Why are we so afraid to be Catholic, as Catholics?

Why are we Catholics so afraid to live our authentic faith? I have heard various Catholics say things which seem to point to the fact that they are afraid to live the true teachings of the faith because of all sorts of really stupid reasons.

"Oh, don't worry, I am not one of those Catholics..."
"I don't think Jesus cares if we..."
"We don't have to do that to get Heaven..."
"In the end I just try to be a good person..."
"There isn't just one way..."
"It isn't about 'right or wrong' but what works for you, personally..."

Diversity is one thing...

···†···

I am not so rigid to believe that the Catholic faith must be practiced in on certain fashion. I know that there are all sorts of spiritual paths that one can take to God. I look at one of my favorite parts of the religious faith: Women's Religious Orders, and I see the beauty and grace in diversity of spirit.

What baffles me isn't that people are diverse, but that we try as hard as possible to fit our faith to us, instead of the other way around. Shouldn't we be focusing on how to best conform our hearts to God? Instead of practicing our faith in a way consistent and in congruity with the past, we are constantly looking for ways to update the faith. I don't think is because we have mastered all the old ways and are looking for new challenges, I think this is because of fear, disbelief, or laziness. We want our faith a certain way. Instant gratification.

Challenge me, O Lord

···†···

As someone that has worked within politics over the course of my lifetime, I have been very accustomed to a rigid way of thinking about certain things. Even as a young person, I found myself quite far to the right on the spectrum of political thought. In doing so, I did it from an intellectual standpoint, but then again doesn't everyone? That being said, I tried to make sure that I was never so rigid in my thought, as to believe something to be true, just because it came from sources or people that I approved of. To me, everything needed to stand on its own. In other words, I tried not to be a "party guy" and simply "toe the party line."

Likewise, in my faith, I don't do things just because they are traditional. (This is where I differ from 'Trads.') I do things because I believe in my heart of heart to be the best, most efficacious, and morally (or Canonically) sound thing to do. Yet, my favorite thing is when God challenges my notion of what that something is.


I love when a new writing of the Pope catches me off guard and makes me question something I always thought. Or when I read a new book, and a certain spiritually makes me look at my own through a new lens. St. Therese is doing that to me right now. As someone with a more aggressive spirituality, if you will, I have never really had much interest in St. Therese. But once I started reading her, I saw how God challenged me, and how He was trying to get me to see that I can always find new ways to refine myself.

Change...for the better?

···†···

So why don't we do this more often then Catholics? A young girl I talk about the faith with recently told me that she prays the rosary in the car. When she said this, I almost fell over, and I called her on it. I remember her telling me once how she didn't like the Rosary, and it never really "did anything for her." The normal, "it is just a bunch of repetition" argument was made, and I told her that it was something you needed to work at. She told me, she understood that now, and after "working at it" she has become quite devoted to the prayer. WOW! It just takes a little effort.

Likewise I have learned of some young boys that are attending Mass in a different form and spiritual tradition than they are accustomed to. In doing so, their approach, and even their gestures, have changed because of this. WOW!

Maybe it is just us old fogeys that can't change? Or maybe it is those of us that are scared of actually diving into the faith? Maybe we are so afraid of losing ourselves, or dying to ourselves because we like it so much... just the way it is. In our culture, if we don't like something, we can just change it. If we don't like our TV, House, or Car - we can just go get a new one.

I think the only way to become a better Catholic is to realize that we aren't perfect. If we aren't perfect, then we have to be constantly challenging ourselves, or pushing ourselves in new ways. We have to question our spirituality, and force ourselves to become better. This doesn't mean that we keep jumping on the next new thing, but instead, stepping outside our box a little. If you haven't been to Eucharistic Adoration in a year... go spend an hour. If you haven't prayed the Rosary in the past month - do it now. If you haven't read an encyclical - try it, give it 10 pages. The point is to push yourself. We are spiritual warriors - athletes of the faith.

If we continue to do what we have always done... we will continue to get what we have always got.

†††

Notre Dame Worried About Protecting Their Image, But In A Greedy Way

Notre Dame never fails to disappoint. Not worried about their Catholic "Brand" they gave Obama a stage and an honorary degree. Further, they arrested non-violent protestors in the course of that situation.

Yet, now they are so worried about logo revenue they have sent a cease-and-desist letter to Chapman High School in Kansas in order to get them to change their logo. Who is Chapman, they are the school that was destroyed by a tornado last summer along with almost 80% of the rest of the town.

Look, I know there are lots of great students at Notre Dame, and lots of great alumni. Most of my Professors at Ave Maria graduated from there. And even though they have every right to do this, and that there are lots of "grey" areas in all of these stories, Notre Dame never seems to take the high ground in any of them. Oh, and for those wondering, Notre Dame could have done several things here. Licensed the logo out or have them alter is slightly are two easy solutions.

Oh, and how did ND find out about the logo? Well, Chapman has been using the logo since 1967 but it wasn't until someone from ND saw it on the Chapman website while reading about the devastation by the tornados that they finally contacted them. Nothing says Spiritual Work of Mercy like legal action motivated by profit motives.

†††

Georgetown Professor Is Clueless as to Why God is Important, and Why Palin Gets 'It'

Not surprised. I am not. We hear jokes about Jesuit institutions all the time and their lack of "Catholicity." Is it the Jesuits fault? Well, that is hard to say, but where there is smoke, there is usually fire.

Take for example the Washington Posts: "Georgetown/On Faith" Blog section where they write about politics. You can read their about section if you want. They have Professor Jacques Berlinerblau writing about Palin's choice not to run. His take? That her priorities are screwed up because she adheres to a God, Family, Country philosophy. Yes, he disagrees with this order because... well... that is what liberals do. You can't even say, "Oh I get what he is saying, good argument I just disagree." No. For a professor at an allegedly Catholic institution, he is completely clueless. Let's look at his article [my comments in red]:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has decided not to run for the presidency in 2012. In her statement she writes:

After much prayer and serious consideration, I have decided that I will not be seeking the 2012 GOP nomination for President of the United States. As always, my family comes first and obviously Todd and I put great consideration into family life before making this decision. When we serve, we devote ourselves to God, family and country. My decision maintains this order.

The order she refers to, “God, Family, Country” comprises a bewildering conflation of priorities, recklessly emphasizing the personal over the civic. Wait, what? Bewildering? You mean, all the slams by the left that the was "reckless" with her children by running in the first place? And a public servant should walk away from the anchor of family once they run, because... the public is more important than the personal. Honestly, this statement is so far from anything sensible that I should have stopped reading here. 

Palin works from the assumption that one enters public service not to uphold the constitution, not to defend the nation, not to enrich the lives of citizens, but to honor God. Ok, this is an allegedly educated person. Why does he mess up the whole concept of mutual exclusion. Even if you were to argue that Palin places God at the top of this list he creates, it doesn't necessarily mean that she then excludes the rest. 

Whose God, you ask? That’s a great question in a society as religiously diverse as our own. From Palin’s vantage point the answer to that can only be: my God and my interpretation of God. Which, chances are, won’t be your God and your interpretation of God. Wait, now, if you believe in God as a public servant, you can't have a personal view of Him? Again, this is a GEORGETOWN professor.

This type of reasoning has roots that extend back deep into the Puritan heritage of this country. Yet it is important to recall that since the times of let’s say, Roger Williams, this reasoning was challenged by dissenters who were every bit as God-fearing as the Puritans. That is to say, in American history there have existed significant faith-based motivations for fearing public servants who claim to serve God. Ahh... so his colors are showing, he admits essentially that we don't want people who believe in God to serve the public.

Taking the Silver Medal in Palin’s hierarchy is “family.” Her emphasis is perhaps psychologically understandable, given the ferocious battering that the Palin clan, most notably the children, has endured in the press over the past few years. Wow... this is just crude. I get more upset the more I read this. The Academia "elite" really are vile people, this is just more of the same though. If you aren't with them, they hate you - literally. 

Yet once again, a politician does not seek elected office to better his or her family. The inverse proposition seems more likely: those who chose to serve do so to the regrettable emotional detriment of their loved ones.

As for the last of Palin’s priorities, it should have been her first and arguably her second and third as well. Americans are certainly allowed to believe that their God is much more important than their country. But those Americans perhaps ought not run for high office. His conclusion: only atheists or fairweather religious should run for office. Thanks professor, one more Catholic college off the list. He makes it much easier for us Catholics to cross Georgetown off the list of where to send our kids for college. 

I can't believe I wasted my time. As I said, I am not surprised. More of the same. Intellectual "elites" at Catholic entities getting it completely wrong. You should stop giving to Georgetown, and you should stop sending your children to allegedly Catholic institutions. I am sure many of you made it out alive... but what if your kids aren't as lucky? Do you want them thinking like this?

††† 

Priests shouldn't swear... in Mass.

This isn't a post I want to write. I have written it over and over, deleting it each time I get anything substantial down.

I guess I could really just leave it at the title:

Priests shouldn't swear in Mass... ever. 

You aren't a rapper, you aren't on "Jersey Shore", you aren't a teenager trying to look cool, you aren't a drunken sailor (are you?), you aren't the Head Coach of Notre Dame's football team, you aren't any of these things... so don't swear. 

You sound vulgar and disrespectful, but don't worry we forgive you (even if you do it 77x), but it is unbecoming and you will lose respect. Trust me, I asked; even the teens, well... especially the teens. 

If the Pope at some point swears during a Mass, or gives a reason as to why it would be appropriate, this rule would then be open to change. Until then.... well, don't swear. 

###

Michigan Football - GO BLUE!

I am glad that Notre Dame isn't really a Catholic School any longer because it frees me from any and all guilt in rooting for Michigan tomorrow in their first game under lights, ever, at "The Big House."

What? They aren't.

Go Blue!

PandaMania: an Accredited Program

Dear Alaskan Catholics and Parents whose children were subjected to Pandas this summer:

I let you down. I failed in my duty as a blogger and defender of the faith. For that, I am truly sorry.

You see, I knew of the Panda problem long ago. In fact, earlier this spring I had a discussion about it with some of the other Alaskan Catholic Bloggers to try and brainstorm the best way to go about "dealing" with the problem. Should I post about it and let people know our thoughts? Should I document all the other blogs and parents that have posted about their encounter with it? But then I was talked out of it when my fellow bloggers chalked up my concern to an "over analyzation" of the program. It couldn't be as bad as I was making it out to be. So I dropped the issue, I was trying to turn over a leaf and be more "positive". So many bloggers complain that Catholic bloggers like myself aren't positive enough (is that hypocritical?). In fact, some have gone so far to call me "critical and judgmental." I should have trusted my instincts.

You see, one of my fellow Alaskan Catholic Bloggers contacted me about the Panda problem the other day and said:

"I knew that it was stupid, but I didn't know it was wrong!"

They meant the Pandas and that is a pretty heavy indictment of the program. But an even bigger indictment came from Simcha Fisher, who is about as mainstream of a Catholic Blogger that you can find. What I mean is that she is the big time, so much so that she writes for the National Catholic Register. So it isn't as if I found some crazy-trad sitting in a basement somewhere with a blog, to support my argument. Instead, a pretty middle of the road, very authentically Catholic big-time Mom blogger supported my argument without any solicitation.

So what did Ms. Fisher say about the Pandas? She said:

Based on PandaMania’s website, I wouldn’t touch this program with a ten-foot pole, even if the Pope himself were teaching it.

Uhh, wow? Really? That bad huh? Maybe she was just trying to make a point, but wait there is more:

...and the Pandamania website itself makes the program look somewhere between useless and dreadful (“What happens when a pack of fun-loving pandas invades your church?” Erm, I’d call 911 and the Knights of Columbus). Two thousand years of top-flight scholarship and divine inspiration, and the best we can offer is ... wacky pandas who may or may not be advocating for abortion? I looked hard for some reason Catholics would want to get involved with PandaMania, but I’m left distressed that Our Sunday Visitor is endorsing this program.

Ok so I guess she really didn't like it. "...somewhere between useless and dreadful..." isn't really a nuanced position.

So for those of you that sent your kids to VBS this summer and they had to deal with the dreadful pandas, I apologize. I let down my guard, and tried to be "nice, loving, positive, and charitable." I decided to keep my fingers quiet and not "stir up the pot" so to speak. I guess that was the wrong choice - I should have trusted my instinct.

But then again, maybe my friend, Ms. Fisher, and myself are wrong. Maybe the Pandas have solidified the faith in a positive and authentic way in your child. If so, I'd love to hear about it and be proven wrong. Honestly, when I am critical of something, I love being wrong. Why? Because it teaches me something and makes me critically examine the flaw upon which I made my faulty conclusion. I'd love for this to be one of those times.

Simcha Fisher suggests Calling 911 or the Knights of Columbus

There are those within the institution of the Church that don't like bloggers. They think that they are jaded, critical, judgmental, divisive, negative, and do nothing but complain. What they don't realize is that 99% of bloggers that "criticize and judge" (their words, not mine) do so not out of anger or spite but because they want a truly Catholic and congruent hermeneutic. They want authenticity in Catechesis. They want Catholicism pure and unadulterated. The pandas don't seem to fit that description.

So the next time you think I am "critical" of something, give me the benefit of the doubt. Email me, message me, comment - do anything to find out where I am coming from and why I am saying what I am. Usually it isn't some anger or spite filled rant that I am going on, but instead it is an attempt to prevent some harm from occurring. It is hard to un-ring a bell, just as it is hard to un-teach a child something.

I know there are some of you that think I am exaggerating. You probably still think I am being sarcastic, snarky, critical and judgmental. So I will let the Church speak for itself. You see, if your kids played with the Pandas this summer they might have learned about Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. Who is that and what does the Church say about him? Well you see, he was a Jesuit priest who is often called the "Father of Modernism (or the New Age)." The kids received a "Person of Faith Card" which are supposed to be "[e]xcellent tools for encouraging children to learn from the examples set by people of faith." The first one in the series is Chardin.

So what does the Church say about Chardin? Well he is famous, that is for sure. He even received a Monitum, which is more or less an official reprimand and warning that they are in danger of some terminal and grave penalty. Another famous contemporary of Chardin that received a Monitum was Hans Küng. So what is the Church's official statement on Chardin? Well this was issued in 1962 [and reiterated in 1981], and to this day remains the official position of the Church:

"Several works of Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, some of which were
posthumously published, are being edited and are gaining a good deal
of success.

"Prescinding from a judgement about those points that concern the
positive sciences, it is sufficiently clear that the above-mentioned
works abound in such ambiguities and indeed even serious errors, as to
offend Catholic doctrine.

"For this reason, the most eminent and most revered Fathers of the Holy Office exhort all Ordinaries as well as the superiors of
Religious institutes, rectors of seminaries and presidents of
universities, effectively to protect the minds, particularly of the
youth, against the dangers presented by the works of Fr. Teilhard de
Chardin and of his followers.

Oi, the Pandas really seem to be a problem. So again, I am sorry for dropping the ball on this one folks. I know that the entire Archdiocese of Anchorage used this program this summer, and many other dioceses around the country as well. I could have saved us all a ton of grief if I would have just trusted my instinct. Heh, maybe the Archdiocese should hire someone to stay up to date on things and keep a finger on the pulse of Alaska Catholicism so as to  brief the Archbishop and Chancery to make sure things like this are known about before they happen. But what do I know?

So please accept this apology. If your kids are running around with Chardin cards, I deeply apologize. I have failed in my duty, and for that I am truly sorry. I will pray for a fortification of the faith in all those that encountered Pandas this summer. I will also make sure that next time I have thoughts about something... I will be sure to blog about it.

Sincerely,

Me

†††

Save the Feasts, Save the Catholic Culture

Corpus Christi Procession; Rathdrum, ID | Link

Father Acervo is a wonderful priest. I miss him dearly, and I know his current parish of Our Lady of Good Counsel will miss him when he moves this summer to Saint Joan of Arc. The reason he I admire him is that he is willing to examine the issues that plague our Catholic Faith in today's culture, and addresses them with critical analysis and a hopeful desire to correct them.

Most recently he has posted about Catholic Feasts, and the fact that in recent years the faithful and many clergy, no longer celebrate them in any meaningful way. This has lead to a degradation in their importance, and have diluted the faith which surrounds itself by them. He sees the problem simply:

Let’s face it. Catholic culture is all but dead in many places especially in the Western World. Yes, it’s largely because most Catholics don’t know their faith anymore, but also because we’ve simply stopped being Catholic. We’ve stopped doing Catholic things.

He is right. In fact, not only have we stopped doing Catholic things, but we have also stopped believing Catholic things. I really think these two go hand-in-hand in many ways. This isn't just the fault of the Catholic faithful, but the clergy as well. Parishes and priests don't celebrate the feasts or devotions that make up the the seasonal flavor of the Church. Instead, these things have been relegated to a by-gone era or they are seen as personal devotions. Fr. Acervo explains:

We can see then what feasts have to do with Catholic culture. Catholics for the most part don’t celebrate festivals anymore. Go to most parishes and liturgical feast days go by with very little notice, if any. A feast day is celebrated with ordinary vestments, ordinary music (if at all), and little to no change in decoration around the altar and sanctuary.

Devotions, blessings, and processions related to feasts have all but disappeared. There are too few places that have Corpus Christi processions (thankfully, this is something that Archbishop Vigneron has restored in the archdiocese). The Roman Ritual contains blessings for many of the Church’s feast days. Most of these blessings no longer appear in the more recent Book of Blessings.

This is very true of my experience here in Alaska. While a few priests attempt to keep things such as Corpus Christi, Divine Mercy, and May Crowning alive, it is very likely that some other priests lets such things go by without so much as a mention. When asked about these "devotions" their non-observance is explained off by saying that they are "private devotions" and are therefore not part of the celebration of the parish itself – and evidently not by the priest. (This was the case this year during both May Crowning and Divine Mercy Sunday.

Now I can understand certain things being private devotions - but such communal things such as the May Crowning, Divine Mercy and Corpus Christi are liturgical events that occur in the year of the Church. I think Father Acervo is right when he says:

If the Church is going to recover her identity, and if Catholic culture is going to be saved, our feasts must be celebrated and restored of their meaning both in our parishes and in our families.

Read his entire post: Recovering Our Feasts

†††

Yoga, Pole Dancing, and other "Christian" workouts

A while back I posted my thoughts about Yoga, and how I felt that it really wasn't the best type of workout for Catholics to be doing. My point wasn't that there was anything intrinsically wrong with the physical movements, but that if you actually did Yoga the way it was supposed to be done in both a physical and meditative way, you would be doing things that were against the teachings of the Church. The Church in fact wrote a "dialogue" about this issue in 2003 titled: Jesus Christ the Bearer of the Water of Life. They were critical of "New Age" practices and warned against delving to deeply into these practices, especially ones that are meditative or psychological in the sense that they transform or transcend the mind to some different "place."

I recently had, or attempted to have, this conversation with some folk. Their argument was: "I don't do the mental aspects of yoga." I brought up breathing and meditation, and the argument was that "the breathing wasn't associated with anything but the physical." The whole "the body is a temple" argument was heavy on the lips. I started to think that maybe I was over thinking this one.

But then I found a story about a Christian woman, former stripper, that teaches other Christians a workout regiment - solely physical and "for Jesus." What is this physical workout? Pole Dancing. Now again, she requires you to bring a Church Bulletin, and says the class is dedicated to Jesus.

So my question is... what do you all think? Are they the same? Different? Is one ok and not the other? Why?

···†···

The essential element in Christian faith, however, is God's descent towards his creatures, particularly towards the humblest, those who are weakest and least gifted according to the values of the “world”. There are spiritual techniques which it is useful to learn, but God is able to by-pass them or do without them. A Christian's “method of getting closer to God is not based on any technique in the strict sense of the word. That would contradict the spirit of childhood called for by the Gospel. The heart of genuine Christian mysticism is not technique: it is always a gift of God; and the one who benefits from it knows himself to be unworthy”. -Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Orationis Formas, 23.

(h/t: Creative Minority Report )


•««UPADATE»»•
Father Z. has posted about YOGA as well... hmm.

†††

Can't Sleep...

March 19th is now: "Contemplative Outreach United in Prayer Day."

Holy Thursday is now: Labyrinth Walk Night

Beware of false prophets. Many will come in HIS name... 

†††

Our own worst enemy

There has been a lot of talk the past few days about the new "Confession" App for the iPhone. Everyone from Father Z to Our Sunday Visitor has commented about it. Not surprisingly, there isn't a clear consensus on the App. Like any new Catholic "product" everyone has an opinion, and not everyone is satisfied.

What is different about this App, from all other Catholic Apps is that this one received an Imprimatur. Even so, the App is receiving a lot of negative press, much of which is coming from non-Catholic sources, but some comes from Catholics themselves. The main complaints are, that there is a worry some will confuse this apps purpose and believe they have actually confessed their sins, and that the app isn't complete and should include more features.

                                                    ...*...

What is frustrating about this situation is that the main arguments against the app aren't against the concept but against how a user interacts with it. We can expect detracting comments from non-Catholic sources, but the negative reports from Catholics is frustrating.

We read time and time again how the Sacrament of Reconciliation needs to be sought more by Catholics, and yet the second a tool comes along that might actually inspire and help some to heed this call, we shoot ourselves in the foot. Instead of applauding the effort, and suggesting future improvements, many titled their review of the app with words like:  "caution, warning, careful" as if using the app was worse than not using it.

                                                    ...*...

Granted, the app is a pay-for-play item, so this might add to the scrutiny of the reviews, but the level of animosity in some of the reviews, even those trying to be helpful was befuddling. Why do we as Catholics harm our own efforts? This isn't to say that we shouldn't be guardians of truth and adhere faithfully to the precepts of our teachings, but I fear that a lot of the problems some have with the app is that it is modern and different.

I fear we will continue to be our own worst enemy if we tear down good efforts to advance our faith. Nothing is perfect, but this app appears to be a very good effort to create a tool to get folks into a confessional. We need to support our Catholic brethren, not tear them down when good and positive advances are made in our faith. If there was something wrong or obtuse about the app I would be all for cautionary words, but that doesn't appear to be the case.

The story that should be written is how non-Catholics are again trying to spread misinformation about the Catholic faith. It is hard to believe that even a Catholic-in-name-only would believe that using the app was an actual confession. Time and words would be better spent discussing why that was the story coming from the secular press. The best way to plant a seed that isn't otherwise in someone's mind is to simply say it...

                                                    ###

The Battle has just begun...

When will we as Catholics wake-up? When will we pick up our flippin' swords and march into battle like the brave Ecclesia Militans that God has ordained us to be? When will we stop hiding behind social-justice causes and poor interpretations of the Eight Beatitudes? When will we stand up and be persecuted, killed, maimed, and burned at the stake for our Savior and for the Faith?

What was that? You didn't know that was part of the deal? Oh yeah, all that and MORE! Not only that, but you should embrace it. We should all have as our own personal mottos: "Ready my stake!" In other words, we should be ready to both die for the Faith, and accept that our persecution is coming... because it is! Unfortunately too many Catholics think that we are somehow all destined for heaven simply because we say we are Catholic and attempt to be good people. I don't know about you, but I am scared out of my mind at the judgment I have coming... I want to live to an old age simply so that I have as much time as possible to do penance for all the horrible things I have done in my short life up to this point.

···•°···

For those newer readers, you may not have read an old post of mine: "The World HATES you" In that post I explained that, point blank - we are told that the world will HATE us because of Jesus. 

If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you.
-John 15:19

Are you ready for this?

Yet, we walk around as if the world is just going to love us because we are so kind. Sure we should try and love one another, but it ain't gonna' happen folks, it just isn't. We are at war! But of course, due to the modernist infestation in our Church, folks run around hiding behind the Beatitudes as if they were somehow a declaration of what we are instead of what we are supposed to strive to be. They are aspirational  and not declarative - trust me, few of us are good enough to ever get there.  So why do we hide behind them, as if they are justification for us being feeble and weak? Meek doesn't mean "passive aggressive" does it?

···•°···

Maybe I am wrong. Maybe the problem is me. Maybe we are supposed to be complacent and accepting of whatever is shoved at us during Mass. Maybe the Pro-Life cause isn't that important because it is open to interpretation. Maybe the Saints lives are simply "fun Catholic fables." I don't know... maybe I am just the remnant of some outdate religion that no longer exists...

The hanging of St. John Ogilvie

...because the Catholicism I know is filled with people like Solanus Casey, Padre Pio, Joan of Arc, and John Ogilvie! I have blogged the last few months in this haze of complacency. I was worried about offending folks because there were those starting to pressure me to "calm my rhetoric." Well... it ain't gonna happen! I am not going to get to the gates of heaven and have St. Peter ask me why I didn't at least try and defend the faith... I'd rather seek forgiveness than wait for permission. We don't have parishes around here that are willing to support us in Catechesis so it is up to us!

Our priests have been neutered. In many places priests are second-class citizens behind the chancery and some aging parish administrator. Their powers are limited to administering the Sacraments at the behest of some lay administrator whose only goal is to ensure that every last bit of tradition is stamped out of the Faith. I am not sure if they are upset that they never understood the tradition, or if their lifestyle is just so contrary to the principles of the Faith that their only hope for Salvation is to hope that God accepts their version of Faith. Sometimes I wonder if they are trying harder to convince us or themselves that their version of Catholic is Truth...

···°•···

So don't relent folks. Don't believe the protestant-esque hype that we are "once saved, always saved." Conversion is the easy part... living it is the hard part. Authenticity is a pain in the rear... because it takes honesty, repentance, penance, and pain. Martyrs didn't die on the rack, burned at the stake, and have their last vision be their bowels as they were ripped from them while still breathing so that you and I could stand around after Mass drinking free trade coffee talking about our free pass to Heaven. No they sacrificed limb and life so that the message of truth and Kingdom of God would persevere on Earth for one more day, so that we might see it. Every time we deny the truth and tradition, we deny the works and sacrifice they endured. So pick up a Rosary, pray for the Church, and defend it in battle... cuz it has just begun!

Link

†††

True Presence - True Courage: Reclaiming Reverence

You will not like this post. Many of you will be disappointed, think I am wrong, and may even stop reading this blog. I am willing to risk that because I feel strongly about one topic: The True Presence in the Eucharist. If you know me at all, I don't pull punches, and I'd rather be wrong and invoke a little thought, than be polite and sit back and watch our Faith be destroyed

···•°···

I really believe that the #1 problem in our faith right now is that we as Catholic's don't truly believe in the True Presence. I know this because of the way people act around the Blessed Sacrament. We don't genuflect, we don't receive the Eucharist in a respectful way, and we have "cattle calls" at Mass to all get our hand outs. Everyone is a part of the problem, Priests, EMHC's, the faithful -- we are the problem.

I told you, you will not like this post. Watch at Mass next time the way Communion is distributed. I have seen more reverence at public functions where they pass out concert tickets. It is a disgrace and now, the haphazard and sloppy way we distribute the Body of Christ has infected those that try and do it in a reverent way. So much so, that some have decided that changing how they receive is the only option to continue doing so in a reverent way.

···°•···

What do I mean? Well I recently read Danielle Bean's post on the NCR:

Danielle Bean  

I could be stubborn and insist upon receiving on the tongue because I have a right to, even when the challenges it causes become a distraction to myself and others. But that doesn’t seem like something Christ would want me to do.

Jesus is Jesus, in my hand or on my tongue.

And that is why I am 90% convinced that from now on, when I receive the Eucharist from an EMHC, I should put my own preferences aside and receive in the way that is least likely to cause confusion and distraction—in the hand.

O Jesus, meek and humble of heart, make my heart like yours!

Now, I don't blame Ms. Bean. In fact, shame on the EMHC. Seriously. They are so proud and haughty, thinking they play an important role in the Mass. Running up to the Altar and "playing priest." Well Mrs. EMHC you role is to know how to properly distribute Communion. Your role is to know how Jesus can be best handled. Who are you to think you are worthy to even touch our Lord? I am not even worthy to receive him, let alone control who does and doesn't get to receive him. It kills me that someone honestly feels that they are some how wrong for wanting to receive in the most humble way possible. It isn't a preference. I really don't blame Ms. Bean, she is simply trying to be the most humble and gracious servant of the Lord. She is trying to be humble for herself, and for the EMHC. What a pity.

What if we all said one day, "I am only receiving from a priest, and on the tongue." Not because EMHC's are wrong to utilize, but when they can't perform their function correctly... it is time for a change. What if we all just lined up in the priest's line and made that statement. Sure, you could say it politicizes the Mass, but what are they, the EMHC doing with their added blessings, their words beyond "The Body of Christ," their eyerolls when we receive on the tongue, or worse when we kneel to receive? Every time we bend and break our traditions for the "nicety" of others, we destroy the faith. We become the problem, we become the Judas, we become the Peter. "Oh no Lord, I would never deny knowing you!" I'd say we are on about strike two, wouldn't you?

···•°···

If we don't get the courage to fight for our Faith, it will quickly evolve into something foreign to us. It will no longer be the True Faith, but some faith. If we don't start acting like we actually believe in the True Presence, we will lose the Truth.

Again, I don't blame Danielle Bean, she is simply explaining how the Catholic Faith in this country has been distorted and lost to the proud and haughty hands of others. The True Presence has been hidden by those who are more interested in form over substance. We must storm against the eradication of truth and the distortion of The Faith. We must have Priests, the faithful, and especially EMHC stand up and say, "I want to do what is right for the Lord, I want to reclaim reverence for the True Presence!"

"The Kingdom of Heaven suffers much violence, and the violent are taking it by force!"

-Matthew 11:12

†††

The Homily on contraception you won't hear this Sunday

Buy it at: Aquinas & More

If you read any blogs aside from this one, you will have surely read about the "Condom Comments" made by the Pope in his new book, which is based on an interview with German journalist Peter Seewald. The book, is entitled Light of the World. I am not here to discuss that matter ad naseum, instead I wish to discuss what he didn't say, and the reasons that are behind the media's all out attack on such an inane and nuanced comment. [If you don't know the issue I am talking about please see: Thomas Peter's take over at American Papist]

···•°···

Today is the first Sunday of Advent. It is the beginning of a new Liturgical year, it is in essence the beginning of our Faith, and it is the beginning of a new journey down the road of faith that we all take. This beginning, this new thing to come is Christ Jesus. He was born of a Virgin, who said: 'Yes.' It was with Mary's fiat that mankind was given the Christ-child, it was done through her total obedience to God's will. It was an acceptance of something greater than herself, even in light of the fear that was surely in her mind and the emotional turmoil that she certainly forsaw in her future. We hear this message time and time again, and yet it is often presented as some untouchable lofty 'goal' that we can never achieve, but should always strive for. It makes no sense... but, this message fits perfectly with the news that has been written about our Faith recently. This Sunday is the perfect opportunity to not only clarify the message, but to propel it forward in a life-affirming, and God affirming way.

···°•···

"False Advertising"

Let me be very straightforward about this: the 'Condom issue' stems from the mindset that exists in the secular world, that the Pope and the Church are simply holding on by their fingertips to a principled position that is archaic. One that not only isn't followed by most Catholics, but one that in reality is bad and harmful to society, e.g. the 'AIDS problem in Africa,' 'over-population,' 'rising health-care costs,' the cost of living, the need for smaller family size, etc... This mentality, and these 'problems' are the result of a secular focused life. It is hard to argue that "God instructs us to believe "X" to someone that denies the initial premise that God exists. Therefore we often find ourselves at a loss. Most people will then descend into speaking in secular/liberal idioms, trying to prove their point in the language of those to whom they are speaking; this doesn't work, but I digress. The real problem is that as Catholics, many of us don't believe in the teachings of the Church regarding contraception. 

···•°···

You think abortion is a tough or close issue for Catholics, try and talk about contraception. It is the fastest way to be labeled extreme, uber-Catholic, or just plain crazy. Try and discuss the Pro-Life "issue" with another Catholic with your premise being that to be fully or authentically Pro-Life, that means being open to life AT ALL TIMES. That means, not preventing life by any means. Seriously, talk about scarlet letters, you will get a big 'F' attached to you for freak in no time flat. Those that don't outcast you that way will in the very least try and explain away their view, or rationalize with you why they have done whatever it is they do. It is an awkward conversation, because it often means "entering the marital bedroom" but not because anyone but the explainer chooses to do so. 

Now before folks jump up and scream, "Well isn't this a 'holier than thou' stance?" I want to explain that I understand the Church's teaching on family, prayer, and Natural Family Planning. I know that not every family can have 12 kids and live a 'normal life.' That being said, I also am sympathetic to those that do have large families and argue that it is easy as long as you are willing to put aside the desire and 'necessity' for certain things in life. Now I am not trying to play both sides of the fence, I just think that within the teachings of our Faith, there is room for both views, and I do understand that some families have to be more intentional about the number of children they have. 

···°•···

All that being said, there is a big difference between not having the patience/desire to raise a large family and lacking the actual ability to do so. The point is that, often people equivocate the lack of the ability to do things with the desire to do so. So what we end up with in our parishes is people who find ways to ignore, conveniently, the teachings of the Faith on contraception. They then explain it away via this equivocation and therefore it comes of, or is at least presented as being inline with Church teaching. What exacerbates this situation is the silence that echoes from the Sanctuary, and sometimes there is even agreement that comes from the clergy. And this gets me to the point of this post; we are in dire need of homilies that not only affirm Pro-Life teaching, but that affirm authentic Pro-Life teachings that discuss the evils of contraception. Anything less than that is disingenuous.

···•°···

The Catholic Faith is not a cafeteria meal. We do not get to walk through life, picking and choosing various precepts, traditions, and teachings as if we are choosing the parts to our meal. Instead, it is like a bridge where every piece is necessary, and if we choose not to "use all the pieces" the whole thing will come tumbling down. The contraception, trap as I like to call it, is one of those "pieces" that so many Catholics are willing to leave out. What they don't realize is that it is a vital piece, as are all the parts, that integrates into so many other areas. It is impossible to compartmentalize it. Therefore, it ends up affecting more than just our belief to that specific area. So what starts as the use of contraception, makes us have less children, which makes us focus more on the money and things we buy those children. It also makes us fail to believe in other 'small' things, just because we have come to think that maybe not everything that is a teaching of the Church is necessary or even correct. All of a sudden we have 25 things we don't believe and our bridge is rather weak, if not tumbling into the river completely.

Contraception: Subtraction, not addition

···°•···

So why not contraception? Because it alters the idea of love and it says 'No' to God. Certainly there are lots of reasons not to have 12 kids, I get that. But there are plenty of other ways to plan family size aside from contraception, and by contraception I mean any preventative methods[*fn. 1]. Contraception though, is a means to an end, and as we good Catholics should know -- that type of moral reasoning is never a good thing. Contraception destroys what love, and consequently sex, is! What I mean is that it changes the purpose of the intimate marital act. It degrades it, devolves it, and minimizes it. You may have heard that there are only a few "animals" that have sex solely for pleasure. It doesn't matter what they are, but the point of the statement --presented as 'science,' is that higher functioning animals are smart enough to have sex more often than merely to procreate. This statement thereby creates two types of sex: procreative and pleasure sex. Follow this thinking down the line and what it says is: "Nature made sex for two purposes therefore using science to separate the two isn't sinful, but highly intelligent."

Now, this isn't the way the argument is framed in discussion because it would be easy to punch holes in this formation of it. Instead what we get is: "Marriage needs sex, it is the ultimate expression of love, and therefore our most carnal needs and impulses are met when when perform this conjugal act." What this statement does is distort what the ultimate expression of love is: Children. See, animals have sex for procreation, it is done instinctively and without "emotion." We on the other hand insert emotion, e.g. love. Therefore, we add to what sex is, we do not subtract, i.e. we take the procreative and add caritas, or at least we should. [*fn. 2]

···•°···

When we add contraception, what we are really doing is subtracting from the formula. We are taking out the procreative and therefore destroying the full essence of sex, and thereby love, but we are also assaulting God. What we are doing is saying, "Sex is imperfect the way You made it, because it has this mettlesome side effect: children." We buy into the dualistic idea of sex, procreative and pleasurable, in that we believe we can have one without the other. Our actions convey the message to God that we know better and we know how sex, pleasure, love, and children affect us and that we know not only how to control those thing but also what is best for us. What an insulting and deplorable thing to do? Do we really think that we somehow make sex better by adding contraception? Have we somehow used our intelligence to outsmart "Nature"? Is the Condom the sexual equivalent of the snowpant? "All the fun of playing in the snow, and none of the pain?" Secular culture is famous for this type of distorted and misaligned thinking. It doesn't make it right, and it doesn't excuse it, but it does explain it --although it remains perverted and toxic.

As Catholics though, our assault is even more violent because we have the precepts and teachings of the Faith to guide us. Instead though we listen to the master of lies, Satan, and allow him to take the most precious of things and distort it to the point of destruction. So you see, the point of the Condom controversy was the secular world trying to perform an "A HA! Gotcha!" on the Catholic faith. They would want nothing more than to convince us of their lie, if for no other reason than to get an ultimate justification to the belief by removing the one remain opposition to their way of thought.  Instead though, they exposed further how off-target and foolish their premise is. Contraception does not add to sex, it subtracts. It destroys essential elements that give a fulness to sex. Contraception hurts people, and there is no way around it. I can tell you that this is a Homily that most of us won't hear this Sunday, but we need to hear it, desperately. 

_______________________________________

*Notes:

• fn. 1:: Some consider NFP contraception because it is preventative. There is an argument to be had here, but it would involve getting into the philosophical discussion pertaining to double effect and this is neither the time nor the place for that discussion. For the sake of this post, let us consider NFP to be completely acceptable both to the teachings of the Faith (which it is) and to my thesis (which I believe that it is.)

• fn. 2: Love is a complex word. I use the Latin caritas here purposely, but I also know that when we add love that isn't caritas we change the purpose of sex, and its nature. The essence is what is important, not the word used. This is one of the major problems in our culture: the improper use or understanding of the word love. 

Could tomorrow bring: Venerable Pope John Paul II or "Why one Jesuit priest is completely off base..."

Tomorrow - or by the time I finish this post - it will be December 19, 2009. This is an EXCITING DAY for me because it is the love of my life's birthday and the day in which Pope John Paul II may be declared Venerable! This is awesome... and clears the way for him to be declared Blessed.

Some major news sources are reporting on this, as well as a major portion of the Cathol-ogosphere. Along with that though, the media decides not to find someone speaking to the amazing things that Pope John Paul II did during his life or the time as Pope, but instead finds someone who diminishes his legacy and this momentous declaration.

The full post I am refering to is found on a Euro-blog on FoxNews.com:
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/12/18/blessed-john-paul-ii-book-your-hotel-now/?test=latestnews

The story is pretty typical coverage of the Church. Ill-informed and off base. The worst though is who they found to comment on the situation: Fr. Thomas Reese: [My comments in BLUE]

One Jesuit priest doesn’t think any pope should be made a saint.[What, really? What? Why? - that is Fr. Reese for you.]

“Saints are supposed to be examples for us how to live a Christian life,” said Fr. Thomas Reese. “How can a pope be an example to anyone but a pope?[WHAT? Under this logic... how can JESUS be an example to anyone but Carpenters or Gods in human form? This is just ridiculous.] We need more young people, parents, business people, politicians and workers as saints.”[Ok this is the part that I have the MOST trouble with. He acts as if Sainthood is some contest or declaration by the Church that is some "American Idol" type contest. He implies that the Vatican sits around deciding who they want to Canonize next. He is completely wrong in his criticism, and horribly misguides readers on the teaching and beliefs of the Theology of Saints. What a shame.]

Fr. Thomas Reese is the same person that:

• Argued that Notre Dame was RIGHT to invite Obama to speak and give him an honorary degree.
• Ran the liberal-esque/modernist-mayhem America, until his resignation.
• Opposes the new translation of the Missal.

I could keep going on and on... but I think you get the point. We need to unite as Catholics. I know that a lot of us bloggers are blamed for doing the opposite. Some argue that we create division and dissent. I would agree that unfortunately that happens sometime. Yet, what if we just let people like Reese run rampant with their blogs and their ideas?

My argument is not that he is a bad or unholy person. Actually, I argue the opposite - that he is a good person and a holy person, just very misguided in his beliefs and teachings. Although the minutia and intricacies of our Theological teachings require prayer, instruction and spiritual guidance; the major tenants are fairly accessible to all who seek them. So to have someone like Rev. Reese be so far off base with those major tenants, and to then lead the unknowing down paths which are contrary to such teachings is unfortunate and damaging. I pray for him, and other modernist-progressives that are attempting to reshape and reform the Church in the image they see fit and to the convenience and appreciation of man, as opposed to the appreciation of Christ. 

Some may ask, "Aren't you simply arguing that you are right and he is wrong? Isn't this about your OPINION versus HIS?" My answer is, NO. This isn't about OPINIONS... it is about the Theological TRUTHS that exist. It is about the truth that is JESUS and his CHURCH.