« January 2005 | Main | March 2005 »

February 28, 2005

The woman at the well - last Sunday's Gospel

For the reader of the New Testament, a man meeting a woman at a well should not be a scene devoid of connotation, though I admit I did not even think about the OT until Catholic Ragemonkey's Fr. Hamilton reminded me of it.  Since it is Jacob's well, you might remember this scene.  A man asking a woman for a drink of water might put you in mind of thisJesus has come to "court" her for God.

Up to this point, she had had six men - the number which represents imperfection that comes from not having the help of God.  Jesus is number seven, perfection, and she found in him the happiness she wanted but couldn't have with those other six.  Her encounter with our Lord recorded in Scripture was her conversion experience.  She took the baptismal name Photina ("The enlightened one" in Greek) and devoted herself to preaching the Gospel, eventually winning the martyr's crown.  Her feast day is March 20.

Posted by Thomas A. on February 28, 2005 at 07:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Opinionweek

Just when I got done giving Newsweek credit for a pretty good pope article, here comes this...thing.  The author probably thought he was being pretty witty with the "impose his will...living will" thing, but really he was showing just showing off his ignorance of Catholicism and the Church.  To begin with, it's pretty asinine to describe the Pope's service as "imposing his will on the Church" especially when that's exactly what he hasn't been doing - following the teachings of the Church rather than his own will, letting bishops have great free rein in administering their dioceses themselves, being very collegial and so forth.  Next he describes the Pope as "stubborn" for trying to serve despite his poor health.  Does he know that saintly priests generally don't let their health stop them unless they're actually in a hospital bed?  St. John Vianney heard confessions all day even when deathly ill.  When people told him he should think about his health, he told them it was not necessary for him to live, but while he did live it was necessary for him to serve God.  Then the reporter displays his cluelessness and resentment as he talks about the Pope's book and speculates about his emergency plans.  Does he think that he is engaging in opinion-free objective reporting?  Does he think his editorializing is just making observations that are so obvious that they don't count as "opinion" at all?

So, can't a news magazine report whatever it wants?  Yes, but the MSM has done such a good job of convincing people that they are "objective" and Catholic news outlets are "biased" that most people will be getting their info on the Church and related matters from people who don't understand her, don't care to understand her, and have an agenda counter to hers.  This goes for Catholics, too.  Ever wonder why so many Catholics have anti-Catholic habits of thought and can't understand their own Church?

Here's some people who are more on the ball:
Jimmy Akin on a "living will" and
National Review's Michael Novak

Posted by Thomas A. on February 28, 2005 at 04:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Browsing the CSC library...

I found a book called "The Meaning of Meaning" and a book on church music written in part by the man who penned arguably the single worst church song (I won't call it a "hymn") of the post-Vatican II era, and one of the St. Louis Jesuits.

Posted by Thomas A. on February 28, 2005 at 03:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Sad story

I don't remember who it was that pointed me to this story, but it is depressing and distressing from beginning to end.  So there's this kid, and his father beats him up and when he's a little older he starts drinking himself senseless and gets hooked on huffing paint.  Then he starts runnning with a gang.  So he's 18, and his gang kills someone.  He says he can't remember whether he killed the guy or not, being all drunk and high.  But his gang all says he did it.  Now he's on death row. 

I always feel so bad for people like this.  Shouldn't he have known that you're asking for trouble being in a gang, doing drugs, and all that?  Yeah, maybe, but who's going to tell him what he should be doing instead?  His father?  No, he's busy kicking him across the room.  I'm guessing he didn't take the kid to church, either.  Drugs were probably the only way he could see to escape his troubles and the gang the first people who accepted and valued him.  And is some poor kid who's in a gang and does drugs going to get the benefit of the doubt from the law?  Probably not.

Remember that part about how God punishes the children of the wicked to the third and fourth generation?  It's not that God is so excessively vindictive, it's just the way the world is - our actions have consequences because we have free will and responsibility whether we like it or not.  The son isn't guilty for the sins of his father, but he's suffering the consequences nonetheless.

So can I ask something of you guys?  Pray for Pablo.  Pray that if he's innocent, that something happens so that he goes free and he reforms his life, or if such is not God's will, for his contrition and that his unjust punishment unite him to the innocent Christ on the Cross.  If he's guilty, either that he get some other sentence so that he can grow in virtue before his death, but even if he can't, that he die contrite and accepting his sentence as punishment for his sins so that he can go straight to heaven without any purgatory (this is what St. Joseph Cafasso taught his penitents).  In fact, St. Joseph Cafasso would be an excellent patron for him.  From a worldly perspective his life may be a complete tragedy, but if one of those things can happen to him, if he can be a saint, then it is not a tragedy but a triumph.  And God will not refuse if we ask him out of love in his Son's name.  So, gentle readers, why not?

Posted by Thomas A. on February 28, 2005 at 03:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Hi, I'm back

Sorry about the blog silence; I hope you haven't all left me yet for sites where they actually post (or the real world).  A severe cold left me with inflammation of the lungs that made it very tiresome to breathe, let alone do anything else.  Since then I have seen the doctor and gotten some medicine and am doing much better.  I haven't been paying much attention to the news, but I still have lots of opinions, so maybe I will write about them.  First, however, I'll be going to Mass and making the most of my day off.

Posted by Thomas A. on February 28, 2005 at 10:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 25, 2005

Sheepish Grin...

I was thinking this morning about Matthew 7:15 ...

"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves."

When I used to hear this passage, it always made me think about corruption in the hierarchy. I'm not sure why, but it seemed to convey the idea that some heretical predator was going to don a cassock and breed disunity from within. Obviously, I still think this reading has its merits.

But I was thinking a bit more about the image of the sheep...and John 21 came to mind..."Tend my sheep...Feed my sheep."

This made me rethink what it meant to dress like a sheep. Matthew 7 doesn't say, "Beware false prophets who come dressed like shepherds but are going to lead the sheep into his den." It isn't the people who appear as bishops that he is warning against. It's people who appear as those the shepherd tends. The false prophets come dressed as laity.

And they are disguised as sheep because this means they can live within the community forever, just devouring one little sheep at a time and never getting caught. The heretical Catholic who doesn't want to leave the Church wants to be on the inside and gnaw on their brethren when no one is looking.

Think about that the next time you talk to a lay liturgist or DRE that says something unorthodox, or a religious in lay clothes who seems to disparage institutions of the Church...

Posted by Peter Terp on February 25, 2005 at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 23, 2005

Suffering

A more open-minded article than you might expect from Newsweek.

"I must lead her [the Church] with suffering," he said. "The pope must suffer so that every family and the world should see that there is, I would say, a higher gospel: the gospel of suffering, with which one must prepare the future."

No novel doctrine here.  God doesn't just win, he really wins.  He doesn't merely destroy his enemies, he makes them help accomplish his purposes first.  Go back and read Exodus if you need a refresher on this.  Death is the last enemy, and suffering receives the same treatment.

This exaltation of suffering may be difficult for many non-Catholics to understand...But in his moment of apparent weakness and defeat, Christians see him [Christ] as triumphant, dying for humanity's sins and opening the way to heaven."The cross is not just something you hang on the wall," says Father Justo Lacunza-Balda, a missionary and director of the Pontifical Institute of Arabic and Islamic Studies. "Christianity is not born in a laboratory or a schoolroom; it's not conceived in an institute of higher learning. It's about suffering, torture, the experience of Christ on the cross." And it is about hope.

Instead of merely abrogating the suffering and death brought into the world by sin, God chose to make even them serve him, and so the path to the Resurrection goes through Calvary.  If we are to conform ourselves to Christ, that means not just in the ways that are comfortable and easy for us.  Some of us will have great and visible suffering and self-sacrifice.  For many of us it will be ordinary and hidden, like it was for St. Therese of Lisieux.  It is no accident that Pope John Paul has declared her a Doctor of the Church.

Posted by Thomas A. on February 23, 2005 at 08:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

What can you tell me about this...

I figure I could just get these answers over e-mail...but blogging seems so much easier now...

Here's the news back in my home parish, and some people there wanted to know what the deal with it was. Mind you, this is all reported word of mouth.

Wedding Services:
1) Apparently the parish officials have asked the father of the bride NOT to escort his daughter up the aisle for the wedding ceremony. So couples who live together are getting married left and right...but a good kid who wants her dad to give her away is flying in the face of Church authority...

2) The parish organist, known as the Honky Tonk Woman (and who is not actually from the parish itself), requires approximately $300 over and above the standard parish fee (which is about $150). In order to ensure the safety of the parish organ, she must be paid in full even if she does not actually pay the organ.
Kind of sounds like a farm subsidy to me.
(Incidentally, she is called the Honky Tonk Woman because of her piano playing style...which is more fit for a saloon than a Mass and used to cause one of the more flambouyant priests to occasionally yell out "Alleluia!" I'm sure the African American parishoners were absolutely delighted to see a short pasty white man with so much soul...)

First Communion:
1) The DRE has sent out a letter which informs the parents that there is no reason their daughters should wear white for their First Communion. Apparently, pastel is the new white. (Yet, you never see a bride who isn't in white...how intriguing...)

2) Attendance at the First Communion Mass is now optional. Instead of receiving First Communion with the rest of the children on April 20th, children can now receive their First Communion at any 11 AM Sunday Mass between April 2nd until the second week of May.
It's nice that their first act of Communion is so totally divisive.

And maybe we could solve a lot of the wedding Mass problems by just sneaking in the vows during the 9 AM Mass homilies...

Maybe somebody should tell these people that liberalism failed and that a new conservatism is sweeping the Church? Or are the changes above actually more conservative, but I just can't tell the difference because I had lived under a "progressive" regime for so long?

Posted by Peter Terp on February 23, 2005 at 09:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 22, 2005

Can't imagine why they're upset

I mean, it only mocks their religion and their most revered cultural heroes and icons at the same time.  (Talkleft.com)

Posted by Thomas A. on February 22, 2005 at 04:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack

The Chair of St. Peter

Altar

Picture source

Here is another picture of it with information from stpetersbasilica.org.

In case you were wondering, no the original chair did not look like that - it was made of wood but has since been encased in a gigantic monument fashioned by Bernini at the request of Pope Alexander VII.

Posted by Thomas A. on February 22, 2005 at 03:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack