Showing posts with label obedience. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obedience. Show all posts

Sunday, June 5, 2016

Elijah and Pushing a Rock

10th Sunday in Ordinary Time, 2016:

Third Sunday of Easter, 2016

by Deacon Lawrence N. Kaas June 5, 2016

I have chosen to speak to you today on our first reading, from 1st Kings. In part because I couldn't believe that a part of the story I hadn't read before, and if I have, I have forgotten it.

The story comes from the time of Elijah the prophet. It was a difficult time in Israel's history. The kingdom had fallen into idolatry. Baal worship had become the official state religion. And there was a terrible drought and famine in the land. Food was scarce, and Elijah the prophet was on the run from the King and his wicked wife, Queen Jezebel. The Lord led Elijah to a brook where he could drink, but soon it dried up. And thus the word of the Lord came to him: "go at once to Zarephath in the region of Sidon and stay there."

Zarephath was located on the Mediterranean coast between Sidon and Tyre in the heart of pagan territory. In fact, it was not far from where Queen Jezebel's home town is located. It was a most unlikely place for Elijah to hide from Ahab and his henchmen. Then God said something else to Elijah that was equally as unlikely: "I have directed a widow there to supply you with food."

This sounds counter-intuitive because nobody struggles more mightily during a time of drought and famine then do widows unless they have grown children to provide for them. The government certainly didn't do it. Their neighbors didn't do it either, as they were probably in as bad a shape as the widow. As Elijah made his journey to is Zarephath , he was certainly thinking that a pagan town and a widow and her young son with little resources could not be of very much help but he went where God told him to go.

This appears to be the first secret, of course, of a fulfilling life. If God tells you to do something or to go somewhere, then get a move on.

There's story about a weak and sickly man who was unable to afford a doctor. He lived in the deep backwoods in a log cabin. In front of his cabin was a huge boulder. One night he had a vision in which God told him to go out and push on the rock in front of his home, all day long, day after day, until God was to tell him to stop. The man got up early in the morning and did as he was told. He pushed on the rock as long as he could. After rest he pushed more. Each day pushed a little harder and a little longer. Day after day he pushed. Days rolled on to weeks, and weeks into months, as he faithfully pushed against this rock.

After several months of pushing this rock, however, the man was getting tired. He began to doubt that his vision came from God. He decided to measure how far he had been able to move the rock during those months, and he discovered that it had not budgeted all.

The man was disappointed and in despair. He sat on his porch and cried, because he had invested so much time and effort for nothing. This day the sun was setting, and Jesus came and sat down next to the man. Jesus asked, "son, why are you so sad?"

The man replied," Lord, you know how weak I am, and the vision you gave me built up false hope. I have pushed with all that was within me for many months and that old rock is right where it was when I started."

Jesus said to him, "I never told you to go move the rock, I told you to push against the rock." Then Jesus told him to step in front of the mirror and look at himself. The man did so and was amazed. He had been so sickly and weak, but now what he saw in the mirror was a strong muscular man. And it dawned on him that he had been feeling better the last two months and it was all because he had been pushing the rock. Suddenly the man understood that the plan of God was not to change the position of the rock, but to change him. That's how obedience to God works. Our task is not to understand what God is seeking to accomplish. Our task is simply to obey.

Later we will see the blessings that will flow due to our obedience.

Elijah then, heard the word of the Lord that he was to go to the town is Zarephath were God had instructed a widow to supply them with food. Elijah did as he was told even though the plan seemed to be misguided. When he come to the gate of the city, he encountered a widow who was gathering sticks. Since this was Baal territory, we may assume that this woman had been raised to worship idols. Yet she was a giving person, a kind person. Elijah called to the window and asked, "would you bring me a little water so that I may have a drink?" Amazingly she did as he asked, even though there was little water to go around. And, as basic as his request for water was, she was going to get it, Elijah called after her and said, "and bring me, please, a piece of bread."

She and her son were on the verge of starvation yet she honored the request of Elijah, as Elijah says to her, "don't be afraid."

I'm sure you all remember the story very well for the oil and flour that she used for baking just never seemed to run dry.

The part of the story that I have to admit I just did not remember and is the part of the story where her son becomes gravely ill and dies in her lap. She was concerned that she was being punished for her sin by having her son taken away from her.

How sad it is that we too sometimes have the same concern.

Yet Elijah picks the boy up from her lap and takes him in his arms carries him upstairs to his room and lays them on the bed. Then he cries out to the Lord, "Lord my God, have you brought tragedy on this poor widow that I'm staying with, by causing her son to die?" You think because Elijah is a prophet that he has life all figured out. But he has no idea how this widows son is dead or at least on the verge of death. After all, he had stopped breathing, so Elijah stretched himself on the boy three times cried out to the Lord, "Lord my God that this boy's life my returned to him!" And so it happened and Elijah picks up the boy and return him to his mother's arms alive.

Similarly is the story in the Gospel where Jesus restores the son of a widow lady on the way to his burial place. Jesus, "says, young man, I tell you, arise!"

How can we wrap ourselves around these stories unless we have the firm belief that when God speaks, it is. Plus!, When God speaks we are, not only to listen but to get busy and do.

One final comment: don't tell God He can't do that! Listen and believe!

You all be Good, be Holy, preached the Gospel always using Words and Holy Actions!.
'Thank you' to Deacon Kaas, for letting me post his reflection here.
More reflections:
Related posts:
Posted by 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, December 2, 2012

Gratitude, Authority, and Duty

I wrote about gratitude, emotions, and reason last Sunday; also imaginary turkeys:
Like I said then: "gratitude" can be something I feel, an emotion; or it can be a reasoned decision. There's nothing wrong with emotions, by themselves, and that's another topic. (December 18, 2011)

Another Angle on Gratitude, and Authority

By the time I finished writing last Sunday's 'being Catholic' post, I'd gone off on a tangent - nothing new there.

Oddly enough, the tangent had nothing to do with geometry or pianos, and that's yet another topic.

I deleted the 'extra' text after copying and saving it. Later I decided that there was enough there to make another post: after a bit of editing.

Authority: Legitimate and Otherwise

There's a connection between gratitude and authority. That doesn't mean that people who aren't the boss should behave like Uriah Heep's unctuous brother. And it certainly doesn't mean that anybody who sits behind a big desk or wears a suit is always right.

I used to think I didn't like authority. Then my wife pointed out that I was quite comfortable with authority: it was pompous nitwits who claimed authority that bothered me. She was right, of course. (March 30, 2011)

Sadly, authority can be misused. Sometimes folks with authority hurt those who they're supposed to help. Yes, I know about the pedophile priests.

But authority, and sensible respect for authority, is important. It starts in the family: or should.

Families: Society at the Cellular Level

The family is the "original cell of social life." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2207) It's where we're supposed to learn about taking care of each other. (Catechism, 2208)

I was blessed with good parents. They made mistakes, sometimes major mistakes, but I never doubted that they loved me. Sadly, not everyone has that experience.

Too many parents apparently demand respect from their children, without earning it. I think some attacks on 'traditional values' trace back to parents who abused their authority. I've been over this before:

Duties for Everyone

Parents are supposed to lead a family, which doesn't mean that kids 'have no rights:'
  • Families are important
    (Catechism, 2210)
  • Family members have duties
Children are supposed to respect their parents. That respect is supposed to come from a sense of gratitude. Bear in mind that this is the way families are supposed to work: not what happens when broken parents fail their children.
"Respect for parents (filial piety) derives from gratitude toward those who, by the gift of life, their love and their work, have brought their children into the world and enabled them to grow in stature, wisdom, and grace. 'With all your heart honor your father, and do not forget the birth pangs of your mother. Remember that through your parents you were born; what can you give back to them that equals their gift to you?'19"
(Catechism, 2215)
Not all parents make it easy for their children "to grow in stature, wisdom, and grace:" but that's the way it's supposed to work.

Nations

It's a big jump, going from from families to nations: but there's still a need for authority, respect, and (usually) obedience.
"The duty of obedience requires all to give due honor to authority and to treat those who are charged to exercise it with respect, and, insofar as it is deserved, with gratitude and good-will.
"Pope St. Clement of Rome provides the Church's most ancient prayer for political authorities:18 'Grant to them, Lord, health, peace, concord, and stability, so that they may exercise without offense the sovereignty that you have given them. Master, heavenly King of the ages, you give glory, honor, and power over the things of earth to the sons of men. Direct, Lord, their counsel, following what is pleasing and acceptable in your sight, so that by exercising with devotion and in peace and gentleness the power that you have given to them, they may find favor with you.'19"
(Catechism, 1900)
"It is the duty of citizens to contribute along with the civil authorities to the good of society in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom. The love and service of one's country follow from the duty of gratitude and belong to the order of charity. Submission to legitimate authorities and service of the common good require citizens to fulfill their roles in the life of the political community."
(Catechism, 2239)
I've run into folks who apparently thought that 'good' citizens should submit to national authorities.

That's not what the last paragraph said:
"...Submission to legitimate authorities and service of the common good require citizens to fulfill their roles in the life of the political community."
(Catechism, 2239) [emphasis mine]
Here's where it gets interesting.

Moral Legitimacy

Obedience and respect for authority are important. I can't disregard leadership that I don't like, and claim virtue.

But that doesn't mean everything a leader says is right:
"Authority does not derive its moral legitimacy from itself. It must not behave in a despotic manner, but must act for the common good as a 'moral force based on freedom and a sense of responsibility':21
"A human law has the character of law to the extent that it accords with right reason, and thus derives from the eternal law. Insofar as it falls short of right reason it is said to be an unjust law, and thus has not so much the nature of law as of a kind of violence.22
"Authority is exercised legitimately only when it seeks the common good of the group concerned and if it employs morally licit means to attain it. If rulers were to enact unjust laws or take measures contrary to the moral order, such arrangements would not be binding in conscience. In such a case, 'authority breaks down completely and results in shameful abuse.'23"
(Catechism, 1902, 1903)
"The eternal law" is natural law, the set of ethical laws woven into the universe. They're as real as the physical laws.

Consequences of ignoring physical laws can be as obvious as a brick dropped on one's foot. Consequences of ignoring ethical laws are real, too: but can take longer to become obvious. My opinion. I've discussed natural law before. (July 4, 2012)

'I was Only Following Orders'

Folks who had helped Germany's 1933-1945 leadership had some explaining to do when the 'Thousand Year Reich' failed to perform as advertised.

It wasn't the first time folks said they 'were only following orders,' it wasn't the last. Sometimes claiming that being ordered to do something nasty worked as a defense, sometimes it didn't. (Superior orders, Wikipedia)

My opinion is that Thomas More and John Fisher were right, and that my long-term plans are best served by doing what's right: not what's easy or expedient.

Will I follow through on that brave sentiment? Ask me after the Last Judgment, and that's still another topic.

"...Contrary to the Demands of the Moral Order..."

Unthinking obedience is not a good idea. Not if I take what the Catholic Church says seriously:
"The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. 'Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.'48 'We must obey God rather than men':49
"When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.50
"Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution."
(Catechism, 2242, 2243)
Note: the Church doesn't say that armed resistance to oppression by political authority is never legitimate. On the other hand, Catechism, 2243, says that using force to resist a rogue ruler is acceptable only if:
  1. Violation of fundamental rights is
    • Certain
    • Grave
    • Prolonged
  2. All other means of redress have been exhausted
  3. Such resistance will not provoke worse disorders
  4. There is well-founded hope of success
  5. It is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution

Faith, Government, and Conscience

America's national government still allows citizens to follow our faith: inside a church. For that, I'm grateful.

The other 167 hours a week, though, the government expects us to follow government orders: even if doing so violates basic ethical principles.

Looking at today's America and item #2 in that five-point list, I believe that we still have quite a few options.

We're stuck with the current chief executive for another four years, but there's a midterm election coming. It will be an opportunity to swap out some members of Congress.

Finally: As a Catholic, I wouldn't be allowed to force another person to believe what I do, even if I had that sort of power. We're told that:
  • Religious freedom is vital
    (Catechism, 2104-2109)
    • For everybody
      (Catechism, 2106)
  • Some actions are always wrong
    (Catechism, 1789)
    • Even if the President says it's okay
      (Catechism, 2242)
  • Human life
    • Is sacred
      (Catechism, 2258)
    • Begins at conception
      • (Catechism, 2270, 2274)
  • Murder is wrong
    (Catechism, 2259-2262, 2268-2269)
By the way, another blogger posted an excellent list of reasons for celebrating. I agree with her, even though I agree that recent American election results were disappointing:
Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, November 16, 2012

Defending Religious Liberty; and Living in a World of Wonder

Much of the week's news was 'more of the same.' These caught my attention:
  1. "Prayerfully Resolute"
  2. Weather Report from a Robot on Mars

Social Media, Yeats, and Elijah

I've been running into quite a few posts in social media that read something like this:
'I'm the only real [Catholic, Christian, American, whatever] left!

"Nobody cares!!

"America has no [moral values, religious leaders, decent citizens, whatever] left!!!'
I even ran into one chap who said that nobody cared: which was odd, since the rest of the post showed that he cared, a lot.

Disappointed, Not Discouraged

Today is the 10th day since America's presidential election. The results disappointed me, but I'm not discouraged: maybe because I've been through something like this before. (November 6, 2012)

I think it helps that I know a little about 'good old days' gone by:
"...Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity...."
("The Second Coming," W. B. Yeats (1919))
Yeats had some reason for feeling apprehensive. Born in 1865, he'd seen his familiar 19th century world fall into the meat grinders of:
Maybe I should be sitting in a dark room, wringing my hands in anguish over the passing of the Cold War, Victorian England and the Hanseatic League: but I seriously doubt it. I've discussed this sort of thing in a few blogs:

Freedom!

I had to change some of my views when I became a Catholic. What "freedom" means isn't one of them. As a Catholic, I have to:
  • Support religious freedom
    (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2104-2109)
    • For everybody
      (Catechism, 2106)
  • Submit to legitimate authorities
    • Refuse obedience to civil authorities
      • When their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience
      (Catechism, 2242)
    (Catechism, 2239)
I've posted that list fairly often. (June 1, 2012)

Catholic bishops in America care about freedom - for everybody. That's why they launched First American Freedom (firstamericanfreedom.com). It encourages education, prayer and public action to protect religious freedom.


1. "Prayerfully Resolute"

"Religious liberty defense must be long-term, Archbishop Lori declares"
Michelle Bauman, CNA/EWTN News (November 13, 2012)

"The strong protection of Americans' religious freedom requires a long-term commitment to formation and education, particularly of young people, the U.S. bishops' leader on religious liberty issues said.

" 'We are prayerfully resolute in pursuing the project of defending and fostering religious liberty, in the short and mid-term and in the long-term,' said Archbishop William E. Lori of Baltimore, who chairs the ad hoc committee on religious liberty....

"...Looking at the immediate future, Archbishop Lori observed that the 'political landscape is the same, but so also is our resolve to eliminate the HHS mandate and most especially the four-part definition that it contains of what constitutes religious activity.'..."
I think Archbishop Lori made sense in that article.

Restoring - or creating - religious liberty in America will take time.

But civilizations have been changed before.

I think we can do it again:

2. Weather Report from a Robot on Mars


(NASA/JPL-Caltech, used w/o permission)
"NASA's Mars rover Curiosity used a mechanism on its robotic arm to dig up five scoopfuls of material from a patch of dusty sand called 'Rocknest,' producing the five bite-mark pits visible in this image from the rover's left Navigation Camera (Navcam). Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech"
"NASA Rover Providing New Weather and Radiation Data About Mars"
Mission News, NASA (November 15, 2012)

"Observations of wind patterns and natural radiation patterns on Mars by NASA's Curiosity rover are helping scientists better understand the environment on the Red Planet's surface.

"Researchers using the car-sized mobile laboratory have identified transient whirlwinds, mapped winds in relation to slopes, tracked daily and seasonal changes in air pressure, and linked rhythmic changes in radiation to daily atmospheric changes. The knowledge being gained about these processes helps scientists interpret evidence about environmental changes on Mars that might have led to conditions favorable for life....

"...The overall goal of NASA's Mars Science Laboratory mission is to use 10 instruments on Curiosity to assess whether areas inside Gale Crater ever offered a habitable environment for microbes...."
I'll grant that what the Curiosity rover is doing lacks the fast-paced drama of Hollywood's 'space' movies. What fascinates me about Curiosity's weather reports and photos of dirt is that this is real.

Mars, Microbes, and a World of Wonder

Human-size Martians, with or without ray guns, would be exciting. For that matter, Martian microbes would be exciting. Any solid evidence that there is or was life on Mars would keep scientists busy for years. Decades.

I think it's very unlikely that Curiosity will find evidence that there was, or is, life on Mars. But it could happen.

Contrary to some expectations, I don't think that discovering life on another world will make Christians self-destruct. Not all of us, anyway. And that's another topic. (January 20, 2012) Like I've said before:
"...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))...

... it's idolizing creation, or some creature, that gets us in trouble. (Catechism, 2112-2114)..."
(November 27, 2011)

Step Back, and Look

One-half light-year long interstellar 'twisters' in the Lagoon Nebula (M8) in the constellation Sagittarius. Photo STScI-PRC96-38aHubble Space Telescope, Space Telescope Science Institute, via NASA, used w/o permissionI could be a 'good Catholic,' and assume that all creation is a few thousand miles across and a few thousand years old. But I'm not bothered by the knowledge that the scale of creation is enormous in both time and space.

I probably wouldn't have made a universe this big. But, as I've said before, God's God; and I'm not.

Looking into the night sky, seeing images captured by orbiting telescopes, and learning more about this creation, probably won't put an end to world hunger: or unsnarl rush hour traffic.

But I think it's a good idea to occasionally take a deep breath, step back, and look - really look - at this astonishing world we live in.
"The heavens declare the glory of God; the sky proclaims its builder's craft."
(Psalms 19:2)

(Hubble Space Telescope, Space Telescope Science Institute, via NASA, used w/o permission)
"Closer view of the "twisters" in the Lagoon Nebula."

Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, November 4, 2012

Being a Good Citizen

Depending on who's talking, 'being a good citizen' can mean always agreeing with a political party's platform; just paying taxes and staying out of jail; or voting, if there's nothing good on television.

Citizenship, Catholic Style

Since I take 'love God, love your neighbor, everybody's your neighbor' seriously, I must:
  • Support religious freedom
    (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2104-2109)
    • For everybody
      (Catechism, 2106)
  • Take an active part in public life
    (Catechism, 1915)
  • Contribute to the good of society
    • In a spirit of
      • Truth
      • Justice
      • Solidarity
      • Freedom
    (Catechism, 2239)
  • Submit to legitimate authorities
    • Refuse obedience to civil authorities
      • When their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience
      (Catechism, 2242)
    (Catechism, 2239)
    (June 1, 2012)
On the whole, I'd rather not get in trouble with civil authorities. But if I had to choose, I'd rather defy the United States Supreme Court than explain to Jesus why I dissed God the Father. (August 27, 2011)

It's a simple decision, but not an easy one:
I'll be back in about an hour, with my hopes and expectations: and, more to the point, a list of 'religious freedom' resources.
You may find a link list of today's three posts, and others, useful. Then again, maybe not:
Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Faith and Obedience

Earlier today, I posted about an odd comment: and odder assumptions about the Catholic Church.Some of what folks 'know' about the Catholic Church simply isn't so. On the other hand, it's true that the Catholic Church is huge, and ancient. I'm okay with that, but some folks aren't.

It's Not American!

The Catholic Church isn't an American institution. Like the fellow said, we're "all over the world:"


(from H.E. Fowler, via Wikipedia, used w/o permission)
"Crowley, Jeremiah J. (1913) 'The Pope: Chief of White Slavers High Priest of Intrigue,' p. 430"

Jeremiah J. Crowley was right on one point. The Catholic Church is "all over the world."

I was attracted by that aspect of Catholicism. (March 23, 2012) But I grew up in a different era, and decided to become a Catholic. Not everybody's like me.

I didn't, by the way, covert to Catholicism to be with folks who were pretty much like me. The Church encourages diversity, and that's another topic.

Superstition?

A dictionary says that superstition is "an irrational belief arising from ignorance or fear." (Princeton's WordNet) For folks determined to believe that religion is an irrational belief arising from ignorance or fear, Catholics are "superstitious."

Here's what the Catholic Church has to say, in part:
"Superstition is the deviation of religious feeling and of the practices this feeling imposes. It can even affect the worship we offer the true God, e.g., when one attributes an importance in some way magical to certain practices otherwise lawful or necessary. To attribute the efficacy of prayers or of sacramental signs to their mere external performance, apart from the interior dispositions that they demand, is to fall into superstition.41"
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2111)
Bottom line, as a practicing Catholic, I'm not allowed to be superstitious. It's against the rules.

I've been over this before:

Faith, and the Alternative

I think I understand why some folks think religious faith is unpleasant:
"By faith, man completely submits his intellect and his will to God.2 With his whole being man gives his assent to God the revealer. Sacred Scripture calls this human response to God, the author of revelation, 'the obedience of faith.'3"
(Catechism, 143)
'Submit my intellect and my will to God?' Why should I give up my whims and preferences? That sounds so - restrictive.

Simon Peter explained why sticking with my Lord makes sense, in the long run:
"Jesus then said to the Twelve, 'Do you also want to leave?'

"Simon Peter answered him, 'Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.

"We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.' "(John 6:67-69)
At the end of all things, I've got two options: to be with my Lord, or not. On the whole, I'll take "the words of eternal life" over the alternative.

I put a definition of faith, Catholic style, and more links under "Background," at the end of this post.

As for why I think it makes sense to submit to my Lord:

Obedience

I spent my teens in the '60s, when obedience wasn't a fashionable idea. The establishment of that era had made a mess of America, and I've been over that before. (January 12, 2010) The establishment's changed in some ways; and not so much in others. (September 15, 2011)

I'm quite willing to obey my Lord. That's because I know who He is, and what He did. (March 18, 2012, March 11, 2012)

Faith, Yes: Blind, No

I've said this before. I'm not required to check my brain at the door when I go to a Catholic church.

I think the Church's position is seen as "vague," or worse, in part because we're expected to think about what we're told.

We're not told that beer is evil, or workers are right. Instead, we're told about moderation and fundamental rights.

That's part of the reason that Catholic groups in America often host Bingo games. And that's yet another topic.

The sort of freedom we have comes with responsibility. (Catechism, 1731-1738). Part of those responsibilities involve being good citizens. (Catechism, 2238-2243) More topics.

Then there's erroneous judgment. (Catechism, 1790-1794) And that's - what else? Another topic.

Related posts:Background:
"FAITH: Both a gift of God and a human act by which the believer gives personal adherence to God who invites his response, and freely assents to the whole truth that God has revealed. It is this revelation of God which the Church proposes for our belief, and which we profess in the Creed, celebrate in the sacraments, live by right conduct that fulfills the twofold commandment of charity (as specified in the ten commandments), and respond to in our prayer of faith. Faith is both a theological virtue given by God as grace, and an obligation which flows from the first commandment of God (26, 142, 150, 1814, 2087)."
"OBEDIENCE: (1) The submission to the authority of God which requires everyone to obey the divine law. Obedience to the Church is required in those things which pertain to our salvation; and obedience is due to legitimate civil authority, which has its origin in God for the sake of the common good and the order of society (1897). The fourth commandment obliges children to obey their parents (2216). (2) Obedience of faith: The first obedience is that of faith: to listen and freely submit to the word of God (144). (3) Obedience of Christ: Jesus Christ substituted his obedience to the will of his Father, even unto death, for the disobedience of sin, in order to bring us the grace of justification and to satisfy for our sins (615). (4) Vow of obedience: In imitation of this obedience of Jesus, as an evangelical counsel, the faithful may profess a vow of obedience; a public vow of obedience, accepted by Church authority, is one element that characterizes the consecrated life (915)."
(Glossary, Catechism)
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, March 16, 2012

'Uncle Knows Best?' HHS Mandate, Religious Freedom, and Presidential Approval

First the good news: If America's ruler is successful, Americans may not have to bother about deciding what they believe about life, death, God, or much of anything else. Experts working for the national government will take care of all that.

Now the bad news: Not all Americans think this is a wonderful idea.

I'm one of them.

I'm also over-stating implications of the HHS mandate that's got every Catholic bishop in America saying "no."

But not by much.

Never mind what I say, though. Here's what Catholic bishops in America say:
Be aware, though: those folks aren't on the government payroll, and aren't acting with presidential approval.

'The Establishment:' That was Then, This is Now

I'm not on the same page as "the establishment." That was true when "the establishment" was a bunch of men with no beards and short hair, wearing white shirts, and trying desperately to look and act sufficiently WASPish.

"The establishment" doesn't look like that now: and I'm still not in cahoots with my 'betters.' I've posted about America's dominant culture, then and now, before:

News, but Not the Establishment Kind

If you get all your news from old-school journalists, you might get the impression that reasonable folks were all for the HHS mandate. And that anyone who doesn't agree with the leader is a religious lunatic. Or just plain nuts. I've been over that sort of thing before:
Here's news that didn't necessarily get approved by The New York Times' editors:
"The CatholicVote.org Legal Fund today filed a first-of-a-kind federal lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on behalf of a Missouri business owner who contends the HHS mandate violates his constitutionally-protected religious beliefs...."
(CatholicVote.org (March 16, 2012))
"...'Religious liberty is not limited to institutions,' said attorney Francis J. Manion, who says his client believes the administration is forcing him to violate his conscience under the new federal rule...."
(CNA/EWTN (March 15, 2012))
"...the Obama administration has been widely criticized over the question of religious freedom. 'The real issue in political life,' ... 'is not contraception: it's the First Amendment. That's the real issue because the Constitution says that there's not going to be a national religion. […] But it also says, "Congress shall make no law restricting the freedom of religion." '..."
(ZENIT (March 14, 2012))
"...'Indeed, this is not about the Church wanting to force anybody to do anything,' said the administrative committee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in a March 14 statement.

"Instead, they explained, it is 'about the federal government forcing the Church - consisting of its faithful and all but a few of its institutions - to act against Church teachings.'..."
(CNA/EWTN News (March 14, 2012))
"...Hawkins told CNA on March 13 that beyond just contraception or abortion, the mandate touches on the issue of religious freedom, which is clear to any woman in the U.S. 'whether she's religious or not.'

" 'It goes too far,' she said, adding that women are beginning to ask fundamental questions about what the government would be able to regulate next if this mandate were to succeed...."
(CNA/EWTN News (March 13, 2012))
"...The Health and Human Services (HHS) Mandate has fueled debates over the Obama Administration's unwillingness to grant the necessary exemptions to religious institutions, forcing these institutions to pay for medical procedures that go against their religious beliefs...."
(ZENIT (March 5, 2012))
I put longer excerpts at the end of this post.1 Headlines and links are under "In the news," too, below "Related posts."

Why Bother?

I'm a practicing Catholic. I take my faith very seriously. That means I can't just sit around, thinking beautiful thoughts and being 'spiritual.'

The Catholic Church has rules, lots of them.There are rules for folks in authority, and for folks who are under the authority of others. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2199, 2238-2242; summary, 2248-2257)

One of the rules says I'm supposed to take an active part in public life. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1915)

Authority, Rules, and "I Was Only Following Orders"

The Catholic Church has quite a bit to say about authority. And about obeying authority:s:
"The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. 'Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.'48 'We must obey God rather than men':49
"When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.50"
(Catechism, 2242)
I've been over that recently:That "moral order" thing may be a little confusing. For the Catholic Church, morality isn't just about sex. I've been over that before, too. (June 3, 2011)

Because I'm a practicing Catholic, I'm not allowed to murder anybody. Even folks who are fair game, under American law and custom. This rule isn't as arbitrary as it may seem. It's tied up with what the Church says about human life:

Health, Science, and the Church

Folks have some very odd notions about religion, science, and being sensible. Bottom line, Catholics aren't required to be stupid. Or daft:
  • Concern for health is a good idea
    (Catechism, 2288-2291)
    • Within reason
      (Catechism, 2289)
  • Scientific medical research is a good idea
    (Catechism, 2292-2296)(from March 8, 2012)
I think the 'religion is against science' notion is connected with a snit involving gentlemen, back in the 19th century - and with the goofy belief that the physical creation is icky. And that's another topic. Topics.

Decisions and the November Election

Since I'm a registered voter in America, with an obligation to take an active part in public life, I plan to vote in the November election. No pressure: but if you're in the same position, you might consider voting, too.

The trick will be to vote responsibly. And that's yet another topic.

Paying attention to truth:
More posts about forcing Catholics to violate our conscience:
The Department of Health and Human Services vs. Conscience
Related posts:
In the news:
1 Excerpts from the news:
"CatholicVote Files Suit Against HHS on Behalf of Missouri Business Owner"
CatholicVote.org, via PRNewswire-USNewswire and Brandenton Herald (March 16, 2012)

"The CatholicVote.org Legal Fund today filed a first-of-a-kind federal lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on behalf of a Missouri business owner who contends the HHS mandate violates his constitutionally-protected religious beliefs...."
"First secular business files lawsuit over HHS mandate"
Michelle Bauman, CNA/EWTN News (March 15, 2012)

"A Missouri business owner has become the first employer of a for-profit, secular company to bring a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration's contraception mandate.

" 'Religious liberty is not limited to institutions,' said attorney Francis J. Manion, who says his client believes the administration is forcing him to violate his conscience under the new federal rule...."
"An Academic Look at the HHS Mandate"
Ann Schneible, ZENIT (March 14, 2012)
"Political Science Professors Consider Broader Implications

"Under the Obama administration's Health and Human Services Mandate, Catholic institutions throughout the United States are facing the possibility of having to either fund medical procedures which go against fundamental teachings of the Catholic Church, or pay a substantial fine.

"ZENIT recently spoke with Professor William R. Luckey and Professor Bernard Way, both professors of Political Science at Christendom College, about the broader implications of the HHS Mandate. Last month, the liberal arts college, located in Front Royal, Virginia, joined a growing number of Catholic institutions speaking out against the HHS Mandate....

"...Due to the requirements that the HHS Mandate imposes on Catholic institutions, the Obama administration has been widely criticized over the question of religious freedom. 'The real issue in political life,' explained Luckey, 'is not contraception: it's the First Amendment. That's the real issue because the Constitution says that there's not going to be a national religion. […] But it also says, "Congress shall make no law restricting the freedom of religion." '..."
"Bishops say mandate fight is about government defining religion"
Michelle Bauman, CNA/EWTN News (March 14, 2012)

"The U.S. bishops are emphasizing that their opposition to the Obama administration's contraception mandate is not about birth control or health care, but about the government's attempt to impose its narrow definition of religion on the country.

" 'Indeed, this is not about the Church wanting to force anybody to do anything,' said the administrative committee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in a March 14 statement.

"Instead, they explained, it is 'about the federal government forcing the Church - consisting of its faithful and all but a few of its institutions - to act against Church teachings.'..."
"Women's support for Obama drops in wake of HHS mandate"
Michelle Bauman, CNA/EWTN News (March 13, 2012)

"A recent poll shows that President Barack Obama's approval ratings dropped 12 percentage points among women voters, despite claims that a federal contraception mandate would help his bid for re-election.

" 'It's definitely something that young women are concerned about,' said Kristan Hawkins, executive director of Students for Life of America.

"Hawkins told CNA on March 13 that beyond just contraception or abortion, the mandate touches on the issue of religious freedom, which is clear to any woman in the U.S. 'whether she's religious or not.'

" 'It goes too far,' she said, adding that women are beginning to ask fundamental questions about what the government would be able to regulate next if this mandate were to succeed...."
"Expert From Becket Fund Explains What Is at Stake"
Ann Schneible, ZENIT (March 5, 2012)
"Expert From Becket Fund Explains What Is at Stake

"The Health and Human Services (HHS) Mandate has fueled debates over the Obama Administration's unwillingness to grant the necessary exemptions to religious institutions, forcing these institutions to pay for medical procedures that go against their religious beliefs...."
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Monday, March 12, 2012

Obedience, Yes: Blind Obedience, No

I've said this before:

The opinions of 'serious thinkers' notwithstanding, the Catholic Church doesn't teach blind obedience. We're expected to obey those in authority over us - as long as what we're told to do isn't immoral. Sounds groovy, except that there are - what else? - rules about what we can and can't decide to not do for 'moral' reasons:
"The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. 'Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.'48 'We must obey God rather than men':49
"When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.50"
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2242)
Looks like "I was only following orders" may not cut it at the particular judgment. ("Particular judgment?" I've mentioned that before. (August 8, 2010) Can't say I'm looking forward to it.)
(from "Citizenship, Rules, Marriage, and Not Being Decently Quiet" (March 5, 2011))

Love, Government, and Getting a Grip

I've said this before, too. The rules are, at their core, simple:
That 'love God, love your neighbor' thing means that I can't do anything I want. Sometimes that's inconvenient.

Folks keep trying to find ways to weasel out of those simple rules. I think that's a major reason for the Catholic Church taking the trouble to explain - in detail:
  • What 'loving your neighbor' means
    • Why it's a good idea
  • Who your neighbor is
  • What constitutes 'hating your neighbor'
    • Why it's a bad idea
After two millennia of weaseling and clarification, there's been quite a bit written about putting 'love God, love your neighbor' into practice. Here's part of what the Church has to say, about:
  • Government
    • "Every human community needs an authority
      to govern it"
      (Catechism, 1898)
    • This authority
      • "Must not behave in a despotic manner"
      • "Must act for the common good as a"-
        • Moral force based on
          • Freedom and
          • A sense of responsibility
      (Catechism, 1902)
    • "Authority is exercised legitimately only"-
      • When it seeks the common good of the group concerned and
      • If it employs morally licit means to attain it
      (Catechism, 1903)
    • "If rulers were to enact unjust laws or take measures contrary to the moral order, such arrangements would not be binding in conscience"
      • "In such a case, 'authority breaks down completely and results in shameful abuse.' "
      (Catechism, 1903)
  • The governed
    • "Citizens should take an active part in public life"
      (Catechism, 1915)
    • Citizens have duties
      • "To contribute along with the civil authorities to the good of society in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom"
        (Catechism, 2239)
      • "Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to"
        • Pay taxes
        • Exercise the right to vote
        • Defend one's country
        (Catechism, 2240)
      (Catechism, 2238-2243, 2255)
"The common good" shows up a lot in that list. It means that I can't think only of myself. It doesn't mean that everybody's supposed to be like me. Individuals are important, and so is letting each of us progress as individuals. It demands respect for the person, and more. (Catechism, 1905-1912)

One more thing: America has a presidential election scheduled in November of this year. American voters have an obligation to vote. (Catechism, 2240) Vote responsibly, and that's another topic.

Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Monday, November 21, 2011

Sloth, Faustian Flip-Flops, and Temptation

New post about Marlowe's
"The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" each Monday
Christopher Marlowe's Doctor John Faustus said a few sensible things in last week's excerpts:
"..."MEPHIST. Ay, that is not against our kingdom; but this is. Think thou on hell, Faustus, for thou art damned.

"FAUSTUS. Think, Faustus, upon God that made the world...."

"...FAUSTUS. Ay, go, accursed spirit, to ugly hell! 'Tis thou hast damn'd distressed Faustus' soul. Is't not too late?..."

"FAUSTUS. Ah, Christ, my Saviour, Seek to save104 distressed Faustus' soul!..."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
Like I said last week: Christopher Marlowe is no theologian. His "Tragical History of Doctor Faustus" is a rip-roaring good drama, in my opinion: which is partly why I'm coming back to it each Monday.

Let's see: where was I?

Faustus, Fear, and the Boys From Below

Faustus had said "Christ, my Saviour," and gotten LUCIFER, BELZEBUB, and MEPHISTOPHILIS, instead.

After dialog that reminded me of "The Godfather" (1972), Faustus did a sharp about-face: and promised to be a thoroughly bad man.

Even granting the presence of the boys from below: that 'repentance' of Faustus seems to have been rather shallow, at best. Or maybe Faustus was so fearful, that he couldn't think straight. I put a few points about reason, repentance, and sin, under last week's Background.

Moving on.

Sloth and Soliloquies

After that little declaration of allegiance, Marlowe's Lucifer trotted out what I called the Seven Deadly Sins floor show. Marlowe got the names right, pretty much. I put terms used in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1866, under the ones with different names:
  • Pride
  • Covetousness
    (Avarice)
  • Wrath
  • Envy
  • Gluttony
  • Sloth
    (Sloth or acedia)
  • Lechery
    (Lust)
Compared to Shakespeare's soliloquies, Marlowe's seven deadly sins don't have much to say. Hamlet's "To be, or not to be" thing, for example, keeps going for 276 words.

Marlowe's Lust only gets 30 words. Gluttony hogs most of the lines for that revue, with 105 words; Sloth has 47:
"...SLOTH.
I am Sloth. I was begotten on a sunny bank, where I have
lain ever since; and you have done me great injury to bring me
from thence: let me be carried thither again by Gluttony and
Lechery. I'll not speak another word for a king's ransom...."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
I think it's pretty clear that Sloth is - slothful. Lazy. Just what you'd expect, from a character with a name like "Sloth."

Definition Time!

Sloth:
  • Noun
    1. A disinclination to work or exert yourself
    2. Any of several slow-moving arboreal mammals of South America and Central America
      • They hang from branches back downward and feed on leaves and fruits
    3. Apathy and inactivity in the practice of virtue
    (Princeton's WordNet)

Sloth, Acedia, and the American Work Ethic

The first definition of "sloth" had me concerned a few years ago, when I was acutely aware of not having gotten as much done at my job as I liked. A priest assured me that he'd never met an American who had a problem with low productivity. (August 16, 2009) This country has its problems: but laziness isn't one of them, in my opinion. Except by our own arguably-exaggerated standards. And that's another topic.

Definition number three is pretty close to what the Catechism has to say about sloth:
"ACEDIA: A less common synonym for sloth, one of the seven "capital" sins (1866). See Sloth.

"CAPITAL SINS: Sins which engender other sins and vices. They are traditionally numbered as seven: pride, covetousness, envy, anger, gluttony, lust, and sloth (1866).

"SLOTH: A culpable lack of physical or spiritual effort; acedia or laziness. One of the capital sins (1866, 2094, 2733)."
(Glossary, Catechism of the Catholic Church)
Having "a culpable lack of physical ... spiritual effort" is still pretty close to the Anglo-American idea of "sloth," but discussions I found in the Catechism about sloth and/or acedia were mostly about prayer and our attitude toward God. (More, under "Background," near the end of this post.)

"All Manner of Delight," and Faustus Flip-Flops Again?

Maybe Marlowe's seven deadly sins revue sounded more enticing, back when Elizabethan English was the latest dialect. Or, maybe not, considering how Faustus reacted to Glutony's little speech:
"...FAUSTUS. No, I'll see thee hanged: thou wilt eat up all my victuals...."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
Faustus doesn't seem to show enthusiasm for any of the seven deadly sins. So how come he says this after they leave?
"...LUCIFER. Now, Faustus, how dost thou like this?

"FAUSTUS. O, this feeds my soul!

"LUCIFER. Tut, Faustus, in hell is all manner of delight.

"FAUSTUS. O, might I see hell, and return again,
How happy were I then!..."
("The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus")
I don't know why there's that apparent disconnect between Faustus's reaction to the seven personified deadly sins, and his professed desire to see Hell. That won't stop me from making a few guesses. Maybe:
  1. The actor was supposed to 'act eager'
    • Or something
  2. It's a dramatization of the vacillating desires of Doctor Faustus
  3. Marlowe didn't finish editing that part of the play
  4. Something else is going on
The way Faustus has been flip-flopping about his deal with Mephistopheles, guess number two might be right.

Temptation, Hell, and Real Estate Fraud

I don't think LUCIFER's claim, that "in hell is all manner of delight" is an altogether accurate statement. Which isn't the same as thinking that temptations are disgusting at first glance:
"...discernment unmasks the lie of temptation, whose object appears to be good, a 'delight to the eyes' and desirable,154 when in reality its fruit is death...." (Catechism, 2847)
Then there's Genesis 3:6. It's sort of like real estate fraud. And no, I do not think that owning property is Satanic, or that everybody who buys, sells, or deals in, real estate is doing something wrong.

Moving on.

I remember reading jokes about 'Rainbow Acres,' or 'El Mirage Estates,' quite a few decades back. Times were different then, and quite a few folks wanted to buy land: and had the credit to do so. Some of them were - imprudent.1

That was then, this is now, and I discovered that today's emphasis is on things like mortgage fraud and a variation of the Nigerian scam. And that's almost another topic. I put some links under "More background," below.

Bottom line? Temptations are tempting because there's some sort of attraction: an immediate pleasure; something "...pleasing to the eyes,...desirable..." (Genesis 3:6)

But, in my opinion, even if 'it feels so good,' walking away from God is a really, really, bad idea.

About Halfway Through Marlowe's "...Faustus"

I did a quick page count, and see that I'm roughly halfway through "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus." So far, I've been having fun with the play. I think it helps that I didn't expect Christopher Marlowe to display much in the line of profound theological insights.

I've been able to enjoy the story: and all those opportunities to see what the Church teaches about the serious topics touched on in the play.

As for whether or not Marlowe was really leading some sort of secret life? He really doesn't seem to have been a 'closet Catholic.' (Footnote 1 (November 14, 2011)) I may get back to the 'conspiracy theory' side of Marlowe and Faustus. Or, not.

Next week, I see I'll be reading CHORUS saying things like "...Did mount himself to scale Olympus' top...." Those Elizabethans do seem to have liked their shout-outs for the classics.

Sort of like today's dramatists dropping something about sustainable development or environmental awareness into a script. Then there's Captain Planet - and I'm getting seriously off-topic.

I'll probably skip ahead, to where Faustus takes a trip to Rome. Now, that might be interesting.

Other posts in this series:
Related posts:
Background:
  • Acedia
    • A form of depression due to
      • Lax ascetical practice
      • Decreasing vigilance
      • Carelessness of heart
    • Presumption "opens the gate" for acedia
    • Acedia "is the reverse of presumption"
    (Catechism, 2733, 2755)
  • Hell
    (Catechism, 1033-1037)
    • Exists
    • Its chief punishment is eternal separation from God
      (Catechism, 1035)
    • "God predestines no one to go to hell...."
    • To enter Hell
      • "...a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary..."
        • "and persistence in it until the end...."
      (Catechism, 1037)
  • Prayer and
    • "Our dullness and laziness"
    • "Humble, trusting, and persevering love"
    (Catechism, 2742)
  • Sloth as one of the capital sins
    (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1866)
  • Temptation
    • Tempting God
      • Testing God's
        • Goodness
        • Almighty power
      • By
        • Word
        • Deed
      • Bad idea
        (Catechism, 2119)
    • Discerning between trials, and temptations
      (Catechism, 2847)
    • Help for resisting temptation
      • Fortitude
        (Catechism, 1808)
      • The Sign of the Cross
        (Catechism, 2157)
      • Practicing
        • Self-knowledge
        • Ascesis
          • Self-denial
          • Self-restraint
        • Obedience to God's commandments
        • Exercise of the moral virtues
        • Fidelity to prayer
        (Catechism, 2340)
      • Avoiding idolatry
        • Idolatry is divinizing that what is not God
        (Catechism, 2113)
      • "Lead us not into temptation"
        (Catechism, 2846-2849)
    • Temptation in prayer
      • Lack of
        • Faith
        • The disposition of a humble heart
      • Acedia/sloth
        (Catechism, 2732-2733)
      • Summarized
        (Catechism, 2753-2755)
    • Prayer and avoiding temptation
      (Catechism, 2612)
    • Temptation of Jesus
      (Catechism, 538-540, 566)
  • Ways to sin against God
    • Indifference...
    • Ingratitude...
    • Lukewarmness...
    • "Acedia or spiritual sloth goes so far as to refuse the joy that comes from God and to be repelled by divine goodness"
    • Hatred of God...
    (Catechism, 2094)
More background:
"...Faustus" excerpts in these posts taken from:
1 Some of the 'wonderful bargains' were outright frauds: there was no land, or the seller had no legal rights to the property. Other deals were a bit more clever. The proud new owner might discover that the property was:
  • Inaccessible
    • Except by helicopter
    • Because the seller hadn't bothered to include streets in the 'development'
  • A total of 10 acres
    • In 100 1/10 acre plots
      • Scattered across several southwestern states
    • One yard wide, by 48,400 yards long
Maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration: but I remember reading about quite a few folks discovering that their "secluded" Florida estate was in the middle of a swamp; or that reaching the "desert paradise" they bought involved a long hike over rough ground.
Posted by 2 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

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.