To continue with the information about the saint days I switched information sources and this came from the Daily Ropman Missal from Our Sunday Vistitor Publishing Division, huntington, IN 1998
Saints Peter and Paul Apostles
SS. Peter and Paul are the principal pillars fo the Catholic church founded by Christ. Peter was chosen by Christ to be His first Vicar on earth, endowed with powers of the keys of the kingdom of Heave (Mt. 16:13-19( and charged with the role of Shepard of Christ's flock (Jn 21:15-17). In peter and his successors, we can see a visible sign of unity and communion in faith and charity. Divine grace led Peter to profess Christ's divinity. St. Peter suffered martyrdom under Nero, in 66 or 67 A.D. he was buried at the hill of the Vatican, where recent excavations have revealed his tomb on the very site of St. Peter's Basilica.
Paul was chosen to form part of the apotolic college by Christ himself on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:1-16). An instrument selected to bring Christ's name to all peoples of the Gentiles. St. Paul was beheaded in the Tre Fontane along the Via Ostiens and buried nearby, on the site where the basilica bearing his name now stands.
Friday, June 29, 2007
Thursday, June 28, 2007
I need the assistance of a better Catholic than I...
OK, Now here is my problem, I was reading this article and it has several interesting things to say. It is about the Pope allowing for a wider use of the old Latin Mass. Here are some of my comments about some of their comments... Maybe you can let me know if I am on the right page or not with my thoughts.
1. "a concession to traditionalists that has caused concern among those fearing a rollback of one of the Vatican's key liberalizing reforms"
OK, I am not really down with this. How is Mass in the vernacular a liberalizing reform? I mean the Latin WAS the vernacular! However, it is nice to have the option of hearing the mass in our own language, the problem is people losing respect for the mass. If we have a few more Lain masses (like the one at Holy Rosary) and it helps build respect... GREAT!!!
2. "The decision follows months of debate. Some cardinals, bishops and Jews..."
Why are the Jews in this debate? Would it be Catholic Jews, Orthodox.... What?
3. "The decision follows months of debate. Some cardinals, bishops and Jews have opposed any change, voicing complaints about everything from the text of the old Mass to concerns that the move will lead to further changes to the reforms approved by 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council."
OK, well that is fair; however, if the reforms have caused damage, the spirit of the changes were not to cause damage, so we need to re-examine the causes of the damage and FIX it.
4. "To celebrate the old Latin Mass now, a priest must obtain permission from the local bishop."
OK, so is the reform needed because too many bishops are outright denying the Mass?
5. "Some cardinals and bishops, ... have objected to any liberalizing of the terms for using the old rite, saying its broader use could lead to divisions within the church, and could imply a rejection of other Vatican II teachings."
I can see this objection; however, again, if there has been damage done (and it is apparent we have lost some reverence for the Mass) then it MUST be fixed! See my above comment.
6. "He said bishops were also worried that any major change "could erode their ability to control how the faith is practiced.'"
Well now, how well are many of these bishops really controlling? And what power do they think this will actually get rid of? I cannot think this will make a large impact either way for I am not sure may bishops would continuously say no to a Mass now that was really wanted by the people in the diocese.
7. "Tamas Moritz, 40, visiting from Hungary, said 'it seems archaic.'"
It does seem archaic, it is from the passed, a language not used anymore besides the wonderful church prayers!
8."'I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it," then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger said. "It's impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that.'"
My last comment... it is sad to Deny people the mass. When visiting a country that speaks a different language, it would be nice if we had the option of going to a mass where we could still follow along with the prayers. I may go to Canada, but not know French, I may go to Japan and not know Japanese...
1. "a concession to traditionalists that has caused concern among those fearing a rollback of one of the Vatican's key liberalizing reforms"
OK, I am not really down with this. How is Mass in the vernacular a liberalizing reform? I mean the Latin WAS the vernacular! However, it is nice to have the option of hearing the mass in our own language, the problem is people losing respect for the mass. If we have a few more Lain masses (like the one at Holy Rosary) and it helps build respect... GREAT!!!
2. "The decision follows months of debate. Some cardinals, bishops and Jews..."
Why are the Jews in this debate? Would it be Catholic Jews, Orthodox.... What?
3. "The decision follows months of debate. Some cardinals, bishops and Jews have opposed any change, voicing complaints about everything from the text of the old Mass to concerns that the move will lead to further changes to the reforms approved by 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council."
OK, well that is fair; however, if the reforms have caused damage, the spirit of the changes were not to cause damage, so we need to re-examine the causes of the damage and FIX it.
4. "To celebrate the old Latin Mass now, a priest must obtain permission from the local bishop."
OK, so is the reform needed because too many bishops are outright denying the Mass?
5. "Some cardinals and bishops, ... have objected to any liberalizing of the terms for using the old rite, saying its broader use could lead to divisions within the church, and could imply a rejection of other Vatican II teachings."
I can see this objection; however, again, if there has been damage done (and it is apparent we have lost some reverence for the Mass) then it MUST be fixed! See my above comment.
6. "He said bishops were also worried that any major change "could erode their ability to control how the faith is practiced.'"
Well now, how well are many of these bishops really controlling? And what power do they think this will actually get rid of? I cannot think this will make a large impact either way for I am not sure may bishops would continuously say no to a Mass now that was really wanted by the people in the diocese.
7. "Tamas Moritz, 40, visiting from Hungary, said 'it seems archaic.'"
It does seem archaic, it is from the passed, a language not used anymore besides the wonderful church prayers!
8."'I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it," then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger said. "It's impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that.'"
My last comment... it is sad to Deny people the mass. When visiting a country that speaks a different language, it would be nice if we had the option of going to a mass where we could still follow along with the prayers. I may go to Canada, but not know French, I may go to Japan and not know Japanese...
We are doing something right!
Ok here are some daily news bits, but these are intended to show things going well. I for one am tired of bad news!!!
In my short history I have never heard of an animail being taken off of the endagnered list; however, the Eagle is making a comback and is no longer on the list!
In today's society it is sad when it is marriages that need the help. I think strong marriages help sociaety! Why then do we distroy them? Anyway, it seems the U.S. Biships are giving aid to married couples by Advertising Marriage
Last, but not least, we look at Pope Benedict XVI claiming catechists as a role model for the church and that it should address the whole person. Who is he talking about? None other than our saint from yesterday... Cyril. It is so cool how things work out.
In my short history I have never heard of an animail being taken off of the endagnered list; however, the Eagle is making a comback and is no longer on the list!
In today's society it is sad when it is marriages that need the help. I think strong marriages help sociaety! Why then do we distroy them? Anyway, it seems the U.S. Biships are giving aid to married couples by Advertising Marriage
Last, but not least, we look at Pope Benedict XVI claiming catechists as a role model for the church and that it should address the whole person. Who is he talking about? None other than our saint from yesterday... Cyril. It is so cool how things work out.
St Irenaeus, Bishop and Father of the Church
St. Irenaeus
Bishop of Lyons, Father of the Church, and Martyr?
Catholic Encyclopedia
Information as to his life is scarce, and in some measure inexact. He was born in Proconsular Asia, or at least in some province bordering thereon, in the first half of the second century; the exact date is controverted, between the years 115 and 125, according to some, or, according to others, between 130 and 142. It is certain that, while still very young, Irenaeus had seen and heard the holy Bishop Polycarp at Smyrna. During the persecution of Marcus Aurelius, Irenaeus was a priest of the Church of Lyons. The clergy of that city, many of whom were suffering imprisonment for the Faith, sent him (177 or 178) to Rome with a letter to Pope Eleutherius concerning Montanism, and on that occasion bore emphatic testimony to his merits. Returning to Gaul, Irenaeus succeeded the martyr Saint Pothinus as Bishop of Lyons. During the religious peace which followed the persecution of Marcus Aurelius, the new bishop divided his activities between the duties of a pastor and of a missionary (as to which we have but brief data, late and not very certain) and his writings, almost all of which were directed against Gnosticism, the heresy then spreading in Gaul and elsewhere. In 190 or 191 he interceded with Pope Victor to lift the sentence of excommunication laid by that pontiff upon the Christian communities of Asia Minor which persevered in the practice of the Quartodecimans in regard to the celebration of Easter. Nothing is known of the date of his death, which must have occurred at the end of the second or the beginning of the third century. In spite of some isolated and later testimony to that effect, it is not very probable that he ended his career with martyrdom. His feast is celebrated on 28 June in the Latin Church, and on 23 August in the Greek.
Irenaeus wrote in Greek many works which have secured for him an exceptional place in Christian literature, because in controverted religious questions of capital importance they exhibit the testimony of a contemporary of the heroic age of the Church, of one who had heard St. Polycarp, the disciple of St. John, and who, in a manner, belonged to the Apostolic Age. None of these writings has come down to us in the original text, though a great many fragments of them are extant as citations in later writers (Hippolytus, Eusebius, etc.). Two of these works, however, have reached us in their entirety in a Latin version:
A treatise in five books, commonly entitled Adversus haereses, and devoted, according to its true title, to the "Detection and Overthrow of the False Knowledge" (see GNOSTICISM, sub-title Refutation of Gnosticism). Of this work we possess a very ancient Latin translation, the scrupulous fidelity of which is beyond doubt. It is the chief work of Irenaeus and truly of the highest importance; it contains a profound exposition not only of Gnosticism under its different forms, but also of the principal heresies which had sprung up in the various Christian communities, and thus constitutes an invaluable source of information on the most ancient ecclesiastical literature from its beginnings to the end of the second century. In refuting the heterodox systems Irenaeus often opposes to them the true doctrine of the Church, and in this way furnishes positive and very early evidence of high importance. Suffice it to mention the passages, so often and so fully commented upon by theologians and polemical writers, concerning the origin of the Gospel according to St. John (see JOHN, GOSPEL OF SAINT), the Holy Eucharist, and the primacy of the Roman Church.
Of a second work, written after the "Adversus Haereses", an ancient literal translation in the Armenian language. This is the "Proof of the Apostolic Preaching." The author's aim here is not to confute heretics, but to confirm the faithful by expounding the Christian doctrine to them, and notably by demonstrating the truth of the Gospel by means of the Old Testament prophecies. Although it contains fundamentally, so to speak, nothing that has not already been expounded in the "Adversus Haereses", it is a document of the highest interest, and a magnificent testimony of the deep and lively faith of Irenaeus.
Of his other works only scattered fragments exist; many, indeed, are known only through the mention made of them by later writers, not even fragments of the works themselves having come down to us. These are a treatise against the Greeks entitled "On the Subject of Knowledge" (mentioned by Eusebius); a writing addressed to the Roman priest Florinus "On the Monarchy, or How God is not the Cause of Evil" (fragment in Eusebius); a work "On the Ogdoad", probably against the Ogdoad of Valentinus the Gnostic, written for the same priest Florinus, who had gone over to the sect of the Valentinians (fragment in Eusebius); a treatise on schism, addressed to Blastus (mentioned by Eusebius); a letter to Pope Victor against the Roman priest Florinus (fragment preserved in Syriac); another letter to the same on the Paschal controversies (extracts in Eusebius); other letters to various correspondents on the same subject (mentioned by Eusebius, a fragment preserved in Syriac); a book of divers discourses, probably a collection of homilies (mentioned by Eusebius); and
other minor works for which we have less clear or less certain attestations.The four fragments which Pfaff published in 1715, ostensibly from a Turin manuscript, have been proven by Funk to be apocryphal, and Harnack has established the fact that Pfaff himself fabricated them.
Bishop of Lyons, Father of the Church, and Martyr?
Catholic Encyclopedia
Information as to his life is scarce, and in some measure inexact. He was born in Proconsular Asia, or at least in some province bordering thereon, in the first half of the second century; the exact date is controverted, between the years 115 and 125, according to some, or, according to others, between 130 and 142. It is certain that, while still very young, Irenaeus had seen and heard the holy Bishop Polycarp at Smyrna. During the persecution of Marcus Aurelius, Irenaeus was a priest of the Church of Lyons. The clergy of that city, many of whom were suffering imprisonment for the Faith, sent him (177 or 178) to Rome with a letter to Pope Eleutherius concerning Montanism, and on that occasion bore emphatic testimony to his merits. Returning to Gaul, Irenaeus succeeded the martyr Saint Pothinus as Bishop of Lyons. During the religious peace which followed the persecution of Marcus Aurelius, the new bishop divided his activities between the duties of a pastor and of a missionary (as to which we have but brief data, late and not very certain) and his writings, almost all of which were directed against Gnosticism, the heresy then spreading in Gaul and elsewhere. In 190 or 191 he interceded with Pope Victor to lift the sentence of excommunication laid by that pontiff upon the Christian communities of Asia Minor which persevered in the practice of the Quartodecimans in regard to the celebration of Easter. Nothing is known of the date of his death, which must have occurred at the end of the second or the beginning of the third century. In spite of some isolated and later testimony to that effect, it is not very probable that he ended his career with martyrdom. His feast is celebrated on 28 June in the Latin Church, and on 23 August in the Greek.
Irenaeus wrote in Greek many works which have secured for him an exceptional place in Christian literature, because in controverted religious questions of capital importance they exhibit the testimony of a contemporary of the heroic age of the Church, of one who had heard St. Polycarp, the disciple of St. John, and who, in a manner, belonged to the Apostolic Age. None of these writings has come down to us in the original text, though a great many fragments of them are extant as citations in later writers (Hippolytus, Eusebius, etc.). Two of these works, however, have reached us in their entirety in a Latin version:
A treatise in five books, commonly entitled Adversus haereses, and devoted, according to its true title, to the "Detection and Overthrow of the False Knowledge" (see GNOSTICISM, sub-title Refutation of Gnosticism). Of this work we possess a very ancient Latin translation, the scrupulous fidelity of which is beyond doubt. It is the chief work of Irenaeus and truly of the highest importance; it contains a profound exposition not only of Gnosticism under its different forms, but also of the principal heresies which had sprung up in the various Christian communities, and thus constitutes an invaluable source of information on the most ancient ecclesiastical literature from its beginnings to the end of the second century. In refuting the heterodox systems Irenaeus often opposes to them the true doctrine of the Church, and in this way furnishes positive and very early evidence of high importance. Suffice it to mention the passages, so often and so fully commented upon by theologians and polemical writers, concerning the origin of the Gospel according to St. John (see JOHN, GOSPEL OF SAINT), the Holy Eucharist, and the primacy of the Roman Church.
Of a second work, written after the "Adversus Haereses", an ancient literal translation in the Armenian language. This is the "Proof of the Apostolic Preaching." The author's aim here is not to confute heretics, but to confirm the faithful by expounding the Christian doctrine to them, and notably by demonstrating the truth of the Gospel by means of the Old Testament prophecies. Although it contains fundamentally, so to speak, nothing that has not already been expounded in the "Adversus Haereses", it is a document of the highest interest, and a magnificent testimony of the deep and lively faith of Irenaeus.
Of his other works only scattered fragments exist; many, indeed, are known only through the mention made of them by later writers, not even fragments of the works themselves having come down to us. These are a treatise against the Greeks entitled "On the Subject of Knowledge" (mentioned by Eusebius); a writing addressed to the Roman priest Florinus "On the Monarchy, or How God is not the Cause of Evil" (fragment in Eusebius); a work "On the Ogdoad", probably against the Ogdoad of Valentinus the Gnostic, written for the same priest Florinus, who had gone over to the sect of the Valentinians (fragment in Eusebius); a treatise on schism, addressed to Blastus (mentioned by Eusebius); a letter to Pope Victor against the Roman priest Florinus (fragment preserved in Syriac); another letter to the same on the Paschal controversies (extracts in Eusebius); other letters to various correspondents on the same subject (mentioned by Eusebius, a fragment preserved in Syriac); a book of divers discourses, probably a collection of homilies (mentioned by Eusebius); and
other minor works for which we have less clear or less certain attestations.The four fragments which Pfaff published in 1715, ostensibly from a Turin manuscript, have been proven by Funk to be apocryphal, and Harnack has established the fact that Pfaff himself fabricated them.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Today's News
Cyril of Alexandria, Bishop and Doctor
I think I am going to start something new. I am going to start to put a little something about each of the saints that are featured in the daily readings for the Roman Cathoilc Chruch according to the Criterion. This is a newspaper for my archdiocies (Indianapolis). So our first saint that we will be looking at will be Cyril of Alexandria.
Cyril of Alexandria, Bishop and Doctor
This information comes from Catholic Encyclopedia.
found on the 9th of June, and (together with St. Athanasius) on the 18th of January.
He was from an alexandrain family and the nephew to Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria. For a period of time he was a monk; however, in October 15th of 412 he was named successor to his uncle as the "Synod of the Oak".
During his time he had a great deal of power that made others jelous. He also drove out the Jewish people who had been massacuring the Christians. He was also able to get 500 monks from Nitria to help defend the patriarch. During these years there were many such riots and battles. Cyril was able to honor martyers and he attempted to keep the peace the best he could.
It also seems, due to a lack of communication with Rome, he was a qersecutor of St. Chrysostom and refused to insert his name in the diptychs of his Church untill he later yielded.
He also took a stand against Antiochene Nestorius who became patriarch of Constantinople. It seems he had some heretical teachings; however, the Pope did not take sides of eather when Nestorius wrote to him. It seems the Pope did have a great deal of respect for Cyril due to him being the first prelate of the East and inheritor of the Athanasius and Pter traditions...
As a Theologian:
The principal fame of St. Cyril rests upon his defence of Catholic doctrine against Nestorius. He wished, against Apollinarius, to teach that Christ was a perfect man, and he took the denial of a human personality in Our Lord to imply an Apollinarian incompleteness in His Human Nature. The union of the human and the Divine natures was therefore to Nestorius an unspeakably close junction, but not a union in one hypostasis. St. Cyril taught the personal, or hypostatic, union in the plainest terms; and when his writings are surveyed as a whole, it becomes certain that he always held the true view, that the one Christ has two perfect and distinct natures, Divine and human. But he would not admit two physeis in Christ, because he took physis to imply not merely a nature but a subsistent (i.e. personal) nature. His opponents misrepresented him as teaching that the Divine person suffered, in His human nature; and he was constantly accused of Apollinarianism. On the other hand, after his death Monophysitism was founded upon a misinterpretation of his teaching. Especially unfortunate was the formula "one nature incarnate of God the Word" (mia physis tou Theou Logou sesarkomene), which he took from a treatise on the Incarnation which he believed to be by his great predecessor St. Athanasius. By this phrase he intended simply to emphasize against Nestorius the unity of Christ's Person; but the words in fact expressed equally the single Nature taught by Eutyches and by his own successor Diascurus. He brings out admirably the necessity of the full doctrine of the humanity to God, to explain the scheme of the redemption of man. He argues that the flesh of Christ is truly the flesh of God, in that it is life-giving in the Holy Eucharist. In the richness and depth of his philosophical and devotional treatment of the Incarnation we recognize the disciple of Athanasius. But the precision of his language, and perhaps of his thought also, is very far behind that which St. Leo developed a few years after Cyril's death.
His writings
The exegetical works of St. Cyril are very numerous. The seventeen books "On Adoration in Spirit and in Truth" are an exposition of the typical and spiritual nature of the Old Law. The Glaphyra or "brilliant", Commentaries on Pentateuch are of the same nature. Long explanations of Isaias and of the minor Prophets give a mystical interpretation after the Alexandrian manner. Only fragments are extant of other works on the Old Testament, as well as of expositions of Matthew, Luke, and some of the Epistles, but of that of St. Luke much is preserved in a Syriac version. Of St. Cyril's sermons and letters the most interesting are those which concern the Nestorian controversy. Of a great apologetic work in the twenty books against Julian the Apostate ten books remain. Among his theological treatises we have two large works and one small one on the Holy Trinity, and a number of treatises and tracts belonging to the Nestorian controversy.
The first collected edition of St. Cyril's works was by J. Aubert, 7 vols., Paris, 1638; several earlier editions of some portions in Latin only are enumerated by Fabricius. Cardinal Mai added more material in the second and third volumes of his "Bibliotheca nova Patrum", II-III, 1852; this is incorporated, together with much matter from the Catenæ published by Ghislerius (1633), Corderius, Possinus, and Cranor (1838), in Migne's reprint of Aubert's edition (P.G. LXVIII-LXVII, Paris, 1864). Better editions of single works include P. E. Pusey, "Cyrilli Alex. Epistolae tres oecumenicae, libri V c. Nestorium, XII capitum explanatio, XII capitum defensio utraque scholia de Incarnatione Unigeniti" (Oxford, 1875); "De recta fide ad principissas de recta fide ad Augustas, quad unus Christus, dialogus apologeticus ad Imp." (Oxford, 1877); "Cyrilli Alex. in XII Prophetas" (Oxford, 1868, 2 vols.); "In divi Joannis Evangelium" (Oxford, 1872, 3 vols., including the fragments on the Epistles). "Three Epistles, with revised text and English translation" (Oxford, 1872); translations in the Oxford "Library of the Fathers"; "Commentary on St. John", I (1874), II (1885); Five tomes against Nestorius" (1881); R. Payne Smith, "S. Cyrilli Alex. Comm. in Lucae evang. quae supersunt Syriace e manuscripts apud Mus. Brit." (Oxford, 1858); the same translated into English (Oxford, 1859, 2 vols.); W. Wright, "Fragments of the Homilies of Cyril of Alex. on St. Luke, edited from a Nitrian manuscript" (London, 1874); J. H. Bernard, "On Some Fragments of an Uncial manuscript of St. Cyril of Alex. Written on Papyrus" (Trans. of R. Irish Acad., XXIX, 18, Dublin, 1892); "Cyrilli Alex. librorum c. Julianum fragmenta syriaca:, ed. E. Nestle etc. in "Scriptorum grecorum, qui Christianam impugnaverunt religionem", fasc. III (Leipzig, 1880). Fragments of the "Liber Thesaurorum" in Pitra, "Analecta sacra et class.", I (Paris, 1888).
(for the full background please read the artical)
Cyril of Alexandria, Bishop and Doctor
This information comes from Catholic Encyclopedia.
found on the 9th of June, and (together with St. Athanasius) on the 18th of January.
He was from an alexandrain family and the nephew to Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria. For a period of time he was a monk; however, in October 15th of 412 he was named successor to his uncle as the "Synod of the Oak".
During his time he had a great deal of power that made others jelous. He also drove out the Jewish people who had been massacuring the Christians. He was also able to get 500 monks from Nitria to help defend the patriarch. During these years there were many such riots and battles. Cyril was able to honor martyers and he attempted to keep the peace the best he could.
It also seems, due to a lack of communication with Rome, he was a qersecutor of St. Chrysostom and refused to insert his name in the diptychs of his Church untill he later yielded.
He also took a stand against Antiochene Nestorius who became patriarch of Constantinople. It seems he had some heretical teachings; however, the Pope did not take sides of eather when Nestorius wrote to him. It seems the Pope did have a great deal of respect for Cyril due to him being the first prelate of the East and inheritor of the Athanasius and Pter traditions...
As a Theologian:
The principal fame of St. Cyril rests upon his defence of Catholic doctrine against Nestorius. He wished, against Apollinarius, to teach that Christ was a perfect man, and he took the denial of a human personality in Our Lord to imply an Apollinarian incompleteness in His Human Nature. The union of the human and the Divine natures was therefore to Nestorius an unspeakably close junction, but not a union in one hypostasis. St. Cyril taught the personal, or hypostatic, union in the plainest terms; and when his writings are surveyed as a whole, it becomes certain that he always held the true view, that the one Christ has two perfect and distinct natures, Divine and human. But he would not admit two physeis in Christ, because he took physis to imply not merely a nature but a subsistent (i.e. personal) nature. His opponents misrepresented him as teaching that the Divine person suffered, in His human nature; and he was constantly accused of Apollinarianism. On the other hand, after his death Monophysitism was founded upon a misinterpretation of his teaching. Especially unfortunate was the formula "one nature incarnate of God the Word" (mia physis tou Theou Logou sesarkomene), which he took from a treatise on the Incarnation which he believed to be by his great predecessor St. Athanasius. By this phrase he intended simply to emphasize against Nestorius the unity of Christ's Person; but the words in fact expressed equally the single Nature taught by Eutyches and by his own successor Diascurus. He brings out admirably the necessity of the full doctrine of the humanity to God, to explain the scheme of the redemption of man. He argues that the flesh of Christ is truly the flesh of God, in that it is life-giving in the Holy Eucharist. In the richness and depth of his philosophical and devotional treatment of the Incarnation we recognize the disciple of Athanasius. But the precision of his language, and perhaps of his thought also, is very far behind that which St. Leo developed a few years after Cyril's death.
His writings
The exegetical works of St. Cyril are very numerous. The seventeen books "On Adoration in Spirit and in Truth" are an exposition of the typical and spiritual nature of the Old Law. The Glaphyra or "brilliant", Commentaries on Pentateuch are of the same nature. Long explanations of Isaias and of the minor Prophets give a mystical interpretation after the Alexandrian manner. Only fragments are extant of other works on the Old Testament, as well as of expositions of Matthew, Luke, and some of the Epistles, but of that of St. Luke much is preserved in a Syriac version. Of St. Cyril's sermons and letters the most interesting are those which concern the Nestorian controversy. Of a great apologetic work in the twenty books against Julian the Apostate ten books remain. Among his theological treatises we have two large works and one small one on the Holy Trinity, and a number of treatises and tracts belonging to the Nestorian controversy.
The first collected edition of St. Cyril's works was by J. Aubert, 7 vols., Paris, 1638; several earlier editions of some portions in Latin only are enumerated by Fabricius. Cardinal Mai added more material in the second and third volumes of his "Bibliotheca nova Patrum", II-III, 1852; this is incorporated, together with much matter from the Catenæ published by Ghislerius (1633), Corderius, Possinus, and Cranor (1838), in Migne's reprint of Aubert's edition (P.G. LXVIII-LXVII, Paris, 1864). Better editions of single works include P. E. Pusey, "Cyrilli Alex. Epistolae tres oecumenicae, libri V c. Nestorium, XII capitum explanatio, XII capitum defensio utraque scholia de Incarnatione Unigeniti" (Oxford, 1875); "De recta fide ad principissas de recta fide ad Augustas, quad unus Christus, dialogus apologeticus ad Imp." (Oxford, 1877); "Cyrilli Alex. in XII Prophetas" (Oxford, 1868, 2 vols.); "In divi Joannis Evangelium" (Oxford, 1872, 3 vols., including the fragments on the Epistles). "Three Epistles, with revised text and English translation" (Oxford, 1872); translations in the Oxford "Library of the Fathers"; "Commentary on St. John", I (1874), II (1885); Five tomes against Nestorius" (1881); R. Payne Smith, "S. Cyrilli Alex. Comm. in Lucae evang. quae supersunt Syriace e manuscripts apud Mus. Brit." (Oxford, 1858); the same translated into English (Oxford, 1859, 2 vols.); W. Wright, "Fragments of the Homilies of Cyril of Alex. on St. Luke, edited from a Nitrian manuscript" (London, 1874); J. H. Bernard, "On Some Fragments of an Uncial manuscript of St. Cyril of Alex. Written on Papyrus" (Trans. of R. Irish Acad., XXIX, 18, Dublin, 1892); "Cyrilli Alex. librorum c. Julianum fragmenta syriaca:, ed. E. Nestle etc. in "Scriptorum grecorum, qui Christianam impugnaverunt religionem", fasc. III (Leipzig, 1880). Fragments of the "Liber Thesaurorum" in Pitra, "Analecta sacra et class.", I (Paris, 1888).
(for the full background please read the artical)
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Wendy Shalit
In the last post I was telling about a book I was reading. Well the author has a blog so now you can see more by Shalit BTW the link will be permanently over to the right!
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Too much
Ok, as many of you reading know, I do not post information about my personal life; however, here is one post that breaks the trend....
I have a theory! Now please understand this is again just based on my personal experiances.
I am reading A Return to Modesty by Shalit and it stated that girls in the 90's experianced more sexual harassment and more direct harassment than what occured in the 50's. This reminded me about the fact that I mentioned in High School that I would not know what sexual harassment was if it hit me in the face. I grew up with the idea that it was OK to touch members of the opposit sex. In fact I would regularly sit on my friends' laps (mainly guys) and also wrestle with them. This was normal everyday events for me. I thought it was funny because everyone else did, and if no one tells you or acts like something is wrong then it must be ok... or so I thought.
It seems sad to me that we become SO unsensitized to bad things occuring all around us. We feel it is normal to treat humans as eye candy. In fact, we dress so people DO treat us this way! Girls wearing shorts that are shorter than some people's underware, guys forgoing shirts to show off chests, and girls almost forgoing shrits for the same. It seems we feel the more flesh we show the more desireable we become. However, the only people we are attracting are people we more than likly do not want. Then we do things with them that are not a good idea; however, we do it anyway because it is what we THINK we are suposed to do. The sexual encounters are more common than playing tag anymore! Middle school girls getting pregnet, in fact I know a boy who has been active since he was like 11 or 12! Why is this occuring in our sociaty?
I am starting to think it is because sexual contact is all we see, we think there is nothing else avalible. I noted that even children's shows have little kids (3-6 years of age) claiming and proclaiming they have "boyfriends" or "girlfriends". At least they ALWAYS have a love interest! I think this should be STOPPED. Though I have not always felt this way.
My background may be a bit confused because I was sexually molested when I was quite young, this tends to change the sexual perspecitve; however, it should not have changed it THIS much! My mother was very open about sex and that it was normal to have. There was talk that I should wait till I was married; however, she never really could tell me why. She did not wait and she was living with a man she was unmarried and had 2 kids by him. What they could tell me is that it was wrong to "sleep" next to someone that you were not married to (they did/do not share a bed). This was strange to me.
Anyway... my first encounter was with my first real boyfriend. He said he wanted it and I wanted to give him something "good" so I decided that i would give him my body. When we broke up he told me this decision had been the sole thing that destroyed our relationship! So the next guy I tried even harder to "keep him satisifed" because all of the married women I worked with told me that was the most important thing in a relationship. Well we broke up... What a suprise! Now I know why these relationships did not work and why they could not have worked! Man I am GREAT at messing things up. Though it was not because I wanted to destroy the relationships, it was because I did not know there was anything better.
I did learn that sex was not the answer; however, I feel once you say yes one time it seems a bit off to say no the next. I am trying to teach myself that it is OK to say no. I feel like an after school special... that is not so special. I pray that one day I can learn to overcome my eary teachings that sex is as necessary as air, and I hope I can deprogram myself to beable to stand up for what is pure, right, and Holy!
I have a theory! Now please understand this is again just based on my personal experiances.
I am reading A Return to Modesty by Shalit and it stated that girls in the 90's experianced more sexual harassment and more direct harassment than what occured in the 50's. This reminded me about the fact that I mentioned in High School that I would not know what sexual harassment was if it hit me in the face. I grew up with the idea that it was OK to touch members of the opposit sex. In fact I would regularly sit on my friends' laps (mainly guys) and also wrestle with them. This was normal everyday events for me. I thought it was funny because everyone else did, and if no one tells you or acts like something is wrong then it must be ok... or so I thought.
It seems sad to me that we become SO unsensitized to bad things occuring all around us. We feel it is normal to treat humans as eye candy. In fact, we dress so people DO treat us this way! Girls wearing shorts that are shorter than some people's underware, guys forgoing shirts to show off chests, and girls almost forgoing shrits for the same. It seems we feel the more flesh we show the more desireable we become. However, the only people we are attracting are people we more than likly do not want. Then we do things with them that are not a good idea; however, we do it anyway because it is what we THINK we are suposed to do. The sexual encounters are more common than playing tag anymore! Middle school girls getting pregnet, in fact I know a boy who has been active since he was like 11 or 12! Why is this occuring in our sociaty?
I am starting to think it is because sexual contact is all we see, we think there is nothing else avalible. I noted that even children's shows have little kids (3-6 years of age) claiming and proclaiming they have "boyfriends" or "girlfriends". At least they ALWAYS have a love interest! I think this should be STOPPED. Though I have not always felt this way.
My background may be a bit confused because I was sexually molested when I was quite young, this tends to change the sexual perspecitve; however, it should not have changed it THIS much! My mother was very open about sex and that it was normal to have. There was talk that I should wait till I was married; however, she never really could tell me why. She did not wait and she was living with a man she was unmarried and had 2 kids by him. What they could tell me is that it was wrong to "sleep" next to someone that you were not married to (they did/do not share a bed). This was strange to me.
Anyway... my first encounter was with my first real boyfriend. He said he wanted it and I wanted to give him something "good" so I decided that i would give him my body. When we broke up he told me this decision had been the sole thing that destroyed our relationship! So the next guy I tried even harder to "keep him satisifed" because all of the married women I worked with told me that was the most important thing in a relationship. Well we broke up... What a suprise! Now I know why these relationships did not work and why they could not have worked! Man I am GREAT at messing things up. Though it was not because I wanted to destroy the relationships, it was because I did not know there was anything better.
I did learn that sex was not the answer; however, I feel once you say yes one time it seems a bit off to say no the next. I am trying to teach myself that it is OK to say no. I feel like an after school special... that is not so special. I pray that one day I can learn to overcome my eary teachings that sex is as necessary as air, and I hope I can deprogram myself to beable to stand up for what is pure, right, and Holy!
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Selling Your Self
What happens when you sell yourself and no one wants you?
Put yourself on the line, emotions, time and effort
In return you get a thank-you and a smile
Not enough money to pay your bills
Wait, don't cry you will look weak!
What happens when you sell yourself and no one wants you?
There will always be people who are better
They are looking for experiance you do not have
Looking for the impossible from you.
What happens when you sell yourself and no one wants you?
Words they use attempt to build you up
What they say distroys you
What happens when you sell yourself and no one wants you?
You stand strong, dry your eyes, and smile...
Put yourself on the line, emotions, time and effort
In return you get a thank-you and a smile
Not enough money to pay your bills
Wait, don't cry you will look weak!
What happens when you sell yourself and no one wants you?
There will always be people who are better
They are looking for experiance you do not have
Looking for the impossible from you.
What happens when you sell yourself and no one wants you?
Words they use attempt to build you up
What they say distroys you
What happens when you sell yourself and no one wants you?
You stand strong, dry your eyes, and smile...
Monday, June 11, 2007
TeamLeader Position
Hey for all those following, I did not get the teamleader position. He did say I was extreamly impressive in my interviews and with my resume, referal letters, and exc so I should apply for other positions as they come avalible!
Pray for me to keep my head up and tears out of my eyes...
Pray for me to keep my head up and tears out of my eyes...
Friday, June 08, 2007
Life is Good!!!
Ok, as you know a few days ago (Please Pray for Me) I was not doing so well. However now I am better!
OK, I am done with my second interview!!! It went really well!!!!!!!!!!!!! I found out that I SO impressed someone over the phone that they sent a thank-you letter or something like that to the agency whos contract I work on! So the guy who is doing the interviews was just told this week that I am SUPER worker by the people who hold our contract! I am so very excited. And to be told that during an interview makes me feel really good about the interview.
I KNOW this position is mine, and even if it is not, I should be getting a reward for this call!
Oh, and the interviewer mentioned he was impressed with the fact that I took so much care to get reference letters and examples of my work. This showed him that I was very interested in the job and a good canidate! Let us see how this turns out.
I will know Monday if I got it or not. I will post the results....
OK, I am done with my second interview!!! It went really well!!!!!!!!!!!!! I found out that I SO impressed someone over the phone that they sent a thank-you letter or something like that to the agency whos contract I work on! So the guy who is doing the interviews was just told this week that I am SUPER worker by the people who hold our contract! I am so very excited. And to be told that during an interview makes me feel really good about the interview.
I KNOW this position is mine, and even if it is not, I should be getting a reward for this call!
Oh, and the interviewer mentioned he was impressed with the fact that I took so much care to get reference letters and examples of my work. This showed him that I was very interested in the job and a good canidate! Let us see how this turns out.
I will know Monday if I got it or not. I will post the results....
Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
I was talking to a friend (Hi John) about Sheen and I thought he had been beatified; however, as always John was correct in thinking that only his cause has been opened and he is clasified as a Servant of God.
Here is some info on his life...
A Brief Biographical Sketch
1895–Born on May 8th in El Paso, Illinois, Archbishop Sheen was the eldest of the four sons of Newton and Delia Fulton Sheen. Though he was baptized Peter John, throughout his life he was known by his mother’s maiden name, Fulton. After his baptism, his mother dedicated him to the Blessed Virgin Mary, a dedication he himself renewed at his First Holy Communion. He lived with his family for a time on a farm outside of Peoria, Illinois.
1900–His family moved to Peoria in order that young Fulton could enroll in St. Mary’s Cathedral [Parochial] School. He often served at Mass at the Cathedral.
1909–He attended High School at the Spalding Institute in Peoria staffed by the Brothers of Mary.
1917–He attended St. Viator’s College in Bourbonnais, Illinois, and later at St. Paul’s Seminary in St. Paul, Minnesota.
1919–On September 20th, Fulton Sheen was ordained a “Priest forever” for the Diocese of Peoria. At the time of his Priestly Ordination, he made his famous promise to make a daily Eucharistic Holy Hour, which he kept faithfully for the rest of his life.
1920–After ordination, he began two years of postgraduate studies in Theology at the Catholic University in Washington D.C., and another year at the University of Louvain in Belgium.
1923–He attended further theological classes at the Sorbonne in Paris and the Angelicum in Rome.
1923–He returned to the University of Louvain where he became the first American to receive the Cardinal Mercier Prize for International Philosophy as well as attaining the Aggrage degree with outstanding distinction.
1925–He spent 9 months working in St. Patrick’s, an inner city parish in Peoria.
1926–He began teaching Theology, then Philosophy and Religion at Catholic University in Washington DC. He was to remain there until 1950. He also began local radio broadcasting in the New York area.
1930–He began his national radio broadcast, The Catholic Hour, which continued for some 22 years, reaching an estimated four million listeners.
1934–He became a Very Reverand Monsignor.
1935–He became Right Reverend Monsignor.
1950–He become the National Director of the Society for the Propagation of the Faith, supervising 129 diocesan directors throughout the country. He held this position until 1966.
1951–He was consecrated a Bishop in Rome by Cardinal Piazza in the Church of Saints John & Paul on June 11, 1951. In the Fall of 1951 he began his famous television series entitled, Life is Worth Living. It eventually reached an estimated 30 million viewers each week. He won an Emmy Award for Most Outstanding Television Personality in 1952. His series ran with great success until 1957.
1962–He attended all of the Vatican Council sessions in Rome, ending in 1965.
1966–He was named Bishop of the Diocese of Rochester, New York on October 26th.
1969–He resigned as Bishop of Rochester. As he said, “I am not retiring, only retreading.” Pope Paul VI named him Archbishop of the Titular See of Newport (Wales). The Archbishop remained relatively active, spending the last years of his life chiefly in writing and preaching.
1979–On October 3rd, the Archbishop experienced one of the greatest moments of his life when Pope John Paul II embraced him in St. Patrick’s Cathedral. The Holy Father said to him, “You have written and spoken well of the Lord Jesus. You are a loyal son of the Church!” On December 9th God called the Archbishop from this life to his eternal reward.
2002–On September 14th, the Congregation for the Causes of Saints officially opened the Cause of Archbishop Sheen, and conferred on him the title Servant of God.
2006 - Two packages containing documentation of two alleged miracles attributed to Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen were sent to Rome where a panel of theologians, priests and doctors will further examine the documents to verify that the alleged miracles were indeed authentic.
http://www.archbishopsheencause.org/bio.html
Here is some info on his life...
A Brief Biographical Sketch
1895–Born on May 8th in El Paso, Illinois, Archbishop Sheen was the eldest of the four sons of Newton and Delia Fulton Sheen. Though he was baptized Peter John, throughout his life he was known by his mother’s maiden name, Fulton. After his baptism, his mother dedicated him to the Blessed Virgin Mary, a dedication he himself renewed at his First Holy Communion. He lived with his family for a time on a farm outside of Peoria, Illinois.
1900–His family moved to Peoria in order that young Fulton could enroll in St. Mary’s Cathedral [Parochial] School. He often served at Mass at the Cathedral.
1909–He attended High School at the Spalding Institute in Peoria staffed by the Brothers of Mary.
1917–He attended St. Viator’s College in Bourbonnais, Illinois, and later at St. Paul’s Seminary in St. Paul, Minnesota.
1919–On September 20th, Fulton Sheen was ordained a “Priest forever” for the Diocese of Peoria. At the time of his Priestly Ordination, he made his famous promise to make a daily Eucharistic Holy Hour, which he kept faithfully for the rest of his life.
1920–After ordination, he began two years of postgraduate studies in Theology at the Catholic University in Washington D.C., and another year at the University of Louvain in Belgium.
1923–He attended further theological classes at the Sorbonne in Paris and the Angelicum in Rome.
1923–He returned to the University of Louvain where he became the first American to receive the Cardinal Mercier Prize for International Philosophy as well as attaining the Aggrage degree with outstanding distinction.
1925–He spent 9 months working in St. Patrick’s, an inner city parish in Peoria.
1926–He began teaching Theology, then Philosophy and Religion at Catholic University in Washington DC. He was to remain there until 1950. He also began local radio broadcasting in the New York area.
1930–He began his national radio broadcast, The Catholic Hour, which continued for some 22 years, reaching an estimated four million listeners.
1934–He became a Very Reverand Monsignor.
1935–He became Right Reverend Monsignor.
1950–He become the National Director of the Society for the Propagation of the Faith, supervising 129 diocesan directors throughout the country. He held this position until 1966.
1951–He was consecrated a Bishop in Rome by Cardinal Piazza in the Church of Saints John & Paul on June 11, 1951. In the Fall of 1951 he began his famous television series entitled, Life is Worth Living. It eventually reached an estimated 30 million viewers each week. He won an Emmy Award for Most Outstanding Television Personality in 1952. His series ran with great success until 1957.
1962–He attended all of the Vatican Council sessions in Rome, ending in 1965.
1966–He was named Bishop of the Diocese of Rochester, New York on October 26th.
1969–He resigned as Bishop of Rochester. As he said, “I am not retiring, only retreading.” Pope Paul VI named him Archbishop of the Titular See of Newport (Wales). The Archbishop remained relatively active, spending the last years of his life chiefly in writing and preaching.
1979–On October 3rd, the Archbishop experienced one of the greatest moments of his life when Pope John Paul II embraced him in St. Patrick’s Cathedral. The Holy Father said to him, “You have written and spoken well of the Lord Jesus. You are a loyal son of the Church!” On December 9th God called the Archbishop from this life to his eternal reward.
2002–On September 14th, the Congregation for the Causes of Saints officially opened the Cause of Archbishop Sheen, and conferred on him the title Servant of God.
2006 - Two packages containing documentation of two alleged miracles attributed to Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen were sent to Rome where a panel of theologians, priests and doctors will further examine the documents to verify that the alleged miracles were indeed authentic.
http://www.archbishopsheencause.org/bio.html
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Reclaim the supernatural
The loss of the sense of the supernaturalhelps to explain the declineof the Catholic Church since Vatican Council II.
Reclaim the supernatural
By Alice von Hildebrand
There is a very simple explanation for the devastation which has taken place in the Roman Catholic Church in the wake of Vatican II: THE LOSS OF THE SENSE OF THE SUPERNATURAL.
No doubt, this collapse was preceded by a steady erosion of this sense, an erosion which started at the time of the Renaissance. The first step was to limit one’s allegiance to the Church to lip service. Gradually this double-minded attitude (that is, keep a good conscience while divorcing the holy teaching of the Church frm one’s life) led to the temptation of watering down the divine message to make it more “palatable” to man’s fallen nature (according to Kierkegaard, this means “changing wine into water”). The next step was to praise the supernatural for purely naturalistic reasons: saints are acclaimed for their “efficiency” and Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Ted Turner are praised in the same breath!). Once on this downside slope, it is easy to fall into the temptation of placing nature over supernature. (A doctorate is more highly regarded than the priesthood). The road is now free for a total collapse of the divine message. Once the supernatural has been eliminated, it is logical that priests, monks and nuns should abandon religious life, and devote their time and energy to secularistic pursuits: to yoke themselves to the “wheel of human progress,” loaded with the rich promise of creating an earthly paradise here and now.
Not so long ago, I heard a nun proclaim that the most saintly priest she had met in her life was her father. I hardly had time to catch my breath to figure out how this was possible, when she volunteered the answer: “he had such a strong social sense.” Indeed, if a priest is only a social worker, seminaries should close. If there is no supernatural, religious life with its vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, becomes meaningless. Why submit oneself in obedience to a superior who has no doctorate, no diploma in the social sciences, no publication to his credit when one is endowed with all these admirable qualities! This is secularistic logic at its best.
Should we wonder that since the close of Vatican II many priests got married — oftentimes with ex-nuns gleefully liberated from “burdensome and crippling vows” which prevented them from being “fulfilled.”
In the sixties, the Catholic landscape reminded one of a piece of land devastated by a tornado.
But in the course of the last ten years, the invincible power of the supernatural has, once again, manifested itself. Father Benedict Groeschel stated in one of his programs at EWTN that in the course of the last ten years, an amazing number of new religious orders have sprung within the Church. Whereas many “old” orders are declining to the point of extinction, (the punishment meted to those who practice “spiritual birthcontrol”), these new foundations blossom at a surprising pace. In a short span of time, they double, triple and quadruple. What is their secret?
They have re-introduced the supernatural: this divine “intrusion” into the natural order, which is so sublime that it could never have been invented by man. The transforming power of the sacraments, the blessedness of the Eucharist, the incredible gift of the sacrament of Confession — “go in peace, they sins are forgiven thee” — are once again, showing their holy vitality. The havoc introduced in the liturgy — the horrible music (if it can be called music at all), the banality of the homilies are — in many places — being replaced by RELIGIOUS services in which the sacred is prominent. Let me mention the Parish of St. John Cantius in Chicago which was “defunct” ten years ago, and is now flourishing: the Latin Mass, (Novus Ordo), has been introduced, followed by the Tridentine Mass with Gregorian chant, and Masses of Mozart and Haydn). Women are not permitted to come to Mass immodestly dressed. There are long lines of parishioners waiting at the Confessional. The sacred is prominent: “Terribilis est locus iste; hic domus Dei est, et porta coeli” (This place is awesome; it is God’s house and the door of heaven).
The young generation has been starved, and as soon as they discover the beauty of the liturgy, the sublimity of Gregorian chant, the enriching silence that should reign in places of worship (which oftentimes remind one of convention centers), they flock there, gratefully, bringing their young children with them. God is re-conquering his Church. The battle is not over, but any one of good will must acknowledge that in the wake of Vatican II the church (with a small c) has deviated from the path of truth and peace.
Once the supernatural is lost sight of, the swarm of human imperfections will proliferate with vitality. “Menschlich, all zu menschlich” wrote Nietzsche. (Human, all too human). Let us briefly mention some of them (their name is legion).
The sublime vocation of the priesthood is a calling to give oneself totally and completely to Christ: to understand how great a privilege it is to be his servant, to do his will, to represent the Holy One at the altar, to give absolution to the sinners in His name. To become a priest because one comes from a modest background, and the priesthood is a sure way of ascending in the social scale, is an unworthy motive. Any wise spiritual director would turn down such “vocations.”
Alas, ambition is deeply rooted in one’s fallen nature, and it is a sheer illusion to believe that because one has a calling to the priesthood, one is ipso facto, liberated from this shackle. There are priests who hope to become a monsignor — a step that will possibly lead to being consecrated a bishop, and a bishop can potentially become a cardinal. The lives of saints testify to the fact that the true servants of God shun honors, and when they are offered to them, either turn them down (let us think of Don Bosco), or accept them under the cross. When the Holy Pius X was elected, — something which he dreaded — he said; “I accept under the cross.” (In his great work, The Republic, Plato already underlined the fact that the ruler worthy of this name is in no way anxious to take the reins of government in his hands). A holy priest is conscious of the fact that the greater the authority one receives, the greater one’s responsibility. St. Benedict writes in his Holy Rule: “Let the abbot remember always that at the dreadful judgment of God there will be an examination …. of his teaching and of the obedience of his disciples. And let the abbot realize that the shepherd will have to answer for any lack of profit which the Father of the family may discover in his sheep” (chap. 2).
These are words which anyone driven by ambition, should meditate upon. The responsibility of those in power is such that they justify the words of St. John Chrysostom who was troubled by the doubt whether any bishop could be saved” (quoted in Lowrie’s Kierkegaard, Vol. II, p. 53l, Harper, Torchbooks).
A simple test to determine whether one is happy to serve, or anxious to rule is the following: suppose that someone, hoping secretly to become a bishop, to become provincial or superior, to become president of a college, suffers a defeat. If his response is bitterness, rancor, it is luminously clear that the person in question was not supernaturally motivated. To be deigned to work in God’s vineyard, in whatever function, should be the only honor that one aspires to. A modest role, performed with love, glorifies God a lot more than a lofty position tainted by ambition (a form of pride). There the chasm separating the natural from the supernatural appears in all its depth. We only need think of the bitterness, the resentment, and sometime the rage of those defeated in politics, business or sports. All of us have seen tennis players hitting their racket upon the ground or shouting obscenities, because they are about to lose a match. If someone blessed with a supernatural attitude suffers a defeat — instead of ranting and raving, he will humbly examine whether this failure it is due to some fault of his: his rashness, his impatience, his lack of wisdom — and if the answer is positive, he will thank God for having opened his mind to this defect, and make the resolution to learn from his mistakes. He will say with the psalmist: “it is good for me that I was humiliated, that I might learn thy statutes” (Ps. 118: 71). If the defeat is due to injustice (a person is not elected because he takes a firm stand against abortion, or because he is not “politically correct”), this is something that God (for reasons that we shall perceive in eternity) has permitted. It should remind us that he can draw good out of evil, or wishes to grace us with the understanding that the servant should not be better treated than his Master who was flouted, rejected and spat upon. FROM A SUPERNATURAL POINT OF VIEW TO HUMBLY ACCEPT A DEFEAT CAN TURN OUT TO BE A RESOUNDING VICTORY, and glorify God in a unique fashion — much more than a victory which in ever so little a degree flatters one’s vanity. One’s attitude toward a defeat is a great test of one’s moral status. To let a defeat defeat one is the greatest defeat. Either to learn from a defeat, or to accept it with equanimity and composure is indicative of a soul that has real inner strength. History teaches one a great lesson: victories are not always beneficial to the victor. Oftentimes, it leads him to brashness, unhealthy self-assurance, and is the first step toward a future defeat. It is related in the life of the great Saint Ignatius that he once said that if his whole work in founding the Society of Jesus would collapse, it would not take him more than a quarter of an hour in front of the blessed sacrament to regain his peace. This is a sure sign of a supernatural spirit, of someone who knows that God is the master of history, and that not a single hair falls from our head without his permission.
Another sign that a “religious” person is not supernaturally motivated is if he allows a spirit of rivalry to penetrate into his work. There are persons who devote their lives to a noble cause, be it, for example, the fight against abortion. If such a person views this cause with a truly supernatural spirit, he will collaborate with any other organization fighting under the same flag. Unfortunately, there are cases in which such organizations develop a spirit of rivalry and actually denigrate one another to guarantee the predominance of their endeavor. Such “Menschlich, all zu menschlich” responses can, alas, also be found between religious orders, as if they were rival political factions, instead of working together in the same vineyard for the Kingdom of God. To ask which is the greatest order in the Church is an inane question; to assume that an order is necessarily greater because it has attracted a larger number of candidates is, once again, to take a secularistic yardstick, instead of adopting a supernatural outlook. How beautiful of St. Francis to call his order “fratres minimi,” to deflect the danger of spiritual pride. Each religious order, each lay religious organization can and will glorify God if its members are supernaturally motivated. Each one of them is called upon to play an instrument in the divine symphony, and no violin, sublime as the tones it produces may be, has a right to denigrate the trombone or the drum.
Man’s fallen nature faithfully accompanies him wherever he goes. This is why Saint Peter warns us that we should be vigilant. There are persons who give their time, energy and money to a worthy religious cause, but do so only if they are given a key position in the work, and if their merit is acknowledged. The very moment that they are replaced by someone else (let us assume that this replacement is justified), they become bitter, and refuse to collaborate in a lesser capacity. Misreading the sublime words of St. John the Baptist: “May He increase, and I decrease,” they are saying; “May he increase, and I with him.” Like Caesar, they prefer to be number one in a village than number two in Rome. They crave for the limelight and are allergic to being in the shade. From a supernatural point of view, it should be a matter of complete indifference whether another person or myself succeeds in accomplishing a task which glorifies God. “Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam” (Not to us, O Lord, not to us, but to thy name give glory [Ps. ll5-1]).
There are even cases of people so convinced that their work is of crucial importance to the Church, so sure that they have the mission of saving the Church, that they refuse to acknowledge that other missionary works have any importance at all. To put it very bluntly, there are people so completely devoted to their work for the blind that they feel justified in being ruthless to the deaf.
The list of possible religious aberrations is long. What has been said should suffice to warn us how crucial it is to beg God for the grace to be animated by His spirit, and to acknowledge humbly that “without Him, we can do nothing.” This is the spirit which — in spite of human frailty and imperfection — has kept the Holy Catholic Church on even keel for two thousand years. Let us pray that it may reconquer the hardened heart of modern man.
Reclaim the supernatural
By Alice von Hildebrand
There is a very simple explanation for the devastation which has taken place in the Roman Catholic Church in the wake of Vatican II: THE LOSS OF THE SENSE OF THE SUPERNATURAL.
No doubt, this collapse was preceded by a steady erosion of this sense, an erosion which started at the time of the Renaissance. The first step was to limit one’s allegiance to the Church to lip service. Gradually this double-minded attitude (that is, keep a good conscience while divorcing the holy teaching of the Church frm one’s life) led to the temptation of watering down the divine message to make it more “palatable” to man’s fallen nature (according to Kierkegaard, this means “changing wine into water”). The next step was to praise the supernatural for purely naturalistic reasons: saints are acclaimed for their “efficiency” and Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Ted Turner are praised in the same breath!). Once on this downside slope, it is easy to fall into the temptation of placing nature over supernature. (A doctorate is more highly regarded than the priesthood). The road is now free for a total collapse of the divine message. Once the supernatural has been eliminated, it is logical that priests, monks and nuns should abandon religious life, and devote their time and energy to secularistic pursuits: to yoke themselves to the “wheel of human progress,” loaded with the rich promise of creating an earthly paradise here and now.
Not so long ago, I heard a nun proclaim that the most saintly priest she had met in her life was her father. I hardly had time to catch my breath to figure out how this was possible, when she volunteered the answer: “he had such a strong social sense.” Indeed, if a priest is only a social worker, seminaries should close. If there is no supernatural, religious life with its vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, becomes meaningless. Why submit oneself in obedience to a superior who has no doctorate, no diploma in the social sciences, no publication to his credit when one is endowed with all these admirable qualities! This is secularistic logic at its best.
Should we wonder that since the close of Vatican II many priests got married — oftentimes with ex-nuns gleefully liberated from “burdensome and crippling vows” which prevented them from being “fulfilled.”
In the sixties, the Catholic landscape reminded one of a piece of land devastated by a tornado.
But in the course of the last ten years, the invincible power of the supernatural has, once again, manifested itself. Father Benedict Groeschel stated in one of his programs at EWTN that in the course of the last ten years, an amazing number of new religious orders have sprung within the Church. Whereas many “old” orders are declining to the point of extinction, (the punishment meted to those who practice “spiritual birthcontrol”), these new foundations blossom at a surprising pace. In a short span of time, they double, triple and quadruple. What is their secret?
They have re-introduced the supernatural: this divine “intrusion” into the natural order, which is so sublime that it could never have been invented by man. The transforming power of the sacraments, the blessedness of the Eucharist, the incredible gift of the sacrament of Confession — “go in peace, they sins are forgiven thee” — are once again, showing their holy vitality. The havoc introduced in the liturgy — the horrible music (if it can be called music at all), the banality of the homilies are — in many places — being replaced by RELIGIOUS services in which the sacred is prominent. Let me mention the Parish of St. John Cantius in Chicago which was “defunct” ten years ago, and is now flourishing: the Latin Mass, (Novus Ordo), has been introduced, followed by the Tridentine Mass with Gregorian chant, and Masses of Mozart and Haydn). Women are not permitted to come to Mass immodestly dressed. There are long lines of parishioners waiting at the Confessional. The sacred is prominent: “Terribilis est locus iste; hic domus Dei est, et porta coeli” (This place is awesome; it is God’s house and the door of heaven).
The young generation has been starved, and as soon as they discover the beauty of the liturgy, the sublimity of Gregorian chant, the enriching silence that should reign in places of worship (which oftentimes remind one of convention centers), they flock there, gratefully, bringing their young children with them. God is re-conquering his Church. The battle is not over, but any one of good will must acknowledge that in the wake of Vatican II the church (with a small c) has deviated from the path of truth and peace.
Once the supernatural is lost sight of, the swarm of human imperfections will proliferate with vitality. “Menschlich, all zu menschlich” wrote Nietzsche. (Human, all too human). Let us briefly mention some of them (their name is legion).
The sublime vocation of the priesthood is a calling to give oneself totally and completely to Christ: to understand how great a privilege it is to be his servant, to do his will, to represent the Holy One at the altar, to give absolution to the sinners in His name. To become a priest because one comes from a modest background, and the priesthood is a sure way of ascending in the social scale, is an unworthy motive. Any wise spiritual director would turn down such “vocations.”
Alas, ambition is deeply rooted in one’s fallen nature, and it is a sheer illusion to believe that because one has a calling to the priesthood, one is ipso facto, liberated from this shackle. There are priests who hope to become a monsignor — a step that will possibly lead to being consecrated a bishop, and a bishop can potentially become a cardinal. The lives of saints testify to the fact that the true servants of God shun honors, and when they are offered to them, either turn them down (let us think of Don Bosco), or accept them under the cross. When the Holy Pius X was elected, — something which he dreaded — he said; “I accept under the cross.” (In his great work, The Republic, Plato already underlined the fact that the ruler worthy of this name is in no way anxious to take the reins of government in his hands). A holy priest is conscious of the fact that the greater the authority one receives, the greater one’s responsibility. St. Benedict writes in his Holy Rule: “Let the abbot remember always that at the dreadful judgment of God there will be an examination …. of his teaching and of the obedience of his disciples. And let the abbot realize that the shepherd will have to answer for any lack of profit which the Father of the family may discover in his sheep” (chap. 2).
These are words which anyone driven by ambition, should meditate upon. The responsibility of those in power is such that they justify the words of St. John Chrysostom who was troubled by the doubt whether any bishop could be saved” (quoted in Lowrie’s Kierkegaard, Vol. II, p. 53l, Harper, Torchbooks).
A simple test to determine whether one is happy to serve, or anxious to rule is the following: suppose that someone, hoping secretly to become a bishop, to become provincial or superior, to become president of a college, suffers a defeat. If his response is bitterness, rancor, it is luminously clear that the person in question was not supernaturally motivated. To be deigned to work in God’s vineyard, in whatever function, should be the only honor that one aspires to. A modest role, performed with love, glorifies God a lot more than a lofty position tainted by ambition (a form of pride). There the chasm separating the natural from the supernatural appears in all its depth. We only need think of the bitterness, the resentment, and sometime the rage of those defeated in politics, business or sports. All of us have seen tennis players hitting their racket upon the ground or shouting obscenities, because they are about to lose a match. If someone blessed with a supernatural attitude suffers a defeat — instead of ranting and raving, he will humbly examine whether this failure it is due to some fault of his: his rashness, his impatience, his lack of wisdom — and if the answer is positive, he will thank God for having opened his mind to this defect, and make the resolution to learn from his mistakes. He will say with the psalmist: “it is good for me that I was humiliated, that I might learn thy statutes” (Ps. 118: 71). If the defeat is due to injustice (a person is not elected because he takes a firm stand against abortion, or because he is not “politically correct”), this is something that God (for reasons that we shall perceive in eternity) has permitted. It should remind us that he can draw good out of evil, or wishes to grace us with the understanding that the servant should not be better treated than his Master who was flouted, rejected and spat upon. FROM A SUPERNATURAL POINT OF VIEW TO HUMBLY ACCEPT A DEFEAT CAN TURN OUT TO BE A RESOUNDING VICTORY, and glorify God in a unique fashion — much more than a victory which in ever so little a degree flatters one’s vanity. One’s attitude toward a defeat is a great test of one’s moral status. To let a defeat defeat one is the greatest defeat. Either to learn from a defeat, or to accept it with equanimity and composure is indicative of a soul that has real inner strength. History teaches one a great lesson: victories are not always beneficial to the victor. Oftentimes, it leads him to brashness, unhealthy self-assurance, and is the first step toward a future defeat. It is related in the life of the great Saint Ignatius that he once said that if his whole work in founding the Society of Jesus would collapse, it would not take him more than a quarter of an hour in front of the blessed sacrament to regain his peace. This is a sure sign of a supernatural spirit, of someone who knows that God is the master of history, and that not a single hair falls from our head without his permission.
Another sign that a “religious” person is not supernaturally motivated is if he allows a spirit of rivalry to penetrate into his work. There are persons who devote their lives to a noble cause, be it, for example, the fight against abortion. If such a person views this cause with a truly supernatural spirit, he will collaborate with any other organization fighting under the same flag. Unfortunately, there are cases in which such organizations develop a spirit of rivalry and actually denigrate one another to guarantee the predominance of their endeavor. Such “Menschlich, all zu menschlich” responses can, alas, also be found between religious orders, as if they were rival political factions, instead of working together in the same vineyard for the Kingdom of God. To ask which is the greatest order in the Church is an inane question; to assume that an order is necessarily greater because it has attracted a larger number of candidates is, once again, to take a secularistic yardstick, instead of adopting a supernatural outlook. How beautiful of St. Francis to call his order “fratres minimi,” to deflect the danger of spiritual pride. Each religious order, each lay religious organization can and will glorify God if its members are supernaturally motivated. Each one of them is called upon to play an instrument in the divine symphony, and no violin, sublime as the tones it produces may be, has a right to denigrate the trombone or the drum.
Man’s fallen nature faithfully accompanies him wherever he goes. This is why Saint Peter warns us that we should be vigilant. There are persons who give their time, energy and money to a worthy religious cause, but do so only if they are given a key position in the work, and if their merit is acknowledged. The very moment that they are replaced by someone else (let us assume that this replacement is justified), they become bitter, and refuse to collaborate in a lesser capacity. Misreading the sublime words of St. John the Baptist: “May He increase, and I decrease,” they are saying; “May he increase, and I with him.” Like Caesar, they prefer to be number one in a village than number two in Rome. They crave for the limelight and are allergic to being in the shade. From a supernatural point of view, it should be a matter of complete indifference whether another person or myself succeeds in accomplishing a task which glorifies God. “Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam” (Not to us, O Lord, not to us, but to thy name give glory [Ps. ll5-1]).
There are even cases of people so convinced that their work is of crucial importance to the Church, so sure that they have the mission of saving the Church, that they refuse to acknowledge that other missionary works have any importance at all. To put it very bluntly, there are people so completely devoted to their work for the blind that they feel justified in being ruthless to the deaf.
The list of possible religious aberrations is long. What has been said should suffice to warn us how crucial it is to beg God for the grace to be animated by His spirit, and to acknowledge humbly that “without Him, we can do nothing.” This is the spirit which — in spite of human frailty and imperfection — has kept the Holy Catholic Church on even keel for two thousand years. Let us pray that it may reconquer the hardened heart of modern man.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Contraception and the Trivialization of Sex Part 4 of 4
Trivial Pursuit
Contracepting the natural end of sexual union and deconstructing its basic nature should leave people not with an exhilarating sense of freedom, but a disturbing sense of meaninglessness. What would the meaning of eating be in the absence of both hunger and nourishment, and the presence of mere will? Dr. Ruth Westheimer, the popular sex education “expert” enjoins people to have “good sex.” But all she means by this maxim is high-powered sexual performance. Where does this leave those who are less than sexually athletic? Love, the nature of the relationship, and its respect for God’s plan are all neatly factored out of the equation. The performance is the thing. But is this not the ultimate trivialization of sex? If you get a good swing at a baseball late in the game when your team is down by 15 runs, is the swing of any importance? Bereft of context, drama, and meaning, is it even worth the effort? Other observers of the sex scene were not blind to the fact that what some commentators were calling “liberation,” more closely approximated “trivialization.” Accordingly, author Gavin Reid notes:
“Copulation-centered thought about human sexuality seeks, in the name of liberation, to turn us into sexual virtuosos. ‘So and so,’ we hear people say, ‘is good in bed.’ Skill in love-making is extremely important to acquire, but when we make it an end in itself and remove the spiritual and total commitment aspects, we relegate sex to the same level as ‘she plays a good hand of bridge’ or “he plays a good round of golf.’”
The attempt to maximize sex as an end in itself leads logically to its ultimate trivialization, or dissociation from any overriding importance. But if all the importance of sex is compressed into how well it is performed, the inevitable outcome of many people will be what psychologists refer to as “performance anxiety.” Impotence and sexual anorexia are also the byproducts of too much emphasis on performance. Sex will be joyful, rather than jaded, when it is accompanied by a rich context of natural and human meanings.
Germain Greer, who once exhorted women to revel in their sexuality, after closely scrutinizing the casualties of the contraceptive revolution, now warns her followers that sex has degenerated into a social gesture that is as trivial as a handshake. She claims that contraceptive technology, instead of liberating women, has turned them into geishas who risk health and fertility in order to be readily available for meaningless sex. Taking the pill, says Greer, is like “using a steamroller to crush a frog,” and the intrauterine device turns the womb into a “poisonous abattoir.” A teenage girl with a packet of pills in her purse and a copy of The Joy of Sex on her bookshelf is a pitiable creature, according to Greer’s new perspective.
Betty Friedan, America’s elder stateswoman of feminism, also began singing a different tune to her legion of followers in a book she wrote 18 years after The Feminine Mystique. Having witnessed the negative side of contraception’s legacy of “sexual freedom,” she used The Second Stage to preach the importance of the family, an institution toward which feminists had been “strangely blind.” She notes that after two decades of the women’s movement, too many women are facing economic misery as a result of divorce and are devalued in the workplace “and sometimes even replaced by other women who got into the men’s world and sometimes took away their husbands.” The Second Stage redirects the meaning of sex to bolster the relationship between husband and wife so that they are better prepared to be good fathers and mothers. The family, she declares, “is the nutrient of our personhood.”
Trying to maximize sexual pleasure would rule out the possibility of ecstasy because the partners are too preoccupied with their own individual satisfactions. In his insightful critique of modern secularism, Chance or the Dance?, Thomas Howard argues that the void of meaning that plagues the modern world makes ecstasy virtually impossible. The myth sovereign in the old order, he writes, was that each thing means everything. The meaning of the sexual act, surely, was not restricted to the mere experience of the act by its performers. Accordingly, “a man went into a woman in private and uncovered her and knew ecstasy in the experience of her being.” The myth sovereign in the new order is that “nothing means anything.” In the new order, we are fragmented, isolated, abandoned, and bereft of ecstasy, despite the exponential multiplication of sex manuals and self-help books.
We are creatures who are made for meaning. The shades of boredom quickly descend on the artificial womb that we fabricate out of comfort and security. And what is boredom but the void that results when the union of love and life is no longer present?
To humanize sex is to give it its fullness, both with regard to space and time. Sex involves love, life, God, and community; it also has implications of commitment, responsibility, and permanence. Contraception prevents sex from being everything it can and should be. But it also devalues what it excludes, making the process of restoring the integrity of sexual union most difficult. The danger is that sexual union will be perceived as trivial in its essence. Advocates of contraception initially wanted to improve love-making between spouses. That early optimism is nearly moribund at present. We need to recover something of that optimism, but restore sexual union to its proper human quality, not through technology, but through respecting the values that are inherent in human sexuality.
Donald DeMarco is a regular columnist for Lay Witness. This article was condensed because of space limitations. For the entire text, call CUF toll-free at (800) MY-FAITH (693-2484).
http://www.cuf.org/LayWitness/online_view.asp?lwID=670
Ok, there is the end of this artical... any thoughts?
Sunday, June 03, 2007
Contraception and the Trivialization of Sex Part 3 of 4
That’s Preposterous!
The common usage meaning of the word “preposterous” refers to something that is contrary to nature, or absurd. Its etymology offers an important additional insight to this meaning. Derived from the Latin words prae (before) and posterius (after), it literally means putting before that which comes after. Preposterousness, then, has to do with a change in order. It is, so to speak, putting the cart before the horse, or bolting the barn door after the animals have escaped.
Preposterousness in the moral domain has a particularly important ramification. When something that should be first is placed second, that which should be first is not simply demeaned, but is in danger of being either lost or rejected. Placing man ahead of God initially demeans religion, but, as history has shown, leads to a rejection of God. A person who places money above honesty will soon become dishonest. If spouses do not subordinate themselves to each other (cf. Eph. 5:21), their marriage is heading for a separation or divorce.
The great problem in placing the secondary end of sexual intercourse first is the likelihood that procreation will be demeaned initially and subsequently rejected. But, in addition to this, the meaning of lovemaking would have to be reinvented. Such recreation would inevitably be arbitrary and therefore subject to a distorted and possibly even perverse interpretation.
The Russian existentialist Nikolai Berdyaev had some insight into this problem when he argued, “If there were no childbearing, sexual union would degenerate into debauchery.” In hindsight, one must acknowledge that these points are well taken. While many have welcomed the “freedom” that contraception offers spouses, they have also recognized a need to restore some measure of nobility and romanticism to the sexual act. As the surrealist painter, Salvador Dali, once told a Time reporter, “The only way to make love is as a sacrament.”
Contraception signals the separation of love-making from baby-making. One is left to wonder about the deeper levels of fragmentation that may result.
Man is a meaning-oriented creature far more than he is a pleasureseeker. There is no pleasure that man enjoys to which he will not ascribe some meaning. But the very notion of meaning implies a relationship or correspondence that goes beyond what a thing is in itself. For example, one is not satisfied in hearing a stream of words; one wants to know what meaning they convey. The activities within a baseball game are meaningful because they are subordinated to the goal of winning. It is the prospect of winning that gives the game its ultimate meaning, otherwise no one would bother to keep score.
Paul Tillich has pointed out that while the great anxiety of antiquity was death, and the chief anxiety of the Middle Ages was condemnation, the principal anxiety of the modern era is meaninglessness. This anxiety is a direct result of the fragmentation of the modern world and the preposterousness that results when the natural order of things is reversed. Unable to bear life in a meaningless world, people are compelled to invent meanings. Unfortunately, these fabricated meanings cannot offer real sustenance for human beings. They reduce everything to the status of a game. And while games can be refreshing diversions from the seriousness of life, they cannot nourish the inner spirit that seeks an answer to the question, “What is the meaning of life?” There is a hunger in all of us that inclines us to search for and be in love with wisdom. In his own self-indulgent way, Alex Comfort is right. The author of the mega-selling secular “bible” of sex, The Joy of Sex, holds that sex is the most important human sport. But Christopher Derrick is right when he says, “The case against Playboy and everything similar is that one’s attention is thereby fixed not upon sex, but upon sexual unreality.”
Fragmentation and preposterousness, therefore, lead to a flight from reality and a preoccupation with fantasy. Reality, of course, being the stronger force, will always be victorious when the two collide. On the dust jacket of a best-selling book that promotes the revolutionary potential of contraception, we find these words from a mortified young husband: “I married a lovely, sexy girl—then she turned into someone’s mother.”
People will age and die, beauty will fade, and children will continue to come into the world, planned or unplanned. That is the reality. With the advent of contraception, many actually believed that it would bring about a paradise on earth. In the words of influential feminist Shulamith Firestone, contraception and its kindred technologies “could undo Adam’s and Eve’s curse both, to reestablish the earthly Garden of Eden.”
http://www.cuf.org/LayWitness/online_view.asp?lwID=670
The common usage meaning of the word “preposterous” refers to something that is contrary to nature, or absurd. Its etymology offers an important additional insight to this meaning. Derived from the Latin words prae (before) and posterius (after), it literally means putting before that which comes after. Preposterousness, then, has to do with a change in order. It is, so to speak, putting the cart before the horse, or bolting the barn door after the animals have escaped.
Preposterousness in the moral domain has a particularly important ramification. When something that should be first is placed second, that which should be first is not simply demeaned, but is in danger of being either lost or rejected. Placing man ahead of God initially demeans religion, but, as history has shown, leads to a rejection of God. A person who places money above honesty will soon become dishonest. If spouses do not subordinate themselves to each other (cf. Eph. 5:21), their marriage is heading for a separation or divorce.
The great problem in placing the secondary end of sexual intercourse first is the likelihood that procreation will be demeaned initially and subsequently rejected. But, in addition to this, the meaning of lovemaking would have to be reinvented. Such recreation would inevitably be arbitrary and therefore subject to a distorted and possibly even perverse interpretation.
The Russian existentialist Nikolai Berdyaev had some insight into this problem when he argued, “If there were no childbearing, sexual union would degenerate into debauchery.” In hindsight, one must acknowledge that these points are well taken. While many have welcomed the “freedom” that contraception offers spouses, they have also recognized a need to restore some measure of nobility and romanticism to the sexual act. As the surrealist painter, Salvador Dali, once told a Time reporter, “The only way to make love is as a sacrament.”
Contraception signals the separation of love-making from baby-making. One is left to wonder about the deeper levels of fragmentation that may result.
Man is a meaning-oriented creature far more than he is a pleasureseeker. There is no pleasure that man enjoys to which he will not ascribe some meaning. But the very notion of meaning implies a relationship or correspondence that goes beyond what a thing is in itself. For example, one is not satisfied in hearing a stream of words; one wants to know what meaning they convey. The activities within a baseball game are meaningful because they are subordinated to the goal of winning. It is the prospect of winning that gives the game its ultimate meaning, otherwise no one would bother to keep score.
Paul Tillich has pointed out that while the great anxiety of antiquity was death, and the chief anxiety of the Middle Ages was condemnation, the principal anxiety of the modern era is meaninglessness. This anxiety is a direct result of the fragmentation of the modern world and the preposterousness that results when the natural order of things is reversed. Unable to bear life in a meaningless world, people are compelled to invent meanings. Unfortunately, these fabricated meanings cannot offer real sustenance for human beings. They reduce everything to the status of a game. And while games can be refreshing diversions from the seriousness of life, they cannot nourish the inner spirit that seeks an answer to the question, “What is the meaning of life?” There is a hunger in all of us that inclines us to search for and be in love with wisdom. In his own self-indulgent way, Alex Comfort is right. The author of the mega-selling secular “bible” of sex, The Joy of Sex, holds that sex is the most important human sport. But Christopher Derrick is right when he says, “The case against Playboy and everything similar is that one’s attention is thereby fixed not upon sex, but upon sexual unreality.”
Fragmentation and preposterousness, therefore, lead to a flight from reality and a preoccupation with fantasy. Reality, of course, being the stronger force, will always be victorious when the two collide. On the dust jacket of a best-selling book that promotes the revolutionary potential of contraception, we find these words from a mortified young husband: “I married a lovely, sexy girl—then she turned into someone’s mother.”
People will age and die, beauty will fade, and children will continue to come into the world, planned or unplanned. That is the reality. With the advent of contraception, many actually believed that it would bring about a paradise on earth. In the words of influential feminist Shulamith Firestone, contraception and its kindred technologies “could undo Adam’s and Eve’s curse both, to reestablish the earthly Garden of Eden.”
http://www.cuf.org/LayWitness/online_view.asp?lwID=670
Friday, June 01, 2007
Please Pray for Me
If you are reading this please pray for me. I really need to learn to keep the bright light and Joy of Christ in me always. Sometimes it disappears. I do not know where it goes, but fight to keep the bad thoughts away. It has been awhile since I have felt this way. I could be the lack of sleep, a cycle thing, it could be extra stress at work/home, or it could just be me not dealing as I should with life. I often feel that those around me despise me. They are just waiting for me to fail or go away. I guess I am not really that nice of a person. I am rude, abrasive, curt, and annoying! How can anyone stand to be around me. I try to make things easier for people at work, but they think I am bossy for doing that. I do not understand. I cannot wait to get to heaven. Maybe then I will finally be the person I feel I need to be.
Speaking of work, I have been here longer than anyone else at the entry level! I have gained so much since starting, but I know that that does not matter. I will never be given a promotion around here. Next week I will find out if that is true. I think I truly hate this job. I do not mind my normal daily work; however, I hate when I have to get on the phones, and I do not much enjoy the co-workers any more. They claim I am rude, but it seems OK for them to speak to me any way they feel they would like to do so. I guess over the years I have lost MUCH respect for those that I work with. I know they do not care about the job and they do not like me because I do! This is about the first time I have really felt bad for doing what Jesus wanted me to do.
I know I am over reacting. God will provide for me and care for me. I have more people who would go to the ends of the world for me than any one person deserves. I need to be thankful for what I have and stop dewelling on what I do not. Honesly who cares if the poeple at work appreciate me, the people at church do, my family does, my friends do. If Lockheed Martin does not think that I am worthy of a promotion after 5.5 years, then I guess when my 6 year anniversery is up and I can leave without penality (tuition reimbursement) then I will be GONE before the door closes.
Speaking of work, I have been here longer than anyone else at the entry level! I have gained so much since starting, but I know that that does not matter. I will never be given a promotion around here. Next week I will find out if that is true. I think I truly hate this job. I do not mind my normal daily work; however, I hate when I have to get on the phones, and I do not much enjoy the co-workers any more. They claim I am rude, but it seems OK for them to speak to me any way they feel they would like to do so. I guess over the years I have lost MUCH respect for those that I work with. I know they do not care about the job and they do not like me because I do! This is about the first time I have really felt bad for doing what Jesus wanted me to do.
I know I am over reacting. God will provide for me and care for me. I have more people who would go to the ends of the world for me than any one person deserves. I need to be thankful for what I have and stop dewelling on what I do not. Honesly who cares if the poeple at work appreciate me, the people at church do, my family does, my friends do. If Lockheed Martin does not think that I am worthy of a promotion after 5.5 years, then I guess when my 6 year anniversery is up and I can leave without penality (tuition reimbursement) then I will be GONE before the door closes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
