An Obamanation
As Catholics, we were warned. Many concerned bishops issued strong statements prior to the election. The Voters Guide for Serious Catholics was well publicized and readily available to anyone willing to read it. Yet, Catholics on the whole voted pretty much along the same lines as the rest of the population, helping to elect a president who openly supports the killing of unborn children.
Earlier this week, I received a letter from my Congressman, Joe Donnelly, a fellow Catholic, who warned that President Obama would likely discontinue the “Mexico City Policy” which prevents taxpayer dollars from going to foreign non-governmental organizations that perform, support, or lobby for abortion. The policy was enacted by President Reagan in 1984, lifted by Clinton in 1993, and reinstated by Bush in 2001. Donnelly is a Democrat, so his pro-life stand is somewhat unusual.
President Obama was inaugurated last Tuesday. On Friday, one day after the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, he rescinded the ban. He delayed the reversal one day so as to not seem “combative”, according to some news reports. Once again, our tax dollars will be subsidizing abortion abroad.
The next four years could spell disaster for the pro-life movement. Obama will likely appoint abortion-friendly justices to the Supreme Court. He may sign legislation such as the Freedom of Choice Act, which would create a fundamental right to abortion that could not be limited. Even Catholic hospitals and Catholic doctors may face attempts to legally force them to perform abortions.
Our nation has chosen a dark path to follow. Our biggest problem is not the economy, health care, enemy governments or terrorist attacks, but rather the moral cancer growing within. Catholics, and in fact all people of faith, must unite in support of our unalienable right to life.
My congressman’s pro-life letter contained an invitation to sign up for his newsletter by going to his webpage. When I did so, I was directed to select my areas of interest from a list of thirteen. None of them mentioned the right-to-life issue. The closest was “values” which is rather vague. Despite his supposed pro-life stand, I could find no mention of it anywhere on his webpage, a fact that I have brought to his attention. Silence can be interpreted as endorsement when it comes to issues like this. Now more than ever, we must make our position known.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Christmas Eve Memories
Before the Thanksgiving leftovers are put away, Christmas music permeates the radio airways. When else can one still hear Bing Crosby, Nat King Cole, Burl Ives, Brenda Lee, and Gene Autry in the regular rotation? Sure, contemporary artists occasionally come out with new Christmas fare, but rarely do they catch on and become annual favorites. Why do we love to hear these same old songs year after year after year? These old songs have a way of transporting us back in time where we recall pleasant memories of family and friends and days gone by.
The celebration of Christmas has always been special for children. The bright lights, presents under the tree, and the anticipation of Santa Claus coming on Christmas Eve make this the most wonderful time of the year for a child. We all have memories of a favorite Christmas. As we get older, it becomes more difficult to recapture the magic. There are very few of us Clark Griswold-types who still go to great lengths make each Christmas a source of new memories. Instead, the traditional carols and we heard as children take us back to that time of innocence. I suspect most of us would say Christmas was better years ago.
I remember when Christmas was really like that depicted in Jean Shepherd’s A Christmas Story or even Frank Capra’s A Wonderful Life. Our town had colored lights strung across the streets in real garland, made of cut evergreens boughs at a local business. What a treat to go downtown shopping at night the week before Christmas when all the stores stayed open until 9 o’clock. There were no shopping malls or big box stores back then. We would go from store to store, each one having a Christmas display in the front window, and clerks who would ask, “Can I help you?” when you entered.
The Christmas songs we heard back then are the same ones we hear today, resurrected each year along with the memories they invoke. Years from now, will people yearn for these Christmases of plastic greenery and light emitting diodes in the same way that I long for real aromatic arborvitae and old fashioned incandescent colored bulbs? Will they still be listening to these same old carols, or will the idea of roasting chestnuts on an open fire be meaningless to them? Come to think of it, I have never done it either.
My favorite Christmas presents were a Lionel Train and a Tonka Fire Truck. I never had the Red Ryder BB Gun like Ralphie in A Christmas Story, but I did have the Mattel Fanner-50 Cap Gun with Safe-shootin’ Shells and Greenie Stickum Caps. Such toys are no longer politically correct to give children, yet they are apparently allowed to play very violent video games. A co-worker of mine recently told of his wife standing in line with their son several hours before midnight, in the cold, on a school night, so he could purchase the first release of a new video game requiring parental consent due to its violent nature. I wonder how many such games will be under Christmas trees this year.
This same family creates their Christmas memories by spending extravagant amounts of money (at least by my standards) on their two teenage boys. This year, they are each getting new flat-screen televisions, and new top-of-the-line cell phones. Last month, one of the boys had over 4000 text messages on the phone bill. Amidst unwrapping all these expensive presents, I wonder if they ever think about what they are celebrating. They never go to church and probably have little idea of who Jesus Christ is or what He did for them. They boys rarely have any need for clothes other than blue jeans or shorts. When it comes time for school pictures, mom buys them nice clothes for the occasion and then returns them afterwards. The father has some Catholic background, but does not appear interested in practicing his faith or instructing his children. I gave him a copy of Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth one day trying to plant a seed. He knows I am Catholic and I try to lead a good example in his presence, but the rest is up to the Holy Spirit.
One of the best ways to create Christmas memories for children is to take them to Midnight Mass. Most of them will not get much sleep the night before Christmas anyway, and most Catholic parishes make Midnight Mass a special celebration with caroling and the Blessing of the Manger. Making this a family tradition can go a long way in keeping the Christmas spirit centered on Christ. My family and I will be going to Midnight Mass in a few minutes.
Getting into the Christmas spirit has been unusually difficult in our little community this year. We have had many funerals take place in the place couple of weeks, including a 28 year-old father, a teenage girl with cancer, and a 10 year-old child. Several families have been hit especially hard and knowing they are hurting puts a damper on everyone’s celebration. Nonetheless, we cannot lose sight of the importance of making Christmastime memorable for children while keeping it in the proper Christ-centered prospective. We never know how many opportunities we will have.
Before the Thanksgiving leftovers are put away, Christmas music permeates the radio airways. When else can one still hear Bing Crosby, Nat King Cole, Burl Ives, Brenda Lee, and Gene Autry in the regular rotation? Sure, contemporary artists occasionally come out with new Christmas fare, but rarely do they catch on and become annual favorites. Why do we love to hear these same old songs year after year after year? These old songs have a way of transporting us back in time where we recall pleasant memories of family and friends and days gone by.
The celebration of Christmas has always been special for children. The bright lights, presents under the tree, and the anticipation of Santa Claus coming on Christmas Eve make this the most wonderful time of the year for a child. We all have memories of a favorite Christmas. As we get older, it becomes more difficult to recapture the magic. There are very few of us Clark Griswold-types who still go to great lengths make each Christmas a source of new memories. Instead, the traditional carols and we heard as children take us back to that time of innocence. I suspect most of us would say Christmas was better years ago.
I remember when Christmas was really like that depicted in Jean Shepherd’s A Christmas Story or even Frank Capra’s A Wonderful Life. Our town had colored lights strung across the streets in real garland, made of cut evergreens boughs at a local business. What a treat to go downtown shopping at night the week before Christmas when all the stores stayed open until 9 o’clock. There were no shopping malls or big box stores back then. We would go from store to store, each one having a Christmas display in the front window, and clerks who would ask, “Can I help you?” when you entered.
The Christmas songs we heard back then are the same ones we hear today, resurrected each year along with the memories they invoke. Years from now, will people yearn for these Christmases of plastic greenery and light emitting diodes in the same way that I long for real aromatic arborvitae and old fashioned incandescent colored bulbs? Will they still be listening to these same old carols, or will the idea of roasting chestnuts on an open fire be meaningless to them? Come to think of it, I have never done it either.
My favorite Christmas presents were a Lionel Train and a Tonka Fire Truck. I never had the Red Ryder BB Gun like Ralphie in A Christmas Story, but I did have the Mattel Fanner-50 Cap Gun with Safe-shootin’ Shells and Greenie Stickum Caps. Such toys are no longer politically correct to give children, yet they are apparently allowed to play very violent video games. A co-worker of mine recently told of his wife standing in line with their son several hours before midnight, in the cold, on a school night, so he could purchase the first release of a new video game requiring parental consent due to its violent nature. I wonder how many such games will be under Christmas trees this year.
This same family creates their Christmas memories by spending extravagant amounts of money (at least by my standards) on their two teenage boys. This year, they are each getting new flat-screen televisions, and new top-of-the-line cell phones. Last month, one of the boys had over 4000 text messages on the phone bill. Amidst unwrapping all these expensive presents, I wonder if they ever think about what they are celebrating. They never go to church and probably have little idea of who Jesus Christ is or what He did for them. They boys rarely have any need for clothes other than blue jeans or shorts. When it comes time for school pictures, mom buys them nice clothes for the occasion and then returns them afterwards. The father has some Catholic background, but does not appear interested in practicing his faith or instructing his children. I gave him a copy of Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth one day trying to plant a seed. He knows I am Catholic and I try to lead a good example in his presence, but the rest is up to the Holy Spirit.
One of the best ways to create Christmas memories for children is to take them to Midnight Mass. Most of them will not get much sleep the night before Christmas anyway, and most Catholic parishes make Midnight Mass a special celebration with caroling and the Blessing of the Manger. Making this a family tradition can go a long way in keeping the Christmas spirit centered on Christ. My family and I will be going to Midnight Mass in a few minutes.
Getting into the Christmas spirit has been unusually difficult in our little community this year. We have had many funerals take place in the place couple of weeks, including a 28 year-old father, a teenage girl with cancer, and a 10 year-old child. Several families have been hit especially hard and knowing they are hurting puts a damper on everyone’s celebration. Nonetheless, we cannot lose sight of the importance of making Christmastime memorable for children while keeping it in the proper Christ-centered prospective. We never know how many opportunities we will have.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Mixed Messages
In the aftermath of the 2008 presidential election, pro-lifers are left to wonder what the next four years will bring. Despite all the prayers, the novenas, the distribution of the Catholic Voter Guides, and the warnings of some US bishops, the pro-abortion candidate still won the election. A poll indicated that 54% of Catholics voted for Obama to only 45% for McCain. Those of us who see this general loss of respect for human life spreading like a cancer through our society are stunned by the prospects of at least four years of liberal proliferation.
Perhaps it is not surprising that more than half of the Catholic vote went to Obama when more than half of the Catholic bishops were sheepish about speaking out to their flocks. The dichotomy was quite apparent. Around 80 Bishops issued strong statements placing abortion and the other so-called non-negotiable issues at the forefront. That left some 140 who said little beyond the document issued by the United States Council of Catholic Bishops, leaving the door open for those resigned to justify a Democratic vote for other reasons. I cannot imagine any issue that would out-weigh the slaughter of millions of innocent babies in their mothers’ womb.
Our diocesan newspaper (Northwest Indiana Catholic, November 16, 2008) has a banner headline calling Obama’s election “A Historic Day.” The CNS article tells of Pope Benedict’s congratulatory message to Obama as reported by Vatican spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi. The article says, “Asked if the pope mentioned any specific issues he was concerned about, Father Lombardi responded, ‘peace, solidarity and justice.’” The article goes on to say the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano published an opinion piece on November 5th, headlined “A choice that unites.” The CNS article also says a commentary on the election for Asianews, a Rome-based missionary news agency, was headlined, “I’m happy for the victory of Barack Obama.” Written by Father Piero Gheddo, a member of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions, the commentary lists only positive results of Obama’s election.
The CNS article covers two-thirds of the front page and the entire back page of the diocesan paper and nowhere mentions of the likely detrimental effects to the Pro-life movement. Yes, Obama’s election is historic, but the article leaves one with the impression that the Church is pleased with the outcome.
An Associated Press story today (November 14, 2008) reports that a South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because of his support of abortion and that supporting him “constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil.” While I am sympathetic to this priest’s stand, the disposition of the voter is relevant in determining whether a mortal sin has actually been committed. Indeed, the priest’s own diocese issued a statement saying his stance did not accurately reflect Church teaching, and again, Catholics may come to conclude there are two sides to the issue, when such is not the case.
On a positive note, Obama’s election with Catholic support has been a wake-up call for the Bishops. Cardinal Francis George, president of the United States Council of Catholic Bishops, issued a congratulatory letter to Obama which said, “We pray that you will use the powers of your office to meet them (uncertainties) with a special concern to defend the most vulnerable among us and heal the divisions in our country and our world.” At the General Assembly in Baltimore this past week, the Bishops approved a Blessing for a Child in the Womb by a 223-1 vote. (I wonder who voted against it?) A Spanish version of the Blessing passed unanimously.
Those of us who were disheartened by the outcome of the election should not despair. A friend sent me a copy of an email he received from his sister, Lucy. It read as follows:
"This morning I arose to the news I dreaded. I wanted to cry.
As I sat down in my chair with my first cup of tea I was silent, speaking with God only in my mind.
I felt such a great despair and in my mind spoke the words, it's over.
Then I realized that this is how the disciples felt when Jesus died upon that cross.
They were in despair, their hopes and dreams had just been laid in the grave. But it wasn't over.
We all know Christ rose from the grave, he conquered death, giving us eternal life,
and he now resides within the heart of every believer through his Holy Spirit.
What seemed like the end was the beginning of new life for all who want this new life.
God always works in ways we do not understand but He is sovereign, in control,
has knowledge and power that are limitless.
If a leader has risen that opposes God, it is only because God has allowed it (Daniel 2:20-23) and
He will work this for His good as He does in all things. (Romans 8:28)
We know the end of the story. God reigns eternally. (Revelation 5:9-13)."
God Bless,
Lucy
In the aftermath of the 2008 presidential election, pro-lifers are left to wonder what the next four years will bring. Despite all the prayers, the novenas, the distribution of the Catholic Voter Guides, and the warnings of some US bishops, the pro-abortion candidate still won the election. A poll indicated that 54% of Catholics voted for Obama to only 45% for McCain. Those of us who see this general loss of respect for human life spreading like a cancer through our society are stunned by the prospects of at least four years of liberal proliferation.
Perhaps it is not surprising that more than half of the Catholic vote went to Obama when more than half of the Catholic bishops were sheepish about speaking out to their flocks. The dichotomy was quite apparent. Around 80 Bishops issued strong statements placing abortion and the other so-called non-negotiable issues at the forefront. That left some 140 who said little beyond the document issued by the United States Council of Catholic Bishops, leaving the door open for those resigned to justify a Democratic vote for other reasons. I cannot imagine any issue that would out-weigh the slaughter of millions of innocent babies in their mothers’ womb.
Our diocesan newspaper (Northwest Indiana Catholic, November 16, 2008) has a banner headline calling Obama’s election “A Historic Day.” The CNS article tells of Pope Benedict’s congratulatory message to Obama as reported by Vatican spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi. The article says, “Asked if the pope mentioned any specific issues he was concerned about, Father Lombardi responded, ‘peace, solidarity and justice.’” The article goes on to say the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano published an opinion piece on November 5th, headlined “A choice that unites.” The CNS article also says a commentary on the election for Asianews, a Rome-based missionary news agency, was headlined, “I’m happy for the victory of Barack Obama.” Written by Father Piero Gheddo, a member of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions, the commentary lists only positive results of Obama’s election.
The CNS article covers two-thirds of the front page and the entire back page of the diocesan paper and nowhere mentions of the likely detrimental effects to the Pro-life movement. Yes, Obama’s election is historic, but the article leaves one with the impression that the Church is pleased with the outcome.
An Associated Press story today (November 14, 2008) reports that a South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because of his support of abortion and that supporting him “constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil.” While I am sympathetic to this priest’s stand, the disposition of the voter is relevant in determining whether a mortal sin has actually been committed. Indeed, the priest’s own diocese issued a statement saying his stance did not accurately reflect Church teaching, and again, Catholics may come to conclude there are two sides to the issue, when such is not the case.
On a positive note, Obama’s election with Catholic support has been a wake-up call for the Bishops. Cardinal Francis George, president of the United States Council of Catholic Bishops, issued a congratulatory letter to Obama which said, “We pray that you will use the powers of your office to meet them (uncertainties) with a special concern to defend the most vulnerable among us and heal the divisions in our country and our world.” At the General Assembly in Baltimore this past week, the Bishops approved a Blessing for a Child in the Womb by a 223-1 vote. (I wonder who voted against it?) A Spanish version of the Blessing passed unanimously.
Those of us who were disheartened by the outcome of the election should not despair. A friend sent me a copy of an email he received from his sister, Lucy. It read as follows:
"This morning I arose to the news I dreaded. I wanted to cry.
As I sat down in my chair with my first cup of tea I was silent, speaking with God only in my mind.
I felt such a great despair and in my mind spoke the words, it's over.
Then I realized that this is how the disciples felt when Jesus died upon that cross.
They were in despair, their hopes and dreams had just been laid in the grave. But it wasn't over.
We all know Christ rose from the grave, he conquered death, giving us eternal life,
and he now resides within the heart of every believer through his Holy Spirit.
What seemed like the end was the beginning of new life for all who want this new life.
God always works in ways we do not understand but He is sovereign, in control,
has knowledge and power that are limitless.
If a leader has risen that opposes God, it is only because God has allowed it (Daniel 2:20-23) and
He will work this for His good as He does in all things. (Romans 8:28)
We know the end of the story. God reigns eternally. (Revelation 5:9-13)."
God Bless,
Lucy
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Judie, Judie, Judie
With the presidential election quickly approaching, the EWTN Q&A section has been deluged with questions about voting pro-life. Most abortion related questions on the website are answered by Judie Brown, president and co-founder of American Life League. While I very much respect her strong pro-life stand, she seems to favor supporting third party or independent candidates who are 100% pro-life over the two major party candidates, one of whom is going to be elected. In reading some of her more recent responses, she may have softened her approach somewhat, but as recently as last Tuesday, she said, “neither man deserves the vote of a committed pro-life Catholic . . .”
A few days earlier, a questioner voiced support for Alan Keyes who is 100% pro-life. Judie Brown replied that Keyes is still in the running and she suggested another website where people can go for information about write-in candidates.
It would be wonderful if every Catholic could vote for a 100% pro-life candidate such as Alan Keyes, but doing so in this case would only serve to exacerbate the problem. John McCain may not be 100% pro-life, but either he or Barack Obama is going to be elected president next week. As did President Bush, the next president is likely to appoint one or possibly two Supreme Court justices. Obama is a liberal who openly favors abortion rights. If he is president and his party has a majority in Congress, one or two liberal justices will likely be seated on the Court for the next twenty or thirty years.
John McCain says he will appoint constructionists to the bench implying a conservative legal philosophy more favorable to the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Judie Brown may find choosing the lesser of two evils unpalatable, but to do otherwise could be tragic. If the majority of pro-life Catholics voted for an independent pro-life candidate, Barack Obama would almost certainly win the election. By stubbornly sticking to an unelectable pro-life candidate, we could actually be perpetuating abortion rights in our country.
Our best chance to stop abortion will rest in the hands a conservative Supreme Court, and despite his shortcomings, John McCain is more likely to appoint such justices. While our attention is focused on the presidential election, even more important is a conservative congress in order to minimize obstacles to the confirmation process, or to block confirmation of liberal nominees should Obama be elected. Don’t think of it as choosing the lesser of two evils. Rather, think of it as choosing the candidate most likely to do good.
In a closely contested race, every vote is important. Wasting it on an unelectable candidate as a matter of principle will not move us closer to the goal. With nearly fifty million active Catholics in the United States, we have the power and the responsibility to stem the intrinsic evils that are becoming entrenched in mainstream America. We can sway public opinion by living our Catholic Faith to the fullest and helping to elect public officials who respect the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
With the presidential election quickly approaching, the EWTN Q&A section has been deluged with questions about voting pro-life. Most abortion related questions on the website are answered by Judie Brown, president and co-founder of American Life League. While I very much respect her strong pro-life stand, she seems to favor supporting third party or independent candidates who are 100% pro-life over the two major party candidates, one of whom is going to be elected. In reading some of her more recent responses, she may have softened her approach somewhat, but as recently as last Tuesday, she said, “neither man deserves the vote of a committed pro-life Catholic . . .”
A few days earlier, a questioner voiced support for Alan Keyes who is 100% pro-life. Judie Brown replied that Keyes is still in the running and she suggested another website where people can go for information about write-in candidates.
It would be wonderful if every Catholic could vote for a 100% pro-life candidate such as Alan Keyes, but doing so in this case would only serve to exacerbate the problem. John McCain may not be 100% pro-life, but either he or Barack Obama is going to be elected president next week. As did President Bush, the next president is likely to appoint one or possibly two Supreme Court justices. Obama is a liberal who openly favors abortion rights. If he is president and his party has a majority in Congress, one or two liberal justices will likely be seated on the Court for the next twenty or thirty years.
John McCain says he will appoint constructionists to the bench implying a conservative legal philosophy more favorable to the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Judie Brown may find choosing the lesser of two evils unpalatable, but to do otherwise could be tragic. If the majority of pro-life Catholics voted for an independent pro-life candidate, Barack Obama would almost certainly win the election. By stubbornly sticking to an unelectable pro-life candidate, we could actually be perpetuating abortion rights in our country.
Our best chance to stop abortion will rest in the hands a conservative Supreme Court, and despite his shortcomings, John McCain is more likely to appoint such justices. While our attention is focused on the presidential election, even more important is a conservative congress in order to minimize obstacles to the confirmation process, or to block confirmation of liberal nominees should Obama be elected. Don’t think of it as choosing the lesser of two evils. Rather, think of it as choosing the candidate most likely to do good.
In a closely contested race, every vote is important. Wasting it on an unelectable candidate as a matter of principle will not move us closer to the goal. With nearly fifty million active Catholics in the United States, we have the power and the responsibility to stem the intrinsic evils that are becoming entrenched in mainstream America. We can sway public opinion by living our Catholic Faith to the fullest and helping to elect public officials who respect the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
It’s About Time
Time management can be a challenge for some of us, myself included. Seems like I never accomplish everything I want to do, but the essentials always get done somehow. Over the years, routines develop and days are filled with certain responsibilities of varying importance. Making adjustments for new demands on our time can be difficult, especially as we get older.
Our new pastor has many ideas and goals he wishes to accomplish in our parish. He has been here less than three months, and already I have been asked to assist with a number of projects. So far, I have been given a box of 13 video tapes to review for possible use in catechesis, been asked to serve on two commissions, assist with building a new confessional, recruit men for a proposed St. Joseph Club to meet on Saturday mornings, and help organize an effort to dedicate every home in the parish to the Sacred Heart. I was even called to the rectory at 10:30 one night to disconnect a faulty light fixture. Now, don’t get me wrong. I don’t mind helping out where I can, but at some point, time becomes a premium. I also maintain the parish webpage, assist in the selection of music for the weekend Masses, help out the choir and repair the antiquated church organ. We also have a St. Vincent de Paul conference of which I am a member.
Outside the parish, I work full time, serve on a civic board, do community service, write for a blog that I like to keep up at least monthly, and have a family I like to see once in a while. I have the usual chores around the house and yard work in the summer. People often assume I will take care of certain things, and I do to the best of my ability. One might think I am busy twenty-four hours and day, seven days a week, but I am not, and that brings me to a conundrum. How much is too much? When is it okay to say no? Should I feel guilty because I enjoy one or two evenings a week when I can come home from work and relax?
There is no doubt that most of us spend way too much time wrapped up in the ways of the secular world at the expense of our spiritual health. Our pastor has lamented the fact that efforts to provide spiritual enhancement for our parish go unappreciated. It is difficult to get people to attend parish events, faith formation classes, even Eucharistic adoration. It is quite sad actually. And yet, I find myself feeling a certain dread about further impositions on my time when these opportunities arise.
Earlier this month, a couple in a neighboring town offered an opportunity to honor the birthday of our Blessed Mother with a Sunday Rosary and luncheon in their garden. Our pastor encouraged members of our parish to attend. The next day at end of the weekday Mass commemorating Our Lady’s birth, our pastor asked how we would feel if someone planned a birthday party for us, and no one showed up. I am assuming from his comment that the Rosary was poorly attended. I don’t know because I did not attend either. Is our Blessed Mother offended or disappointed that I did not go? I hope not. I do try to pray the Rosary about four times a week.
I guess the point of all this is that I feel a little burned out at times. I realize my priorities are not in the best of order and that brings on some good old fashioned Catholic guilt. Does Our Lord want me to jettison a few responsibilities in order to spend more time in prayer or adoration, or can I do as well by serving others? Is it okay to reserve some down time for myself, or am I being wasteful if I lie on the sofa to watch a ballgame? I need to give all of this much more thought, but right now I don’t have time.
Time management can be a challenge for some of us, myself included. Seems like I never accomplish everything I want to do, but the essentials always get done somehow. Over the years, routines develop and days are filled with certain responsibilities of varying importance. Making adjustments for new demands on our time can be difficult, especially as we get older.
Our new pastor has many ideas and goals he wishes to accomplish in our parish. He has been here less than three months, and already I have been asked to assist with a number of projects. So far, I have been given a box of 13 video tapes to review for possible use in catechesis, been asked to serve on two commissions, assist with building a new confessional, recruit men for a proposed St. Joseph Club to meet on Saturday mornings, and help organize an effort to dedicate every home in the parish to the Sacred Heart. I was even called to the rectory at 10:30 one night to disconnect a faulty light fixture. Now, don’t get me wrong. I don’t mind helping out where I can, but at some point, time becomes a premium. I also maintain the parish webpage, assist in the selection of music for the weekend Masses, help out the choir and repair the antiquated church organ. We also have a St. Vincent de Paul conference of which I am a member.
Outside the parish, I work full time, serve on a civic board, do community service, write for a blog that I like to keep up at least monthly, and have a family I like to see once in a while. I have the usual chores around the house and yard work in the summer. People often assume I will take care of certain things, and I do to the best of my ability. One might think I am busy twenty-four hours and day, seven days a week, but I am not, and that brings me to a conundrum. How much is too much? When is it okay to say no? Should I feel guilty because I enjoy one or two evenings a week when I can come home from work and relax?
There is no doubt that most of us spend way too much time wrapped up in the ways of the secular world at the expense of our spiritual health. Our pastor has lamented the fact that efforts to provide spiritual enhancement for our parish go unappreciated. It is difficult to get people to attend parish events, faith formation classes, even Eucharistic adoration. It is quite sad actually. And yet, I find myself feeling a certain dread about further impositions on my time when these opportunities arise.
Earlier this month, a couple in a neighboring town offered an opportunity to honor the birthday of our Blessed Mother with a Sunday Rosary and luncheon in their garden. Our pastor encouraged members of our parish to attend. The next day at end of the weekday Mass commemorating Our Lady’s birth, our pastor asked how we would feel if someone planned a birthday party for us, and no one showed up. I am assuming from his comment that the Rosary was poorly attended. I don’t know because I did not attend either. Is our Blessed Mother offended or disappointed that I did not go? I hope not. I do try to pray the Rosary about four times a week.
I guess the point of all this is that I feel a little burned out at times. I realize my priorities are not in the best of order and that brings on some good old fashioned Catholic guilt. Does Our Lord want me to jettison a few responsibilities in order to spend more time in prayer or adoration, or can I do as well by serving others? Is it okay to reserve some down time for myself, or am I being wasteful if I lie on the sofa to watch a ballgame? I need to give all of this much more thought, but right now I don’t have time.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Latin Loathers
While listening to the Catholic Answers Live radio program recently (7-31-08, first hour), I heard a caller from Spokane, Washington express dismay that the Church was returning to the Latin Mass and nuns in habits. Apologist Jimmy Akin tried to assure her that she need not worry. He explained that no one is advocating a complete return to the Latin Mass. The norm will continue to be Mass in the vernacular. Pope Benedict has merely recognized the attachment some Catholics have to the Latin Mass and has made it permissible for priests to celebrate the Mass in that form for them.
In the middle of Jimmy’s explanation, the caller asked if she could say something. He said yes and the woman stated she was “appalled” that Catholic Answers was so conservative. Regular listeners to Catholic Answers know that of all the Catholic apologist regulars on the program, Jimmy is probably least capable of masking his ire at certain callers when they become combative. Instead of calling them by name, he will address them as “Sir” or “Ma’am”. I sensed a “Ma’am” coming up and Jimmy did not disappoint.
Jimmy explained to her that Catholic Answers is neither conservative nor liberal. Catholic Answers is orthodox, meaning they seek to teach what the Church teaches. The caller became quite agitated and asked, “Where is God in all of this? God didn’t want this” to which Jimmy replied, “How do YOU know that God didn’t want this?” The caller shot back with “How do YOU know he did?” Jimmy stated that he knew God wanted this because it comes from the Pope. At this point, the caller expressed some disdain for the conservative leanings of the Pope prompting Jimmy to express concern for the state of her soul.
This exchange sadly typifies the polarization among some Catholics today regarding liturgical matters, and more importantly where it comes to fidelity to Church teaching. One can be liberal or conservative as long as he or she is orthodox. Being orthodox means respecting the authority of the Pope and accepting what the Church teaches. This is where we get into difficulty with some folks who think they know better than the old man in Rome.
In this particular case, nothing is being imposed on anyone. The Mass to which this woman is accustomed will continue to be the ordinary form. That is not to say the ordinary form cannot be celebrated in Latin. It can be, but Mass in the vernacular will continue to be the norm. What she may find more upsetting is new language in the ordinary form that will be coming soon. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments recently approved a revised English translation of the Order of Mass, which will be binding on us here in the United States.
Our English language undergoes subtle changes over time, sometimes called semantic drift. This happens in many different ways through every day usage. Words take on new meanings or connotations. One of the commonly used examples is the word gay, which usually means something much different today than it did a few decades ago.
Catholic apologists occasionally have to explain that they are so called because they explain and defend certain positions or doctrines of the Church. This type of apology has nothing to do with expressing regret as we commonly use the word today. That same apologist may also find it necessary to explain that when we pray to saints, we are simply asking for their intercession. The word pray originally meant to ask, and that is the way Catholics use it. Prayer in that sense is not a form of worship as some believe.
Changes in the language may seem insignificant, but variations in the way we communicate happen more rapidly than one might think. Our parents used expressions that would seem dated or even nonsensical today. Our children sometimes communicate in slang we do not understand. Find a hundred year-old newspaper and see how much writing styles have changed in a century. Now imagine the challenge facing a two thousand year-old Church in accurately passing down revelation to all of us living today.
That is one of the beauties of Latin. It is a dead language not subject to this evolution of meaning that all other contemporary languages experience. When our liturgies were celebrated universally in Latin, Catholics all over the world were using the same words, hearing and saying the same things. We may not have always known what we were hearing and saying, but we were always united.
When Vatican II permitted Masses to be celebrated in the vernacular, the Latin Mass had to be translated into all the various languages Catholics use, including of course, English. This may sound like a simple task, but it is not. A word for word translation is impossible. Sentence structures differ from one language to another. The translator must express the meaning intended by the original writer, and in many cases, that meaning may be subject to interpretation. In the case of the English translation of the Mass we use today, some would say it was done hastily and does not always adequately express the meaning of the original Latin. The new translation is a more precise translation.
Why is this so important? The Catholic Church is universal and she is one. When we participate in the Mass, every Catholic in the world is united at the foot of the Cross. If we are to be truly united, we must share the same mind and spirit, as Paul tells us. If every translation carries with it some variation in meaning, our unity can be compromised. The best way to assure this does not happen is to stay as close to the original as possible. When the priest says, “The Lord be with you” and we answer “And also with you”, we are not saying exactly what the original Latin says, and therefore, not necessarily what other Catholics are saying in other languages. The more precise response would be “And with your spirit”, and that is what we will soon be saying when the new translation goes into effect.
I pray that people like the caller from Spokane who was “appalled” by any thought of returning to Latin in the Mass, will see the beauty and historical significance of the Latin language in the Church, as well as the benefits of embracing it today. Thanks to the wisdom of Pope Benedict, we will continue to have the ordinary Mass in our improved English translation, plus the beauty and reverence of the Mass in Latin if we so choose, and that is extraordinary!
While listening to the Catholic Answers Live radio program recently (7-31-08, first hour), I heard a caller from Spokane, Washington express dismay that the Church was returning to the Latin Mass and nuns in habits. Apologist Jimmy Akin tried to assure her that she need not worry. He explained that no one is advocating a complete return to the Latin Mass. The norm will continue to be Mass in the vernacular. Pope Benedict has merely recognized the attachment some Catholics have to the Latin Mass and has made it permissible for priests to celebrate the Mass in that form for them.
In the middle of Jimmy’s explanation, the caller asked if she could say something. He said yes and the woman stated she was “appalled” that Catholic Answers was so conservative. Regular listeners to Catholic Answers know that of all the Catholic apologist regulars on the program, Jimmy is probably least capable of masking his ire at certain callers when they become combative. Instead of calling them by name, he will address them as “Sir” or “Ma’am”. I sensed a “Ma’am” coming up and Jimmy did not disappoint.
Jimmy explained to her that Catholic Answers is neither conservative nor liberal. Catholic Answers is orthodox, meaning they seek to teach what the Church teaches. The caller became quite agitated and asked, “Where is God in all of this? God didn’t want this” to which Jimmy replied, “How do YOU know that God didn’t want this?” The caller shot back with “How do YOU know he did?” Jimmy stated that he knew God wanted this because it comes from the Pope. At this point, the caller expressed some disdain for the conservative leanings of the Pope prompting Jimmy to express concern for the state of her soul.
This exchange sadly typifies the polarization among some Catholics today regarding liturgical matters, and more importantly where it comes to fidelity to Church teaching. One can be liberal or conservative as long as he or she is orthodox. Being orthodox means respecting the authority of the Pope and accepting what the Church teaches. This is where we get into difficulty with some folks who think they know better than the old man in Rome.
In this particular case, nothing is being imposed on anyone. The Mass to which this woman is accustomed will continue to be the ordinary form. That is not to say the ordinary form cannot be celebrated in Latin. It can be, but Mass in the vernacular will continue to be the norm. What she may find more upsetting is new language in the ordinary form that will be coming soon. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments recently approved a revised English translation of the Order of Mass, which will be binding on us here in the United States.
Our English language undergoes subtle changes over time, sometimes called semantic drift. This happens in many different ways through every day usage. Words take on new meanings or connotations. One of the commonly used examples is the word gay, which usually means something much different today than it did a few decades ago.
Catholic apologists occasionally have to explain that they are so called because they explain and defend certain positions or doctrines of the Church. This type of apology has nothing to do with expressing regret as we commonly use the word today. That same apologist may also find it necessary to explain that when we pray to saints, we are simply asking for their intercession. The word pray originally meant to ask, and that is the way Catholics use it. Prayer in that sense is not a form of worship as some believe.
Changes in the language may seem insignificant, but variations in the way we communicate happen more rapidly than one might think. Our parents used expressions that would seem dated or even nonsensical today. Our children sometimes communicate in slang we do not understand. Find a hundred year-old newspaper and see how much writing styles have changed in a century. Now imagine the challenge facing a two thousand year-old Church in accurately passing down revelation to all of us living today.
That is one of the beauties of Latin. It is a dead language not subject to this evolution of meaning that all other contemporary languages experience. When our liturgies were celebrated universally in Latin, Catholics all over the world were using the same words, hearing and saying the same things. We may not have always known what we were hearing and saying, but we were always united.
When Vatican II permitted Masses to be celebrated in the vernacular, the Latin Mass had to be translated into all the various languages Catholics use, including of course, English. This may sound like a simple task, but it is not. A word for word translation is impossible. Sentence structures differ from one language to another. The translator must express the meaning intended by the original writer, and in many cases, that meaning may be subject to interpretation. In the case of the English translation of the Mass we use today, some would say it was done hastily and does not always adequately express the meaning of the original Latin. The new translation is a more precise translation.
Why is this so important? The Catholic Church is universal and she is one. When we participate in the Mass, every Catholic in the world is united at the foot of the Cross. If we are to be truly united, we must share the same mind and spirit, as Paul tells us. If every translation carries with it some variation in meaning, our unity can be compromised. The best way to assure this does not happen is to stay as close to the original as possible. When the priest says, “The Lord be with you” and we answer “And also with you”, we are not saying exactly what the original Latin says, and therefore, not necessarily what other Catholics are saying in other languages. The more precise response would be “And with your spirit”, and that is what we will soon be saying when the new translation goes into effect.
I pray that people like the caller from Spokane who was “appalled” by any thought of returning to Latin in the Mass, will see the beauty and historical significance of the Latin language in the Church, as well as the benefits of embracing it today. Thanks to the wisdom of Pope Benedict, we will continue to have the ordinary Mass in our improved English translation, plus the beauty and reverence of the Mass in Latin if we so choose, and that is extraordinary!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)