Following the Voice within

Those who have ears, let them hear

2012-02-16T12:42:00.000-07:00

Christ used that phrase to signpost something important and difficult. I'm borrowing from the Master here because that is how it was related to me.

I have been reading and listening to a LOT of heated rhetoric back and forth in the media and on teh intarwebz. I have lots of opinions about who may have the right of things and who need a swift kick in the keester. Far more importantly, there is something which may be lost in all of the hollerin that we NEED to remember.

Those people, yes..'those' people with the crazy ideas which will be the death of (insert institution here). Those people?

They are us.

They are well-intentioned folks who are attempting to sort out the world as much as 'we' are using the limited toolset of experience and knowledge. Just like us. That applies equally to the atheists and to the zealots, to the princes of the church and the princes of this world, to the radical conservatives and liberals and everyone in-between. We are all, at base, trying to do what we think is right, fitting and proper. If we're serious about being followers of Christ, then consider how you would want them to treat you before you pen an incendiary missive or kick a can of petrol onto the comment bonfire.

Those who have ears, let them hear.

Have a gander at this

2012-02-13T14:32:00.000-07:00

quotes to ponder

2012-02-13T12:21:00.000-07:00

"Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" (Phi. 2:12b)

"Work out your own salvation. Do not depend on others"
Siddartha Gautama, the Buddha

"Follow the truth, no matter where it may lead."
Dominic de Guzeman, founder OFP

Ok...yes. You really DO do this on purpose.

2012-02-11T16:20:00.001-07:00

Reading through all of the heated rhetoric regarding the 'culture wars'. It's about those uppity wimmenz, teh gayz and their 'agenda' (why do I never get these memos?), the secular culture and the crypto-muslim presidents.

So, then...there's the daily reading:

Why do you pass judgment on your brother or sister? Or you, why do you despise your brother or sister? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. For it is written, "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall give praise to God." So then, each of us will be accountable to God. Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another.(Romans 14:10-13)

On purpose. I'm seein this now. Lemmie guess. "Let those who have ears, let them hear".

Another strong voice joins the Choir Invisible

2012-02-11T15:28:00.003-07:00

Bruce speaking out against
mountain-topremoval
months before his death

Bruce Cassidy of Frankfort, Kentucky, ended his long battle with cancer yesterday. Bruce was a tireless orator and activist for social justice from the Ciivil Rights era through the months proceeding his passing. Raised Irish-Catholic (it's one word, you know), Bruce came of age when Vatican II was coming to fruition. His life and his work remains a strong embodiment of the values of those times and a concrete example of how those values are still valid today.

Bruce had a gift, a charism if you will, when it came to social connections. He knew everyone in Frankfort, from the homeless to the Governor, knew their lives, their tragedies and triumphs and related to everyone there with a equanimity which belies the true meaning of the word compassion.

His experiences with the Roman Church caused him to leave their fold, yet I would argue in terms that I normally would reserve for Michael Judge and George Romero that his deeds, words and motivations were more catholic than those being pronounced today by the 'faithful' in that community. His wit, his humour and his friendship will be sorely missed.

Until we meet again, Bruce, my our loving Father hold you in Her arms.

He does this on purpose

2012-02-10T15:26:00.000-07:00

Quote of the Day:
"We cannot -- we will not -- comply with this unjust law."
- Cardinal George, speaking about the HHS directive

Reading for the day:
"Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment." (Romans 13:1-3)

I think She really does this on purpose. *looks up* You DO do this on purpose, don't you?!

Today's Reading: Butterflies

2012-02-08T13:05:00.000-07:00

I have written and deleted several pointed posts about the RC prelates and their proxies going on about this, that and the other. Some pretty brilliant stuff, honestly, with scriptural rebuking and using tradition to up-end their own arguments (no lepers, though, every fiery sermon is better with lepers). As I read through it all, though, I see that this would do naught but continue the cycle of vitriol and viciousness which has led me here now. So, let's try the old standard and look the reading today. I was going to talk about the entire passage (Romans 12: 2-8), but brevity and a bit of 'encouragement' has pointed me at just examining a single verse, verse 2:

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

Simple enough, right? Yah, except this is Paul writing and the original greek is far more important.

καὶ μὴ συσχηματίζεσθε τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ, ἀλλὰ μεταμορφοῦσθε τῇ ἀνακαινώσει τοῦ νοὸς εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τί τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, τὸ ἀγαθὸν καὶ εὐάρεστον καὶ τέλειον.

When we say conformed, the greek συσχηματίζεσθε , sysxēmatízō has the subtext of assuming the outer shape or appearance.

The word translated as 'world' is αἰῶνι, aiṓn, which more accurately means age or time, rather than kosmos, which is the universe or world.

When it says transformed, the greek is μεταμορφοῦσθε, metamorphoo, the root of metamorphosis. To change form in agreement with your inner being.

The word 'renewal' here is ἀνακαινώσει, anakaínōsis -completing a process to make anew, a renovation or renewal

The 'mind' is νοὸς, noos/nous which incorporates understanding, reason and intellect. It is our god-given capability to comprehend.

to 'prove', δοκιμάζειν, dokimázō concentrates on an active discernment to affirm, as one tests metal to show its worthiness.

The 'will of God', θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, thélēma is the key word here, for it is always used in scripture to refer to the Creator/Sustainer (theós). Thélēma is the specific desire, wish or will of the God which is looking at the results of said desire.

Putting the pieces together... "do not assume the external appearance of this time, but be inwardly changed by re-forming your understanding, so your active discernment affirms the desire of the Creator - the intrinsically good, fully acceptable and even complete in perfection."

Umm. Right. I'm just going to go over in this corner and think an awful lot about this.

Thanks Coyote. *twitch, twitch*

apologies for not posting, I has a sad

2012-02-08T01:42:00.000-07:00

There is a point one reaches where the spittle-flecked invective and shrill, self-righteous cries become too much, when knowledge that honest, well-meaning folk are at each others throats with rage-blinded vehemence which turns into a bitter stew that bores a hole in your soul.

That would sum up my feelings regarding news items in the last week or so. There are so many stories that they start to bleed into one another. One Million Moms tries to strong-arm J.C. Penney because they hire the hippest lesbian on the planet, the Koman Foundation (the Race for the Cure folks) decides breast-cancer screening is less important than abortions in publicly killing funding for Planned Parenthood, the 'faithful' in an uproar over the government requiring insurance companies to cover contraception as part of prescription plans, Proposition 8 being soundly defeated, ensuring a U.S. Supreme Court rematch. The list goes on and on.

So yes, I has a sad. I has a sad for the teens who see adults acting like irrational children, who cannot but equate the God of love and inclusion with hatred and exclusion. I weep for those who contemplate suicide tonight because parents would turn their own children out into the street because the way God made them isn't what they (or their church) want. I grieve for those who would believe that acceptance, love and peace are unimportant compared to a morally superior position.

How important is a theological argument when Christ freezes in the street? What use is moral superiority when the Prince of Peace goes hungry? Where does the balance lie when weighing doctrinal purity against the blood of the innocent spilled by those who wish to be right more than be a servant of God?

Kyrie eleison
Chirste eleison
Kyrie eleison, Eleison imas olous

That horizontal element

2012-01-27T12:28:00.000-07:00

Who controls the vertical? The horizontal?

I have mentioned previously, but I believe that there are two axes which direct most any faith system. The first is the 'vertical', which is the relationship with the Divine (which I term the 'spiritual'). The second is the 'horizontal', which is the relationship we have with one another (the 'religious'). These two dimensions are summed up in the twin commandments to love God and to love one another.

As you all know, I do a lot of thinking, reflecting, praying and such. The majority of it revolves around the 'vertical' element, however, with an attempt to understand (in what limited way I can) the Divine and my relationship with Her.

My thinking about the horizontal element has been focused on my portion of that equation, but I realise that I am not alone in the horizontal any more than I am the sole actor in the vertical. This is at least part of why I feel drawn towards pastoral ministry over being a theologian or going into a hermetic order. It is in connecting with others, being actively engaged in the horizontal, that I see my talents being used, my heart the lightest and myself being the least comfortable. You read that right. This is where things get dicey.

Being in relationship with anyone is knowing where they are and meeting them as closely to that point as your moral dictates permit. For most people and settings, this isn't such a hard thing for me. Where it gets very interesting (in that chinese sort of way) is when you are perceived as an authority figure or somehow are a representative for the church. At that juncture, you are no longer your own man, so to speak. There is a question in my mind about authenticity and the interplay of being sensitive/responsive to those who are in your social group while at the same time being true to your understanding of the religious and the spiritual.

Honestly, I would really appreciate some external viewpoints on this, so your thoughts and opinions about this would be even more appreciated than usual.

todays reading with a Republican slant

2012-01-26T11:11:00.000-07:00

"For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins?" (Heb. 10:1-2)

There is a lot of verbiage these days about the 'new-that-is-old' Roman church with its insistence on obedience and doctrinal purity. Reading this passage from Hebrews hits home against these things even more strongly than it may first appear. Paul refers to the law as the shadow and not the form of things, alluding to an allegory which most of his readers would have known - Plato's Cave.

The Law is not the form, not the reality of Salvation, it is the shadow which is cast upon the wall which is, at best, the verisimilitude of Salvation. Once we have been freed from the cave and can see the reality that is God and Salvation through Christ, how can we return to arguing about an iota of difference or mouth vs. hand? How can you demand obedience to a shadow from one who has experienced the light?

"Wouldn't he remember his first home, what passed for wisdom there, and his fellow prisoners, and consider himself happy and them pitiable? And wouldn't he disdain whatever honors, praises, and prizes were awarded there to the ones who guessed best which shadows followed which? Moreover, were he to return there, wouldn't he be rather bad at their game, no longer being accustomed to the darkness? Wouldn't it be said of him that he went up and came back with his eyes corrupted, and that it's not even worth trying to go up? And if they were somehow able to get their hands on and kill the man who attempts to release and lead them up, wouldn't they kill him?" (Plato, Republic, 517a)

Of course they wouldn't, Socrates. The Jews had the Romans kill Christ, because the shadows say they can't kill their own.

A thought for today

2012-01-23T16:01:00.001-07:00

Phillip Parker (1998-2012) R.I.P.

It's not who you are that holds you back;
It's who you think you're not.

You are a being of Light, suffused by the Holy Spirit.

You are created in the image and likeness of the Divine.

You are good enough, not by what you do, but because of who you are.

Don't let anyone convince you otherwise.

Conceptions on conception, God and life

2012-01-23T11:44:00.000-07:00

This would be where I push more buttons, I do believe, and this is directed at those who of the mind that 'life begins at conception'.

I have no desire to argue against that claim on merits, for until there is a scientific method of detecting a soul, any discussion as to when a body is 'ensouled' is entirely speculative. Instead, I wish to engage the matter from a scientific and philosophical perspective.

Let us start from the scientific perspective. Ignoring the various methods of human intervention (abortion/contraception), the medical community has known for some time that approximately 22% of fertilized eggs never reach implantation and are excreted during the monthly cycle. Additionally, of those fertilized eggs which DO reach implantation and generate a chemically-recognizable pregnancy, 31% will result in a miscarriage of one form or the other. Here...let me help ya.

100 zygotes * 22% = 78 implanted zygotes
78 implanted zygotes * 31% = 24 miscarriages
22 + 24 = 46% ; 100% - 46% = 54% of fertilized eggs CAN reach maturity and be born.

Note these numbers don't concern themselves with contraception and/or abortion techniques (which lower the zygote->baby rate by another 22%), just how we are built by God. And this is what I'm on about.

If we say....
1. zygotes are ensouled. (life begins at conception)
2. Over 45% of all zygotes are never born
3. these ensouled beings carry the stain of Original Sin

...then how does this inform our understanding of God? How do we reconcile this with the notion of a loving, caring and merciful God? If those things are irreconcilable (as I believe they are), then what must we change?

Is God not loving, caring and merciful?
Is an unborn ensouled at some time other than conception?
Is there not Original Sin?

For myself, I am far more inclined to believe that the unborn is ensouled around the quickening, when they begin to move and function as beings independent of the mother. I also do not believe in Original Sin (but I have talked about that before).

But y'all need to figure it out for yourselves.

marriage, sex and related rediculous topics

2012-01-19T11:37:00.001-07:00

Stronger than God's plan?

So, yah...it's about that time to poke at a hornets nest.

There has been a lot of blog traffic recently about marriage, the Plan of God (can you hear the capital letters?), the purpose of sex and other related topics which I would laugh about if others weren't taking them so seriously.

The first matter I shall engage and dispose of with alacrity - contraception. If God is all-powerful, then the Trojan man here ain't gonna foil His plan.

Coming then to the act proper, it is not unlike so many other things which are natural and seemly, which is to say that it has more than a single purpose. When one dines, it is not just for nutrition but also gustation and fraternization. The social benefits and pleasure which one may derive from a meal is no less seemly or proper than the fortitude which said meal provides. It is when one's appetites, whether in bed or at table (or elsewhere), overcome temperance or prudence that the appetite becomes a vice. Note, though, that the repast is not at fault, nor are the multiple benefits derived therefrom an evil, but it is the driving force from within that is the question.

Bringing this into more modern and customary parlance, sexual congress can be for reproduction, but it is also for pleasure and intimate social bonding. The argument can be made that the latter two are actually more essential to the definition of sexual acts than 'makin babies'. In any event, to ignore the aspects of social bonding or pleasure which are intertwined with sexual congress is to fundamentally misrepresent the act and to misconstrue the affect which it has upon the individuals involved.

This brings us to marriage. "Mawwige is what bwings us togwether today". As any who have been party to that 'dweam within a dweam', I will say that it is SO not about sex or having children. It's about being there for each other when times are good and bad, through thick and thin...when you want to hold your spouse closely, by the throat or in your arms. The only people who would think otherwise are those who have no experience in the matter. Further, the concept behind marriage has radically changed multiple times over time and cultures. To say that any social institution is an immutable entity is to willfully ignore the whole history and insult the intelligence of your audience.

Just sayin.

The Original Sin thing

2012-01-18T12:53:00.000-07:00

"Don't lay your sins on me, bro!"

From the time I was small, it was drummed into my head that, from birth, all of mankind is a fallen, sinful creation of a perfect, loving God, that I can never do anything right by myself and I (along with everyone other than Jesus) are horrible, craven beasts. Thank you Augustine, Calvin and Knox. Of course, the culprit here is a snake with an apple, some chick and her overly-trusting husband.

This has always bothered me on a nearly subconscious level, as it defies the notion of a loving creator God. Ignoring that is counter-intuitive to say a loving God would such a thing (discussed here) or that Original Sin entirely undermines the efficacy of baptism and salvic grace (more in a moment about that), I come to Ezekiel, Deuteronomy and Romans.

"The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself." (Ez. 18:20)

"Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin." (Deut. 24:16)

"He will judge everyone according to what they have done. He will give eternal life to those who keep on doing good, seeking after the glory and honor and immortality that God offers. But he will pour out his anger and wrath on those who live for themselves, who refuse to obey the truth and instead live lives of wickedness." (Rom. 2:6-8)

That seems pretty clear to me. If I am not held accountable for my father's deeds (good or bad), then how can I be held to account for the deeds of the first of man?

The efficacy issue is a mostly separate thing. The idea runs like this:
1. There is Original Sin (which is defined as a hereditary stain due to the sin of Adam)
2. The Blood of the Lamb washes our souls clean of every stain (Rom.5:18, among others)
ergo..any child who is born of two who have been baptized would be without the stain of Original Sin.

If it were not the case, then Grace through belief is not wholly efficacious. Even if the above parents of the child have mortally sinned after baptism, the stain of Original Sin was washed away, else Grace is not wholly efficacious.

Oh, there's more...probably a lot more, but that's enough for now. There is a lot of 'tree-shaking' there with HUGE implications. Read it over a few times, sit and pray with the idea. Decide for yourself what is right.

An ancient church, my hols and an italian friar

2012-01-17T14:36:00.000-07:00

There thoughts and patterns of things which accumulate over time until, by a simple prod, the log jam comes loose and thoughts tumble. Hold on.

So, I recently was on hols to visit my parents in Florida. Over the course of the week, it came home crystal that our respective world-views, however similar they had been in the past, are quite different today. With the exception of the financial/economic sector, they are state-of-the-art 1960's views and when a situation arises which conflicts with this world-view (such as Nixon being more 'liberal' than current 'liberal' thinking), the information is either summarily dismissed or ignored.

Segue to religion... The church I attend is principally filled with Baby Boomers who took Vatican II at its word and when the retrenchment started, left the Roman fold disillusioned and wounded. Our liturgy is classic 'low-mass' liturgy, replete with guitars and Haagen/Haas/St. Louis Jesuits. It makes me chuckle a bit to hear them talk about how the RC is 'going back to the past', because what I see is a different form of the same thing. Benny and his jets are looking to restore the church to what they perceive it was when they were in their youth. So are most of the folk in my parish. Trouble is....this isn't 1950....or 1970. This is a new millennium and the world has changed SOO very much since then that it is sometimes hard to understand the mindset which went into some of the positions taken by either Benny or the boomers.

As I have said before, religion functions as a horizontal societal instrument to build and reinforce the community. As religion is no longer the central glue to a local community and the needs of the community and its members no longer align perfectly with Church Doctrine (tm), the church must adapt to this if they wish to remain relevant to the community and retain their role as defined above as a religion. Despite what 'some folk' would like you to believe, all of the 'major' religions have developed, changed and morphed over their lifespan. That is why they have survived and prospered as long as they have, because the people recognized the importance of addressing the concerns of today, not a generation/century/millenium ago.

So what's with the friar? Three words - "Rebuild my church".
It isn't "make a replica of the ancient church" or "restore the church of your youth", but "rebuild my church". When you rebuild something, you replace the old, worn-out parts with new ones, tighten and realign everything, coming out with an alloy of new and old which is far better then the original without being an entirely new creation.

An update on leaping

2012-01-12T13:05:00.000-07:00

An update on this.

Trust me, He says...a leap of faith, She says.

“Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.”
- Martin Luther King Jr.

“When you have come to the edge Of all light that you know And are about to drop off into the darkness Of the unknown, Faith is knowing One of two things will happen: There will be something solid to stand on or You will be taught to fly” - Patrick Overton

Thanks be to She who lives forever for the lessons in soaring.

follow-on thought - quote

2012-01-11T10:36:00.000-07:00

What does love look like? It has the hands to help others. It has the feet to hasten to the poor and needy. It has eyes to see misery and want. It has the ears to hear the sighs and sorrows of men. That is what love looks like.

- St. Augustine of Hippo

Essentialism

2012-01-11T10:01:00.000-07:00

I've been thinking again. *hears stampede of feet and cries of terror*

No, really.

Words matter. I've said this before and it's true. I have been thinking about how to describe where my spirituality is centered and how my religious/pastoral care is oriented. The more I study, pray, meditate and cogitate, the more I realise that a great deal of what is held is "vital" or "important" isn't either. They're distractions, fig leaves, window dressing or ret-cons which may be of some help (at best) or can be horribly destructive (at worst).

Does the Divine care about the wording in liturgy? That bells are rung and thuribles swung? No. That's for us.

What about our understanding of Theology? Surely He must care about how we think of Her, right? Mebbie, but I doubt it. That's still us.

Our belief in Scripture! That's vital, right? I can hear Coyote's snort to that in my own words. The words are ours, put down so we may understand Her better and have an idea on how He wants us to act towards others.

The Divine is love. We are created in His image and Her likeness, we are loved for what we are. That's the key, now isn't it. THAT is the essential. We are made in the image and likeness of love-that-is-God. We are love-made-flesh, as Christ was. Given that, we are enjoined to be what we are: Love-made-flesh.

The rest...

"In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love." - Meldinius (often attributed to St. Augustine)

perspectives

2012-01-10T11:16:00.000-07:00

Despite what some of my 'friends' would say, I do not live in a cave, out in the desert, atop a pillar, under a rock or otherwise engage in eremitic tendencies. Every day, there is fresh news from the economic front about the 'great recession' and how the global economy is being affected. Today, a story came out of Greece, who has been arguably the worst hit of all first world nations by the crisis.

Due to long-term unemployment and disintegration of governmental social services, some families are having to do what seems impossible by 'modern, civilized' standards - abandoning their own children. Since public institutions are incapable of assistance, it is up to private organizations, like the Greek Church, to shoulder this burden at a time when donations are plummeting and the state is taxing non-profits for the first time.

For the parents who must choose, Lord have mercy
For the children who have no choice, Christ have mercy
For those who see and cannot turn a blind eye, Lord have mercy

A thought for today

2012-01-09T13:24:00.000-07:00

So VERY stolen directly from Thom:

Imagine an institution that requires its leaders to attend not only college, but graduate school. Imagine that the graduate school in question is constitutionally forbidden from receiving any form of government aid, that it typically requires three years of full-time schooling for the diploma, that the nature of the schooling bears almost no resemblance to the job in question, and that the pay for graduates is far lower than other professionals. You have just imagined the relationship between the Christian church and her seminaries.

Jerry Bowyer, Forbes.com blog, 04/20/2011

I guess that's why it's neither a job nor a career, but a vocation.

Thought for the day - A leap of faith, he says.

2011-12-31T08:06:00.001-07:00

"Courage is being scared to death, and saddling up anyways."
- John Wayne

Don't be a rock if you want some bread

2011-12-28T10:49:00.002-07:00

I'll have the loaves and fishes, please.

My dear friend Bill was talking about 'pro multis' and the new mass and I commented about 'false ecumencism'. I replied that John 3 shows that there is nothing false about the universality of Christ's message, which is summed up in John 3:15-17. This comment, specifically regarding πᾶς versus πολλοί (all vs. many), led to a re-reading of Matthew 7 and, through that, a realisation that I should talk about something which I have believed for some time but I may have not fully articulated, if actually addressed at all.

In John 3, Christ tells Nicodemus that all (πᾶς) who believe in the Son of Man will have life eternal.
In Matthew, Christ tells the crowds at the sermon on the mount that all (πᾶς) who ask, receive. This resonates with the healing miracles which Christ does. In every instance, there is an overt act of faith in Christ and his divinity which results in the miracle.Whether it is touching the hem of his garment, washing in Bethesda or as simple as a cripple who tries to stand when he is told to, they are concrete actions which demonstrate the people's trust and belief.

This all ties back into the Mat. 7 reading:

πᾶς γὰρ ὁ αἰτῶν λαμβάνει καὶ ὁ ζητῶν εὑρίσκει καὶ τῷ κρούοντι ἀνοιγήσεται. ἢ τίς ἐξ ὑμῶν ἄνθρωπος, ὃν αἰτήσει ὁ υἱὸς αὐτοῦ ἄρτον μὴ λίθον ἐπιδώσει αὐτῷ; ἢ καὶ ἰχθὺν αἰτήσει μὴ ὄφιν ἐπιδώσει αὐτῷ; For all who ask receive, and all who seek find, and all who knock, it will be opened. Which among you, mankind, when his son asks for a loaf, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, he will not give him a snake, will he?

Two things stand out here. The first is that God will always give good fruits to his children who ask. The second part is that we have to ask. To have the eternal life spoken of to Nicodemus, we must believe. This is neither unilaterally dispensed nor irresistibly thrust down our throats, but rather something we must seek, we must ask for, we must want. Lip-service won't do and being a lump waiting for Divine salvation doesn't cut it either. We have to be active participants in the process.

Hullo...have you seen my bukkit, Mr. Carpenter?

2011-12-27T15:36:00.000-07:00

Of all the things which happened this Christmastide, I will speak of something which happened a million miles from the altar.

I spent most of Boxing day with an acquaintance who I would now call a friend. For the better part of a dozen hours, we spoke of many things...
of gays and God and ex-boyfriends,
of forensics and the King of Kings.

What was brilliant was talking at great length and substantive depth with someone about religious and spiritual matters who has actually put thought and energy into the topic. What made such a discussion even more of interest and value is that this person has a worldview which is, at the kindest, wildly different from my own.

Part of the conversation set revolved around a number of what I would consider reasonably standard 'gotcha' matters for those who 'just believe'. Topics like...OT vs. NT understandings of God, the role of the Devil, inconsistencies in scripture, NT canon and canonicity. What really struck me about this whole exchange was his comment that how refreshing and odd to find someone who had answers.

This, of course, led to further conversations about the infantilization of religion, especially within the context of the US and Christianity. Upon reflection, though, it is starting to become a more widespread phenomenon within the US.

How often is it that we just accept what we are told without question?
How often is it that the lens of Hooker's Reason is focused on what 'we all believe' to be true?
When did it occur that common sense is neither common nor sensical?

synthesis - Turn, turn turn

2011-12-27T11:03:00.000-07:00

"Of what avail is frock, or rosary,
Or clouted garment? Keep thyself but free
From evil deeds, it will not need for thee
To wear the cap of felt: a darwesh be
In heart, and wear the cap of Tartary."
- Sa'di, Gulistan

'Tis the gift to be simple, Its a gift to be free,
'Tis the gift to come down where you ought to be,
And when we find ourselves in the place just right,
Will be in the valley of love and delight.

When true simplicity is gained,
To bow and to bend, we will not be ashamed,
To turn, turn, will be our delight,
Till by turning, turning we come round right
- Joseph Brackett, Simple Gifts

...on the feets of Steven

2011-12-27T10:07:00.002-07:00

One of the more iconic of the 'second tier' of Christmas carols is that of Good King Wenceslaus, which is based upon the legend of Duke Vaclav I of Bohemia who was martyred for his faith. Unfortunately, most of us don't get past the 'feets of Steven' (well, that's how WE sung it when I was 12) and fewer still grasp the whole of the story which the carol is telling.

In brief, on the night after Christmas it is bitterly cold and snowy. The king sees a poor man out on such a night gathering sticks for a fire. He finds out where the fellow lives (some three miles, on the edge of the forest), and sets out personally with wood, drink and food to dine with this peasant. The point of this tale is contained in the last verse, which I quote:

Therefore, Christian men, be sure wealth or rank possessing
Ye who now will bless the poor shall yourselves find blessing.

The 'good king' here doesn't invite the peasant into his house, nor to sup at his table amid the splendid finery. No, he removes himself from his comfort to meet the poor man on his level, where he lives. Of course, that is what God-as-Christ did. He became flesh to meet us where we are. He shared the bitter cold and wintry nights, braved the snow and dark to sup with us where we live. That is the core of the Incarnation.

Thanks be to God.

Merry Christmas

2011-12-24T23:33:00.001-07:00

To all of those who come by my scribblinz (and I know who both of you are), I wish you a most beautiful, peaceful and happy Christmas.

I offer here two of my favourite Christmas songs for your Christmas day.

Reflections on Yule vespers

2011-12-22T15:59:00.000-07:00

Last night concluded our advent vesper series and it was marvelous and so very different. As it was Yule, the theme was about darkness and light. The only light in the sanctuary was provided by the candles which covered the altar and environs (including the advent wreath). It truly was beautiful and the service, simple and unadorned, was very fulfilling. The light/dark imagery really started to make me think about darkness, the night and other related things.

It is in the light that we believe that see clearly, where things are well known and we are comfortable. During the day, we are consumed with the business of our lives, our jobs and all of the other 'stuff' which 'demand' our attention. When darkness falls...real darkness falls. That's when things change.

"In dark silence, comes whisperings of new beginnings."

It is at night when must we admit (if only to ourselves) we don't see things well, that even the most familiar seems alien and our confidences are shaken. The rational, logical world of the day turns into some alternate realm where your non-rational mind shows itself. It is in the darkness that your most basic fig-leaf, belief in your own senses, is ripped away and you are left with the painful discomfort of knowing that you don't know and that, in a very real sense, you can NEVER know.

"In dark silence, comes whisperings of new beginnings."

The Celts believed that nighttime is when the veil that separates this world and the next is thinner and I see that it is in the still of the night that one perceives things and ideas which the day blinded us to. Being shaken out of the rote of the Light allows for change and perceiving things differently affords the opportunity for growth. If one can sit in that darkness and still the internal mutterings, there is much to learn, to see and to hear in that place which is What is needed to enable that growth and change is to be still, listen and wait.

"In dark silence, comes whisperings of new beginnings."

National Geographic reported some time ago about how our obsession with electric lighting is all but extinguishing the night. It is becoming enough of an issue in parts of the world that 'dark-sky oases' are being established in first-world nations. As people who have neither day nor night, we live by arbitrary, artificial, external schedules instead of the clock of the world (or even our own internal body clock).

To really understand, to truly comprehend, we must go beyond and outside. Sit in the dark silence and listen to the snow fall. Accustom your eyes (both inside and out) to the darkness and hear the whispers of new beginnings.

the reading and the thought which came unbidden

2011-12-21T14:57:00.001-07:00

When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said, “Come, make us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we don’t know what has happened to him.”

Aaron answered them, “Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me.” So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool. Then they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.” (Ex. 32:1-5)

The way this nation worships the almighty dollar, I really wonder if we've traded in a golden calf for the brass bull above.

pebbles

2011-12-20T14:35:00.001-07:00

There is an analogy used in Taoism (and Buddhism too, as I recall) that if your mind is clear and calm, it will be like the surface of a still pond. Contrawise, if your mind is muddled or disturbed, then it is like a choppy lake, full of waves.

When a thought, an idea or some insight is given to you, it is a pebble dropped into the pond. If you are still, the ripples echo out, affecting much more than the initial pebble. There is this wonderful and sneaky person in my life who wanders past every so often and, when I least expect it, she pitches a pebble and sits back with a gentle smile.

" It (the mystical) is a marvelous journey." *plunk*

A lot of my personal angst? issue? trouble?....that's a good word....a lot of my personal trouble has been circling around the mystical and esoteric nature of my spiritual development. The theology and religious stuff...that's written down and easy to understand. It's reasonable, logical and rational. But a lot of what's going on right now is flying blind on a moonless night. There are no maps, no books and no flight plan that YOU can see. It's you and Him and a whole lot of ignoring everything that's going on between your ears. Can you turn back?

"You can always say no, but you know this is gonna be AWESOME. Trust me." Thanks Dad. :P

Faith is not belief without proof...it is trust without limits.

With a comment, my friend tosses in another pebble and I recognize her as an agent of Her just as I can hear His chuckle in her laughter.

Blessings upon my dear sister-in-Christ, my crone.

Thanks to her and thanks be to God.

Lessons from the saints - Blessed Charles the Good

2011-12-20T11:26:00.000-07:00

This is Charles the good, prince of Denmark, Count of Flanders and related to the Capetian rulers of France through marriage. He was martyred while at mass, hacked to pieces over the love of money.

You see, Charles, like my beloved St. Homobonus, used his wealth and power for the benefit of the people. He reformed laws to promote a more equal system of justice, clothed the naked, fed the hungry and distributed alms to the poor. During the famine of 1124-25, he enacted laws to punish those who were price-gouging as well as established food distribution points, at one juncture giving away 7,800 loaves of bread in a single day. Despite his exceptional generosity (even for the day), Flanders' coffers were not emptied.

The nobles committing the price-gouging (including one Fr. Bertulf FitzErembald) conspired and sent knights entered the church where Charles was at mass and hacked him to pieces on the spot. Upon discovering the demise and circumstances surrounding the murder, the Flemish peasantry seized all involved and tortured them to death.

What can we learn from Charles?

That charity (in the general, handing out stuff meaning) does not mean putting yourself in the poorhouse to help those who already live there.

That those who have means, influence and power have a greater responsibility to use that power for the good of all.

[note: originally written 2 March 2011]

Thoughts about confirmation

2011-12-20T11:06:00.001-07:00

This weekend past we celebrated the sacrament of confirmation with four wonderful young men and women being welcomed as adults into our community. The occasion and the homily attendant thereunto has brought to mind some reflections regarding this sacrament and it's importance in the past and present.

There can be a lot of discussion about 'vertical' component of confirmation and it's most common component which is mentioned, but I find that to be a red herring not unlike that of ordination into holy orders. The journey to that sacrament is what matters in the spiritual dimension, not the ceremony itself. That said, the 'horizontal' component of the sacrament is what I want to talk about.

Partly, it is a recognition of the church community that the confirmants are both adults and in the community. In days past, this was of great significance and we still see this sort of 'coming of age' ceremony in certain cultures (Quinceañera, bar/bat mitzvah, etc.). In today's western culture, though, I believe that it's significance is of lesser importance, as the general secular culture has far different cues as to a child becoming an adult. This, btw, is a huge rant on my part, as we have culturally diffused and delayed this adulthood process to the point that it is hard to argue when it fully occurs. Is it at 16 with the drivers license? At 18, with voting and (probably) high school graduation? Is it at 21, when they can drink? Is it at some undefined time when 'schooling' is over and they enter the workforce full time or when they move out of their parent's house? Additionally, with the general rejection of specific denominations (and, more generally, organized faith systems), the 'seal of the Church' means far less than it did in an age when the church community was (effectively) the whole of the community.

In part, it is a public affirmation by the confirmants that they, after a lengthy education and discernment process, are willingly accepting the values of the church and dedicating themselves to applying said values. I find this to be a far more relevant and powerful portion of the process. It is a public expression of a personal pledge to embrace the teachings of our faith and, more narrowly, the traditions and culture of the church. In a time when organized faiths of any stripe are shedding people faster than an oak tree's leaves in October, to have youth affirm the relevancy of the church mission in their lives is heartening.

[note: originally written 14 November 2011]

Ahhh....the good old days

2011-12-20T11:02:00.001-07:00

The rally cry of returning to the 'good old days' is one that fills me with deep ambivalence. For most of my life, it's been a code phrase about returning to some parallel universe version of the 1950's and 1960's, where "life was simpler and more carefree". You know...when McCarthy's Red Menace loomed around every corner, women, fags and negros better 'know their place or they'll get what they deserve' and the world was one step away from an atomic nightmare. Ah yes, good times.

In much a same vein, I hear and read a lot about going back to 'the roots' of the church...to the Early Church. What part of that would you like? The part where there isn't a bible yet, but conflicting third-hand accounts of what may or may not have been? How about the whole 'persecution' angle? You could be a martyr for real, then..it's quite fashionable, you know. There's always the whole "If you disagree with my theological positions, I'll slaughter you and your entire family" thing..that was popular.

My point isn't, in either instance, to say that 'those days' were universally bad, but rather we have a nostalgic tendency to consider another place and time to be much better than where and when we are simply because it's somewhere and somewhen else. This sort of nostalgia isn't new, either. Seneca disparages about 'these kids nowadays' over 2000 years ago and Cicero laments over the decline of society as Rome nears the apex of it's glory.

My point is that we should neither vilify nor lionize the past. Examine our history, our heritage. See what is good and bad with equal candor and consider what can be applied most readily for the highest good for the greatest number.

Bringing this back to the Church, there are advantages of a hierarchical structure...and advantages to a congregational structure.

[note: originally written 30 July 2010]

further thoughts about ortho-

2011-12-20T11:00:00.001-07:00

The recent discussions regarding the divisions in other churches and the upcoming synod came together in a recent reading from Galatians.

"yet we know that a person is not counted righteous by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be counted righteous by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be counted righteous." (Gal 2:16)

So, it isn't by the cultural conventions or the strict adherence to sub-sub-sub-canons that we are saved? Seems that was a major point of Christ's message. Obeying the forms and minor points of the law are unimportant. What is important is basic belief in a few universal tenets and letting your conscience dictate your actions. Salvation doesn't come by eating fish on Friday, wearing certain clothes, saying 'hail Mary's' or praying [x] times a day in a very specific manner.

To me, that was a strong point of the Gospel lesson (woman with the alabaster jar) that was glossed over. The Pharisee, Simon, was a man who obeyed all the rules and knew all the 'right-thinking', the Orthodoxy. The 'sinful woman' didn't, yet she did what her heart told her was the right thing...she followed the 'right action'. Orthopraxis.

The point behind these practices is the application of specific beliefs, which gets me to the crux of the matter. More often than not, these sorts of practices derive from interpretations of concepts which may or may not apply to the present day. One example which springs to mind is the recitation of the Nicene Creed. The creed was developed in the fourth century and was used as an instrument of doctrinal definition to refute a series of heterodoxies. That's all well and good, but when the parishioners say the creed today, they do so ignorant of the 'heresy' they are refuting and don't really understand the import which the creed implies.

To honour traditions and to defend thoughts/beliefs which have minimal relevance in this day and age is neither right thinking nor right practice, but is a mindless echoing of the ghosts of the past. In the discussion between the two ortho's, one would like to have both. If one must choose, though, the good of 'doing' outweighs the good of 'thinking'.

[note: originally written 9 May 2010]

todays reading: you salty dog

2011-12-20T10:48:00.000-07:00

"Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; it is thrown out." (Mt. 5:13)

The church is good, but if it loses its holiness, how can it be made holy again? It is fit neither for man nor beast; it is thrown out.

[note: originally written 19 November 2011]

inequality

2011-12-20T10:42:00.000-07:00

No, actually, this isn't another gay post (despite what the image to the right may suggest). Not really. This is about how deep traditions of inequality drill down and how hard it is for good, smart, well-meaning folk to root them out.

I have a good friend who is both a catholic and an ordained pastor. During a recent conversation, the Assumption was brought up and I mentioned my (admittedly heretical) opinion that I see it as distracting to the central message and that I didn't see the importance of it and certainly don't see it as worthy of pulling out the Infallible Stick. My friend explained to me that it was exceptionally important , nay even vital as it proved that God accepted female flesh into heaven.

I was gob-smacked. Here was a highly educated, articulate and deeply spiritual pastor telling me that girls needed 'extra proof' of the Divine's acceptance.

"What? Why wouldn't God accept half of the world? That doesn't make any sense.", I say.

"That's because you weren't raised Catholic", she replied in a tone which explained the finality of the statement.

Huh? If you're Catholic, you're supposed to believe that God considers wimminz as second-class? This would be the same 'Mary as Co-redemptrix' people, yes? (One of these days, I should write up my Marian heresies, but I don't need that much hate today). Why would anyone need extra proof of Gods acceptance?

The answer appears is to be due to clerical leadership who were taught (and then taught others) a Vatican I/Victorian model of femininity which is as out of whack with reality as the 'bra-burning feminazis'. This isn't strictly a spiritual issue, but like so much of tradition, it has some roots in the Spiritual. The whole 'weaker sex' idea harkens back to a time when you keep the woman barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. And (in this particular instance), I wouldn't blame Vatican I for this precisely. That sort of attitude was not out of line for a moderate, God-fearing gentleman of the 1860's. And that's the trouble, as the Victorian mindset far outlasted the Victorian period.

Vatican II brought the Church from the 1860's to the 1960's and should be lauded for it. But, since then, the Roman Church has slid back into a 1950's mindset where 'modern women' are allowed to wear shoes, as long as wear heels when they stay in the kitchen and raise the (minimum of 2) kids. Meanwhile, the rest of western society has gone into the 21st century, where a women can wear a T-shirt and jeans (undergarments optional) and sit next to a guy who carries his own ~~purse~~ satchel on the same subway which will take them to the same job which pays each of them the same amount.

This reminds me strongly of the reading from Galatians 3 : "Through faith you are all children of God in Christ Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free person, there is not male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

So, when I read about reproductive rights, female ordination, the 'male-female complementary model' or the non-straight 'issue', I keep coming back to this misguided notion that people are supposed to be a certain way (manly men, girly wimmins and obedient kids) or, at the very least, act a certain way which is to be dictated by an ecclesiastical authority composed of old, white guys who have never (officially) had sex (I've heard that altar boys don't count).

[note: post originally written 19 Oct, 2010]

Hints, allegations and things left unsaid

2011-12-20T10:38:00.000-07:00

When you start a post, Blogspot saves your musings in a draft until you post. I had written some of a post the other day and had to leave the thought unfinished. Going back to it today, I noticed a number of drafts - hints of what I was thinking and things left unsaid.

To help clear out my queue and breathe life into these thoughts, the next few posts are thoughts from the past. In some cases, I have written about the topic more fully since then. In some cases, my opinions on the matter have matured a bit since the seed was planted. Still, this blog is about my journey and observations along the way, so I think it's still valid.

reflections on Advent vespers

2011-12-15T15:18:00.000-07:00

aka...the post stream that will not end.

As I mentioned earlier, we share space with the Lutherans and, from time to time, we hold joint services which highlight both our differences and our commonality. I truly believe that this is the way forward in regards to ecumenicism, to not water down our liturgies to a milque-toast level, but to show what both binds us together and allow it to be a teaching moment showing our unique ways we understand our relationship to the Divine. Anyways, this year we have been holding advent vespers which highlight the meditative, Taizé tradition.

I must say that I gain an incredible amount from Wednesday vespers, both during Advent and Lent and the 'non-traditional' aspect of this meditative service is exactly the sort of grounding which I am needing right now.

With all of the uncertainty in my own life right now, as well as in the world at large, and how dark the future appears (both literally and metaphorically), I believe that our closing song really is appropriate.

thoughts, random and otherwise

2011-12-15T14:41:00.000-07:00

There are about 5 posts I could make today....further analysis of the sexual violence report, commentary about the Census data showing half of the US are 'poor', discussion on the reading, my concerns about the uncertainties of employment or even my personal life (or lack thereof). There's a lot there, but I think I want to focus on other things for a moment.

As I may have mentioned before, our parish shares space with an old ELCA church filled with genuinely nice people who seem to honestly understand the thought of ecumenicism. We each worship in our own way and, thanks to working and worshiping together, have come to understand and respect our similarities and differences.

It's funny, but there are little things which I see, I notice, and they sink in and have a certain meaning or symbolism which niggles down into my subconscious. As I mentioned before, we are doing 'catchphrases' for Advent, short phrases which encapsulate the reading's meaning.

The second sunday was 'make ready' and there is a gold/brass latin cross which hangs by wires over the altar such that it appears to float in mid-air. I recall this because as the homily went on about John giving the old pharisees an ear-ful, I looked up and noticed an errant sunbeam.

There, spotlighted by a shaft of light, was a small cobweb growing on this golden, shiny cross. The more I gazed at it, the more it made me think of the priests in Jerusalem and Rome and all over. It made me think about how organized faith enshrines things and laws as inviolate and eternal and how holding those old things in such reverence subverts their purpose and turns us away from God. Someone during the week must have noticed them too, because the cobwebs weren't there next week...when we talked about 'make straight the way'. *whistles innocently*

CDC report on sexual violence. We're not listening.

2011-12-15T11:45:00.000-07:00

The CDC released a study today about rape and sexual violence which has rather deeply disturbed me. According to the NISVS report:

approximately 45% of women and 22% of men are victims of sexual violence over their lifetimes.
1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men reported severe physical violence.
1 in 5 women reported having been raped, with 80% being under 25 and 42% under 18 when they were raped for the first time.
1 in 71 men reported having been raped, with 28% of those being under 11 when they were raped for the first time.
Nearly 40% of non-hispanic minority males surveyed reported rape, sexual violence and/or stalking.

As disturbing as those figures are, here is where things really go pear-shaped. The focus of this report is sexual crimes perpetrated by intimate partners. Go back and re-read those numbers, because that is what we, as a society, are doing to those we love. This isn't some frat party accident or bathroom stall happenstance, these are our husbands, wives, SO's and boy/girlfriends who are doing this.

If this is an indication of how messed up the collective understanding of how to express love and intimacy is, then perhaps some of the pronouncements from the prelates sound no less removed from reality than those to whom they are preaching to.

I can recognize and even rationalise the long-standing disconnect between social justice and capitalism and how we, as a nation, have delved into narcissism. The vilification and demonizing of certain groups (including my own), I can intellectually grasp as a defense mechanism and the age-old conflict of the 'Other' and how that can lead to man's inhumanity to man.

But this?

This?

"This I command you, that you love one another." (Jn. 15:17)

We're not listening. Kyrie Eleison.

todays reading

2011-12-14T13:14:00.001-07:00

Fr. Michael Judge

“Therefore be on the alert, for you do not know which day your Lord is coming. But be sure of this, that if the head of the house had known at what time of the night the thief was coming, he would have been on the alert and would not have allowed his house to be broken into.For this reason you also must be ready; for the Son of Man is coming at an hour when you do not think He will.

Who then is the faithful and wise slave, whom his master has put in charge of his household, to give the other slaves their allowance of food at the proper time? Blessed is that slave whom his master will find at work when he arrives. Truly I tell you, he will put that one in charge of all his possessions.

"who's next?"

But if that wicked slave says to himself, 'My master is delayed,' and he begins to beat his fellow slaves, and eats and drinks with drunkards, the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour that he does not know.He will cut him in pieces and put him with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Matt. 24:42-51)

I would like to point out one should take yesterday's reading in conjunction with the theme of this one.

not todays reading, what I was told to say.

2011-12-13T10:41:00.000-07:00

The word of YWHW came to me, saying:

“Therefore, son of man, say to your countrymen,

‘The righteousness of the righteous man will not save him when he disobeys, and the wickedness of the wicked man will not cause him to fall when he turns from it. The righteous man, if he sins, will not be allowed to live because of his former righteousness.’

If I tell the righteous man that he will surely live, but then he trusts in his righteousness and does evil, none of the righteous things he has done will be remembered; he will die for the evil he has done.

And if I say to the wicked man, ‘You will surely die,’ but he then turns away from his sin and does what is just and right— if he gives back what he took in pledge for a loan, returns what he has stolen, follows the decrees that give life, and does no evil, he will surely live; he will not die. None of the sins he has committed will be remembered against him. He has done what is just and right; he will surely live.

Yet your countrymen say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ But it is their way that is not just. If a righteous man turns from his righteousness and does evil, he will die for it. And if a wicked man turns away from his wickedness and does what is just and right, he will live by doing so. Yet, O house of Israel, you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ But I will judge each of you according to his own ways.”(Ezekiel 33:1,12-20)

The word of YHWH.

miscellany

2011-12-12T14:02:00.000-07:00

Ever since the RC potentates decided to rewrite their liturgy, it got me to thinking and a few things have been bouncing about my head for a while. I figure I should put them to e-paper before I lose them.

I ask, oh Lord, that as we go about our daily lives, you prick our conscience :
That our thoughts become right thoughts.
That those right thoughts become right words
That those right words become right deeds.
Not for us, the Church or the world....but for you alone be the glory. Amen.

A Pelagian's Confeitor.
Oh Lord, creator of all, You are the spark of the universe and are in all things, yet we are all too often blind to that spark. In our deeds, we harm the world and, thus, You as well. Kyrie Eleison.

Christ Jesus, you showed us that within our brothers and sisters lies the Divine, yet we are short-sighted and sometimes do not see this. In our words, we harm our brothers and sisters and, thus, You as well.. Christe Eleison.

Holy Wisdom, you dwell within us as guide and counselor, yet we are foolish and sometimes do not listen. In our thoughts, we harm ourselves and, thus, You as well.. Kyrie Eleison.

P: <sign of cross> May the Lord have mercy upon us, forgive us and lead us to everlasting life.
V: Thanks be to God.

Invitation to Communion
P: <holding aloft the cup and host> IDE! ECCE! VOICI! MIRA! BEHOLD! The Lamb of God! <pause> Happy are we who are called to this supper.

V: Lord, you have made me worthy to receive you. Only say the word and I shall be here.

P:Christ came not for a few, but for all. This table is not meant for the select, but for everyone. All are welcome!

The Synchratic method

2011-12-07T22:01:00.000-07:00

I have discussed at some points in the past about synchronicity and how it seems to be a part of things in my life. I finally understand (at least to an extremely limited part) why. Socrates used a dialectic method of teaching. Some Buddhists use koans. For my beloved Coyote, it is the Synchratic method. As I have said a thousand times "once is chance, twice is coincidence, thrice denotes a pattern." So, this is how it works in practice.

"Hey Tim. Here's something you probably want to see."

"Ya Dad, whatever. Kinda busy here with this unimportant thing"

"Here it is again. It's kinda cool."

"huh....yah, right."

"Remember this? you may wanna look at it."

"OHH, Hey there. Look at that! Wow, that's a brilliant idea. Thanks!"

"Such a smart kid." *chuckles*

If wishes were fishes.....

2011-12-05T15:55:00.000-07:00

Reading Colkoch's post about Bishop Eddie Long, it made me come back to something which I've said in person but I don't believe I have ever articulated here. One of the more common visualization games that I have played (along with 'win the lottery') is 'if you had one wish for others, what would you wish for'? This sort of imagining game is of value and interest because it reveals much about the person. Originally, the exercise ignored the phrase 'for others', but I find it more instructive to give a gentle prod so that the questioner is encouraged to see how they would like to see change in the world.

World peace is a common answer, as is a cure for cancer, removal of suffering and an end to hunger. Of course, I've got to be different (it's never that simple, is it?). I would desire that everyone know the consequences of their actions.

Consider this and consider it carefully.

Free will is, in no way, abrogated or restrained. That said, each person would know what the effect that their thoughts, words and deeds would be and let their conscience (and/or the Spirit, as you determine how that sort of thing works) be their guide.

Thus, Bishop Long would still have the capability to 'mess around' with male teenagers, but he would know how that sort of chicanery will harm the boys. Similarly, certain prelates within the RC church would have the free will to decry anyone as 'unworthy', but every person who turns away from God because of their words will be known to said prelates.

So, um...yah.

Advent - words and experience

2011-12-05T13:22:00.000-07:00

For advent this year, our parish is using certain word phrases found in the scripture readings. These phrases are put onto business cards that are handed out to parishioners as well as being scribed on a sign that is attached to the altar. Last week, the phrase was 'Stay Awake' (from the Gospel), which engendered multiple amusing comments about homiletic style and such.

This week was 'Make Ready' (from Isaiah) which is echoed in the reading about the coming of John the Baptist. The thrust of the homily was that what we were to make ready for and how that comes about could very well defy our own expectations (as, no doubt, it did Zachariah) and that what God intends quite frequently clashes with our grand designs. Much was also made of talking about the Desert/Wilderness and what that means in the jewish context. The Wilderness is where the scapegoat is cast out into and where the 'demons' live. It is the 'beyond' where decent, god-fearing folk never travel. But I'm getting a bit ahead of myself.

The first Saturday evening of each month, one of our sister parishes holds a Celtic service and I make sure to put everything aside to go. They have a wonderful faith community and the liturgy is a very different and quite valid way of worship. At the conclusion of the mass, each of us were invited to turn to the person beside us, hold their face in our hands and, look into their eyes, saying (among other things) 'you are the face of Christ'. Though I cognitively recognized what was going on, Dad had different plans, as I was to find out later in the evening.

A friend of mine invited me out later that evening, as part of the 'get the hermit out of his cave' program. OK, fine. So we went to a club (which I don't do) and more specifically, a gay bar (which I've never done) that was holding some big shindig, so all these people he knew were going to be there (do you smell a setup, cause I sorta did). I have a strong impression of precisely who I am and am not interested in and the sort of person who frequents 'those places' doesn't fall into that impression. After all, it's one of 'those places', you know. I'm one of those people who tend to observe rather than actively participate and, being in an unfamiliar and slightly uncomfortable setting, that's what I did. The more I watched, the more my understanding and impressions changed, dropping judgments and preconceptions. Then, it all clicked.

The realisation that what I have read and said in the past became what I saw. The Christ within, the Christ in all - a disparate group of individuals suddenly visualized as a multi-locational unified entity and, for a shining moment, that inner Divine was revealed to me. I must admit I was intermittently giggling for most of the rest of the evening. Then, the next morning, I hear the homily mentioned at the first, about the Wilderness and making ready and how God's plans are often very much not what we expect.

There, in the 21st century Christian wilderness, the face of Christ. Thanks be to God.

Just....just watch

2011-11-30T19:17:00.000-07:00

Quote of the day

2011-11-30T10:56:00.001-07:00

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it.

Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.

Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.

Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.

Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

Gautama Siddharta, the Buddha

todays reading: You guys don't even read this, do you?

2011-11-29T15:27:00.002-07:00

I swear this is the response of
most people today

As the link on the left indicates, I follow two daily lectionaries. As both of them only cover a (small) portion of scripture and they are on different cycles, I commonly get different viewpoints on things.

Here's the gospel reading from the USCCB lectionary:

In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will. All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, or who the Father is except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” (Lk 10:21-22)

Having read the surrounding areas, concordances and commentaries, you quickly understand that it's not just the 'wise' and the 'children' that Christ is talking about. He's talking about the pharisees and the people - the clergy and the laity. The irony that this is the USCCB reading is both delicious and painful.

Do the prelates even read the scriptures any more or is that one of those other 'archaic things' which are no longer needed? Don't the laity read this, or is that another of those Vatican II reforms the RC sheeple are supposed to ignore? I suppose that's there's a lectionary as opposed to the whole Bible - TL;DR, right?

I mean, I guess there's really no need for people to read the Word of the Lord, as the prelates have the ability, nay, the responsibilty to rewrite the entire Deposit of Faith to suit their needs. Be obedient, attend Mass and we may choose to reveal God to you (for a small donation of only 10%/week).

Nah, they don't read this stuff anymore.

(Not) keeping up with the Joneses

2011-11-28T15:30:00.000-07:00

This Sunday was the first week of Advent and the service was, as expected for non-ordinary times, slightly quirky and very pleasing. The boundless creativity of our liturgy committee to re-imagine the non-ordinary times of the year is heart-warming, even if I don't always 'get it'. The hot topic of discussion in the Narthex wasn't the new wrinkles in our service, but rather what the ~~Joneses~~ Romans are up to. Somehow, I ended up being the Shell Answer Man.

"Did you hear about the new Roman Missal?" I've read the new mass, yes. No, I haven't heard it 'in person' as I'm not really welcome in a Roman church and have no interest in flying under false colours to hear a liturgy which I can't support theologically, morally or scripturally.

"Are we going to do that?" A change like that would require several public meetings and agreement by both laity and clergy. In short, it's more likely we'll be inviting the Arch-bishop to Christmas midnight mass. (Considering that the arch-diocese presently doesn't HAVE an archbishop, the odds are pretty easy to calculate).

There was one off-hand comment that really struck home, though. During these discussions, I mentioned how the new Roman liturgy makes me sad to one of our parishioners. She patted me on the shoulder and said, "They can do anything they like." She's right and yet....

I guess what bugs me about that is the definition of the word 'they'. To say 'they' implies an 'us' and indicates an 'other'. Of course, I realise that she meant 'they' as 'Romans', but my mind went to the prelates and priests as 'they' vs. the 'us' of the laity. I mean, the changes which the Roman laity want has nothing to do with consubstantial and mea culpa.

In our catholic church, the laity and the clergy decide together how things are to be run, how mass it to be celebrated and whether or not we, as a parish, will accept and abide by what the House of Bishops and the Synod say. The separation between laity and clergy is a VERY thin line.

I've not been involved with the Roman church, but all accounts say that this is 180 degrees from their modus operandi. Here's the sticking point, though - the basis of what I've described above came directly from the Roman Church with imprimatur. The fore-runner of our church was established by Archbishop Casey some 30+ years ago wherein the laity ran just about everything and their was an on-call priest who lived an hour away who came and said mass on Sundays. The most recent Arch-bishop decided to put a stop to that, so most of the laity left the Roman Church and became the core of our present parish, which joined the already extant Ecumenical Catholic Communion.

This is all a bother to me because, fundamentally, there is no 'they', whether collared or RC. There are only 'us', the creations of the Divine.What clothes you wear or what job you hold doesn't change that. What person you love or church you attend doesn't change that. If the Joneses want to think otherwise, let them. They can do anything they like. Then again, so can we.

words about words

2011-11-22T16:10:00.000-07:00

Words have power. What words we use, their order and the emphasis we place upon them matters to a level that cannot be understated. So, it seems, I am in need to talk about words and about the new(?) Roman Missal. The theory is that the 3rd Typical Edition is a more faithful and literal translation of the 'original latin' than that 'hastily penned' 2nd Typical Edition. I suppose it never dawned on the Roman Church that the 'original' is common Greek and not medieval Latin or that, heaven forfend, there are idioms, phrases and concepts which don't literally translate....but nevermind that. This is long enough that I'll hide the rest behind a cut.

In the first, I should mention that I put the question mark next to the word new because, in large part, this isn't a new missal. Unlike the changes in 1973, what is in this edition are from previous versions, either from the 2nd Typical Edition or things I find in my old 1930's 'I Pray the Mass' book, with the 'changes' being from the latter time period. In short, it is a pretty solid roll-back of the ecumenical and inclusive-language reforms of Vatican II. Some of the more disturbing changes to the liturgy I will highlight here, which underly a few themes. For a full examination of what's changed, here's a brilliant side-by-side comparison.

There is the Confiteor. In the long form, there are some subtle and not-so-subtle changes. The Mea Culpa returns (breast-beating and all) as well as it being 'greatly sinned'. More subtle and disturbing is the one word change "I confess (that I've been greatly naughty), ~~and~~ therefore I ask the Blessed Mary Ever-Virgin, all the Angels and Saints...". This change is explained by Louie Verrecchio at the Catholic News Agency:

In summary, we are essentially saying in the Confiteor, "I know that I have sinned – greatly – against the Thrice Holy God - therefore I seek forgiveness, and I do so by turning not just to God alone, but to all who have been wounded by my actions. I know that my sins not only affect my relationship with the Lord, but also with every member of His Body. Therefore I turn to His Most Holy Mother. I turn to those beyond this world - the angels and saints. And I turn as well to my brothers and sisters, begging prayers of forgiveness of all concerned."

Considering this happens at every mass, it implies that (a) we 'greatly sin' all the blinkin time and (b), we can't pray to the aforementioned Thrice Holy God Himself (or even Christ), but must ask the Co-Redemptrix and the Saints/Angels to pray for us. Now, I can only speak for myself, but it's hard for me to recall the last time I 'greatly sinned'. Screw up? Sure. Miss the mark? I'm an expert. Greatly Sin? Notsomuch. And, excuse my Protestant upbringing and Celtic Spirituality, but God is ultimately accessible, as She is within us all and I, as His creation made in Her image and His likeness have the innate capability to speak directly with Her. No intercessors or middle managers required. Straight to the top.

In the short form (aka. Form B) there is a stark difference. Before, the priest would say 'Lord, we have sinned against you'. Now, only the people say that. Louie 'explains' it this way.

Notice the shift in accountability that has been affected by this change. Now it is all of the people – not just the priest - who say, we have sinned. This is important. The Penitential Rite is a personal admission of sin. It’s not enough for the priest – who stands in the Person of Christ – to see our sin. Of course the Lord sees our faults, but we need to see them, we must admit to them personally and seek forgiveness for them in order to be considered truly penitent.

I believe he is half right. There is a shift in accountability, but that shift in accountability has gone from 'people' to 'laity', with the priest as "the Person of Christ" seeing our sin. As if the priest isn't a person like the laity are people. Yes, the Lord sees our faults and we need to see them too, but the priest has just as many faults and needs to see his own as much (if not more) than any of those in the pews.

The Creed has been changed from a communal to a personal statement of faith "I believe"....but you must say it just this particular way (saves rant for another day.) The Son is 'consubstantial', (not one in being) with the Father.

"For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary and became man."

For us men?!? Really?! And the Son is not born of the Virgin, but is incarnate of her. The 'explanation' is that, since life begins at conception, Jesus 'became man' before he was born. I would point to an alternate explanation. As a verb., incarnate means "embody in flesh" or, literally, 'made into flesh'. Let's re-read that, then.

"...and by the Holy Spirit was embodied in the flesh of the Virgin Mary and became man."

Yah, I'm leaving that to the Marians and backing away slowly.

In the Sanctus, He is Lord God of Hosts, with some emphasis being on a heavenly army (a la onward Christian Soldiers), not a God of power and might. In the Consecration Narrative, Christ doesn't just take the cup, but he takes the precious chalice in His holy and venerable hands and he says that his blood "...will be shed for you and for many so that sins may be forgiven."

Cardinal Weurl commented in the Pittsburgh Gazette, "That doesn't change the doctrine that Jesus died for everyone, Cardinal Wuerl said. The New Testament "makes it very clear that Christ died for all people," he said. "It doesn't mean that some aren't invited into salvation. We always understood and we continue to teach that while 'multis' says 'many' it means 'all.' ".

That's fine and dandy to say so to the unwashed and unsaved, your Grace, but that's not what the words say and that isn't what the Roman Church 'has always understood' or taught. Many says many. All says all. The Vatican I pure and holy city of God wasn't for all, but only for the chosen and that's who you're talking to and talking about here, not the Universal (catholic) church nor to the prostitutes or the poor whom Christ broke bread with.

This deification of the priests, the denigration of the laity and the words of exclusivity are really hallmarks of a church which lost relevancy sometime during Franklin Roosevelt's administration. I normally would leave this be, especially as I am NOT Roman, but recent meditations and events have reminded me how powerful words can be and how strong the 'old ways' can be.

Reimagining Bernardine - a consistant ethic of compassion

2011-11-18T15:26:00.000-07:00

Wiki-creep is a fascinating thing. Through a convoluted chain of links and related topics, I ended up reading Fr. McBrein's article about Cardinal Bernadine and the Seamless Garment (aka consistent life ethic) at NCR. This got me to thinking...which leads to pondering...which leads to writing.

I believe that Bernadine's underlying premise, which is to construct a universally applicable ethical model regarding life is quite laudable. Where I find a disagreement with him is to say that said life must be universally preserved. There ARE fates worse than death for a person and to concentrate solely upon the life of an individual tends towards forgetting that we are all connected and that every action taken by a person has rippling effects that spread out to the ends of the earth.

In general, a person who must make such a choice needs to examine both the person 'at risk' as well as all of those directly affected by the decisions, taking into account the quality of the life, the life circumstances and take a critical look at the intent behind the decision. They should call upon Holy Wisdom to guide and inform the decision, recognizing that each circumstance is unique and what is right for a certain person at a certain time may not be the right choice at a different time for a different person.

I recognize that these sorts of questions are never simple or easy. There are no higher stakes and yet we must collectively recall that Primacy of Conscience and Free Will demand that the choice is not ours to make. Each person must walk that road for themselves. Our compassion affords us the ability to walk with them, to help and support them without judging as the Spirit walks with us, guiding and comforting, but not condemning.

That is, after all, what we would want in a time of need. That is the essence of loving our neighbour as ourselves.

Dancing in the Straw

2011-11-17T16:08:00.001-07:00

Angels dancing on the head of a pin

So, it has a been a while since I have talked about the formal actions towards ordination. Indeed, I'm not entirely sure if I have spoken about this at all except in the vaguest of terms. A word of warning here, as the following statements could be misread. I am not antithetical to academics, far from it, but a lack of ready application begs askance towards the intrinsic merit.

As I look more and more at differing programs, it appears so easy to become caught up in a whirlwind of theories, proofs, dogma and -ologies which are all vitally important for any serious candidate for ordination. It seems that anyone who has been called by God must be intimately familar with the ramblings of Rahner, the lectures of Lonergan and the homilies of Heidigger. One must he hip to the hermeneutics in fashion, conversant with the Christology du jour and versed in the vocabulary of the devoted elite.

Put in a 14th century context, a postulant must be able to answer (with attendant proofs) the famous question about angels and the head of a pin, as well as give context as to it's importance. (As an aside, the question deals with the question of perfect, supernal beings existing without form (as pure entities of spirit) or if they have substance.)

Thinking about it brings to mind Aquinas and Dominic. The first is the Angelic Doctor's famous statement, "All that I have written seems to me like so much straw compared to what I have seen and what has been revealed to me." Why would arguably the greatest theologian of all time say this about the theology which he had written? Because he had had a direct, relevatory experience - a brush with the raw and ineffable Divine so incredibly different from the logics and proofs and counterarguments which comprise the Law.

The second is one of the few quotes we have from Dominic de Guzeman, spoken during his time studying theology. There was a famine which struck his city and he sold everything, including his precious books, to give alms to those in need. When questioned about such a rash and foolish gesture for a scholar, he replied, "Would you have me study off these dead skins, when men are dying of hunger?"

A theologian is one who studies and ponders. That is my default state and something which comes as natural as breathing to me. A priest is one who works and prays. That is what Dad has asked me to be. Both have value and those categories are not mutually exclusive. But quoting Jerome won't comfort a widow, prepare the greiviously ill for a happy death, feed the hungry or clothe the naked and, despite what I would like to become, this is about what She wants and has asked me to do.

My brass-tacks question to any course of study is if it helps one love God and/or love thy neighbour more fully? If the answer is no, then mayhap there are better things to be doing.

An antidote to the poison (belated)

2011-11-14T23:47:00.002-07:00

This post should have gone up about two weeks ago, but I only got the text below today. Given the poisonous rhetoric which I read coming from the RC church (among others), I figure that I really should post this, as it captures the essence of my Catholic (but not Roman) church and what we're about.

The following are selections from readings which were interspersed throughout the All Saints Day mass.

Before processional
"Who are you? Are you married with kids, worrying for them and committed to their welfare? Are you divorced? Are you married for the second, or even the third time? Are you a single parent struggling to make ends meet, but also hoping to have love in your life again? Are you gay or lesbian? Well if you are, then you belong to us because you belong to Christ. The Good News is that Christ is the host here today and he welcomes you as part of his body. The words from the Gospel are addressed to you: Peace be with you."

During Eucharist, after the Words of Institution
"Are you new here? An immigrant maybe? Are you from another Christan tradition? Are you full of doubt today, like Thomas? Are you fearful like the disciples were? Has it been a while since you darkened the doorway of a church? None of that matters. You belong to us because you belong to Christ. The Good News is that Christ is the host here today and he welcomes you as part of his body. The words from the Gospel are addressed to you: Peace be with you."

During Eucharist, after Agnes Dei is sung
"All people of good will are welcome here: That is the Good News! If you've been away, you can come back; if you've been living in darkness, you can come to the light; if you haven't been able to believe without seeing God, look around you, the Body of Christ has come to Mass today. Sinners are welcome, saints too. Everyone is welcome to come to Christ, our God indeed!"

(what is said at the end of the prayers of every Eucharist)
"The meal of God has been prepared for the people of God, which is each and every one of us, so all are welcome to receive."

Thanks be to God for these people.

Balancing act

2011-11-08T14:54:00.000-07:00

As I sit today and ponder things, there are several balancing acts that come to mind. The first which shows itself is the balance between the spiritual and the religious, a scale which I consider in the terms of our vertical relationship with the Divine and the horizontal relationship with each other. It is all well and good for a person to have a strong vertical relationship, but without a healthy horizontal relationship it does little to help the Body of Christ (which is composed our brothers and sisters in Christ) or, in a more general sense, the Family of God (who are all of us). Contra wise, if we focus entirely upon those around us in physical form, we lose invaluable insight into the nature of the Divine and fail to cultivate a truly vital and special relationship with the Divine.

Another balancing act is between the Heart and the Mind, what may be considered the art and the science of Religion. Without an understanding of the Heart, the experiential and spiritual aspect of the religious, then the all the words of the Law and the Prophets are but dried ink on dead skins. Without a grasp of the Mind, the academic and rational aspect of the religious, then our experiences are without context and are incommunicable to others.

Another balancing act which has presented itself recently is the question of Temperance vs. following one's heart. Temperence lies in moderation and restraint. And following one's heart lies in doing what is often unrestrained and immoderate. It is, again, the tension between the logical, rational mind and the emotional, non-rational heart. Too much of either causes you to burn with ardor or freeze with icy logic. One could extend it further and say that it is a confluence of structure and creativity, of order and chaos.

All of these balances to maintain...so many wheels in motion....just like the world around us.

breaking the cycle

2011-11-07T12:09:00.000-07:00

Back a thousand years ago, when I was married, my (now) ex said something to me which has stayed with me. She said that how you were treated in your last relationship is how you will treat others in your next. Put into more general terms, unless you actively attempt to break the cycle, how others have treated you forms how you treat others.

This thought came back to me this morning as I was reading an article about Israel and Palestine. The problem really comes in what I would call a destructive echo chamber or feedback loop. This is something which anyone with small children knows intimately.

Bobby does X, which means Sally can do X, which encourages Bobby to do X+1, which entitles Sally to reciprocate and and and....I'm stopping this car RIGHT NOW!

That's the point. We need to stop the car (individually and collectively). If the internet has taught me anything (other than every cat owner needs a video camera), it is that trolls, like the poor, will always be with us. There will always be someone in a group who is insensitive, deliberately argumentative and generally irascible. Do we treat them as they have treated us or do we treat them as we wish to be treated?

The 'root' of the problem

2011-11-05T20:59:00.000-06:00

A turnip shaped like a thingie?!

With apologies to any who speak OZ.

After reading Colkoch's reply to my earlier post, I felt the gentle rapping of a ten-ton hammer against my skull as my muse, subtle as ever, wished to gain my attention.

As I commented elsewhere (and my brilliant friend Bill pointed out), Avila's comments are a nuanced version of Manichaeism, an early Persian belief which competed with Christianity during the early church. In a nutshell, Manichaeism says that 'God' created all of the perfect and eternal things, which are of the spirit. Additionally, 'God' has an evil countpart called the Demiurge who created all of the imperfect and temporary things which are of the flesh. Thus, to embrace the natural, physical world is to 'worship' the Demiurge while by denying yourself the things of this world, you revere and worship 'God'.

Obviously, as we are born and raised in the natural, physical world as corporeal beings, we must have a predisposition towards what we know, see and interact with seamlessly - the natural, physical world. Therefore, we have an inborn disposition to turn from 'God'. At this point, let us introduce our 'agent'.

Raised as a Christian, this agent defied his mother's faith and became a libertine. Indulging in wine, women and song, he became a Manichaeist. After over 15 years of a hedonistic lifestyle, he had a conversion experience and returned to the religion of his youth. Key among the tenets which precipitated the conversion St. Anthony of the Desert's extreme aesthetic lifestyle and Romans 13:13-14. "Let us behave properly as in the day, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual promiscuity and sensuality, not in strife and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh in regard to its lusts." Five years after this conversion, Augustine was made bishop of Hippo. The rest of the story you probably know.

It is difficult to understate the influence of Augustine on Christian thought. His views on sin and the material world were the backbone for Thomas' writings on the matter and are the template for Calvin. How profoundly Augustine's 'personal issues' have affected overall Christian thought can be seen in the concept of concupiscence. Catholic Catechism teaches that concupiscence is the natural desire to sin (which comes as a direct result of the Fall of Man). One would note that the word itself translates from the Latin: con-, with + cupi, cupid - desire (usually sexual) + -escere - suffix denoting beginning of a process or state) and is most commonly translated as 'ardent, usually sensual, longing or lust'.

Thus, the 'root' of sinful desires is sexual in nature. To deny sinful desires is, at its core, to deny sex. This has been said in many ways over the years, but to see how deeply ingrained the thought is and to see how profoundly one man's guilt over his hedonistic past has shaped Christian doctrine is...illuminating.

Yet, we observe in nature and our own Reason informs us that sex is not, in fact, innately sinful. It is a natural and powerfully positive force which helps cement the bonds of an intimate personal relationship with another. At the most profound level, it can provide an emotional and even spiritual experience of two people becoming one (as Christ spoke of in regards to marriage) and, in a more general sense, is an experience which is treasured and revered as good by any who practice it as part of a healthy relationship that also includes attraction and attachment.

Who, then, argues that it is sinful? A celibate man wracked by guilt over his past? A patristic hierarchy who are forced to refrain from any form of healthy intimate relationship? I am reminded of those who lived through the psychedelic era talking to their children. "Don't do drugs or have any of that free love. We did that and it was great...but, um...we 'know better' now, so don't you do that."

The fundamental disconnect

2011-11-03T14:36:00.000-06:00

So, last week the Boston Pilot (the official publication of the Arch-diocese of Boston) published an editorial written by the USCCB associate director for policy and research, Dr. Daniel Avila. In it, Dr. Avila advanced the notion that same-sex attraction is of the Devil. And I quote,

"In other words, the scientific evidence of how same-sex attraction most likely may be created provides a credible basis for a spiritual explanation that indicts the devil. Any time natural disasters occur, we as people of faith look back to Scripture's account of those angels who rebelled and fell from grace. In their anger against God, these malcontents prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. They continue to do all they can to mar, distort and destroy God's handiwork.

Therefore, whenever natural causes disturb otherwise typical biological development, leading to the personally unchosen beginnings of same-sex attraction, the ultimate responsibility, on a theological level, is and should be imputed to the evil one, not God."

Daniel Avila, "Some fundamental questions on same-sex attraction," The Boston Pilot

Sharp readers will note that the article itself has been pulled with a retraction/apology which says that somehow Dr. Avila's editorial was published without a nihil obstat or imprimatur. I can and have argued on multiple occasions as to why the 'natural law' argument is fundamentally flawed, as well as how the 'intrinsically disordered' position is explicitly contrary to both the Deposit of Faith and the Catechism of the Church. The more I have pondered this, though, the more that it begs 'some fundamental questions', as the article title states.

The most fundamental of these is the understanding of what constitutes an intimate relationship.

The noted anthropologist Helen Fisher defines the parts of a relationship as lust, attraction and attachment, with what she is calling lust being analogous to what Avila is calling 'attraction' - being the only one of the three which has anything to do with sex. Her research has shown that the drive of lust is the least powerful of the three. For those of us who have actually been in a long-term relationship, her research 'proves' what we have known all along - that long-term relationships have little to do with sex. They are about being with the other person, sharing your lives (both in good and bad) and working together. It's chicken soup and fluffed pillows when they're sick, TV on the couch and cooking in the kitchen together. It's putting up with his family (and he putting up with yours), laughing about 'that one time' and conversations with just knowing glances. Can sex be a part of that? Yes, but even then it's about being together, not the quick fix.

And this is the root of the disconnect. These concepts are as foreign to them as the form of celibacy practiced by clerics is to us. There is no frame of reference, no way of understanding. No class or book can teach you what it really means. Individually and collectively, the celibate clerical class has no possible way of grasping or understanding these things. They must be experienced for oneself and those experiences are gender-independent.

And now for something completely different.

2011-11-03T10:09:00.000-06:00

In stark contrast to pouring my heart out earlier, I would like to reflect upon something rather different. The more and more I sit and consider matters of sexuality, sexual orientation, marriage, procreation and how 'some people' view them, the more I am coming to the conclusion that it is not based upon arcane theological opinions, ancient holiness codes or a deep-seated desire to protect society. Nah...it's far more fundamental than all of that. I keep coming back to the idea that it is based around the cartoon behind the cut.

clarifications and authenticity

2011-11-02T15:00:00.000-06:00

Be forewarned....this is a deep dive into my brain and heart. Don't feel bad if you want to skip this and go onto other topics.

To prevent the spam and TL:DR, I have linked the rest of this lengthy post behind the cut.

A very good friend of mine sent me a note recently, expressing concern for my recent entries. One of the traps of the written word is that without outside vetting, there can be some miscommunication as the author knows what they said even if the words convey something else entirely. Another thing I have learned over the years is that for every person who voices a concern, there are at least 5 who are thinking something similar but not saying anything. With that as background, lemmie 'splain.

For the better part of 7 years, I have been in a relationship with a sweet, wonderful and loving young man. As all relationships do, we have had ups and downs over the years and we grew apart over the past year and a half while he took care of his Dad back east. When he returned, we decided that he should live on his own so he could grow and mature as an individual. This further precipitated our growing apart. About two weeks ago, we got together and spent the day. During that time, we talked a lot about each of us as well as 'us' and we both decided it was best that we should look towards NOT getting back together as a couple, but find folks who are more in tune with where we are and are going. In truth, it was more of an acknowledgment of the facts on the ground than anything else and I am quick to point out that he and I are still friends and have full intentions to stay that way (not unlike I have with my ex-wife).

We still have feelings for each other and still care about each other, but to continue in the vein we have been would be less than truthful and would be damaging to both of us. Also, this is something which I have seen as a possibility for a long time and really desired to avoid, but there it is. As I processed this, I realised that the whole experience is one of catharsis (a word I detest in its modern usage). Catharsis means 'purging' and if you were ever forced to take castor oil as a child, you know that a purgative is not something you want, even if you need it. Yet, recognizing the need for that medicine, especially when it's not desired, is what I was alluding to both here and here.

If there is but one thing that I may give thanks about how I have been made (and, in truth, there are many), it would be my unusual manner of acceptance of loss and grief management. In short, the pain and convulsions are over mercifully quickly and the acceptance of what is, rather than dwelling on what was happens at a pace which can be startling to even me. Combine that process with the hard deadline of Halloween to resolve a position (do you really want to carry this another year or do you want to bury it tonight?) and the formalized cleansing that is attendant to that evening and there is an efficacious method of emptying the cup.

That leads me to where I am now. You really don't notice how heavy your load is until you set it down. You don't really know how dark the closet is until you come Out. Things are better and they keep getting better. There is still a bit of transition to deal with, but I can feel in my bones that this is where things are supposed to be and I trust that Dad, in all his coyote wisdom, has my best interests at heart.

Thanks be to God.

All Saints Day

2011-11-02T12:55:00.000-06:00

Yesterday was the feast of All Saints. At our parish, there is an exercise we are performing regarding this feast. The laity was given pen and paper and asked to write down the name of a saint which personally inspires them. Since I helped out collecting the papers, I got a chance to look at the names and it was more than a bit of a surprize. In the first, let me tell you who was NOT on the list.

No Mary. No ancient prelates or popes. Nobody listed in the Golden Legend or Butler. In fact, I don't believe there was a single canonized saint in the pile.

The people listed were people, most of them alive. There are grandparents and cousins, fellow parishioners and neighbours. Flawed, human beings who are doing their very best to be like the Master and in doing so, accidentally inspiring others to do the same.

Whether consciously and intentionally or not, this is pretty much the exact understanding of the saints which existed in the apostolic and pauline period of Christianity and despite my love of hagiography and history in general, I am comfortable with the the parish's general choice. For there to be inspiration, the stories must have resonance and relevance to us as people in the here and now. That's why, in part, I chose Michael Judge over the archangel of the same name. Who holds more resonance, the general of the Armies of Heaven or a gay cleric who fought against alcoholism?

In the end, though, we should follow their example by following the example of Christ.

It's new years? crap.

2011-10-31T15:05:00.000-06:00

This is the vigil of All Saint's Day, commonly known as Halloween (all hallow's eve). It is also known as Samhain, the Celtic Rosh Hashanah/Yom Kippur. This is the night when the veil between worlds is thinnest and when one make peace with what has happened in the last year.

I'm pretty sure I'm not ready for that yet. I realise how much I need it. The dead need burying, lest they walk amongst us for another year. The echoes of the past need to be put to rest, else they shall haunt us. I so wish to hold on to what was, what I wish would be....but it IS dead and I DO need to bury it. Begone then, foul spectre, and plague me no further.

The reading - a picture is worth a 1000 words

2011-10-31T09:29:00.001-06:00

His Eminence, Cardinal Burke, surrounded by 'Fathers'

Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying,

"The scribes and the Phariseeshave taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you,but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice. They tie up heavy burdens hard to carryand lay them on people's shoulders, but they will not lift a finger to move them.

All their works are performed to be seen. They widen their phylacteries and lengthen their tassels. They love places of honor at banquets, seats of honor in synagogues,greetings in marketplaces, and the salutation 'Rabbi.'

As for you, do not be called 'Rabbi.'You have but one teacher, and you are all brothers. Call no one on earth your father;you have but one Father in heaven.Do not be called 'Master';you have but one master, the Christ. The greatest among you must be your servant.Whoever exalts himself will be humbled;but whoever humbles himself will be exalted." (Mt. 23:1-12)

Enough is enough

2011-10-28T10:25:00.001-06:00

My good friend posted a rather disturbing story today and my reply morphed into a post of it's own. The substance of the story is that some punk in high-school beat another kid badly enough to give him a concussion and the need for dental reconstruction. The attacker was suspended for three days from school.

How do we know this happened? Oh, because this was during class. Because somebody made a video of the attack with their mobile and then posted the video on facebook.

Did anyone help? No. What about the teacher? She wasn't even there. Did anyone speak up, step in or do anything? No. The victim gets a trip to the hospital and the bully gets a 3-day suspension (less than if he'd been caught with liquor at school).

This is one of the few instances when I channel the OT, smitin and lightnin g-d. Every person in that room is complicit. All of them, sinned by omission. The teacher, the staff, the principal...all complicit. There are millstones and a briny deep for each and every one of them.

Enough is enough.

Saying "it gets better" isn't enough, because it won't. It won't unless we, individually and collectively make it better.

We are called to be the voice for the voiceless, to stand for justice and to help the helpless. We are the hands of Christ.

We can make it better and with God's help we will make it better.

But we have to do that. It's on us.

Thoughts about the reading

2011-10-27T13:39:00.001-06:00

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (Jn. 3:16-18)

"Brothers and sisters: If God is for us, who can be against us? He did not spare his own Sonbut handed him over for us all, how will he not also give us everything else along with him? Who will bring a charge against God's chosen ones? It is God who acquits us. Who will condemn? It is Christ Jesus who died, rather, was raised,who also is at the right hand of God,who indeed intercedes for us. What will separate us from the love of Christ?" (Rom 8:31b-35a)

Ask those who follow Peter's successor for your answer, Paul, for they believe they can judge and deny the love of Christ to those whom they deem unworthy.

Thoughts about the reading

2011-10-26T15:47:00.000-06:00

Then the disciples came and asked him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” He answered, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away. The reason I speak to them in parables is that ‘seeing they do not perceive, and hearing they do not listen, nor do they understand.’" (Mt. 13:10-13)

Long ago and far away, I studied Tai Chi and, by extension, Taoism from a wise and good man. At one point, we started talking about Zen Buddhism and koans. He told me that the point of a koan is not unlike that of a parable. The conscious mind has it's biases and 'understanding' of the universe and will refuse to see and hear and understand something which does not fit the already prescribed belief. This is the fundaments behind why people can witness true atrocities and not acknowledge them.

But a parable...a parable engages the conscious brain in a puzzle or story which it can relate to while the underlying message, the truth which would otherwise be blocked by the conscious mind of the listener, sneaks in through the back door. Safely inside, it sits and waits until the conscious mind is ready to understand and then, like a stroke of lightning, it springs forth from within, granting satori to the listener.

So, let me tell you a story...

posts to anger and offend - contraception and abortion

2011-10-25T11:17:00.000-06:00

Having a distinct lack of plan about the current socio-economic crisis facing the US, some political folk on the far right have dragged out the old chestnut of social conservatism, particularly what is commonly called 'a women's right to choose'.

Having suffered through the slings and arrows of an upbringing exposed to protestant evangelicism, I am well aware of the scriptural underpinnings of the procreation movement as well as the age and context thereof. There are several verses in the Old Testament (Genesis and Psalms, specifically) which directly or obliquely reference the desire to have a large family. This is not surprising, considering the audience was a small, warlike nation some 3000 years ago (oops, there I go with that historical/critical stuff). My thoughts are not centered around arguing the validity of words from three thousand years and miles ago, but rather a different set of arguments which are more rooted in the here and now.

Regarding contraception, the current argument runs that family planning is alternately an assumption of personal responsibility and a contravention of the will of God. Now the first side I can argue easily. If men/women (for whatever reason) feel they are not ready, willing, and/or able to bring a child into this world AND are unwilling (for whatever reason) to wholly abstain from sexual congress, then the responsible option is to take safe and effective steps to prevent pregnancy.

The other position is far more dicey, for it assumes an untenable position - that any mortal may know the designs of the Divine. It also assumes something which I find laughable, which is that the designs of the aforementioned omnipotent Divine could be so easily thwarted by a pill or a piece of rubber. Finally, it presumes to override Primacy of Conscience and Free Will, replacing them with a 'one size fits none' approach to an intensely personal and situationally dependent decision.

Regarding abortion, things are much trickier but the bottom line is the same. When does the soul enter the fetus, transforming a saprophytic polyp into a human being? What are the ultimate consequences of either keeping or aborting said polyp/human? What about in cases of rape, incest or endangerment of the mother? To categorically state that any action is universally good OR evil presumes a level of understanding of the universe and the persons performing the actions that is far beyond the ken of mankind. It also denies Primacy of Conscience and Free Will.

In both cases, I would point out that it is a personal decision to be considered at length with prayer and thoughtful introspection. Whether or not I would consider either acceptable does not alter the fact that one must always be permitted to make a choice, whether that choice is right or wrong. Your definitions of wrong and right may vary (and that's ok).

glasses of the heart

2011-10-24T14:16:00.001-06:00

This weekend has been of interest and has brought something into crystal-focus which I believe I have been ignoring. Without going into the sordid and personal details, let us say that what was is now, unequivocally and irreversibly no more. I have intellectually known this to be for some time, but my heart held out hope - for naught.

I have been mulling over the possible lessons to be learned from all of this. Of course, I have been talking with Dad about these things and trying to grasp what's going on.

The reply was thus: "Before you fill a glass, it must be empty."

Beyond the obvious, personal implication of this profound statement, there is a question posed regarding the wider, collective conscience and scripture/tradition. How much that is disused, no longer applicable and generally gathering dust do we, as Christians and Catholics, keep around? How much detritus and debris which we've never bothered to sweep away is left cluttering up the place, making it harder to have space for more current understanding of the Divine and the world around us.

Right. I need to get out my psychological dustpan and sweep things clean so that when the new stuff arrives (whatever, whoever and whenever that may be), I'll have an uncluttered spot for it. I think between the comfy couch of non-conformity and the armoire of hopes and dreams.

My, but look at all the dustbunnies.

Keep calm and lock the doors

2011-10-21T11:23:00.001-06:00

Flipping through my normal news sources, I came across an 'in other news' story about the Occupy London (dubbed by the BBC as 'anti-capitalist protest'). Seems that said protests are large enough that they have accidentally done what the Nazis needed the Blitz to do, they have shuttered St. Paul's Cathedral.

Citing health and safety concerns, the Right Reverend Graeme Knowles, dean of the cathedral, announced that they will be closing St. Paul's until further notice. As can be seen by the image above, the protest camp is sandwiched between the historic cathedral and the Exchange, filling Paternoster Square.

What struck me about this story most is that I see it as a sad tale of missed opportunity. Here is a large group of people who are following their conscience and speaking out against economic/social injustice and the Church, rather than providing assistance and showing that they are sensitive to the needs of their neighbour, decide to turn out the lights and lock the doors.

Is that the message that they wish to send?
Is that the message we wish to be sent?
Is that the message that Christ has charged them to preach?
Where is God in this?

Thoughts about the reading - the 99% and the 1%

2011-10-19T12:01:00.002-06:00

"Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." (Ezekiel 16:49-50)

The top 1% in the US control more wealth than the bottom 95% combined. The average worker in the US makes 20 times as much as the average worker in the global economy, which is $2/day. 1 billion people in the world work for under $1/day.

The US, as a nation, throws away half of the food it buys and over 1/3rd of the population is clinically obese, yet almost 15% of people in the US don't know where their next meal is coming from. An estimated 3.5 million people in the US are homeless, 1.35 million of whom are children.

I pray that there are 50 good men/women in America tonight. Shoot, I'll settle for 5.

Ignoring the hand

2011-10-17T12:12:00.000-06:00

This all starts about a week ago when someone very close to me said that her cousin was in hospital and in grave condition. The guess was that he OD'd, but honestly, nobody on this plane will ever know for sure. The cousin is my age and has been openly gay for years. As he decided whether or not to shuffle off his mortal coil, half of the family was making fumbling attempts about being supportive while the other half was warming up the band to dance on his grave. All of them good Christians, you know.

Dad and I talked and I did what I do. On Wednesday, the matter was settled and he passed on. In the end, I know that said cousin rests in the arms of the Divine, despite what any prelate or preacher would tell you.

Today, I read of yet another boy who, at least partially due to bullying, decided that it won't 'get better' and chose to take up arms against his sea of troubles. Jayme Hubley was 15, had started the rainbow alliance in his school and was active in trying to make this world a better place.

What grieves my soul is what put both of them there. It's what put Jamie and Seth and Jayme and Billy and Chris and all the rest there. This felt need to escape. There are a raft of things which fill the bill, from TV to 'the homosexual lifestyle' to drugs and even suicide, but all of them are escaping.

Escaping a world which is seems uncaring at best and actively hostile at worst. Escaping a world filled with inhumanity and solitude and hopelessness. Escaping a world filled with grave-dancers and haters, of narcissists and navel-gazers. These things are also a cry. A cry for help. A cry in the darkness. A cry asking if there is anyone out there and does anybody care.

If we are the eyes and hands of Christ, then we NEED to see these people. We need to hear their cries and we need to answer them. We need to grasp the hands of the men and women who are drowning and let them know that our God, through us, hears their cries, feels their pain and DOES give a damn...does love them...does care.

If we do not, then all of the theology is for naught, all of the preaching is but words and all of the Scripture is dust.

Today's Reading

2011-10-17T09:40:00.001-06:00

I had a lot written, but I think I'll let the text speak for itself.

"Take care to guard against all greed,for though one may be rich,one's life does not consist of possessions."

Then he told them a parable.

"There was a rich man whose land produced a bountiful harvest.He asked himself, "What shall I do, for I do not have space to store my harvest?"

And he said, "This is what I shall do:I shall tear down my barns and build larger ones.There I shall store all my grain and other goodsand I shall say to myself, "Now as for you,you have so many good things stored up for many years,rest, eat, drink, be merry!""

But God said to him,"You fool, this night your life will be demanded of you;and the things you have prepared, to whom will they belong? "Thus will it be for the one who stores up treasure for himselfbut is not rich in what matters to God." (Luke 12:15-21)

Kyrie Eleison
Christe Eleison
Kyrie Eleison

Relevancy in the Church : why I hate Vatican II

2011-10-11T13:36:00.000-06:00

Part of the joy and pain of having my particular skill-set is that I observe and analyze on a near-instinctual level and question if an idea/concept/thing has been obsolesced or is it still needed and/or has value.

As you can imagine, these skills are of great help and value in the 21st century where change occurs at an ever quickening pace. This brings me to my church and one of the times when it WAS asked, front and center - Vatican II.

One of the best 'short answers' to the question of "What is the ECC?" is that it is a communion of churches fulfilling the promise of a catholic Church as embodied in Vatican II. As far as it goes, I find that to be an accurate description of things and that's the problem.

You see, ecumenical councils and synods are formed in response to perceived problems and are generally focused to resolve present issues within the Church. Whether it be the Council of Jerusalem or the second Vatican Council, they are reactionary and responsive to the times in which they are held. This is why during the healthiest times of the Roman Church's history, one sees a council every generation or so to subtly alter positions and doctrines in a manner to best meet the needs of the laos.

On October 11 1962, 49 years ago today, Pope John XXIII called for the Second Vatican Council. The Cold War was at it's peak, the US was just starting to send uniformed troops into some little country named Vietnam, President Kennedy made his iconic 'moon' speech about a month ago, formally throwing down the gauntlet for the Space Race, nobody had heard of the Beatles and the modern civil rights movement was just beginning to get a head of steam. This was the time which defines the largest generation in modern times, the Baby Boomers, and a time which changed the western world.

But that time was (almost) 50 years ago.

Today, the Cold War is over, the great era of space exploration is done, The Beach Boys have been replaced by Lady Gaga and the few arguments which remain regarding racial and gender equality are about 'how much is enough', not 'if'. Today, the issues are about corporate avarice, environmental destruction, sexual orientation and teen suicide/bullying.

If the church, any church, is to have relevance, it needs to be willing and able to address the concerns of the people in the here and now, in the 21st century. Having an understanding of the past is well and good, but living in the 20th century does nothing for the Body of Christ. Just ask the RC folks, whose leadership seems determined to live in a 19th century world of Fundamentalist Evangelicism and a 'Perfect City of God' where only those deemed worthy may worship.

Requiescant In Pace

2011-10-06T18:35:00.000-06:00

Thirteen years ago, Matthew Shepherd died after a long and cruel ordeal not two hours from where I sit in one of the most liberal/progressive areas in this country His death brought to light the ugly and intolerant nature which lives in the hearts of some and started the conversation about bullying and homophobia on a national scale.

In a few moments, I am going to leave for a meeting at my parish where a lot of straight folks half-again my age are looking to understand what others go through on a daily basis by being honest with who they are.

If it weren't for Matthew (and others like him), this conversation would never be happening. Don't forget how far we've traveled in those years and yet how far the road is ahead. May the promise of a better tomorrow temper the sorrows of auld lange syne.

Thanks to you, Matt. Rest in peace with God.

The gay thing...It's a choice (part deux)

2011-10-05T15:24:00.000-06:00

I have updated my earlier post twice now and realise I really should just make a second post. As I said previously, the Divine has made me in Her image just like you and everyone else.

Some are left-handed, some are right.
Some are brown-skinned, some are white.
Some are blonde, with hair in plaits.
Some are gay and some are straight.

Your choice is what to do about it. Before I talked about dealing with others. Now I'm talking about you.

Do you accept who you are, what you are and why you are?

Do you deny these things, try to change them or loathe yourself because of them?

Do you accept the gifts that the Infinite and Almighty have given you or do you spurn them?

Do you see the Christ within and the Christ in all?

Do you let others dictate your self-worth and value (as if they have the right to judge)?

It's your choice.

The gay thing...It's a choice, you know

2011-10-05T09:25:00.003-06:00

People are created by the Divine in His image - black and white, tall and short, gay and straight, thin and fat, male and female, blonde brunette and red-headed. The choice is what we do with that.

We choose to be racist, misogynistic or homophobic.

We choose to love others or to hate them.

We choose to include or exclude.

We choose to be jerks or to be excellent to one another.

"There are set before you fire and water; to whichever you choose, stretch forth your hand. Before man are life and death, whichever he chooses shall be given him." (Sirach 15:16-17)

"Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make." (Duet. 30:19a)

Our choice.

Your choice.

Choose wisely.

Lessons from the Saints - Francis

2011-10-04T20:47:00.000-06:00

"I have been all things unholy. If God can work through me, he can work through anyone."

"If a superior give any order to one who is under him which is against that man's conscience, although he do not obey it yet he shall not be dismissed."

"Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words."

What more can I add other than Thanks be to God.

pls 2 ignorez, ktksbai

2011-09-30T11:38:00.000-06:00

I now understand why the mechanic's car never runs properly. Even when you do get around to looking after the beast, it is so much easier to see the answers to other peoples problems than your own.

Bugger!

Lessons from the Saints - Archangels Gabriel, Michael and Raphael

2011-09-29T12:27:00.000-06:00

Today is the feast of the Archangels Gabriel, Michael and Raphael (formerly Michaelmas). I have put some thought into reinforcing last years post about Mike, but in searching for a suitable image for today, something struck me which resonates. There is page after page of images depicting angels in glory with streaming light and awesome, but either by themselves or entirely over-awing and overshadowing the 'normal' people in the image (as seen at left).

Trouble is that it entirely undermines the purpose of what angels (and archangels) are about. It is not about the pretty boi with the wings and the shiny halo. It is about Who sent said angel and why they were sent. If, as in the case of Gabriel, it is to deliver a message, the message is important and not the messenger. If we are talking about Michael, it is about G-d, not he whose name asks "who is like G-d"?

When you read the story of Tobit, Raphael doesn't spread his wings and speak with a voice like a trumpet. He spends the story as Azariah, a kinsman and friend to Tobias, working with him by giving sage advice and useful assistance rather than commanding from on high. In short, he is the Raphael of the image to the right, not above. At any point, Tobias could have ignored the advice, refused the assistance and gone his own way.

I guess that's where this is going (and no, this is not where I started at all). Even the greatest of angels are our brothers and sisters, fellow servants of the Divine who do their part in the great plan just as we do ours.

When we look to them, or to any of the saints, for inspiration, guidance and assistance (and I see no reason why we shouldn't), we should take care to recall that they labour for the same end as we should - the glory of G-d.

intersections of thought and story

2011-09-28T15:59:00.000-06:00

Thinking about things again...still...and the thoughts are still coalescing. That said, lets seee what comes out of my fingers. The NT reading for today is one I am not familiar with.

Now concerning food sacrificed to idols: we know that 'all of us possess knowledge.' Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.Anyone who claims to know something does not yet have the necessary knowledge; but anyone who loves God is known by him.Hence, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that 'no idol in the world really exists,' and that 'there is no God but one.' (I Cor. 8:1-4).

From here, Paul says that even though we understand what is and is not important (in this case, consumption of food sacrificed to idols) not everyone may and that we must take special care not to do/say things which would cause others to stumble because they may not understand. What pops out like a 3-d kids book is that short statement.

"Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up." An alternate translation would be that Knowledge fosters arrogance but love strengthens us. As someone who has focused much of my life on 'knowing'....That stings. It stings because I feel the truth in it. As I have said before, I am not entirely discounting the importance of learning, but without the heart, the head is naught but an adding machine. This, in an odd way, brings me to a story about the recently deceased sister Mary Whited who was summoned to defend herself and the 'possible heresies' of her order (you may recall this was during the unofficial inquisition of the nunneries).

Speaking before the head of the ~~Inquisition~~ CDF, Cardinal Rodé, her message to his Holiness (who would, of course, decide the case) was simple.

And I said, ‘Tell him we are faithful.’ And he said, ‘Is that all?’ And I said, ‘That is enough.’ ”

We are faithful. We are filled with love. We have hope for the world, an well as our own parts in it.

That is all. That is enough.

one grain of truth

2011-09-26T14:03:00.000-06:00

As I said before, I seem to have developed a mental winnowing fan, separating the wheat from the chaff in matters of religion, theology and such. A particular kernel of Truth which has been presented I shall pass along to you forthwith, though I shall warn you that it is a hard seed which may taste bitter.

I see, now, that the vast majority of the problems facing the world and the Church are of our own making and not of God. Futher, the solutions to those problems are within our purview (our mess, our cleanup).

The economic, environmental and socio-political crises which presently plague our world are principally rooted in the 'benign avarice' of western capitalism. There are specifics I could mention and various examples I can give, but boiled down to its simplest form we have abandoned the future for the now and jostled our neighbour aside to get our heads into the feeding trough. Social Darwinism and our ability to vote ourselves a 'free lunch' has put us all on the endangered species list.

Putting a more personal and painful angle on this is the one year anniversary of Billy Lucas' death, punctuated with Jamey Rodemeyer's demise. When teens like Jamey or Billy or Jim or Tyler or Seth or Raymond or Asher or Carl or the scores whose names we don't know...when they prefer to take up arms against this sea of intolerance and hatred rather than suffer the slings and arrows of that grave misfortune, we are all complicit in their deaths. We, individually and collectively, have stood by and done nothing while these kids called for help. They looked for someone to save them, to care about them, to comfort them and society (individually and collectively) was too interested in its own personal concerns to care for them. Been there, seen that.

Where is God in all of this? Simple. As a responsible and loving parent, He has given us the rules by which She wishes us to live and then has stood back and is letting us (individually and collectively) choose to follow them...or not. But what if it all goes down the crapper?

Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make.Oh, that you would choose life, so that you and your descendants might live! (Deut. 30:19)

In short, it is OUR choice. We can love each other, work for justice and tend to the stranger. We can love our possessions, work for 'just us' and tend to our mutual funds. We can save the world or be a party to its destruction. We can prevent another funeral or dance upon a child's grave.

Your choice. My choice. Our choice.

Kyrie Eleison

We are experiencing trancendental difficulties....

2011-09-26T11:39:00.004-06:00

For those of you who read this blog regularly (and I know who both of you are), you may have noticed a distinct and sudden decline in postings. Part of that is due to mundane workload, as August and September are the truly busy times of the year for me and much of my blogging (or thinking about what I am going to blog) happens while I'm at work.

Much more serious and significant is that I've come to a bit of a wall and this was highlighted by the Sunday homily, wherein Fr. Teri talked about the questions we ask and how that reflects upon the person you are.

Trouble is, I've pretty much stopped asking questions (at least, in the way she was talking about). There are times when I do have some conundrum that flickers across my mind, but it is as easily banished by the answer which flies up from memory, clothed in the armour of Reason and brandishing the shield and sword of Tradition and Scripture. I carry about with me a mental winnowing fan and have resolved the few kernels of Truth from so much chaff which calls itself dogma, doctrine, theology and religion. One of these kernels will be mentioned in the next post.

The other matter which haunts my mind is the problem of being alone. It's been about a year and a half now, yet each night I long for a voice to answer me as I come through the door, someone to cook for, to fall asleep next to, to wake up beside and to just be with. There are a lot of dark and depressing thoughts, pitfalls and generally nasty places that this subject conjures, so I'll not focus on it overmuch here other than to say that it's a delicate balance between being still/listening and actually being proactive in the situation.

*sighs*

taking pride in a rainbow

2011-09-14T15:32:00.000-06:00

Synchronicity is something which has been happening more and more to me in the past year. One could say that it is the paw of the Divine, one could say that it simply that I am being more observant. The bottom line is that it happens and happens a lot. To wit, the tale below.

Our parish is putting on a series of thought provoking seminars about contemporary social issues. The first set is about homosexuality and it is instructive to recall that our parish is mostly of the 'boomer' - 'mature' vintage. The presenters of the series (proud PFLAG parents) explicitly asked me to come and join their seminar because I'm a genuine gay person, you know, and they'd like to have 'the real thing'...or something like that. Raise awareness, dispel myths and boldly come out to the parish all in one shot? Sure!

At work, we are doing a week-long series of seminars on cultural diversity and to kick the week off, we invited a local professor of cultural studies to speak about such things. The gentleman was an excellent speaker and although he didn't really mention gender preference or identification, one of his points struck home - that people are people first and parts of stereotypical groupings second.

As I am driving to an appointment yesterday afternoon, I was thinking about these things and trying to come up with some cogent, reasonable and original thoughts. That's when I saw this beautiful rainbow which made me stop in my tracks (figuratively). It was bright and shining against the darkened clouds with a reflection not unlike the image above. The image brought to mind the pride flag with it's colours representing unity in diversity, but something there didn't sit right. The pride flag has six distinct colours, each crisp and differentiated from each other. Looking at the genuine article (as above), one notes that those neat, clean divisions are absent and that the spectrum of colour is contiguous.

There it is.

We don't fall into neat, distinct little boxes, crisply differentiated from our neighbours who live 'over there'. Instead, we are all on our own wavelength, each of which rests next to the others in a tapestry of life but still unique and special. No two of my friends are identical - emotionally, mentally, physically, sexually or spiritually. We all are on that continuum of the rainbow and although some stereotypes can apply to any of us, no stereotype truly defines who we honestly are. We are all unique individuals created in the image and likeness of the Divine.

Celtic liturgy and practice

2011-09-13T15:40:00.000-06:00

The past few weeks have been preparation for Saturday mass. As the title of the post suggests, it was a celtic liturgy. What does that mean? Means a bunch of stuff in both the practice and philosophy.

The most obvious thing about the mass was the music, which was principally the wonderful music of br. Stephan Waligur. There's no SLJ/OCP low-mass guitar stuff here, but rather a mashup of Taize meets Riverdance which seems to resonate with many of 'celtic' descent as if you tapped their lizard brain and poured 25yo scotch.

The other difference revolves around the change in liturgy and, more importantly, the reasons for the change. The philosophy is that there is no break between the supernal and natural world. Put differently, it is a rejection/refutation of the Manichean break between the good and enternal spiritual vs. the evil and temporary material. The implications of this single shift are more profound and pervasive than one would initially anticipate.

If the supernal and natural are the same, then we talk about the Christ within/the Christ in all. We as creations of the Divine are not marked by original sin (why would a benevolent Deity do such a thing? c.f. Luke 11:5-13), thus the Confiteor is mostly obscelesced. I mean, yes, we sin and we do look for forgiveness, but that is because we're short-sighted and easily distracted from what is important, not because of come Calvinist/Augustinian idea of being worthless from conception as part of 'the Plan' by a loving and merciful God. Further, you have the shockingly simple and profound statement at the beginning of the Holy Communion. "Lord, you have made me worthy to receive you. Only say the word and I shall be healed."

In the news

2011-09-13T08:47:00.000-06:00

"Your Holiness, there's a woman here to see you."

Reuters News is reporting this morning that SNAP and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) has filed a complaint with the International Criminal Court. In this complaint, they charge Pope Benedict XVI and three others personally responsible for tolerating and encouraging sexual abuse.

"Crimes against tens of thousands of victims, most of them children, are being covered up by officials at the highest level of the Vatican. In this case, all roads really do lead to Rome," CCR attorney Pam Spees said.

What is of interest is that the Vatican (like 43 other nations i.e. Israel, Syria, Iraq and North Korea) never signed or ratified the Intenational Criminal Court treaty, so there's question of jurisdiction. On the other hand, Libya was another non-signatory nation and Col. Qaddafi is presently charged with crimes against humanity.

At best, these proceedings will cause the RC hierarchy to make substantive changes in their stance and force the Vatican to practice what they preach regarding moral rectitude and obligation. At the very least, it will force the connection between the parish pedophile and their papal protector and that has far-reaching legal implications in the US civil court system.

Wimminfolks and Contextualisation

2011-09-02T14:25:00.000-06:00

One of my coworkers and I were talking about religion yesterday (shockhorror, I know). He is what I would refer to as a generic (non-denominational) protestant of a slightly evangelical stripe. One of his beefs with his generic, protestant of a slightly evangelical stripe church is their acceptance of women in 'positions of teaching authority'. I asked him to define that more practically which comes out as a woman in the role of pastor (or higher). Sure, ok, whatever. I don't agree, but he is as entitled to be wrong as I am, so live and let live.

This morning, he sent me a link to a substantive article which shows the biblical basis for his conclusion. Or, at least, it purports to. Almost all of it revolves around I Tim. 2:11-14. Since this is all about context, I'm going to zoom out a bit and quote verses 8-15, which bounds the discussion while italicizing verses 11-14.

"In every place of worship, I want men to pray with holy hands lifted up to God, free from anger and controversy. And I want women to be modest in their appearance. They should wear decent and appropriate clothing and not draw attention to themselves by the way they fix their hair or by wearing gold or pearls or expensive clothes. For women who claim to be devoted to God should make themselves attractive by the good things they do. Women should learn quietly and submissively. I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly. For God made Adam first, and afterward he made Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result. But women will be saved through childbearing, assuming they continue to live in faith, love, holiness, and modesty."

The point here is that Paul is writing a private letter to Timothy and telling the lad what he (Paul) feels the Church should look like and what he (again, Paul) permits/allows.

I want men to pray everywhere (not just in temple).
I want women to wear 'decent' clothes (can you hear your grandmother's voice in that?).
I don't permit women to teach or have positions of power over men.

Given the time and place in which this is written, as well as the constitution of the church (recall that they are still considered Nazarene jews at this point, not a separate religion) it all makes sense. But, there is no God in those things....it's all Paul and what Paul wants.

This ties into the bigger question. Who makes a priest? a bishop? a deacon? If we believe in ontological change and the Divine calling those who are ordained, then it's the Divine who makes the priest (etc.) and She can make a boy-priest just as easily as He can make a girl-priest.

There's a lot more here which could be said, but I think I'm probably homilizing to the sopranos.

Direct pointing in scripture

2011-08-31T13:01:00.002-06:00

Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church addresses the UN

I was watching a video for the RC church presented by my friend Thom as an example of social media done right. During the video, they flashed several decontextualized verses, but one stood out like a beacon, as if to say "DUUUDE! Read the rest of this!" I've been through this before and I know when to listen. Here's the whole thing in context.

Finally, brethren, be strengthened in the Lord, and in the might of his power. Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places. Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. (Eph. 6:10-13)

Note that the emphasis isn't mine, but it was put into my head. So, the question is why?

Oh ineffable Divine, Hagia Sophia, Coyote...what are you trying to say to an open-minded and questioning scholar, a gay man who was made by You this way and a 21st century progressive who believes in equality, justice and transparency?

Really now, Dad, could you spell it out more clearly? Pillars of fire and booming voices are pretty classic, from what I've read.

Catholic amnesia

2011-08-30T16:01:00.000-06:00

Reading a friends blog, he mentioned something about history and how americans have a short-term memory when it comes to the past. As an avid amateur historian (recall the only difference between professional and amateur is one gets a check), this got me thinking, which got me writing.

One of the things which initially attracted me to catholicism is the rich history and tradition that is considered of great value. What a great shock and disappointment it was for me to find out that this image of catholicism is a relic of the past itself. Today, it seems, the history of the Roman church is what Rome decides it is, just as what the Tradition means is what Rome says it means. That may have worked in the 19th century....but this is not the 19th century.

As someone who has been quite active in historical research during the past 10+ years, the internet has truly become the revolution that was promised. With a single set of bookmarks, one can have nearly the entire corpus of major Roman theological thinkers from the Apostolic era to Aquinas to apocryphal writings which were considered legendary until a generation ago.

All for free and for download to peruse in your bunny-slippers and bathrobe without regard to your standing with the museum curator, the special collections librarian or some theologian or priest trying to divine if you are 'worthy' to read these texts.

What this means is that the catholics (Roman and otherwise) have a truly unique opportunity to recover and (re)discover their heritage, their religious inheritance. That also means that when there are disagreements with the hierarchy concerning texts, their meaning and importance...well, spirit-led conscience should be your guide (much to the consternation of some who wish to control and restrict).

In the very end, of course, we should be like the knight in the image above, following the Salvic Cup by faith...even when there is no visible support.

P.S. - while you're at it...most catholics should probably ALSO read the scriptures. No no, really. It's ok...you're allowed and HAVE been allowed for quite a long time.

Altar-girls 2 (no electric boogaloo)

2011-08-24T17:48:00.000-06:00

It appears that there is far more to the restriction of girls as altar servers that I am not grasping.

I mean, if there are young people who desire to serve God, one would think that is the sort of behaviour one would wish to encourage.

If we are to believe Galatians 3, gender is no bar within the people of God as we are all made one in Christ.

If we are to apply the Golden Rule, why would anyone wish to exclude another from Christ's table, from participation in mass or in any form of worship?

And what about Christ's own words?

"And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea." (Mat. 18:5-6)

I mean...I realise that pre-V2 RC didn't allow the laity to read the scriptures, but I thought that V2 opened it up, not prevented the clergy from reading them too.

Oy gevalt!

Lessons from the Saints - Bartholomew/Nathanael

2011-08-24T14:25:00.001-06:00

Today is the feast of St. Bartholomew, traditionally identified as Nathanael in the gospel of John. One of the twelve, the story his Calling is what I would like to consider.

Philip found Nathanael and told him, "We have found the one about whom Moses wrote in the law, and also the prophets, Jesus son of Joseph, from Nazareth."

But Nathanael said to him, "Can anything good come from Nazareth?"

Philip said to him, "Come and see."

Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said of him, "Here is a true child of Israel. There is no duplicity in him."

Nathanael said to him, "How do you know me?"

Jesus answered and said to him, "Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree."

Nathanael answered him, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel."

Jesus answered and said to him, "You believe because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than this." (Jn. 1:45-50)

What we see here is someone different than Simon Peter (whose calling is just before), who silently follows. This is a man who has doubts and is skeptical, but is open to the possibility of greatness. To me, the crux of the verse are those simple words of Philip's, "Come and see".

Not demanding nor cajoling nor even dismissive derision. "Come and see". Decide for yourself.
There is the true Calling. Come and see. Decide for yourself what is right.

As we read, of course, Nathanael does come and see and he does decide to follow Jesus. He believes and that belief shall be rewarded.

I shall leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine how this should apply in our lives today.

Syncronicity and lillies

2011-08-23T14:40:00.000-06:00

I am reading on multiple blogs about the decision to forbid girls to serve as altar boys at the Cathedral of SS. Simon and Jude in Phoenix (something girls have been allowed to do within the Roman Church since 1983). This falls in line with other discussions I've read regarding the exclusion of gays, of women in ordination and of priests who don't 'tow the ideological party line'.

After this, I'm reading about the emphasis on in persona Christi, on the inerrancy of the Church, the importance of 'dressing the part' (both the building and the man) and the vital nature of following all the minutiae of the catechism.

Then, there's the gospel reading:

Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You lock the Kingdom of heaven before men. You do not enter yourselves, nor do you allow entrance to those trying to enter....

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You pay tithes of mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier things of the law: judgment and mercy and fidelity. But these you should have done, without neglecting the others. Blind guides, who strain out the gnat and swallow the camel!

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You cleanse the outside of cup and dish, but inside they are full of plunder and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee, cleanse first the inside of the cup, so that the outside also may be clean.” (Mt. 23:13, 23-26)

Further commentary would be gilding the lily.

All God's creatures

2011-08-22T15:57:00.000-06:00

Seems that Francis got to Ireland after all. For my friend Thom.

H/T to Madpriest.

I knew him, Horatio.

2011-08-21T18:58:00.000-06:00

I was minding my own business, reading on Colkoch's blog about the whole World Youth Day and what Benny's homilies are about and the thrust of her comments were about the Holy Father's emphasis of Christ's sacrifice to the near total exclusion of the resurrection. This got me thinking...which got me blogging. You've been warned.

I swear, this wasn't my idea.

Ever since I was little, it's been all about the sacrifice, pain, suffering and death. The more I look at it, I think folks have it all wrong. Don't misunderstand, I recognize the importance of the Passion, but it's like reading Hamlet and saying that the only part that matters is a single soliloquy. Without context, without the rest, it's pointless.

Christ's ministry was about teaching others how to be like God, how to reunite with the Diving in a deep, personal way that defies structure and hierarchy. The core of this is to love G-d and to love others. In brief, to be a self-less, love-filled person who sees the face of the Divine in all they meet. The ultimate expression of that love, the ultimate proof of practicing what you preach, was the Passion. The climax of the story is the resurrection where Christ returns in glory as fulfillment and proof of God's promise.

Without the resurrection, the Araians would have been right in denying the Divinity of Christ and he would have been not unlike Hilel or Shammai, a great teacher and prophet of the Jewish people who taught the world how to live closer to God, eventually showing by the Passion the depth of his own understanding of the teachings.

Without the Passion, the teachings may have rung hollow, with the Rabbi not wishing to take the final step to do what was needed to show people the bottomless nature of his love. His resurrection would prove his favour with G-d, but it wouldn't be the proof of Salvation which is central to the teachings.

Without the ministry, his death and resurrection would have happened as a footnote to the final destruction of the Jewish temple and the Diaspora. None would know that the prophesy was fulfilled and the flame of Christianity would never have been sparked.

All of the parts are integral to the overall message, just as all three acts are important to the story arc of Hamlet.

Augustine said, "God became man so that man may become God". Because God became flesh and dwelt amoung us, we may know how to follow Him back to the Divinity. Through his ministry, He has taught us the Way. Through the Passion He has shown us the Truth. In his resurrection, He has demonstrated the promise of the Life everlasting.

The elephant in the room

2011-08-19T13:07:00.000-06:00

Taking the conservative Christian wing of the Republican party at their word (sic), then they are of the opinion that the United States is (or was/should be) a Christian nation. At the very least, it is a nation founded on (and should return to) Christian Values™.

Assuming that, why would they be against Medicare/Medicaid (tending to the sick and dying), Food stamps (feeding the hungry), Social Security (providing for the elderly), Welfare (helping the poor), a progressive tax structure (giving your cloak when asked) and education programs (tending the lambs of the flock)? Why would they be for tools of violence if they follow the Prince of Peace? Why would they be so in bed with the capitalist dream if the love of money is the root of all evil?

Note that I DO believe that the rank-and-file here are god-fearing Christians, not amoral, duplicitous meanies (that appelation I reserve for politicians of most any stripe).

However....

Do they really believe that those policies are what Christ meant when he said to love your neighbour?
Can they honestly say that they do these things wanting said policies done unto them?

Just sayin.

FUD for thought

2011-08-18T13:43:00.001-06:00

The more I read about current events as of late, the sadder I become. It is not the media, for I know that they thrive on violence, despair and FUD to line their coffers. It is not the complex kabuki theatre that is politics in the US, for they are just as culpable and capable as the media to borrow trouble for their own ends. It isn't the rampant hypocrisy of 'certain churches' with their misplaced nostalgia for Victorian values nor the brazen, rapine behaviour of corporate America nor the economic news which should have me wallowing in shadenfreude like pig in slop.

No...it is a deeper thing that connects them all and goes far beyond.

What I see, day in and day out, is a consistent reinforcement of a self-centered approach to reality which is defined by materialism, consumerism and levels of self-absorption which are just stunning. Time and again it is about 'me' and 'mine', what directly affects me and how I can get/keep/avoid things that are about me. The corollary is that people in our society don't truly recognize what is going on around them...who is going on around them...and how their actions or non-actions have consequences for other folks.

In short and and brief, we have (individually and collectively) eschewed our mandate as human beings and treat other people as 'Other', not as people. These things are reasonable enough if you are an amoral and soul-less entity solely devoted to the accumulation of material wealth (i.e. a corporation), but when churches, governments and people start acting this way, they are abandoning the core ethic if being human.

What to do? Where is God in all of this?

Love removes fear, Faith is the antidote of uncertainty and Hope counters destructive doubt. Our call to do unto others is a near-direct antithesis to the present day, post-structuralist/post-post-modernist capitalist society.

Lord,

Help me see myself in the Other and them in me;
help me see the Christ within and the Christ in all.

Let my hope be an anchor in the storm-tossed sea;
let my faith be a lamp against the present pall.

Help me reflect your love and mercy;
help me see beyond the present squall.

Here I am, Lord.
Let me be an instrument of your peace;
let me be the change you wish to see in the world;

Lessons from the Saints - Assumption of the BVM

2011-08-15T13:40:00.000-06:00

This Sunday we celebrated the feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary (which is, technically, today).

Generally, our parishioners are not great Marians, but are those who feel specific devotion to the B.V.M. and the Assumption (along with the other 21 major feasts dedicated to the B.V.M.) allows for the expression of their faith towards the Christotokos.

The homily on Sunday was of specific interest because it didn't focus on the Assumption itself (which is non-canonical and springs from the 4th century despite being an 'infallible' part of the Deposit of Faith) but rather upon the larger topic of disassociation. In a nutshell, none of us can be like the Blessed Virgin (or Christ or saint so-and-so) because they are way up there in the celestial clouds, so holy and special, and we're just Joe-pew-warmer who are unworthy and lowly *beats breast as appropriate*. Bah and also humbug.

What makes the story of Mary (and almost all of the other saints) of great value is that they are us, with faults, flaws, bad days, broken hearts and all the other things which come with being human. What sets them apart from you and me is that others took notice when God spoke to them and they obeyed. Let me step through that.

God speaks to us all (though not all hear the Voice) and we have the option (free will, baby) to obey.

Millions of us do this every day and millions of us answer that Call as our own charisms dictate.

Those we call saints today are people whose actions were noticed by others and whose lives/deaths have been lifted up as examples for the faithful to follow.

I'll close with the gospel reading from the Vigil of the Assumption (which most folks never hear).

While Jesus was speaking, a woman from the crowd called out and said to him, “Blessed is the womb that carried you and the breasts at which you nursed.”

He replied, “Rather, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.” (Luke 11:27-28)

Focus on the essentials here. Listen to the Voice and follow the Calling. That is what Mary and all of the saints did, what Christ did and what we should all do.

Lessons from the Saints - Lawrence

2011-08-12T11:34:00.000-06:00

As promised, I am writing about the patron saint of the South (you'll see).

Lawrence of Rome was an archdeacon who worked for the bishop of Rome, Pope Sixtus II. When Sixtus and the other six archdeacons were arrested, this left Lawrence as the leader of the church in Rome as well as the steward of the Treasures of the Church (including, by tradition, the Grail).

After the death of Sixtus, the prefect of Rome demanded Lawrence appear before him with the Treasures of the Church in three days. In response, Lawrence distributed every penny of the church to the poor, lame, blind and indigent. When he appeared, a crowd of these 'wretched refuse' came with him and he is purported to have said that these people were the treasures of the Church and that the Church was far richer than the Emperor.

The prefect was....unamused, and this action led to Lawrence's martyrdom by being roasted alive atop a gridiron. Legend has it that Lawrence told the executioner at one point to 'turn me over, I am done on this side'.

Part of the inspiration that comes from Lawrence comes from his courage and I will admit that at least part of what I draw from the tale is his bon vivant spirit in the face of pain and death. Given the recent conversations about current economics and societal issues, I would like to highlight the part of the tale which normally gets underplayed.

Lawrence, in the course of a week, goes from being one of seven personal assistants to the bishop of Rome to being the de facto Pope, responsible for safeguarding the wealth of the Church....and having an 'audit' in 3 days. He hears the Call and steps up to the plate, doing what is hardest but best, knowing his life will be forfeit because of it. Having decided to do these things, he does them with flair and a happy heart. There's a lot to that.

Oh, and why the patron saint of the South? Barbecue, of course.

Arab Spring and the British Summer

2011-08-11T13:33:00.001-06:00

Something about closing barn-doors....

I've been reading a lot about the riots which have erupted in major centres about England these last few days. The catalytic event was the police slaying of a black father of four who was pulled out of cab and gunned down. When pressed for reasons, the the police responded by saying that 'he shot first'...with a gun he didn't have.

The youth of Britain have their own response. They have protested. They have rioted. They have looted and they have burned.

There are many purported reasons for these actions, from the economic disaster which is the current capitalist system, long-standing prejudices between 'real' Britians and immigrants (read white and everyone else), breakdown of the social order, power struggles within the scandal-ridden Scotland Yard and even viral consumerism taken to it's absurd conclusion, gansta rap music and the pervasive use of 'new-fangled technology' such as twitter.

"Look out! He's got a rhyme!"

I would take a lesson from our arab brothers this spring and say that there is a much deeper problem.

When those who are given power to govern abuse and neglect the governed...

When the rich exploit and suppress the poor...

When colour, creed, sex and even hair colour are things which separate and divide us...

When the old spend the future of the young and then spit in their faces...

This is when mankind sees others as 'less than', when he no longer recognizes the face of God in anyone, let alone everyone. This is when we, individually and collectively, become inhuman.

That, IMO, is the root causal agent. We have become so insular and detached that we do not see that BOTH the police AND the rioters are people...let alone that they are the children of God. Those in power, be it in Damascus, Downing St. or D.C., would do well to recognize that and take whatever steps are needed to engage the 'hooligans' and the 'rabble', lest we all suffer.

P.S. - Sorry about the lack of posting. Between holiday, some serious cogitation and the busy season starting at work, I have not had the opportunity to post. I promise I'll put up something about the patron saint of the South soon.

Lessons from the Saints - Nicodemus

2011-08-03T13:08:00.001-06:00

Nicodemus in his Cardinal's garb
(cappa magna not included)

Today is the feast day of St. Nicodemus. Nicodemus features somewhat prominently in the gospel of John, appearing thrice throughout the gospel story. What we know for certain is that Nicodemus was a pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin.

Recall that the pharisees were the comparatively 'populist' and more progressive of the two major socio-religious groups in that day (in comparison to the saducees, who were formed from the aristocracy and believed in a more conservative and literal interpretation of things). The Sanhedrin was the supreme religious body who decided on policy.

Thus, we see that Nicodemus is a moderate to liberal, highly placed member of the establishment who comes to this renegade preacher under cover of darkness to discuss things. And what does this man with great power and authority say to Jesus?

"Rabbi, we know that You have come from God as a teacher; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him." (Jn 3:2b)

This simple statement, the opening salvo in a relatively long and fruitcake-dense discussion, demonstrates that even among his greatest detractors where some who saw and recognized the power and truth in Jesus' message. Further, it underlines the delicate situation that Nicodemus (and others) were in.

There they were, the 'progressives' in a cut-throat battle with the 'conservatives' for the direction of the judaic faith under the thumb of Roman 'oppression' (oppression meaning acceptance of other gods) with the monastic ascetics (Essenes) and those who would purify Zion of infidels (the Zealots, who want to reenact the Maccabean rebellion) as minor players. Then comes this rebel preacher from the sticks who seems to speak with an authority which none have seen in hundreds of years. He has a syncretic approach to Judaism which is both familiar and yet very different from the current beliefs. To openly accept him would invite political (and personal) disaster, yet the signs are obvious to any who see that the messenger is from YHWH.

So, it comes to some hard questions.
Do the prelates respect centuries of tradition and preserve the church?
Do they heed their conscience and abandon the church they know?
Do they attempt to straddle the two and affect change within the church?

Nicodemus attempts the last, using his position to deflect the pharisees from arresting Jesus (Jn. 7) and then, after the crucifixion, he personally purchases the materials for burial and performs the Taharah of Christ's body (Jn. 19). History shows, however, that the Zealots 'win' the political struggle and incite a revolt which causes the destruction of the nation of Israel.

Examining the present situation in the RC community and the wholesale abandonment of Tradition, Ecclesiasties comes to mind, "We don't remember what happened in the past, and in future generations, no one will remember what we are doing now." (Eccl. 1:11)

So, what is to be learned from Nicodemus? Perhaps to be more generous in understanding the prelates and their position? Perhaps to be sensitive to personal conscience and it's function within our experience? Perhaps to refocus our attention to Tradition so we do not repeat the mistakes of the past? I will leave the answer as an exercise for the reader.

Walking in faith

2011-08-02T13:25:00.001-06:00

Today's reading is from Matthew, wherein Christ sends the disciples ahead and then returns to them by walking across the Sea of Galilee. Not surprisingly, the disciples are scared witless.

At once Jesus spoke to them, “Take courage, it is I; do not be afraid.”

Peter said to him in reply,“Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water.”

He said, “Come.”

Peter got out of the boat and began to walk on the water toward Jesus. But when he saw how strong the wind was he became frightened; and, beginning to sink, he cried out, “Lord, save me!”

Immediately Jesus stretched out his hand and caught him,
and said to him, “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?”

There are a few things here. The first is Simon wanting proof that Christ is who he says he is by performing yet another miracle, but specifically one for him. The second is that the miracle DID happen, Peter DID walk on the water, until his faith wavered. Thirdly, as soon as Peter cried out for salvation, Christ was there.

I could wax prosaic about parallels between this parable and the present (insert denomination here) church. Instead, I think it is more instructive to examine ourselves personally and think about the presence (or absence) of miracles.

Throughout the gospels, there is a pattern to Christ's miracles when they interact with man (i.e.- when Christ isn't showing power over nature). The mortal is shown to be in need, the mortal (whether by external exhortations or internal prodding) has faith in Christ, demonstrates that faith in some way (normally Christ tells them to do something) and the miracle occurs. This is particularly of interest in this reading as we see that the miracle waxes and wanes with Peter's faith.

I mention all of this because I was raised in a tradition which believes that the Age of Miracles is over and that the Age of Reason, with it's emphasis on the rationality of the Divine Watchmaker and the logical and munificent bargain that is salvation. At the risk of having chicken and eggs here, it makes me wonder.

If a person does not have faith in miracles, then it follows that one would not see them when they happen.
If a person does not have faith in salvation, then it follows that they would not receive it.
If a person does not have faith in the Divine, then they would (at least in this world) not know Her benefice.

As I have mentioned previously, Faith is trust without limits.

Trust in God, know His benefice.
Trust in salvation and receive it.
Trust in the existence of miracles, and you will see and experience them.

So, follow Christ and walk in faith on the water.

An update

2011-08-01T13:27:00.000-06:00

For those of you (and you know who you are) who have been wondering about my reticence as of late, it is explained by the word to the left. Yes, I have been on holiday...and a proper holiday, that is. No visiting my parental units or 'his family', but I had a friend from back east come out and visit.

The time off was brilliant and I worked hard to fully clear my calendar so we could go and do whatever without interruptions. This brought into crystal focus how much I have taken on in the last year. There's choir and SCA and the RPG stuff and church committee this and church committee that.

It also gave me the opportunity to chat at length with an intelligent and spiritual but strongly areligious person. Folks like this are my intellectual whetstone, for reasonable discourse with a logical and open-minded individual who is all-too-willing to play devil's advocate is precisely the sort of grist I need to further hone my beliefs. I have some thoughts, but I'm gonna let those bubble around in my head for a bit. It's been a long week and a half.

Peace to all