Wednesday, November 30, 2011

The Sea of Galilee, Four Fishermen, and God the Son

Today's Gospel reading is Matthew 4:18-22. It's one that I've heard at intervals, as far back as I can remember: where Jesus says "Come after me..." to Simon Peter and Andrew; and then called the sons of Zebedee, James and John.

I hadn't realized until recently, just how odd the response of those four men was. They were on the job, making a living, when someone comes along and says 'follow me.' I've had jobs that I wasn't all that fond of: but even then, I don't think I'd have dropped what I was doing and walked away from my livelihood.

Here's that reading:
"8 As he was walking by the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon who is called Peter, and his brother Andrew, casting a net into the sea; they were fishermen.

He said to them, 'Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men.'

9 At once they left their nets and followed him.

He walked along from there and saw two other brothers, James, the son of Zebedee, and his brother John. They were in a boat, with their father Zebedee, mending their nets. He called them,

and immediately they left their boat and their father and followed him.
"
(Matthew 4:18-22)
This doesn't look like one of those obscure passages. It's a fairly straightforward, simple narrative: Jesus was walking by the Sea of Galilee; told two fishermen to follow him; they did; then Jesus walked along and did the same thing again.

I could assume that the 'real' meaning is hidden in numeric values assigned to letters in the Hebrew original.1 That's not gonna happen.

I've said this before: Since I'm a Catholic, I don't have to sort out conflicting claims, or try multiplying the number of apostles by the number of times fish are mentioned in Revelation, to figure out what that part of Matthew 'really means.'

Granted, those two footnotes aren't likely to cover all the subtleties, but I'm confident that they cover important points:
"8 [18-22] The call of the first disciples promises them a share in Jesus' work and entails abandonment of family and former way of life. Three of the four, Simon, James, and John, are distinguished among the disciples by a closer relation with Jesus (⇒ Matthew 17:1; ⇒ 26:37)."

"9 [20] Here and in ⇒ Matthew 4:22, as in Mark (⇒ Mark 1:16-20) and unlike the Lucan account (⇒ Luke 5:1-11), the disciples' response is motivated only by Jesus' invitation, an element that emphasizes his mysterious power."
(Footnotes 8, 9, Matthew 4)
On a strictly emotional level, I like the reference to "mysterious power" mentioned in footnote 9.

Jesus: Divine and Human

Focusing strictly on how spiritual and unworldly and inhuman Jesus is - wait, I've mentioned Gnosticism, before. Recently. More to the point, the Church has a few things to say about those heresies: Catechism of the Catholic Church, 285, for example.

Bottom line, God created the physical world. God doesn't make junk. The physical world is basically good. But it's not perfect. Yet. (Catechism, 302)

More recently, I think American culture has swung too far in the other direction: accepting, perhaps grudgingly, that Jesus really existed. But often insisting that He must have been completely, totally, human. Not divine at all.

That's nothing particularly new, either. Nestorians had a problem with the idea that Jesus is I AM (John 8:58) - although they apparently hadn't decided that God shouldn't exist. That seems to be a fairly new twist. More about Jesus, and folks having a hard time accepting God's 'big picture' revelations, in the Catechism, 464-469, 470, 471-474, and a whole lot more.

I can see how folks have had trouble, as the centuries roll by, accepting one basic idea:
"...Jesus Christ is true God and true man...."
(Catechism, 464)
I've read that part of the Catechism, I've thought about what sort of Person my Lord is: and I don't completely understand how God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit work.

I've also read the book of Job, so I don't expect to know as much as God. God's God, I'm not, and I'm okay with that.

Getting back to today's Gospel reading, and that "mysterious power," what those four men did isn't really that odd. Under the circumstances. They'd heard God's voice - quite literally - giving them a clear, simple, instruction. Then they apparently decided that God the Almighty outranked their father, their job, or any other concern they had.

Two millennia later, even though I grew up with the American work ethic: I think they made the right decision. And, in my own way, I'm trying to do the same thing: follow Jesus.

Sort-of-related posts:
1 Hebrew? Greek? Latin? What about Aramaic? Like I've said before, the Catholic Church's 'official language' is Latin. But we're multi-lingual. There's a Latin translation of the Bible: also a Greek translation, the Septuagint, the original Hebrew for the Old Testament, and translations into regional and trade languages like English.

With a history spanning several thousand years, working with Sacred Scripture can get interesting:
"...We are told by the Gospel of Matthew that when Jesus, in response to Peter's confession of faith, announced the establishment of "his Church"--"Upon this rock I will build my Church" (Mt 16:18)--he employed a term whose common usage at the time and in various passages of the Old Testament allows us to discover its semantic value. It must be said that the Greek text of Matthew's Gospel uses here the express mou ten ekklesían. This word ekklesía was used in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Bible dating from the second century B.C.) to translate the Hebrew qahà l and the corresponding Aramaic qahalà , which Jesus probably used in his response to Simon Peter. This fact is the point of departure for our lexical analysis of Jesus' announcement...."
("Christ's Call Establishes the Church," Pope John Paul II (July 20, 1991))
The English-language document I got that from uses the Latin alphabet to express Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic words. Which is just as well. I've got Hebrew fonts on my system, but not everybody does. Don't be too impressed at how 'spiritual' I am, to have those fonts. I've also got fonts for Chinese, Arabic, and a few other languages that I wanted to see without transliteration.

Then there are my Lord's words from the Cross, which include:
"And at three o'clock Jesus cried out in a loud voice, 'Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?' 14 which is translated, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' "
(Mark 15:34)
And that's a lot more topics.

More, partly about language:

Monday, November 28, 2011

Lie and Hype for a Good Cause?!

This post is a follow-up to:

Earlier today, I wrote about the curious lack of adult stem cell research news coverage.

There's plenty about embryonic stem cell research, how it's
  • Vital to progress in the medical sciences
    • By implication
  • Only possible with embryonic stem cells
    • By omission
  • Opposed by people who are
    • By implication
      • Uncaring
      • Backward
      • Science-hating
      • Against progress in the medical sciences
    • Because they are against (embryonic) stem cell research
Sometimes old-school journalists even mention that a protest is over embryonic stem cell research. Is that list over-simplified? Yes: but I think it's fairly accurate caricature of what the 'better' news outlets do.

'Whatever It Takes?'

Would this be wrong?
  • Getting upset about biased news coverage
  • Telling myself that 'the end justifies the means'
  • Blogging about 'facts' that I make up as I go along
I could tell myself that I'm 'fighting the good fight' for a noble cause.

And I'd be wrong.

That's not just my opinion.

"The end does not justify the means."

It's possible to feel good about 'doing evil, that good may follow.'

But that's not the way we're supposed to act:
" 'An evil action cannot be justified by reference to a good intention' (cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Dec. praec. 6). The end does not justify the means."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1759)
Knowing what I do about cause and effect, consequences, and my particular judgment: I think I'd better not try the 'do evil that good may follow' trick.

Sticks, Stones, and Hurt

Maybe the little rhyme, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me," is still be part of American culture.

Insults and verbal abuse don't leave physical evidence, but the notion that "words will never hurt me" is wrong.

I think false witness and perjury are obvious examples. (Catechism, 2476) More socially-acceptable distortions of truth can hurt, too, and that's almost another topic.1

Lies

As I said earlier today, the Catholic Church thinks truth is important. (Catechism, 2464-2503)

So far, I suspect that most folks might go along with the idea that truth is nice. There's a sort of flip side to that idea, though:
" 'A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving.281 The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil: 'You are of your father the devil, . . . there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.'282

"Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error. By injuring man's relation to truth and to his neighbor, a lie offends against the fundamental relation of man and of his word to the Lord."
(Catechism, 2482-2483)
I don't think I'm distorting the meaning of those paragraphs by pulling out a few key points:
  • Lying is
    • Speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving
    • the most direct offense against the truth
    • The work of the devil
  • A lie
    • Injures
      • Man's2 relation to
        • Truth
        • His2 neighbor
    • Offends against
      • The fundamental relation to the Lord, of
        • Man
        • Man's word
Basically, 'lying hurts people and we shouldn't do it.'

Setting the Record Straight

Let's say I decide that lying is out of the question, and that I shouldn't even distort the truth. What's left?
"...[senior fellow at the Discovery Institute's Center on Human Exceptionalism and lawyer Wesley J.] Smith said that in order to counteract this dynamic, alternative media 'has to keep setting the record straight' and stay factually accurate in their reporting.

" 'In doing so, it is important that they not engage in the same journalistic malpractice from the other side,' he noted. 'In other words, stick to the facts and don’t engage in the same kind of hype that the pro-embryonic stem cell research media have.'

"Smith also said it's necessary to remind people 'that the field is still young and many of the encouraging adult stem cell successes constitute early experimentation.'..."

"Critic points out media bias against adult stem cells"
Marianne Medlin, CNA (Catholic News Agency) (November 25, 2011)
I think Wesley J. Smith probably had outfits like CNA (Catholic News Agency) in mind, when he said "alternative media." Smith's advice can be applied to 'alternative-alternative media,' too. Like this blog.

Information Technology, Freedom, and Me

Information technology has taken 'getting published' out of the hands of a relatively small number of the 'better sort.' These days, just about anybody can set up a blog and start 'publishing' their views: even this middle-aged guy living in central Minnesota.

This opening of the 'marketplace of ideas' to folks who don't know the 'right people,' say the 'proper' things, or have the 'correct' beliefs, is a mixed blessing. Online, I can get access to:
  • The Bible
  • Pornography
  • The Amazon.com 'bookstore'
    • That sells stuff from appliances to watches
  • Photos of rabbits
  • Up-to-date, detailed, weather information
  • Poorly-drawn cartoons
  • Blogs
    • Like this one
    • That aren't anything like this one
This is most emphatically not the America I grew up in. And I like it.

That's not the way everybody feels. Quite a few folks like the 'good old days,' when folks like me would probably never get our thoughts and opinions past the information gatekeepers.3

Wanting to maintain the status quo can make folks to odd things: like when the Christian Coalition and Feminist Majority joined forces. They wanted a government agency to decide who was allowed to put stuff online: and who was allowed to see it. I'm not making that up.

Happily, we're still allowed to speak our minds.

And that's another topic.

Related posts:
In the news:
Background:

1 I've gotten the distinct impression that the Church doesn't approve of "unjust injury," even when it's the sort that doesn't leave a bruise:
"Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.278 He becomes guilty:
  • of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
  • "of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another's faults and failings to persons who did not know them;279
  • "of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them."
(Catechism, 2477)
2 The word "man" is three letters long. The phrase "all human kind, regardless of race, creed, color, gender, lifestyle choices, economic status, or sex," isn't. Like it or not, "man" and "he" are recognized English usage to mean "all people," and "some generic person." I've done time in American academia, am glad I'm out, and am not about to start writing things like "siblinghood of person," when there's a simpler, saner, way of getting an idea across.

This excerpt says about the same thing, but more diplomatically:
"...When the meaning of the Greek is inclusive of both sexes, the translation seeks to reproduce such inclusivity insofar as this is possible in normal English usage, without resort to inelegant circumlocutions or neologisms that would offend against the dignity of the language...." (Preface the Revised Edition of the New Testament)
3 An information gatekeeper is someone who controls access to information. Traditional information gatekeepers in America included:
  • Newspaper editors
  • Teachers and organizations of teachers
  • Leaders of colleges and universities
  • Entertainment industry executives
  • Publishers of books and magazines
I discussed the declining influence of traditional information gatekeepers in another blog:

Stem Cell Research, Assumptions, and Getting a Grip

All stem cell research is important, and should be in the news.

I'll get back to that, after reminiscing about the 'good old days.' There's a connection.

The 'Good Old Days' - Weren't

I remember the 'good old days,' when many 'regular Americans' saw the world as one big battleground between dirty communists and America. It wasn't an entirely simplistic world view. These folks sometimes went after Americans they thought were commie sympathizers, and that's another topic.

Don't get me wrong: I like living in America. I think there's a reason that folks are trying to break into this country. I also think that communist leaders have a far-from-unblemished record; and that no country or system of government is even close to being perfect.1

Stem Cell Research

"Critic points out media bias against adult stem cells"
Marianne Medlin, CNA (Catholic News Agency) (November 25, 2011)

"After researchers in California called off a major U.S. embryonic stem cell study, a legal expert says that most major news outlets have given zero coverage to the far superior benefits of adult stem cells.

" 'Since embryonic stem cells were first derived, the media has told a materially unbalanced story,' said Wesley J. Smith, a lawyer and senior fellow at the Discovery Institute's Center on Human Exceptionalism.

"Smith said in a Nov. 23 interview with CNA that successful adult stem cell clinical trials 'have either been ignored totally, or generally underplayed as story after story has claimed adult approaches offer more limited benefits than embryonic.'..."
I don't know why old-school journalists don't seem to know about research or applications involving adult stem cells.

Maybe there's a deliberate effort to make 'the Masses' believe that:
  • Life-saving medical research depends on embryonic stem cells
  • Abortion centers provide a steady stream of dead "embryos"
  • Any opposition to abortion, therefore, is
    • Anti-science
    • Anti-medicine
    • Anti-woman
    • And pretty much icky
Or maybe traditional American journalists simply never imagined that adult stem cells were useful. After all, the 'right' folks keep telling journalists about embryonic stem cells: and adult stem cells are what Catholics and other outsiders talk about.

Assumptions

I think it's very easy for folks to believe that what 'everybody knows' is true. Particularly when 'everybody' is a relatively small, somewhat insulated, set of friends and acquaintances. Or when 'everybody' is part of a majority that also has a great deal of economic, social, and political power.

Back in the 'good old days,' when America was more of a WASP nest than it is now, I think quite a few folks took chauvinistic patriotism at least somewhat seriously.

That was then, this is now. The folks who hold the reins in today's America aren't any more solidly attached to reality as the Frank Burns types, and I've been over this before.2

Getting a Grip

I could rant about 'those Satanic people over there,' and how we must do anything it takes to end abortion now.

The end justifies the means, right?

Wrong!
" 'An evil action cannot be justified by reference to a good intention' (cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Dec. praec. 6). The end does not justify the means." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1759)
The Catholic Church thinks truth is important. (Catechism, 2464-2503)

We're also told that lying is wrong. (Catechism, 2482-2486)

Following the 'but he started it' principle, I could decide start using the same sort of hype as old-school news media. But lying, or distorting truth, is against the rules: and that's a topic for another post.
Updated (November 28, 2011, 9:03 PM)

I wrote about lies, distortions, and rules, here:
Related posts:In the news:
1 I've discussed cultural biases and blind spots, past and present, before:2 Insularity may be easier to maintain with relatively small groups who are physically isolated from the rest of the world. Folks whose world is urban American aren't immune, though. And those who live in an insular subculture and control traditional information media may be particularly resistant to unfamiliar ideas:

Gluttonous Friars, and the Great Faustian Helicopter Chase


New post about Marlowe's
"The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" each Monday

Last week's post started with a longish 'as you recall in our last episode' rehash of what Doctor John Faustus, the 'Boys from Below,' and all, had been up to. I'm giving brevity a try this week.

Christopher Marlowe's Faustus has flip-flopped. A lot, rather abruptly snapping:
  • From a terror-stricken repentance
  • To an apparent disinterested viewing of the seven deadly sins
  • To wanting a look at Hell
That's where I'll pick up the action:

Faustus and the Helpful Demons

"...FAUSTUS. O, might I see hell, and return again,
How happy were I then!


"LUCIFER. Thou shalt; I will send for thee at midnight.110
In meantime take this book; peruse it throughly,
[!]
And thou shalt turn thyself into what shape thou wilt....
"
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
We'll see how reliable LUCIFER is, when it comes to timetables. I've harangued before, about how reliable demons are, as business partners: and why Mephistopheles, Lucifer, and company, are so willing to 'help' Faustus.1

Faustus seems to have gotten flip-flopping out if his system for the moment, and is in his 'mighty Lucifer! Great Lucifer!' mode:
"...FAUSTUS. Great thanks, mighty Lucifer!
This will I keep as chary as my life.


"LUCIFER. Farewell, Faustus, and think on the devil.

" FAUSTUS. Farewell, great Lucifer...."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")

Elizabethan England, 1604, and All That

Next, Lucifer and Belzebub leave Faustus and Mephistopheles. We'd write "Beelzebub," on this side of the Atlantic, in this century, and that's another topic.

Or, maybe not so much of another topic. Elizabethan English isn't quite the language that's spoken in England today, and quite a lot has happened in the four centuries since Marlowe's play opened.

I think it's a mistake to expect Christopher Marlowe to fit into one American academia's contemporary pigeonholes; or treat "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" as if it were written by someone who either understood - or cared about - theology. I strongly suspect that Marlowe was mostly interested in writing a rip-roaring good yarn that would pack audiences in.

Doctor John Faustus, Mad Scientists, and All That

Granted, I compared Marlowe's Faustus to the 20th century mad scientist movies.2 But I was careful about how I phrased that:
"...Recently, the Faustian morality tale got recycled as the B-movie Mad Scientist. The one who meddled with things that Man Was Not Meant to Know...."
(September 20, 2011)
The 'recycling' job involved much more than re-naming John Faustus, and putting him in a white lab coat: and that's yet another topic.3

Elizabethan Drama, Movies, and Getting a Grip

I'd like to think that there aren't many folks who really believe that 'we can learn so much from the movies.' On the other hand, a friend of mine would watch a movie to learn about some subject.

Using his methods, someone wanting to learn about African economics would watch "Jungle Drums of Africa," and I've ranted about that sort of thing before.4

I don't think that people have changed all that much since 1604, when "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" was first published; or since Socrates said: "Envy is the ulcer of the soul."

I think it's reasonable to think that Christopher Marlowe had entertainment in mind when he wrote his "...Faustus." That, and earning money. I also think it's likely that a fair number of folks who saw "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" thought they were getting educated.

Which they were, sort of.

The Great Faustian Helicopter Chase

Helicopter chase?! That heading looks very odd, considering that:
  • Neither of us are living in Elizabethan England
  • Helicopters hadn't been invented when Christopher Marlowe was around
  • "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" isn't a movie
So what's with "The Great Faustian Helicopter Chase?!"

Getting chased by an aircraft was arguably exciting when Hitchcock filmed "North by Northwest" in 1959.

Trust me: this relates to Faustus. Sort of.

Helicopters replaced airplanes a decade or so later. I remember 'the good old days,' when it felt like most movies, and many television shows had to have a helicopter chase. I don't miss 'the good old days' all that much.

Marlowe's audiences wouldn't have expected helicopters. But they do seem to have liked long-winded speeches. I've mentioned Shakespeare's soliloquies before.

Four centuries later, lines like this aren't quite as entrancing:
"...Graven in the book of Jove's high firmament..."
"He now is gone to prove cosmography,
And, as I guess, will first arrive at Rome,
"
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
Four hundred years from now, folks may wonder how we sat through helicopter chases: and that's yet again another topic.

Faustus, Mephistopheles, and Travelogues

Faustus and Mephistopheles come back onstage a little while after Chorus stop talking about those two going to Rome.

I'll skip the long spiel Faustus has, apart from this sample:
"...Trier,114
Environ'd round with airy mountain-tops,
With walls of flint, and deep-entrenched lakes,
Not to be won by any conquering prince;
From Paris next,115 coasting the realm of France,...
"

"...fruitful vines;
Then up to Naples, rich Campania,
Whose buildings fair and gorgeous to the eye,
The streets straight forth, and pav'd with finest...
"
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
Faustus is basically giving a travelogue. Minus the illustrations, probably. Nothing wrong with that, and like I said: Elizabethan audiences seemed to like this sort of thing.

Juicy Lines, Gluttonous Friars

Mephistopheles gives a speech that's mostly another lecture-only travelogue, and then gets to some more juicy lines:
"...MEPHIST. Nay, Faustus, stay: I know you'd fain see the Pope,
And take some part of holy Peter's feast,
Where thou shalt see a troop of bald-pate friars,
Whose summum bonum is in belly-cheer....
"
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
Now that's more like it. After speeches that the Elizabethan upper crust might have been more likely to appreciate, here's something that everybody could dig their teeth into: a demon showing off some of those evil, greedy, worldly, and definitely un-English Catholic friars! I've gone on about Henry VII and that sort of thing before.5

Marlowe's audience might have been more familiar with Latin than most English-speaking folks are these days. Remember: it wasn't all that long, since Henry VIII had decided to be his own pope. "Summum bonum" comes through Google Translate as "the highest good."

The Catholic Church: Two Millennia of SNAFUs

I don't know if Catholic friars had the sort of obesity problems that many Americans have today. It's possible, though. Catholics aren't perfect people, and some Saints earned a rep for whipping their religious order into shape.

Then there was Pope St. Gregory VII, who "was a dedicated reformer, or an enormous pain in the neck." (September 1, 2009) How folks saw him may have depended on whether or not St. Gregory VII was sorting them out.

I've discussed the Catholic Church's wildly improbable survival before. The bottom line, as I see it, is that we're getting outside help. Which is exactly what the Catholic Church has been saying for about two millennia now. (August 18, 2010)

'Satanic,' Sincerity, and Sheen

In a way, things haven't changed all that much in the last four centuries. Not in the English-speaking world, anyway.

In some circles, folks are still convinced that the Catholic Church is Satanic:


(Chick Publications, via FoxNews.com, used w/o permission)

Folks with that sort of view are probably sincere. But being sincere doesn't mean being right. I've used this quote before:
"There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church - which is, of course, quite a different thing."
(Bishop Fulton Sheen, Foreword to Radio Replies Vol. 1, (1938) page ix, via Wikiquote)
Other posts in this series:Slightly-related posts:
Background:
  • Gluttony is one of the seven capital sins
    (Catechism, 1866)
  • Capital sins
    • "are called 'capital' because they engender other sins, other vices"
      (Catechism, 1866)
  • Greed / avarice is a sin, too
    (Catechism, 2536)
"...Faustus" excerpts in these posts taken from:

1 Christopher Marlowe's Doctor John Faustus has a knack for asking sensible questions, and either ignoring or forgetting the answers:
2 "X: The Man with the X-Ray Eyes" and other 'mad scientist' movies aren't direct adaptations from the old 'Faust' stories. They're so similar in theme and 'message,' that I'd rather believe that 20th-century screenwriters consciously adapted an old story to a new setting. And a new set of fears.
3 It took quite a lot of work to change Doctor John Faustus into the fellows we met in cinematographic presentations such as:
I think Faustus and the standard-issue mad scientist share the same sort of confusion over what they are, and how much they can know:
"Dr. James Xavier: I'm blind to all but a tenth of the universe.
"Dr. Sam Brant: My dear friend, only the gods see everything.
"Dr. James Xavier: My dear doctor, I'm closing in on the gods."
(X: The Man with the X-Ray Eyes)
Then there's 'science,' cinema, and silliness:
  • 1965
    • Germ warfare kills lots of people
  • 1968
    • Insane computer kills crewmates
  • 1970
    • Massive supercomputer is built
    • Takes over the world
  • 1971
    • Germ warfare
    • Zombies
  • 1974
    • Killer robots
    • No zombies
  • 1976
    • A nice, neat, orderly society
      • Where life is groovy
      • Until you hit 30
      • Then you die
      • Then a crazed cop kills the master computer
  • 1978
    • Killer bees kill lots of people
    • And make a nuclear reactor 'go critical'
  • 1979
    • Set in a "dystopic future Australia"
    • Cop
    • Biker gang
    • Vendetta
    • No zombies
  • 1981
    • Set in a "dystopic future Australia," again
    • Cynical drifter
    • Small community
    • Bandits
    • Still no zombies
  • 1984
    • Evil computer mastermind
    • Determined killer cyborg
    • Threat of nuclear apocalypse
  • 1984
    • Toxic waste turns small town citizens into mutant flesh-eating zombies
    • A movie with a message
  • 1987
    • Yet another post-apocalyptic world
      • Warrior
      • Desert
      • Settlers
      • Gang
  • 1987
    • A nuclear/biological war killed all the men
      • Except one dude
      • Who's held captive by women
    • And there are these giant mutant frogs
    • Really: I'm not making this up!
  • 1999
    • Humanity makes an artificial intelligence
    • That takes over the world
Some of those were marketed as 'science fiction,' others as relevant cinema. What I see is a long string of movies playing up fears that computers are evil, science is bad, and we're all gonna die. Horribly. Except for improbably-colorful biker gangs and settlers.

Also giant mutant frogs.

I adapted that list from something I did in another blog:4 For someone wanting to learn about, say, penguins, the trick would be to distinguishing between films like "March of the Penguins" (2005), and "Happy Feet" (2006). I'd like to think that's a silly example, but - remember 2012? Some of my related rants, in another blog:5 I don't think that Henry VIII of England was necessarily interested in the theological angle, when he set himself up as a mini-pope. His personal knock-off of the Catholic Church wasn't all that different from the original, at least when it came to appearances. I think Henry VIII's main concern was having a proper Englishman running his church: so that he could get divorces that would stand up in an English court. 'It's good to be king.' Sort of.

Sunday, November 27, 2011

New Roman Missal, Advent 2011: Snits and Sense

The new Roman Missal was blessed during Mass this morning, down the street at Our Lady of the Angels church. We also started celebrating the Mass, using the new Roman Missal.

It's going to take a while, before I get used to the new words. During one of the responses we sing, I got in several words of the old version before getting smart and reading from that little card.


We've been practicing with these "Pew Cards," from AndWithYourSpirit.com, for a few weeks. (November 20, 2011)

New Roman Missal: We're Getting it Right

This is the first Sunday when Catholics in America, and around the world, have been celebrating Mass with the New Roman Missal.

We've been getting 'heads up' messages about it for more than a year - and the parishes here in Sauk Centre have spent the last few weeks practicing some of the parts. Like "and with your spirit." (Not the 'good old-fashioned' "and also with you.")

I haven't noticed anyone complaining that 'nobody told us about this,' but maybe you have. There have been the predictable complaints. And sensible statements.1

Everything I've heard and read about the new Missal, from folks who understand Catholicism and know Latin, is that the New Roman Missal isn't so much a revision of the English translation, as a correction.

I don't know how or why words like credo got - imaginatively? - translated, back when grooviness was in the air: but this time, someone made sure the translation was (much) more accurate.

New Roman Missal: IT AIN'T AMERICAN!! (or Irish, or Australian, or Andorran, or - - - )

I don't know what's going on in other people's minds - which is just as well. I have enough trouble, trying to keep myself on-track, and that's another topic.

I also wasn't at all surprised to find this in the news:
"...thousands of other Catholics, including some bishops in the U.S., Ireland and Australia, are criticizing it as 'archaic' and 'convoluted,' with some worrying the theology is too 'exclusivist.' One Seattle priest, Michael Ryan, creator of a website called 'What if we just said wait?' has attracted more than 22,000 protest signatures from leading Catholic clergy, liturgists, musicians and lay people...."
(The Vancouver Sun)(and yes, I know: Vancouver is in Canada)
Like I said, I don't know what happens in another person's mind. My guess, though, is that some of the "protest signatures" are from folks who are annoyed that the Catholic Church isn't acting like the decent American (or Irish, or Australian, or Andorran - or whatever) church they feel it is.

I've gotten used to old-school journalists focusing on a marginal, but groovy, set of folks, and that's yet another topic.

I'm not particularly upset that The Vancouver Sun found some American bishops who didn't feel good about the new Missal. There were times, from 1058 to 1181, and again from 1316 1447, when we had the Pope: and up to four ersatz Popes running around.2 Things could be a lot worse.

It's the Catholic Church

Reality check: the Catholic Church is in America, and Ireland, and Australia, and Andorra. But we're not part of an American, Irish, Australian, or Andorran church. The Catholic Church is - literally - the Universal Church.

I think the confusion comes partly from the decision to translate Ecclesia into my Germanic language - but leave "Catholica" pretty much alone, apart from dropping the final vowel. And that's yet again another topic.

Our official language is Latin. Yet again more topics.

Like it or not, the reality is that documents like the Catechismus Catholicae Ecclesiae (Catechism of the Catholic Church) are in Latin: not English, or German, or 中文 (繁體 or 简体).

Time to Switch Off the Autopilot

The 'it's not fair!' response to the New Roman Missal wasn't nearly as universal as it may seem in some of America's better Starbucks.3 Not as far as I could tell, anyway.

I've run into a fair number of folks who knew that the new Missal was coming, why it was coming, and aren't offended at living in a world where everybody isn't pretty much just like them:
"...It's going to take me some getting used to (after a lifetime of ritual responses, I'm practically on autopilot!), and I'm sure there will be some moments of self-conscious laughter in the pews, but I'm ready for the 'new' Roman Missal."
(Sister Anne Flanagan)
Of course, I'm one of those Catholics who take their faith seriously, and who realize that the world is larger than their circle of friends and acquaintances.

Maybe I'm being unfair: and that's, good grief, one more topic.

I found Sister Anne Flanagan's post refreshing. Particularly what she said about being "on autopilot." I'm a convert to Catholicism, so my 'autopilot' has been reprogrammed a few more times than a 'cradle Catholic's.' But today I discovered that quite a bit of what I do during Mass is - habit.

I suppose the trick will be to keep paying attention to what I say and do - after the New Roman Missal becomes a habit.

Related posts:
News and views:
Background:

1 Excerpts from "News and views:"
"Changes to the Mass are not American, but universal"
Sister Anne Flanagan, Daughter of St. Paul and author of Nun Blog, The Seeker blog, Chicago Tribune (November 26, 2011)

"For the third time in the lifetime of some Catholics, the Mass is changing. One gentleman came into my community's downtown bookstore very upset by all this. To him, the new translation of the Mass prayers (which go into effect on the First Sunday of Advent—tonight, practically speaking) can only mean that things were going 'backwards,' to a time 'before Vatican II.'

"He wasn't much mollified when I mentioned that what we'll be hearing are the words that Vatican II gave us (plus some new things, courtesy of Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI). 'We don't speak like this,' he replied. 'It's not how we Americans express ourselves.' And he was right.

"Cardinal Francis George has been closely involved with the whole process, exercising the Latin skills he acquired in his priestly training when everything-including the classroom lectures-was done in Latin. He recently commented that the new translation had to accommodate the needs of English speaking Catholics in some 30 nations. For all its ungainliness in some respects, the translation is another sign of the universality of our prayer.

" 'The Lord be with you: And with your spirit.' 'Through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault.' 'I am not worthy that you should come under my roof...' It's clear that these words we will hear and speak and offer to God are not our own...."

"On Sunday Catholics return to 'mea culpa,' English version"
The Vancouver Sun (November 25, 2011)

"Are Roman Catholics ready for Sunday? On that day they will be exposed to the biggest change in four decades in what they will hear, recite, sing and do during their main church ritual.

"Canada is one of 11 English-speaking countries in which tens of millions of Catholics will begin Sunday to adopt the Vatican’s English translation of the old Latin liturgy. The date, Nov. 27, marks the first day of Advent and the beginning of the Christian calendar.

"The Vancouver archdiocese is among hundreds busily trying to educate the roughly 400,000 nominal Catholics in the region about what to expect Sunday, including an English-language version of the penitential Latin 'mea culpa.'
The revised mass – the central act of worship – is being praised by most Catholic leaders and traditional faithful as more 'reverential' and 'scriptural.'


"However, thousands of other Catholics, including some bishops in the U.S., Ireland and Australia, are criticizing it as 'archaic' and 'convoluted,' with some worrying the theology is too 'exclusivist.' One Seattle priest, Michael Ryan, creator of a website called 'What if we just said wait?' has attracted more than 22,000 protest signatures from leading Catholic clergy, liturgists, musicians and lay people...."

2 Source:3 Yes, I know: Starbucks is an international coffee company, serving ethical coffee, that started in Seattle, Washington.

God Doesn't Make Junk: Or Mistakes

I watched a documentary called "The Human Family Tree" this week. National Geographic's summary of their 90-minute DVD reads, in part:
"Join geneticist Spencer Wells and a team of technicians from National Geographic's Genographic Project as they trace the human journey through time and space, from our origins in the heart of Africa to the ends of the world. Cutting edge science, coupled with a cast of New Yorkers...."
("The Human Family Tree," DVD, National Geographic Store)
With a copyright date of 2009, the "cutting edge science" probably isn't quite so much now: but it's still fairly contemporary.

Genetics, Science, and Getting a Grip

I enjoyed seeing a selection of folks living in New York City react to information about their very distant ancestors. The documentary showed how genetic markers trace the New Yorkers' forebears back, over thousands of generations.

"Enjoyed?" Maybe that sounds odd, coming from a 'religious person:'
  • I'm a Catholic
    • And take my faith very seriously
  • Genetics is a science
    • 'Everybody knows' that science is against religion
      • And vice versa
In this case, 'everybody' is wrong.

Despite what shrill secularists and latter-day Know Nothings claim, science and religion aren't absolutely opposite ways of thinking. Not for someone who learns what the Catholic Church says:
"...'methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.'...."
(Gaudium et spes, quoted in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 159)

God, Creation, and Knowledge

The way I see it:
  • God created everything
    (Catechism, 268)
  • We're supposed to seek God
    (Catechism, 1)
  • We can learn some things about God by studying what He created
    (Catechism, 31-36, 282-289)
    • But God has revealed more about Himself, than what's in creation
      (Catechism, 37-38)
One place where we can get into trouble is confusing God's creation with God. Or assuming that God doesn't exist because there's a physical world.

Then there's the idea that 'ignorance is next to Godliness,' or that avoiding knowledge is a virtue.

"The Sky Proclaims Its Builder's Craft"

I see creation as a world of wonder. I also think that not studying the created world is a strange way to honor God the Creator.

The Church doesn't seem to have a problem with paying attention to creation. (Catechism, 280, 282-289) Particularly since "The world was made for the glory of God," and "Creation reveals God's Glory" (Catechism 293-294; "Creation Reveals God's Glory," Pope John Paul II (March 12, 1986))

Again, it's idolizing creation, or some creature, that gets us in trouble. (Catechism, 2112-2114)

Among other things. Job 5:7, and all that.

For me, ignoring what we've learned about creation would feel like saying, "I'll worship you, God: but I refuse to be interested in stuff that glorifies you." That approach to the Almighty isn't quite disrespectful - but it seems odd, to deliberately avoid knowledge about what God has spread across the skies:
"The heavens declare the glory of God; the sky proclaims its builder's craft."
(Psalms 19:2)

"Hallelujah! 1 Praise the LORD from the heavens; give praise in the heights."
(Psalms 148:1)

"Praise him, sun and moon; give praise, all shining stars."
(Psalms 148:3)
I put an excerpt from "Jubilee of Scientists," Pope John Paul II (May 25, 2000) at the end of this post.1 I think these are some key points from that excerpt:
  • Science
    • "...Was considered the only criterion of truth or way to happiness...."
      • In past centuries
      • By some folks
      • Sometimes
    • Reveals
      • Laws which govern the universe
        • Their interrelationships
    • Draws people toward God
      • "...all research ... gives man the possibility of discovering the Creator...."
  • Some folks felt that God wasn't 'scientific'
  • Faith
    • Integrates all research
    • Deepens understanding
    ("Jubilee of Scientists," Pope John Paul II (May 25, 2000))
I don't see that studying God's creation is being criticized.

Dualism, Creation, and a Sticky Science

I suspect that a dislike of science has roots far deeper than the 19th century. For at least a couple thousand years, some folks have been diffident, at best, about the physical world. I've mentioned two high-profile dualistic heresies before: Manichaeism, and Gnosticism. (Catechism, 285)

Gnosticism says that the physical world is evil, which is uncomfortably close to some contemporary Western notions about what 'being spiritual' is.

The Church says that "God creates an ordered and good world." (Catechism, 299) I had no problem accepting that idea. Living in a part of the world with dramatic seasonal changes, but where water melts again each spring, may have helped.

Then there's the sticky, icky, side of biology. Let's face it: living things can be messy.

God: Large and In Charge

Maybe I wouldn't have thought of making a physical creation on the scale that God did: but I'm not going to tell the Almighty, "you can't do that." I've read the book of Job, particularly Job 38-41.

We've learned a few things in the two-dozen-plus centuries since someone wrote Job, but the bottom line hasn't changed. God is large and in charge:
"Then Job answered the LORD and said: 1 I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be hindered. I have dealt with great things that I do not understand; things too wonderful for me, which I cannot know. I had heard of you by word of mouth, but now my eye has seen you. Therefore I disown what I have said, and repent in dust and ashes." (Job 42:1-7)
I don't expect to know everything about God's creation, much less why God did things the way He did. But I'm pretty sure that
  • God doesn't make junk
  • Giving us brains and curiosity wasn't a mistake
  • Knowledge of the Infinite God is beyond our abilities
    • But that we're supposed to
      • Be curious
      • Use the reason God gave us
I don't know that I'd quite call it a downside, but being a reasoning, rational, being does raise some issues:
"God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. 'God willed that man should be "left in the hand of his own counsel," so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him.'26
"Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.27"
(Catechism, 1730)
And that's another topic. Somewhat-related posts:
Links to yet more slightly-related posts:
From National Geographic:
Background:

1 Excerpt from "Jubilee of Scientists," Pope John Paul II (May 25, 2000):
"In past centuries, science, whose discoveries are fascinating, has held a dominant place and at times was considered the only criterion of truth or way to happiness. A reflection based exclusively on scientific elements tried to accustom us to a culture of suspicion and doubt. It refused to consider the existence of God or to view man in the mystery of his origin and his end, as if this perspective might call science itself into question. It sometimes saw God merely as a mental construct which would not stand up to scientific knowledge. These attitudes have estranged science from man and from the service it is called to offer him...."

"...Based on an attentive observation of the complexity of terrestrial phenomena, and following the object and method proper to each dicipline,[!] scientists discover the laws which govern the universe, as well as their interrelationship. They stand in wonderment and humility before the created order and feel drawn to the love of the Author of all things. Faith, for its part, is able to integrate and assimilate every research, for all research, through a deeper understanding of created reality in all its specificity, gives man the possibility of discovering the Creator, source and goal of all things. "Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made" (Rom 1:20)...."
("Jubilee of Scientists," Pope John Paul II (May 25, 2000))

First Sunday of Advent, 2011: Joy, Peace, Love, and a Dog Named Rollo

Readings for November 27, 2011, First Sunday of Advent 2011:

First Sunday in Advent 2011

By Deacon Lawrence N. Kaas
November 27, 2011

Deacon Dick Folger writes what he calls "Sermon Starters" in a publication that I get, that could be called 'watchful and alert.'

He writes:
"From Advent darkness will come a great light, just as a glorious dawn paints the morning sky. In today's Gospel Mark reminds us to be vigilant. We never know when we will be called to judgment.

"Perhaps we need to be like a guard dog always alert for intruders, even when sleeping. One exception was Rollo, a big bloodhound. Like a good guard dog, he always napped at the entrance of his owner's little country store. A stranger noticed a sign at the store entrance, warning, 'Danger! Beware of dog.' Looking down at the snoring Rollo, he asked the owner, 'Is that the dog folks are supposed to beware of?'

" 'Yep, that's him.'

"The stranger was amused. 'He certainly doesn't look like a dangerous dog to me. Why in the world did you post that sing?'
'Because, the owner explained, before I posted that sign, people kept tripping over him."
"
Now maybe Rollo wasn't the best watch dog, but he sure put himself in position of guardian. Sometimes we have to be like Rollo and be tripped over to come to attention.

This first Sunday of the new Church year gives us all kinds of reasons to come to attention. Keeping in mind the last sentence of our Gospel today.
"May He not come suddenly and find you sleeping. What I say to you, I say to all: 'Watch!' "
Mark's Gospel is a reminder that Christ is always seeking to enter our world and our lives with joy, peace, and love.

Fr. Thomas Merton has expressed his own experience of God this way.
"Whether you understand or not, God loves you, is present to you, lives in you, calls you, saves you and offers you an understanding and light which are like nothing you ever found in books or sermons.... If you dare to penetrate you own silence.... and risk the sharing of that silence with the lonely other who seeks God through and with you, then you will recover the light and the capacity to understand what is beyond words. It is the intimate union of God's Spirit and your own intimate self, so that you and God are, in all truth, one."
This takes place in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and that is why the Church has worked so hard to get the new translation right. It appears that until now we have were praying in prose while now with the new translation we are praying in poetry. Not that there was anything wrong using prose but poetry has a beauty to it that is most respectful of God to whom we address our prayer and worship.

Our Bishop reminded us in the Visitor this week:
"The celebration of Mass, as the action of Christ and of the People of God, arrayed hierarchically, is the center of the whole of Christian life for the Church both universal and local, as well as for each of the faithful individually."
Yes, I know, with all the preparation that has been going on we will not really be able to claim this new liturgy until we have used it. But the best of what I see is that we will have to pay attention, Father and us, too, as every Word is important. Finally we will come to the realization the most important activity of the day is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

'Thank you' to Deacon Kaas, for letting me post his reflection here.
More reflections:Vaguely-related posts:

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.