartmentalization that many of us forget what we know, and we can be easily led astray by subtle heresies about the nature of God, the Immaculate Conception, the Catholic Church as the only means of salvation, etc.

As hard as it is to believe, if we come away from mass linked more closely to Our Blessed Lord, we too can become, “A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.” At the risk of sounding too modernistic, they do have a point when they stress that we are His body. Saint Paul used to stress that too. Thus, no matter what our priorities actually are (and hopefully our priorities align nicely with God’s), we could hardly do better for the greater glory of God, for ourselves, for our family, for our friends, for our Church, for our parish, for our superiors, for our cohorts, for our subordinates, for our enemies, for complete strangers, and for all of creation, than to DO MASS BETTER!

Maybe “doing Mass better” isn’t the absolute highest priority in life – I really don’t know. But I think it can be reasonably argued as such a priority. This can be pointed to in many ways, but for the sake of space, I will simply point to the short instruction contained in the 1962 Roman Missal:

Of all the practices recommended by our holy religion: Morning and Evening Prayers, Prayers before and after Meals, Visit to the Most Holy Sacrament, Rosary, Way of the Cross, etc.--the august Sacrifice of the Mass is infinitely greater. It is the most precious, the most holy of practices, as well as the most conducive to man's salvation.

As we stand now in the heart of Lent, the time of conversion, we should look once again at our priorities. Doing Mass well, better than we have, should be high on our list. One will find no other thing that supports greater spiritual benefit. Shouldn’t we all desire that?

I don’t think I heard any objections, so I’ll continue. Practically speaking, how can we pray the Mass well? I’m here to help. Here's four things you can do:

1. First, make sure to follow the advice of Pope Saint Pius X [my emphasis]:

The Holy Mass is a prayer itself, even the highest prayer that exists. It is the Sacrifice, dedicated by our Redeemer at the Cross, and repeated every day on the Altar. If you wish to hear Mass as it should be heard, you must follow with eye, heart, and mouth all that happens at the Altar. Further, you must pray with the Priest the holy words said by him, in the Name of Christ and which Christ says by him. You have to associate your heart with the holy feelings which are contained in these words and in this manner you ought to follow all that happens on the Altar. When acting in this way you have prayed Holy Mass.

For us in today’s Church, were very little is whispered at the altar, one would think this would be easily accomplished. But because we hear the same words echoed week after week, we rarely “associate [our] heart[s] with the holy feelings” at each point in the Mass, most notably from the Offertory onward. Typically, we let the predictable words flow empty through our ears. This requires true “active” participation. This require the study of the Mass and attempting to find out where our hearts should be at any time. Thus, during Mass, we can “active”-ly put our hearts where they need to be.

2. Read Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, aka Pope Benedict XVI.

Books like Spirit of the Liturgy, Feast of Faith, A New Song for the Lord, God Is Near Us, and his series on Jesus of Nazareth. Take my word for it. HE KNOWS THIS STUFF! Why go to The Shack to unlock the mysteries of faith when you can learn from a man who knows it, and communicates it better than anyone. An easy read? By no means do I mean that. But with time, patience, and prayerful reading, he can shed considerable brightness on your blind spots. This Pope is grace for our times. Take advantage of his wisdom.

3. Go back through the test taken above. Correct shortcomings.

4. Go to my Mid-Lent Virtual Seminar

Yes, I’m going to offer a Mid-Lent Virtual Seminar. I hope you will attend. It will most certainly help with your Mass.

Please read the sidebar to reckognize my numerous creditials and expertice for this. Expect the Seminar to begin in the next few days, give or take a week, and run for 14 or so posts. Consider it like the Way of the Cross, without the indugences or any devotional grace.

But whether you attend the Seminar or not, please take away one thing - pray the Mass. Every Mass offers the opportunity to participate in something beyond anything we could imagine. Jesus Christ is there, through the liturgy, offering our petty gifts to the Father, transformed in His holy hands. You're prayer for the conversion of your sister, or comfort for your dying mother, or for that job that you need to support your family, or for the victims of earthquakes - how are they best offered? Going straight to God yourself? That's good. Going through the Mother of God? That's better. But in the hands of Jesus, the High Priest, the Saving Victim, offered directly to the Father? If prayer is better heard from the righteous, you have no better hearing for your prayers than this.

Don't waste the precious gift of the Mass. Pray it well.

A Bad Start

2010-02-17T05:16:00.003-06:00

Wake up. Get excited! Today is the start of a magnificent journey of prayer, penance, and renunciation, and I need to get worked up about it. Yawn.

I stagger to the coffee maker. Can't find the normal water-fill cup used for coffee. Have to use a smaller one. This means two trips to the refrigerator.

On the second trip, I spy a tasty morsel of chicken enchilada on the casserole pan from last night. Toss in mouth. Not much chewing needed. As I'm filling the cup at the fridge and the morsel is headed toward my throat for swallowing, it hits me.

FASTING! ABSTINENCE! AHHHHHH!

Ten seconds of intense spitting back into the casserole dish. Leave for wife to clean. Use water to wash-out mouth. Start coffee.

Read morning prayers with wife. Almost say the A-word after the opening Glory Be. Finish prayers. Ask out loud, "Is coffee okay for fasting?" I'm the cradle Catholic, so a definitive answer wasn't expected. Fill coffee cups for both. Make a conscious decision not to google for an answer on the coffee.

Prepare to open breviary. Look up at crucifix. AHHHHH! THE PALMS ARE STILL UP!

This was the first hour of the first day. Only 959 hours to go.

Is your soul prepared?

Happy Contraceptives Day!

2010-02-14T14:05:00.002-06:00

Ok, ok, maybe its not an official ~~holy day~~ holiday in our country just yet, but personal sexual ~~slavery to lust~~ "freedom" seems to have become the de facto religion of our country, if you consider how pervasive contraceptives have become.

But what to do with all of those leftover birth control trays? Surely throwing them in the trash only adds to the amount of dangerous hormone that goes into the environment and creates genetically mutated fish and frogs. We can't recycle those containers, and it is un-American to even consider reducing birth control pill use. The only thing left is to reuse. BUT HOW?

Glad you asked! What better way to say "I love you" than to give your sweetheart chocolate? Of course it is to give them chocolate shaped like birth control pill containers!

Amazingly, someone actually came up with the idea of creating a baking mold out of those old containers. And, really, I can't think of a better icon to what American culture has reduced Valentine's Day. St. Valentine, pray for us. Pray for us all.

Masculine Discussion on Feminism

2010-02-09T13:05:00.003-06:00

Tonight, the Lay Mystagogues will be fitting on our boxing gloves and attending the Argument of the Month Club's argument over "Marian Femininity vs. Modern Feminism."

Now for those of you who don't know, the AOTM is a club for men alone. That is, real "manly" men, who like to eat "manly" meals, and who apparently like to emphasize that they are "manly" at every opportunity. Being secure in my own masculinity, even though I have never considered myself a "manly" man with all the fixin's that go along with that, like toting a power drill, or guzzling beer, or smashing empty beer cans on my forehead, this whole emphasis on "manliness" to me seems, well, pretty "unmanly". Here is a sampling from the dinner menu tonight (sic):

Apetizer: AOTM Louisiana Hot Wings for starters and yes celery for those girly men who are watching their girlish figure. But for the real man who want taste, we have Blue Cheese dressing to stick that celery in.

Now I must admit that I have never attended the AOTM Club before, and although it is tempting to cover my entire body in blue paint with a giant letter "J" on my chest (for "Jesus" naturally) in order to fit in, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that all this "manliness" is just sort of a tongue-in-cheek celebration of being men.

Aside from all this chest thumping, the question that comes to mind is this: Why are a bunch of men discussing the appropriate way for women to be feminists? As a man, I am must more interested in being a real man, like Jesus, than how a woman can be a real woman, like Mary. But no women will benefit from such a discussion because women are not allowed is this meeting to talk about how women should behave. Apparently I'm supposed to go home to lay down the law and, from my chair as high-manly-priest of my home, instruct my subordinates, including (apparently) Mrs. Andy, how to appropriately behave.

It just seems wrong, yet somehow intriguing. I pray that this group's need to feel manly is simply a "tongue in cheek" attitude. If worse comes to worse, I will just get big and fat tonight on the all-you-can-eat buffet. You know, like a REAL man.

The Lion as Catholic

2010-02-09T06:01:00.005-06:00

Certainly we do not want men to allow their Christianity to flow over into their political life, for the establishment of anything like a really just society would be a major disaster. On the other hand we do want, and want very much, to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but, failing that, as a means to anything—even to social justice. The thing to do is to get a man at first to value social justice as a thing which the Enemy demands, and then work him on to the stage at which he values Christianity because it may produce social justice. For the Enemy will not be used as a convenience. Men or nations who think they can revive the Faith in order to make a good society might just as well think they can use the stairs of Heaven as a short cut to the nearest chemist's shop. Fortunately it is quite easy to coax humans round this little corner. Only today I have found a passage in a Christian writer where he recommends his own version of Christianity on the ground that "only such a faith can outlast the
death of old cultures and the birth of new civilisations". You see the little rift? "Believe this, not because it is true, but for some other reason." That's the game, (C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, Letter XXIII)

Admittedly, I dive into to politics often. I'm sure this makes my apologetics partner grown. There is a very good reason, though. And Phil Lawler's reveiw of Ted Kennedy's posthumous autobiography, True Compass, A Memoir, puts that reason into perspective (my emphasis).

Because they concentrated so heavily on the misbehavior that he never denied, most of Kennedy’s conservative critics failed to realize the real political masterstroke that he never discussed. Over the course of his political career, Kennedy steered steadily leftward without endangering his popular support in Massachusetts; he brought his constituency along with him. Still more remarkably, he became more and more open in his conflicts with the Catholic Church—eventually becoming the most influential opponent of Catholicism on key public issues—while remaining the most visible Catholic legislator in Washington.

Throughout his public life, and especially at his death, Ted Kennedy was identified as a devout Catholic. He was, after all, the standard-bearer for the most famous Catholic family in America. His brother had been the country’s first Catholic president; his father was so close to Boston’s Cardinal Cushing that he referred to him as “Richard” (which is curious, really, since everyone else in Boston called him “Dick”); he himself had received his First Communion from Pope Pius XII.

How did Kennedy manage to maintain the public perception that he was a loyal Catholic, even while he worked to shatter the solidarity that once characterized the Catholic voting bloc? How did he keep alive the traditional presumption that ethnic Catholics belonged in the Democratic Party, even as the Democratic Party began to marginalize anyone who upheld Catholic moral teachings? That question is never addressed in True Compass. In his memoir, as in his public career, Ted Kennedy deflects attention from his most remarkable—albeit ultimately destructive—achievement.

Lawler, in his review, details the political shift that brought Catholic Democrats to the place of defending the culture of death. I'm not sure this was all Ted Kennedy's doing. It's hard to believe one man could scandalize an entire region and a good percentage of the nation. The evil "Spirit of Vatican II" was quite active in this political transition of American Catholics, and this transition obviously transcended politics. Nevertheless, I must concede to Lawler two points. One - He's clearly an expert on the matter. Two - I was once one of Ted Kennedy's scandalized.

But that is for another time. I've blogged about Kennedys before, and may soon after.

Kennedy mentions his Catholicism hundreds of times in this book, but almost invariably he is referring to the cultural heritage of Catholicism rather than to its doctrinal content or its spiritual exercises—the form rather than the substance of his faith. Still he insists that his faith shaped his political outlook. In one of the book’s most revealing passages, he relates how his thoughts matured as he entered adult life:

"My own center of belief, as I matured and grew curious about these things, moved toward the great Gospel of Matthew, chapter 25 especially, in which he calls us to care for the least of these among us, and feed the hungry, clothe the naked, give drink to the thirsty, welcome the stranger, visit the imprisoned. It’s enormously significant to me that the only description in the Bible about salvation is tied to one’s willingness to act on behalf of one’s fellow human beings."

It boggles the mind that an adult Catholic—who presumably heard the Scriptures read at every Sunday Mass, even if he never read the Bible himself—could claim that there is only one passage in the Bible addressing the question of salvation. But the above quotation contains another sign, less obvious but even more telling, of the author’s detached attitude toward his faith. When he says that “he calls us to care for the least of these among us,” Kennedy never identifies who “he” is. The name of Jesus does not appear anywhere in this memoir.

“All of my life, the teachings of my faith have provided solace and hope,” Kennedy wrote as he faced the prospect of death. He surely did draw solace from his faith, but
not guidance. He knew that the Church offered words of comfort; he never recognized that the Church also spoke with authority. So in his final illness, while he felt the need to write to Pope Benedict XVI, asking for the pontiff’s blessing, he still saw no need to renounce his long history of public opposition to Church teaching on the dignity of life.

A Christianity without Jesus, a Catholicism without sacraments, a doctrine without authority: this is the conception of the Church that emerges from True Compass. Ted Kennedy saw Catholicism as an important part of his identity, of his family history, of his cultural patrimony. But his life story provides very little evidence that his faith shaped his political ideals. On the contrary, it seems clear that his political ideals shaped the content of his faith. The story of Ted Kennedy’s public life is, to an alarming extent, the story of a generation of Catholics—in Boston in particular, in America in general. It is, regrettably, not a story of how these Catholics shaped the
popular culture, but of how that culture changed their faith.

This is the story of faith kept at arms' distance, used, as Lewis wrote, as a means, and not embraced to the fullest. Faith is turned upside down. God is made in our image instead of the reverse.

Probably the saddest chapter of his tragic life was revealed at his funeral, something Lawler mentions above. This was his letter, delivered by President Obama, to our Holy Father. Oddly, it was read by Theodore Cardinal McCarrick to offer the mourners comfort. Instead, for those of us who were searching for something hopeful in his words to indicate a conversion, what Cardinal McCarrick read was confirmation of his fantasy faith, a platform for his pride, and persistent obstinance. Kennedy's intention seemed to be to lay out for Pope Benedict his cause for salvation, nay, canonization.

I want you to know Your Holiness that in my nearly 50 years of elective office I have done my best to champion the rights of the poor and open doors of economic opportunity. I have worked to welcome the immigrant, to fight discrimination and expand access to health care and education. I have opposed the death penalty and fought to end war.

Those are the issues that have motivated me and have been the focus of my work as a United States senator. I also want you to know that even though I am ill, I am committed to do everything I can to achieve access to health care for everyone in my country. This has been the political cause of my life. I believe in a conscience protection for Catholics in the health field and I will continue to advocate for it as my colleagues in the Senate and I work to develop an overall national health policy that guarantees health care for everyone. I have always tried to be a faithful Catholic, our Holiness, and though I have fallen short through human failings, I have never failed to believe and respect the fundamental teachings of my faith. I continue to pray for God's blessings on you and on our church and would be most thankful for your prayers for me.

(I can't say he did much for those "conscience protections", as his colleagues in the Senate passed a bill without any, and his legacy candidate made it clear that she didn't believe in them.)

With all due respect, why Cardinal McCarrick thought this would be a fitting tribute at his funeral is beyond me. The idea that we can trumpet our own case for salvation (fudging or straight-up lying about the facts) and use the faith for whatever we see fit is a terrible heresy. It's plagued Ted Kennedy's generation, and every one since.

What would have brought me more comfort is to find out that he received his sacraments before passing. That's more important than any accomplishments or failings that seemed to follow him to his death. Luckily, like other high-profile obstinate cafeteria Catholics, he was at the receiving end of prayers and graces, and had priests available at his last hour. That is what gives us hope that Kennedy will see God - not his expansion of government to solve the problems of the poor.

It is most unfortunate that members of the Church seemed to be agreeable to Kennedy's public version of faith, thus allowing his scandal wide influence for 40 years. I'm grateful that those days seem to be coming to an end. But I can't help but note how tragic it was that his scandal wasn't addressed early, publicly when warranted, and consistently. Many will say that I don't know that it wasn't addressed properly. But how can 40 years of public scandal from a man wearing the Catholic label and no public rebuke from his bishop be considered proper?

The errors of Kennedy in matters of faith are widespread. In fact, most all of us suffer from this tendency to some extent. Always remember to check your own version of faith with the one that has God's promise of Truth. Submit early and often, and root out your tendency to run with your own will.

My Eyes Have Seen Thy Salvation

2010-02-02T09:46:00.014-06:00

Suscepimus, Deus, misericordiam tuam in medio templi tui, secundum nomen tuum, Deus. Ita et laus tua in fines terrae;
Justitia plena est dextera tua.
Magnus Dominus et laudabilis nimis in civitate Dei nostri, in monte sancto ejus.
Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto, Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum, Amen.

We have received Thy mercy, O God, in the midst of Thy temple; according to Thy Name, O God, so also is Thy praise unto the ends of the earth;
Thy right hand is full of justice.
Great is the Lord, and exceedingly to be praised, in the city of God, in His holy mountain.
Glory be... (Introit for the Presentation of the Lord)

The Feast of the Presentation is a favorite of my family, for reasons I've hinted about over these first few months of blogging. Maybe next year I'll blog about that. As for right now, I'm going to take it easy on Andy's lack of interest in my lengthy posts, and rather send you to one of the best bloggers I've found at liturgical reflections, Karinanne. And here is another one sure to please from Father Mark.

Don't forget to have your candles blessed today.

But rather, I'm ALWAYS asked what a serious lay mystagogue does for fun. That seems to be the burning question of our many fans out there. Well, lots of things. It's really hard to narrow it down. But recently, I took some video of a bike ride I was on with Andy. I apologise for the music; Andy fancies himself a producer and it couldn't be helped. I think this gives you a glimpse into the personal life of a mystagogue spending his free time in God's creation.

~~Groundhogs Day~~ The Feast of the Presentation is always a good time to start thinking about Lent. I think I'll be giving up extreme sports. And you?

Contact CBS Now!

2010-01-26T08:39:00.004-06:00

CBS, the television network that will broadcast this year's Superbowl, is being pressured by the peddlers of the Culture of Death to not broadcast a pro-life commercial during the game.

A coalition of women's groups called on the CBS network on Monday to scrap its plan to broadcast an ad during the Super Bowl featuring college football star Tim Tebow and his mother, which critics say is likely to convey an anti-abortion message.

The ad -- paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family -- is expected to recount the story of Pam Tebow's pregnancy in 1987 with a theme of "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." After getting sick during a mission trip to the Philippines, she ignored a recommendation by doctors to abort her fifth child and gave birth to Tim, who went on to win the 2007 Heisman Trophy while helping his Florida team to two college football championships.
The New York-based Women's Media Center was coordinating the protest with backing from the National Organization for Women, the Feminist Majority and other groups.

"An ad that uses sports to divide rather than to unite has no place in the biggest national sports event of the year -- an event designed to bring Americans together," said Jehmu Greene, president of the Women's Media Center.

You know, I get the point that abortion may be more divisive than Budweiser vs. Miller or Pepsi vs. Coke. But the feminist concern is not about dividing, but rather that life argument is raised at all. As my previous post points out, the pro-abortion argument only survives when it remains unchallenged. That is their concern. To them, the pro-life cause has no place anywhere, let alone the most-watched commercial stage.

My fellow pro-life bloggers, please spread the word. We need everyone who can to contact CBS now and encourage them to stand up to the pressure.

As for me, if they decide to cancel the commercial, I will not watch the Superbowl, nor anything else on CBS for 2010. If they cancel, it is a clear message to me as a pro-lifer, one who wants to spread that message, that my patronage of their network is unappreciated. That, however, won't be in my message to them. They are planning on running it as of right now, and they don't need threats. They just need some backbone reinforcement. Thanks and admiration will do just fine.

Timeliness is important. I'm sure there is support within the notwork for dropping the ad, and that contingent won't give up. Some support right now might help keep this ad in it's prime-time location.

Change - Yes We Can! But...

2010-01-23T05:58:00.003-06:00

UPDATE at bottom of post.

There has been considerable chest-pounding in the wake of the Massachusetts Senate race. The conservative pundits have been celebrating the dawning of a new era, a paradigm shift, for the American electorate. President Obama promised "change", and he most certainly delivered. Not all of the change, though, was the same change he promised. Some of it was (e.g. coddling our enemies, selling-out our friends, massive government solutions for all those who earn less than average) and some of it wasn't (e.g. bipartisanship, line-by-line budget cutting, tax breaks for the middle class), but it was most certainly a change. As his presidency passes the first anniversary, more Americans are realizing that misdirected change is actually worse than the status quo. On January 19th, that reality was manifested in the election of Scott Brown. But is this the first gust of the winds of change, or was this a tempest in a tea party pot.

One thing that struck me was how amazingly brazen was his competition. Martha Coakley, among her many striking statements, declared that devote Catholics, you know, the ones who actually believe in the sanctity of human life, "...probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room," on the chance that they might be in a position to treat a rape victim and refuse the abortifacient morning after pill. Killing the unborn is so important to Martha that she made this her most vocal issue. Keep in mind, Scott Brown is not pro-life. He only believes in the so-called "common sense" provisions, like parental notification, a ban on late-term abortions, and conscience rights for medical personnel.

In Martha's world, a woman's right to an abortion supersedes all other rights. The reason she declared that devote Catholics need not apply for medical jobs was to make that distinction between her abortion absolutism and Brown's softer pro-abortion position. Her campaign used this distinction to paint Brown as a heartless extremist. This tactic resonated well with a good portion of the electorate.

Massachusetts is 44% Catholic, more than all the other religious affiliations combined. Martha herself is Catholic. Yet she made it clear that belief in what the Catholic Church teaches is extreme and justifies nixxing their rights expressed in the 1st Amendment of the Constitution in favor of a right which is no where expressed in the same document.

We have a strong Catholic voting population. And we should also be able to assume that, among the rest of the 56% of the population, there resides a substantial number of people of good conscience who would recognize this blatant disregard of fundamental human rights.

Rather, what we find is that this woman, whose positions should make her disqualified for any office this side of the free world, garnered 47% of the vote. That tells me that her radical statement on the second-class status of faithful Catholics might have changed a few minds, but it did not move the voting numbers like such a revealing statement should.

Phil Lawyer breaks down the real reason for the Brown victory and the likely fallout, and unfortunately, despite all the giddy pundits, there isn't much to celebrate.

It was, I am convinced, a long-overdue manifestation of independence on the part of the state's voters, who have been held in thrall for years by liberal ideology and Kennedy mystique. That's progress.

It was also a reminder that American voters, even in true-blue Massachusetts, resent the idea that their representatives in Washington might ignore their wishes and enact a sweeping federal policy-- like health-care reform, in this case-- despite heavy public opposition. With the arrival of Senator Scott Brown on Capitol Hill, the
unpopular plan is apparently dead. That's progress, too. (As C.S. Lewis pointed out, when you realize that you're headed in the wrong direction, the best way to make progress is to turn back.)

However, I hope no one who read my analysis concluded that political sanity has returned to Massachusetts. We have a long, long way to go before a healthy political climate is restored. Consider: Senator-elect Brown is not pro-life. On the issue of health-care reform his vote may benefit the pro-life position; the state's largest pro-life group saw that as reason enough to endorse his candidacy. But Brown did not appeal for pro-life support, did not use pro-life arguments, did not mention pro-life issues. On the contrary, while his opponent Martha Coakley made her unswerving support for abortion the #1 issue in her campaign, Brown did his best to dodge the issue. He may now suspect that he won despite the support of pro-lifers, and liberal journalists will encourage him toward that conclusion. Republican consultants will tell their candidates to imitate Brown's campaign strategy, avoiding the abortion issue. Already the new Senator from Massachusetts is being touted as the ideal GOP candidate: populist in approach, patriotic, conservative on fiscal questions, and silent on social issues. In the long run, the upset in Massachusetts is more likely to benefit the "big tent" Republicans than the pro-life movement.
...

The Church remains silent. The majority of voters in Massachusetts are not registered in any political party. These independent voters swung the election for Scott Brown, demonstrating that they have finally escaped the magnetic force of the Kennedy family. But what will replace that influence? There's an old common-sense principle in politics: You can't beat somebody with nobody; you can't beat something with nothing. For 45 years Ted Kennedy offered a vision of what the political system should accomplish, and Massachusetts voters embraced that vision. When Martha Coakley put forward a very similar vision, the voters rejected it. But Scott Brown had no compelling vision. The Republican Party-- in Massachusetts, at least-- has no vision at all. And politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum. Someone will provide a new vision: a new model for politics. Who will it be? As I explained in my book The Faithful Departed, the Catholic Church was once, not too very long ago, the dominant force on the local scene, and set the agenda for discussion of public issues. But for more than a full generation now the Catholic influence has been waning, and Church institutions have been co-opted to serve the purposes of a secular liberal ideology.

If ever there was a time for a genuine Catholic revival in Massachusetts, now is that time. But it won't be easy; we have miles and miles to go.

This vote, and the general current of the country, is a rejection of the policies and tactics of the Obama administration. But one should soberly recognize that despite all that's happened in the last year, this nation hasn't embraced everything that is anti-Obama. There very well could be big victories for the loyal opposition over the next few years. This represents the ebb and flow of the political landscape, with the recent spike only came about because we have an aggressive administration that played too strong of a hand in too short of a time span. We haven't fundamentally changed. The liberals and their media allies only have to keep tearing down American values until something sticks, and they'll be back on top again.

As Catholics, we need to reclaim what has been lost. How can so many Catholics feel just fine in the pro-abortion camp? As Phil stated, we have such a long way to go. So don't take the wrong message from this election. If anything, this election shows what a terrible state we are in today. The victory for Scott Brown was a great thing, a very great thing indeed. However, it doesn't mean a collective light bulb went off in Massachusetts. Politicians on both sides of the aisle didn't stop being liars and cheats, for sale to the highest bidder. The only paradigm that shifted was that voters realized that Obama wasn't the transcendent leader that they believed he was only a year ago. And many of them will forget that lesson as soon as they learned it.

What we need is to begin to reclaim the Cafeteria Catholic into the genuine fold of the Church. Our bishops and priests are incrementally moving in that direction as best as I can see. This is one long road, though. The ranks of our priests are poisoned with some bad apples. Our parish and diocesan staffs are infiltrated with Marxists, feminists, and pragmatists. Our schools seem more of a reflection of the modern culture than an escape from it.

We will know we are there when we can have open and frank discussions on moral issues like abortion with our neighbors. Abortion's worst nightmare is an honest discussion. Abortion cannot stand up to any logical construction. It stands upon lies and convenient sound bytes. Yet a real discussion can't take place. Even conservative talk radio avoids the issue. In public, both sides throw long-standing phrases past each other, and the real questions are never addressed. Bringing up a topic like this could even get you fired at work.

How can any one's mind change if we can't talk about it? A unified Catholic Church is the first step in that direction. We can't transform the culture if we can't get our own house in order. If we have the Church as a solid base, the citizenry will find the courage to put abortion, and all other "extreme" issues, back into the public square.

The message of this post: Hurrah for Scott! Now the rest of you, don't get your hopes up or let your guard down. Nothing earth shattering happened or is likely to happen soon. Our best hope is to support the Church in her movement away from silence and more towards cultural confrontation.

UPDATE: So, you ask yourself, what did he mean when he said, "Yet a real discussion can't take place?" If I could write good, maybe I would have wrote something like this here:

A survey of the justifications advanced by scientists, philosophers, and other members of the elite class, such as judges, to justify the legalization of induced abortion reveals that they have abandoned rational inquiry in favor of ideology. For although their arguments have the trappings of the objectivity of scientific method and other marks of rational inquiry, it is clear that they subvert reason and manipulate evidence to actualize an ideal that they perceive to be above all rational criticism. This enslavement to ideology is but a reenactment of what happened in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia to the detriment of science and philosophy, not to mention the degradation of human life.

Inatius Insight has a detailed explanation as to why we can't argue the case for life. Part II is here. That ought to make Andy's eyes glaze over.

Smile!

2010-01-22T14:33:00.006-06:00

I thought I'd take a break from our regularly scheduled ~~"ramble"~~ "deep and powerful insight" to bring you something that may make you smile.

It's time for your celebrity lullaby!

Bringing Christmas to a close

2010-01-09T17:20:00.005-06:00

Most have gotten beyond Christmas already, but I always milk it to the last minute. After all, mystery of the Incarnation is beyond us, so taking a fair amount of time with it is appropriate.

Here is a good image to close it out.

I saw this scene today for the first time in the Clare and Francis DVD Mrs. Jack gave to the family for Christmas. The scene bounces from Saint Clare at San Domiano and Francis on his way home from his visit with the Sultan of Egypt. These events may or may not have happened the very same Christmas, but when your movie is over three hours, you've got the right to take a few shortcuts.

The images are powerful and hopefully lasting. Enjoy!

2009 In Review

2009-12-30T05:07:00.003-06:00

This week between Christmas and New Years Day is always prime time for news organizations to show you what a good job they did throughout the year keeping you up on current events. They remind you of what happened, since any news observer cannot remember back to the last newscast. They will also do some considerable editing and commentary to show that Obama's first year was a major success, especially considering all the turmoil he inherited from the Bush administration, which aparently includes Nigerian panty-bombers.

Yawn.

If you are going to subject yourself to this media self-praise, I recommend reading a year in review from someone who remembers the events of 2009 a little differently than anyone else:

On a more upbeat note, the nation finds a new hero in US Airways Capt. Chesley Sullenberger, who, in an astonishing feat of aviation, manages to land a US Airways flight safely in the Hudson River after it loses power shortly after takeoff from LaGuardia. Incredibly, all 155 people on board survive, although they are immediately taken hostage by Somali pirates.
...
. . . President Obama, speaking on health care before a joint session of Congress, is rudely interrupted by Kanye West, who grabs the microphone and declares that Beyoncé has a better health-care plan. No, wait, sorry: The president is rudely interrupted by Republican congressperson Joe Wilson, who shouts ``You lie!'' Wilson later apologizes for his breach of congressional etiquette, saying, ``I should have just mooned him.''

You'll have a much improved recollection of 2009 reading this alternative than with CNN. It has been one crazy, unforgetable year. The good news is, 2010 will have its work cut out for it if it wants to be crazier.

A continued Merry Christmas, and may 2010 be all you hope for.

REJOICE!

2009-12-28T11:07:00.005-06:00

Thus saith the Lord: A voice was heard on high of lamentation, of mourning, and weeping, of Rachel weeping for her children, and refusing to be comforted for them, because they are not. Thus saith the Lord: Let thy voice cease from weeping, and thy eyes from tears: for there is a reward for thy work, saith the Lord: and they shall return out of the land of the enemy.

(Jer 31:15-16)

And all that sat in the council, looking on him, saw his face as if it had been the face of an angel.

(Acts 6:15)

Matthew points us to Jeremiah for a prophecy of the Holy Innocents. We needed the pointer, because most people would have thought that he was referring to the Assyrian slaughter of the Kingdom of Israel. That is where most of her children, and those of her maidservant, resided. Save the tiny tribe of Benjamin, the tribal family structure of all her children all but ceased. The surviving dominant tribe of Judah and the priestly tribe of Levi would better be described as the children of her older sister Leah.

But Matthew reminds us that the Word of God is not limited in meaning. The children of Bethlehem are hers, as this is the location of her tomb. Thus we can proceed to the words of comfort that dilute the sorrow of story. "Let thy voice cease from weeping, and thy eyes from tears: for there is a reward for thy work, saith the Lord: and they shall return out of the land of the enemy."

Two years ago today, my family was in our parish chapel for Mass. My son, Jack II, a joyful boy that would give Saint Stephen a run for his money in the most angelic face category, was just a tad over two years old. His language was at a stage where he knew very few words of his own, but could do a manageable job of parroting what he's heard. Even before his birth, we thought this boy would one day be a priest. This day of two years ago, he would provide yet another confirmation.

After communion, as the celebrant was finishing with the purification of the sacred vessels, the chapel was silent as can be. My son took advantage of the silence. He had quietly observed Mass from start to finish. He was too young to be bored. His older sister, Jackie I, was at that stage, and she was working her way through that boredom. Jack III wasn't yet a year old.

The priest made his way to the chair to be seated for a moment. At this particular parish chapel, the congregation universally remains kneeling until the closing prayer. As the priest sat down, Jack 2, for no reason we can figure out, shouted twice, "Re-joice!"

This brings to mind the words of Saint Paul from a little over two short weeks previous, "Rejoice in the Lord always! I say it again, rejoice." It's Christmas, of course. This day of Christmas, though, reminds us that the Lord is a sign of contradiction (Luke 2:34, Acts 28:22).

I am come to cast fire on the earth; and what will I, but that it be kindled? And I have a baptism wherewith I am to be baptized: and how am I straitened until it be accomplished? Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation. For there shall be from henceforth five in one house divided: three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against his father, the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother, the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. (Luke 12:49-53)

Since our first miscarriage, we've had a special connection to this Feast of the Holy Innocents. It's a sad connection, still in the back of our mind wondering what person was lost. Was it a boy or girl? What would he or she have looked like or been like? And try as I do, it is hard to understand why some die before baptism. I certainly have no claim to any merit for my baptism.

It's hard. Any family that's been through it knows that, though the grief is handled in different ways. Most friends of ours are certain that they have saints in Heaven interceding for them. We do pray to our departed children, now three in number. As far as their status, all I have to say is that I don't know and the Church doesn't know. The news is primarily good, though:

As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. (CCC, 1261)

I guess Limbo could be looked at as their worst possible fate, and that should be enough for my peace. Still, there is a pain that we carry. There is a desire that can't be fulfilled. And that's the way it will remain until the day that He fixes the mess that we make.

This day two years ago, we were just two to three weeks from laying to rest our second miscarriage. The death of innocents read in the liturgy was a reminder of the innocents that the Lord himself took, by his own accord, from our joy. Quite appropriately, we often are reminded on this day in the homily that abortion is our modern day equivalent of this biblical slaughter, only on a much higher scale.

But at least the abortionists can't see the face of the children!

How could Herod's thugs have slaughtered children in their mother's arms? This kind of depravity is unimaginable. Certainly not unprecedented - from Genghis Khan to Hitler to Saddam Hussein, we have plenty of examples to show that this kind of depravity is possible. But still beyond imagination.

Similarly, we celebrated the martyrdom of Saint Stephen just two days ago. They stoned him, even though they knew he was innocent. The Sanhedrin saw that he had the face of an angel, the face of innocence, and they still had him stoned.

How could they? How?

Early in Christmas, we commemorate two great acts of murder. It seems so distant from the tranquil adoration of the shepherds just a few days ago. Yet my son had it right. Rejoice! As one man with the blood of Stephen on his hands said, "Rejoice in the Lord always!" These days of Christmas should shock us out of our sentimental picture of an idealistic Nativity scene. The contradiction should not be blurred. If it is blurred, then we'll always be at the whim of apparent fortune.

We must trust in the Lord, as the man with Stephen's blood on his hands once said, "We know that all things work for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose." That means abortion, miscarriage, terrorism, despotism, genocide, starvation, etc., etc. Our challenge is to stay in the fight for good, but not be scandalized by the bad. Never get discouraged.

Sorrow is as certain as death and taxes. If rejoicing is a certain reaction for us as well, we'll be much further along. How many of us have looked into the face of Jesus and sinned? We have the blood of God on our hands, yet that same blood can cover our sins. How's that for a contradiction?

As we commemorate the death of innocents this Christmas, let us rejoice. Because to us was born the most innocent of the innocents, who will turn his own murder into our redemption. If the urge hits you, remind the somber that today is a day of Christmas - God came down to us -us in our depravity. No matter what happens, no act of evil will overcome that. Rejoice!

And when I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw everyone to myself. (John 12:32)

Thou must leave thy lowly dwelling,
The humble crib, the stable bare.
Babe, all mortal babes excelling,
Content our earthly lot to share.
Loving father, Loving mother,
Shelter thee with tender care!
Loving father, Loving mother,
Shelter thee with tender care!
Shelter thee with tender care!

Blessed Jesus, we implore thee
With humble love and holy fear.
In the land that lies before thee,
Forget not us who linger here!
May the shepherd's lowly calling,
Ever to thy heart be dear!
May the shepherd's lowly calling,
Ever to thy heart be dear!
Ever to thy heart be dear!

Blest are ye beyond all measure,
Thou happy father, mother mild!
Guard ye well your heav'nly treasure,
The Prince of Peace, The Holy Child!
God go with you, God protect you,
Guide you safely through the wild!
God go with you, God protect you,
Guide you safely through the wild!
Guide you safely through the wild!

God Among Us

2009-12-24T03:37:00.006-06:00

Come Lord Jesus, do not delay; give new courage to your people who trust in your love. By your coming, raise us to the joy of your kingdom, where you live and reign with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
(Collect for Dec. 24th, Roman Missal)

Lo, the hand of the LORD is not too short to save, nor his ear too dull to hear. Rather, it is your crimes that separate you from your God, It is your sins that make him hide his face so that he will not hear you. For your hands are stained with blood, your fingers with guilt; Your lips speak falsehood, and your tongue utters deceit.

No one brings suit justly, no one pleads truthfully; They trust in emptiness and tell lies; they conceive mischief and bring forth malice. They hatch adders' eggs, and weave spiders' webs: Whoever eats their eggs will die, if one of them is pressed, it will hatch as a viper; Their webs cannot serve as clothing, nor can they cover themselves with their works. Their works are evil works, and deeds of violence come from their hands. Their feet run to evil, and they are quick to shed innocent blood; Their thoughts are destructive thoughts, plunder and ruin are on their highways. The way of peace they know not, and there is nothing that is right in their paths; Their ways they have made crooked, whoever treads them knows no peace.

That is why right is far from us and justice does not reach us. We look for light, and lo, darkness; for brightness, but we walk in gloom! Like blind men we grope along the wall, like people without eyes we feel our way. We stumble at midday as at dusk, in Stygian darkness, like the dead. We all growl like bears, like doves we moan without ceasing. We look for right, but it is not there; for salvation, and it is far from us. For our offenses before you are many, our sins bear witness against us. Yes, our offenses are present to us, and our crimes we know:

Transgressing, and denying the LORD, turning back from following our God, Threatening outrage, and apostasy, uttering words of falsehood the heart has conceived. Right is repelled, and justice stands far off; For truth stumbles in the public square, uprightness cannot enter. Honesty is lacking, and the man who turns from evil is despoiled. The LORD saw this, and was aggrieved that right did not exist.

He saw that there was no one, and was appalled that there was none to intervene; So his own arm brought about the victory, and his justice lent him its support. He put on justice as his breastplate, salvation, as the helmet on his head; He clothed himself with garments of vengeance, wrapped himself in a mantle of zeal. He repays his enemies their deserts, and requites his foes with wrath.

Those in the west shall fear the name of the LORD, and those in the east, his glory; For it shall come like a pent-up river which the breath of the LORD drives on. He shall come to Zion a redeemer to those of Jacob who turn from sin, says the LORD. This is the covenant with them which I myself have made, says the LORD: My spirit which is upon you and my words that I have put into your mouth Shall never leave your mouth, nor the mouths of your children Nor the mouths of your children's children from now on and forever, says the LORD.

Rise up in splendor! Your light has come, the glory of the Lord shines upon you. See, darkness covers the earth, and thick clouds cover the peoples; But upon you the LORD shines, and over you appears his glory. Nations shall walk by your light, and kings by your shining radiance.

Raise your eyes and look about; they all gather and come to you: Your sons come from afar, and your daughters in the arms of their nurses. Then you shall be radiant at what you see, your heart shall throb and overflow, For the riches of the sea shall be emptied out before you, the wealth of nations shall be brought to you. No longer shall violence be heard of in your land, or plunder and ruin within your boundaries. You shall call your walls "Salvation" and your gates "Praise." No longer shall the sun be your light by day, Nor the brightness of the moon shine upon you at night; The LORD shall be your light forever, your God shall be your glory. No longer shall your sun go down, or your moon withdraw, For the LORD will be your light forever, and the days of your mourning shall be at an end.

Your people shall all be just, they shall always possess the land, They, the bud of my planting, my handiwork to show my glory. The smallest shall become a thousand, the youngest, a mighty nation; I, the LORD, will swiftly accomplish these things when their time comes.

The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

(Abraham was) the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, the son of Ca-inan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalale-el, the son of Ca-inan, the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,

and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram, and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon, and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse,

and Jesse the father of David the king. And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asa, and Asa the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah, and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, and Amos the father of Josiah, and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.

And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of She-alti-el, and She-alti-el the father of Zerubbabel, and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations. (Isaiah 59:1-21, 60:1-5, 18-22; Matt 1:1; Luke 3:34b-38; Matt 1:2-17)

Tale of Two Hymns

2009-12-22T15:42:00.006-06:00

As one who has no schooling in music, formal or informal, I’d like to take my hand at music critic and historian, setting my mystagogical gaze at two hymns of the season. The two hymns honored for this treatment: Angelus ad Virginem and Adeste Fidelis.

Hymn: Angelus ad Virginem

Background:

The word that comes to my mystagogue mind is “sweet”. Most encounters with God’s angels are anything but sweet. When Abraham met some angles, they went on to raze Sodom. Jacob fought one all night long, and almost won, until the angel decided to up the ante and made him gimpy the rest of his life. Balaam would have been annihilated were it not for his talking ass. Zachariah was made dumb for nine months. And Peter was hardly treated as if he were the Vicar of Christ. Thus was the way man and angle would mingle.

This meeting between Gabriel and Mary was different. The angel’s gentleness and deference to his queen stands in stark comparison to other angelic meetings, and the hymn poetically delivers this message: This is no ordinary request, and she is no ordinary woman.

The origin of the hymn is not precisely known, but it’s latest composition must have been the mid-14th century when it was published in Ireland. The melodic organ accompaniment featured in the video followed several centuries later, and the cheery notes reflect it’s proper place in the liturgy on Gaudete Sunday.

Translation:

Gabriel, from heaven's king
Sent to the maiden sweet,
Brought to her blissful tiding
And fair 'gan her to greet.
'Hail be thou, full of grace aright!
For so God's Son, the heaven's light,
Loves man, that He a man will be and take
Flesh of thee, maiden bright,
Mankind free for to make
Of sin and devil's might.'

Gently to him gave answer
The gentle maiden then:
'And in what wise should I bear
Child, that know not man?'
The angel said: 'O dread thee nought.
'Tis through the Holy Ghost that wrought
Shall be this thing whereof tidings I bring:
Lost mankind shall be bought
By thy sweet childbearing,
And back from sorrow brought.'

When the maiden understood
And the angel's words had heard,
Mildly, of her own mild mood,
The angel she answered:
'Our Lord His handmaiden, I wis,
I am, that here above us is:
And touching me fulfilled be thy saw;
That I, since His will is,
Be, out of nature's law
A maid with mother's bliss.'

The angel went away thereon
And parted from her sight
And straightway she conceived a Son
Through th' Holy Ghost His might.
In her was Christ contained anon,
True God, true man, in flesh and bone;
Born of her too When time was due; who then
Redeemed us for His own,
And bought us out of pain,
And died for us t'atone.

Filled full of charity,
Thou matchless maiden-mother,
Pray for us to him that He
For thy love above other,
Away our sin and guilt should take,
And clean of every stain us make
And heaven's bliss, when our time is to die,
Would give us for thy sake;
With grace to serve him by
Till He us to him take. Amen.

Video:

Hymn: Adeste Fidelis

Background:

This hymn was composed by John Francis Wade, and Catholic Englishman who spent much of his life in the 18th century in exile from his homeland. His place of exile was town of Douay in Brittany, which was a center of exile for English Catholics. The plight of English Catholics was foremost in his life, as he, in 1745, fought on the side of Prince Charles Edward Stuart in his failed attempt to claim his rightful thrown.

Despite the Jacobean origin of this masterpiece, bygones are bygone in modern times, and Wade’s hymn is universally sung by Anglicans and Catholics alike as the most popular way to greet the Christmas celebration. The text praises the mystery of the Incarnation, and beckons all of mankind to adore the divine Christ Child. But it mixes very interestingly with a melody of defiance, influenced by nationalism and the counter-reformation. The video offered, a choice sure to please Andy’s personal taste, highlights this defiant strain, welded perfectly to the news of glad tidings (see if you can spot Mr. and Mrs. Andy).

Translation:

YOU’RE ALL WORTHLESS AND WEAK! THAT’S WHY YOU NEED A SAVIOR!
NOW DROP WHAT YOU’RE DOING AND GET TO BETHLEHEM!
IS THAT AN AMULET ON YOUR ROBE?

Video:

Our Darkest Day

2009-12-21T21:15:00.003-06:00

And he hath broken my teeth one by one, he hath fed me with ashes. And my soul is removed far off from peace, I have forgotten good things. And I said: My end and my hope is perished from the Lord. Remember my poverty, and transgression, the wormwood, and the gall. I will be mindful and remember, and my soul shall languish within me.

These things I shall think over in my heart, therefore will I hope. The mercies of the Lord that we are not consumed: because his commiserations have not failed. They are new every morning, great is thy faithfulness. The Lord is my portion, said my soul: therefore will I wait for him. (Lam 3:16-24)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia. (Charles Schultz)

This image of the Rising Dawn, Orient, Dayspring, or Sun of Justice (depending on the verse or translation), is one of the most used of the coming Christ. There seems to be something in our human programming that attracts us to this as it seems universal among various pagan religions. What images hope like the rising sun? It’s often used in analogies for certainty, as in, “As sure as the sun rises in the east…” And as this rising sun, an image of the our Lord’s Advent, Nativity, Resurrection, and Return, a hope we can believe in with certainty, comes up over the snow (the picture is the view from my doorstep), today in Vespers, we address our Savior as “Oriens”, the Rising Dawn.

I’m sure the ancient mystagogues figured this out years ago, but the dawn of this day is special, since it's our shortest day, making “Oriens” a fitting placement on the calendar.

This brings to mind an interesting documentary I saw last year, The Star of Bethlehem. It’s impressive. That’s assuming the self-produced film isn’t a hoax, and not being much of a star gazer myself I’m not in a place to pass judgment. The filmmaker and star, Frederick Larson, details his personal faith journey, his research and his amazing findings, showing what he believes is the real star. However, I was uncomfortable with part of what he stated.

According to the film, as I can recollect, he found these amazing messages in the stars around the time of Jesus’ birth that seem to correlate with the biblical account. However, Christian Tradition was ignored, and without a good reason in my opinion.

According to his figuring, the magi arrived somewhere around December 25th. I assume he’s using the Gregorian Calendar, but he didn’t specify. After showing these results, he goes on to say, “I’m not saying that Jesus was born on December 25th. I don’t think anyone believes that.” [My recollection of the quote]

Well, I hate to break it to him, but I do. His findings actually might suggest it if he would take another look at them and the biblical Nativity. I’m a year removed from watching it, so I can’t document it completely, but I don’t think he took into account two facts:

1. Zachariah was incensing the Holiest of Holies roughly six months before the annunciation. Such a ritual could only take place on one day in the year – Yom Kippur. This would have occurred between mid-September and mid-October, Gregorian (it would be interesting to see the actual dates of Yom Kippur from 2 and 3 BC). From a theological perspective, this makes perfect sense – to announce the forerunner, the one who will provide a baptism of repentance, on the Jewish Day of Atonement. This, quite conceivably, could have taken place on the Autumn Equinox. So, with some rough reckoning (Annunciation six months later, and our Lord’s Nativity nine months later) we can see, with the Bible as our guide, that Jesus must have been born sometime near December 25th.

2. Under the Julian calendar, June 24th was the Summer Solstice, and December 25th was the Winter Solstice. Of course, June 24th is the Nativity of John the Baptist, the one who said, “He must increase, and I must decrease.” And, on the old calendar, the sun in fact did decrease daily, until the darkest day of the year, December 25th. God could pick no better day than this one to bring to us the Light of the World, when the world was most in need of light.

The date of December 25th fits biblically and uses the natural rhythms of nature to tell us something theologically. Frederick Larson, for all his interesting work on the biblical star, missed that. I still highly recommend this video – it is extremely impressive despite my quibbles. But it’s too bad, because even if he doesn’t give the date of Christmas credence, his research still points to it. His findings also gives the magi longer than twelve days to arrive at Bethlehem, something they would definitely need if they in fact launched from Susa, Babylon, Nineveh, or some other place of Zoroastrian-Persian origin. An arrival on January 6th (Julian) certainly wouldn’t seem out of the question with his findings.

I guess the point is, Catholic Tradition is reliable, as sure as the sun rises in the east. In fact, more sure, because even the atheists know that the day will come when the day won’t come.

And although I will keep in line with the Church and celebrate Christmas on December 25th, it is still not lost on me that Jesus was born on the old December 25th, the Winter Solstice, which is in fact today. Happy Birthday, my Lord!

O Rising Sun, splendour of light eternal and sun of righteousness: Come and enlighten those who dwell in darkness and the shadow of death. (Vespers Antiphon, Divine Office for Dec 21)

Light Number Four

2009-12-20T10:26:00.003-06:00

Rise up in splendor! Your light has come, the glory of the Lord shines upon you. See, darkness covers the earth, and thick clouds cover the peoples; But upon you the LORD shines, and over you appears his glory. Nations shall walk by your light, and kings by your shining radiance. (Isaiah 60:1-2)

I was asked last year to write an article on the Advent Wreath for a parish newsletter. It was never published. But, here you go:

The Spirit and the bride say, "Come.” Let the hearer say, "Come.” [Rev 22:17a]

Please ask yourself, “Can I genuinely pray from the heart, ‘Amen! Come Lord Jesus!’ as John the Apostle did?” It can be difficult. For many of us, our lives are comfortable. We all have times of stress, anguish, and unhappiness, but most of us are not ready to trade the life we know for the tribulation of the Second Coming. Fear of this is understandable. But that fear can be replaced with “joyful hope” through the pious observance of Advent.

What would Easter be to us were it not preceded by the journey of Lent, walking with our Lord to the Cross? So too, Advent is the key to the preparation for and appreciation of the Incarnation, manifested by a birth in the poverty of refugee lodging. God the Son condescended to become man. Imitate Him during this much-neglected penitential season.

A simple, traditional devotion to aid your family’s liturgical focus is the Advent wreath. Place the blessed wreath at the center of your dinner table. After the family has gathered for the meal, turn off ALL the lights. Before the meal blessing, light the candles, one each for that particular week of Advent. The lighting should be accompanied by prayers, Advent hymns, or readings (made more challenging by the dark, of course), customized by your family’s preferences.

From our faith, we know that we live in a world of darkness and Christ is our only light [Jn 1:3-5]. But our eyes adjust to the darkness, and we can fail to recognize our need for the Uncreated Light. This nightly devotion provides us a perspective on reality. The burning candles become for us, “…a symbol of the prophetic light gradually illuminating the long night prior to the rising of the Sun of justice.” [Directory on Popular Piety, 98]. The subdued light draws the family together and reminds them of Whom is at their center, and that they too are refugees until the day they behold the Eternal Light, gathered with their true family for a feast beyond imagination. After four weeks, even children will anticipate the Infant Jesus more than Santa Claus.

Whether He’s descending the clouds, placed in a manger, or lifted by the hands of a priest, you and your family will welcome the Divine Guest in your heart, and pray with grateful longing, “Come, Lord Jesus!”

For resources on this and other family Advent devotions, visit our Gift Center and view the Advent Workshop at www.catholicculture.org.

"Mary, Did You Know?"

2009-12-19T19:41:00.001-06:00

Answer: Yes

The Home Nativity Scene

2009-12-19T14:30:00.011-06:00

Let thy thoughts be upon the precepts of God, and meditate continually on his commandments: and he will give thee a heart, and the desire of wisdom shall be given to thee. (Wis 6:37)

Ah, yes. Nothing marks the approach of Christmas like the home Nativity scene. This little addition to the home is the most popular and most explicit image of the event we celebrate. What is key, though, in this season of Advent, is not to write off the centuries-old tradition as a mere decoration to enhance the jolly tiding, but to spend time gazing on this scene. Use it for Advent meditation to invite the Baby Jesus into your home and heart. That's it's true purpose.

Unfortunately, not everyone gets this. As in years past, I took an interested role in the Nativity display this year. We have a little hearth grill in our dinette, a grill that's never been used for its intended purpose. This happens to be one of those vacuum spots in the home. I think all homes have these spots located in various places. Although we use the space to house fruit bowls and potato baskets, it inevitably vacuums in all those things that we don't want to put away. Junk mail, cell phones, bills to pay, tools from the garage, prayer cards, recipe books, various pieces from toy sets, refrigerator magnets, etc.

Come Advent, we make it our Nativity location. It has a handy overhead light, and it really stands out as we eat our meals, particularly those meals lighted by the Advent candles. It also keeps the figurines out of reach of the really young ones. The only problem is, old habits die hard.

This year, I took on the Nativity setting on my own. I carefully relocated the potatoes, onions, and the huge fruit platter. All those alien objects also were given a new home. Then the trusty Costco Nativity set was laid out on our added drop cloth and with a homemade backdrop. I resolved to make it a top priority to keep this scene clear in order to facilitate unobscured meditation.

Well, my resolve was not up to the task. And, hey, I have to admit, when we got into the major task of stocking our pantry with yummy homemade Christmas treats (some of which did get sampled early for quality control), even I, Mr. Resolve, resorted to using the hearth grill to gain the needed counter space, being too lazy to clean as we go.

That's okay, I told myself. A momentary laps won't do too much damage. I re-resolved myself. I re-instructed the family. This was to be holy ground, and we shan't desecrate it with profane objects like grocery coupons!

After repeated requests and relocations, I came into the dinette to see tomatoes, fresh from, of all places, Costco, removed from their box and set neatly upon a platter, right there with our other Costco product. Well, no problem. Just pick up the platter, move it, and move on. Hours later, the tomatoes are back, this time without the platter.

Resolve is officially spent. In fact, I think it is easier to change the story than it is to keep foreign objects out of the Nativity scene. So I've decided to just go with it.

So with some slight editing, my favorite hymn, one of the first to rise out of the shadows of Cromwell's England (can you believe they banned Christmas Carols? Those Calvinists were serious killjoys) will need some slight editing.

While farmers watched

their crops by night
All seated on the ground

The angel of the Lord came down

And glory shone around

"Fear not," said he,

For trembling

Had seized their tomato-stained hands

"Glad tidings of great joy I bring

To you and all of man,"

"To you in David's

Farm this day

Is born of David's line

The Savior who is Christ the Lord

And this shall be the sign."

"The heavenly Babe

You there shall find

Near ripe tomatoes displayed

And meanly wrapped in swathing bands

And in a havestbasket laid"

Thus spake the seraph,

And forthwith

Appeared among the vines

Of angels praising God, who thus

On gaspacho they did dine

"All glory be to

God on high

And to the earth be peace;

Ketchup henceforth from heaven to men

Begin and never cease!"

I wonder what Cromwell would think of that one? Not that it matters. He never had to worry about keeping a manger scene pristine, that despot.

To Arms! To Arms!

2009-12-18T14:43:00.005-06:00

Okay, Armchair Activists. You are being called to call on some critical causes. Don't think about it. You are being implored by trusted sources, so just do it. Do it now, do it often.

Tom Peters is covering the healthcare sham, and he has some things you can do to help. He's asking you thank Senator Nelson for standing up for the unborn, and to remind Senator Casey of his promise and obligation to stand up for the unborn.

And, hey, why you're at it, why not take some actions to kill this avenue for separating you from your money and freedom. Hugh Hewett is one of many sponsoring the Free Our Healthcare Now action.

And, while you're at it, please express your support for the implementation of the new English translation of the mass. Adoro has the details. We have a better chance of getting that done than we have avoiding the government takeover of healthcare (include abortions, contraceptives, and the firing of medical personnel for standing up their religious freedom), but don't let that keep you from supporting the bishops who want to do the right thing and are taking fire from the embedded liberals in every diocese.

Take 15 minutes, save the world, and get back to your day.

A Good Lesson for Advent

2009-12-18T05:35:00.004-06:00

This post from the Acton Institute, along with the documentary trailer, really struck me:

Just over a year ago, I traveled with the Acton Institute to Rwanda in preparation for a new project on poverty. Although we were there primarily talking to entrepreneurs about wealth and poverty, it was impossible not to have questions about the 1994 genocide. In less than 100 days, nearly one million people were murdered and tens of thousands were responsible for these deaths. Flying into the country with that knowledge, a mere 14 years later, I didn’t know what to expect. I was anxious and unsettled, the same sort of tension that I felt while visiting Tim’s body at the funeral home. The weight of death stood in stark contrast to such a vibrant culture.

Genocide destroyed Rwanda — socially, economically, and politically. After some measure of stability was restored, the new leaders needed to find a way to further return order and rebuild the infrastructure that was lost. Punishing the murderers and enacting justice was immediately a problem. How do you uphold justice when the guilty are too many to count? The small, landlocked country didn’t have the prison space to lock up all of the killers. With an overwhelming backlog of court cases and little hope of full reparation, Rwanda’s leaders tried something revolutionary. Incarceration and execution were set aside in favor of reconciliation. Beginning in 2003, over 50,000 killers who acknowledged their part in the genocide were released and reintegrated back into society. The doors were opened for genocidaires to live side by side with the surviving members of families they had destroyed.

Advent should help us to face the ugliest elements of our lives, reminded of the shortness of our time to fill the valleys and make low the hills. The Gospel of Gaudette Sunday contains a stark note of caution regarding the One, "...Whose fan is in his hand, and he will purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his barn; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire." Few things can focus the need for repentance like examining those in extreme situations:

Filmmaker Laura Waters Hinson jumps headlong into the tension between the justified victim and the repentant killer. Her hour-long documentary, As We Forgive, tells the personal stories of two women struggling to forgive the men who took their families from them. Hinson also shares the testimonies of the men, wracked with grief and remorse, as they do their best to find forgiveness and rebuild trust. With the help of Rwandan mediation groups, the victims and killers meet face to face in an
attempt to reconcile.

There is nothing forced about the forgiveness process Hinson exposes in As We Forgive. She simply uses the camera as a window through which the audience watches it unfold. The story follows Rosaria, who has already forgiven the man who killed her family. Her journey in the film is one of re-building trust. I liked Rosaria immediately and was amazed by the peace and gentleness that flowed from her, despite the incredible hardships. But not so with another woman, Chantal, who has no desire to meet the man who wronged her. The pain she suffered is tangible and forgiveness is nothing compared to the justice she feels she deserves. Hers is a story of deep grief and a desire to withhold forgiveness.

I will never forget the personal stories I heard from the survivors of the genocide during my visit. The stories of the killers, however, were not told nor did I ask to hear them. Hinson, on the other hand, has the insight to recognize the importance of the guilty men’s accounts. Both men describe the darkness that overcame them and how the weight of their actions has affected their lives. Their burden of guilt is heavy and, although terrified to meet and interact with Rosaria and Chantal, both men do whatever they can to redeem themselves.

Anyone else have trouble forgiving those in the family who squeeze the toothpaste from the top of the tube?

Check out the whole post - I think it's a timely subject. While you're doing that, I'll head out to check Home Depot and see if they rent bulldozers. I've got to ramp-up my leveling project.

Next mystagogue project - avoiding the "righteous anger" crutch. [Oh, how I love that one :( ]

UPDATE - I notice that the author of this post is a new contributor to the Acton Institute blog. She's got an interesting video of her own on Rwanda and poverty. Check this out:

Thoughts on Poverty. from Tabitha Blanski on Vimeo.

See if you can Spot Jack

2009-11-29T07:01:00.001-06:00

I saw this wonderful clip today. See if you can spot Jack!

OSAS Defeated by a Single Two-letter Word

2009-11-14T16:11:00.006-06:00

As you probably don't know, I love apologetics, especially the arguments that I often see from our separated Bible-believing brethren, you know who. Sometimes I get in "study mode" and I turn on a Protestant radio station and listen to whatever is on.

This morning, David Wheaton was on challenging people to call in and discuss OSAS, aka "Once Saved, Always Saved". He said that the most convincing argument in his mind for it comes in the tenth chapter of the gospel of John:

John 10:27-29

My sheep hear my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish. No one can take them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one can take them out of the Father’s hand.

Aside from the knee-jerk apologetic reaction, the "Yeah, but we can take ourselves out of his hand", I decided to think a little deeper.

The foundation of his argument hinged on the statement that he believes that "Those who have really been saved are saved", as in "those who have truly decided to follow Christ are saved". But that leaves the question, assuming his assertion is true - How do I know that I have truly decided to follow Christ?

I think most people who follow OSAS assume that they have, but I have met a couple of people who have fallen away for a time and have come back. That leads them to believe that they weren't really saved in the first place, and then they realize that they can never really know if they are currently saved, or are they one of those who will fall away again?

Let's look at the verse in John. The key to the argument is this: "My sheep hear my voice; I know them, and they follow me." So if we are really his sheep, then we hear Jesus' voice. But how do we hear Jesus' voice?

Luke 10:1-3,16

After this the Lord appointed seventy[-two] others whom he sent ahead of him in pairs to every town and place he intended to visit. He said to them, “The harvest is abundant but the laborers are few; so ask the master of the harvest to send out laborers for his harvest. Go on your way; behold, I am sending you like lambs among wolves. Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.”

In this verse, Jesus demonstrates the Church. This group of people he has called and sent forth to proclaim the good news. Those who listen to them, listen to Christ. How do the sheep hear his voice? Through the Church!

But one may argue that the "Church" is nothing but the set of all believers in Christ, and in one sense it is, but that is not the Church that Christ established. He established a visible Church made up of true teachers, not an invisible Church made up of true believers (as many non-Catholics believe). How do we know this?

Matthew 16:18-19

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Jesus said "IT". The gates of hell will not prevail against "it". He didn't say "the gates of hell will not prevail against "them".

We sheep hear His voice, and the voice is His Church, the Catholic Church, founded upon Jesus and all of His teachings. And the teaching of the Catholic Church is that, unless we are predestined, that we are most certainly not "Once Saved, Always Saved."

Drive By Post

2009-11-12T05:37:00.006-06:00

A real quick post, and I need to yield the computer to Mrs. Jack.

Do you celebrate Veteran's Day or Martinmas? I'd like to see us blend those traditions together. After all, St. Martin was a veteran, and a little more of a celebration is called for.

Speaking of Veteran's Day, Amy Proctor reports that President Obama still can't make up his mind about what to do in Afghanistan. His "thinking" this strategy over during the two bloodiest months of the war ought to remind voters that elections matter.

On the abortion front, Jeff Miller calls for the wall to come down between social justice and the pro-life effort. Amen. And Michelle Malkin points out the 14th victim of the Fort Hood shooting that the media will never count.

So, you may ask, why is Obama dithering while our military personnel die? Why is there a wall between social justice and the right to life? Why can't the media note the 14th victim? All such questions are answered by that very long post I wrote on the liberal dialectic. Please read it and never question these absurdities again.

UPDATE: Father V. does an excellent job of explaining the logic that favors abortion. Bravo! Along with finding the nearest common ground, true dialog on any important issue must start with defining the argument from the other side, with terms that both sides can agree on. Now, which pro-abortion blogger will step out an do the same from his side?

Can it be that we could exist as a country where one’s conscience can be the determining factor? The question becomes can a people live in unity where one sees a soul-less life to be treated as the “host” wills and the other who sees a person with legal and God given rights of peace, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

I don't expect to see much of a reaction from the other side to an honest debate. That's something that historically hasn't played itself out. Those who subscribe to the liberal dialectic believe that all is fair to champion the oppressed, lies included. The truth is something to be feared. To date, no one has yet explained the pro-choice position on the beginning of life and stuck around to defend their logic. It won't hold up. Unless, of course, someone is honest about it. Then it holds up logically, but opens a new can of worms that would unify the nation against the practice. That's why a close, honest examination of the issue is avoided. In the liberal mind, the end is what matters, and it will be achieved by any means deemed necessary.

How Terrible Is This Place!

2009-11-11T09:46:00.008-06:00

Our family marks the liturgical calendar at our Grace Before Meals. Following the typical "Bless us, O Lord..." we add a little verse to remind us of the season or the liturgical day. We don't do that for every day, just for the Solemnities, Feasts, and special saints. The rest of the time, the verse is to remind us of the monthly devotion (e.g. the Holy Name in January) or the season (Advent, Easter, etc.)In the last year, I reformed the verses using the old Roman Missal (from the Introits, Graduals, Communios, Vespers, etc.). Even though we follow the new calendar, I just like the language and liturgical choices of the old Missal.

Just to give you a for example, here are some verses from Palm Sunday through Divine Mercy Sunday.

Passion Sunday Hosanna to the Son of David - Blessed is He that cometh in the Name of the Lord
Holy Week The zeal of Thy house hath consumed me - And the reproaches of them that reproach Thee, fell upon me
Holy Thursday A new commandment I give unto you - That you love one another as I have loved you
Good Friday It is consummated - And bowing His head, He gave up the ghost
Holy Saturday The Lord is my portion, said my soul - Therefore will I wait for him
Easter Sunday Christ our Pasch is sacrificed, Alleluia - Therefore let us feast, Alleluia
Easter Octave This is the day which the Lord hath made, Alleluia - Let us be glad and rejoice therein, Alleluia
DM Sunday After eight days, the doors being shut, Alleluia - Jesus stood in their midst and said: Peace be to you, Alleluia

And so it goes. No, we don't memorize them. We have our handy spreadsheets nearby to help. Eventually, the monthly or seasonally verse gets memorized, and we ignore the spreadsheet. That always leads to missing a day or two (sorry Simon and Jude!)

My favorite verse in the spreadsheet is the one for November 9th. This one goes, "How terrible is this place! - It is none other than the House of God". To be honest, the reason I like it is it makes me giggle. Yes, I find it funny because of the alternative, and more used, meaning of "terrible", and I can't help but glance at the messy kitchen from the meal just prepared.

The whole Introit goes as follows:

Terribilis est locus iste: hic domus Dei est, et porta caeli: et vocabitur aula Dei.

Ps. Quam dilecta tabernacula tua, Domine virtutum! concupiscit, et deficit anima mea in atria Domini.

How terrible is this place? this is no other but the house of God, and the gate of heaven; and it shall be called the house of God. (Genesis 28:17,22)

How lovely are thy tabernacles, O Lord of hosts! my soul longeth and fainteth for the courts of the Lord. (Ps. 83(84):2, 3)

Followed by the signature doxology, and repeat.

It is interesting that, at least in the mass text (I haven't checked the Divine Office) that first part, the part that makes me giggle, is no longer a part of the liturgy. I have to say, that's sad. It's not sad that I don't get to giggle at mass. After all, the New American translation, I believe, is "Awesome" instead of "Terrible". But it is a verse that reminds us of where we stand in the church. Should we need a reminder? I'm sure Mary never needed one. But the fact is that I forget vastly more than I remember. When Israel uttered those words of Genesis, he trembled in fear. Even though we might not, it is important to remember that we should.

I think one of the most impressive fruits of Vatican II is the three-year cycle for the Missal. In pre-conciliar years, there was only a one-year cycle, and each mass had only one scripture reading before the Gospel (either a Lesson or Epistle). Today, we get much more of the Bible at mass, and it's truly a blessing. But unfortunately, something always falls out. The Mass of the Dedication of Saint John Lateran, much like other Masses of old, used to be named from the first words of the Introit. It is almost as if this Mass has lost its identity. And as one looks through the old Missal, it's easy to see a lot more. One can see why we used to be a much more militant "Church Militant".

I am grateful that we still have the old mass out there. As our Sacred Liturgy continues to evolve as the years go by, I do believe the current retention of the old form will act as a stabilizer for the new form as it undergoes future changes. I don't know for sure, but I think the bishops and the laity were so anxious to cut the old form loose that they had no idea what they were tossing aside. Thus, we've seen some pretty crazy things since then, most notably in the liturgy. In the old form, the rubrics seem to be universally respected. I sure wish the same could be said for the new form.

Our English-speaking bishops are really making strides in the right direction, returning language to the liturgy which will lend itself towards greater respect, maybe even a little trembling now and then. I pray for a successful transition, with full ascent from priests and laity. I hope that will lead to other changes. Like priests turning their back on the people, unafraid that they will turn back again and see the pews empty. Like a Latin Credo, chanted. Like a glorious organ reverberating during the recession. Beautiful altars! Pews that face the same direction! And sit lower than the sanctuary! Pianos and guitars shoved into the closet! Parishioners who say, "Yes, Father, I'm on it!" instead of "Why don't we try this..." Cats and dogs, living together!

My apologies. I got carried away again.

I'm sure there will be trouble. While we as a Church should proceed with caution and charity, like Jacob, we need to remember whom to fear.

Welcome Punjab!

2009-11-10T13:04:00.003-06:00

Hey, write one post that vaguely addresses the issue of Islamic terrorism, and, whammo, I get a hit from Punjab! No one is reading the blog because it's been dormant for 2.5 months, and then immediately, one post on Major Hasan, and Punjab finds it.

Well, it is customery in my politically correct culture to make certain I stress that my uncompromizing hatred of Islamic terrorism is not transposed the followers of Mohammed. Faithful Muslims have my deepest respect. Please return often.

Of course, not all those in Punjab are Muslim. A modest Catholic presence resides there. Regardless of your faith, I welcome you and am honored with your visit.

For my Christian visiters, I offer this:

For any new Muslim friends that drop by, I offer this:

Ad Majorum Dei Glorium!

Berlin and Fort Hood

2009-11-09T12:45:00.004-06:00

UPDATE: Father Sirico has a much more eloquent statement for the occasion. His assessment was bleak, but I loved how he ends on a hopeful note:

Then I remember the years leading up to 1989. The
people who brought that victory about were not defeatist or compliant.

A former Hollywood actor, undaunted by ridicule and
the compromising lethargy of his own party; a Soviet prisoner, Alexander
Solzhenitsyn, reaching from the frozen tundra of the Gulags of the Soviet Empire
and wounding the omnivorous bear with a simple pen; an iron lady in England,
Margaret Thatcher, who didn’t get the memo about the demise of capitalism and
the rise of the Marxist dialectic; a rough and crude Polish shipyard worker,
Lech Walesa, who led a workers’ revolt against the Worker’s Paradise, encouraged
by another Pole, John Paul II, who on his appearance on the world stage bade the
world to throw open the doors to Christ and who, without tanks or military
resources, stood face to face with Soviet puppets who literally trembled at his
calm articulation of the Truth.

It is a remarkable testament to the human thirst
for freedom under such hardship and against such odds—in the midst of
deprivation and with guns pointed at them—all they were able to achieve, these
mothers and fathers of freedom. Their example calls us not to acquiesce to the
softer, more insidious and seductive tyranny of our own time, but to redouble
our efforts.

Their example also calls us to remember what too
many of us today have forgotten: We are beings with a destiny both in and beyond
this world—a destiny which can only be worked out in human freedom.

Twenty years ago today, the Berlin Wall fell. Growing up in the 70’s and 80’s, such an event was unthinkable. We thought of the Reds as strong, inflexible, unbreakable, with a zeal for world domination. The thought then was that the wall would only come down if Soviet expansion assumed the entire city of Berlin, or possibly something worse. It was the symbol of the divide between east and west. In the past, citizen uprisings in Czechoslovakia and Hungary were met with brutal repression. As much as we despised the Wall, most of us were used to the idea of living with it.

Then citizen uprisings began that year. It wasn’t just Berlin. Before the wall fell, also in 1989, citizen movements in Hungary and Poland managed to force multiparty elections, and lo and behold, the communists lost. Soon after November 9th of that year the Velvet revolution toppled the communist government of Czechoslovakia and citizens gained control of the military forces in Romania, closing out 1989 with the hasty executions of Nicolae Ceausescu on Christmas day.

The news was fast and furious and there was giddy hope for the future. Of course, not all was well, as Yugoslavia and China did not adjust well to this new paradigm. Nevertheless, such a stirring victory for human freedom was deemed a fantasy. Looking back, was it not for the courage of men and women who believed in God and our inheritance of Western Civilization, such a glorious day as the fall of the Berlin Wall. The multitude of heros will never be counted in this life, but three names resound today; Reagan, Thatcher, and John Paul the II.

Looking at Reagan in particular, I can only state what I remember from my high school and early college years. It seemed as if he was on an island of his own. When he made his famous speech at the Brandenburg Gates in 1987, many people unduly influenced by the media shrieked with embarrassment that we had such a fool as our leader. I was one such person. His foreign policy was reckless, so we said. And his senile mouth was even more dangerous. We couldn’t wait to rid our nation of this dolt.

Ronald Reagan, to his credit, subscribed to a traditional American school of thought which recognizes the dignity of the human person. His critics, for the most part, do not. They would never admit to that, but the liberal dialectic reduces the person to a set of traits based on accidents of birth or inclinations. And it has so pervaded American thought that I don’t think, 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, that we could in our age so valiantly participate in such a noble endeavor.

Recent news mocks this momentous anniversary. I could apply this to the current debate over healthcare, but instead, since other bloggers have written well on the Fort Hood massacre, I will piggy-back on that and look to contrast the weakness of our current times with the strength of the previous generation of leadership.

Former Education Secretary and Drug Czar Bill Bennett zeroed in on this earlier today.

I give you the words of two German Chancellors: Helmut Kohl and Angela Merkel.
When the wall came down, Helmut Kohl told President George H. W. Bush: “Without
the U.S., this day would not have been possible. Tell your people that.” And
last week, Angela Merkel said this:

I think of John F.
Kennedy, who won the hearts of the Berliners, when, during his visit in 1961,
after the wall had been built, he reached out to the desperate citizens of
Berlin by saying, “Ich bin ein Berliner.” I think of Ronald Reagan, who, far
earlier than most, clearly saw the sign of the times and, standing in front of
the Brandenburg Gate, already in 1987, called out, “Mr. Gorbachev, open this
gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” This appeal shall remain forever in
my heart.

I thank George Herbert Walker Bush for the trust he
placed in Germany and then-Chancellor Helmut Kohl, offering something of
immeasurable value to us Germans already in May 1989: partnership in
leadership. What a generous offer 40 years after the end of the Second World
War.

“Forever in her heart,” “partnership.” “leadership.”
“Immeasurable value.” “Generosity.” That is what the United States of America
stands for, that is what this country dedicated to a proposition stands for.
That is what our men and women in uniform fight for.
…Last week the
battlefield showed itself in one of the most unimaginable places: Ft. Hood,
Texas. We don’t need to wring our hands and our brains to try and figure out the
motive of the terrorist, when someone fires on Americans, killing as many as he
possibly can, shouting “Allahu Akbar,” that is all I need to know. The
question of motive need not be asked, especially not when you have further
evidence of devout religiosity, and vocal criticism of our military missions in
our other battlefields, like Iraq and Afghanistan: all of which was true of
Nidal Hasan.

But there are questions to be asked and I suspect many
of the answers will be unsatisfying — I also suspect we will see memos or some
kind of paperwork on Nidal Hasan that will prove embarrassing to officials in
the FBI, our intelligence services, or the military. There are many stories to
relay relating to Hasan — here’s just one, reported
by the AP: “Fellow students of Hasan in a military training course
complained to the faculty about Hasan’s ‘anti-American propaganda,’ but said a
fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from
filing a formal written complaint.”

This last part is one isolated example that showed Maj Hasan had no business on duty. Had this man been a non-Muslim and spouted right-wing hatred in this manner, there is no doubt he would have been stripped of his commission and been closely watched by the FBI, if not incarcerated. As ironic as it sounds, this man could not be treated as if he were a potential Islamic terrorist because he was a Muslim. It sounds silly, but you know that it is true.

This insane political correctness has continued in Orwellian fashion in the aftermath. From President Obama to the talking heads on most of the cable shows, the association of the man’s professed religion and his actions, though obvious to all, has been ignored.

We were instructed twice by the president not to “jump to conclusions”. Of course, that means we aren’t supposed to jump to the obvious conclusion. But, not much more than an hour after the first rounds were discharged into our innocent service men and women, the FBI had no trouble declaring that terrorism wasn’t involved. The media then “jumped” into full gear “conclusion” mode, speculating that gunman was a victim of discrimination and post traumatic stress syndrome (despite his lack of deployment to a combat theater). This is a good roundup of the media “jumping to conclusions”, other than the obvious. The obvious, that this man is a traitor and an Islamic terrorist, is avoided. Days later, it’s still avoided.

The same flawed thinking that fought President Reagan every step of the way has had 20 more years to metastasize and pervade more and more of our institutions; media, education, government, the Church, and even the brave world of our military. So what is going on here? Why is this insanity taking over?

Let it be said that liberals are principled. They just don’t adhere to universal principles in certain, and very important, matters of right and wrong. Dr. Jose Yulo wrote a very short and profound post, the key to unlocking the mind of the liberal, and all of us who are susceptible to it.

The motivation behind the massacre still remains mysterious. What is
intriguing, however, was the quickness with which some news organizations began
the narrative of a soldier ridiculed because of his ethnicity, ultimately
cracking and lashing out in a rage against his perceived persecution. Making
matters more interesting was the possibility of the murders carried out because
of post-traumatic stress, an unusual possibility to say the least since, by
latest account, the attacker had not yet been deployed overseas and therefore
had yet to experience the fire of combat.

Perhaps unknown to its various authors, the roots of this narrative run
deep and parallel to the precedents set forth by certain philosophical schools
in the last century. Paramount here is the dichotomous worldview ham-fistedly
established by Marx and perennially finding converts among cultural elites. The
dialectical clash between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie is often
chameleon-like, assuming the suitable color and hue to fit the assigned
socio-political context.

In the liberation theology of Paulo Freire, the
paradigm of the oppressor and the oppressed takes form as the basis for the
Brazilian's distillation of Socratic dialogue into "conscientization." In this
third world setting, members of the latter class are made aware of their
assigned status and encouraged to rebel, sometimes violently, against the former
since, as Freire claims, rebellion is an "act of love."

Integral in this school of thought is the belief that group membership
in the oppressed class, even removed by both time and current economic
conditions, permits for a looser interpretation of moral norms, enabling a
historically underprivileged group the license to "correct" their plights by
means restricted only by their creativity.

Read the whole article. It’s very important, especially if you’ve ever found yourself questioning the liberal devotions to abortion, reverse-racism, the labor movement, environmentalism, anti-capitalism, sympathy for foreign and domestic communists and terrorists, the peace movement, and a paranoid fear of an imperial United States. In every case, you can cast a group in the role of the bourgeoisie and the opposing group in the role of the proletariat. It’s pretty simple, then, to understand the thinking.

For example, let’s take abortion. In this case. men (that is All Men) are the oppressor group and women are the oppressed. It is clear that there has been a history of male oppression over the physically weaker sex. That is universally understood. So now, with that history, women can be defined as an oppressed group, even if much of that oppression has long past. As an oppressed group, they bear no responsibility for anything they do as a member of that oppressed group. It’s simply a reaction to being a victim. Children, in fact, limit the potential of women to combat this inequality with men, an inequality which renders them victims. They are forced to live pregnant for nine months (something not inhibiting men), nurse (again, something men could not do, even if they wanted to), and nurture the children through their young youth. This limits the potential of a woman who desired to pursue her own career, compete in a male world, and reach what they consider a place of respect. Therefore, abortion is a required option. A) It’s perfectly moral to rectify inequalities and B) even if it were not moral, a woman is a victim and cannot be held responsible for her actions.

You might be tempted to wonder why unborn children are not considered an oppressed class. That’s a good question that needs to be explored, and once answered, could be used to convert more liberals to the pro-life cause. But as my wife, a sociology graduate student, remarked, there have to be hierarchies of the oppressed to order the thinking of elites, and currently woman occupy a high tier than the unborn. My guess would be that woman are outside of the womb, and therefore can complain about their oppression, whereby the unborn cannot. It could be as simple as that.

Please understand, I was once a liberal myself. Having converted through the course of the 90’s, I have to say that I cannot understand my own thinking. But this is how I think it starts. My family was in most ways very traditional. My mother stayed at home and my father worked at the factory. We were a union family. We cared about many issues, but clearly when it came to politics, the issue that trumped all others were labor concerns. Thus, we belonged to our own oppressed class.

Thus, in 1987, I’m a huge Ronald Reagan detractor. But still, despite that, we were still pro-life, and we never subscribed to the grievances of the environmentalists, the gay community, the peace movement, or any of the other liberal groups. They were crazy. Yet, we still loyally voted for candidates who were supported by all those other groups.

I theorize that the rank and file oppressed only subscribe to their own grievance. They generally don’t subscribe to all the other grievances out there that the liberals all embrace. Take the black community as an example. They vote liberal in lock-step since they see themselves as an oppressed group, and their grievances will be addressed by they liberals. But all the studies I’ve seen show that they line up against other liberal causes; gay marriage, abortion, environmentalism, etc. Yet, much like my family, their own grievance trumps all, and that’s the way they vote.

After high school, I went on to college, and moved from being an oppressed to being an elite. Sympathy for one oppressed class can lead to the universal sympathy of liberalism. An elite sees the big picture, recognizes all these oppressed groups, and understands the need for political cooperation in order to accomplish justice for any of them. An elite does not necessarily have to belong to an oppressed class. They only have to be a champion for them. That gives their life meaning. We all want to champion the oppressed, don’t we? In return, the oppressed adopted us. We can, thus, be a member of the oppressed without ever suffering oppression. Pretty good deal, eh?

And what happens when an oppressed member decides to fight for the oppressors? The highest scorn of the oppressed and their elite champions is reserved for the traitor, people like Clarence Thomas and Sarah Palin. Feel free to earn money, social status, and fame, but never turn your back on the people you left behind.

It is a conservative reflex to blame liberals for relativism. That is unfair. As I’ve shown, the liberal dialectic is very defined. But their reactions seem relativistic, since they can see evil and fail to condemn it, as is the case with this Fort Hood shooting. That is, evil from the conservative’s perspective, one that expects people to take responsibility for their own actions and holds them accountable.

When George W. Bush declared what is now known as the Bush Doctrine (any nation that assists the terrorists will be considered as guilty as the terrorists), he was criticized as being simplistic and seeing the world through rigid, black-and-white lenses. How could something so logical be so offensive? This criticism seems kind of relativistic, doesn’t it? Well, when viewed through the liberal dialectic, we, the United States, through our military and economic strength, are the oppressors of the world. Through our support of Israel, we’ve marginalized even further the plight of the Muslim world. So the help that terrorists, who were justified in their outrage against the US, receive from terrorist-sponsoring nations should not be acknowledged, since they obviously need the help to combat the US juggernaut. That isn’t relativistic from their standpoint.

Let me be careful at this point. This doesn’t mean that liberals overtly or covertly support terrorists. However, there is a level of sympathy that prevents them from interiorly condemning them and exteriorly acting on the condemnation. That’s why the president and the media are afraid to admit the obvious, for it might lead to a condemnation of someone who wasn’t responsible for his actions.

So here we are, 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and we in the United States seem to be rapidly adopting the thinking that would have prevented that wall’s momentous fall. Maybe someday I will write on the errors of the conservative dialectic, but I will have to recognize that error first. I have no doubt that errors are there (especially when I continue to hear prominent conservatives insist that healthcare is not a right), but I don’t think in this era that they are important. Right now, the call to intellectual arms needs to favor an end to this group dialectic which is destroying our ability to see and respond to the truth.

By the way, this, again, is why we homeschool.

My latest hero

2009-08-24T13:37:00.004-05:00

I'd like to be this guy for a moment. I'll let you figure out which guy I'm talking about.

Mrs. Jack and I used to be residents of Camas, WA. Unfortunately, before this guy, Camas was best known for being the place where Tonya Harding used a hubcap as a frisbee and destroyed the face of her live-in boyfriend. Said boyfriend not only sold any sense he had to be with this frisbee pro, but he also sold off his testosterone to press charges against her for domestic battery.

Thank you David for providing a better model for us men.

Quick Liturgical Post

2009-08-24T09:29:00.004-05:00

Liturgy seems to be on the mind of everyone on the cat-blogs. It's on my mind, too, but I'm busy at the moment so I'll put my thoughts in later - thoughts stemming from a conversation I had over breakfast with my wife.

The quickest way to write a post is to have others do it for you.

If you are a malcontent, like most of us lay mystagogues, you've heard this one before, "Well, at least we CAN go to mass! There are people all over the world that can't go to Mass at all!" Adoro gives us her take on that. That argument reminds me of the use of Elizabeth Taylor's (or any celeb's) multiple divorces as an argument for why same-sex should be okay.

Ignatius Insight has a post on one of their publications, a new book entirely on the ad orientum: Turning Towards the Lord. That one will be worth a read, after I get to the stack of books ahead of it. But the post itself provides a lot of detail, and will, no doubt, leave you with no choice as to buy the book.

And were you ever curious as to the liturgical reform from a century ago? I wasn't all that interested until Shawn Tribe blogged about Don Lambert Beauduin's 1914 publication, La Piété de l'Eglise. Here's just a snippet...

D. Propaganda 2. Reawakening the old liturgical traditions in the home, that link domestic joys with the calendar of the Church, and using for this end especially the musical works composed for such purposes.

Ding ding ding! This is what I plan to write about later. As for now, please read what others have to say.

The One, and the Second Commandment

2009-08-20T18:22:00.008-05:00

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that shall take the name of the Lord his God in vain. (Ex 20:7)

Cursing in the name of God has often been thought in modern times to be the exclusive way to sin against the second commandment. If you were to read an examination of conscience, you might find some other ways that tend to be uncommon (e.g. blasphemy, lying during a confession, etc.). In pre-Christian days, the Hebrews made it very easy to keep this commandment – never utter His name at all. Nowadays, we can see the wisdom of that prohibition, as variants of God’s name are used in the most casual way. But let me propose another means of breaking this commandment that I think is quite common, but often overlooked. What if we were to use God’s name for our own manipulative purposes?

Obvious examples of this are clear; televangelists whose obvious motive is to manipulate their preaching into cash, religious charities that front for other purposes, and those who invoke God to justify their own sinful behavior. But I think we are all are more susceptible to this sin than we may realize. As fallen man, we tend to turn creation upside down and create God in an image suitable to our sensibilities. That way, we can get along with him much better. This temptation is all the more enticing when it comes to politics.

The Founding Fathers of the United States invoked God, declaring it a “right” granted by God to declare independence.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

While our Founding Fathers were not very Catholic (only one of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence was openly Catholic), they were most certainly steeped in the Natural Law, which owes it’s heritage to pre-Enlightenment Era Catholic thought, even as some of its practitioners often considered the Church it’s greatest foe. The human right to be governed in such a way is truly “self-evident”, and it can certainly be reasoned that war may be necessary to achieve such governance. But then they took it one step further, suggesting that it was a God-given “duty” to sever the tyranny of the English crown.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government."

And the grievances were listed – all of them true, but most were exaggerated. One could reasonably conclude that “Prudence” had not yet run the course. But the Founders took liberty at this point to declare it their duty to change the government. To believe that was fine – but it was still a debatable point that they essentially declared to be “self-evident”. To declare it God’s expectation that they take up all means necessary to achieve independence is shaky ground. A few humble words, such as, “We believe that such has been the patient sufferance,” would go a long way toward admitting the proper relationship between the Creator and the created.

Nit-picky? Well, lay mystagogues tend to be that way. Even when it comes to opposing brilliant and esteemed icons. But one might think, “That’s probably what they meant.” To that, I reply, “This document was heavily scrutinized and painstakingly drafted. I’m confident they meant what they wrote.”

Speaking of brilliant and esteemed icons, let’s fast-forward to 1862. Abraham Lincoln exemplifies how American presidents have historically invoked the name of God.

"The will of God prevails. In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong. God cannot be for and against the same thing at the same time. In the present civil war it is quite possible that God's purpose is something different from the purpose of either party - and yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adaptation to effect His purpose.”

Unassuming. Completely lacking in self-serving presumption. Humble. Acknowledging His sovereignty, and asking His blessing. This is the standard, and presidents have generally held to that.

Now let me bring forward the much maligned George W. Bush, in what I consider his greatest speech, given during the National Day of Prayer and Remembrance. He ended his speech with this, very much in line with Lincoln.

“On this national day of prayer and remembrance, we ask almighty God to watch over our nation, and grant us patience and resolve in all that is to come. We pray that He will comfort and console those who now walk in sorrow. We thank Him for each life we now must mourn, and the promise of a life to come.
As we have been assured, neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, can separate us from God’s love. May He bless the souls of the departed. May He comfort our own. And may He always guide our country.
God bless America.”

This was a humble, comforting reminder of who we are, at a time when the nation truly needed that reminder. This ending was a walk-off grand slam if there ever was one. I hesitate to point out, though, the line that preceded this closure, one which would echo with resilience through his first term as president.

“And the commitment of our fathers is now the calling of our time.”

We have a case of presumption. Veiled as it is, the implication is undeniable. According to President Bush, America was called to fight and defeat the ideology of Islamic terror and deliver the torch of freedom to those repressed by the same.

Now let me be clear. I’m not claiming that Bush was wrong. In fact, just the opposite. To accomplish the defeat of this deadly ideology and bring freedom to oppressed people would indeed be moral, and more importantly charitable. It is not out of line to believe that this is what God called our nation to do.

And it is also notable that other presidents in the past seemed to have shared similar ideals for America (Andrew Jackson, James K. Polk, Woodrow Wilson, and John F. Kennedy, just to name a few), so Bush isn’t unique in his outlook. All of the listed men had a faith in God, and believed in His hand guiding the actions of the nation. But I haven’t found any of them stating in public a particular divine calling for a specific endeavor.

Now considering both Bush and the Founding Fathers, both made and stated presumptions on God’s will for a specific course of action. In both cases, I agree with their presumption. In both cases, assuming they believed what they stated, they certainly did not break the second commandment. My problem is that, in both cases, as statesmen, it would be preferable to leave such assumptions unsaid. This is a bad precedent. It opens a can of worms to any armchair theologian in politics.

In fact, one of those armchair theologians has risen to the oval office. We are to believe now that God is calling Obama to have the federal government take over our health care. “We are God's partners in matters of life and death,” he proclaimed to some clerical supporters. And then, despite the fact that he is lying with impunity, he has the audacity of accusing those trying to set the record straight of “bearing false witness.”

Watch out Catholics – your bishop just might be bearing false witness.

Now it is absolutely necessary that religious and lay mytagogues walk on this shaky ground of announcing God’s will from time to time. We need that. For example, on the issue of abortion – there is no debate on the issue itself. Abortion is evil, no ifs, ands, or buts. What to do about it, though, is not a matter of dogma. It’s a matter of prudence. This is where we need leaders who stand up and preach the need for a specific course of action, to the point of declaring the opposite course of action a sin. Specifically in regards to health care, our bishops have repeatedly stated that universal access to health care is a human right and a Christian obligation. We need this kind of guidance from people who know God well. We need it from our Pope, our bishops, our priests, our families, and our friends. We don’t need it from our President, who isn’t (unfortunately) elected on the basis of how well he knows God.

Our chief statesman should invoke the name of God often, privately and publicly. But such an invocation must be done humbly, acknowledging His majesty, and asking His divine assistance. From our chief statesman, it should never be done with presumption. A can of worms has been open, and is now being served by a man who, either sincerely or insincerely, appears to be using God’s name for his own wrongful designs.

Sorry to be a petty hair-splitter, but I do believe that sometimes those hairs make a noticeable difference.

Update - Looks like I'm not the only one to notice that President Obama was calling the Bishops liars. Deal W. Hudson at InsideCatholic has a post on it. He rhetorically asks, "How stupid does Obama and his advisors think we are?" I've been asking the same question since I saw Obama's first stump speech in 2007.

Catholic Culture

2009-08-18T07:50:00.005-05:00

"And if the watchman see the sword coming, and sound not the trumpet: and the people look not to themselves, and the sword come, and cut off a soul from among them: he indeed is taken away in his iniquity, but I will require his blood at the hand of the watchman. 7 So thou, O son of man, I have made thee a watchman to the house of Israel: therefore thou shalt hear the word from my mouth, and shalt tell it them from me." (Ez 33:6-7)

I'd like to take this opportunity to put a plug in for a website that keeps delivering time and time again. For years, my homepage was CatholicCulture.org. It was a website that served as a clearinghouse for useful Catholic information, dealing in both current and timeless issues. Right as the page opened, we would see where we were on the liturgical calender, see the Collect from the mass, find headlines on news related to the Church, read solidly Catholic commentary, and have easy access to devotions, crafts, and recipes for the Domestic Church. They have an impressive library of documents and public domain publications to research just about anything Catholic.

This website has undergone some changes over the years, most particularly a merger with their then sister website, the Catholic World News. Some of the information takes some searching these days, but all the stuff is still there.

My homepage was changed recently to the Blogger Dashboard so that I can follow the better bloggers out there. But we are still a monthly financial contributor and visit their website often. I cannot recommend a better website out there for daily immersion in your Catholic faith.

Their main contributors, Dr. Jeff Mirus and Phil Lawler, speak their minds. They are very respectful and humble, yet they have to courage to offer their opinions on controversial matters, even as their enterprise depends on donations from readers and faithful dealings with the Bishops. A quick search of their documents shows that they take a skeptical view of Medjugorje, something certain to alienate a large portion of potential readers. They also won't shy away from reporting unflattering information that may hurt fundraising efforts of the USCCB's pet projects. If there is an alarm that needs to be raised, they will do their duty.

So please visit them often, and contribute if you like what you see. I'm sure in these current economic times, they could use the boost. Also, keep an eye on their blog. Just this morning, Lawler is offering a couple of interesting contributions of interest to all Catholics.

For instance, recall my post on education that had some unflattering characterizations of the current Health Care Reform debate. But with a Culture of Death administration and a Culture of Death congress pushing health care reform, why have the Bishops for the most part remained on the sidelines? Mr. Lawler writes respectfully of the second Catholic contingent in this debate:

"This difference in perspectives, I think, is at the heart of the recent debate among Catholics over questions such as whether or not Catholic Charities should support health-care reform legislation. Some Catholics-- let's put the folks from Catholic Charities in this category-- have been working hard to enact health-care reform. Now the time is ripe, there's plenty of momentum behind the effort, and they're frustrated to see that the abortion issue is jeopardizing all the progress. That's understandable."

Also offered this morning is an important issue to ALWAYS keep in the forefront of our daily lives. Lawler reminds us of the persecution of the Church in India, a nation in which the United States has taken a growing economic interest(my emphasis in bold):

"Over the years we have carried literally hundreds of stories about the sufferings of Christians in India-- as well as the trials that our Christians brethren face in other countries. (See today's Feature about the latest fervent pleas by Vietnamese Catholics for an end to government oppression.) But I'm sorry to say that these stories attract fewer readers than most other CWN headlines. That's a shame-- literally-- because Alex Kannattumadom is right. Wherever Christians are suffering for the faith, they deserve our support.
Maybe there isn't much that we can do to help our fellow Catholics living thousands of miles away, apart from praying for them. But prayer is the most important step that we could take to preserve their hope and their courage. And the knowledge that we are praying for them should bolster their morale."

By all means, pay close attention to what's going on at Catholic Culture. I can attest that these guys will keep you better informed Catholics.

Liturgical Prefigurement of the Cross

2009-08-17T19:11:00.005-05:00

One thing I always love is when a great mystagogue adds another piece to the puzzle - in this case, that puzzle that we'll keep mystagoging for eternity, the Paschal Mystery of our Blessed Lord. Father Schnippel added another great piece today, my emphasis in bold:

"As Israel became established as a nation, this sacrifice was moved from the home to the Temple, for in the Temple, the Sacrifice became more liturgical, with associated prayers and rituals. In fact, one such ritual is vitally important for our study of Jesus as the New Passover: after the lamb for each family was killed, two wooden rods were inserted to assist in the roasting: one along the spine, the other through the ribs, from shoulder to shoulder. Each of these lambs, by the thousands, would be carried out of the Temple and to the homes of the people in and around Jerusalem. ‘Crucified lambs’ were being offered for the people."

Whoa! There's a new one for me. Please read his entire post, Jesus, the New Passover.

"And I saw that the Lamb had opened one of the seven seals, and I heard one of the four living creatures, as it were the voice of thunder, saying: Come, and see." (Rev 6:1)

Welcome to 1984

2009-08-14T11:38:00.005-05:00

There are many reasons for homeschooling. It’s a very useful means to pass along the Catholic faith and a sure means of avoiding the leftwing indoctrination towards relativism, diversity, environmentalism, and sexualization. For those who don’t have the means to homeschool or send their kids to a private school that won’t push such nonsense, parents have a responsibility to de-indoctrinate their kids at home, and thankfully many parents are doing this.

When asked about our reasons for homeschooling, Mrs. Jack’s primary response is that we want to provide our kids with a classical education. Along with mathematics, art, science and faith, it is very important to us that our kids are well-grounded in the classical trivium (grammar, logic, and rhetoric). This is the learning style that built Western Civilization. That same civilization that has dominated the earth for the last 2,500 years. There was sound reasoning behind this style. Our modern schools for the most part have shrugged this in favor of a style that is primarily indoctrination and secondarily k through 12 day-care.

It’s one thing to be Catholic. Yes, we are weird. For good reason, we’re peculiar. That’s understandable, and it has always been so from the birth of the Church nearly 2000 years ago. But here in the United States, natural human reason is now a rare commodity. The history of mankind has been best characterized by “might makes right”. But in our grand experiment here in the United States, the respect for the God-given freedom and sovereignty of the individual has allowed for us as a nation to actually be right most of the time. Though we’ve gotten some things terribly wrong (slavery comes to mind), peoples’ pursuit of happiness generally leads them closer to truth. But if we dismiss our educational inheritance, we will become pawns of our passions and easily manipulated by those whose passion is power. The United States of America could very possibly slip into tyranny.

Mrs. Jack has seen this first-hand, as she has instructed and assisted at university classes at a major state institution. This is a center of learning with a respected academic reputation in this field, yet to witness it from the inside, Mrs. Jack wonders how bad it must be at the mediocre universities. Students are only concerned about memorizing what they need to for the tests. And instructors are all-too eager to spoon feed these students what they want them know. Students receive a very narrow education, so narrow and manipulative that in some cases, they actually leave the class less intelligent than when they entered. The idea of learning wisdom from the great minds and works of a chosen academic field is lost. What its been replaced with is learning the various agendas of the instructors just enough to score well.

I think all of us have seen the loss of honest debate. We used to have a news media that would prevent people from telling lies. If some major figure lied to the country, he ran the risk of being exposed as a liar and ruining his reputation. That didn’t completely prevent people from lying, but it has at least held our civic leaders somewhat in check.

People who are younger than me may not remember what it was like to have a somewhat honest media. They have always been liberal, but they did a better job giving our people the whole story than they do today. What we’ve seen in the last few years has been steady progression towards an altered reality.

Most people can remember in the 2004 presidential election, when bloggers and swiftboat veterans were questioning Candidate John Kerry’s account of his service record and clearly caught him in a lie. The main-stream media avoided the story, either pleading ignorance, or dismissing the bloggers and veterans as nut-jobs and liars. On the other hand, they couldn’t wait to trash President Bush’s service record, so anxious that they ran with documents that were obvious forgeries. In fact, President Bush’s entire eight years, minus a short 9/11 honeymoon, was under constant fire from a press that would gin-up stories and keep him under relentless attack.

Now it’s even worse. Barrack Obama, who’s past was carefully hidden by the same media that left no stone unturned when it came to a conservative vice-presidential candidate, became president, and the Whitehouse press corps was transformed from rabid vermin to parrots and pack-mules.

In George Orwell’s novel 1984, his protagonist works for the Ministry of Truth, the official government agency that delivers the news to their people. This is the key to the control of the people. With the exclusive authority to deliver information, the citizens of Oceana are manipulated in any way the state deems it necessary. 1984 didn’t introduce this concept. We have already seen this played out throughout history. The United States and other places that take their God-given right to a free press seriously are truly the exception.

But what if? What if the free press voluntarily decides to support one side? What if, in mass, all the various private agencies that deliver the news decide that they are going to support a specific agenda? Could the same propaganda effect of 1984’s Ministry of Truth be accomplished through voluntary compliance?

We are certain to find out if we watch for it, because that is exactly what is evolving right before our eyes. It has been in the process for many years. For instance, how did Senator Ted Kennedy get away with his baseless screed against Judge Robert Bork in 1987? And how about that “crisis” of the government shutdown in 1995? In both cases, the media failed to report the whole story, but propagated the lies of the liberal agenda toward a successful outcome. But as time has gone on, past attempts of the media to manipulate public opinion look modest by comparison.

Take President Obama’s Town Hall this past Tuesday. In public and on the record, he took a room stacked with supporters and told lie after lie after lie after lie (Imagine Bush attempting something like that?). We have the black and white text of the bills running through the House and Senate, but Obama won’t address the specifics, continually addressing generalities which are contradicted by the language of the bills. The news media, rather than call him out for that, continues to run with these lies as if they are the truth, and tries to portray those who point out the lies and the real agenda behind Obamacare as kooks.

It’s gotten to the point now that they go after a Senator that gives veiled credence to the possibility of a “Death Panel”, suggesting that he should be censured.

Has it really come to that. A Senator is to be censured for admitting what is obviously in the bill, while the media angrily insists it is not?

The Granted, these two fools are liberal commentators, but in a forum of honest debate, they wouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a respectable news outlet.

We have a media that promotes lies and selectively covers stories to provide their viewers with an altered reality, specifically designed to promote the same left-wing agenda as the current administration. Unlike 1984, there appears to be no central authority controlling this. Neither is there a central authority filling our universities and entertainment media with left-wingers. This has simply happened as a matter of natural progression. How? Well, a qualified and honest sociologist might be useful to present a theory. But thanks to the deterioration of the academics, good like finding a sociologist without an agenda willing to take this question on. But while I’m at a loss as to how to explain how it happened, I can easily answer what enabled it.

If you sent your child to a university and found that they were teaching him insane ideas, and they were training him to be an imbecile, what would you do? Of course, you would stop wasting your money on an institution that was wasting the intellect of your child. But universities spent centuries developing public trust. With that trust in hand, who are we to question it? In the past, instructors would have to defend their teachings in public, before all to hear, and they had to adhere to logic, rhetoric, and the scientific method. And that defense was not a one-time deal. It could occur at any lecture or public forum, and could happen at any point during a career. Instructors who couldn’t adhere to these principles didn’t last. Nowadays, defenses are conducted in limited circles, and if you find a circle of fools, you too can be a respected scholar.

That’s the problem. We don’t even know how to defend common sense, let alone complex issues. As our society has drifted from the model of a classical education, we now no longer have a capacity to debate issues. Passions now drive the masses. We begin with a conclusion based on feelings, and we need not reach it with sound logic, nor defend it with sound rhetoric. Respect for differing opinions is dead because those opinions either aren’t presented well or, when actually well-presented, they aren’t heard. All that matters is how we feel.

Feelings are very important. They are there for a very important reason – to act as a check again faulty reasoning, or to take-over when the time is not there to think things through. But they cannot replace thinking. There once was a time when serious debates took place. People put their feelings aside, listened, and respect both. Now when a serious debate takes place, it’s a game of how many lies you can tell, worried not that a compliant media will expose you after the debate.

We continue, in more rapid fashion, drifting towards Orwell’s 1984, even if it is not in the way Orwell supposed. In the past, I believe our grounding in a classical trivium allowed us to separate truth from lie and prevent this oligarchic team from forming. Now, without that grounding, education is no longer a passing of wisdom and the tools to grow. Instead, we are used to being spoon-fed how to think. And now, who are we to question what we are being told?

I am encouraged by current events which show that people are standing up to the lies. We haven’t entirely forgotten our American instincts. However, our current state is so bleak, I don’t know if we will always be able to walk away from totalitarianism unless we reclaim our educational inheritance.

That is why we homeschool. And while we do it, we also need to evangelize this priceless gift from the past. Future generations depend on our society reclaiming a classical education.

Divorce is Not a Sin

2009-08-06T20:03:00.003-05:00

Call me a fly-by-night theologian. Perhaps that is what I am, but today I believe I had an epiphany, and its so simple its beautiful.

The Catholic Church teaches that marriage, validly entered, is indisoluable, and while there are certain passages that (in some Bible translations) say that there is an exception for adultery, the church doesn't teach that, and it takes a long drawn out explanation of what the word "porneia" means and its really a hard thing to explain to your plain average Joe Protestant.

Instead, lets look at divorce from a common Protestant perspective, which is that divorce itself is a sin. There is argument among even Protestants as to whether or not this is true, and whether or not marriage is a covenant, but those who believe it is not often claim that divorce is a sin and that, once you divorce, you just need to confess it to God and he will forgive you. Then, they may claim that you are free to marry another person.

This logic does not hold, though, and the reason is simple: divorce cannot be a sin because God permitted it (via Moses) in the Old Covenant. Since God is all good, he would never give someone a license to sin, because that would make God evil. But because of the fact that God cannot approve of sin, divorce is not a sin. And if divorce is not a sin, then you cannot confess it and have it forgiven of you, thus you cannot get out of a marriage by confessing a divorce to God. You are still married, just as God intended, if you are a Christian.

Also, let's say for argument's sake, that divorce were a sin. Then you could confess it, but you need to repent, that is, amend your life. How do you amend your life for a divorce? You "remarry" or reconnect with your "divorced" spouse. So regardless of whether divorce is a sin or not, you are not able to exit from a marriage covenant that is validly made.

Now that is not to say that in certain circumstances, such as abuse, a person could not leave their spouse. But if they were to remarry they would be committing adultery, and the only way to repent from that would be to leave their new spouse and remain single for the rest of their life.

The apostles understood this when Jesus spoke to them. You can hear it in their voice when they said "If that is the case, then it is not expedient to marry."

Call this human logic but the Catholic Church has got this right. Marriage is forever. Praise God!

An Old Standby

2009-07-27T13:06:00.006-05:00

Okay, so Andy and I are lazy mystagogues. Just add a "z" to the title, and you begin to figure out why we couldn't get jobs as writers (and that's before you actually read this stuff we post).

Since I'm lazy, but still want this blog to be active, and still want all three of our followers to remember that we haven't fallen off the face of the earth (I saw Andy last night, and he's doing fine), I will let St. Alphonsus Liguori guest blog. After all, when you can't think of anything to blog about (probably because there is too much going on to narrow down a coherent thought - granted, a coherent thought would be new for this blog, but it is still a goal) go to a timeless classic.

Have you hugged your mother today?

M

y dear Queen and Mother, Mary, I will address thee in the words of St. Germanus : "Thou art omnipotent in saving sinners ; thy prayers are all-powerful with God, because thou art the mother of true life."—Serm. iii. in Dorm. B. V. Then, O my mistress, if I have recourse to thee, all my sins cannot make me despair of salvation. Thou obtainest by thy prayers whatever thou wishest. If thou prayest for me I shall certainly be saved. I will then say to thee with St. Bernard : Pray for me, who am so miserable, O great Mother of God, for thy Son hears thee, and grants whatsoever thou askest (Depr. ad glor. V.). I am indeed a sinner; but I wish to amend my life, and I glory in being specially devoted to thee. I am, it is true, unworthy of thy protection; but I know that thou hast never abandoned any one who has placed his trust in thee. Thou art able and willing to save me, and I trust in thee. When I was in the state of perdition, and forgetful of thee, thou didst think of me, and didst obtain for me the grace to enter into myself. How much more ought I to trust in thy mercy now that I am dedicated to thy service, and that I recommend myself with confidence to thy prayers! O Mary ! pray for me, and obtain for me the grace to be a saint. Obtain for me holy perseverance ; obtain for me a great love of thy Son, and of thee, O my amiable mother! I love thee, O my Queen! and hope to love thee always. Do thou also love me, and obtain for me the grace that I may be transformed from a sinner into a saint. - Saint Alphonsus Liguori, Preporation for Death, Consideration XXXII

Thanks for guest blogging Doc. Come back soon!

She didn't just say that...

2009-07-11T12:18:00.006-05:00

You've got to be kidding me. Either I'm completely out of touch or this person is. I scanned the headlines and found the most bizarre headline:

Without a Doubt:
Why Barack Obama represents American Catholics better than the pope does.

What? Oh, let me guess. As Americans, we're smarter than the rest of the Church. We know Jesus better than those old guys at the Vatican. We've advanced further and discovered things they have yet to tap into. We've inherited some sort of nuanced enlightenment by virtue of our geography.

Might this article contain something other than the tired-old sound bytes about reducing (not ending) abortions and helping the poor by creating secular government bureaucracies to distribute our love?

Nope. But this article is still a great read, because it goes beyond the sound byte and provides the depth (or shallowness?) of this person's lack of ascent. Finally, someone from the liberal church has the guts to explain herself completely and expose the arrogance, egotism, and complete disregard for the virtue of obedience.

The entire article is an outrage. I'll quote this one snippet:

"Before he became John Paul II, Karol Wojtyla had a telling all-or-nothing formulation: "If it should be decided that contraception is not an evil in itself then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit is on the side of the Protestant Churches."
That attitude has resulted in some heinous decisions."

Oh, I see. The entire magisterial teaching on the use of contraception can be reduced to our Church leaders not wanting to admit a mistake. This, from a person claiming earlier in the article that...

"... listening to the other has been a particular stumbling block for the Catholic hierarchy"

Hipocracy, thy name is Kathleen Kennedy Townsend. If you had bothered to actually read Humanae Vitae, and the teaching of His Late Holiness John Paul II, you would not detract from these beautiful and divinely inspired teachings by reducing them to the sin of pride, which unfortunately is something that you understand quite personally and to which you can obviously relate (judging alone from this article, this conclusion is unmistakable).

Let me explain. We are Catholic Americans. Yes, we have our own culture that we value. We do things differently and have our own attitude, and a unique identity. But the "Catholic" comes first. We are not American Catholics. Were we to be American Catholics, we would cease to be catholic. By it's very name, "Catholic" transcends lesser characteristics of our person. Were these lesser characteristics to be greater, we would cease being catholic. What made the Catholic Church catholic was when there became no distinction between Jew or Gentile, Hebrew, Samaritan, or Greek. We are a family of faith that works in the USA, England, Lebanon, India, China, Australia, and Ghana. All of us connected by one God, one faith, one baptism. The second we start believing in ourselves above the mystical body of Christ, we become heretics, separated brethren. We become Martin Luther, Henry VIII, or Bishop Marcel Lefevre. Our Lord said, "You be one, or you be not mine."

This person needs so many prayers. Please pray for her. And she's not alone. Our parishes have many just like her. It is a fundamental hang-up that I suffered from most of my life. It really is, in my opinion, and denial of the divine. We want to believe in our own infallibility, or at least our own ultimate authority in our lives. We look at the Church as a man-made, fallible institution, not is the mystical body and bride of Christ. And we can't look beyond our own prism, which is this case is one in which all matters can be reduced to politics. When I was there, many good Catholics prayed for me. I have so far to go, I know, but at least I'm not THERE any more, thanks to God's grace and prayerful Catholics.

He is infinite. He can bring the coldest hearts and the stiffest necks back home. The mindset of the liberal church is insurmountable through reason. But it's nothing for God. I will be turning my offense into prayer. If He is just waiting for us to ask, let Him wait no longer.

At the feet of the Vicar

2009-06-06T04:34:00.002-05:00

Shawn Tribe posted some incredible insights from our Holy Father:

This is important: The faith is not only thought; it touches the whole being. Given that God made man with flesh and blood and entered into the tangible world, we have to try to encounter God with all the dimensions of our being. In this way, the reality of God, through faith, penetrates in our being and transforms it. For this reason, Rabanus Maurus concentrated his attention above all on the liturgy..."(Benedict XVI)

Go read his post, digest it, and use it in future mystagoguery.

I'm Speechless

2009-06-05T13:49:00.004-05:00

I read this article today, and I can't help but to post it. I mean, it simply blows my mind. This guy almost won a pulitzer prize once.

Abortion is murder. In my view women have--and ought to continue to have--the right to murder their unborn babies. Each abortion is a tragedy, some necessary and others not, and all of them are murder. It's not a position that I'm comfortable with. But as sad and horrible as abortion is, I can't see telling a woman who doesn't want to carry a pregnancy to term that she has to do so.

I'd love comments, because I can't comment on the article on that site. And I'm having trouble processing it.

Defining Moment?

2009-05-31T18:05:00.009-05:00

You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thy enemy. But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you: That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust. For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have? do not even the publicans this? And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more? do not also the heathens this? Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect. (Mt 5:43-47)

Timing is such a mystery. Today, at about the same time (give or take a few hours) thousands, if not millions, of people in our country were offering the sacrifice of our Lord for an end to abortion, a gunman was entering a Lutheran church to turn a notorious abortionist into a martyr. What are you up to Lord?

I often ask that question. I appreciate the fact that He tolerates such questions from finite creatures.

A few things come to mind.

1. -- The murder of George Tiller will be manipulated to silence the pro-life movement. He is now the trump card to silence all debate, today and for the next 20 years. Here are the “facts” that the pro-death mentality will make the following assumption, which they do in many cases: Criminals, like this gunman, aren’t really responsible for their own actions. Sociological elements cause such behavior. This gunman, therefore, is the product of the groups that promote the idea that abortion actually kills a human being. So if you oppose abortion, you are encouraging acts like this. DON’T BE SILENCED! PUT THEM ON THE DEFENSIVE! It's important to understand that these people have a self-serving agenda, and explaining to them a thousand times over the next ten years that you don’t condone the murder of abortionists plays right into their hands. Don’t play that game. “So, are you accusing me of murder?” Make them answer that question, yes or no. Don’t let the conversation go any further until they give you a definitive answer. If the answer is “no”, then they have no business linking your pro-life views with the actions of a terrorist. If the answer is “yes”, then you need to call a spade a spade. “Maybe in your Orwellian universe it is murder to support the lives of unborn children, but that stands to reason, since it was similar logic that allowed, and continues to allow, millions of unborn children to die year after year.” Counterattack the logic in short-order. Abortion proponents have been waiting for this moment to turn the tables on the pro-life movement. They wont’ let it pass. Don’t run. Meet them head on. And whatever you do, do not wear this man. Make the abortion advocate wear their lame attempt to silence and brand you.

2. -- The murder of unborn children happens silently, while abortionists get front page attention. By my count, this is 6 abortionists and their staff to be murdered since 1993. In that same time period, there have been about 20 million unborn children killed in their mother’s wombs by surgical abortion. Every life is precious to God. So we cannot simply write-off six lives as insignificant. But neither can we ignore the disparity. Being an abortionist is dangerous, but much less dangerous than being an unborn child. Keep this reality in mind as the media targets the pro-life movement.

3. -- Do you take our Lord seriously when he tells you to love your enemy? Well, here He is presenting an excellent opportunity. Tiller is a particularly egregious foe. His participation in needless late-term abortions means that this man brutally killed many helpless children at a stage in life when they were unmistakably human. This is about as cold-blooded as it gets. Did he die in his rebellion or did he receive final mercy? We don’t know. His particular judgment is likely over. But our God is not bound by time. We can pray now that this man repented at the moment of his death and was spared eternal fire. Both God and Satan want his soul. I don’t think it does us much good to side with Satan on anything. So please, offer prayer that Tiller be granted eternal joy, as well as all his supporters in the pro-death camp. Rosary, Mass or Divine Office intentions would be best, but offer something for this poor soul. That’s about the only love we have left to offer George Tiller. But at least it is something, and it may make a difference for him.

It’s important to remember in times like these to avoid cynicism. “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself.” (John 12:32) God seems to be littering our world with crosses. A person of faith, as we all should be, should gaze out on those crosses and praise God for drawing the world closer to Himself. That is his promise, and that should be our hope.

As always, act as a Christian should. The murder of George Tiller could be a defining moment in the pro-life movement. Will we go forth or retreat? Stay faithful, and you put the definition on this moment. Don't let the pro-abortionists and one lunatic terrorist do it for you.

We've just celebrated the mass of Pentecost. Now is not the time to hide the truth, but proclaim it without fear. "The Spirit of the Lord fills the whole world. It holds all things together and knows every word spoken by man, alleluia." (Wisdom 1:7, Introit for Pentecost)

Update: Jeff Miller has a roundup of some reactions from Catholic bloggers. While you're praying for Tiller, remember also his grieving family.

No Greater Love Hath a Man

2009-05-23T00:14:00.008-05:00

In Flanders Fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

[In Flanders Fields, LtCol John McCrae(1872-1918), MD, Canadian Army]

We often mystagogue about the moral confusion of our day. But we degrade that phrase “moral confusion” when viewed through the eyes of an American warrior, from 1775 to the present day. The same can be said for anyone of any nation who has been cast in the duty of battle.

Victor Davis Hanson, a Classics professor, historian, and farmer, summed this up nicely back in 2003:

Battle also is not merely a logical continuance of politics, but an abnormal event in which thousands of warriors — most often in the past, young male adults — are freed to kill each other for a few hours, a dramatic and strange experience bound to change their lives and the fate of their families and friends for centuries thereafter.

The American warrior, be he a soldier, marine, seaman, or airman, accepts violence and even death so that the our nation and much of the world can live in peace. For those who have never been in battle, which includes me, imagine the moral dilemma. At a moment in your life when you are at grave risk of being killed, you must do your duty, which includes the killing of others. Is this war just? Is this engagement a necessity? Is my target a combatant? Am I killing enough? Am I sending my enemy to eternal rest or fire? Am I still in the state of grace after all this killing?

While warfare has been a permanent fixture in human history, and the warrior instinct remains intact even in our civil society, we all recognize that it is antithetical to the peaceful existence that we take for granted. The free nation that we live in today, flawed as it is, was built on the deaths of men who put their very souls on the line. The calling of battle reaches beyond heroism. Yes, their reasons for being in the battle may not be so noble as I suggest. But regardless, the service was rendered. Our respect and our eternal gratitude needs to be returned.

The piece of the aforementioned author, from his book The Ripples of Battle, begins with this:

On my rare visits to the local cemetery, I am always struck by the unremarkable grave of Victor Hanson. The inscription is as spare as the stone itself — name, state, rank, dates of birth and death, and nothing much more except the nondescript "29 Marines / 6 Marine Div / World War II." Unlike the other impressive tombstones of relatives in the family plot, there are no inscribed res gestae, not even a "loving father" much less a "beloved grandfather." A man who dies tragically, young, and alone does so without capital, either monetary or human. When he leaves behind no progeny, it is evident in the modesty of his commemoration.

But then his mother died in childbirth, his father was blinded in the vineyard by a sulfur-machine accident. He was killed at twenty-three, without wife or children, his body eventually shipped back and reinterred in Kingsburg, California. And because Victor was an only child, when he died on Okinawa, his father Victor Hanson's thin line perished as well. Had his memory vanished as well?

Certainly there are no Hansons left of Victor's direct ancestry to appreciate the significance of his modest epitaph, whose calculus — death recorded on May 19, 1945, serving in the 29th Regiment, 2nd Battalion, Company F of the 6th Marine Division — reflected his presence at the nexus of one of the worst days of the bloodiest campaign in the Pacific theater, the final assault and capture of Sugar Loaf Hill and its environs.

…

Yet without ostentatious stones, lasting works of fame, or any surviving immediate family, had the childless, young Victor Hanson really perished on that godforsaken hill with dozens of his friends on May 18? Surely not. Growing up, I heard his name nearly daily. My father was his first cousin, but the two were more like brothers, given their near-identical ages and lifelong companionship; for a time they lived side-by-side on adjoining farms, went to the same college, and joined the Marines. And so it was that the last half century our parents talked often about this mysterious dead man. "If only Vic had lived," the refrain went, followed by all sorts of counterfactuals concerning the subsequent sad fate of his father, his high school and college prospects, whom he might have married, children reared, partnerships entered with my father, grandparents consoled, college work that presaged future success, farms saved — rather than people saddened, sickened, and cast adrift, and homesteads soon to be sold or lost. I began as a child almost to resent this shadowy moral exemplar, who had died without making a mistake, thus leaving his namesake with the burden of emulating such character.

This is a moving story with a point we easily forget. The sacrifice of war echoes beyond the mere loss of an individual. I guess that stands to reason. If a man is to fight for a cause greater than himself, his sacrifice will also be shared well beyond himself. The bigger the man, the bigger the ripple his death will send.

In this fallen world of our, war has not ceased to be necessary. Some people simply can’t handle that fact. Peace has never been won in geopolitical terms by using the ostrich approach. But as necessary as it is, it is also dysfunctional. One cannot expect, even when fighting for an ultimate just cause, as we did in World War II, that each engagement is a justified step. As it turns out, our most costly battle of that great conflict remains strategically ambiguous sixty years after the fact:

Given the large number of American dead on Okinawa, I do not believe that the good and experienced men who planned the storming of Okinawa — Operation Iceberg — in the luxury suites of the San Francisco St. Francis Hotel were all that wise in the manner of their war making. Neither do I give all that much credence to the United States Army's official narrative of the campaign, which concluded with the confident excuse, "The military value of Okinawa exceeded all hope." I acknowledge that both traditional and revisionist historians have only scorn for those like me who question the need for or the logic of Iceberg — and I can offer no alternative to the strategy of taking the island that might have ensured fewer dead on either side. Surely I do not know how the Americans could have gone ahead with plans to invade Japan with the knowledge that they either could not or would not eliminate first a veteran army of 110,000 Japanese on Okinawa at their rear. And I also know that others more illustrious died on Okinawa — Ernie Pyle, Gen. Simon Bolivar Buckner himself, and several Medal of Honor winners. And I grant that the death of a twenty-three-year-old farm boy I never met from Kingsburg, California, pales besides two hundred thousand combined Japanese soldiers and Okinawan civilians incinerated, blown apart, and slowly starved to death that summer. Yes, I accept all that, but I also know of the wide ripples of one man's death, and as I look at his ring they have not ended — at least not quite yet.

As we observe the sacrifice of those who accepted the call to fight for our nation, let’s do so with our eyes open to the enormity of that sacrifice. We can’t put ourselves in their combat boots, but we certainly can do more than grill on the patio, read a book, or mow the lawn. We can make their heroism a deeper part of our lives. Remember them. Pray for them. Learn about them. Pass to the next generation the value of duty to country. Live a life worthy of their sacrifice. Fight the political battles for a more virtuous America.

Every Sunday, we are reminded of that perfect sacrifice of our Blessed Lord. Memorial Day should remind us that many have taken His commandment seriously.

Eternal rest grant unto them, o Lord

And let perpetual light shine upon them

May the souls of our fallen men and women in service to the United States of America and all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.

Victor Davis Hanson’s four part series from National Review Online can be read here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4. He unearths the mystery under the inconspicuous grave stone and reveals the enormous cost and impact of war.

Progs and Trads Together on TOB?

2009-05-20T04:13:00.007-05:00

Here is a very thought-provoking read from Micheal Liccione on his view of the continuity between the old contractual and the new covenantal view on marriage, visited on the occasion of recent news-making statements of Theology of the Body advocates.

This topic is one of the central salients in spiritual combat, as priests who hear the confessions of males know all too well. Its also being the most widely discussed is not altogether unreasonable from any standpoint. If only because of the effects of original sin, the deadly sin of lust is common and even manifests itself in marriages. Like any other deadly sin, lust is incompatible with the love of God and neighbor, even if the neighbor happens to be one's spouse. It doesn't even take faith to know that the line between lust and healthy sexual desire is quite porous. So the notion that one should strive to be both good in bed and an orthodox Catholic seems ludicrous to unbelievers and disaffected Catholics as well as to many traditional believers.

That was just an enticement. The entire posting is loaded. I highly enourage comments on this one, as for me, this is one of the more confusing topics of the day.

The Millstone in the Living Room

2009-05-18T21:39:00.005-05:00

In my continued attempt at burying Andy's post, I want to make a quick comment on another old controversy that I've stayed out of. This one involves the Miss USA contestant Carrie Prejean, the young lady who had the guts to answer the question about marriage honestly.

For those hermits who just logged on the last few days, she received a question about gay marriage from a gay judge, and though she stumbled a bit at the beginning of her answer, she gave the answer that she knew would cost her the Miss USA crown. Since then, she's been the scorn of the progressive community, replacing Sara Palin as the new Maria Antoinette.

Let me say upfront that I have deep admiration that this woman would work so hard for this opportunity for many years of her young life and in a blink of an eye knowingly toss it aside to stay faithful to her values. For that, she has been universally praised by many conservative commentators, in particular those in Catholic media.

Through all of the controversy, one thing hasn't been mentioned. Miss Pegean knows that marriage is between a man and a woman, and she knows that not just instinctively, but also because it's in the Bible. Good for her, and for anyone who makes it this far. Now, let's crack open that Holy Bible and dig a little deeper.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house: neither shalt thou desire his wife, nor his servant, nor his handmaid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is his. (Exodus 20:17)

You have heard that it was said to them of old: Thou shalt not commit adultery. But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 7:22-23)

And he said to his disciples: It is impossible that scandals should not come: but woe to him through whom they come. It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones. (Luke 17:1-2)

Now this may not be the major point of this story, but it does bear mentioning. When I looked up this story on a news service, I saw the article complete with a picture of Miss Prejean on stage in a white bikini. As with any contestant in this pageant, she is exceptionally alluring. The primary appeal of the pageant is to get an eyeful of the finest looking women this country has to offer. And while there is certainly a place to admire beauty, when it is done so obviously to encourage the lust of men, it's a near occasion of sin.

One would think that in all the commentary that this story has had in the Catholic media, somewhere there would be made mention of the fact that this pageant is inappropriate viewing for most men, and all boys. It intends to serve no better purpose.

It's hard to blame Miss Prejean, particularly when she acted with such courage. But it still needs to be pointed out that while she is verbally defending the sacred bond of marriage, she is physically defeating it when she exhibits herself on a stage such as that.

So please, ladies, keep your husbands and sons away from the television when this burlesque show comes around next year. One defense of marriage does not a wholesome show make. Better yet - Men, protect the garden! and not just your own garden.

The Fighting Relativists of ND - Post Script

2009-05-18T20:10:00.004-05:00

I'm not really feeling inspired enough to produce a blog post. However, I am motivated to bury the post directly below this one. Despite Andy's well intentioned point, posting videos of such a grotesque nature might be offensive to certain classes of people, for instance, people who breathe.

So, on to Notre Dame. I must confess that as one who was an avid college football fan before becoming an avid Catholic, I have had little regard for the University of Notre Dame, the prima donna of the college football community. Too good to join an athletic conference. Too fawned-over to actually have to have a decent team in order to be ranked. So worshiped by the sports media that they get opportunities not afforded to other teams (like getting a shot an #1 Florida in in the 1992 Sugar Bowl).

Now things are different, and, unfortunately, my attitude hasn't changed much. I'm not at all thrilled that they have a mural of the Risen Lord that they trivialize by calling it "Touchdown Jesus". And they employ on their Theology staff a Fr. McBrien, who's never found a doctrinal error that he didn't want to teach.

In short, Notre Dame did not impress the secularistic or the theistic portions of my life. But three years ago, something happened that made me reconsider. Father Jenkins, the university president, voiced a marvelous critique of Vagina Monologues, and seemed to be signally an eventual ban from the Notre Dame campus. Progress, so I thought, initiated by a courageous priest willing to stand-up for Catholicism in the midst of the antithetical world of American academia. That lasted a few weeks before he folded like the football team did against Oregon State in the Fiesta Bowl (or the Insight.Com Bowl, take your pick). Any thoughts of sending my kids there lasted for the same few weeks.

So as far as Obama's honorary degree and his commencement speech go, I have to say that I'm encouraged by the fact that some Catholics put up a fights. Over 70 bishops penned their disapproval! When have we ever seen that? And while the mainstream media avoided the condemnations and protests, noting them only to display them as freakish, the news that Notre Dame won't honor a basic moral principle is out, and they will be damaged goods to faithful Catholics until they clean house.

Father Z followed the story tenaciously, and he seems a little discouraged by the outcome. But still looking forward, he offers a solution to this and other deeply rooted problems within the Catholic community.

We are not getting the fullness of the Church’s teachings from Notre Dame or other, now lesser, water carriers of the secularist agenda. We are not getting it from very many of our leaders in the Church.

And so…

I urge all priests and bishops who read this blog with any slight quaver of resonance or benevolence, to consider this with care:

If you sense that something quite serious and important is going on right now, for the love of God rethink your approach to how you foster Holy Church’s proper public worship.

Do all in your power and through your influence to foster a worship of God which conforms not to worldly goals – as praiseworthy as they may be in a world still dominated by its dire prince – but rather to the real point of religion: an encounter with mystery.

Our worship must become more and more focused on the one who is Other. Seek what is truly above in your rites and raise people to encounter mystery.

You will be challenged and reviled, blocked and attacked as you do. You will be worn down and afraid under the weight of resistance.

But I think that to save the world we must save the liturgy.

Sunday reaffirmed this for me.

They can’t compete with the fullness of Catholic liturgy and sound preaching.

Reforming the liturgy along the lines Pope Benedict has proposed may be the most loving and effective option we have in these ever hotter times.

People will have to keep working very much in the sphere of the secular. Of course! Our inward Catholic Christian identity must find outward expression and bring concrete fruits.

But I think the real work now – where we will make some effective headway – must be done at the level of our public worship.

It always keeps coming back to that.

Things Could Be Worse

2009-05-16T17:17:00.005-05:00

Sometimes I complain about the music at church. There's one song we've dubbed "The Gloria Hoedown" and a version of the memorial acclamation (Christ has died, Christ has risen...) that sounds like a ripoff of the Beatles' "Come Together". And then there was the time when our extremely talented organ player was forced to bang out a song that sounded strangely like the theme from Gilligan's Island. Yet with all of that, I can still be thankful that I have yet to witness something like this at church:

Maybe that version will be in the next edition of the hymnal, possibly between selections from this album (H/T Ironic Catholic's blog):

Right now, it seems that only time will tell.

"Best" Practices in Parish Stewardship

2009-05-13T12:30:00.004-05:00

Here is an excerpt from a book recommended to me recently, called "Best Practices in Parish Stewardship" by Charles E. Zech. Let's see if you can spot what is missing:

Best Practices in Parish Stewardship

1) Be a Welcoming Parish
2) Have an Active Stewardship Council
3) Make Stewardship a Critical Component of the Parish Plan
4) Emphasize Stewardship in all Parish Formation and Education Programs
5) Provide the Opportunity for Lay Witness Presentations
6) Communicate with Parishioners about Stewardship
7) Encourage Parishioners to Pledge
8) Good Stewardship Starts in the Parish House

The magical formula has been revealed: act like we really like people when they show up at mass, butter them up with food and games, hammer stewardship into their heads at every opportunity, regularly interrupt the words of Jesus (speaking through our priests) with presentations by lay witnesses, give people an easy way to donate without having to think about it too much, and then tell them exactly where their money is going, and create a stewardship council to make sure it all happens just like we planned. Now sit back and let the money roll in.

Did you catch what is missing? God! No mention of prayer, internal conversion, fasting, penance, or even outreach opportunities that make people feel good about helping others. Last time I checked, "Greeting the parishioner" was not among the corporal works of mercy. And these items are the result of a "comprehensive survey".

Now I know of no panacea for causing people to open their checkbooks and support their church. All I know is that Jesus' sermon on the mount wasn't cut short by a guest speaker cajoling the disciples to fork over the dough.

I think my brother Jack was on to something when he said that we need conversion first, and stewardship will come later. I know that my personal conversion brought about great fruits. Before, I hardly went to church, and when I did, it was at best a couple of bucks in my pocket that ended up in the basket. Post-conversion? Wham! Attempting to tithe, weekly adoration hour, internet apologetics defending the faith, daily prayer, and on.

As I was thinking about this last night, it made me think of our faith, and how we are justified. We are justified by grace through faith and works. The key though is that faith comes before works, always. As a baby, it is the faith of our parents that empowers the work of baptism. As an adult, it is an 8 month period of discernment.

Where this "best practices" list goes wrong is that it puts works before faith. None of these "best practices" help increase faith (except possibly faith formation, which I agree with). And I believe that I have seen the result of following them - a parish culture where the word "stewardship" gives parishioners a headache and quickly becomes background noise. If they don't love their Catholic faith, chances are they aren't going to love up their parish and their world with being good stewards.

I believe that there should be no such thing as a "Total Stewardship Parish". Instead, preach the faith, preach it boldly! Introduce the Traditional Latin Mass and let the graces flow. Convert people, teach them the truth, start a fire in their soul and their heart. Show them Jesus! Stewardship in all its forms will flow from within. Might a parish lose parishioners? Probably - but Jesus was not interested in the lukewarm. In John Chapter 6, thousands turned away from him and he did nothing to stop them. The book of Revelation tells us that He will "vomit us out of His mouth" if we are neither cold nor hot. I say, better to preach the truth and force everyone to be cold or hot. It is the hot that give the most anyway - they are the ones carrying the load. And if we can entice some more to become hot, souls are saved.

Let us pray for our priests, for our parishes, and for each other, that we may come to know the full truth and have it set us on fire. Our parishes, our communities and our world will be better and stronger for it.

Idle Hands

2009-05-12T00:26:00.007-05:00

And the book of Isaias the prophet was delivered unto him. And as he unfolded the book, he found the place where it was written: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me. Wherefore he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor, he hath sent me to heal the contrite of heart, to preach deliverance to the captives, and sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of reward. And when he had folded the book, he restored it to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. – Luke 4:17-20

In the above scripture, our Blessed Lord put two scriptures together from Isaiah for his listeners in the Nazarene synagogue. I’m going to try something remotely similar by putting together two recent blog posts. WARNING – Do not try this at home. Only a true mytagogue is qualified for such advanced techniques.

Recently, Adoro provided a witness to the problem with the accepted view of evangelizing the new generation of young adults.

… [T]hey (we!) are seeking God. And if they enter a parish and find the theology of the parish to be wishy-washy, they leave. If they find disunity, they leave. If they find outreach without sincerity and REAL understanding...they walk. They realize their lives are worth far more than a ten-cent smile and a frivolous handshake. They don't want their singlehood to become one of slave labor to the Church, their singlehood a memory of years spent in weird pigeonholed isolation at a parish that doesn't know what to do with them other than to plug them into various volunteer holes that need warm bodies to fill them.

Young adults want to get involved, yes. Absolutely. But not without a deeper meaning. Not without God. For their primary search, even if they can't explain it, is God. They are seeking happiness. They are seeking Our Lord, and they don't know where YOU have placed Him.

How true! All too often, as we look to build our parish communities, we end up chasing a somewhat secular (faithless) model for building an organization. We can’t reach them unless we get them through the door. We can’t keep them unless they return. They won’t return unless our community appeals to them. They won’t be committed unless we give them something to do. If we push through all of that, the sacraments will do their thing and our community will become the workers’ paradise that we keep singing about.

While I am knocking this approach, it would be wrong not to admit that there is some secular logic to it, which makes it thoroughly tempting. The flaws, though, are fatal. I’m sure its practitioners who pervade today’s Catholic parishes are absolutely sincere in their intention of doing the Lord’s work. But, to put it bluntly, they are following the ideology of Nimrod, that infamous architect of the Tower of Babel . They left the Catholic Church, the Bride of Christ, behind. They deliberately ignore Rome, believing that the Holy Spirit can guide us to come up with something better than what God gave us through the Catholic Church.

There are legends that this self-made community works. There may even be some real-world examples of it. Yet everywhere I’ve seen it tried, the results are the same. Efforts to get people more involved inevitably lead to burdening the people who are already too involved. The stagnant population of the community tend to remain that way.

The bottom line – parishes are putting STEWARDSHIP ahead of CONVERSION. In fact, there exists a general assumption that stewardship leads to conversion. It is self-evident that this is entirely backwards. Did Mother Teresa become a saint because she fed the hungry and cared for the dying? Or did she feed the hungry and care for the dying because she became a saint? According to her, and human reason, it’s the latter.

What keeps us Catholics from getting this right? It’s pretty simple. If a parish is addressing the needs of souls, it’s doing what it’s supposed to do. A people that is deeply in love with our Lord Jesus will build the Kingdom the way He wants it built, and that’s all that matters. Sorry, Nimrod.

And what can a parish do to accomplish this? For starters, let everyone drop his or her pride, pastors and lay leaders alike. Read the exhortations of the pope, the dogmatic documents of the ecumenical councils, and the instructions from the curia. Then watch our Holy Father in action. How does he say mass? What is he focusing on in his addresses? Then look at your community. Where is your parish lagging? What is your parish disregarding? (hint: if the Bishop allows it, it doesn’t mean it’s good. If he demands it, well, that’s another matter.) Then get to work on preparing the parish to receive the sacraments in the manor set forth by our High Priest, through his Bride. The deviation from the treasures God has given us through the Church is an exercise in pride. Souls will suffer, despite the pleasant veneer some will claim.

As our Holy Father wrote in a previous job (my emphasis):

[The obligatory character of the liturgy] is a guarantee, testifying to the fact that something greater is taking place here than can be brought about by any individual community or group of people. It expresses the gift of joy, the gift of participation in the cosmic drama of Christ's Resurrection, by which liturgy stands or falls. Moreover the obligatory character of the essential parts of the liturgy also guarantees the true freedom of the faithful: it makes sure that they are not victims of something fabricated by an individual or a group, that they are sharing in the same liturgy that binds the priest, the bishop and the pope. In the liturgy, we are all given the freedom to appropriate, in our own personal way, the mystery which addresses us. – Feast of Faith, p 67

Fidelity to the liturgy, along with the needed catechesis (see the blog’s masthead for details), will properly dispose the faithful to the sacraments they receive. This will light the fire that most seem to think will come about through happy songs and passing out sacred vessels.

And, speaking of happy songs, let me get back to the promise of joining together two blog posts. Music is a major problem with liturgy today. Parishes actively seek what they consider attractive music to please the people in the ~~worship space~~ nave. This form of superficial evangelization plays right in to the misguided attempt to lure young people that Adoro blogged about. True to form, this attempt to occupy minds and hearts during “silent” periods not only misses the point, but counters the point in so many ways. Jeffry Tucker wrote a manifesto of sorts on the sociology of Church music, and in doing so covers why this attempt to entertain the people fails miserably:

In light of this, special demands are placed on Catholic musicians to use music that embraces what unites us and allows Catholic communities to thrive, understanding that anyone who is choosing their religion by social considerations alone is not likely to be interested in the Catholic faith to begin with. If we attempt to jump into the existing rivalrous market of demographic stop-'n'-shop, we are surely going to lose. There is always a body of believers out there who can do this better than we can.

And there is another factor here to consider. To seek to appeal to a certain group, we necessarily alienate other groups. We've all had the experience of car pooling or riding in the car with someone who has the radio tuned to a station we find egregious. So it is when we choose this over that form of secular music for our worship. We cannot and will not agree so long as we are choosing on subjective grounds alone.

This is the great error made variously in the history of the faith, mostly recently in the 1960s and 1970s in the U.S. when Catholics attempted to tailor-make their liturgy to blend in with a slice of time in order to win the hearts of a certain age demographic that temporarily believed its wishes were more important than anything else. To do this ended up creating massive division, and we still face the consequences today.

What do Catholics have as a primary concern that others put lower down the list? It is that most unfashionable idea of universal truth, a body of belief and practice, that transcends politics, community, nation, and even time. That is something so precious and wonderful, so appealing in the long run, that we should never turn away from it but rather embrace it completely. In that same way, sacred music challenges us to leave aside our tastes, to bury our egos, to turn off our iPods and digital subscriptions, to look outside our own group identity, and sing a new sing unto the Lord (the text to the Introit in the 5th Sunday of Easter).

I have found myself more and more attracted to a mass that appreciates sacred music. What a difference from the busyness of the typical performance-style music provided today at most parishes! I’ve spent many hours in front of the Blessed Sacrament simply making up for the prayer I missed at mass because the entertainment was so distracting. As efficacious as it is to be in eucharistic adoration, it is no substitute for the mass, where offerings are always accepted and multiplied. There’s a noise compulsion that is clearly at odds with the mass, as if active participation means we need to keep people’s attention occupied for fear they might have a prayer encounter of their own.

Recently, while commuting home, I heard a Protestant service on the radio. It was very evangelical, with a charismatic preacher imploring his flock to spread the gospel. That was followed by a cover of a praise and worship song (guitar, bass, drums, a lot of “I will do this” and “I will do that”) I’d heard before at mass. But there was a huge difference when I heard it this time. The music was a perfect fit! It belonged in this direct style of worship. There was no mystery to contemplate. There was no awe in the Incarnation, Death, and Resurrection of our Lord. It was simple, it was emotional, and it was motivating. And with the adrenaline rising through the body, the music was seamless. Thus, praise and worship music has a place. That was an epiphany for me.

And what purpose does it serve at the mass? For that matter, what do the emasculated show tunes, jingles, and hippy songs in our modern “song” books accomplish? At best, they relieve us as we endure the boredom of our weekly liturgy. At worst, they dull the encounter with our Lord. They rob us of the, “… freedom to appropriate, in our own personal way, the mystery which addresses us.” They create noise which deflects our minds and hearts from the fullness of meeting the one whose death makes eternal happiness possible.

It basically changes the mass into a sing-a-long communion service. As one wise blogger put it, it’s like preparing a prime rib eye steak with a blender.

The result? Deep conversion is much more difficult as people miss the opportunity to have the fullness of grace which was offered to them. This is no small matter. This is a self-inflicted cap on spiritual growth, not to mention a source of theological confusion.

To sum up this entire post, busyness is not the answer to call of the New Evangelization. Jesus is the answer. That hasn’t changed in 2000 years. If someone thinks he has a better idea than the Catholic Church, you know, the one guided by the Holy Spirit, then that someone has his own need of a deeper conversion. We can’t offer anyone, young or old, something that we don’t have. Yes, we do have sacraments. But our vanity can, and does, diminish the work of those sacraments on our lives. When we truly make the effort to surrender ourselves to His authority and assist at mass to our fullest capacity, no ministry scheme and no liturgical customizations would compare to the attraction we would possess.

Just to be clear, I am all in favor of innovation and ideas. But they must first be checked against the directions and advice of Church authority. All Catholics of good faith want the same thing. We just need to remember, Nimrod isn’t going to get us there.

Prayer Rationing

2009-05-05T21:24:00.005-05:00

I haven’t quite mystagogued this one out yet. I welcome anyone’s advice. Holy Mother Church recommends that we pray for the suffering souls in Purgatory. I have taken that recommendation lightly in my own life. Our family says a quick prayer after dinner for the souls of the faithful departed. In November, we extend that prayer from one line to two! Yep, I’m sure we’re popping souls out like popcorn in an iceberg.

Still, I guess it is something. St. Catherine of Siena, one of the greatest religious mystagogues of all time (I love tossing that word in, can you tell?) says that no suffering on earth compares to what the suffering souls are undergoing in Purgatory as I type. It is of course an act of charity to relieve suffering, particularly when it is so extreme.

However, looking at this from my lazy boy seat, I think there is something more imperative that the relieve of the suffering souls. You can see where I’m going with this, I’m sure. As bad as Purgatory is, I think it is better to be in Purgatory knowing the Beatific Vision is just a few centuries away than it is to be on earth with a chance of being condemned. Would it then not be better to spend our finite time in the Church Militant with a prayer focus strictly on those who’s salvation depends on prayer?

It is so difficult to contemplate eternity. All I know is that it is a lot longer than I can put into thoughts. But Purgatory is not eternity. Hell is. Every day for eternity is a new beginning of torment. It is so terrible, I’m not going to try to put it in words. The souls of Purgatory must take great consolation in that their torments will pass and they will see God. No such consolation for the souls of Hell.

There are people out there, ones whom you know, but most whom you don’t, who may be one offering away from salvation. Why then give that offering for someone who’s already all but made it?

Just curious. I will still pray for souls since the Church instructs us to do so. But I am curious as to the logic since there is an infinite chasm between landing in Hell and landing in Purgatory.

By the way, Andy, if I pass away while this blog is still active, please erase this post. Thanks Buddy!

Réquiem ætérnam dona eis, Dómine, et lux perpétua lúceat eis – Introit, Requiem Mass, Roman Missal (1962)

The Sky is Falling!!!

2009-05-01T22:47:00.003-05:00

This unresting anxiety is the greatest evil which can happen to the soul, sin only excepted. Just as internal commotions and seditions ruin a commonwealth, and make it incapable of resisting its foreign enemies, so if our heart be disturbed and anxious, it loses power to retain such graces as it has, as well as strength to resist the temptations of the Evil One, who is all the more ready to fish (according to an old proverb) in troubled waters.

Anxiety arises from an unregulated desire to be delivered from any pressing evil, or to obtain some hoped-for good. Nevertheless nothing tends so greatly to enchance the one or retard the other as over-eagerness and anxiety. - St Francis de Sales, Doctor of the Church, Introduction to a Devote Life, Part IV

Light blogging this week. Well, make that no blogging until now. Why? I have to admit that my attitude this week would have been something very wrong to share. Anxiety has been hard at work on me. Work has been about as stressful as I can remember. And the news lately? I know it can get worse, but this steady drip of death news is sucking the atmosphere dry of hope.

Let’s see, where to begin? Everything Obama has been bad news. Thanks to the chance discovery of uncounted ballots in Minnesota (and those chance discoveries always seem to favor the party of death) and the betrayal of a pro-death Republican in Pennsylvania, the president now has the rest of this congress to alter the fabric of America for generations. And not just our country. He also wants to export modern American family values to countries that just aren’t aborting their kids fast enough. Kathleen Sebelius gets in without a wimper thanks to a potential swine flu epidemic. And now we have a vacancy on the Supreme Court that will be filled by someone even more radical than Obama, not that Justice Souter was any picnic (thanks a lot HW).

And what’s to turn the tide? Obama is in the oval office thanks to a growing electorate of the unmarried. In 2007, 40% of the births in the United States were illegitimate. Courts are dictating gay marriage, and no one revolts? This nation has forgotten that the primary purpose of marriage is for the procreation, support, and education of children. Now marriage is all about self. So even though the people still instinctively know something is wrong with gay marriage, they can’t argue why without sounding like a bigot. In two generations, who will be left to explain the purpose of marriage? Two generations ago, people instinctively knew abortion was wrong. Four generations ago, people instinctively knew contraception was wrong. Slowly, sometimes not so slowly, this Culture of Death is claiming our country, a nation that was once portrayed as that “shining city on the hill.”

What’s to turn the tide? The institutions that saturate our secular culture and influence minds and behaviors are all on the side of this brave, new America. Entertainment media, news media, corporations, education at all levels – how is one to avoid the groupthink that sex, materialism, and uber self-esteem is the key to happiness?

So I think you get the gist of my anxiety this week. Bleak prospects at work, bleak prospects for the future of this country (not to mention all the other countries unfortunate enough to follow our lead) and, not mentioned previously, an inordinate number of friends, family and co-workers are going through tough times with employment, sickness, and other tragic circumstances. Anxiety. That doesn’t make for an interesting blog post. Nor a beneficial one.

The Blessed Mother’s Immaculate Heart will prevail. I know that, with all my heart I know that. Christ is the victor, and I’m on His side most of the time. But it is such a challenge to see the decline of goodness in our time and have faith that God will bring about a greater good. My faith is weak, therefore, I fear.

But the Lord’s mercy is never exhausted, even for those of weak faith. Today, I have a reprieve. I failed to pray for it. In fact, my prayer life slipped mightily during the last week. Nevertheless, He’s granted a reprieve, and it came though my marriage and the fruit of that marriage. It came from a child.

I usually say a rosary or chaplet in my car or listen to talk radio on the way home. I really didn’t feel like praying today (**Alert – I am aware that this is the best time to pray. Thanks for thinking that anyway**), nor did I want to increase my anxiety by listing to other people complain about what’s going on. That might alert me to something I didn’t know, and ignorance is preferable in my situation.

I’m weak, so I turned to a source designed for people in my state. Pop music. While commuting home from work, to take my mind off the misery of this week, I turned to the music that has made a considerable contribution to the Culture of Death. To my credit, I dialed away from most of the songs that were too ME ME ME ME ME focused, but a few of them slipped through, like Jesse’s Girl, and Tonight and the Rest of MY Life (I only know the chorus to that song, and listening to the rest, I got the impression that Nina is signing about being a demon. How’s that for the soul!). I got to sing along to one of the great sap songs in history, “Honey you! Are my shining star. Don't you go away.” (Don’t worry, that song ain’t going away from any of the heads of you blessed readers. He he.) You just have to sway along with that one. And I got to chill to a Counting Crows song I’d never hear before, but yet I had, if you know what I mean.

And then I had to gasp as I’m sort of singing along to Man on the Moon (“sort of”, meaning my ears cannot discern what Michael Stipe is singing most of the time) and discovered, for the first time, that the song takes silly cheap-shots at organized religion, modeled no doubt by the Catholic Church.

Well, at least it ended on a high note. A song about anxiety came on the radio. It’s a song called Overkill, one I used to sing along to in my adolescent years. This was a version I’d never heard before. This was Collin Hay solo, just him and his guitar. Very nice, and very apropos for the mood. I sat in the driveway until it ended.

Then I entered the house singing. Don’t worry, my family is used to it. “Day after day, it reappears. Night after night, my heartbeat shows the fear. Ghosts appear and fade away.” My daughter, bless her, hugged me as I walked in, and listened to me sing as I made my way to the kitchen toward my wife.

“Daddy, what song is that you're singing?”

“It’s an old song called Overkill. It’s by a group called Men At Work.”

“Are we going to sing that at Mass?”

My wife and I just about died laughing. Anxiety gone! And it hasn’t returned. Thank you Lord! You truly stoop to conquer.

(For those of you who don’t get the irony of a five-year old asking if we will be singing a pop song called Overkill at the mass, you obviously aren’t on the All Are Welcome-Gather Us In-City of God-Canticle of the Sun-We Are Called five-week cycle. You didn’t get it, but that’s okay, because you already have so much)

In your mercy keep us free from sin and protect us from all anxiety as we wait in joyful hope for the coming of our Savior, Jesus Christ. – Roman Missal

Go Fish

2009-04-23T12:29:00.006-05:00

The "Spirit of Vatican II" (or SVII for short[see update below]) takes a blow in the diocese of Steubenville. The American Papist has details:

Okay, technically, Catholics in the US are only allowed to dispense from the year-round Friday abstinence from meat if they substitute a comparable penance for it ... but in practice, the vast majority of Catholics have forgotten to even do this. Bishop R. Daniel Conlon, however, has dispensed with the substituting ... and has instead brought back the simple Friday abstinence from meat in his diocese. I especially respect that he ties this sacrificial abstinence to witnessing for the unborn and providing them with concrete assistance:
"I am inviting the Catholic people of the Diocese of Steubenville to resume the practice of abstaining from meat on all Fridays throughout the year, but with a twist. I am asking that this be not only a penitential practice but also an experience of prayer and service. This can happen by connecting abstinence with our witness to the sacredness of human life. (In another section he says: Abstinence can also be service if we eat simple meatless food and donate the financial savings to the poor or to pro-life efforts.)"

I've heard detractors of Friday abstinence say that it's not that much of a sacrifice. In fact, this is true. But neither is saying three Hail Mary's after confession. It doesn't have to inflict pain in order to be a sacrifice. Man cannot make a sacrifice of his own worthy of our Creator. God takes small sacrifices, like plain bread and wine, and gives us Himself in return. What's good about Friday abstinence is it reminds us that we're Catholic. It's a devotion that causes one to make different choices, to plan in advance, and to have to mortify one's appetite from time to time. One does not disrupted something as routine as eating without recalling why, and it becomes an offering, small as it may be. Additionally, it reminds others that we're Catholic. Just today, I had a person at work count me out of pizza for tomorrow for this reason. He informed me that Lent was over despite being certain that I already knew that.

I know the dispensing of Friday abstinence had little to do with Vatican II, at least officially. But this is clearly one of the fruits of that SVII. Most of those fruits seem to be directed toward the shedding of our Catholic identity, be it liturgy, music, prayer, devotions, vocations, theology, or attitude. And like all the other dominoes that fell, it leaves those of us who grew up in the post-conciliar years scratching our heads. After all, they didn’t really dispense with Friday abstinence. They allowed it's dispensing only in the case of a willful substitution of penance. But no one knows that! Well, some people know that, but if you will allow me to generalize, this amendment to Friday abstinence was universally misunderstood. I guess my annoyance at liturgical abuses is misplaced when we can’t even get a simple precept of the Church correct. How could the shepherds of the Church allow this ignorance among the faithful?

Well, maybe they had other fish to fry.

Good for the Diocese of Steubenville! I pray that the faithful get behind this. If they do, other episcopates may follow Bishop Conlon's lead.

UPDATE - For clarification purposes, I'm not an advocate for ignoring Vatican II. Quite the opposite. So I am clear - Vatican II was guided by the Holy Spirit. The term "Spirit of Vatican II" is what is coined by liberals to do and to advocate anything they want. It is a spirit of infidelity, and has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit.

Time to Get Holy

2009-04-21T11:46:00.004-05:00

In his apostolic letter "NOVO MILLENNIO INEUNTE" or "At the Beginning of the New Millenium" (written over eight years ago :shock:), among paragraphs 30 and 31, Pope John Paul II wrote:

"I have no hesitation in saying that all pastoral initiatives must be set in relation to holiness."

Did you read that? All pastoral initiatives must be set in relation to holiness. Our wonderful Pope, John Paul the Great, was writing to the universal church stating that all pastoral initiative must be set in relation to holiness.

How much have you heard about holiness at your parish? Do Catholics really know that they are called to be holy? Why aren't we hearing about this kind of thing more?

Someone asked him, "Lord, will only a few people be saved?" He answered them, "Strive to enter through the narrow gate, for many, I tell you, will attempt to enter but will not be strong enough. After the master of the house has arisen and locked the door, then will you stand outside knocking and saying, 'Lord, open the door for us.' He will say to you in reply, 'I do not know where you are from.' And you will say, 'We ate and drank in your company and you taught in our streets.' Then he will say to you, 'I do not know where (you) are from. Depart from me, all you evildoers!' ~ Luke 13:23-27

How many times have we passed this passage by and ignored it or shoved it aside because it was too difficult? How can getting to heaven be hard? Especially when we have all these sacraments and this apparent "formula" for getting to heaven. Yet here we hear about people eating and drinking in His company and Jesus teaching in their streets. Is this not exactly what we are getting at each mass? Jesus is addressing this to members of His Church - and telling them that the way is narrow and many will attempt to enter but will not be strong enough - and simply showing up at mass two times a year, every Sunday or even every day is not enough.

What does Jesus mean when he says that we are not strong enough? Many protestants believe that they don't have to do anything once they "are saved", why would they have to be strong to enter heaven? Many Catholics believe that simply observing the sacraments, if even in a mechanical way, gets them to heaven, what does that have to do with being strong?

The fact is, both erroneous "beliefs" have nothing to do with being strong. There is something more needed. And the Bible tells us what that is:

This is the will of God, your holiness. Therefore, whoever disregards this, disregards not a human being but God, who (also) gives his holy Spirit to you. ~ 1 Thessalonians 4:3a,8

The word "holiness" actually in a way means "strength" or "stability". Being holy is being strong, and this is the strength we need to enter heaven.

How do we become holy? It’s a process. We need to pursue God with our whole heart, persevering in prayer and working to grow both in love for Him and in virtue. Pursuing God alone will not gain us the strength we need to enter heaven; we cannot make ourselves holy. But it does demonstrate to God that we love him, that we truly want to be holy, and He then will give us what we need in our lives to make us holy, and the grace to become holy, and the therefore the strength to open the gate.

I found a wonderful series of talks, provided (partially) for free by the National Fellowship of Catholic Men and the Catholic Men's Fellowship of Pittsburgh, concerning St. John of the Cross and his collected writings. St. John of the Cross wrote four works which all concern growing in holiness. John Paul II was profoundly influenced by this great doctor of the church. This is required listening.

Talk 1 of 6: Transformation in Christ - A Saint for the New Millennium: the Life, Work and Vision of St. John of the Cross

Talk 2 of 6: Transformation in Christ - Beginning the Journey: Our Response to God's Call

Talk 3 of 6: Transformation in Christ - The Providential Role of Trials and Dryness

Talk 4 of 6: Transformation in Christ - Our Response to Spiritual Blessings

Transformation in Christ - The Remaining Talks (Discs 5 and 6)

The last two talks you have to buy. The six disc set is $30 including shipping and handling. I think if you just start listening to the series you will realize what a deal this is.

Please pray for me that I may grow in holiness, and for all Catholics to take up this universal call to holiness.