Friday, April 30, 2010

Nun's Chapel in Chile Bombed: Prayer Wouldn't Hurt

Headline and first paragraphs of news:
"Bomb explodes damaging chapel of Good Shepherd Sisters in Temuco"
agenzia fides (April 28, 2010)

"A note sent from the Chilean Bishops' Conference to Fides announced that Bishop Manuel Camilo Vial, Bishop of the Diocese of Temuco San Jose, visited the Sisters of the Good Shepherd, in solidarity, as they were recently affected by the explosion of a bomb which caused serious damage to their chapel, located near their house.
The Sisters reported that at dawn on April 27, they heard a loud explosion hit the Chapel of Our Lady of Lourdes, located in Carrera Bulnes, causing the destruction of windows, doors, and pews. Immediately after, the chapel caught fire, but fortunately the flames were extinguished by firefighters. The vibrations of the explosion also caused the breaking of windows of houses near the chapel....
"

"Bomb Explodes Outside Church in Southern Chile"
Latin American Herald Tribune (undated, probably April 27, 2010)

"A small bomb exploded early Tuesday outside a Catholic church in the southern Chilean city of Temuco, destroying the front door and shattering windows, police and press reports said.

"The blast occurred at 3:05 a.m. outside the Iglesia del Buen Pastor in downtown Temuco, the capital of La Araucania region, some 672 kilometers (about 420 miles) south of Santiago.

"The explosion also damaged some nearby houses, Radio Cooperativa said.

"Some pamphlets from a group calling itself Kaos Nativo Orquestal were left outside the church, investigators said...."
Good news: it looks like nobody was hurt. Bad news: the property damage will cost money to repair; and next time someone could be hurt or killed.

I've prayed for the well-being of the folks in that area: No pressure, but you could consider doing the same.

Related posts:More:
A tip of the hat to catholicseeking and ZephyrK9, on Twitter, for the heads-up on this matter.

'Just Routine: Nothing Special' - a Priest in a Small Town


Updated (May 9, 2010)

A more detailed re-write of the letter is now on the Letters to Priests website: "Just Routine, Nothing Special."

(Thanks for letting me share.)
I forgot to make a copy of my submission to Letters to Priests this evening. I'm not sure how long it takes the Letters to Priests folks to process a submission, and besides: I'd like to get this one available in more than one place.

Here's more-or-less what I wrote, earlier today:

Father James Statz, of the Our Lady of the Angels parish in Sauk Centre, Minnesota, is just an ordinary priest.

Not everything about his years here have been strictly routine. There was the Christmas tree - over a dozen feet of it - that clipped him when it fell during Mass. (Sauk Centre Journal (December 25, 2005) And there was the stroke that could have killed him, but didn't. (Sauk Centre Journal (May 29, 2010) And there's the new Marian garden between the church and the rectory.

But for the most part, Father Statz just goes through the routines: celebrating Mass; hearing confessions; anointing the sick. Standing in for Jesus in a small central Minnesota town.

Which, when you think about it, is a pretty big deal.

New on the Blogroll: Matthew Warner (Again on the Blogroll, actually)

I added this to A Catholic Citizen in America's blogroll today:
Matthew Warner "Matt Warner is a Catholic husband, father, tweeter, blogger and social media nerd. In 2008, Matt left his engineering career to focus full time on New Media and the Catholic Faith. He is the founder of flockNote.com, TweetCatholic.com, QuoteCatholic.com and his popular blog, FallibleBlogma.com. In his free time, he can be found changing diapers...."
"In his free time??" Well, some folks are a bit more overclocked than others.

Matthew Warner recently posted about the Letters to Priests idea. My take:

Letters to Priests: This Looks Like a Good Idea

This looks like a good idea:
"Catholics in New Media: Letters to Priests"
Matthew Warner (April 30, 2010)

"In these trying times for the Church, one of the resulting tragedies has been that a very small percentage of bad priests have given a bad name to so many good ones. This is most certainly tragic. It's tragic that so many great priests are going unappreciated. And it's tragic that so many of us aren't aware of so many of these wonderful priests. And all of this in this Year of the Priest.

"That's why a neat new project I recently became aware of is so appropriate: Letters to Priests - Thanking the Men of the Catholic Church. It's 'an interactive book being written to promote positive public relations of Catholic Priests.' They are asking everyone to submit letters describing how a priest has positively impacted their lives. Anyone can participate....

"...One of their challenges is trying to let the many Catholics who are not yet online know about the project. So they are encouraging us to spread the news in our parish bulletins and any way we can in order to collect more letters.

Sounds like a worthy cause to me!
"
The post includes a URL: LettersToPriests.com. I've given the website a quick once-over. The letters are - not the sort of thing you see in the news, here in America.

There's a fairly straightforward online 'submit a letter' page - which I plan to use as soon as I finish writing this post. Or, for folks who prefer using snailmail, Letters to Priests has this USPS address:

Letters to Priests
c/o Teena and Anne
P.O. Box 482
Ada, MI 49301

I'm writing about Father James Statz, of the Our Lady of the Angels parish here in Sauk Centre, Minnesota. There have been a few lively moments while he's been here, like the time the Christmas tree didn't hit him - and the time a stroke did. (Sauk Centre Journal, May 29, 2004 - he's back with us, happily.)


A tip of the hat to MatttnewWarner, on Twitter, for the heads-up on his post.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Living in America and Living a Catholic Life

A post about Catholic Anti-Americanism? No, I haven't gone crazy. Well, crazier. (February 25, 2010)

I saw an article called "Catholic Anti-Americanism" yesterday. (Thanks, Matthew Warner and InsideCatholic, on Twitter, for the heads-up.)

"Catholic Anti-Americanism isn't your standard-issue rant about "Catholics and Muslims along with the fake Jews." (April 2, 2009)

I think the author of the article makes some pretty good points.

I'll get to "Catholic Anti-Americanism," right after:

Commie Pinkos, Bleeding Heart Liberals, and Stereotypes

If you've read another blog of mine, Another War-on-Terror Blog, you'll have gathered that I don't think America is perfect, but that I don't see this country as a source of all that is icky, either. I also don't think much of the sort of national and ethnic chauvinism I see expressed by folks I call "red, white and blue-blooded Americans." (Another War-on-Terror Blog, November 6, 2009, January 7, 2010, September 12, 2009, July 3, 2008)

I see that I've touched on that attitude in this blog, too. (April 14, 2010)

A stereotype, "a conventional or formulaic conception or image" (Princeton's WordNet) is a handy way of dealing with some facet of reality. And, in some circles, using stereotypes is a fairly good way of gaining acceptance. You have to be careful about which stereotypes you use with which people, of course.

I doubt that there are many American subcultures where most people 'know' that communist infiltrators are controlling the federal government and that America is behind all the world's unpleasantness. But, you never know.

Besides, the 'red scare' and McCarthyism haven't been current for - a long time. These days, we've got other demographics telling us to be scared of other (allegedly) terrible threats. Some folks have shown - imagination? - in their warnings: like the threat of those shape-shifting, space-alien lizard people.

I'm getting seriously off-topic.

A little more about stereotypes, and I'll get to that "Catholic Anti-Americanism" article. This excerpt is from another blog of mine:

"Stereotypes: Convenient, But Poor Substitutes for Facts

"I've run into quite a number of odd beliefs in my time. At various times, I've heard or read that:
  • Commies are behind all problems
  • American imperialists cause all problems
  • All problems are caused by
    • Blacks
    • Whites
    • Chinese
    • Japanese
    • Jews
    • Catholics
    • Religion
      • Especially Christianity
    • Whatever
  • Poverty causes crime
"I'm a bit skeptical - to put it mildly - about all of the above. If nothing else, those sincerely-held beliefs paint reality in strokes that are 'way too broad.

"Take 'American imperialism,' for example. I'm not happy about the way the Hawaiian Islands were confiscated, and I am happy that the federal government has finally started recognizing treaties it made with the American nations, well over a century ago. But I don't see big, bad Amerika as the imperialist warmonger it's made out to be in some circles.

"After all, we recently elected a Hawaiian president: Is that really the act of imperialist oppressors?..."
(Another War-on-Terror Blog (January 7, 2010))
One of the points I was trying to make was that it isn't always the other guy who's slipped into applying stereotypes as a substitute for observation and thinking.

Finally: What's All This About "Catholic Anti-Americanism?"

Here's how that insidecatholic.com article started:
"Catholic Anti-Americanism"
Joe Hargrave, insidecatholic.com (April 28, 2010)

"Inevitably, writing for a blog called 'The American Catholic' will force you to think long and hard about the relationship between Catholic and American ideals. When I began blogging there a year ago, I held to certain prejudices found among Catholic traditionalists and progressives alike -- prejudices that amounted to what I would describe as a romantic anti-Americanism: a belief that America, in conception and realization, is inherently incompatible with the Catholic Church.

"According to this view, America's intellectual roots in Enlightenment thought, Puritan jurisprudence, capitalism, and liberalism are responsible for a number of problems facing American Catholics, making us particularly vulnerable to anti-Catholic tendencies such as political and economic individualism or defiance of authority, including Church authority. As both a liturgical traditionalist and a recovering leftist, the appeal of a contrary, romantic anti-Americanism was strong.

"But a closer look at the Catholic experience in the United States, as seen from the perspective of both American Catholics and the papacy, challenges that world view. As it turns out, this kind of anti-Americanism, whether it comes from "throne and altar" traditionalism or the anti-capitalist Left, has no basis in either. It is a failed hypothesis for many reasons; here I will present three...."
The three points Mr. Hargrave made were, very briefly:
  1. The idea of religious liberty - that First Amendment stuff - is an import
    • British Catholics fleeing persecution encouraged the Marlyland Toleration Act (1649)
  2. The "Americanism" heresy has been "somewhat misunderstood"
    • I'll get back to this
  3. America is a secular state
    • Good thing, too: for the sake of religious faith
That "Americanism" heresy is old news - and doesn't have all that much to do with speaking English with an American accent or having a bicameral legislature. Mr. Hargrave said that the "Americanism" heresy is the notion that:
  1. The Church must engage in theological and liturgical experimentation or opportunism to become amiable to people of other faiths
  2. The natural virtues should be elevated above the spiritual virtues of the saints
    • Because they allow men to act with greater freedom and strength
  3. Religious orders are less worthy of respect, cultivating as they do the spiritual virtues
Actually, Mr. Hargrave is summarizing what Pope Leo XIII wrote, back in 1899. ("TESTEM BENEVOLENTIAE NOSTRAE | Concerning New Opinions, Virtue, Nature And Grace, With Regard To Americanism," Pope Leo XIII (Encyclical promulgated on January 22, 1899), English, via EWTN.com)

I recommend reading what Leo XIII had to say, by the way. Be sure to set aside quite a bit of time. As with most encyclicals, Pope Leo XIII didn't write with sound bites in mind. For example:
"...This over-esteem of natural virtue finds a method of expression in assuming to divide all virtues in active and passive, and it is alleged that whereas passive virtues found better place in past times, our age is to be characterized by the active. That such a division and distinction cannot be maintained is patent—for there is not, nor can there be, merely passive virtue. 'Virtue,' says St. Thomas Aquinas, 'designates the perfection of some faculty, but end of such faculty is an act, and an act of virtue is naught else than the good use of free will,' acting, that is to say, under the grace of God if the act be one of supernatural virtue...."
("TESTEM BENEVOLENTIAE NOSTRAE," Pope Leo XIII (January 22, 1899))
I think that a reasonable super-summary would be that saying that spiritual virtues aren't as important as natural virtues is - from a Catholic point of view - wack. And that some of what's in the minds of American people is okay.

Just like some characteristics of other nations are okay.

Bottom Line? America is Okay: So is Akrotiri - and Botswana - and Comoros - You Get the Idea

Developing a balanced view of the country you're in may never have been particularly easy. It's certainly not something that only Americans living in the early 21st century deal with:
"...'My country, right or wrong,' is a thing that no patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying, 'My mother, drunk or sober.' No doubt if a decent man's mother took to drink he would share her troubles to the last; but to talk as if he would be in a state of gay indifference as to whether his mother took to drink or not is certainly not the language of men who know the great mystery.

"What we really need for the frustration and overthrow of a deaf and racous Jingoism is....."
("The Defendant," G. K. Chesterton (1901), page 125ff (Google Books) (text is also online at fullbooks.com))
Me? on the whole I like living in America. It helps that I worked in an ESL (English as a Second Language) program while living in San Francisco. I got to know people who had come to America: partly to 'get rich;' mostly to enjoy freedom.

Which threatens to draw this post into yet another topic. Time to quit.

Not-entirely-unrelated posts:

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Stem Cell Research: Backed by the Vatican, No Kidding

This post is mostly about research, stem cells, medicine, and the Catholic Church. But, given some of the cherished beliefs still held in many American subcultures, I'd better make a couple points, with links to where I discussed them:
No kidding: a person could be a practicing Catholic while deliberately avoiding everything the rest of us have learned about creation in the last several centuries. But it's not necessary.

I don't think it's a good idea, either.

Now, about stem cell research:
"Vatican-supported stem-cell research at University of Maryland Medical School holds 'great promise' "
George P. Matysek Jr., The Catholic Review (Archdiocese of Baltimore) (April 28, 2010)

"Leaders in the scientific and faith communities were optimistic that a new international initiative focused on intestinal stem cell research could yield significant medical advances – without fanning the ethical controversies that surround embryonic stem cell research.

"The International Intestinal Stem Cell Consortium, which has the support of the Vatican, will be led by the University of Maryland School of Medicine in Baltimore. It will include scientists from the Vatican’s children’s hospital, several institutes in Italy and the University of Maryland School of Medicine Center for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine.

"The partnership was announced April 23 at a news conference in Rome. A second news conference was held April 28 at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.

"Dr. Alessio Fasano, a UM professor of pediatrics, medicine and physiology and director of the Mucosal Biology Research Center, told The Catholic Review he hopes the consortium research will lead to real treatments for gastrointestinal conditions such as celiac disease and ulcerative colitis...."
I'm not surprised that the Holy See is backing stem cell research. Propaganda of the last few centuries notwithstanding, science and Catholicism go 'way back. But then, I've been interested in science since I was a pre-teen, majored in history, and try to sort out facts from opinions.

More recently, I've had a very personal stake in learning what the Catholic Church teaches about bioethics: ("Prayer, Medicine and Trusting God" (March 4, 2010), for starters)

Isn't Stem Cell Research Evil?

Whether or not a practicing Catholic can conduct stem cell research depends in part on where the stem cells come from. It's pretty much the same set of rules we have for organ transplants.

Donating your organs is a good thing, and encouraged. Taking someone else's organs with that person's permission is not nice, and we shouldn't do it. Killing the donor is worse. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2296) The Catholic Church teaches that even people who don't look just like us are people, too. Even who haven't been born yet. (Catechism, 2270-2275) Calling someone an "embryo" or "formless mass of protoplasm" doesn't make killing that person okay.

At least, that's what the Catholic Church teaches. We're not even allowed to kill ourselves. Which is another topic.

But stem cells from a source that doesn't involve killing someone? Yeah, the Catholic Church is okay with that. A little more than okay with it: we're backing that sort of stem cell research.

Related posts, mostly about stem cells, bioethics, and Catholic beliefs:

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Catholics aren't Klingons

Maybe you've heard this, in a "Star Trek: The Next Generation" episode. Maybe not. Not everybody's a "Star Trek" Fan.
"Counselor Troi: I know Klingons like to be alone on their birthdays. You probably want to meditate or hit yourself with a pain stick or something."
("Star Trek: The Next Generation," Parallels (1993), quoted on IMDB)
I watched "...Next Generation" when it was airing: and liked some aspects of the 2nd Trek series. Including that line.

Catholics aren't Klingons: Quite

"You probably want to meditate or hit yourself with a pain stick or something" was funny, in context. It's also pretty close to the way quite a few Americans view Catholics. My opinion.

That's an informed opinion. I was born into a nice, mainstream-Protestant family. We lived in a part of the country where many folks were terribly, terribly Christian (just ask them). Quite a number of these Christians believed with a holy(?) passion that those Satanic Catholics over there were anything but.

Needles to say, I got interested in Catholics and Catholicism. Think about it: what teenage boy isn't fascinated, at least a little, by something big and bad?

Then, after digging into the last several thousand years of humanity's story, I converted to the 'Whore of Babylon.' (These days, it's "Queen of Whores - tomato, tomahto.) But my conversion is another topic.

Growing up outside Catholicism, and converting well into my adulthood, gives me a perspective that cradle Catholics don't have.

Let's face it: to outsiders, we look weird. Strange. Alien.

Sort of like Star Trek's Klingons.

I don't mean the bumpy foreheads of the "Star Trek" movies and later series: I mean inside, where it counts.

"Star Trek's" Klingons are pagans, by the way: quite a bit like my Norse and Celtic forebears. A bit more civilized, though. Klingons didn't, as I recall, conduct 'human' sacrifice. My ancestors did. Well into historical times.

Catholics worship the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Three Persons, One God. Pagans we're not. (We aren't polytheists, by the way - but I don't know how the Trinity works)

And, we're real.

(Father Dowling isn't: Which is yet again another topic.)

Catholics: Strange People With a Thing For Pain?

Quite a few folks, in America at least, if they think about those Catholics at all, are likely see us as strange people with a thing for pain and suffering. Or dupes of warped men. Or people working for some sort of international corporation. (I wish I was kidding about that. Which is yet another topic. (February 4, 2010, for starters)

The idea that Catholicism is all about pain and suffering is, to me, very understandable. The Desert Fathers - 17 centuries back, was it? - left a lasting impression. Then there are all those 'lives of the saints' books from the 19th and early-20th centuries: full of brave little saints dying horribly, with brave little smiles on their cherubic faces.

Some people find those books spiritually uplifting. Me? Not so much: although I've learned to appreciate that sort of spirituality. Another topic.

Martyrdom is a sort of fast-track to sainthood: but not all saints are martyrs. ("Saints: That's so Medieval" (February 14, 2010))

Then there are people who punish themselves - severely, sometimes - because they think that's what God wants them to do. Yes: sometimes we need to suffer. The way I see it, if I need to suffer, I can count on God to supply that spiritual medicine.

Besides, the point of suffering is more about penance than about feeling pain. (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1434-1439, for starters) And penance involves a whole lot. Like praying, fasting, almsgiving, and reading the Bible.

By the way: particularly because of some medical conditions I've been blessed with, I needed to look up Catholic teaching about using our brains when it comes to health care:
Catholics: We say that we must trust God (215); and we go to doctors anyway? No wonder some folks think we're hypocrites.

Catholics and Crucifixes

Then there are those crucifixes.

There's a joke about a boy who was giving his parents and teachers trouble, so his folks sent him to a Catholic school. Coming home after the first day, he went straight to the kitchen table, opened his books and did his homework. All of it. A week later, it still was the same story. His parents asked him why he was studying so hard. The boy replied, "you said they were disciplined there? They've got one guy nailed to the wall!"

A Catholic crucifix can be a little - unsettling - to someone who's not used to them. Particularly if the Corpus is life-size, with realistic coloring.

I'd say "lifelike," but that's a 3D representation of a dead body: a man who's been tortured to death. And, my Lord.

Which is why there are several small sculptures of a horribly-dead man on the walls of my home: and another, smaller, one hanging around my neck.

Klingon decor, anyone?

Acting Like Jesus Matters

Then, there's the sort of thing Garrison Keillor probably had in mind when he invented the "Our Lady of Perpetual Responsibility Catholic Church" for Lake Wobegon.

We put a bit more emphasis, compared to some branches of Christianity, on acting like we give a rip about what Jesus said and did. Although individual Catholics may have - interesting - views, Robert Burns' "Holy Willie's Prayer" (1785) describes a distinctly non-Catholic approach to holiness.

Despite what you may have been told, by the way, Catholics do not believe that we can work our way into Heaven.

On the other hand, we do think that we're supposed to act like we take Jesus seriously. There's a pretty good discussion of faith and works in this article: "Introduction to the Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy," insidecatholic.com (April 27, 2010) (A tip of the hat to newadvent, on Twitter, for the heads-up on that article.)

Works of mercy are things we do. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2447)

Let's put it this way: I'd just as soon not try explaining to my Lord why I said I followed him - while refusing to follow his orders.

Why do I Take Jesus Seriously?

Quite a few people have said that they're God. Jesus is one of them. What sets him apart is that, a few days after he'd been executed: he got up; traveled around; and had a working lunch with his followers. Then there was the time - after he'd been crucified, died, and was buried - that my Lord gave the eleven disciples their marching orders. (Matthew 28:16-20)

Worked for them: works for me.

Klingons Meditate: So do Catholics

Again: "Star Trek's" Klingons are fictional. Catholics aren't.

Still, there are points of similarity:
  • Believing there's more to life than having a good time
  • Taking duty seriously
  • Meditating
I know: The "Star Trek: The Next Generation" Klingons mostly meditated off-screen - and their culture was modeled on non-Western cultures.

Well, cultures other than the contemporary Western one.
Christianity is a Really, like, Western Religion, isn't It?
No: and Jesus isn't an American.

Christianity "looks" Western because Europe (eventually) embraced Christianity: and European countries have been fairly prominent players in global affairs for the last few centuries. But my faith started out in lands at the east end of the Mediterranean: in Asia. For that matter, I've heard Christianity described as an "oriental mystery cult." There's something to that. Again, sort of.1

Somewhere between five hundred and a thousand years from now, I suspect that 'everybody' may 'know' that Christianity is an African religion: but that's definitely another topic.

Catholicism is a universal faith. We've got a solid core, but the trimmings tend to reflect what folks in an area were doing before they heard of my Lord.

For example, at Our Lady of the Angels church, down the street from my house, we drag a tree inside each year, for Christmas. I wouldn't necessarily expect Catholics in Sri Lanka (we're there) or Cebu (we're there, too) to have this custom. It may not be a particularly good fit with their cultures.

Then there's liturgical dance. It's forbidden in Catholic churches: in the West. Other parts of the world, it's encouraged. Why? Dance means different things in different cultures. (January 10, 2010)

Wrenching myself back to the topic:
Catholics Meditate: How Weird is That?
I've heard that meditation is bad, foreign, Satanic: downright un-American. Granted, that was back in the sixties and seventies. Quite a few things were changing then: fast. Some folks take change better than others.

I'll grant that meditation probably isn't the first thing you think of, when you hear the word "American." We're a peppy - sometimes jittery - lot, and anything that involves sitting still and 'doing nothing' doesn't really appeal to many of us.

I'm an American, by the way: and on the whole I like the culture(s) I was born and raised in.

I'm also a Catholic, so I need to pay attention to what the Church says. Like this:
"The Lord leads all persons by paths and in ways pleasing to him, and each believer responds according to his heart's resolve and the personal expressions of his prayer. However, Christian Tradition has retained three major expressions of prayer: vocal, meditative, and contemplative. They have one basic trait in common: composure of heart. This vigilance in keeping the Word and dwelling in the presence of God makes these three expressions intense times in the life of prayer."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2699)
After that, there's quite a bit about
Here's how the paragraphs on meditation start:
"Meditation is above all a quest. The mind seeks to understand the why and how of the Christian life, in order to adhere and respond to what the Lord is asking. The required attentiveness is difficult to sustain. We are usually helped by books, and Christians do not want for them: the Sacred Scriptures, particularly the Gospels, holy icons, liturgical texts of the day or season, writings of the spiritual fathers, works of spirituality, the great book of creation, and that of history - the page on which the 'today' of God is written."
(Catechism, 2705)
There's more, of course, about meditation. In Catholicism, it seems like there's always more.

I'll wrap this post up with another quote about meditation, Catholic style:
"There are as many and varied methods of meditation as there are spiritual masters. Christians owe it to themselves to develop the desire to meditate regularly, lest they come to resemble the three first kinds of soil in the parable of the sower.5 But a method is only a guide; the important thing is to advance, with the Holy Spirit, along the one way of prayer: Christ Jesus."
(Catechism, 2707)
Related posts:

1 Oriental?! Christianity?!! Before someone has a stroke, let's look at what some words mean:
  • Oriental:
    • "denoting or characteristic of countries of Asia" (Princeton's WordNet)
  • Asia:
    • lands "...east of the Suez Canal, east of the Ural Mountains and south of the Caucasus Mountains (or the Kuma-Manych Depression)... and the Caspian and Black Seas... bounded on the east by the Pacific Ocean, on the south by the Indian Ocean and on the north by the Arctic Ocean"
      List of countries
    (Wikipedia, Asia)
I know: "Asia" is a word in a Western language. People living in Asia see themselves as members of distinct cultures: Sort of like Italians think they're not quite identical to Germans or the Irish. "Oriental" is in that enormous list of words that are "offensive." Well, this isn't a perfect world. Moving on.

Jesus was born in Bethlehem, and (after some time in Egypt) grew up in Nazareth. He was executed in Jerusalem. All those places, except for (most of) Egypt, are in that Wikipedia list of "Asian" countries. And "Oriental is "denoting or characteristic of countries of Asia."

I don't see that it's so crazy to think that Christianity started out in Asia. The Church making its headquarters in Rome made sense, at the time: For the first few centuries, Rome was sort of like New York City, Washington, London, and Paris for lands around the Mediterranean. Now, not so much: but after about 2,000 years you have to expect a little change.

"Mystery cult?" Well, I don't feel all that good about the word "cult:" but I can see the point. Again with a definition:
  • Greco-Roman mysteries
    • "Mystery religions, sacred Mysteries or simply Mysteries, were religious cults of the Greco-Roman world, participation in which was reserved to initiates...."
    (Wikipedia, Greco-Roman mysteries)
Okay: I can see the connection, sort of.

Christians generally practice baptism. For Catholics, it's a sacrament. (Catechism, 1213-1274) The Eucharist is something reserved for baptized Catholics - with some qualifiers.

So, yeah: Catholicism is a mystery religion. Sort of.

As for being secretive about what we believe, or what's involved? We're ordered to tell about who (and whose) we are, what we do, and why we do it. Take the Eucharist, for example. (Catechism, 1322-1419)

Well, That's Interesting: Benedict XVI and the Bible

I think this post/article is worth reading:
"Scott Hahn on Benedict's Biblically Focused Pontificate"
The Sacred Page (April 26, 2010)

"National Catholic Register has a great piece up by Scott Hahn celebrating the fifth anniversary of Benedict XVI's election to the papacy. In the article Hahn discusses how the Holy Father has especially devoted his pontificate to calling the faithful to the study of Sacred Scripture.

"While this priority of the pope is not something you'll hear much about in the mainstream media, make no mistake about it, this pontiff has been uniquely focused on calling the faithful to renew their faith in the Bible...."
A "Bible-believing" Pope? No surprise. We've had 264 before Benedict XVI.

The Catholic Church isn't a "Bible-believing church" in the contemporary American meaning of the phrase, though. Although individual American Catholics may have a personal style that's similar to that of "Bible-thumpers," the Catholic Church isn't "Bible believing."

Not in the sense that we all think Pastor Bob or Reverend Bill preaches Direct From the Bible - and that everybody else is in league with Satan and/or duped by the Devil. Yes, I'm being unfair. A little. ("Haiti: Voodoo, Pat Robertson, and the Catholic Church" (January 16, 2010))

I've written about the Catholic Church and the Bible before. This is a fairly good summary:
"...Catholics aren't in a "roll-your-own doctrines" church. What the church believes and teaches is based on"The Magisterium interprets the deposit of faith in its written form, and in Tradition. But there are rules. "...this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant." (86) And the Church gets its authority from Jesus, who...."
(February 19, 2009)
The Bible? Yes: I read the Word of God - translated into the language I know best. Do I "believe in" the Bible as the Word of God? I'm Catholic: I have to. It's in the rules. (Catechism of the Catholic Church (105)

Am I surprised that a Pope is putting an emphasis on studying the Bible? No: but then, I know a little bit about the Catholic Church.
A tip of the hat to MatthewWarner, on Twitter, for the heads-up on the 'Scott Hahn' article.

Monday, April 26, 2010

The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity: Charming Book, Local Author

"The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity," by Deborah Lee Holt, is another of those devotional books: a collection of pictures and prayers, songs and observations.

This one is, maybe, more 'personal' than most. From the author/artist's introduction:
"I was at a point of persona crisis in October of 1996. A friend suggested that I turn to God with total trust. She recommended going and praying before Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, or before the Tabernacle. I felt quite embarrassed about this, though, because at the time I didn't know what the Blessed Sacrament was or even what the Tabernacle was; so after dropping off our children at school, I apprehensively found my way to the Tabernacle...."
The first picture came in January of 1997, By August of 2000 there were 10. The pictures aren't your run-of-the-mill 'religious art.'

The best way to show what I mean is by showing "The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity's" cover:



As the book's "Foreword and Letter of Recommendation" put it:
August 15, 2002
Assumption of Mary into Heaven

My dear Friends in Jesus and Mary,

It was a delight to read through the informative book entitled "The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity," authored and illustrated by Deb Holt. Overall, it can be said that this presentation is charming in its simplicity and allows the reader to easily focus upon the many riches of these profound precious mysteries of our Faith. The illustrations are childlike in their almost primitive style, which makes this book's unique approach even more endearing to the reader. It is hoped through this edition, that one will better grasp the depth and breadth of the scriptural insight, "unless one becomes like a little child, one cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

Always in Christ,

Archbishop Lawrence Khai
Rev. Andrew John, Mission Director
Arch Diocese of Thare-Nonseng, Thailand
I don't look for a "Nihil Obstat" or "Imprimatur" in books written since around the mid-point of the 20th century. Procedures for granting that sort of certification have changed. Partly, I suspect, as an adaptation to the flood of written material that was being produced.

Is "The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity" Okay, Theologically?

Short answer, yes. That's not my opinion, by the way.

Deborah Holt ran "The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity" past a Church authority. Good idea, too, I think. I'd have done the same thing, if I'd produced a book like that.

I've done what I can to educate myself about Catholic teachings. But I'm a layman, and one of the functions of priests and bishops is to be subject experts in what the Catholic Church believes. I'd be daft to not use a resource like that.

I've seen a letter from the Diocese of St. Cloud [Minnesota] Chancery Office, saying that a priest has read the book, and that "he finds the book free of all doctrinal error."

"St. Cloud has spoken" isn't in the same league as "Rome has spoken," but that 'free from error' works for me.

Thailand; Minnesota: The Catholic Church is All Over

While I'm thinking of it: Thailand? Minnesota? What gives? I've discussed what the Catholic Church is in other posts. ("The Catholic Church: Universal. Really" (April 19, 2010), "Accommodating Indigenous Cultures: Including Ours" (January 10, 2010), for starters)

I'm not surprised that a letter of recommendation came from Thailand. The Catholic Church is, literally, the Universal Church. The word "catholic" started out as καθολικός (katholikos, for folks who use the Latin alphabet): which means universal, among other things.

I'd also expect that "doctrinal error" check to be made in the diocese where a book was authored. The Catholic Church is universal: but folks living near an author are more likely to understand the local language and culture.

"Primitive?" isn't That an Insult?

"Primitive" means quite a few things. When someone who's had some background in art uses the term to describe art, or an artist, it generally means, "of or created by one without formal training; simple or naive in style." (Princeton's WordNet)

Think Anna Mary Robertson "Grandma" Moses. The New York Times did a pretty good job of summarizing her accomplishments in her obituary. (The New York Times (December 14, 1961)

Symbolism: This May Take Some Getting Used To

Pictures - and even the colors - in "The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity" mean something. I don't mean the 'it moved me' sort of 'meaning.' Deborah Holt uses a moderately complicated system of symbolism.

Don't worry: She gives a pretty good description of what the colors and all the rest mean. Nothing fancy: just that white means purity, goodness, piercing, light; yellow stands for sunny, bright, cheerful, light. That sort of thing.

Again, why write about it, when I can show you some examples:


That's the page where Deborah Holt explains how she uses color.


One thing this book isn't, is drab. That's a typical opening page for a chapter.


That horizontal line across the picture? It's not a printing error, or a crease in the original artwork. It indicates that the people are standing in water. This isn't, quite, representational art.


Folks who go to Our Lady of the Angels church in Sauk Centre, Minnesota, are already familiar with the originals of Deborah Holt's work. This collage was on display in the church entry about a month ago. (March 28, 2010)


Earlier this month, another set of pictures. These are on the cover, and page 77 of "The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity." (April 11, 2010)

Should You Buy This Book?

Whether or not you buy "The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity" is up to you. Like the Chancery Office said, it's free from doctrinal error: so if you're a Catholic, you can read it without keeping your defenses up.

But whether or not you buy it depends on a whole lot more. Like whether you can afford the $19.95 (plus shipping and handling, likely enough). For a book with something like 129 pages that includes 10 high-quality art reproductions that's a quite reasonable price, I think. (It's 8 1/2 by 11 inches, wire-bound.)

But I've seen quite a few things I'd like, that had a reasonable price: which I'll never be able to afford. And that's okay.

Another important point you'd need to consider is: do you want the thing? If you don't, why buy it?

About the binding. If a book just doesn't 'feel like a book' if it doesn't have hard covers, or at least pages that are attached all the way down one side: that could be a problem for you and "The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity." I think the wire binding is a good idea: the book lays flat, even if you aren't holding it down.

I'm not much of a 'devotional book' reader myself, but I've used them from time to time. Some of those books are so 'well bound' that keeping the things open is a distraction. Enough said.

Deborah Holt did a good job with this book: not just the artwork, but the tedious job of keeping track of where she got the prayers, songs, and sayings she quotes. One page is mostly a list of copyright permissions.

Finally, there's a reference section in the back of the book, with two parts: Mary, our Mother - The Rosary in Scripture; and Symbols and Where they are Found in Scripture (by chapter).

I'm not going to buy "The Seven Sacraments and Life in the Trinity." Partly because I can borrow my father-in-law's copy. Which I did, to take those photos.

But don't let that stop you. As I wrote about a year ago, "Not All Catholics are Like Me - Thank God." (March 18, 2009) This book could become a valuable part of your spiritual life.

But not if you can't find a copy.

Here's where you can order the book, or learn more about it.

Deborah L. Holt
DRAW NEAR MINISTRIES
P.O. Box 264
Sauk Centre MN 56378

There's a CD, too: but I don't know as much about that.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Fourth Sunday of Easter 2010

Readings for April 25, 4th Sunday of Easter 2010:

4th Sunday of Easter 2010

By Deacon Lawrence N. Kaas
April 25, 2010

I ran across a story that I hope you will enjoy: It was on the 30th anniversary of Archbishop Fulton Sheen's death. When New York Archbishop Dolan thanked God for the life of the memorable television and radio personality that was Bishop Sheen. Bishop Dolan said that while he was a seminarian in Rome he saw a crowd gathered around the famous archbishop. Sheen told the crowd he had come from an audience with Pope Paul VI. Someone asked what the pope had said to him. Sheen blushed and replied, "The Holy Father said, 'Fulton Sheen, you will have a high place in heaven,' "

Someone else asked Sheen what he had replied to the Pope. Sheen said, "Your Holiness, would you mind making that an infallible statement?"

In today's Gospel, Jesus tells us that we are His flock and that he is giving us eternal life, and no one will snatch us out of the Father's hand. He has promised all of us that we will have a high place in heaven.

I ran across another story that reinforces the idea of the Good Shepherd and our roll in that mission. It is said that Mother Teresa was caring for a dying man and at one point he looked up at her and said, "does your God look like you?" Mother responded that she tries to do what God wants her to do at which he responded, "if your God looks like you I want to be His follower."

I pose the question to you, what did the man see in Mother Teresa? He, for sure saw the Love of God that shown from the eyes of Mother Teresa, for him, who he know did not look or feel lovable. What a gift she gave to him on his death bed to know that he was loved and that the God he saw reflected in mother eyes was his God as well.

Father Mullady tells of a time when he visited a Benedictine abbey when he was invited by an abbey shepherd to come and see his sheep. Having preached on the subject but never experienced what he was about to see. The Sheep were at the other side of the pasture when the shepherd called in a loud voice: "Halo, Halo," and the sheep prickled up their ears and rushed over the shepherd. They heard the call of the shepherd and recognized someone who cared for them, they sought refuge and guidance from him.

Had others made the same call, the sheep would not have responded.

There was a new bishop who wanted his picture taken with a flock of sheep as to show his ministry to the flock of Christ. Dressed in his Episcopal vestment, miter and crosier, the trouble began because every time he walked up to the sheep they ran away. Supposedly he joked that he hoped this was not a comment by God on his pastoral ministry! You know what I thought when I read this: didn't they know that they could take two pictures and super-impose!

God calls each of us, with an eternal providence, as our shepherd. The trouble is that some hear the voice and recognize him and others do not. "The sheep that belong to me listen to my voice; I know them and they follow me. I give them eternal Life."

But grace must find an open spirit to receive it. God never acts against the nature of something he has created and man's is characterized by freedom.

In Acts, Paul and Barnabas tirelessly give the world God's call to repentance, to believe in eternal life bought by Christ. They always go first to the Jews, and do so in typical synagogue speech, as recounted today in Pisidian Antioch. Some believed. They listened not just with their ears, but with their hearts, and this was the occasion of Paul and Barnabas also to go to the Gentiles. And when the gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of God: they believed and were baptized to eternal life.

We too, as gentiles, have heard the call of the Good Shepherd and as it turned out because of the gentiles the word of God has spread throughout the world. Had Jesus decided to spread His Word only through the Jews or for that matter only by His own presence we would not have even heard the Word at this time in history.

Each of us who have responded to the call of the Good Shepherd are called to evangelize the world or at least our little corner of it. Please do not wait for Father and I do the evangelizing for you will have to wait a hopeless long time. Father and I are called to serve and teach you in a manner by which all of you can go into the work-a-day world and by your example and prayer be part of the reality of the Good Shepherd, the one who calls and receives an answer as one whose voice is known.

You can well imagine, if each of us truly responds to the call of the Good Shepherd and then to live it to the fullest. The world would be a much different place, a world living the Divine attributes in a attitude of Love. A world imaging Eternity so much so that those who are hearing the call for the first time would marvel. See how they love one another. And looking into our eyes seeing what the dying man saw in the eyes of Mother Teresa. LOVE
'Thank you' to Deacon Kaas, for letting me post his reflection here.
More:

A Young Man With 'Old' Ideas, Vatican II, and the AmChurch

I'll use a comment I left on another blog's post, to introduce a rather remarkable video.

A remark about "the old ways" in that comment needs a little intro, itself. The blogger whose post I commented on was under the impression, I discovered, that the young man was discussing Catholic beliefs which had been done away with by Vatican II.

I can see how someone could get that impression.

Some parishes have been treated to - imaginative - ideas: presented "in the spirit of Vatican II." In America, "in the spirit of Vatican Two" is a phrase that seems to mean something like "I heard about something called Vatican II that changed everything, so I'll say this groovy idea is 'in the spirit of' Vatican II."

That's where we got 'find the Tabernacle' church designs, flower pots being used as chalices, and once - so I've heard - the host sewn into a banner. All very groovy, all done "in the spirit of Vatican II," and all seriously not what the Holy See had in mind for the AmChurch.

If you've heard a priest say that some weird practice was a Vatican II thing: I believe it. We've had quite a bit of trouble with a (mercifully small) number of priests over the last few decades. (April 11, 2010, for starters) And it hasn't all involved trouble with their zippers.

Me? I'm not a professional theologian, so I actually read the Vatican II documents, as issues came up. Which is another topic.

That Video About a Young Man With His Head Screwed on Straight: Didn't Think I'd Get to It, Did You? ;)

Here's that comment:
"As you said, *he gets it!*

"This was a good way to spend 8:16.

"One point, though: I don't know that these are, strictly speaking, 'the old ways.' They're God's ways, as taught by his Church. These ways were introduced to time quite a long while ago, and in that sense they're 'old.'

"On the other hand, the last I heard, God isn't 'in' time the way we are. And I'm not sure that we have a word for the 'direction' God is from 'now.' The closest we seem to come is phrases like, 'Who was, and is, and is to come.'

"Just a thought."
And here's the video:

"Crazy Catholic Guy talking...

GabiAfterHours, YouTube (April 8, 2010)
video, 8:16

"For some reason I look more tired with every video, but I feel the same... Guess its called getting old."

If the video doesn't play back well: Try viewing it on YouTube. I've done a little formatting to make it fit in this blog's format. My code and a few browsers don't play well together, so: like I said, try it on YouTube.

Am I surprised? Not really: I remember being around the age of this young man. Several decades back. I wanted to find a system of belief that made sense, along with quite a few other people.

GabiAfterHours found the right answer a whole lot faster than I did, but maybe he had a better starting point that mine.

Which is okay: It's been an eventful ride. Which is yet another topic.

Not-completely-unrelated posts:
A tip of the hat to AncientSoul and alwayscatholic, on Twitter, for the heads-up on this video.

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Visits From Dead People, Cultural Assumptions, and Twitter

There's a point to this post, and I'll get to it:

Hallucinations, Dead Relatives, and Assumptions

My father died last year, so I had quite a few conversations with folks who worked with him, in a hospice program. Nice people, by the way, all of them.

My father reported seeing folks from his family: people he'd grown up with. He reported seeing members of my household, too, when we came to visit. The difference is that the folks from my household who visited are still alive. The folks he grew up with: most of them have been dead for a while.

Folks from hospice discussed this sort of thing with me, and I noticed two approaches to the data.

One was to call what my father reported "hallucinations," and explain to me that this sort of thing is fairly common among people who have lived a long life, and are now in the process of dying. I'm sure the intent was to inform and reassure me: and I was touched by the effort.

The other was to call what my father reported as - visits. From people he knew. Along with an explanation that folks who are dying often report visits like that.

Both people were discussing the same sort of phenomenon with me. Each had her own set of assumptions about how the data - my father's reports - should be interpreted.

Do I believe in ghosts? If by that you mean, am I a 19th-century spiritualist? No. I don't pay mediums to connect me to one of my pet cats, either.

But, do I believe that I can't die, and that I've never met a "mortal" human being: because there isn't any such thing? Yes. I could be wrong about this, but I really don't think so.

Why Did I Not Confront The Unbeliever With The Error Of Her Ways?

I suppose I could have tried to "convict" the hospice worker who regarded my father's reports as hallucinations. But I didn't.

For what I hope are good reasons.

I've been preached at by some well-meaning (I trust) folks. I don't react well to slogans hurled at me - no matter how impassioned the delivery. I am not likely to embrace assertions that reject almost everything I've been taught: certainly not if aggressively raised in a conversation about something else.

My guess is that quite a few people in America have similar reactions to 'Bible thumpers.'

I did, as I recall, drop a suggestion that nearly-universal experiences may have many possible explanations. And left it at that. There was no clear opportunity for 'witness,' beyond what I did. Besides, the hospice worker has at least as much data as I do about end-of-life experiences: and I think that facts, in the long run, often speak for themselves.

Do I Believe in Ghosts?

Like I said, I'm not a 19th century Spiritualist.

On the other hand, I've lived too long and experienced too much to assume that being "rational" in a good old-fashioned Victorian-Materialist sort of way is particularly sensible. I'm dubious - putting it mildly - about people who excitedly talk about how some fellow who died a long time ago and comes to see them regularly.

But I accept the idea that people have a soul (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1703) - and that the very common reports by people who will soon die, of seeing 'dead people' they knew might be something other than "hallucinations."

Finally, the Point of This Post

A couple days ago, PatriceEgging and I were discussing something on Twitter. The subject of posting about personal 'spiritual' experiences was raise, and she said something like 'I will, if you will.'

So, I wrote "Really Spiritual Experiences: Those are Okay" and posted it Thursday.

Now, she's posted "Why I believe in Heaven," Patrice Egging: Music and Ministry (April 24, 2010).

And that's what this post is about: linking to that post.

Related posts:

Friday, April 23, 2010

The Catholic Church; Counter-Culture; and Fitting In

I think this helps explain why 'everybody knows' how icky the Catholic Church and how wrong the Pope is and how nobody who's smart would ever believe that stuff that those Catholics say.
"Church treated unfairly by media because of counter-cultural teachings, cardinal says"
Catholic News Agency (April 23, 2010)

"Pope Benedict and the Church are not being treated fairly in the media coverage of the sexual abuse scandal because his teachings disagree with the relativistic and individualistic culture of today, said Cardinal Ennio Antonelli this week.

" 'It's evident that it is an attack not only against the Pope, but also and especially against the Catholic Church as authoritative moral reference of our world today,' said Cardinal Antonelli, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, in an interview with the Italian newspaper Il Foglio on Wednesday."

"There are various elements that show 'clearly a militant "information" against the Church,' the cardinal asserted. Citing examples of this pattern, he specifically alluded to the 'tone' and 'tenacity' of the accusations, the re-use of past cases that were already public as current news, the lack of statistics in reports and the promotion of the idea that pedophilia only exists within the clergy and not as 'an enormously widespread vice in society.'

"In order 'to darken the image of the Church and compromise its credibility,' he explained, 'it's logical that they seek to strike the Pope in person, even if the firmness and coherence of his commitment against certain criminal behaviors has always been known.'..."
Benedict XVI's firm and consistent stand against what the 'pedophile priests' have done is known: among Catholics who pay attention to their faith, and get their information from reliable sources, as well as this culture's traditional information gatekeepers.

Happily, these days it's a little easier to get around the dominant culture's information filters.

There's more to the CNA article. I suggest reading the whole thing. Particularly since I think what Cardinal Ennio Antonelli said is very unlikely to show up on, say, CNN.

Of course, if you're an American who prefers to keep your ideas conventional and wants to march in lockstep with this culture's leaders: that's your choice. My responsibility ends when I've said what is so.

Here's part of that excerpt from Catholic News Agency again:
"...Citing examples of this pattern, he specifically alluded to the 'tone' and 'tenacity' of the accusations, the re-use of past cases that were already public as current news, the lack of statistics in reports and the promotion of the idea that pedophilia only exists within the clergy and not as 'an enormously widespread vice in society.'..."
(CNA) [emphasis mine]

Priests, Schoolteachers, and the General Public

I don't blame reporters and editors for omitting statistical data in their articles. Quite a few people aren't all that comfortable around statistics - or, maybe, facts in general.

Can't say that I blame them. Facts are like big, hard, heavy, sharp-edged rocks. A person who likes to walk around with his or her eyes closed will run into a fact sooner or later: and that'll hurt.

Besides, since Catholic priests are about as likely to abuse children as schoolteachers are, maybe we'd better start attacking schoolteachers? Better go after the general public first. Somebody from that lot is twice as likely to abuse children as a priest or a schoolteacher. (April 11, 2010)

Haven't heard about that? I'm not surprised. It's one of those big, heavy, sharp-edged facts. And it doesn't make Catholic priests and teachings look bad.

Fitting In With the 'Right People,' or Fitting In With God

I've said this before, but it bears repeating. I'm one of those "close minded fools" who believes that God is real. And, I expect that I'll have to go through a sort of final evaluation.

On the whole, I'd rather explain why I didn't conform to America's dominant culture: than why I defied what God has been telling us for thousands of years.

Related posts:In the news:

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Really 'Spiritual' Experiences: Those are Okay

I'll share a little 'spiritual' experience I had, at the end of this post.

First, though, I'd better explain why my faith doesn't depend - at least not entirely - on that sort of thing.

'I Laughed, I Cried: It Moved Me'

I've had deeply-moving experiences that stirred my heart and other major organs. Some of them were 'religious.' That's fine. Feeling emotions is a part of being human; we're made that way.

But most grownups also have about three pounds of very complex neural circuitry in our heads: and not all of it is tied up with managing body functions, sensory input, and what our glands are doing.

Human beings aren't, I think, strictly rational creatures: but most of us are able to think rationally.

Rational Religion: No Kidding

Religion doesn't have anything to do with being rational, right? Everybody knows that.

In some American subcultures, sadly, just about everybody does make that assumption: and the rest keep carefully silent about what they think. I've posted about this before. A few times. (See "Faith and Reason, Religion and Science (March 20, 2009), for starters.)
Impressing the 'Right People;' or God? It's Your Call
A word of advice? If you want to get accepted by the more 'sophisticated' American subcultures, adopt a derisive, dismissive attitude toward religion. Particularly Christianity. Some eastern belief systems are okay, sometimes.

I don't recommend that you do that. At all. God doesn't like being brushed off.

But if you think you can get along without God: He may accommodate your preferences. A few 19th-century wits notwithstanding, that would be very unpleasant.

If you're convinced that people who think God is real are "close minded fools," well: That's what you believe.

I don't agree: but then I'm one of those 'religious' people: I would say that.

Getting High on Jesus, Rousing Revivals and the Dark Night of the Soul

I've got nothing against "that HALLELUJAH! feeling. (August 26, 2009) It's okay to feel good about God and Jesus and going to church and praying and all that.

But if my faith depended on an emotional high, I'd probably be dropping in and out of a number of denominations with a 'Southern Baptist' style. And going to the mountains now and again for a Rocky Mountain High.

Then there's the sort of faith modeled by Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta.
"...About two years ago, if you believe what you read in the press and the blogosphere, we found out that Mother Teresa was an atheist, a fake, a fraud - not spiritual at all.

"That's because letters were made public, showing that for a very long time, she didn't feel all that uplifted and peppy about Jesus. She went about her work and prayers, relying on her will, not her feelings...."
(August 26, 2009)
I wrote about her possibly-record-setting dark night of the soul before.

From a touch-feely, 'uplifting' point of view, Mother Teresa of Calcutta was one of the biggest frauds of the 20th century. Because she didn't feel 'high on Jesus and life.' For a long, long time.

Me? As I wrote before:
"...I see a spiritual dryness, a lack of emotional uplift, as something like Special Forces training: rigorous; definitely not for everybody; reserved for those few who can handle it.

"Calling Mother Teresa a hypocrite or an atheist because she went through an unusually long dark night of the soul is like saying that a Green Beret isn't a real soldier because he's had training most GIs don't get."
(August 26, 2009)
I'm no Mother Teresa. Very few people are.

Maybe that's why I've had this sort of experience, now and then:

Charisma: Either You Got It, or You Don't

There's a story I heard, from someone who'd been at Oral Roberts University in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

And yes: there was a big, big scandal there. I know. While I'm at it, let's not forget the Pedophile Priests!

Moving along.

Anyway, there's this 'prayer tower' on the Oral Robers campus. A sort of compact Space Needle, to be used for prayer and meditation.

This fellow was in the prayer tower, alone, looking out over the Oklahoma landscape. His back was to that floor's entrance. He said he didn't hear anything - but he 'felt' that someone was there. Turning around, he saw Oral Roberts stepping through the door.

I'm inclined to accept the fellow's account at face value.

Oral Roberts, the man who founded the university, had what Americans call charisma: "a personal attractiveness or interestingness that enables you to influence others" (Princeton's WordNet) That doesn't make him a good or a bad man: it was a part of him.

The way I'm using the word, I don't mean "charismatic" in the religious sense. This sort of "charisma" is what many celebrities have: as well as some insurance salesmen, priests, ministers, street cops - and people with less high-profile posts in society. Oral Roberts, from my experience seeing him on television and reading about him, had charisma by the bushel. Some people do.

There are times when I'll 'feel' someone who's within maybe forty or fifty feet. I think most people have. I'm not talking about goofy spiritualism: just something that people experience now and then. Generally, when I feel that and look in the direction of the (pressure?), there's someone there.

Feeling the Real Presence: Sometimes

Then there was the time at Mass. I like to sit near the front, a few pews back. It's a shorter walk, and I get a better look at what's happening. Particularly the conscecration of the host.

What I'm going to write next can fairly easy be dismissed as self-hypnosis, mass hysteria (pun intended), or random neural activity. That's possible, but I don't think so.

Anyway, right around the moment when the priest said, "Behold the Lamb of God," I felt that someone was there.

Well, duh: the priest was there. So, as I recall, was the deacon. But the priest had been there for a while already. And, as usual, I felt nothing out of the ordinary from that direction.

At the moment of consecration, or so close that I couldn't discern a delay, I felt somebody just about where the priest was standing. Big time.

The sensation made the most sense, if I assumed that someone with world-class 'charisma' was sitting on the altar. Which is ridiculous, since I could see that there wasn't anybody there besides the ordinary folks who'd been there before.

Like I said: Maybe I'm making the whole thing up. Fooling myself. I don't think so, though.

The moment of consecration is when "The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins...." (Catechism, 1377) That time, I was allowed to perceive that Jesus was there.

I've experienced that a few other times. Maybe a handful. No big deal: Maybe my Lord knew I needed a reminder that He's there.

Sort-of-related posts:
A tip of the hat to PatriceEgging, on Twitter, for getting me started on this post. I'm not sure that she meant to do that: but that's the way it is.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Scapulars and a Crucifix: Showing Where You Stand

Another day is just about over, and I didn't find an 'I gotta blog about that' topic for A Catholic Citizen in America.

Well, actually, I did: but I'd posted about it before. CatholicChoice, on Twitter, asked "Do you remember or know the Catholic tradition on the Brown Scapular?" and linked to FreeBrownScapular.com, The Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. There's a pretty good writeup on the brown scapular there.

And, yes: I've heard of it. And the green scapular.

I wore a green scapular for a while, years back. I did not formally begin a devotion to that - or the brown scapular. But yeah, I know about them.

Starting in Lent, a couple years or so back, I've been wearing a small crucifix around my neck. It's the parish priest's idea: he said we should have something visible, to show our faith.



That's 'last year's' crucifix. The one I've got on now is the one my son gave me after this Lent. He'd been praying for me. It's a different design, but about the same size: a little over an inch and a half tall.

What I like about these 'chaplet' crucifixes is that they're visible. Sauk Centre is a quite Catholic community, so I'm hardly 'being brave,' wearing a crucifix. That's not the point.

What I figure is, it doesn't hurt to have another man walking around town with something around his neck that says 'I'm a Catholic' to anybody who bothers to look.

Might even do some good.

Related post:

Like it? Pin it, Plus it, - - -

Pinterest: My Stuff, and More

Advertisement

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store

Popular Posts

Label Cloud

1277 abortion ADD ADHD-Inattentive Adoration Chapel Advent Afghanistan Africa America Amoris Laetitia angels animals annulment Annunciation anti-catholicism Antichrist apocalyptic ideas apparitions archaeology architecture Arianism art Asperger syndrome assumptions asteroid astronomy Australia authority balance and moderation baptism being Catholic beliefs bias Bible Bible and Catechism bioethics biology blogs brain Brazil business Canada capital punishment Caritas in Veritate Catechism Catholic Church Catholic counter-culture Catholicism change happens charisms charity Chile China Christianity Christmas citizenship climate change climatology cloning comets common good common sense Communion community compassion confirmation conscience conversion Corpus Christi cosmology creation credibility crime crucifix Crucifixion Cuba culture dance dark night of the soul death depression designer babies despair detachment devotion discipline disease diversity divination Divine Mercy divorce Docetism domestic church dualism duty Easter economics education elections emotions England entertainment environmental issues Epiphany Establishment Clause ethics ethnicity Eucharist eugenics Europe evangelizing evolution exobiology exoplanets exorcism extremophiles faith faith and works family Father's Day Faust Faustus fear of the Lord fiction Final Judgment First Amendment forgiveness Fortnight For Freedom free will freedom fun genetics genocide geoengineering geology getting a grip global Gnosticism God God's will good judgment government gratitude great commission guest post guilt Haiti Halloween happiness hate health Heaven Hell HHS hierarchy history holidays Holy Family Holy See Holy Spirit holy water home schooling hope humility humor hypocrisy idolatry image of God images Immaculate Conception immigrants in the news Incarnation Independence Day India information technology Internet Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Jesus John Paul II joy just war justice Kansas Kenya Knights of Columbus knowledge Korea language Last Judgment last things law learning Lent Lenten Chaplet life issues love magi magic Magisterium Manichaeism marriage martyrs Mary Mass materialism media medicine meditation Memorial Day mercy meteor meteorology Mexico Minnesota miracles Missouri moderation modesty Monophysitism Mother Teresa of Calcutta Mother's Day movies music Muslims myth natural law neighbor Nestorianism New Year's Eve New Zealand news Nietzsche obedience Oceania organization original sin paleontology parish Parousia penance penitence Pentecost Philippines physical disability physics pilgrimage politics Pope Pope in Germany 2011 population growth positive law poverty prayer predestination presumption pride priests prophets prostitution Providence Purgatory purpose quantum entanglement quotes reason redemption reflections relics religion religious freedom repentance Resurrection robots Roman Missal Third Edition rosaries rules sacramentals Sacraments Saints salvation schools science secondary causes SETI sex shrines sin slavery social justice solar planets soul South Sudan space aliens space exploration Spain spirituality stem cell research stereotypes stewardship stories storm Sudan suicide Sunday obligation superstition symbols technology temptation terraforming the establishment the human condition tolerance Tradition traffic Transfiguration Transubstantiation travel Trinity trust truth uncertainty United Kingdom universal destination of goods vacation Vatican Vatican II veneration vengeance Veterans Day videos virtue vlog vocations voting war warp drive theory wealth weather wisdom within reason work worship writing

Marian Apparition: Champion, Wisconsin

Background:Posts in this blog: In the news:

What's That Doing in a Nice Catholic Blog?

From time to time, a service that I use will display links to - odd - services and retailers.

I block a few of the more obvious dubious advertisers.

For example: psychic anything, numerology, mediums, and related practices are on the no-no list for Catholics. It has to do with the Church's stand on divination. I try to block those ads.

Sometime regrettable advertisements get through, anyway.

Bottom line? What that service displays reflects the local culture's norms, - not Catholic teaching.