Showing posts with label exorcism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label exorcism. Show all posts

Sunday, December 1, 2013

Going to Hell With Dante

Jan Van der Straet/Stradanus, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.
"...There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them. They themselves are equally pleased by both errors and hail a materialist or a magician with the same delight...."
(C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, via C.S. Lewis Quotes, About.com)
I think quite a few folks still enthusiastically commit both errors: not that the same person would be likely to nurture a Faustian fascination with the demonic and insist that demons, angels, and all things spiritual are nonsense. Marlowe's Doctor Faustus nearly does so: but he's a character in an Elizabethan drama. (October 10, 2011)

The "excessive and unhealthy interest" in devils that Lewis discussed isn't, I think, limited to folks who try to make demons work for them. Colorful faith healers of earlier generations and folks who see no problem with do-it-yourself exorcisms don't enjoy a prominent place in American society today, which is just as well.

Knowing my Limits

I have the same authority to cast out demons that any other Christian has: but I'm not an exorcist. Prayers like "Saint Michael, the archangel" and sprinkling holy water are pretty close to my limit.

I'm no more qualified to go toe-to-toe with Satan, than I am ready to join a SWAT team. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1506, 1668, 1673; Code of Canon Law, 1172)

I don't think holy water, or the words of any prayer, are magic, by the way. That would be superstition: which is against the rules. Using holy water reminds me of my baptism, it's a sacramental, and that's another topic. Topics. (Catechism, 1667-1673, 2111)

Jonathan Edwards, Mark Twain, and Me

Jonathan Edwards didn't invent Hell, but his "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" sermon helped popularize it in America: sort of.

Back in 1741, when Edwards wrote "...Angry God," the Great Awakening was firing folks up with fear of hellfire.

The Great Awakening passed, but the notion that God has anger management issues didn't: along with several distorted ideas about Hell. Several generations after "...Angry God," Samuel Clemens/Mark Twain wrote:
"I don't like to commit myself about heaven and hell - you see, I have friends in both places.

"When I think of the number of disagreeable people that I know who have gone to a better world, I am sure hell won't be so bad at all."
(Mark Twain, p.377 of Evan Esar, "20,000 quips & quotes" (1968))

"I studied a minute, sort of holding my breath, and then says to myself: 'All right, then I'll go to Hell."
(Mark Twain, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1885), via Bartlett's Quotations, 16th ed.)
By the late 20th century, quite a few Americans had decided that Hell didn't exist at all. Others apparently thought it was a place for folks they didn't like, and I had become a Catholic: which is yet another topic.

More of my take on coming attractions and common sense:

Hell: Real; Optional; and Undesirable

Hell is quite real. It's not the climate that makes it a punishment: it is the eternal separation from God.

God didn't create anyone whose inevitable destination was Hell: but every person can decide that loving God isn't worthwhile, and walk away from eternal happiness. I think that's a daft decision, but it is an option. (Catechism, 1033-1037)

Hell isn't a counterpart of Heaven run by an 'antigod.' Satan is just a created being, an angel who misused free will and convinced some other angels to reject God. (Catechism, 328-330, 391-395, 632-635)

God won't drag anyone into Heaven, kicking and screaming. We aren't forced into Hell, either. Where we spend eternity depends on choices we make: to love and serve God, or not. (Catechism, 1021-1022, 1854-1864)

Sin and Judgment

As I said last week, sin isn't all about sex, drugs, and rock & roll. It is a failure to love God and love our neighbor.

Realizing that some action is sinful is one thing. Deciding that the person who commits the act is going to Hell is profoundly imprudent:
"1 2 Stop judging, that you may not be judged.

"For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you...."
(Matthew 7:1-5)
We're supposed to leave the final judgment of individuals up to God. (Catechism, 1854-1864)

We know about Saints because of what they do, and that's yet again another topic. ("New Laws for the Causes of Saints," Congregation for the Causes of Saints(1983))

In Dante's version of Hell, lust is assigned the second circle: a windy place for folks who let emotions run their lives.

There's nothing wrong with emotions, God designed us to experience them. But God also gave us reason, and expects us to use it. (Catechism, 1763-1770, 1778)

No sin is unimportant, but some merely hurt our relationship with God: while some sever it entirely. The good news is that it takes a conscious, deliberate rejection of God and God's mercy to sever our ties with the Almighty.

Deliberately ignoring God is an option, not noticing the Almighty isn't. (Catechism, 1849, 1854-1864)

Hell, Imagined

Dante Alighieri's "Divine Comedy" reflects an educated 14th century Catholic layman's view of Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory: but it's not an official Catholic document.

The "Divine Comedy" isn't a theological treatise, either. It's a poem, a work of imagination. Dante populated his (fictional) Hell with folks he knew, or knew about. I've run across several explanations for that creative choice.

Maybe he really was a vindictive little twerp who was trying to "get even" for insults, real or imagined. Maybe he had deep-seated neuroses. Or maybe Dante used the names of people his readers would recognize, because their public lives made them exemplars of some particular failing.

I think the later explanation is more plausible: particularly since Dante went to the trouble of writing two more epic-length segments of "The Divine Comedy" after "Inferno."

Dante wasn't the first to imagine what Hell might look like, but his epic poem helped shape today's imagery. Again, Dante's terraced funnel is fictional: a poet's image, not Church teaching.


(From Mediakron Dante, Gregory Kane, used w/o permission.)

I think it's also important to remember that Dante's "Divine Comedy" takes the poet and reader on a guided tour of Hell, Purgatory, and Paradise. It's an effective way of showing the "big picture," even if it's an allegory, not a gazetteer.

Here's an overview of Heaven, Hell, and everything in between: as imagined by Dante.


(From Mediakron Dante, Gregory Kane, used w/o permission.)

Those concentric spheres make it look like Dante put Earth in the middle of the universe. I think it's more accurate to say that we live near the bottom. In "The Divine Comedy," the only place downhill from here is Hell. Late Medieval and Renaissance cosmology is - you guessed it - another topic.

Finally, we get one life, one final decision, and that's it. Purgatory is a sort of ICU for folks who died in God's grace and friendship, but aren't ready for heaven. (Catechism, 1021-1022, 1030-1032)

Related posts:
Posted by 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Getting a Grip About: Technology and Magic

What I said earlier about idolizing science applies to technology, too. Treating anything that's not God as if it's divine is a really bad idea. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2112-2114)

Technology

Humanity is made "in the image of God." We have awesome responsibilities, including stewardship of this creation. (Genesis 1:26-31) (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 355-361)

We're "in the image of God," but we're not God, so we need tools to get most work done. Developing tools and using them to maintain or improve what we can, comes with being human. It's the sort of creature we are.

We've had some technology, like cooking fires, for so long that they seem quite 'natural.' Newer tech, like steam locomotives and the Internet, has made some folks uneasy. (January 27, 2013; Apathetic Lemming of the North (April 9, 2012))

Like science, technology is a "precious resource."1 By itself, technology isn't bad: or good. It's how we decide to use technology that makes a difference. (Catechism, 2293-2295)

Harmless Entertainment

As I said in the first post, I've got three sorts of 'magic' in mind today:
  • Harmless entertainment
  • Unfamiliar technology
  • A really bad idea
The first sort is 'stage magic,' prestidigitation, "manual dexterity in the execution of tricks." (Princeton's WordNet) It's the sort of 'watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat' thing that I've enjoyed.

I suppose stage magic could be harmful, if used to distract folks while a pickpocket exercises another sort of manual dexterity: but so could many other activities.

Unfamiliar Technology

There isn't anything 'magical' about telephones, television, computers, or the Internet. But these new technologies might seem 'magical' to someone who had grown up without them. I think that may explain the dislike or fear of new tech that I've seen.

A few generations ago, watching events on the other side of the world as they're happening, and talking with folks who are miles away, might have seemed like 'magic.'

I remember when my family got our first television set, and the first public transatlantic television feed. Today, we've gotten used to seeing crystal-clear live television from almost anywhere on the planet.

By the way, I might take dire warnings about the malefic influence of the Internet on the nation's youth: if I hadn't heard the same sort of thing about television; and telephones. Sure, we've got social ills today: but I don't think technology is to blame, any more than letting teens use telephones caused social upheavals in the '60s.

I've quoted Job 5:7 before, and that's almost another topic.

A Really Bad Idea

The third sort of 'magic' involves making a deal with a fallen angel. It's a very bad idea. Satan isn't nice, and can't be trusted. The same goes for the other angels who followed Satan's lead. (Genesis 3:5; Luke 10:18; Peter 2:4) (Catechism, 391-395)

For folks who learned about exorcism and the Catholic Church from dramatic offerings such as "The Last Exorcism Part II" and "Catholic Ghoulgirls," the real thing might seem rather dull.

Hollywood histrionics notwithstanding, Satan is quite real. I agree with the chief exorcist of Rome:
"The world must know that Satan exists...."
(CNA/EWTN News)
The Catholic Church has quite a few words to say about unauthorized efforts to control or communicate with "occult powers," but they boil down to "don't." (Catechism, 2116-2117)

Divination isn't a good idea, either. (Catechism, 2115-2116)

I suppose someone had a fit back in the day when meteorology was a new science, and weather forecasts became possible.

That's not divination: we get weather forecasts by studying physical conditions. Data from weather satellites helps, a lot: and that's yet another topic.


(from Reto Stöckli, via NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, used w/o permission)

Exorcism

"When the Church asks publicly and authoritatively in the name of Jesus Christ that a person or object be protected against the power of the Evil One and withdrawn from his dominion, it is called exorcism...."
(Catechism, 1673)
Unlike divination or magic, exorcism is authorized contact with the Evil One. A simple sort of exorcism is performed during Baptism. (Catechism, 1673)

A major exorcism is a very serious matter, and may only be performed by a priest with specific approval of the bishop. It is emphatically not a 'do-it-yourself' proposition. Preparations for a major exorcism include making sure that it's the Evil One, not some illness, causing the problem. (Catechism, 1673)

Somewhat-related posts:
1 Science and technology are "precious resources:" provided that we use them ethically:
"Basic scientific research, as well as applied research, is a significant expression of man's dominion over creation. Science and technology are precious resources when placed at the service of man and promote his integral development for the benefit of all. By themselves however they cannot disclose the meaning of existence and of human progress. Science and technology are ordered to man, from whom they take their origin and development; hence they find in the person and in his moral values both evidence of their purpose and awareness of their limits."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2293)
Posted by 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Friday, April 27, 2012

"A Consistent Ethic of Life," Reality Checks About Religion, and a New Widget

One reason I joined the Catholic Church was that it made sense. Even the parts I didn't like at first. I also learned, eventually, why I wasn't entirely comfortable with cultural mores like capital punishment.

There's more to learn about what the Church has taught: more than I could absorb in a lifetime. Which is why I hope to keep learning until last things happen. And that's another topic. Topics.
  1. Death Penalty, a Consistent Ethic of Life, and Connecticut
  2. Fundamentalist? Conservative? No, I'm Catholic
  3. "To Proclaim Christ to the World"
  4. What Folks Know, That Just Ain't So
  5. Also Noted: The New Vatican Widget
On the whole, I think this is a fairly 'upbeat' selection from the news.

Sure, some reporters are clueless where religion is concerned, but that's nothing new. What's remarkable, I think, is that some actually 'get it.'

Then there's today's news release from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. America has taken a step toward "a consistent ethic of life."

1. Death Penalty, a Consistent Ethic of Life, and Connecticut

"Bishops Welcome Repeal Of Death Penalty In Connecticut"
USCCB News Release (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) (April 26, 2012)

"The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) congratulated the Connecticut bishops, the Connecticut Catholic Conference, Catholic Mobilizing Network, and all dedicated advocates against the death penalty for their work to bring about the repeal of the death penalty in Connecticut. Governor Dan Malloy enacted the legislation April 25, making Connecticut the 17th state to repeal the death penalty.

" 'As Catholics we are dedicated to promoting a consistent ethic of life, which values all human life as full of dignity and inherent worth – even those convicted of the worst crimes,' said Bishop Stephen E. Blaire, chairman of the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development. 'We welcome the courageous decision by the governor and the legislature to abolish the use of the death penalty in Connecticut. We stand in solidarity with all those who work for a just and safe society that protects its citizens and upholds the sanctity and dignity of all human life.'

"Pope Benedict XVI, like his predecessor John Paul II, has called for the end of the use of the death penalty. In November 2011, Pope Benedict expressed support for efforts for 'political and legislative initiatives being promoted in a growing number of countries to eliminate the death penalty.' "
I've felt like killing someone. That doesn't make it right, though:
  • Human life is sacred
    (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2258)
  • Murder is wrong
    (Catechism, 2259-2262, 2268-2269)

Lethal Force and Options

How about someone who wants to kill me? Or someone else? Or actually murdered someone? The answer gets a little complicated:
  • Lethal force is an option for self-defense
    • But only if necessary
    (Catechism, 2264
  • Legitimate defense of others is right
    • And may be a grave duty
    (Catechism, 2265)
  • The state has a duty to
    • "Curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights"
    • Inflict punishment
      • Proportionate to the gravity of the offense
    (Catechism, 2266)
  • Punishment inflicted by the state
    • "Has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense"
    • Defends public order
    • Protects people's safety
    • Assumes the value of expiation
      • When willingly accepted by the guilty party
    • Has a medicinal purpose
      • Must contribute to the correction of the guilty party
        • As far as possible
    (Catechism, 2266)
About punishment contributing "to the correction of the guilty party:" A countdown to death might focus the convicted party's attention on the need for repentance. Or, not. On the whole, I'd rather give someone more time to think, and less opportunity for blind panic.

Mistakes, Executions, and the Super Bowl

I might think that the death penalty was okay in this country, if I also thought that
  • America's judicial system never made mistakes
  • The United States Supreme Court could unkill someone
  • America couldn't afford to restrain dangerous people
About that last item, it's hard for me to believe that America can't afford to keep people locked up. Not when Super Bowl commercials cost $3,000,000 for each 30 seconds: and make good business sense. (CNN)

Sure, it's easy to kill someone and send a nice 'sorry about that' note if a mistake was made. But 'easy' and 'right' aren't necessarily the same thing.

Justice, Real and Imagined

There are quite a few flavors of justice. There's what we see in some westerns: "We're gonna give you a fair trial, followed by a first class hanging." ("Silverado" (1985))

Then there's the sort of 'justice' that made good Samaritan laws necessary. I remember when America's courts were getting used to the idea that punishing folks who helped accident victims wasn't prudent.

More recently, America's courts had apparently decided that folks who committed crimes were 'victims of society.' I'll agree that committing a crime is the result of a disordered conscience, but that's about as far as I'll go. I've discussed natural law and common sense before:Finally, here's part of what the Catholic Church says about situations where a judge thinks someone is probably guilty of a serious crime:
"Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm—without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself—the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity 'are very rare, if not practically non-existent.'68" (Catechism, 2267)

2. Fundamentalist? Conservative? No, I'm Catholic

"NY Times writer defends Church teachings in online series"
Benjamin Mann, CNA (Catholic News Agency) (April 25, 2012)

"New York Times writer Ross Douthat has defended Catholic theological and moral teachings, in a series of articles explaining how the Church is not 'fundamentalist' but simply 'orthodox.'

" 'What I describe as "Christian orthodoxy" is not identical to everything that calls itself conservative Christianity in the United States, and it's certainly not identical to Christian fundamentalism,' wrote Douthat, a Catholic convert known for his conservative social and political outlook, in an April 16-19 online exchange with Slate magazine author William Saletan...."
I'm a Catholic convert myself. Most of the Catholics I know are 'cradle Catholics,' who grew up going to Mass and absorbing our heritage. I missed out on quite a lot by growing up outside the Church.

On the other hand, since I joined the Church as an act of will, I was aware that there was a whole lot to learn. Also that I couldn't count on what I'd grown up with to give me a general idea of what was so, and what wasn't. I think there's value in that.

There's Old, and there's Ancient

"...The Catholic columnist pointed out that Biblical 'fundamentalism' is actually a modern phenomenon, originating in the 19th and 20th centuries. By contrast, Christian orthodoxy 'is an ancient thing, dating back to the early centuries A.D., when Christian doctrine was first codified.'

"While Christian orthodoxy accepts Scripture as inspired by God, it does not employ it for inappropriate purposes – such as predicting the end of the world, ruling out scientific discoveries, or interpreting natural disasters as forms of divine retribution...."
I didn't become a Catholic because the Church is ancient, quite. But I've been a historian: and I know how wildly improbable it is for an institution to hold together for two millennia. Particularly with the sort of leadership the Church had now and then. I've been over that before. (January 13, 2011)

I also didn't become a Catholic because there's a science academy at the Vatican. But it helped that I didn't have to check my brain at the door. I've been over this before:

3. "To Proclaim Christ to the World"

"The Changing Image of Benedict XVI"
H. Sergio Mora, ZENIT (April 24, 2012)
"The Pope as Seen by Vatican Reporters"

"Initially the media portrayed Pope Benedict XVI as God's Rottweiler, the stern protector of the faith. Seven years later he is now seen as a gentle and humble intellectual who has learned to move among the people, and a paternal figure who has made himself loved.

"He is also seen as a reformer who has never lost sight of his objective: to proclaim Christ to the world and bring everyone closer to the Church. A Pope who has faced up to tremendous problems such as the sexual abuses.

"This is the image that emerges from some interviews that ZENIT held with correspondents and Vatican experts who follow Benedict XVI's pontificate, even if some of them hold that he has a difficulty with communication that still persists.

"According to Giovanna Chirri, Vatican expert for the Italian Agency ANSA, 'This Pope is a theologian who, although he became a reformer, never lost sight of his objective: to proclaim Christ to the world.'..."
I was very glad to see that last phrase in the excerpt: "to proclaim Christ to the world." It looks like at least one reporter 'gets it.'

Not all do: take the clueless "exorcism" reporting in Canada, for example.

4. What Folks Know, That Just Ain't So

"Canadian media criticized for irresponsible 'exorcism' reporting"
Benjamin Mann, CNA (Catholic News Agency) (April 24, 2012)

"Canadian news outlets are sensationalizing an event that was not treated as demonic possession and did not prompt a search for an exorcist, according to the Diocese of Saskatoon's communications office.

"Communications coordinator Kiply Yaworski told CNA that the public had been misled by 'headlines that were completely false,' suggesting that an exorcism had been performed by a local priest in March.

" 'There was no rite of exorcism,' said Yaworski. 'No one here was calling it that.' She said media outlets were erroneously connecting the 'blessing of a distraught man' to the topic of possession and exorcism, 'just to get people to click on their stories.'

"Yaworski was eager to clear up misunderstandings about an event reported by CBC News on April 13, under the headline 'Exorcist expertise sought after Saskatoon "possession".'..."
Exorcisms are real. The Catholic Church has specialists who deal with that sort of thing: and procedures that filter out situations that are better-handled by counseling, detox, or some other less-drastic intervention.

That's reality. Then there's what we find in the movies:

Ignorance and Adequate Reporting

Reporters and editors who produce the sort of "exorcism" story Yaworski discussed may realize that watching "House of Exorcism" isn't a good way to learn about Catholic practices. But however they get their education, the results are less than adequate.

'Bias' is a serious issue. But I'm also concerned about folks who 'know' things that just aren't so. I've said this before:
" 'Non-biased' is part of the picture. I think some of the apparent 'bias' is more of a complete lack of understanding.

"There are times when I suspect that if football games were covered with the same expertise as 'religious' stories, we'd hear announcers discussing the hole-in-one made by the goalie."

(Comment on a post by Lisa Hendey (March 28, 2012)) (March 28, 2012)

"Unnamed 'Church Leaders' "

"...CBC's article acknowledged that the priestly blessing the man received was 'not a formal exorcism.' Bishop Donald Bolan, the only Catholic leader named in the article, reportedly said it was unclear whether the man was possessed or merely mentally disturbed.

"But his comments were placed alongside those of the unnamed 'church leaders,' who were said to be 'considering whether Saskatoon needs a trained exorcist' after 'a case of what is being called possible demonic possession.'...
(CNA)
I think using anonymous sources makes sense. Sometimes. Let's say that a reporter learned that space aliens had infiltrated the U.S. Department of State. The reporter wouldn't have paid attention, except the source was the department's Executive Secretary: who had hard evidence. In that (wildly improbable) situation, keeping the source anonymous might be a good idea. ('Space aliens?!' I'll get back to that.)

The point is that sometimes sources have very good reasons for staying anonymous: so that they can remain sources of information; or remain alive.

I suspect that sometimes 'unnamed sources' are used because the reporter or editor wants to keep readers from learning that the story is based on a tale spun just before closing time at the corner bar. Or that the editorial staff needed an 'outside' source for something that 'everybody knows.' Am I being cynical? Maybe.

"Vast Oversimplification"

"...During the incident, the diocese said, 'a priest blessed a distraught and emotional man with holy water and prayed with the family, before advising them to call the police.'

"In his statement on the matter, Bishop Bolan stressed the reality of supernatural evil, but confirmed that no exorcism had occurred in the March incident.
" 'In Jesus' ministry there were exorcisms, and so it is not something that we can lightly dismiss,' he said.

" 'But the headline that the bishop of Saskatoon is looking for an exorcist was a vast oversimplification. Catholic dioceses, like other Christian communities, must look at how best to respond to requests in this area.'..."
(CNA)
Like the bishop said, supernatural evil is real. So are families, the police, and Saskatoon.

Very briefly, about exorcism. It's:
  • Real
  • Involved in the sacrament of Baptism
    • Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1237, 1673
  • A power and office the Church received from Jesus
Exorcism, defined:
"EXORCISM: The public and authoritative act of the Church to protect or liberate a person or object from the power of the devil (e.g., demonic possession) in the name of Christ (1673). A simple exorcism prayer in preparation for Baptism invokes God's help in overcoming the power of Satan and the spirit of evil (1237)."

(Catechism, Glossary, E) [links added]
(May 17, 2011)

As I've said before, technically-accurate discussions of exorcism tend to be fairly dry reading: which may explain why so many movies get it wrong.

I take exorcisms, supernatural evil, and Satan, seriously. But I also take Jesus seriously, and I've read Matthew 16:18. It's like the bishop said:
"...'Our resurrection faith is that life is stronger than death, that God brings hope out of despair and light out of darkness,' Bishop Bolen said. 'It is more important to affirm the goodness of the love of God than to speculate about the nature of events such as these.' "

(CNA) [emphasis mine]

"Journalistic Infotainment-Like Art-Product"

In the wake of the Kennedy assassination in 1963, up to somewhere after Watergate, reporters were taken quite seriously. The brave reporter, on a quest for Truth, became a stock character in movies. I've discussed stereotypes and movies before:And that's yet another topic.

When Richard T. Heffron needed intrepid heroes for a movie about a conspiracy by robots to take over the world, "reporters" filled the bill neatly. That was in 1976.

Like I've said before, change happens. A few years after "Futureworld", another creative team gave us a somewhat different view of reporters:


(© Studio Foglio, LLC (1980-2008), used w/o permission)
An artist's view of the "journalistic infotainment-like art-product" we find at newsstands. (Buck Godot (December 18, 2008))

I could be wrong, but I suspect that reporters and editors have made too many mistakes: and simply don't have credibility any more. Except among their friends and fans, maybe.

I've discussed reporters, editors, and other old-school information gatekeepers, in another blog:I've posted these quotes before:
"It ain't so much the things we don't know that get us into trouble. It's the things we know that just ain't so."
(attr. humorists Mark Twain,11 Artemus Ward, Kin Hubbard, and Will Rogers; inventor Charles Kettering; pianist Eubie Blake; baseball player Yogi Berra (once, by Al Gore))
"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,12 Foreword to Radio Replies Vol. 1, (1938) page ix, via Wikiquote)

5. Also Noted: The New Vatican Widget

"Vatican Web Page Releases Widget"
ZENIT (April 20, 2012)

"To mark Benedict XVI's seventh anniversary as Pope on Thursday, the Vatican internet service announced that a new www.vatican.va widget is available...."

"...The 'Focus' area of the homepage www.vatican.va contains the mail address at which users may request the code to insert on their own pages the 'vatican.va widget'."
I've seen the www.vatican.va widget, think it looks pretty good. It's also seems like a pretty good way to get at-a-glance announcements of at least some of the latest Vatican posts. There are also tabs for "Angelus," "Audiences," and "Bulletin."

I don't plan to add it to this blog, though. For starters, the Vatican's website has fairly user-friendly navigation, and I've put a link to vatican.va hear the top of this blog's sidebar, under "Links to the Vatican, USCCB." Besides, I can't think of a good place to put one more item. Not today, anyway.

Related posts:
Posted by 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Catholics, Credulity, and Credibility

I think there's a reason why some folks see Saints as strange people who lived in strange places a long time ago.

The Catholic Church is about two millennia old, and is literally universal. Examples of almost anything related to the Catholic Church are likely to be 'long ago and far away.'

'Strange,' Yes: 'Bizarre,' No

Saints are people who "lived a life of exemplary fidelity to the Lord." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2156) But they're also people. I think it's a mistake to see them as oddballs who had nothing in common with 'real' people.

I generally don't assume that folks who were born in another century, or on another continent, are 'strange.' Not in the 'bizarre' or 'foreign' sense. Different, sure: but once I get past the cultural trappings and personal quirks - I don't see all that much difference.

But then, I don't think folks have changed all that much since Stephen became the first Christian martyr. (Acts 6:5-7:60) Keep an eye on that "young man named Saul" in Acts 7:58. We catch up with him again, two chapters later, in Acts 9:1.

I'll get back to the "young man named Saul" later in this post.

Ravana, Romeo, and Body Counts

This story could be set almost anywhere, at any time:
  • A man
    • Gets infatuated over a woman
    • Loses whatever common sense he had
    • Does something
      • Daring
      • 'Romantic'
      • Incredibly imprudent
  • More people get involved
    • Lots more people
  • People get killed
I've just described
Sure, Paris, Ravana, Romeo, and Tony, are different. In the stories, they're a Trojan prince, a demon, a rich kid, and a hoodlum.

But they all act pretty much the same way. They display:
  • Great passion and resolve
  • Negligible wisdom
It's interesting that Laurents and Bernstein kept the body count fairly low in their version: and that's almost another topic.

Sex, by the way, isn't the problem in these stories. What caused trouble were daft decisions, and I've been over that sort of thing before. (August 30, 2011)

A Martyr, a Convert, and Human Nature

Remember the "young man named Saul" in Acts 7:58?

I'm picking up Saul's story two chapters later. He's "still breathing murderous threats against the disciples of the Lord." (Acts 9:1) This man is not exactly someone you'd expect the folks he's got in his sights to welcome with open arms.

Later in Acts 9:21, Saul has changed his mind, changed sides, and is now a gung-ho Christian.

He's also called "Paul," but that doesn't seem to be so much a 'new name,' as two versions of the same name: "Saul" for when he's around folks from home; "Paul" when he's around folks who are used to hearing Greco-Roman names. (foonote 5 of Acts 13) And I'm getting off-topic.

Light, Blindness, and Voices

Saul's sudden switch isn't as arbitrary as it may seem. He had an up-close-and-personal run-in with the Second Person of the Trinity on the road to Damascus. (Acts 9:3-9)

Saul had good reason to take the voice he heard seriously. For one thing, he was temporarily blinded. For another, the men he was traveling with heard the voice too. I suppose I could claim that Saul was suffering from hallucinations and psychosomatic blindness: but a whole bunch of guys, all having the same hallucination at the same time? That's a bit too much of a coincidence for me.

But, in principle, most of the events in Exodus could be coincidences: natural events that 'just happened' to occur at exactly the right time and the right place for the folks following Moses.

Also, in principle, someone could roll "snake eyes" a hundred times in a row. That would be a wildly improbable statistical fluke. Or, more likely, someone loaded the dice.

Or I could say that everything in the Bible is a lie: and be considered 'intelligent' in some circles. (December 18, 2011)

You Want Me to Welcome Him?!

Saul/Paul figured that Christians in Damascus wouldn't believe that he was on their side now: and he was right. Christians, the ones I know, are no more likely than anyone else to think that someone determined to kill us has suddenly changed his mind.

Take Ananias, for example. He had good reason to think that Saul intended to do bad things to him and his fellow-Christians:
"There was a disciple in Damascus named Ananias, and the Lord said to him in a vision, 'Ananias.' He answered, 'Here I am, Lord.' The Lord said to him, 'Get up and go to the street called Straight and ask at the house of Judas for a man from Tarsus named Saul. He is there praying,"...
(Acts 9:10-11)
What Ananias says in Acts 9:13-14 could be summed up as 'you have got to be kidding.' Only he was more eloquent, detailed - and much more respectful.

The point is that Ananias didn't simply 'listen and obey.' He made jolly well sure that he understood the orders - and expressed some quite reasonable concerns.

Then he did as he was told. Acts 9:11-19 goes from the vision Ananias had, to where Saul/Paul settled down for a few days.

"Settled" isn't quite the right word. The rest of Saul's life was anything but settled. After that experience on the road to Damascus, Saul/Paul of Tarsus traveled over quite a bit of the Roman world, and finally lost his head in Rome. Literally. ("Papal Basilica, Saint Paul Outside-the-Walls")

Religion, Psychiatric Conditions, and Getting a Grip

So: Catholics 'hear voices in our head and do what they say?' Some of us probably do. With something like 1,100,000,000 of us living today, the odds are pretty good that some of us have any given disease: including schizophrenia.1

With all our talk of "faith," someone might think that Catholics think there's an eleventh Commandment about credulity being next to Godliness. Let's see what "credulity" (and "credulous") mean:
  • Credulity
    • The tendency to believe readily
      (Princeton's WordNet)
  • Credulous
    • Disposed to believe on little evidence
    • Showing a lack of judgment or experience
      (Princeton's WordNet)
As a Catholic, I'm not allowed to be incredulous. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2089) Being credulous isn't recommended, either. (1 John 4:1; "General Audience - 29 October 1997" Pope John Paul II (October 29, 1997)) And preying on folks who are credulous isn't allowed. (Catechism, 644, 2117)

Credibility, Cliques, and All That

A dictionary says that credibility means "the quality of being believable or trustworthy." (Princeton's WordNet)

Ever since my Lord told us to "make disciples of all nations" (Matthew 28:16-20), the Catholic Church has had the job of evangelization. Personal experience tells me that a hard-sell 'repent, you lousy sinner' approach isn't terribly effective.

It might be nice, if folks would hear "Christian" and immediately assume that the person described is:
  • Honest
  • Forthright
  • Knowledgeable
  • Dedicated to public service
  • Sane
That's not always the case. Sometimes you'll have someone who seems convinced that Christians are by definition hate-riddled lunatics who should be locked up. More often, the other person has run into a Christian with more zeal than sense: or read about a 'religious nut' in the news. I've posted about that before:
I'm no expert on 'how to win friends and influence people.' I could, though, have a shot at writing "How to Lose Friends and Alienate People." Convincing those around you that what you say isn't worth hearing is fairly easy.

Here's how to lose friends and alienate people, in a few easy steps:
  • Verbally attack their
    • Style of clothing
    • Musical preferences
    • Taste in art
    • Eating habits
    • Economic status
  • Drag your beliefs into every conversation
  • Use jargon
Add a condescending attitude, and either imply or state outright that you're part of a select little group of 'better' people, and you're done. In several senses of the word.

Getting Your Linguistic Ducks in a Row

Jargon - a sort of language-within-a-language - isn't a problem, by itself.

Here's an example of jargon:
"I'll have my ducks in a row as soon as this SWOT analysis gives me an actionable silver bullet."
Some folks would realize that I meant:
I'll have the details carefully planned out as soon as an analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats gives me a simple, guaranteed, solution that can be done in the near future.
If both sides of a conversation understand the same jargon, it's a good way to get a lot said in a few words.

Most of the time, though, if I said things like "SWOT analysis" and "actionable silver bullet:" all that folks would be likely to hear is some middle-aged guy using jargon.

At best, unfamiliar jargon will only prevent the other person from understanding what's said. At worst - well, that depends partly on what attitude the speaker has, and how obviously crazy he or she is. Which brings up yet another topic:
The basic idea was that folks won't take ideas seriously, if they can't understand whoever is talking. It also helps if folks don't think the speaker is crazy.

And I am not going to go off on that tangent. Again.

Somewhat-related posts:
Background:
1 Schizophrenia is one of those psychological disorders or psychiatric diseases that could be mistaken for 'evil spirits at work:'
"Schizophrenia"
A.D.A.M. Medical Encyclopedia, via PubMedHealth (Last reviewed February 7, 2010)

"Schizophrenia is a complex mental disorder that makes it difficult to:
  • "Tell the difference between real and unreal experiences
  • "Think logically
  • "Have normal emotional responses,
  • "Behave normally in social situations...
Which reminds me of 'sophisticated' notions about religion - and that'll wait for another post.

Evil spirits and exorcisms are real enough. But so is schizophrenia. Also major depression and ADHD-inattentive. Both of which I've got. I suppose I could have found a shaman or faith healer and tried 'driving out' my ADHD. But those approaches are really bad ideas. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2110, 2111) I've been over that before:
Instead, I've been seeing a psychiatrist: and deal with ADHD by taking Methylphenidate. Which is what I am supposed to do, as a practicing Catholic. And I've been over that before, too:
Posted by 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, December 5, 2011

Faust and Friars - Cursing God? - For the Pope?!

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

Marlowe's 'Faustus:' Why Bother?

Another Monday, another 'Marlowe's Faustus' post: which may seem like an odd topic for a blog called "A Catholic Citizen in America."

This blog is supposed to be about being a Catholic in America.

So why am I posting about what some Englishman wrote, long before this country existed?

For starters, I wanted to get reacquainted with Marlowe's adaptation of the Faust legend. It's one of those 'culturally significant' things.

"The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" helped bring the German story to the English-speaking world, where it became part of our culture. For example, I think some Mad scientists in the movies are a 20th-century take on Faust, and I've been over that before.

The Catholic Connection

Ever since Henry VIII decided to be a mini-pope, the English speaking world has 'known' things about the Church that are colorful, sensational, and wrong. Marlowe put a fair number of those beliefs in his "...Faustus."

It's the 'Catholic connection' that I'm mostly concerned with: particularly since I think American culture inherited quite a lot of England's store of misinformation.

Marlowe's England isn't 21st-century America, but there's a fairly straight path leading from Elizabethan England to the country I live in. I'll get back to that.

Faustus, Friars, and All That

Last week, I looked at:
  • How Marlowe got Faustus and Mephistopheles to Rome
  • Gluttonous friars in Marlowe's imagined city

Fictional Settings, Real Names

Rome was, and is, real enough. Marlowe's version isn't.

That's not a criticism. Marlowe's "...Faustus" is fiction. His Rome was essentially a fictional setting: a backdrop for his characters. Authors, playwrights, and directors routinely set their stories in real places: like Ironside's San Francisco, or New York Undercover.

I think it's a good idea to remember that their settings are fictional versions of real places: a combination of real and imagined elements.

Profligate Papists, Long-Winded Actors, and Action Movies

Marlowe gives his Elizabethan audience an earful about the extravagant lifestyle of those profligate papists. Which I take about as seriously as WWII-era depictions of Germans and Japanese in American movies. And that's almost another topic.

Long-winded actors seem to have been popular in Elizabethan theaters: like Hamlet's "To be, or not to be,--that is the question...."

About 200 words later, he says "...Be all my sins remember'd," and gets back to the business of driving Ophelia insane while racking up an impressive body count.

Tighten up the dialog, drop the soliloquies, add a few explosions, and you've got an action movie. And that's another topic.

The point is that Marlowe's "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" is downright wordy:
"...FAUSTUS. Well, I'm content to compass then some sport,
And by their folly make us merriment...."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")

Pranking the Pope

I'm skipping past quite a bit of that sort of thing, to where Faustus plays a practical joke on the (fictional) Pope:
"...POPE. My lord, here is a dainty dish was sent me from the Bishop of Milan.

"FAUSTUS. I thank you, sir.
[Snatches the dish.]

"POPE. How now! who's that which snatched the meat from me? will no man look?—My lord, this dish was sent me from the Cardinal of Florence....."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")

Sour Saints?

Individual Catholics may act as if 'thou shalt not smile' is part of the Decalogue, but that's not what the Church teaches. I've posted about 'sour saints' before.

Interior conversion, penance, repentance, and learning to control my desires, are all important. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1430, 1431, 1434, 2015)

So is joy and humor. (Catechism, 1676)

I think the action in this part of Marlowe's play is, essentially, funny. But I also think Moe Howard and the other Stooges are funny.

"The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" and The Three Stooges

Some of Stooges' films weren't theologically sound, but I'm not likely to do a detailed critique of of them. Seriously, who would see "Bedlam in Paradise" as anything more than 16 minutes of The Three Stooges?

I see slapstick elements in Marlowe's "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus." But the play doesn't read like a comic romp. I get the impression that "...Faustus" is entertainment that folks could take serously.

Back to Marlowe's Rome, a peeved pontiff, and far-fetched friars.

Mephistopheles, Faustus, and Cursing Friars

Under the impression that he's dealing with ghosts, the Pope has some friars come in.

Think 'Elizabethan Ghostbusters.'
"...MEPHIST. Nay, I know not: we shall be cursed with bell, book, and candle.

"FAUSTUS. How! bell, book, and candle,—candle, book, and bell,—
Forward and backward, to curse Faustus to hell!
Anon you shall hear a hog grunt, a calf bleat, and an ass bray,
Because it is Saint Peter's holiday.

"Re-enter all the FRIARS to sing the Dirge.

"FIRST FRIAR.
Come, brethren, let's about our business with good devotion.

"They sing.

"CURSED BE HE THAT STOLE AWAY HIS HOLINESS' MEAT FROM THE TABLE! maledicat Dominus!

"CURSED BE HE THAT STRUCK HIS HOLINESS A BLOW ON THE FACE! maledicat Dominus!

"CURSED BE HE THAT TOOK FRIAR SANDELO A BLOW ON THE PATE! maledicat Dominus!

"CURSED BE HE THAT DISTURBETH OUR HOLY DIRGE! maledicat Dominus!

"CURSED BE HE THAT TOOK AWAY HIS HOLINESS' WINE! maledicat Dominus? ['?' sic] Et omnes Sancti! Amen!..."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
There's quite a bit going on here.

Elizabethan Theology?

Marlowe's audience knows that Doctor John Faustus is a living human being. They should realize that, anyway: yet more topics.

Mephistopheles is up to his old tricks, encouraging Faustus to think of himself as being a creature like the demon: "...we shall be cursed with bell, book, and candle...."

What's disturbing in this part of Marlowe's play is the "dirge," cursing Faustus and Mephistopheles. It's aimed partly at a person who is alive, and whose eternal destination isn't yet determined. As such, it's inappropriate: putting it mildly.

On the other hand, Marlowe's fictional Pope is under the impression that he's dealing with a "ghost." Which might, maybe, be approximately correct, in the case of Mephistopheles.

That's not the main problem, though.

Having a chorus of friars singing, "maledicat Dominus," and "et omnes Sancti" is - far-fetched, at best.

Marlowe, Latin, and Cursing God

I'm no Latin scholar, but I think "maledicat Dominus" translates as "curse the Lord." In the context of Marlowe's play, that's something Faustus might say.

But those friars, acting on the Pope's behest?

Here's what Marlowe has them say:
"...maledicat Dominus? ['?' sic] Et omnes Sancti! Amen!..."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
Translated:
"...curse the Lord ... And all the saints! Amen!..."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
That's wrong. On at least two levels.
Sadly, I think a fair number of folks here think that saying "curse the Lord ... And all the saints! Amen!" is the sort of thing done by the 'Satanic' Catholic Church.1. A friend of mine insisted that the moon and sun revolve around Earth, because it says so in the Bible. That chapter's footone 3 discusses probabilities. I've discussed science, faith, and getting a grip, before. Fairly often.2

"Curse God and Die?!"

Some Americans believe every word in the Bible is literally true. Like Joshua 10:12-13.2

Sure, "curse God and die" is in the Bible. (Job 2:9) But Job said it was a bad idea. (Job 2:10) I think it is, too.

Cursing God on stage, as a line in a play, is one thing. In real life? I've got my particular judgment to think of. Death will have closed the books on my decisions, and I'll spend eternity in Heaven: or Hell. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1021-1022)

What my final destination is depends on whether I've accepted or rejected "the divine grace manifested in Christ." (Catechism, 1021) All things considered, cursing the Lord is a very bad idea.

Excommunications, Exorcisms, and Getting a Grip

As for the notion that the Pope would formally send someone to Hell - for a comparatively minor offense? That probably played well in post-Henry VIII England. It sounds like what some Americans believe about the Catholic Church, too.

The fact is, excommunication is as far as the Church goes with punishment. (Catechism, 1463)

Since Marlowe's make-believe Pope thought he was dealing with a "ghost," that "curse the Lord" "dirge" could be seen as an exorcism. Problem is, that's not how exorcisms work.

Not even close. (Catechism, 1237; 1673; Glossary, E; Also see Catechism, 517; 550) I've been over this before.3

We're Not English: Now

Here's where I get back to the idea that Marlowe's England isn't 21st-century America, and why I'm posting about "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" anyway.

America and England have a long history:
  • The United States of America started as a set of English colonies
  • The default language here is English
  • American culture was heavily influenced by English culture
    • No surprise, since the colonists were English
    • We're less 'English' now
      • But our roots show
America isn't the WASP nest it was several generations back, and that's another topic. The cultural baggage brought over by English colonists, and others, includes a fairly well-defined attitude toward 'those Catholics:'


(From Thomas Nast Portfolio, Ohio State University, used without permission.)

New Century, Old Assumptions

Granted, we're living in the 2000s. Thomas Nast spent most of his life in the 1800s. Jonathan Edwards wrote his famous "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" in 1741.

Quite a bit has changed since "Sinners ... Angry God" helped set the spiritual tone over here. But I think American culture retains residue from beliefs and assumptions of earlier centuries.

Tolerance, Beliefs, and Fulton Sheen

On the whole, America has treated Catholics rather well. It's illegal to kill us. Which didn't keep Father James Coyle alive, back in the 'good old days,' and that's almost another topic. Topics.

Despite a cultural and legal history of comparative tolerance, I think there are rich veins of anti-Catholicism running under much of America's cultural landscape.

Thanks to this country's Protestant roots, and fallout from post-Reformation European politics, I think Fulton Sheen's observation is still true:
"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)

Fire, Brimstone, and Getting a Grip

It's been quite a while since I last heard about a 'fire and brimstone' preacher. I think that's a hopeful sign. Emotionally rousing as something like 'Brimstone Bill and his First Hallelujah Revival Touring Show' might be: I don't think scaring people silly is a good idea.

'Scaring' isn't the problem. It's 'scaring people silly' that I don't think is prudent. Fear, by itself, can be a good thing:
"The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the LORD, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding."
(Proverbs 9:10)
When an emotion like fear gets too strong, though, folks have trouble thinking straight:
Then there's the sort of malignant virtue that makes it hard to emulate the tax collector in Luke 18:10-14.

I try to have a calm, reasoned acknowledgement of my sins - without:
  • Trying to
    • Divert attention to 'that sinner over there'
    • Convince myself that sin
      • Isn't real
      • Doesn't matter
      • Can't be wrong, since it feels so right
    • Whatever
  • Panicking
That's no great virtue on my part. What the Church teaches about judging others - but not being stupid - is fairly clear:
"1 Therefore, you are without excuse, every one of you who passes judgment. 2 For by the standard by which you judge another you condemn yourself, since you, the judge, do the very same things. ... There is no partiality with God. " (Romans 2:1-11)
"You hypocrite, 3 remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother's eye."
(Matthew 7:5)
"although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1861)

The Faust Legend: 'Based on Real Events'

Stories about Faust first hit the press in 1587. Christopher Marlowe finished his "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" a little over ten years later, and the story's been resurfacing at intervals ever since.

That was about 150 years after Gutenberg (re)invented movable type: which poured oil on the troubled fires of European politics. Movable type made from clay had been invented in 1041, in China.4 But someone had invented bureaucracy in China long before that, which is another topic.5

And I'm not going to get distracted by comparing the Internet and the Gutenberg press.

Where was I? German legend. Faust. Right.

Like I said, the first printed retelling of Faust's story was a Faust chapbook, produced in 1587. It's been retold quite a few times since then, including:
  • Dr. Faust at Boxberg Castle
    (Germany, Bernhard Baader)
  • Dr. Faust's Hell-Master
    (Germany, Joh. Aug. Ernst Köhler)
  • Dr. Faust in Erfurt
    (Germany, J. G. Th. Grässe)
  • Dr. Faust and Melanchton in Wittenberg
    (Germany, J. G. Th. Grässe)
  • Dr. Faust in Anhalt
    (Germany, Ludwig Bechstein)
  • A Scholar Assigns Himself to the Devil
    (Denmark)
  • Selected musical works based on the Faust legend
    (from "Faust Legends," D. L. Ashliman, University of Pittsburgh)
John Faustus and all the other Fausts trace back, more or less, to a real person: Johann Georg Faust.6 Looks like stories 'based on real events' didn't start with television shockers.

Other posts in this series:
Somewhat-related posts:
Background:
"...Faustus" excerpts in these posts taken from:
1 As I've said before, folks can have odd ideas about what's real:
2 My faith doesn't require me to ignore facts and stop thinking, as I said at the start of this link list of posts about the Catholic Church and studying God's creation:
I take the Bible very seriously. But it's not a computer repair manual, or a science textbook:
3 I have nothing against movies as entertainment. But "The Exorcist" and "Scream Blacula Scream" aren't particularly good ways to study exorcism:
4 There's a pretty good introduction to Johannes Gutenberg's printing press, book printing, and movable type at:
5 Bureaucracies are okay: the Catholic Church uses a 'bureaucratic' system to stay organized.

Bureaucracies are quite efficient at dealing with tasks. Provided that:
  • The tasks don't
    • Change
    • Require innovative thought
  • The bureaucracy's environment doesn't change
Like I said, I think bureaucracies are okay. Provided that they're used by an authority that can change the rules, whether the bureaucrats like it or not.

My understanding is that China and civilizations growing around the east end of the Mediterranean Sea weren't all that far apart, technologically, until about 2,000 years back. Then China developed a bureaucracy. There's an interesting discussion about bureaucracies and China online:
6 Johann Georg Faust / Johannus Faustus was a real Renaissance man. Literally:
The article has enough cited references to be plausible.
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

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

Pinterest: My Stuff, and More

Visit Brian H.'s profile on Pinterest.

Advertisement

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light Candle  • Find a Retailer
• Spiral Light Candle Store

Popular Posts

  • A 'Saint Brian,' Sort of
    My name is Brian Gill. In keeping with the customs of my culture, the first name is one which my parents chose for me, the last is the name ...
  • Blind Mice; Heroism During the 'Batman' Killings
    The London 2012 Olympics start today: but instead of analyzing the significance of a South Korean flag being displayed with a North Korean...
  • A Catholic Citizen in America: New Location
    The good news is still that Blogger's changes haven't made images in my posts here unviewable. ( May 6-16, 2016 ) Instead of jumpi...
  • Mass Murder in Orlando
    I'd be writing a longer, more detailed, post about this; but still haven't resolved some technical issues. ( May 6, 2016 ; updated M...
  • Elijah and Pushing a Rock
    10th Sunday in Ordinary Time, 2016: 1 Kings 17:17 - 24 Galatians 1:11 - 19 Luke 7:11 - 17 Third Sunday of Easter, 2016 by Deacon L...

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.