Verizon's "customer service."
My phone line has always been problematic. It always goes out in rainy weather. The weather has cleared now, but no one can hear me when I speak on the phone, and there's the ever-present static.
So I can't report the problem using my own phone.
If you've ever tried to report an issue via the incredibly cluttered Verizon website, you know what I'm going through.
And I have time to work on this today, because I'm home sick.
Yeah.
Tell me again why deregulating the phone industry was a good thing ... ???
11 February 2008
05 February 2008
Who's gonna win?
Karen Hall lays it out well, and I'm not going to try to improve on it, rushed as I am at the moment. She says that conservatives will be able to rally behind John McCain, because:
For me, it comes down to, what will the world think of whomever we elect? We can natter about family values and the sanctity of marriage all we want, but we need peace and prosperity at home to accomplish anything of worth, whether at home or abroad.
Those who decry the war might do well to remember that, after the Towers were bombed, it ended for us in our country. Some would say it was because of our exemplary TSA folks, etc. Perhaps. I'd like to think it was also because our media gleefully painted George W. Bush as a reckless, mindless, heartless cowboy - and there were those who - while perhaps not sure about that - were inclined not to test the theory, if you know what I mean.
(Instead, head on over to the Anchoress if you want to hear how it's really going ... the incredible gains the Iraqis are making towards independence, with our help.)
Barack Obama doesn't seem to have the, er, inner strength. It's one thing to get everybody yelling for "change", but can he lead this country if it is under attack? I don't know, and I don't want someone to learn on the job at a time like that. I think Hillary, on the other hand, could inadvertently start a war, by lecturing some intemperate world leader with that second-grade-teacher-ish voice of hers.
McCain isn't perfect. However, I believe he knows the true purpose of government, which is to defend the country so that we can live in peace and get on with our business, literally, which is what supports the world economy. The world leaders all know this. And anyone who stops to remember will know that, while he doesn't make a big deal about it, John McCain proved he has grit, determination, courage, and the kind of leadership ability that will see him through the worst of circumstances.
He also has the kind of resources and relationships needed to assemble a good working Cabinet, not just sycophantic hangers-on.
I'm glad he's still in the race. He has my vote.
(1) He's pro-life.Indeed. And not only against his contenders in the election.
(2) He's a war hero.
(3) He can win.
Many will narrow it down to #3.
For me, it comes down to, what will the world think of whomever we elect? We can natter about family values and the sanctity of marriage all we want, but we need peace and prosperity at home to accomplish anything of worth, whether at home or abroad.
Those who decry the war might do well to remember that, after the Towers were bombed, it ended for us in our country. Some would say it was because of our exemplary TSA folks, etc. Perhaps. I'd like to think it was also because our media gleefully painted George W. Bush as a reckless, mindless, heartless cowboy - and there were those who - while perhaps not sure about that - were inclined not to test the theory, if you know what I mean.
(Instead, head on over to the Anchoress if you want to hear how it's really going ... the incredible gains the Iraqis are making towards independence, with our help.)
Barack Obama doesn't seem to have the, er, inner strength. It's one thing to get everybody yelling for "change", but can he lead this country if it is under attack? I don't know, and I don't want someone to learn on the job at a time like that. I think Hillary, on the other hand, could inadvertently start a war, by lecturing some intemperate world leader with that second-grade-teacher-ish voice of hers.
McCain isn't perfect. However, I believe he knows the true purpose of government, which is to defend the country so that we can live in peace and get on with our business, literally, which is what supports the world economy. The world leaders all know this. And anyone who stops to remember will know that, while he doesn't make a big deal about it, John McCain proved he has grit, determination, courage, and the kind of leadership ability that will see him through the worst of circumstances.
He also has the kind of resources and relationships needed to assemble a good working Cabinet, not just sycophantic hangers-on.
I'm glad he's still in the race. He has my vote.
02 February 2008
This article makes me sad, too
"Even great sex can end in post-coital blues."
What if the emotions are real? Some (I suspect many) men are suffering from a couple of issues: 1.) their emotions are separate from their selves, and entirely ignored unless they cause a problem - in which case, the man just wants to fix it, like a broken alternator, and just move on; and/or 2.) men are persuaded at every turn that sex is good and necessary, and it has nothing to do with love, permanence, etc.
But inside, we know the difference.
Men talk a good game, but I suspect that most want a loving home, too. This man is engaging in behaviour which the wisdom of ages says is best reserved for husbands and wives in the context of home life. When he doesn't have that, his body may be satisfied, but his soul cries out in loneliness and grief.
In fairness, Brian alludes to this by writing, "We communicate other things with sex, too, like satisfaction, bonding and commitment. If we aren’t emotionally invested and ready to communicate those, however, repenting in the car might seem like a great idea."
He does, of course, stop short of the obvious: "If we aren't emotionally invested and ready to communicate those with someone to whom we've committed ourselves in marriage, then we shouldn't write checks with the body that the soul can't cash," or something like that.
And he does point up gently the questioner's apparent immaturity: "By the way, if you try explaining any of this to a lover who asks what’s the rush, you might want to avoid calling her a 'chick.' Just a thought."
Great sex isn't just what happens in bed. Great sex is talking and paying the bills together and reluctantly making time to visit the folks and walking the dog at oh-dark-thirty when the mate wants to sleep. It's getting up in the morning and resolutely going to work, whether that's to an office, a construction site, or the kitchen. It's looking into the eyes of your child in one of those moments when it hits you just who that child is, and how he or she came to be. Mere sex alone is nothing compared to that, and going through the motions just to have physical closeness and nothing more is sad.
Maybe the man will figure that out one day. Maybe it's the Spirit, working on his soul. Let us pray for him to know what's really best for him and for the women he is now merely using.
Q: I’m male, 33, and wonder why the majority of times after sex with a chick I feel depressed. It could be the greatest sex ever, but afterwards I'm depressed and can’t wait to get away from her. As soon as I’m back in my car and on the road I feel better. Any insights?Brian Alexander, the column's author, replies with some quotes from literature, then serves up the obligatory scientific reason:
There may actually be a scientific reason why this happens, though I like the poetry better. It involves the hormone prolactin...But ... but ...
What if the emotions are real? Some (I suspect many) men are suffering from a couple of issues: 1.) their emotions are separate from their selves, and entirely ignored unless they cause a problem - in which case, the man just wants to fix it, like a broken alternator, and just move on; and/or 2.) men are persuaded at every turn that sex is good and necessary, and it has nothing to do with love, permanence, etc.
But inside, we know the difference.
Men talk a good game, but I suspect that most want a loving home, too. This man is engaging in behaviour which the wisdom of ages says is best reserved for husbands and wives in the context of home life. When he doesn't have that, his body may be satisfied, but his soul cries out in loneliness and grief.
In fairness, Brian alludes to this by writing, "We communicate other things with sex, too, like satisfaction, bonding and commitment. If we aren’t emotionally invested and ready to communicate those, however, repenting in the car might seem like a great idea."
He does, of course, stop short of the obvious: "If we aren't emotionally invested and ready to communicate those with someone to whom we've committed ourselves in marriage, then we shouldn't write checks with the body that the soul can't cash," or something like that.
And he does point up gently the questioner's apparent immaturity: "By the way, if you try explaining any of this to a lover who asks what’s the rush, you might want to avoid calling her a 'chick.' Just a thought."
Great sex isn't just what happens in bed. Great sex is talking and paying the bills together and reluctantly making time to visit the folks and walking the dog at oh-dark-thirty when the mate wants to sleep. It's getting up in the morning and resolutely going to work, whether that's to an office, a construction site, or the kitchen. It's looking into the eyes of your child in one of those moments when it hits you just who that child is, and how he or she came to be. Mere sex alone is nothing compared to that, and going through the motions just to have physical closeness and nothing more is sad.
Maybe the man will figure that out one day. Maybe it's the Spirit, working on his soul. Let us pray for him to know what's really best for him and for the women he is now merely using.
20 January 2008
Attachment marriage
Just got done having a look at Danielle Bean's blog. I gather from it and from a quick drop-in at Heart, Mind & Strength (God, please support Pam Pilcher and her family) that there was a bit of a (courteous) dust-up about Attachment Parenting, or AP.
There is a corollary to that which I think is important: the willingness to be affectionate in marriage. We all know those married folks who show up together at a party or some gathering, and either split up immediately, only to reunite for the drive home, or who stay by each other the whole time, never touching each other.
I sometimes wonder if it's a sad side effect of the attitude that affection in marriage is simply about sex, and nothing else. (For a good discussion of this, see this article.)
To insist on interpreting physical closeness as a prelude to sex is a serious misunderstanding, and very dangerous to marriage. People need to be cuddled. It's such a strong need that they'll become very vulnerable to anyone who's willing to listen to them and touch them in a reassuring way. There is nothing quite so discouraging as to offer friendly, non-sexual touch and have one's hand removed ... however kindly it is done.
There is a corollary to that which I think is important: the willingness to be affectionate in marriage. We all know those married folks who show up together at a party or some gathering, and either split up immediately, only to reunite for the drive home, or who stay by each other the whole time, never touching each other.
I sometimes wonder if it's a sad side effect of the attitude that affection in marriage is simply about sex, and nothing else. (For a good discussion of this, see this article.)
To insist on interpreting physical closeness as a prelude to sex is a serious misunderstanding, and very dangerous to marriage. People need to be cuddled. It's such a strong need that they'll become very vulnerable to anyone who's willing to listen to them and touch them in a reassuring way. There is nothing quite so discouraging as to offer friendly, non-sexual touch and have one's hand removed ... however kindly it is done.
And now, a word from the grammar lady
When you have the frame of an idea - the skeleton, so to speak - and you want to fill in the blanks and make it whole - put meat on it, in other words - you want to flesh it out.
Not flush it out.
Thank you. You may go back to what you were doing.
Not flush it out.
Thank you. You may go back to what you were doing.
A priest to pray for
A post on The New Liturgical Movement today highlighted an article Dr. Jeff Mirus of Catholic Culture wrote in which he discusses The Other Health Crisis: Why Priests are Coping Poorly by Fr. Paul Stanosz in Commonweal.
Dr. Mirus' article absorbed me. As he points out, "this article unintentionally demonstrates an extremely important spiritual point."
It is important to read both articles in their entirety. However, a flavor of Fr. Stanosz' conclusions may be seen in these sentences, which appear towards the end of his article:
Read Dr. Mirus' article to see what he thinks. For my part, I was struck by the solutions Fr. Stanosz recommends: "embracing" the reality of a foundering American church, and taking care of his health.
At only one point does Fr. Stanosz mention his boss (not the archbishop; Jesus). And it is in a remarkable paragraph.
I think, for me, that is the key.
While it could be argued that one might embody the compassion and virtue of Jesus, there is only one way that is going to happen ... and that way is not mentioned anywhere in the article.
Mother Teresa was renowned for an extraordinary, relentless, heroic charity. Her order is full of those who regularly rescue dying persons and tend to their loathsome physical conditions and, in truth, embody the compassion and virtue of Jesus.
However, they do not try to rev themselves up for this exclusively by sitting around and singing songs about how wonderful it is to be with Jesus.
They kneel on the floor, and they pray and meditate on Jesus. Then they go out with their hearts and minds and thoughts attuned to Him, so that they readily recognize Him in His most needy ones.
Fr. Stanosz refers to "... high stress, poor health, and low morale. More and more [priests] are battling burnout and depression as well as suffering heart attacks and dying prematurely..." Yet we know that health benefits, such as lower blood pressure, increased longevity, and reduced risk for depression, may occur in people who regularly practice their spiritual faith or who are part of a religious community. Fr. Stanosz rejects "disciplines and devotional practices that flourished in the middle of the last century," identifying them with unsuitable candidates to the priesthood. He does not mention the prayer habits and lifestyles of those priests who are suffering. However, Carlo Carretto wrote: "I do not believe in theologians who do not pray... When there is a crisis in the Church, it is always here: a crisis of contemplation."
While perhaps not to Fr. Stanosz' taste, there is a worldwide initiative to help priests through Eucharistic Adoration which has been launched by no less than the Congregation for the Clergy in Rome.
Dr. Mirus gave a balanced, clear analysis of Fr. Stanosz' article. I think there are some of us who can clearly see what Fr. Stanosz perhaps cannot, in his exhausted and dispirited state. Let us pray for him.
Dr. Mirus' article absorbed me. As he points out, "this article unintentionally demonstrates an extremely important spiritual point."
It is important to read both articles in their entirety. However, a flavor of Fr. Stanosz' conclusions may be seen in these sentences, which appear towards the end of his article:
For me personally, acknowledging that the church and priesthood are in decline will lower my expectations of my bishops, brother priests, and my parishioners ... I’ll learn to say “no” when diocesan officials ask me to take a third, fourth, or fifth parish. I’m not advocating apathy in the face of decline; I’m merely recognizing that the decline began before me and will continue after me. Even Pope John Paul II, with all his vision, courage, and tenacity, was unable to return the masses to the church. The new evangelization he called for remains to be undertaken.In his words, one can sense Fr. Stanosz' tired resignation. My heart grieves for this priest, and for all who feel as he does.
And so I anticipate ministering to a shrinking Catholic flock as I grow old. This does not mean that the work and mission of the presbyterate will be increasingly irrelevant. On the contrary, it will be all the more pressing and challenging. Embracing this reality decreases my anxiety, sharpens my vision, makes my expectations more realistic, and makes my spirit less likely to burn out; it leads me to care for my health, so that I will be able to care for those entrusted to me. To restore health to our pastoral function, we priests first need to admit our own pain and disorientation in a foundering church.
Read Dr. Mirus' article to see what he thinks. For my part, I was struck by the solutions Fr. Stanosz recommends: "embracing" the reality of a foundering American church, and taking care of his health.
At only one point does Fr. Stanosz mention his boss (not the archbishop; Jesus). And it is in a remarkable paragraph.
An aging presbyterate should not exhaust itself in implementing new programs that are at best only Band-Aids. Instead, we must acknowledge the magnitude and the complexity of the forces that lie behind American Catholicism’s loss of vigor, and stop blaming Vatican II or the bumbling bishops who shielded pedophiles and failed to protect children. We should avoid blithely scapegoating “the culture of death” and the evil of the secular world. After all, there are currents of sin and grace in both the church and the world. An eagerness to blame “the world” may keep us from seeing our own failure to embody the compassion and virtue of Jesus Christ.Dr. Mirus discusses the many problems and implications of the passage, and I (again) recommend reading his article. What struck me about it was Fr. Stanosz ends by saying, in essence, that we should embody the compassion and virtue of Jesus.
I think, for me, that is the key.
While it could be argued that one might embody the compassion and virtue of Jesus, there is only one way that is going to happen ... and that way is not mentioned anywhere in the article.
Mother Teresa was renowned for an extraordinary, relentless, heroic charity. Her order is full of those who regularly rescue dying persons and tend to their loathsome physical conditions and, in truth, embody the compassion and virtue of Jesus.
However, they do not try to rev themselves up for this exclusively by sitting around and singing songs about how wonderful it is to be with Jesus.
They kneel on the floor, and they pray and meditate on Jesus. Then they go out with their hearts and minds and thoughts attuned to Him, so that they readily recognize Him in His most needy ones.
Analyzing her deeds and achievements, John Paul II asked: "Where did Mother Teresa find the strength and perseverance to place herself completely at the service of others? She found it in prayer and in the silent contemplation of Jesus Christ, his Holy Face, his Sacred Heart."From Wikipedia
In his first encyclical Deus Caritas Est, Benedict XVI mentioned Teresa of Calcutta three times and he also used her life to clarify one of his main points of the encyclical. "In the example of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta we have a clear illustration of the fact that time devoted to God in prayer not only does not detract from effective and loving service to our neighbour but is in fact the inexhaustible source of that service." Mother Teresa specified that "It is only by mental prayer and spiritual reading that we can cultivate the gift of prayer."
Fr. Stanosz refers to "... high stress, poor health, and low morale. More and more [priests] are battling burnout and depression as well as suffering heart attacks and dying prematurely..." Yet we know that health benefits, such as lower blood pressure, increased longevity, and reduced risk for depression, may occur in people who regularly practice their spiritual faith or who are part of a religious community. Fr. Stanosz rejects "disciplines and devotional practices that flourished in the middle of the last century," identifying them with unsuitable candidates to the priesthood. He does not mention the prayer habits and lifestyles of those priests who are suffering. However, Carlo Carretto wrote: "I do not believe in theologians who do not pray... When there is a crisis in the Church, it is always here: a crisis of contemplation."
While perhaps not to Fr. Stanosz' taste, there is a worldwide initiative to help priests through Eucharistic Adoration which has been launched by no less than the Congregation for the Clergy in Rome.
Women were also mentioned as important members of this new initiative. “The vocation to be a spiritual mother to priests is not well known, poorly understood and therefore not commonly practiced, despite its vital importance. Regardless of age, all women can be spiritual mothers to a priest”, the congregation noted. Women are also encouraged to pray anonymously for a specific priest and to spiritual accompany him.My patron saint - one Fr. Stanosz likely does not "cotton to" - was committed to interceding for priests.
Dr. Mirus gave a balanced, clear analysis of Fr. Stanosz' article. I think there are some of us who can clearly see what Fr. Stanosz perhaps cannot, in his exhausted and dispirited state. Let us pray for him.
Is divorce ever a good thing?
Tim Harford, writing in The Undercover Economist on Slate, thinks so. The article is well-written and thought-out, and worth reading. The money quote for me:
H/T The Anchoress.
[Research shows that] the new laws had an unexpected—but rational—effect: by giving women an exit-option, they gave men stronger incentives to behave well inside a marriage. The result? Domestic violence fell by almost a third, and the number of women murdered by their partners fell by ten percent. Female suicide also fell.Having lived through the fallout from my mother's dogged commitment to her toxic marriage, followed by my own unintentional following in her footsteps, I cannot but agree with his conclusion to that paragraph:
It is a reminder that the binding commitment of marriage has costs as well as benefits.Harford writes,
While the divorce rate has been falling for three decades, it would be a shame if it fell too far. Justin Wolfers comments, "We know there exists something called an optimal divorce rate, and we're 100 percent sure it isn't zero."Read the whole thing.
H/T The Anchoress.
19 January 2008
A passionate rant
One of my regularly occasional stops when grazing blogs is Video meliora, proboque; Deteriora sequor. He recently mentioned the Jane Austen presentations on Masterpiece Theatre, and seguéd into a review of Karl Keating's recent newsletter in which he opines about "soul mates":
BALDERDASH.
One needs to approach marriage like any other vocation: with prayer, soul-searching, and thoughtful observation and learning.
I suppose a reasonable analogy would be when one called to religious life thinks about whether they want to join an order or, in the case of priests, become a diocesan priest. At one point I was discerning a vocation, myself. (And it was one of those where I often prayed, "would you please let me alone, Lord? Go pick on somebody else!" Heh.) But, in the course of my discernment, I learned that, were I to enter religious life, I would be happiest as a Discalced Carmelite - didn't figure out if the active life would suit me more than the contemplative, because at that point my family needed me and I had to abandon the project - whereas the Benedictine or Franciscan charism are not attractive to me.
One can't just "be a nun" any more than one can just "be a wife." Your vocation involves aspects which you must choose ultimately based on your heart and what you learn through prayer, meditation, and fact-finding.
In the same way, one needs to be very discriminating when it comes to one's spouse. To add to the difficulty, there is no time of one's life when it is more difficult to think clearly. But the one you marry will not only be your life's companion; you are engaging the co-creator of your children and the one to whom you will entrust the raising of those precious lives.
I believe Mr. Keating's intentions are the best, but I believe he is mistaken. I think his message to young people is erroneous, and risks hurting lives. His message discourages faith - the kind of warm, confiding faith which gets one through so many difficult years as a youngster.
It gave me such comfort to know that God had in mind the right vocation for me, and, in due time, if I was open to experience and listening to Him, I would find out what it would be. To say that there is no one He has picked out for us belittles His reach and His power and, most of all, His love. Either He is God, or He's not. If He is, let us trust Him.
Let's hear from a Doctor of the Church:
That, my friends, is passion.
Is Pope Benedict XVI a passionate man? Let's see: he's 80 years old, but he works like a horse and does everything he can to be the kind of leader a Pope should be. He loves God, his brother, Mozart and cats. But, brothers and sisters, he is passionately in love with God, and passionate about serving God's people.
Do you want a priest who isn't passionate about God and his vocation?
Do you want a spouse who isn't passionately in love with you???
How can Mr. Keating counsel those with the vocation to marry to give up the idea that there is one person they are meant to love, and instead resolve to be content with only "...sufficiently happy"?
If God does not, or will not, or cannot give us what we need day by day, then it's God's intimate, caring, miraculous, all-powerful love which is the fairy tale.
This from an apologist.
God help us.
Liking is something that "just happens." Loving is something we have control over. Liking is a spontaneous emotional reaction. Loving is an act of the will. You never will like everyone, but you can love anyone.OK, I'm with him so far as that goes... but English is poverty-stricken when it comes to the word "love." There are lots of kinds of love - and some of them are not willed.
What seems incongruous is that "you can love anyone." I am not saying that you will, because in all probability you won't. But it is theoretically possible in a way that liking everyone is not.Of course. But already Mr. Keating's words betray a potential for deeper understanding. Saints generally give up pretty quickly on forcing themselves to do anything like love the unlovable. They love God and the souls He created, however not-Godlike their material selves are in that moment. If you force yourself to do anything without being conscious of God's love, you will soon exhaust yourself. Just sayin', is all.
Many years ago, when I first practiced law, I one day was appointed to represent a rapist at a hearing. He was perhaps the only person I ever have met who seemed to have an entirely dormant conscience. I found not the least thing likeable in him, and I knew that, unless he changed dramatically and unexpectedly, I never could like him. But I also knew that I could love him, because love is an act of the will.
Loving is not an act we carry out very successfully. I don't remember feeling any love toward that rapist--pity, perhaps, but not love. Yet I must have realized that I could have loved him, had I willed it. A saint would have willed it, but not even a saint could have willed himself into liking him, absent the rapist reforming and becoming likeable.
In summary, then, when it comes to basically good people whom we meet, it is possible for us to love any of them. This even applies to prospective spouses, and here I come to the real point I wish to make.That was an abrupt transition ... from the spiritually evolved ability to love the unlovable, to considering a prospective spouse, with only a "when it comes to basically good people whom we meet..." - but that's a stylistic nitpick, so let's soldier on:
As you know, Catholic Answers hosts chastity talks by various speakers. Such talks are aimed at young audiences--high school and college students, chiefly--and, by necessity, the speakers themselves are young. At least they are still years away from middle age.Yes, it is shocking - because it's not true. (What is 'easy driving distance,' anyway?) He backpedals with, "Of course, there also are a hundred or a thousand with whom they might be miserable" - but, as they say, the damage has been done. But wait - there's more:
Some speakers who have spoken for us, when first starting out, told their young audiences that somewhere out there was a Prince or Princess Charming, someone fated from all eternity to be a young person's perfect match. Listeners were told something like this: "Save yourself for that one person that God has set aside just for you."
When I learned that this is what was being said, I told our speakers to cut it out--because it wasn't true. It sounded romantic, and it sounded pious, but it wasn't true. It left each young listener thinking that there was one and only one person whom he could love and have a happy marriage with and that, if he waited long enough, God would arrange for the couple to meet.
That's not how real life works. When I have a chance to speak to young people, I shock them by saying, "Within easy driving distance, there are a hundred people whom you could marry and have an equally happy life with."
My point was that a marriage is what you make of it, under grace. In the old, old days, marriages often were arranged--and often turned out very well, no worse than the average marriage entered into by people who imagined they were marrying a Prince or Princess Charming.When you're talking about something as important as marriage, I think there's a bit more substantiation needed than a careless statement like that. How does he know? And what does "turned out very well" mean?
This does not, of course, mean that every match is a good one or that every match is wisely entered into. (I am reminded of Dr. Johnson's remark, when told that a man who had been very unhappy in marriage had remarried immediately after his wife had died: "It was the triumph of hope over experience.") But it does mean that fairy tales should be left to children.There's only one word for nonsense like this.
It does no harm for a ten-year-old girl to dream of a Prince Charming, but half her life will be wasted if she still thinks, at thirty-five, that she should wait for the appearance of a Prince Charming whom God has reserved for her and that she should let pass other prospects with whom, in fact, she could be sufficiently happy.
BALDERDASH.
One needs to approach marriage like any other vocation: with prayer, soul-searching, and thoughtful observation and learning.
I suppose a reasonable analogy would be when one called to religious life thinks about whether they want to join an order or, in the case of priests, become a diocesan priest. At one point I was discerning a vocation, myself. (And it was one of those where I often prayed, "would you please let me alone, Lord? Go pick on somebody else!" Heh.) But, in the course of my discernment, I learned that, were I to enter religious life, I would be happiest as a Discalced Carmelite - didn't figure out if the active life would suit me more than the contemplative, because at that point my family needed me and I had to abandon the project - whereas the Benedictine or Franciscan charism are not attractive to me.
One can't just "be a nun" any more than one can just "be a wife." Your vocation involves aspects which you must choose ultimately based on your heart and what you learn through prayer, meditation, and fact-finding.
In the same way, one needs to be very discriminating when it comes to one's spouse. To add to the difficulty, there is no time of one's life when it is more difficult to think clearly. But the one you marry will not only be your life's companion; you are engaging the co-creator of your children and the one to whom you will entrust the raising of those precious lives.
I believe Mr. Keating's intentions are the best, but I believe he is mistaken. I think his message to young people is erroneous, and risks hurting lives. His message discourages faith - the kind of warm, confiding faith which gets one through so many difficult years as a youngster.
It gave me such comfort to know that God had in mind the right vocation for me, and, in due time, if I was open to experience and listening to Him, I would find out what it would be. To say that there is no one He has picked out for us belittles His reach and His power and, most of all, His love. Either He is God, or He's not. If He is, let us trust Him.
It does no harm for a ten-year-old girl to dream of a Prince Charming, but half her life will be wasted if she still thinks, at thirty-five, that she should wait for the appearance of a Prince Charming whom God has reserved for her and that she should let pass other prospects with whom, in fact, she could be sufficiently happy.Some of us are destined for the single life. The only way to find out is by the absence of a suitable spouse. Some of us are destined for religious life, and to marry without conviction of vocation will keep us from that. Life has those disappointments which, if patiently and prayerfully endured, can be turned around into joy beyond description. Mr. Keating may not mean his "shocking" words this way, but I hear, and those kids hear, "Just because God has been inside your soul, that doesn't mean He knows what you want and need. Even if He did, He wouldn't care, and He wouldn't (or couldn't) do anything about it. You're on your own. Just go find someone and quit dreaming."
Let's hear from a Doctor of the Church:
Thérèse, the little Spouse of Jesus, loves Him for Himself; she only looks on the Face of her Beloved to catch a glimpse of the Tears which delight her with their secret charm. She longs to wipe away those Tears, or to gather them up like priceless diamonds with which to adorn her bridal dress. Jesus! . . . Oh! I would so love Him! Love Him as He has never yet been loved! . . .(from her autobiography)That was her vocation: to love Jesus. And she did, as fiercely as anyone ever has. She fought to be with Him and did so at a very young age. She knew what she wanted and would settle for nothing less.
That, my friends, is passion.
Is Pope Benedict XVI a passionate man? Let's see: he's 80 years old, but he works like a horse and does everything he can to be the kind of leader a Pope should be. He loves God, his brother, Mozart and cats. But, brothers and sisters, he is passionately in love with God, and passionate about serving God's people.
Do you want a priest who isn't passionate about God and his vocation?
Do you want a spouse who isn't passionately in love with you???
How can Mr. Keating counsel those with the vocation to marry to give up the idea that there is one person they are meant to love, and instead resolve to be content with only "...sufficiently happy"?
If God does not, or will not, or cannot give us what we need day by day, then it's God's intimate, caring, miraculous, all-powerful love which is the fairy tale.
This from an apologist.
God help us.
13 January 2008
"His back to the people" - here we go again
Fr. Z. goes over an AP article on the Mass which Benedict XVI offered in the Sistine Chapel, in which the temporary little altar was not used, but the original altar, the design of which fits in with breathtaking beauty.
The breathless "it's a break with tradition!" thing is just too funny. It's got some of us laughing our apses off.
The breathless "it's a break with tradition!" thing is just too funny. It's got some of us laughing our apses off.
11 January 2008
St. Thérèse has done it again
You have to see this to believe it.
The parish of St. Thérèse of Lisieux in Alhambra has established the Extraordinary Form as a regular Sunday mass at 1:00pm. This is not surprising. The parish is under the care of the Discalced Carmelites (there are three establishments in the immediate area), and has had perpetual adoration for a long time.
They are the first to be listed on the archdiocesan website, below the list of those Masses established under the previous "free and generous" policy. {polite cough}
I cannot begin to imagine with what chagrin the Archdiocese resigned itself to posting that Mass.
(One notes that the page is still called "indult" - http://www.archdiocese.la/ directories/ parishes/ indult.html. And, of course, the link is to "Tridentine (sic) Masses".)
The parish was actually named for St. Thérèse before her canonization in May, 1925. From their parish history:
When her relics were brought to Alhambra, I had the great joy and blessing of making a visit. I made a special prayer that day for courage and perseverance, two virtues which seem entirely lacking in my character when it comes to my Faith. I could not persevere when things went so far wrong after Vatican II; I hadn't the courage to stand up for what I knew was right. I was spending so much time protecting myself against spiritual corruption that I finally fled. During her visit in 1997 it seemed like there would be no end to the nonsense; the Catholic Church was unrecognizable; where was Jesus? So I was led by God at that time to ask St. Thérèse as a special favor for courage and perseverance.
I would like to say that I was given those virtues, but that's not what happened at all. I'm just as weak as ever ... weaker, even. My courage is in Jesus. I rely on Jesus alone. If there's anything courageous to be done in my life, I do it entirely in His strength and guidance. My perseverance is a kind of stubborn resolve to love Him no matter what. Archbishop Mahony and certain Jesuits and all that crowd can do what they will; I shall not quit loving Jesus. Nor will I quit seeing Jesus as the Christ, the King. I kneel in His presence.
Archbishop Mahony finds that disobedient, and therefore scandalous. So I don't give scandal. I don't kneel at Mass. I can't, because I'm not there.
But I do kneel at the Mass in the Extraordinary Form.
Jesus would be within His rights to annihilate me for my cowardice. Instead, He has graciously condescended to give us Pope Benedict XVI and has supported and blessed him in his arduous work. I was astonished at Summorum Pontificum - and deeply humbled. And now ... this. At a parish near enough to me to remove all excuses from attending. The parish named for my patroness, St. Thérèse.
I asked for courage and perseverance. Instead, the more acutely aware I am of my weakness and my need every moment for God's love and forbearance, the more I am given.
The parish of St. Thérèse of Lisieux in Alhambra has established the Extraordinary Form as a regular Sunday mass at 1:00pm. This is not surprising. The parish is under the care of the Discalced Carmelites (there are three establishments in the immediate area), and has had perpetual adoration for a long time.
They are the first to be listed on the archdiocesan website, below the list of those Masses established under the previous "free and generous" policy. {polite cough}
I cannot begin to imagine with what chagrin the Archdiocese resigned itself to posting that Mass.
(One notes that the page is still called "indult" - http://www.archdiocese.la/ directories/ parishes/ indult.html. And, of course, the link is to "Tridentine (sic) Masses".)
The parish was actually named for St. Thérèse before her canonization in May, 1925. From their parish history:
On January 26, 1925, the [Discalced Carmelite] Fathers were able to take up permanent residence in a newly acquired home at 515 Vega Street, purchased for $37,000. (the house had been built in 1899 by Seth Champion). The Carmelites blessed their new home on January 27, dedicating it to Blessed Therese, thus becoming the first Irish mission of the Discalced Carmelites.St. Thérèse is my patron saint. Her intercession is often like her life and her Little Way: hidden, easy to discount, full of deep meaning, and powerful for those who are aware of it. What she asks, she gets. I have no doubt whatever that she asked our good God for her parish to be the first listed on the Archdiocesan as offering the Extraordinary Form of Mass on a regular basis, and I have no doubt He was glad to comply, that those who love that form of Mass may find her parish and have solace there.
When her relics were brought to Alhambra, I had the great joy and blessing of making a visit. I made a special prayer that day for courage and perseverance, two virtues which seem entirely lacking in my character when it comes to my Faith. I could not persevere when things went so far wrong after Vatican II; I hadn't the courage to stand up for what I knew was right. I was spending so much time protecting myself against spiritual corruption that I finally fled. During her visit in 1997 it seemed like there would be no end to the nonsense; the Catholic Church was unrecognizable; where was Jesus? So I was led by God at that time to ask St. Thérèse as a special favor for courage and perseverance.
I would like to say that I was given those virtues, but that's not what happened at all. I'm just as weak as ever ... weaker, even. My courage is in Jesus. I rely on Jesus alone. If there's anything courageous to be done in my life, I do it entirely in His strength and guidance. My perseverance is a kind of stubborn resolve to love Him no matter what. Archbishop Mahony and certain Jesuits and all that crowd can do what they will; I shall not quit loving Jesus. Nor will I quit seeing Jesus as the Christ, the King. I kneel in His presence.
Archbishop Mahony finds that disobedient, and therefore scandalous. So I don't give scandal. I don't kneel at Mass. I can't, because I'm not there.
But I do kneel at the Mass in the Extraordinary Form.
Jesus would be within His rights to annihilate me for my cowardice. Instead, He has graciously condescended to give us Pope Benedict XVI and has supported and blessed him in his arduous work. I was astonished at Summorum Pontificum - and deeply humbled. And now ... this. At a parish near enough to me to remove all excuses from attending. The parish named for my patroness, St. Thérèse.
I asked for courage and perseverance. Instead, the more acutely aware I am of my weakness and my need every moment for God's love and forbearance, the more I am given.
Bank of America + Countrywide? Eeeewww!!
Bank of America is set to acquire Countrywide.
I have a credit card with BofA which I am doggedly paying off. Once that's done I shall never use it again. I warn everyone away from the place. They are the absolute worst chiselers, always just on this side of the law. Let's just say you'd have to compartmentalize well to work at BofA, or go through some pretty elaborate rationalizations ... because if you do business with them, you're supporting an organization which is really out to get people. I don't like their attitude. It's the kind of bullying that gets shrugged off with "We're acting within the law."
Countrywide ... unfortunately, my home loan is with them. They have a fascinating little trick associated with the "pick your own payment date" deal. I won't detail it here. It's legal, I suppose, but if I were foolish enough to use them again for credit I'd pay more than I have to for interest - and I'd never know why. I found out by accident by taking the time to ask some open-ended questions of one of those kids who call trying to sell you a line of credit. If you have that option, chat up one of those kids and see if you can get them to tell you your internal account status. Not what's reported to the credit bureaus, but what they see on their screens.
Separately, they had a scary computer issue right after I got my loan. I spent HOURS on the phone with reps - one of whom actually burst into tears because she'd had so many people call HER in tears. Those of us who had that twice-a-month payment option - which Countrywide apparently dreamed up without involving their programmers - were getting threatening letters from Countrywide because our loan payments were going into a black hole in their computer system. So far as Countrywide knew, no payment had been received - yet my account showed it had been withdrawn. The suspense was, would we get it straightened out this month BEFORE the report went to the credit bureaus? That was not fun.
I just hope BofA has done some serious due diligence. I'm afraid they'll find some horrible messes buried in the computer systems at Countrywide ... the kind that class actions are made of.
I have a credit card with BofA which I am doggedly paying off. Once that's done I shall never use it again. I warn everyone away from the place. They are the absolute worst chiselers, always just on this side of the law. Let's just say you'd have to compartmentalize well to work at BofA, or go through some pretty elaborate rationalizations ... because if you do business with them, you're supporting an organization which is really out to get people. I don't like their attitude. It's the kind of bullying that gets shrugged off with "We're acting within the law."
Countrywide ... unfortunately, my home loan is with them. They have a fascinating little trick associated with the "pick your own payment date" deal. I won't detail it here. It's legal, I suppose, but if I were foolish enough to use them again for credit I'd pay more than I have to for interest - and I'd never know why. I found out by accident by taking the time to ask some open-ended questions of one of those kids who call trying to sell you a line of credit. If you have that option, chat up one of those kids and see if you can get them to tell you your internal account status. Not what's reported to the credit bureaus, but what they see on their screens.
Separately, they had a scary computer issue right after I got my loan. I spent HOURS on the phone with reps - one of whom actually burst into tears because she'd had so many people call HER in tears. Those of us who had that twice-a-month payment option - which Countrywide apparently dreamed up without involving their programmers - were getting threatening letters from Countrywide because our loan payments were going into a black hole in their computer system. So far as Countrywide knew, no payment had been received - yet my account showed it had been withdrawn. The suspense was, would we get it straightened out this month BEFORE the report went to the credit bureaus? That was not fun.
I just hope BofA has done some serious due diligence. I'm afraid they'll find some horrible messes buried in the computer systems at Countrywide ... the kind that class actions are made of.
23 December 2007
Thank you, Papa Benedict
Reading various items on Fr. Zuhlsdorf's most excellent blog, I'm humbled and grateful at the fruit of the Motu Proprio.
Fr. Ze has excerpted an article written by Fr. Michael Kemper in America. I've copied the following from Fr. Z's blog. As you read, keep in mind that this is a self-identified liberal priest writing for one of the most liberal Catholic publications.
He opens by describing how he was approached by some parishioners with a request for the Extraordinary Form. At first, he objected, citing his unfamiliarity with Latin. But ...
I would say that his experience can be shared by the laity in attendance, as well.
The sad thing is that there are so many of us who lost, if not our faith, the belief that any of it mattered any more. I invested so much of myself into the Church, only to have it turn on me savagely and tell me I was wrong and deluded to love what it was up to 40 years ago. There were few priests as honest and fair-minded as Fr. Kemper.
I have only myself to blame that I didn't "stick it out" in hopes of relief in my lifetime. However, I had to make the choice of remaining in the Catholic Church and losing my faith, or withdrawing and staying close to God. Of course, that ultimated in life choices which mean I may never again be a communicating member of the Catholic Church. Pope Benedict surely knows about the thousands of us out there. I hope he prays for us, as I do for him.
But read the excerpt quoted above again, and reflect on what this means. The Catholic Church has survived, as Jesus said it would. Deo gratias!
Fr. Ze has excerpted an article written by Fr. Michael Kemper in America. I've copied the following from Fr. Z's blog. As you read, keep in mind that this is a self-identified liberal priest writing for one of the most liberal Catholic publications.
He opens by describing how he was approached by some parishioners with a request for the Extraordinary Form. At first, he objected, citing his unfamiliarity with Latin. But ...
My original cranky demurral crumbled under the force of my own pastoral self-understanding, which had been largely shaped by the Second Vatican Council. As a promoter of the widest range of pluralism within the church, how could I refuse to deal with an approved liturgical form? As a pastor who has tried to respond to people alienated by the perceived rigid conservatism of the church, how could I walk away from people alienated by priests like myself—progressive, “low church” pastors who have no ear for traditional piety? An examination of conscience revealed an imbalance in my pastoral approach: a gracious openness to the left (like feminists, pro-choice advocates, people cohabiting and secular Catholics) and an instant skepticism toward the right (traditionalists).As he explored the Rite, he realized that
I had never noticed as a boy, I discovered that the old rite’s priestly spirituality and theology were exactly the opposite of what I had expected. Whereas I had looked for the “high priest/king of the parish” spirituality, I found instead a spirituality of “unworthy instrument for the sake of the people.”Please pray for this priest.
The old Missal’s rubrical micromanagement made me feel like a mere machine, devoid of personality; but, I wondered, is that really so bad? I actually felt liberated from a persistent need to perform, to engage, to be forever a friendly celebrant. When I saw a photo of the old Latin Mass in our local newspaper, I suddenly recognized the rite’s ingenious ability to shrink the priest. Shot from the choir loft, I was a mere speck of green, dwarfed by the high altar. The focal point was not the priest but the gathering of the people. And isn’t that a valid image of the church, the people of God?
I would say that his experience can be shared by the laity in attendance, as well.
The sad thing is that there are so many of us who lost, if not our faith, the belief that any of it mattered any more. I invested so much of myself into the Church, only to have it turn on me savagely and tell me I was wrong and deluded to love what it was up to 40 years ago. There were few priests as honest and fair-minded as Fr. Kemper.
I have only myself to blame that I didn't "stick it out" in hopes of relief in my lifetime. However, I had to make the choice of remaining in the Catholic Church and losing my faith, or withdrawing and staying close to God. Of course, that ultimated in life choices which mean I may never again be a communicating member of the Catholic Church. Pope Benedict surely knows about the thousands of us out there. I hope he prays for us, as I do for him.
But read the excerpt quoted above again, and reflect on what this means. The Catholic Church has survived, as Jesus said it would. Deo gratias!
As Christmas approaches...
my prayer is that you will have a blessed and joyous holy day.
The new job continues to be absorbing, satisfying, and sometimes anxiety-inducing. I have a good boss, and that makes all the difference. But I start early in the morning, and get home late at night. A conversation with my dear one, a bite of dinner, and sometimes a walk ... then I'm ready for bed.
I have even less time these days because I have a new puppy, whom Bear and I are raising together.
The new one was found by a family, friends of my sister's. Unfortunately, what with two dogs of their own, and plans to downsize to a condo soon, they couldn't keep the charming little fellow. My sister sent me word, along with pictures (drat her!).
He's six months old, exuberant, smart, endearingly affectionate. Last week I hit the wall with him - I asked myself and anyone who would listen: "what was I thinking?" This week is better. He's growing and learning fast. He and Bear play hard together every day. They're comfortable together.
For here, I'll call him Inky.
Inky isn't the same breed as Bear, but their genes stem from the same group at the dog show; the Herding Group.
Once again, it looks like a quiet, solitary Christmas. Perhaps my last? I do not know. God knows. I'm content in that.
Blessings to you this Christmas.
The new job continues to be absorbing, satisfying, and sometimes anxiety-inducing. I have a good boss, and that makes all the difference. But I start early in the morning, and get home late at night. A conversation with my dear one, a bite of dinner, and sometimes a walk ... then I'm ready for bed.
I have even less time these days because I have a new puppy, whom Bear and I are raising together.
The new one was found by a family, friends of my sister's. Unfortunately, what with two dogs of their own, and plans to downsize to a condo soon, they couldn't keep the charming little fellow. My sister sent me word, along with pictures (drat her!).
He's six months old, exuberant, smart, endearingly affectionate. Last week I hit the wall with him - I asked myself and anyone who would listen: "what was I thinking?" This week is better. He's growing and learning fast. He and Bear play hard together every day. They're comfortable together.
For here, I'll call him Inky.
Inky isn't the same breed as Bear, but their genes stem from the same group at the dog show; the Herding Group.
Once again, it looks like a quiet, solitary Christmas. Perhaps my last? I do not know. God knows. I'm content in that.
Blessings to you this Christmas.
06 October 2007
Still here...
Finding that computer at night leads me to stay up too late. Reading a book is better; i know when my body's sleepy, and it's easier to close it and go to bed.
On the computer, I'm enthralled by backgammon, the news, ... anything. I do not know when my body is tired until my head starts to ache. So I stay away.
But, once in a while, I do stop in, and read a bit to catch up.
I am grateful for all of you ... you helped me back to life, and keep me there, on my feet, moving.
On the computer, I'm enthralled by backgammon, the news, ... anything. I do not know when my body is tired until my head starts to ache. So I stay away.
But, once in a while, I do stop in, and read a bit to catch up.
I am grateful for all of you ... you helped me back to life, and keep me there, on my feet, moving.
20 August 2007
God has a sense of humor
For so many years, if you tried to protest the innovations in the Mass, you could be severely reprimanded by Sister/Father/Bishop/whoever. "Vatican II required it."
Thanks to the Internet, cellphones with cameras, YouTube, blogs, etc., the truth about what Vatican II did, and did not, teach is out there.
Fr. Martin Fox is one of those serene and sane priests who is taking much of his valuable time to use the Internet as another way to teach.
He writes in his blog, Bonfire of the Vanities:
We are blessed to have the right to have reverent worship again ... whether in the ordinary or extraordinary form of the Latin rite.
Thanks to the Internet, cellphones with cameras, YouTube, blogs, etc., the truth about what Vatican II did, and did not, teach is out there.
Fr. Martin Fox is one of those serene and sane priests who is taking much of his valuable time to use the Internet as another way to teach.
He writes in his blog, Bonfire of the Vanities:
... this discussion raises a very significant question: have we got Vatican II right? If not, what would a proper celebration of the liturgy, in view of Vatican II, look like?Father points out to a commenter that this last was not from a document from the Council.
This really is the question facing us. This is why we’ve had so much activity, in recent years, focused on the Mass: revision in the Missal, revision of the translation, stricter norms from Rome and the bishops, a lot of re-evaluation of music and particular components of the liturgy, a greater emphasis in the seminaries on liturgy, the exhortation we’re studying, and a revival of questions about the old rite, the Mass of Pius V.
And if I haven’t piqued your interest enough already, let me do so with some more surprises, concerning what Mass according to Vatican II might look like:
Ø The Mass does not envision use of hymns as we know them. None.
Ø The Mass can be celebrated legitimately in Latin or the local language (i.e., English for us), but even where the vernacular is used, some Latin is expected.
Ø While communion under both species is encouraged, it is not required, and has some practical difficulties that may make not doing it all the time more appropriate. One of those concerns has to do with over-using "extraordinary ministers of holy communion." I.e., how "extraordinary" is a ministry if it is routine?
Ø There is nothing wrong with the "old" architecture.
Ø While the priest facing the people is a well known change since Vatican II, the Council did not require it nor even mention it! In fact, what happened was that 1964 document, from Rome, proposing implementation steps, merely said the following: "It is better for the main altar to be constructed away from the wall so that one can easily walk around the altar and celebrate facing the people" (Inter Oecumenici, 91).
We are blessed to have the right to have reverent worship again ... whether in the ordinary or extraordinary form of the Latin rite.
06 August 2007
POD things
I'm probably the last person in the entire blogosphere to "get" this.
I knew this:
P.O.D. = pious and overly devotional
so what are PODCAzTS, if not something to foster P.O.D. ways? ;)
(Besides his clear thinking and excellent writing, Fr. Z has the most mellifluous voice... I'm a fan - and I usually avoid podcasts, much preferring to read than listen, tyvm.)
I knew this:
P.O.D. = pious and overly devotional
so what are PODCAzTS, if not something to foster P.O.D. ways? ;)
(Besides his clear thinking and excellent writing, Fr. Z has the most mellifluous voice... I'm a fan - and I usually avoid podcasts, much preferring to read than listen, tyvm.)
01 August 2007
Another new voice in the blogs
The Catholic Bibliophagist (bibliophagist, n.: a devourer of books) has set up shop on Blogger. I feel at home with her already, if only because the picture of her many full bookcases looks oh-so-familiar. However, her place is much tidier than mine, I'm afraid. :)
Alas, my linking to her will do nothing to improve her blog traffic, as my readership has (justly) dwindled to nothing since my dear one came back into my life after a 30-some-odd year absence.
However, while my distraction has been bad for the blog, it's been good for my life in general. I do so much more these days ... take care of myself better ... enjoy life in general. In fact, I'm reading again. In fact, as I type this, I have a stack of books at the end of the computer table, awaiting my attention. Here's a list, in ascending order of size (like I said: stacked), with a few notes about their provenance:
The Imitation of Christ, translated by Ronald Knox. Found at Barnes & Noble and bought with a gift card given to me by my sister for Christmas.
Elizabeth Peters, Guardian of the Horizon, paperback: Amelia Peabody is part of who I am by now, and I love the books. They are good mid-range interesting novels which delight and amuse without wearying.
The Ambassadors and The Aspern Papers and Other Stories, Henry James, in Konemann editions; A Portrait of a Lady is beside the recliner where I sit in the evening and read. All gotten some years ago at Vroman's, the excellent independent bookstore in the area.
Elizabeth Berg, We Are All Welcome Here. Got this at Borders through their three for two summer sale. Rather a remarkable novel... very enjoyable. (It's actually been read and needs to go back on the shelf.)
Picture Maker, Penina Keen Spinka - has a bookmark right in the middle. I must've put it down some months ago and utterly forgotten about it, although I remember the vivid scenes.
Lamb in Love, Carrie Brown. The cover was just so intriguing. Don't know if I'll like the story. From the Book Club, I think.
Hamlet's Dresser, Bob Smith. Same place as the previous - wherever it was.
The Iowa Review, 37/1, Spring 2007.
Glimmer Train Stories, issues 62 and 63.
The Missouri Review, Vol. 30 Number 1 2007.
The Penguin Book of Columnists, edited by Christopher Silvester. Also from Vroman's.
And that's just one miscellaneous stack collected during a puttering-through of the rest of the house the other day.
Like I said, my house isn't as tidy as the new gal's.
I don't have any Harry Potter anything. Completely off the radar so far as I'm concerned. Just not interested.
But then, like I said ... I'm just sort of coming back to myself. I might just buzz thru a H.P. someday, you never know.
Anyway, welcome to the new blogger!
Alas, my linking to her will do nothing to improve her blog traffic, as my readership has (justly) dwindled to nothing since my dear one came back into my life after a 30-some-odd year absence.
However, while my distraction has been bad for the blog, it's been good for my life in general. I do so much more these days ... take care of myself better ... enjoy life in general. In fact, I'm reading again. In fact, as I type this, I have a stack of books at the end of the computer table, awaiting my attention. Here's a list, in ascending order of size (like I said: stacked), with a few notes about their provenance:
The Imitation of Christ, translated by Ronald Knox. Found at Barnes & Noble and bought with a gift card given to me by my sister for Christmas.
Elizabeth Peters, Guardian of the Horizon, paperback: Amelia Peabody is part of who I am by now, and I love the books. They are good mid-range interesting novels which delight and amuse without wearying.
The Ambassadors and The Aspern Papers and Other Stories, Henry James, in Konemann editions; A Portrait of a Lady is beside the recliner where I sit in the evening and read. All gotten some years ago at Vroman's, the excellent independent bookstore in the area.
Elizabeth Berg, We Are All Welcome Here. Got this at Borders through their three for two summer sale. Rather a remarkable novel... very enjoyable. (It's actually been read and needs to go back on the shelf.)
Picture Maker, Penina Keen Spinka - has a bookmark right in the middle. I must've put it down some months ago and utterly forgotten about it, although I remember the vivid scenes.
Lamb in Love, Carrie Brown. The cover was just so intriguing. Don't know if I'll like the story. From the Book Club, I think.
Hamlet's Dresser, Bob Smith. Same place as the previous - wherever it was.
The Iowa Review, 37/1, Spring 2007.
Glimmer Train Stories, issues 62 and 63.
The Missouri Review, Vol. 30 Number 1 2007.
The Penguin Book of Columnists, edited by Christopher Silvester. Also from Vroman's.
And that's just one miscellaneous stack collected during a puttering-through of the rest of the house the other day.
Like I said, my house isn't as tidy as the new gal's.
I don't have any Harry Potter anything. Completely off the radar so far as I'm concerned. Just not interested.
But then, like I said ... I'm just sort of coming back to myself. I might just buzz thru a H.P. someday, you never know.
Anyway, welcome to the new blogger!
How the Motu Proprio is different from what went before
Jimmy Akin reports on an article with an even-handed take on the Motu Proprio, including mostly accurate descriptions of the extraordinary form of the Latin mass.
Although it has caused a great deal of clucking in the liturgical henhouse, the Motu Proprio is actually a very mild, inoffensive thing. After all, if there is no call for the extraordinary form of the Mass, no priest will have to say it. It doesn't force anybody to do anything!
If the ordinary form of the Mass is what people want, the Motu Proprio will fade into history. No harm, no foul. I can't imagine what some people are so exercised about.
It isn't at all like what happened in the name of "The Spirit of Vatican Two." That was done forcefully and without options.
Of all the articles I've read, this is the one written by someone for whom I'd like to buy a cup of coffee and sit and talk for a while.
Although it has caused a great deal of clucking in the liturgical henhouse, the Motu Proprio is actually a very mild, inoffensive thing. After all, if there is no call for the extraordinary form of the Mass, no priest will have to say it. It doesn't force anybody to do anything!
If the ordinary form of the Mass is what people want, the Motu Proprio will fade into history. No harm, no foul. I can't imagine what some people are so exercised about.
It isn't at all like what happened in the name of "The Spirit of Vatican Two." That was done forcefully and without options.
Of all the articles I've read, this is the one written by someone for whom I'd like to buy a cup of coffee and sit and talk for a while.
In my desire to return to church, I see the Latin Mass as an acceptable solution: With your back to the congregation and speaking in a dead language, you would find it difficult to tell me how to vote. Allow me to experience the joy of communion without the anguish of our modern-day differences. Bring back the Latin, and bring back an embattled believer.I think maybe Pope Benedict has people like us in his heart.
17 July 2007
It's not just Roman Catholics who cringe at their music sometimes
In an interview posted on ChristianityToday.com, Pioneer Doerksen relates "...my deep concern about some of what is going on in the modern worship explosion—the shallowness, the man-centeredness, the banality. I wanted to do something that was about God and his core attributes. A song like "Holy God" is a God song, not a song about our feelings toward God."
He's doing something about it - writing his own - but at least it shows that Roman Catholics who've been cringing in the pews at horrible music are not alone.
He's doing something about it - writing his own - but at least it shows that Roman Catholics who've been cringing in the pews at horrible music are not alone.
04 July 2007
Fr. Z did a post on Cardinal O'Malley's report of the meeting about the Motu Proprio in Rome. I have preserved some of Fr. Z.'s [comments].
In my comments at the meeting I told my brother bishops that in the United States the number of people who participate in the Latin Mass even with permission is very low. [Where in the USA? It’s a big place. Could Archbishop Burke have had a different experience?] Additionally, according to the research that I did, there are only 18 priories of the Society of St. Pius X in the entire country. Therefore this document will not result in a great deal of change for the Catholics in the U.S. Indeed, interest in the Latin Mass is particularly low here in New England. [Time will tell. I have the impression that this expresses H.E.’s hope rather than his prediction. But when you are a Cardinal Archbishop, those often coincide.]I'm very glad that Fr. Z. posted this with his notes. His restraint and courtesy are a salutary model for me.
In our archdiocese, the permission to celebrate the Latin Mass has been in place for several years, and I granted permission when I was in Fall River for a Mass down on the Cape. The archdiocesan Mass [...singular…] is now at Immaculate Mary of Lourdes Parish in Newton. It is well attended, and if the need arises for an extension of that we would, of course, address it.
This issue of the Latin Mass is not urgent for our country, [I suspect it may be more urgent than H.E. may believe.] however I think they wanted us to be part of the conversation so that we would be able to understand what the situation is in countries where the numbers are very significant. [I think that the "1" for whom the shepherd described by Jesus left the "99" was "very significant".]
Of gnats and camels
In a column about the recent article in U.S. Catholic magazine about betrothal in which the authors wrote, "Given the current research that demonstrates that not all cohabitors are alike, we propose the re-introduction of an ancient ritual of betrothal for nuptial cohabitors, followed by intensive marriage preparation in the Catholic pastoral tradition," Archbishop Chaput wrote
Actually, in all fairness, this document did not, in any way, rescind the requirement of Friday abstinence. (However, in its own way, it is an example of the dangers of naiveté, isn't it?)
(And, before I get comments about tradition and custom vs. law, let me point out that the authors of the article base their argument on the idea that cohabitation and marriage are matters of custom rather than law. Therefore, they would say that it's as useless to condemn premarital cohabitation as it was to condemn eating meat on Fridays.)
There has been much reference to "The Spirit of Vatican II" in the last 40 years. In its usual sense, this phrase uses "spirit" in the non-personal sense.
Well, friends, I'm here to tell you that there was a spirit, all right - but no benign, sterile philosophy. It was an intelligent, extremely subtle and clever being, resolutely dedicated to undermining all the good the Catholic Church has and is. In order to face down this malevolent spirit, we must be equally as dedicated and resolute.
"Barney masses" not quite the thing one has in mind, here, if you get my drift.
There's a remarkable document over at the Vatican. It's remarkable to me because its tone seems almost breathless in its urgency. Its language is from 1907, so it's hard to read, I know; but it's chilling, because its writer clearly foresaw the impending disorders, and wanted so much to head them off.
As we know, this was not just "paranoia." From 1914:
All emphasis mine.
Source
Even in our day, John Paul II wrote:
What brought all this on was some time spent in Eucharistic Adoration yesterday evening, in the church where I was baptized 36 years ago. As our Holy Father works with such dedication to heal the rifts left by the "smoke of Satan,"* let us pray and be holy and behave in charity towards those who have fallen prey to Modernism - but let us also be wise and strong and unafraid to unmask those errors of thought and belief wherever they appear. Archbishop Chaput has done so much, and he will do more, God willing. But let's not leave it all to him. Let's defend ourselves against anything that leads us away from trusting God, instead of our own weak, fallible, limited selves.
*"Riferendosi alla situazione della Chiesa di oggi, il Santo Padre afferma di avere la sensazione che «da qualche fessura sia entrato il fumo di Satana nel tempio di Dio». C’è il dubbio, l’incertezza, la problematica, l’inquietudine, l’insoddisfazione, il confronto..."
... I believe in the intelligence and good will of the authors. I also believe that their argument is bafflingly naïve. If the Church, in her reflection on the Gospel, has always taught that sex outside marriage is morally wrong, then for the Church to now bless “nuptial cohabiters” amounts to colluding in sin. Ritualizing a sinful behavior, or calling it a nicer name, does not change its substance. The very last thing we need in a society already awash in confused sexuality is a strategy for accommodating it.Now, before I go any further, let me say that I deeply respect and admire Archbishop Chaput. Having said that, I would remind him that
"...the law of abstinence embodies a serious obligation whose transgression, objectively considered, ordinarily involves a mortal sin."Oh, no, wait - it doesn't.
Actually, in all fairness, this document did not, in any way, rescind the requirement of Friday abstinence. (However, in its own way, it is an example of the dangers of naiveté, isn't it?)
(And, before I get comments about tradition and custom vs. law, let me point out that the authors of the article base their argument on the idea that cohabitation and marriage are matters of custom rather than law. Therefore, they would say that it's as useless to condemn premarital cohabitation as it was to condemn eating meat on Fridays.)
There has been much reference to "The Spirit of Vatican II" in the last 40 years. In its usual sense, this phrase uses "spirit" in the non-personal sense.
Well, friends, I'm here to tell you that there was a spirit, all right - but no benign, sterile philosophy. It was an intelligent, extremely subtle and clever being, resolutely dedicated to undermining all the good the Catholic Church has and is. In order to face down this malevolent spirit, we must be equally as dedicated and resolute.
"Barney masses" not quite the thing one has in mind, here, if you get my drift.
There's a remarkable document over at the Vatican. It's remarkable to me because its tone seems almost breathless in its urgency. Its language is from 1907, so it's hard to read, I know; but it's chilling, because its writer clearly foresaw the impending disorders, and wanted so much to head them off.
It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. From all that has preceded, it is abundantly clear how great and how eager is the passion of such men for innovation. In all Catholicism there is absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. They wish philosophy to be reformed, especially in the ecclesiastical seminaries. They wish the scholastic philosophy to be relegated to the history of philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live. They desire the reform of theology: rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for history, it must be written and taught only according to their methods and modern principles. Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to be harmonized with science and history. In the Catechism no dogmas are to be inserted except those that have been reformed and are within the capacity of the people. Regarding worship, they say, the number of external devotions is to he reduced, and steps must be taken to prevent their further increase, though, indeed, some of the admirers of symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head. They cry out that ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic departments. They insist that both outwardly and inwardly it must be brought into harmony with the modern conscience which now wholly tends towards democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity and authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized The Roman Congregations and especially the index and the Holy Office, must be likewise modified. The ecclesiastical authority must alter its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political organizations it must adapt itself to them in order to penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, and are to be more encouraged in practice. They ask that the clergy should return to their primitive humility and poverty, and that in their ideas and action they should admit the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, gladly listening to the teaching of their Protestant masters, would desire the suppression of the celibacy of the clergy. What is there left in the Church which is not to be reformed by them and according to their principles?All emphasis mine.
As we know, this was not just "paranoia." From 1914:
There are to be found today, and in no small numbers, men, of whom the Apostle says that: "having itching ears, they will not endure sound doctrine: but according to their own desires they will heap up to themselves teachers, and will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables" (II Tim. iv. 34). Infatuated and carried away by a lofty idea of the human intellect, by which God's good gift has certainly made incredible progress in the study of nature, confident in their own judgment, and contemptuous of the authority of the Church, they have reached such a degree of rashness as not to hesitate to measure by the standard of their own mind even the hidden things of God and all that God has revealed to men. Hence arose the monstrous errors of "Modernism," which Our Predecessor rightly declared to be "the synthesis of all heresies," and solemnly condemned. We hereby renew that condemnation in all its fulness, Venerable Brethren, and as the plague is not yet entirely stamped out, but lurks here and there in hidden places, We exhort all to be carefully here and there in hidden places, We exhort all to be carefully on their guard against any contagion of the evil, to which we may apply the words Job used in other circumstances: "It is a fire that devoureth even to destruction, and rooteth up all things that spring" (Job xxxi. 12). Nor do We merely desire that Catholics should shrink from the errors of Modernism, but also from the tendencies or what is called the spirit of Modernism. Those who are infected by that spirit develop a keen dislike for all that savours of antiquity and become eager searchers after novelties in everything: in the way in which they carry out religious functions, in the ruling of Catholic institutions, and even in private exercises of piety. Therefore it is Our will that the law of our forefathers should still be held sacred: "Let there be no innovation; keep to what has been handed down." In matters of faith that must be inviolably adhered to as the law; it may however also serve as a guide even in matters subject to change, but even in such cases the rule would hold: "Old things, but in a new way."
All emphasis mine.
Source
Even in our day, John Paul II wrote:
"In theological enquiry, historicism tends to appear for the most part under the guise of “modernism”. Rightly concerned to make theological discourse relevant and understandable to our time, some theologians use only the most recent opinions and philosophical language, ignoring the critical evaluation which ought to be made of them in the light of the tradition. By exchanging relevance for truth, this form of modernism shows itself incapable of satisfying the demands of truth to which theology is called to respond."Archbishop Chaput is absolutely right when he calls the premise of the article "bafflingly naive," but I am just as baffled at the naiveté of protesting a conclusion which is the natural outgrowth of all we've been commanded to tolerate over the last thirty some-odd years.
What brought all this on was some time spent in Eucharistic Adoration yesterday evening, in the church where I was baptized 36 years ago. As our Holy Father works with such dedication to heal the rifts left by the "smoke of Satan,"* let us pray and be holy and behave in charity towards those who have fallen prey to Modernism - but let us also be wise and strong and unafraid to unmask those errors of thought and belief wherever they appear. Archbishop Chaput has done so much, and he will do more, God willing. But let's not leave it all to him. Let's defend ourselves against anything that leads us away from trusting God, instead of our own weak, fallible, limited selves.
*"Riferendosi alla situazione della Chiesa di oggi, il Santo Padre afferma di avere la sensazione che «da qualche fessura sia entrato il fumo di Satana nel tempio di Dio». C’è il dubbio, l’incertezza, la problematica, l’inquietudine, l’insoddisfazione, il confronto..."
Long time, no post
My days are very full with a wonderful new job which makes the best use of my skills of any I've ever had. It's the first job I still enjoyed after two weeks, and now that liking has extended into four months. I'm learning a great deal, and also calling upon skills hard won in previous assignments. It is a blessing for me - not least because I'm earning more, even if it is mostly due to overtime. :)
Other than that, all is well with family and friends, thank God. Dearest one has been put a bit off-balance by the new job thing (he lives in another state and is looking forward to the day when we can be together). However, the job is not permanent in my mind, whereas he is permanent in my life and has been so, however deeply buried in memory at times, for 37 years.
Like many others, I'm anticipating the Moto Proprio with the same childlike hope as if it were Christmas: full of wonderful things, many of which will not be seen until they're found under the tree, and unwrapped. May God bless us at this time with maturity and patience and love.
Other than that, all is well with family and friends, thank God. Dearest one has been put a bit off-balance by the new job thing (he lives in another state and is looking forward to the day when we can be together). However, the job is not permanent in my mind, whereas he is permanent in my life and has been so, however deeply buried in memory at times, for 37 years.
Like many others, I'm anticipating the Moto Proprio with the same childlike hope as if it were Christmas: full of wonderful things, many of which will not be seen until they're found under the tree, and unwrapped. May God bless us at this time with maturity and patience and love.
17 June 2007
And I never did find what I was looking for about Augustine.
Took at a look at the new blog, CatholiDoxies, and found the post, Coffee with Father George. Scanning thru it, I read:
Huh? I've heard a lot about this, but never read anything that I can remember. Off to Google. After a couple of clicks, found my way to the Jollyblogger and this terrific post where he quotes from a post by Anthony Bradley:
However, when a man says his wife isn't interested in sex, I can't help but suspect cluelessness lurking somewhere. I'm an inveterate advice-giver, so here's mine. Your mileage may vary, opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the management, professional driver on closed track, etc.
* Get the television out of the bedroom. In fact, remove it from every room in the house where meaningful conversation might possibly occur. That might mean you end up with one small TV in the laundry room, to watch while you do the ironing. Do you think I'm joking? Do you want a loving marriage?
* Get lots of sleep. At a minimum, go to bed on time - early - right after the kids. Both of you. Always. One of the sexiest, dearest things a man can do is let a tired woman sleep. If you're raising children, she needs a tremendous amount of sleep. Take the kids to the park and let her nap.
* Keep the non-sexual affection-to-sex ratio at about 80:20. Beware of the "if he's touching me, it must mean he wants sex" pattern. Make it about her. Touch her lovingly, savour her body, gaze into her eyes - cherish her.
* Establish a weekly date night. Let nothing interfere except illness - then reschedule.
* Be helpful. Cheerful. Uncomplaining.
* Don't pooh-pooh marriage counseling. It's OK to use it before you're ready to separate. Really. Cheaper and easier than divorce. I promise. You're probably a less-than-stellar communicator, or you wouldn't be in this predicament. You'll pay someone to coach your golf game, or help you lift weights; why not pay someone to teach you how to romance your wife?
* Don't wait for someone else to strike up an email emotional affair with your spouse; get there first. Keep the "did you get the milk" email and chat to the necessary minimum. You need to have the kind of email exchanges that you would have with someone who listens, and loves, and cares, and is all about you. Be that kind of person for your spouse. Set aside ten minutes on your lunch hour to call or chat or email "how are things going?" Really listen to the reply. If you think you know the fix to the problem, keep your mouth shut unless you're specifically asked for help. Be sympathetic.
* If you ever indulge in sarcasm, hostility, or the kind of remark which is followed by "just kidding," stop doing that immediately. Forever. Just quit cold. If you want great sex, you need a great love. Needling someone is not loving.
* Be on the lookout for things you like, admire, appreciate, adore, etc. about your dear one, and tell them and anyone else who'll listen. Praise your spouse to your children.
* Look your spouse in the eye and let yourself feel love for them. Say "I love you," quietly, then kiss them gently and non-sexually. Let them respond as they will. Repeat as often as you can get away with.
* Figure out what you really need and want. A man may focus on sex as being what he needs, when what he really wants is to be held and focused on and touched with love and cared for generally. If what I just wrote doesn't make sense, go track down someone who can help you figure it out.
* Pray very humbly, for yourself and for your spouse. Prayer always works ... not necessarily to fix the situation - sometimes it can't be fixed - but to change your attitude and perceptions, so that you can discern what to do. Ask for wisdom. Act in love. Trust God. What I wrote above may or may not be true for you. But this is true: God knows and cares and wants what's best for you.
I started by mentioning how I thought it would be impossible to decide between RCism and Orthodoxy by simply examining the history and theology and coming to a rational decision. I was perhaps expecting pastoral advice here, such as I've received from Fr. Gregory Jensen on this blog, but what I got was a lesson in and hearty endorsement of the Orthodox version of church history. Not a problem at all, as far as I am concerned. I learned quite a bit. Part of this involved a discussion of Augustine as the source of so much legalism and casuistry in the West, as well as the serious issues surrounding Augustine's view of sex.
Huh? I've heard a lot about this, but never read anything that I can remember. Off to Google. After a couple of clicks, found my way to the Jollyblogger and this terrific post where he quotes from a post by Anthony Bradley:
I grew up in a black church and in the black church no subject in all of creation is off limits to speak about from the pulpit, including sexuality in marriage. I've recently heard a black pastor teach about the benefits of men pursuing their wives with love, passion, and service and the good, natural consequence of him loving her well: really good sex.I don't know the answer to that. I suspect there is a cultural aspect to it; some cultures are more openly affectionate, whether verbally or physically, than others, and true WASP culture isn't usually that way.
I have a friend who used to pastor an all black church and now pastors a church of mostly conservative white evangelicals. We recently discussed pastoral challenges and differences between the cultures and he admitted that most of the couples in his church now don't have sex much at all. And I said that was also true for many of my white friends as well (esp. if they married girls that grew up in conservative homes). We were both like, "huh, what's up with that?"
We sat in shock talking about the things we hear from our white brothers like "yeah we only have sex a few times a month (two or three tops)." Or we both heard this one from different men "yeah, we haven't had sex in six months." The number of married guys I know confused and frustrated about the fact that their wives just don't seem to be interested in sex much has blew us both away.
However, when a man says his wife isn't interested in sex, I can't help but suspect cluelessness lurking somewhere. I'm an inveterate advice-giver, so here's mine. Your mileage may vary, opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the management, professional driver on closed track, etc.
* Get the television out of the bedroom. In fact, remove it from every room in the house where meaningful conversation might possibly occur. That might mean you end up with one small TV in the laundry room, to watch while you do the ironing. Do you think I'm joking? Do you want a loving marriage?
* Get lots of sleep. At a minimum, go to bed on time - early - right after the kids. Both of you. Always. One of the sexiest, dearest things a man can do is let a tired woman sleep. If you're raising children, she needs a tremendous amount of sleep. Take the kids to the park and let her nap.
* Keep the non-sexual affection-to-sex ratio at about 80:20. Beware of the "if he's touching me, it must mean he wants sex" pattern. Make it about her. Touch her lovingly, savour her body, gaze into her eyes - cherish her.
* Establish a weekly date night. Let nothing interfere except illness - then reschedule.
* Be helpful. Cheerful. Uncomplaining.
* Don't pooh-pooh marriage counseling. It's OK to use it before you're ready to separate. Really. Cheaper and easier than divorce. I promise. You're probably a less-than-stellar communicator, or you wouldn't be in this predicament. You'll pay someone to coach your golf game, or help you lift weights; why not pay someone to teach you how to romance your wife?
* Don't wait for someone else to strike up an email emotional affair with your spouse; get there first. Keep the "did you get the milk" email and chat to the necessary minimum. You need to have the kind of email exchanges that you would have with someone who listens, and loves, and cares, and is all about you. Be that kind of person for your spouse. Set aside ten minutes on your lunch hour to call or chat or email "how are things going?" Really listen to the reply. If you think you know the fix to the problem, keep your mouth shut unless you're specifically asked for help. Be sympathetic.
* If you ever indulge in sarcasm, hostility, or the kind of remark which is followed by "just kidding," stop doing that immediately. Forever. Just quit cold. If you want great sex, you need a great love. Needling someone is not loving.
* Be on the lookout for things you like, admire, appreciate, adore, etc. about your dear one, and tell them and anyone else who'll listen. Praise your spouse to your children.
* Look your spouse in the eye and let yourself feel love for them. Say "I love you," quietly, then kiss them gently and non-sexually. Let them respond as they will. Repeat as often as you can get away with.
* Figure out what you really need and want. A man may focus on sex as being what he needs, when what he really wants is to be held and focused on and touched with love and cared for generally. If what I just wrote doesn't make sense, go track down someone who can help you figure it out.
* Pray very humbly, for yourself and for your spouse. Prayer always works ... not necessarily to fix the situation - sometimes it can't be fixed - but to change your attitude and perceptions, so that you can discern what to do. Ask for wisdom. Act in love. Trust God. What I wrote above may or may not be true for you. But this is true: God knows and cares and wants what's best for you.
15 June 2007
Amy posts about the Motu Proprio, referencing Fr. Z's blog:
I'm with Zach. And I've more doubt in the Trinity than I do in the likelihood of the bishops' conferences trying to stop it from happening.
I am looking forward to it with great hope. I see God's hand in this. The method of the original promulgation of the "reforms" after Vatican II was often not God-like, but dismissive, cruel and arrogant. Did Jesus ever tell people about the Way in dismissive, cruel or arrogant language or gestures? And His message was ever so much more revolutionary than a mere church service method! It was a huge wrenching change for some. Yet He did not feel the need to rip them away from it ... He led them.
So does Pope Benedict. He has been leading up to this for years, starting with his beautifully-written works about the Mass. Now, by means of gentle suggestions and encouraging words, he has the world's attention. We are waiting. There is anticipation. Something is going to happen, and it will be both good and, at times, difficult. But he is bringing us something very special, something the family loved for centuries.
That is how a father should act - not ripping something away and slapping the hands of those who innocently (or otherwise) grabbed onto it and claimed it for their own. He leads and encourages and suggests, and their attention is drawn. He does not remove the current object, confident that the intrinsic worth of his gift will be known. And so it shall be, if God wills.
May God bless him, and us, in this and all things.
Here are the main points in the piece, which I have in Italian below (with my emphases).In the first comment on Amy's post, Zach Frey said:
* The document is ready and signed.
* It is being translated.
* It will be issued before the Pope’s summer break.
* There is a long explanatory letter from the Pope, of a theological nature to the bishops of the world to help the MP’s reception.
* There will be a press conference with Cardinals Arinze (CDWDS), Castrillon Hoyos (P.Comm. Ecclesia Dei) and Herranz (PC Leg. Texts – retired).
* The delay resulted from strong opposition of bishops conferences.
* A friend of the Pope, Msgr. Nicholas Bux (a well-known author I respect on traditional matters), says it is a matter of days.
It is fascinating from an ecclesiastical politics perspective.
Also, the whole "is it coming?" buzz seems to me one more example that this Pope Benedict fellow is one sharp cookie.
Look at how the "maybe it's coming soon" delays have worked to keep people talking about the return of the TLM.
And if the delay really is due to opposition from the bishop's conferences, that's a beautiful piece of political aikido that His Holiness is practicing.
I'm with Zach. And I've more doubt in the Trinity than I do in the likelihood of the bishops' conferences trying to stop it from happening.
I am looking forward to it with great hope. I see God's hand in this. The method of the original promulgation of the "reforms" after Vatican II was often not God-like, but dismissive, cruel and arrogant. Did Jesus ever tell people about the Way in dismissive, cruel or arrogant language or gestures? And His message was ever so much more revolutionary than a mere church service method! It was a huge wrenching change for some. Yet He did not feel the need to rip them away from it ... He led them.
So does Pope Benedict. He has been leading up to this for years, starting with his beautifully-written works about the Mass. Now, by means of gentle suggestions and encouraging words, he has the world's attention. We are waiting. There is anticipation. Something is going to happen, and it will be both good and, at times, difficult. But he is bringing us something very special, something the family loved for centuries.
That is how a father should act - not ripping something away and slapping the hands of those who innocently (or otherwise) grabbed onto it and claimed it for their own. He leads and encourages and suggests, and their attention is drawn. He does not remove the current object, confident that the intrinsic worth of his gift will be known. And so it shall be, if God wills.
May God bless him, and us, in this and all things.
27 May 2007
Beware of these chips
My D.F. told me about Pringles Select Szechuan Barbecue rice crisps, and then actually bought some for me. Now I'm hooked on the stupid things.
24 May 2007
It's a scene played out in darkened sonogram rooms all over the country every day:
I truly believe that the women facing this agonizing choice are victims. They are caught up in a web of lies fed them by thoughtless or uninformed media people, well-meaning doctors, and putative ethicists who persuade them of a series of incorrect conclusions. Where you start in your thinking determines the road you will take... up to and including taking actions which cause the very dilemma in the first place, of having more children than the doctors feel is wise to try to carry to anything like "term."
We are slaughtering untold numbers of presidents, theoreticians, waste management specialists, teachers, mothers, fathers, warriors, peacemakers, mathematicians, linguists, cookie-bakers and lawyers every single day. Of course, we are also self-selecting against chromosomally-deficient persons every day, too - including those whose male or female genes render them inappropriate for life, according to their parents. Those ill and damaged people would be a drain on society, no doubt; they would also allow us to have the opportunity to cherish and care for them. And - I realize for some this will be heresy - sometimes, the doctors are wrong. They predict all kinds of miserable outcomes, but their dire predictions come to naught.
Maybe what's needed is a dose of reality. Maybe, instead of sentimentality, we need to look at the real reason for wanting population to decline:
As for the mothers who are persuaded to do the heinous act of allowing a perfectly healthy child to be killed, I would not trade with them for a moment. If ever their ability to remain in denial about what they have done breaks down, they will know what they have done, and they will suffer terribly. God is merciful, and loving, and knows to what extent their "choice" was theirs, and how much was in response to cruelly relentless deception and lies. If they ever feel in need of peace about what they did, I pray they will find it in His love. But, unless they are able to prevent the truth from breaking through into their consciousness, they will forever think of that little one, alive and waving.
Greenbaum turned the screen toward the patient. "That’s the little heartbeat," she said, pointing to the area where a tiny organ was clearly pulsing. "And there are the little hands. There's the head. The body."But, instead of a glow of happiness, this reaction from the mother:
"Oh, my God, I can really see it!" the patient cried. "Oh, my God! I can see the fingers!"
"Okay!" she said, abruptly, gesturing for the screen to be turned away. She began sobbing. There were no tissues in the room, so her husband gave her a paper towel, which she crumpled to her face. The patient spent the rest of the procedure with her hospital gown over her face, so she would not see any more of what was happening.What happened was something like this:
Then he pinned [the third one] with the needle, and pushed the plunger to release the chemical. The fetus, which had been undulating and waving, went still. It would remain in the womb, while the other fetuses grew and developed.Source
"Let's check the other two," Evans said, and they moved the transducer to see the other two fetuses, still there, still waving, two hearts beating, unaware of what had just happened to the sibling they would never have.
I truly believe that the women facing this agonizing choice are victims. They are caught up in a web of lies fed them by thoughtless or uninformed media people, well-meaning doctors, and putative ethicists who persuade them of a series of incorrect conclusions. Where you start in your thinking determines the road you will take... up to and including taking actions which cause the very dilemma in the first place, of having more children than the doctors feel is wise to try to carry to anything like "term."
We are slaughtering untold numbers of presidents, theoreticians, waste management specialists, teachers, mothers, fathers, warriors, peacemakers, mathematicians, linguists, cookie-bakers and lawyers every single day. Of course, we are also self-selecting against chromosomally-deficient persons every day, too - including those whose male or female genes render them inappropriate for life, according to their parents. Those ill and damaged people would be a drain on society, no doubt; they would also allow us to have the opportunity to cherish and care for them. And - I realize for some this will be heresy - sometimes, the doctors are wrong. They predict all kinds of miserable outcomes, but their dire predictions come to naught.
Maybe what's needed is a dose of reality. Maybe, instead of sentimentality, we need to look at the real reason for wanting population to decline:
...the farmers of Bobai and nearby towns have been known since the Qing Dynasty for resistance to highhanded rulers. True to their legacy, they rose up against the collection teams, whom they decried as bandits. Backed by their sons, thousands of peasants and townspeople encircled government and birth control centers across surrounding Bobai County, residents here said, stoning riot police brought in to quell the unrest and, in some places, trashing local offices.Are we being persuaded to cull ourselves into small, manageable groups so we cannot fight back against people who would control us for their own ends?
"There was trouble in all the villages around here," said a truck driver who, like most of those interviewed, spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid retribution by local officials.
Even near the main county office building, a witness said, a white banner was unfurled calling for revenge against Su Jianzhong, the Bobai County Communist Party secretary. "Crack down on the head of the bandits, Su Jianzhong," it advertised for all to see, until authorities pulled it down.
The townspeople were all the more unwilling to accept authorities' demands for payment because, as frequently is the case in China, they expressed belief that local officials were generally corrupt and that the money for fines would go to line their pockets rather than into government coffers.
As for the mothers who are persuaded to do the heinous act of allowing a perfectly healthy child to be killed, I would not trade with them for a moment. If ever their ability to remain in denial about what they have done breaks down, they will know what they have done, and they will suffer terribly. God is merciful, and loving, and knows to what extent their "choice" was theirs, and how much was in response to cruelly relentless deception and lies. If they ever feel in need of peace about what they did, I pray they will find it in His love. But, unless they are able to prevent the truth from breaking through into their consciousness, they will forever think of that little one, alive and waving.
20 May 2007
Friends first, friends forever
from Sigmund, Carl and Alfred, via the Anchoress:
Physical intimacy cannot ’speed up’ the friendship part of a relationship, much less the emotional part of that relationship. Physical intimacy will either enhance a solid platonic relationship that already exists or it will destroy a relationship that might have worked, had the physical intimacy been delayed.I know this is true, and I know it from sad, sad experience. Fortunately, deep, real friendships never end, and God is good.
Tony Snow's address to the Catholic University of America graduates
... Commit. This is a way of talking about faith. American culture likes to celebrate the petulant outcast, the smart-aleck with the contempt for everything and faith in nothing. Snarky mavericks. The problem is these guys are losers. They have signed up for an impossible mission. Because they’ve decided they’re going to create all the meaning in their lives. They’ve either decided that no moral law exists or they will be the creator, the author of those laws. Now one road leads to complete and total anarchy. Life is solitary, nasty, brutish and short. The other is to insanity, since it requires playing God. We know in our hearts, intuitively, from our first years as children, that the universe unfolds with a discernable order and that moral laws, far from being convenient social conventions, are firm and unalterable. They predate us, they will survive us. Rather than admitting our weakness a lot of times, we just decide we’ll try to get by. And maybe rather than giving God credit, we’ll try to look for a cheap substitute.
Walk into a bookstore, you’ll know what I mean. The shelves are groaning underneath the trendy tomes promising salvation — medicine balls, herbs, purges, all sorts of weird stuff. In politics, there’s a variant that elevates government to the status of God. It says that it is the source of love. It ought to be the recipient of your tithes, but government, while it does pursue compassionate ends, cannot be loving and personal. It treats all of us as completely equal rather than uniquely divine. The point is you can’t escape the question of God and you can’t escape the question of commitments.
When it comes to faith, I’ve taken my own journey. You will have to take your own. But here’s what I know. Faith is as natural as the air we breathe. Religion is not an opiate, just the opposite. It is the introduction to the ultimate extreme sport. There is nothing that you can imagine that God cannot trump. As Paul said “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” And once you realize that there is something greater than you out there, then you have to decide, “Do I acknowledge it and do I act upon it?” You have to at some point surrender yourself. And there is nothing worthwhile in your life that will not at some point require an act of submission. It’s true of faith and friendship. It is a practical passage [of the Bible], especially to marriage.
Tolstoy once said all happy marriages are happy in the same way and here’s what he meant. When both people commit, when they say, “You and I are bound together, forever, period, no questions, no codicils, no pre-nups, no escape clauses,” then all of a sudden, the temptations become irrelevant, and the glories become possible.
There is nothing like the pleasure of being a parent. Waking up the next morning to somebody whose breath has become the echo of your heartbeat. Trust me on this, it does not get any better. Commit.
Just checking in
A lot can happen in a month. Children are born. Untying of ties goes on. On the other hand, some things never change, even though some things might.
My spiritual journey continues, and this quiz correctly reflects where I've found myself of late:
You scored as Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan. You are an evangelical in the Wesleyan tradition. You believe that God's grace enables you to choose to believe in him, even though you yourself are totally depraved. The gift of the Holy Spirit gives you assurance of your salvation, and he also enables you to live the life of obedience to which God has called us. You are influenced heavily by John Wesley and the Methodists.
What's your theological worldview?
created with QuizFarm.com
Peace and blessings to you.
My spiritual journey continues, and this quiz correctly reflects where I've found myself of late:
Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan | 89% | ||
Roman Catholic | 75% | ||
Neo orthodox | 68% | ||
Charismatic/Pentecostal | 64% | ||
Emergent/Postmodern | 57% | ||
Reformed Evangelical | 50% | ||
Classical Liberal | 36% | ||
Fundamentalist | 25% | ||
Modern Liberal | 18% |
What's your theological worldview?
created with QuizFarm.com
Peace and blessings to you.
22 April 2007
Who knows why it happened?
The Book of Job used to not make sense to me. I tried to read it a couple of times, but just couldn't get "into" it.
The month my mother died, I read it through and understood it, and it comforted me.
When something like this happens, we ask, Why? And someone will say, "God knows," a sort of verbal shrug.
The Book of Job is the answer to "Why?" And the answer truly is, God knows.
God knows what the young man was thinking. God knows the crazed and twisted thoughts in his mind.
God knows the pain he inflicted. The terror.
God knows each sorrowing heart left in the wake of the tragedy ... those who are still in a daze of shock, barely able to comprehend that their child will not be with them, here on earth, any more.
Those who watch by hospital beds and feel tempted to guilt for their relief that their dear one is alive, though wounded - God knows all they feel.
God knows. There is nothing He cannot know about this horrible tragedy.
And, as I learned to do while my mother was dying, there is one way to deal with it: to sit before God, and tell Him how much it hurts, and why.
In speaking (crying, wailing) to Him about it, you will learn, and He will comfort you.
Because He knows.
He knows the name of the one you lost; He created that one out of His thought, planned for that one from time out of mind. He knows where that one is at this moment, and His love for that dear one you cry for has never ended, and never will - any more than yours has.
I do not believe God plans these horrors. I do trust Him to know about them... to know what I cannot know.
I trust Him to stand watch over those who mourn and grieve and worry because of what happened at Virginia Tech. I believe He waits to receive anyone who turns to Him in its wake, even if they only rail at Him for allowing such a senseless crime.
At least they are talking to Him.
Like any parent, He can stand it. Tell Him how you feel. He knows, of course, already; He knows you that well. But you must know the truth ... and the only way you will find out is to talk with Him, and tell Him where it hurts.
Let Him comfort you.
While it can never be His will to hurt the ones he loves - which is all of us - it is always His will to bind up our wounds, to listen to us tell Him over and over again how it was and how it is, and to hold us close while we cry.
My heart goes out to anyone who knows what the Book of Job is about. I am grateful to God that it is there. It comforted me and taught me to turn to God when I don't know why.
God knows.
The month my mother died, I read it through and understood it, and it comforted me.
When something like this happens, we ask, Why? And someone will say, "God knows," a sort of verbal shrug.
The Book of Job is the answer to "Why?" And the answer truly is, God knows.
God knows what the young man was thinking. God knows the crazed and twisted thoughts in his mind.
God knows the pain he inflicted. The terror.
God knows each sorrowing heart left in the wake of the tragedy ... those who are still in a daze of shock, barely able to comprehend that their child will not be with them, here on earth, any more.
Those who watch by hospital beds and feel tempted to guilt for their relief that their dear one is alive, though wounded - God knows all they feel.
God knows. There is nothing He cannot know about this horrible tragedy.
And, as I learned to do while my mother was dying, there is one way to deal with it: to sit before God, and tell Him how much it hurts, and why.
In speaking (crying, wailing) to Him about it, you will learn, and He will comfort you.
Because He knows.
He knows the name of the one you lost; He created that one out of His thought, planned for that one from time out of mind. He knows where that one is at this moment, and His love for that dear one you cry for has never ended, and never will - any more than yours has.
I do not believe God plans these horrors. I do trust Him to know about them... to know what I cannot know.
I trust Him to stand watch over those who mourn and grieve and worry because of what happened at Virginia Tech. I believe He waits to receive anyone who turns to Him in its wake, even if they only rail at Him for allowing such a senseless crime.
At least they are talking to Him.
Like any parent, He can stand it. Tell Him how you feel. He knows, of course, already; He knows you that well. But you must know the truth ... and the only way you will find out is to talk with Him, and tell Him where it hurts.
Let Him comfort you.
While it can never be His will to hurt the ones he loves - which is all of us - it is always His will to bind up our wounds, to listen to us tell Him over and over again how it was and how it is, and to hold us close while we cry.
My heart goes out to anyone who knows what the Book of Job is about. I am grateful to God that it is there. It comforted me and taught me to turn to God when I don't know why.
God knows.
Beauty and attention
I was visiting a favourite blog which I haven't read in a long time. I came across this intriguing post about this article in the Washington Post. Ann of Holy Experience writes:
I had just finished reading it when the announcer at the classical music station I listen to began to speak of the same article. He interviewed the musician. As the musician spoke, I transcribed some of what he said:
The experiment does show something, however: it shows the importance of a frame for art. Yes, we should all be alert to beauty, but we're not always going to be. That's why we need cues to help us know when something is beautiful and worth our attention.
Musicians need to perform in areas conducive to thoughtful listening. Artists need to present their work in areas where it can be savoured. Writers need books - still the best way to read. And worshipers need places to think of the greatest Artist of all. Even the plainest church can, and should be, beautiful.
We cannot always wander around, rapt in the beauties of life all around us. "Life is real, life is earnest," my grandmother used to quote. I have come full circle from going through life without looking, to living in quiet appreciation of all I could absorb, to what I hope is a place of balance. I need to be open to the Beloved as He shows me His gifts to me, but also I need to concentrate on the task at hand, finding in its performance a beauty all its own.
It was 7:51 a.m. on Friday, January 12, the middle of the morning rush hour, and a fiddler played before his open case. On that morning in January, life had no gilded, glinting frame; life was just happening, as it so often does, one part fading unnoticeably into the next. In the next 43 minutes, the violinist performed six classical pieces and 1,097 people passed by; who had time to stop and stare? Life was happening, full of care…and with no frame to punctuate the laudable moments.I highly recommend the Post article, which can be found here.
I had just finished reading it when the announcer at the classical music station I listen to began to speak of the same article. He interviewed the musician. As the musician spoke, I transcribed some of what he said:
"I knew that I would be ignored...it's tough to take... but it was fascinating. ... We forget that music is a participatory experience be more aware and be open to beauty... [as artists,] that's our job, in a way: remind us of the beauty around us... maybe we could be more aware of the beauty that's around us all the time."Now, it could be argued that it wouldn't matter WHAT was going on, one wouldn't expect busy New Yorkers to stop for anything on their way to work ... in that sense, it was a setup, and almost cruel ... suppose someone did want to listen, they really could not, without suffering consequences out of proportion to the gift of music at that time.
I don't think it's fair to imply that people don't respond to music in such a situation. It was too early, and the music was presented in a cacaphonic, hectic environment.A couple of minutes into it, something revealing happens. A woman and her preschooler emerge from the escalator. The woman is walking briskly and, therefore, so is the child. She's got his hand.
"I had a time crunch," recalls Sheron Parker, an IT director for a federal agency. "I had an 8:30 training class, and first I had to rush Evvie off to his teacher, then rush back to work, then to the training facility in the basement."
Evvie is her son, Evan. Evan is 3.
You can see Evan clearly on the video. He's the cute black kid in the parka who keeps twisting around to look at [the violinist], as he is being propelled toward the door.
"There was a musician," Parker says, "and my son was intrigued. He wanted to pull over and listen, but I was rushed for time."
So Parker does what she has to do. She deftly moves her body ... cutting off her son's line of sight. As they exit the arcade, Evan can still be seen craning to look.
The experiment does show something, however: it shows the importance of a frame for art. Yes, we should all be alert to beauty, but we're not always going to be. That's why we need cues to help us know when something is beautiful and worth our attention.
Musicians need to perform in areas conducive to thoughtful listening. Artists need to present their work in areas where it can be savoured. Writers need books - still the best way to read. And worshipers need places to think of the greatest Artist of all. Even the plainest church can, and should be, beautiful.
We cannot always wander around, rapt in the beauties of life all around us. "Life is real, life is earnest," my grandmother used to quote. I have come full circle from going through life without looking, to living in quiet appreciation of all I could absorb, to what I hope is a place of balance. I need to be open to the Beloved as He shows me His gifts to me, but also I need to concentrate on the task at hand, finding in its performance a beauty all its own.
07 April 2007
"Why are we not told plainly?"
"He charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead." Mark ix. 9.
Some years My Utmost for His Highest's daily readings synch up beautifully with the liturgical calendar. This is one of those years.
The day after my mother died, I went through the motions of my day in a kind of aware numbness. I was aware of being in shock. The day I'd so often feared when younger had finally arrived, mercifully delayed by God until my sister and I were adults and out on our own. I felt exhausted. I was conscious of a profound sense of relief: I would never have to visit the hospital again and find her there, trying to keep going in spite of the mysterious illness which kept dragging her down and away from us.
Most of all, however, I just felt alone.
The soul who'd guided me and encouraged me... the one whose sense of humor was so keen and hilarious that it would never be equalled... the one who'd taken so much of my young years with her own mid-life miseries... she was gone, at last. Permanently, always, forever gone.
I felt abandoned. An orphan. I was thirty-five, but it didn't make any difference; I felt bereft. The sense of being alone was very keen, and very new.
On Holy Saturday, I can imagine that's how the apostles felt: shock, lostness, guilty relief that it was finally over. Most of all, though, they must have been so tempted to feel alone.
The temptation to doubt could never be any fiercer for anyone than it must have been for them. They'd trusted Him with everything - literally, their very souls. He had promised so much ... but He lay in the tomb, dead. Had they believed in just another one of those itinerant preachers that Gamaliel recounted, as told in Acts 5, who were slain and their followers scattered "and came to nothing"?
Holy Saturday, with the drama and agony of Friday past, and the hope of Easter ahead, is a day of profound interior quiet. Not rest; more like ... waiting. Bated breath. Listening, hoping...
After my mother died, I would sometimes have dreams about her. In my dreams, she was alive and well, usually with her beautiful tabac blonde hair hanging loose down her back, wearing a lovely white gown, her sea-green eyes bright, her manner peaceful and assured - none of the nervous tension and dithering that consumed her at times in her time on earth. In the dreams we talked, or did things together; inexplicable things, but all peaceful. I would wake refreshed, and feeling like I'd had a nice visit with her. Sometimes it would take me several moments to come fully awake and realize she was gone from my sight forever... the dreams were that real.
Did the apostles fear that they would only dream of Jesus returning? Did they look for Him in crowds?
When someone you love very much dies, you want to tell others about them. You want others to know how special they were, how much they meant ... but you know you cannot. They can understand only to the degree they, too, have lost someone so dearly loved... and some have not, and others don't want to even think about it. In sort of the same way, Jesus' little flock couldn't talk about Him to anyone outside "the family." They had to stay silent, waiting ... hoping ... listening. "He charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead." Mark ix. 9.
May Jesus bless all those who go to communion tomorrow with His risen life - for real.
Some years My Utmost for His Highest's daily readings synch up beautifully with the liturgical calendar. This is one of those years.
The day after my mother died, I went through the motions of my day in a kind of aware numbness. I was aware of being in shock. The day I'd so often feared when younger had finally arrived, mercifully delayed by God until my sister and I were adults and out on our own. I felt exhausted. I was conscious of a profound sense of relief: I would never have to visit the hospital again and find her there, trying to keep going in spite of the mysterious illness which kept dragging her down and away from us.
Most of all, however, I just felt alone.
The soul who'd guided me and encouraged me... the one whose sense of humor was so keen and hilarious that it would never be equalled... the one who'd taken so much of my young years with her own mid-life miseries... she was gone, at last. Permanently, always, forever gone.
I felt abandoned. An orphan. I was thirty-five, but it didn't make any difference; I felt bereft. The sense of being alone was very keen, and very new.
On Holy Saturday, I can imagine that's how the apostles felt: shock, lostness, guilty relief that it was finally over. Most of all, though, they must have been so tempted to feel alone.
The temptation to doubt could never be any fiercer for anyone than it must have been for them. They'd trusted Him with everything - literally, their very souls. He had promised so much ... but He lay in the tomb, dead. Had they believed in just another one of those itinerant preachers that Gamaliel recounted, as told in Acts 5, who were slain and their followers scattered "and came to nothing"?
Holy Saturday, with the drama and agony of Friday past, and the hope of Easter ahead, is a day of profound interior quiet. Not rest; more like ... waiting. Bated breath. Listening, hoping...
After my mother died, I would sometimes have dreams about her. In my dreams, she was alive and well, usually with her beautiful tabac blonde hair hanging loose down her back, wearing a lovely white gown, her sea-green eyes bright, her manner peaceful and assured - none of the nervous tension and dithering that consumed her at times in her time on earth. In the dreams we talked, or did things together; inexplicable things, but all peaceful. I would wake refreshed, and feeling like I'd had a nice visit with her. Sometimes it would take me several moments to come fully awake and realize she was gone from my sight forever... the dreams were that real.
Did the apostles fear that they would only dream of Jesus returning? Did they look for Him in crowds?
When someone you love very much dies, you want to tell others about them. You want others to know how special they were, how much they meant ... but you know you cannot. They can understand only to the degree they, too, have lost someone so dearly loved... and some have not, and others don't want to even think about it. In sort of the same way, Jesus' little flock couldn't talk about Him to anyone outside "the family." They had to stay silent, waiting ... hoping ... listening. "He charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead." Mark ix. 9.
-- Oswald ChambersThere must be communion with His risen life ...Say nothing until the Son of man is risen in you--until the life of the risen Christ so dominates you that you understand what the historic Christ taught. When you get to the right state on the inside, the word which Jesus has spoken is so plain that you are amazed you did not see it before. ...
Our Lord does not hide these things; they are unbearable until we get into a fit condition of spiritual life. "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now." There must be communion with His risen life before a particular word can be borne by us.
May Jesus bless all those who go to communion tomorrow with His risen life - for real.
06 April 2007
The Collision of God and Sin
"Who His own self bare our sins in His own body on the tree." 1 Peter ii. 24.
Never tolerate the idea of martyrdom about the Cross of Jesus Christ.
The Cross did not happen to Jesus: He came on purpose for it... Beware of separating God manifest in the flesh from the Son becoming sin.
The Incarnation was for the purpose of Redemption. God became incarnate for the purpose of putting away sin; not for the purpose of Self-realization.
The centre of salvation is the Cross of Jesus, and the reason it is so easy to obtain salvation is because it cost God so much. The Cross if the point where God and sinful man merge with a crash and the way to life is opened--but the crash is on the heart of God.
Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest
05 April 2007
Uh oh ... ;)
| You Are 12% Texas |
 Damn Yankee! You think the sun comes up just to hear you crow. |
Oh well ... it just means I have a lot to look forward to ... right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)