On Broadway

ALL THAT JAZZ
Hannah was telling me all about choreographer George Balanchine, his flamboyant life, his four wives, and great talent. This naturally led me to remember one of my very favorite movies, All That Jazz. A semi-autobiographical work by choreographer Bob Fosse, this film takes you close to the heart of the Broadway dance world. We follow successful, insecure, talented, lecherous choreographer Joe Gideon through his routine in getting a show underway. Along the way we learn about his flirtation with death (personified wonderfully by Jessica Lange), his inability to maintain any honest relationship, and watch some fabulous dance routines. It is dark but wonderful in its complexity and clarity. Considering that I usually prefer comedies I always am surprised that I love this film as much as I do. Parts are hard to watch, depending on your level of sensitivity, but really worth it. Highly recommended.

Levels of Truth

Our book club is reading Peter Kreeft's essays comparing Christianity with various other religions. One of the most interesting to me was Uniqueness of Christianity. He addresses the arguments used against considering Christianity, or indeed any religion as unique to itself. You can read those for yourself at the link but I especially appreciated the point that modern relativism likes to reduce religion to the level of relating to each other. It also was interesting to look at all religions based on how much truth they teach.

But any Christian who does apologetics must think about comparative religions because the most popular of all objections against the claims of Christianity today comes from this field. The objection is not that Christianity is not true but that it is not the truth; not that it is a false religion but that it is only a religion. The world is a big place, the objector reasons; "different strokes for different folks". How insufferably narrow-minded to claim that Christianity is the one true religion! God just has to be more open-minded than that.

This is the single most common objection to the Faith today, for "today" worships not God but equality. It fears being right where others are wrong more than it fears being wrong. It worships democracy and resents the fact that God is an absolute monarch. It has changed the meaning of the word honor from being respected because you are superior in some way to being accepted because you are not superior in any way but just like us ...

By Catholic standards, the religions of the world can be ranked by how much truth they teach.

• Catholicism is first, with Orthodoxy equal except for the one issue of papal authority.
• Then comes Protestantism and any "separated brethren" who keep the Christian essentials as found in Scripture.
• Third comes traditional Judaism, which worships the same God but not via Christ.
• Fourth is Islam, greatest of the theistic heresies.
• Fifth, Hinduism, a mystical pantheism;
• Sixth, Buddhism, a pantheism without a theos;
• Seventh, modern Judaism, Unitarianism, Confucianism, Modernism, and secular humanism, none of which have either mysticism or supernatural religion but only ethics;
• Eighth, idolatry; and
• Ninth, Satanism.

To collapse these nine levels is like thinking the earth is flat.

How Proud Can I Be?

Rose has a teacher who's very popular with the students. For many of these freshmen, its the first time they've come across a "college style" teacher. You know the kind I mean. He's funny, larger than life, and loves to break away from world history to riff about other things. Problem is that he's so busy riffing these days that very little teaching gets done. And the things he's "teaching" the kids boil down to 90 minutes of talking about his personal philosophy of life for way too many classes. I think that he thinks he's teaching the kids to "think outside the envelope." The fact that he's generally preaching to the choir with his liberal, culturally based agenda hasn't occurred to him, but whatever. Rose would rather have him actually spend time teaching but she'll let it flow over her. No one ever disagrees with him. Why would they? He's smart, he's the teacher and ... he'll take you down and make you look like a fool if you try it. So no one ever dares try that in front of the whole class. Except, of course, for Rose yesterday.

The teacher was using the Great Schism as a jumping off point to talk about why priests should be married and in the process asked the class, "Why are we here?" They had been primed by previous speeches and dutifully replied, "To procreate." Except for Rose who raised her hand to point out that we are here for much more than mere procreation. Battle was joined. It ranged over a wide field of religious subjects ... with Rose steadfastly resisting the teacher's declarations that humans are simply animals, the Bible can't be trusted because it was written by men, and the Church has no authority because it is run by men. They were about to tackle the subject of faith when she was saved by the bell.

This was no easy task for her. Rose is quiet and reserved. Certainly no 14-year-old willingly opposes one of the school's most popular teachers in front of a class of her peers. However, as she told me, she knows how influential this teacher is and it infuriated her for him to use his authority about matters of religion when he was not following Church teachings in her Catholic school. As she said, "This is important. It is the truth!"

Talking it over with us last night, only one thing bothered her. Carried away by the argument she had several times, "had a tone" with the teacher. Even though the teacher also had been carried away and less than respectful a few times, Rose wanted to make it right. "Even though he's wrong, he has the right to his opinion and I should have been more respectful." So today she is seeking him out to apologize. Not for the content but for the occasional tone of the argument.

How proud can I be? Rose stood up for the truth in daunting circumstances, she is self aware enough to see her flaws, and she is a big enough person to apologize when it may put her at a disadvantage. I'm thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis proud!

The Problem of Evil

Working my way through Peter Kreeft's Fundamentals of the Faith, I continue to be struck at how well he summarizes answers to common objections to the existance of God. While the existance of evil never particularly was something that struck me as a reason there could not be a God, it clearly is one of the main objections. In fact it is one of the only two objections that St. Thomas Aquinas could find. (The other was the apparent ability of natural science to explain everything in our experience without God.) You can find Kreeft's chapter on evil here. What I liked most were his comments on the philosophical problem of evil.

Finally, what about the philosophical problem? It is not logically contradictory to say an all-powerful and all-loving God tolerates so much evil when he could eradicate it? Why do bad things happen to good people? The question makes three questionable assumptions.

First, who's to say we are good people? The question should be not "Why do bad things happen to good people?" but "Why do good things happen to bad people?" If the fairy godmother tells Cinderella that she can wear her magic gown until midnight, the question should be not "Why not after midnight?" but "Why did I get to wear it at all?" The question is not why the glass of water is half empty but why it is half full, for all goodness is gift. The best people are the ones who are most reluctant to call themselves good people. Sinners think they are saints, but saints know they are sinners. The best man who ever lived once said, "No one is good but God alone."

Second, who's to say suffering is all bad? Life without it would produce spoiled brats and tyrants, not joyful saints. Rabbi Abraham Heschel says simply, "The man who has not suffered, what can he possibly know, anyway?" Suffering can work for the greater good of wisdom. It is not true that all things are good, but it is true that "all things work together for good to those who love God."

Third, who's to say we have to know all God's reasons? Who ever promised us all the answers? Animals can't understand much about us; why should we be able to understand everything about God? The obvious point of the Book of Job, the world's greatest exploration of the problem of evil, is that we just don't know what God is up to. What a hard lesson to learn: Lesson One, that we are ignorant, that we are infants! No wonder Socrates was declared by the Delphic Oracle to be the wisest man in the world. He interpreted that declaration to mean that he alone knew that he did not have wisdom, and that was true wisdom for man.

There's No Place Like Home ... for Celebrating the Liturgical Calendar

THE CATHOLIC HOME: Celebrations and Traditions for Holidays, Feast Days, and Every Day by Meredith Gould

Who better than a nice Jewish girl to tell Catholics how to celebrate their faith at home? Jews have always been known for a sensibly domestic-centered observance of their religion, and Gould, a Jewish-born convert to Catholicism, speaks from a unique dual perspective. Having lived in a Jewish home, she knows about lighting Sabbath candles, but also remembers when Catholics kept holy water and statues in their houses. In her own home, which she affectionately describes as "the Hermitage" and "Julian of Norwich goes suburban," she has revived traditions that fell by the wayside after changes wrought by Vatican II, and also established a multitude of new ones.

Readers seeking to reinforce Catholic identity on the home front will find plenty of ideas, among them a how-to for celebrating Christmas when it actually arrives, instead of weeks before, and making Halloween holy by embracing it as the eve of All Saints Day. Gould's writing is light and airy ... her ideas are well-grounded and refreshing. She wisely reinforces her suggestions with excerpts from the Catechism of the Catholic Church and uses the church's sacraments and elaborate calendar of feast days and liturgical seasons as the skeleton of her book, trotting out bits of history and legend for added interest. Gould's engaging enthusiasm will doubtless have readers asking, "Who knew Catholicism could be so much fun?" (From Publishers Weekly)

There is not much I can add to the above except to say, "Get this book!" Even if you are well versed in reinforcement of Catholic liturgy through home traditions I think it would serve as a good reminder of following the liturgical calendar through the year. I really appreciated having everything supported by a quote from the Catechism and Gould's Jewish heritage adds nice depth to showing the customs as completion of Jewish tradition. I would have loved to have a book like this when my kids were little ... well, if I had been Catholic then.

The Long Day Closes

LUKE 23:44-49
This passage covers the darkness falling over the land, the Temple veil splitting, Jesus' death, and the Centurion's words acknowledging Jesus' innocence. A lot of significance is covered in a small amount of writing.

1. The Temple veil. William Barclay tells us:

This was the veil which hid the Holy of Holies, the place where dwelt the very presence of God, the place where no man might ever enter except the High Priest, and he only once a year, on th great day of Atonement.

The Navarre Bible points out:

The tearing of the curtain of the temple shows the end of the Old Covenant and the beginning of the New Covenant, sealed in the blood of Christ.

2. Jesus' death. The details of Jesus' death, brief as they are reveal two things which William Barclay illuminates.

• Jesus cried with a great voice. Three of the gospels tell us of this great cry (Matthew 27:50; Mark 15:37). John, on the other hand, does not mention the great cry but tells us that Jesus died, saying, "It is finished." (John 19:30) In Greek and Aramaic It is finished is one word. It is finished and the great cry are, in fact, one and the same thing. Jesus died with a shout of triumph on his lips ... He shouted it like a victor who has won his last engagement with the enemy and brought a trememdous task to triumphant conclusion.
• Jesus died with a prayer on his lips. "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." That is Psalm 31:5 with one word added -- Father. that verse was the prayer every Jewish mother taught her child to say last thing at night. Just as we were tauight, maybe to say, "This night I lay me down to sleep," so the Jewish mother taught her child to say, before the threatening dark came down, "Into thy hands I commit my spirit." Jesus made it even more lovely for he began it with the word Father. Even on a cross Jesus died like a child falling asleep in his father's arms.

3. The Centurion's words. The Navarre Bible points out that his acknowledgment of Jesus is just one of many brought by the cross. I always had noticed these but never put them all together like this.

Jesus' redemptive death on the cross immediately begins to draw people towards God by way of repentance: as he made his way to Calvary there was the probable conversion of Simon of Cyrene and the lamentations of the women of jerusalem; at the cross, the repentance of the good thief, the effect of grace on the Roman centurion, and the compunction felt by the crowd reported in this verse. Jesus had prophesied, "When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men to myself" (John 12:32). this prophecy begins to come true on Golgotha, and it will continue to be fulfilled until the end of time.

This is the final entry I'll make from my study of Luke. I believe I'll be moving on to Genesis next. Some really great stuff there that you'd never expect, including good coverage of typology. More about that later.

Waiting for the Oven to Preheat

So I got up at 3:45 to start preheating the oven for two French Toast Casseroles. This weekend is the Women's CRHP ( prounounced "chirp") Retreat. They have to begin breakfast by 6:00 in order to be done in time for the hour fast before the 7:30 Mass that they'll attend. Our team serves breakfast this time and Joan and I have to be there by 5:15 to start the big 100-cup coffee pot perking. We're wondering if 5:15 is early enough but its too late to change it now as that is when the Kitchen Coordinator has her alarm set for and will unlock the back door for us.

Then we'll serve breakfast, clean up, attend that 7:30 Mass, and I'll do a 1 hour security shift beginning at 9:00. Yesterday, as part of the Continuation Committee, Joan and I were at the church at 6:00 making coffee, slicing bagels, making fruit salad, etc. for the welcoming breakfast buffet that kicks off the retreat. Short on sleep this weekend? Yes! But I remember how wonderful it was having a big, hot breakfast on Sunday. The retreat is intense and you get very little sleep attending it. You need that big, hot breakfast to keep going.

I never realized what someone else went through to give us that breakfast when we attended and on the one that we gave. It is worth it to offer it to these women as a small contribution to what Christ is doing in their lives this weekend. When I took coffee to one woman yesterday morning she sat all by herself at a table and shyly confided, "I don't know anyone else here," as we looked over the room of 70 other talking women. I told her, "Neither did I when I attended my retreat, but by the time you're done you'll know them all ... and you won't believe the difference this will make in your life." Just then four women pulled her into their conversation and I left. Those are the moments that make the early mornings worth it and take me back to what this all meant to me. How wonderful to be allowed to contribute to it happening in others' lives ... even if it is just making sure the coffee is made.

Funniest Family Ever

MALCOLM IN THE MIDDLE - 1st Season DVD
We have watched Malcolm in the Middle from the very beginning. It consistently has been one of the most hilarious shows ever. Tom loves it because it brings back memories of growing up with his four brothers. Naturally it is way over the top but somehow the family gets into the most absurd situations in a perfectly natural way ... and we all laugh out loud. The last season went terribly astray and we quit watching. Our guess is that a key writer moved on. However, the show was fabulous for many years with dead on comic writing and the perfect acting required to bring these situations off naturally. Only the first season is out on DVD but if you haven't seen it this is the perfect chance to give it a try. We've been laughing ourselves silly watching every night during the last week and that puts you in a great mood for the end of the day.

The Promise of Paradise

LUKE 23:39-43
Like most people I always liked the fact that even in His utmost suffering Jesus so generously rewarded the criminal who stood up for Him. Think of it. That might have been the only good deed that man ever did but it was enough to get him into paradise. When we read William Barclay's explanation of what that promise really meant we see just how generous Jesus is.

It was of set and deliberate purpose that the authorities crucified Jesus between two known criminals. It was deliberately so staged to humiliate Jesus in front of the crowd and to rank him with robbers...

The word Paradise is a Persian word meaning a walled garden. When a Persian king wished to do one of his subjects a very special honor he made him a companion of the garden which meant he was chosen to walk in the garden with the king. It was more than immortality that Jesus promised the penitent thief. He promised him the honored place of a companion of the garden in the courts of heaven.

Very cool.

Charismatic?

Reading the excellent article about Discernment by Peter Kreeft, I was struck by this:

I assume that many readers of this page are (1) Catholic, (2) orthodox and faithful to the teachings of the church, (3) conservative, and (4) charismatic. I have had many friends -- casual, close, and very close -- of this description for many years. In fact, I fit the description myself.

I kept coming back to it. Peter Kreeft called himself charismatic? Wasn't that speaking in tongues, shouting "Hallelujah, Lord!" with hands in the air, possibly holy rolling? Snakes? No, probably no snakes ... that seemed too extreme. But, he had mentioned also being conservative, orthodox and faithful to the teachings of the church. That did not seem to go with being charismatic.

Worse, yet, when I thought about it, I suddenly realized that I might have some of those charismatic characteristics. I prayed out loud with my CRHP (pronounced "chirp) sisters, we would "pray over" someone who needed it for whatever reason by crowding around and laying our hands on her, we are very into the Holy Spirit ... I really didn't like where this seemed to be going. So I thought that I'd better get a few facts. A short Google later, I was in possession of some very interesting information ... a real definition of a charismatic Christian.

Charismatic is an umbrella term used to describe those Christians who believe that the manifestations of the Holy Spirit seen in the first century Christian Church, such as glossolalia [speaking in tongues], healing and miracles, are available to contemporary Christians and ought to be experienced and practiced today.

The word charismatic is derived from the Greek word charis (meaning a grace or a gift) which is the term used in the Bible to describe a wide range of supernatural experiences (especially in 1 Corinthians 12-14).

Often confused with Pentecostalism (which it was inspired by), Charismatic Christianity tends to differ in key aspects: Charismatics reject the preeminence given by Pentecostalism to glossolalia, reject the legalism sometimes associated with Pentecostalism, and often stay in their existing denominations ...

While Charismatic Christians are not exclusive to any single denomination, Charismatic theology is not uniquely Protestant. There is a burgeoning Charismatic movement within the Catholic Church, and Pope John Paul II is reputed to have a Charismatic Priest as his personal pastor. wordIQ Dictionary & Encyclopedia

So, not necessarily speaking in tongues but primarily very open to the graces, miracles, power and presence of the Holy Spirit. And even the Pope might be on board with this. Ok. I was feeling better, less freakish anyway. In fact, thinking about it, I realized that definition could be used on practically everyone who has gone through the Christ Renews His Parish retreat and formation.

Christ Renews His Parish (CRHP), to which I have referred repeatedly in this blog, is an amazing process. It begins with a two-day retreat held in isolation from the world, but on church premises. The main emphasis during that time is a series of witnesses telling of their personal encounter with Christ based on one of a series of topics, such as Renewal, Reconciliation, Discipleship, etc. There are various other activities that I won't go into here but suffice it to say that you almost can feel the Holy Spirit flowing during that time. The retreat participants can then go on with their "team" to a series of weekly meetings that go on for six months while they study Scripture and prepare to give the next retreat.

Nothing I say here can adequately describe how close that CRHP team becomes and how God works in and through their lives. We shared miracles, graces, answered prayers ... and no speaking in tongues. During that time is when I realized that I suddenly felt about the Holy Spirit as I did about God and Jesus. He was an active participant in my life. The Holy Spirit used CRHP to change my life so much so that sometimes I feel like a different person ... and have had people who knew me before mention it independently.

Mulling all this over and continuing on my Kreeft readings in Fundamentals of the Faith, I came across this passage that pulled it all together for me.

When Paul visits the church in Ephesus (Acts 19), he notices something missing -- I think he would notice exactly the same thing in most of our churches and preach the same sermon -- and he asks them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" (Acts 19:2). Why would he ask that unless he saw a power shortage? Why did twelve fishermen convert the world, and why are half a billion Christians unable to repeat the feat? The Spirit makes the difference ...

We have received the Spirit by faith and baptism. "Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him" (Rom 8:9). But we need the release, the empowering, the anointing of the Spirit. Such empowerment is probably what the New Testament means by baptism in (or of or with) the Holy Spirit. It is supposed to happen at confirmation. Apparently, it usually does not. Millions of confirmed Catholics receive it afterward, usually in charismatic prayer meetings or seminars. The charismatic movement is obviously God's answer to Pope John XXIII's prayer for a new Pentecost. Popes Paul VI and John Paul II both blessed it but said that it will fulfill its purpose only when, like the early liturgical movement, it ceases to have a separate identity of its own and is absorbed into the whole Church. In other words, every Catholic should be a charismatic, baptized in the Spirit, empowered like the apostles.

The difference this baptism in the Spirit makes is not primarily in any particular charismatic gift, such as tongues. Paul clearly says not to get hung up on tongues (1 Cor 12-14). The difference is far greater: like the difference between a picture and a live person, between dead orthodoxy and living truth, between words and power. If we are not certain that Jesus Christ is present in us, working, acting, making a difference, rather than just being a teacher, an example, a lovely but remote historical figure, then we need Pentecost. And when that happens, the world will be won again.

What CRHP does is just what Kreeft describes above ... it brings a new Pentecost. No wonder people come out of there glowing. Like the apostles they just can't stop telling people the Good News. When you find something like that you want to share it with everyone. Now I finally understood why the apostles had to have the Holy Spirit before they could accomplish anything. It literally changes you from the inside out. No wonder it is called Christ Renews His Parish ... and our priest and deacon are 100% behind it. And I understood why Peter Kreeft could call himself orthodox, conservative, and charismatic. It turns out that is what I am myself.

Now we just need to find a new word that doesn't carry all those negative connotations ... because I know what I thought about charismatic Christians. "Spirit filled?" Kinda crazy but not as bad. "Full of grace?" Hmmmm, no one is going to understand that at all and ... still kinda wacky. Well, I'll keep working on that part. All I know is CRHP made me into a charismatic Catholic and I couldn't be happier. If this is the future of the Catholic Church I can't wait to see the day when all Catholics are charismatic Catholics.

UPDATE: I think the best alternative to the term charismatic is one that a CRHP sister suggested. How about a whole heartedly practicing Catholic?

UPDATED UPDATE: I have been pleased to get response from CRHPers in other parishes. And, I think we have a winner from a person who is familiar with CRHP and the Holy Spirit, "I think it's a Catholic who has finally stopped practicing and started really living it!" I like that ... fully living the faith!

This person went on to add: "I describe the process this way: think of a jar filled with water. Now, put a lid on that jar and put it under a flowing faucet. What happens to the flowing water? It does not enter the jar at all but bounces off. Unscrew the lid, however, and the constantly flowing water flows into the jar and the water in the jar overflows. The jar is constantly filled to thee brim and overflowing with fresh water.

We are the jar...the water is the Holy Spirit. The lid is how we close ourselves off to the workings of the Spirit. CRHP, the charismatic renewal, or any other kind of real and profound experience of God causes us to allow God to unscrew the lid and let the Spirit flow. For some of us, God has to take one of those instruments used for unscrewing a lid that is on real" tight! For others, the lid comes off easily."

There They Crucified Him

LUKE 23:32-38
This is the crucifixion where Jesus was between two criminals, the soldiers cast lots for his garment, and the inscription, "King of the Jews" was placed over him. William Barclay tells us the common way this was done. There was no new "aha" moment for me in reading this but it served to reinforce the horror of crucifixion. I have read that crucifixions commonly were done through the wrist instead of the hand but for all I know there may have been more than one way it was done.

When a criminal reached the lace of crucifixion, his cross was laid flat upon the ground. Usually it was a cross shaped like a T with no top piece against which the head could rest. It was quite low, so that the criminal's feet were only two or three feet above the ground. There was a company of pious women in Jerusalem who made it their practice always to go to crucifixions and to give the victim a drink of drugged wine which would deaden the terrible pain. That drink was offered to Jesus and he refused it (Matthew 27:14). He was determined to face death at its worst.

The victim's arms were stretched out upon the cross bar, and the nails were driven through his hands. The feet were not nailed, but only loosely bound to the cross. Half way up the cross there was a projecting piece of wood, called the saddle, which took the weight of the criminal, for otherwise the nails would have torn through his hands. Then the cross was lifted and set upright in the socket. The terror of crucifixion was this -- the pain of that process was terrible but it was not enough to kill, and the victim was left to die of hunger and thirst beneath the blazing noontide sun and the frosts of the night. Many a criminal was known to have hung for a week upon his cross until he died raving mad.

The clothes of the criminal were the perquisites of the four soldiers among whom he marched to the cross. Every Jew wore five articles of apparel -- the inner tunic, the outer robe, the girdle, the sandals and the turban. Four were divided among the four soldiers. There remained the great outer robe. It was woven in one piece without a seam (John 19:23-24). To have cut it up and divided it up would have ruined it; and so the soldiers gambled for it in the shadow of the cross. It was nothing to them that another criminal was slowly dying in agony.

The inscription set upon the cross was the same placard as was carried before a man as he marched through the streets to the place of crucifixion.

Miracles as Evidence of God's Existance

If I were an atheist, I think I would save my money to buy a plane ticket to Italy to see whether the blood of Saint Januarius really did liquefy and congeal miraculously, as it is supposed to do annually. I would go to Medjugorge. I would study all published interviews of any of the seventy thousand who saw the miracle of the sun at Fatima. I would ransack hospital records for documentated "impossible", miraculous cures. Yet, strangely, almost all atheists argue against miracles philosophically rather than historically. They are convinced a priori, by argument, that miracles can't happen. So they don't waste their time or money on such an empirical investigation. Those who do soon cease to be atheists -- like the sceptical scientists who investigated the Shroud of Turin, or like Frank Morrison, who investigated the evidence for the "myth" of Christ's Resurrection with the careful scientific eye of the historian -- and became a believer. (His book Who Moved the Stone? is still a classic and still in print after more than sixty years.) Peter Kreeft, Fundamentals of the Faith

Interesting idea isn't it? Just go check out the facts for yourself on those miracles and trust the evidence of your own eyes. It takes someone with a very open mind or a determination to prove the miracles false to go check them out. I think such people are much rarer than is commonly believed. Certainly, most atheists I know would not investigate but just argue from what they already know to be true.

The Road to Calvary

LUKE 23:26-32
Jesus carries his cross and Simon of Cyrene was impressed by the soldiers to assist. When I read the details about this I remember that when studying Acts it was mentioned that a certain Simon may actually have been the same Simon of Cyrene. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if what started out as a bad experience wound up being the saving of his soul. William Barclay tells us the history to go with this segment.

When a criminal was condemned to be crucified, he was taken from the judgment hall and set in the middle of a hollow square of four Roman soldiers. His own cross was then laid upon his shoulders. And he was marched to the place of crucifixion by the longest possible route, while before him marched another soldier bearing a placard with his crime inscribed upon it, so that he might be a terrible warning to anyone else who was contemplating such a crime. That is what they did with Jesus.

He began by carrying his own Cross (John 19:17); but under its weight his strength gave out and he could carry it no farther. Palestine was an occupied country and any citizen could be immediately impressed into the service of the Roman government. The sign of such impressment was a tap on the shoulder with the flat of the blade of a Roman spear. When Jesus sank beneath the weight of his Cross, the Roman centurion in charge looked round for someone to carry it. Out of the country into the city there came Simon from far off Cyrene, which is modern Tripoli. No doubt he was a Jew who all his life had scraped and saved so that he might be able to eat one Passover at Jerusalem. The flat of the Roman spear touched him on the shoulder and he found himself, willy-nilly, carrying a criminal's cross.

Fasting

I know that fasting is one of those things that is good for you. Jesus did it. The saints have done it. It is one of those voluntary mortifications that not only offers a chance to gain discipline but also to unite ourselves to Christ in suffering that can be offered up for an intention.

I'm probably like most people when it comes to fasting. No one likes to be hungry and no one I know looks forward to the Church's few fast days during the year. They make it as easy as possible with an allowance of one full meal and two small meals (which should not add up to one full meal). I've always taken full advantage of those loopholes. I never stopped to apply Father B's reminder from my RCIA classes, "Remember, the Church gives you the bare minimum of law. That doesn't mean you have to stop there." He was talking about the strictures to make a Mass "count" (you must get there when they begin reading the Gospel and you can leave after the Eucharist). As with most of Father B's reminders, this is one that applies to much more.

After doing a real fast for 24 hours I've gotta say, what a sissy I've been. It was much easier to go cold turkey than do those "two small meals." The only problem I had was that because Alexa's inspiration was so sudden I had no "gearing up" time as I usually do for regular fast days. I kept forgetting I was fasting ... reaching involuntarily for that chip or finding myself getting ready to pop that bit of cheese in my mouth. The amount of nibbling I barely stopped in time was very revealing ... way too much between meal snacking going on here! Just because of the timing of Rose's drum lessons, I wound up going over the 24 hours but it was no big deal. I found that once I was in the zone there might be hunger pains (which are reminders to pray) but even grocery shopping was no big deal. This time at least the key was my mental attitude and, no doubt, some extra grace.

I'm glad I did this not only because of the opportunity to sacrifice something for Terri Schiavo. I learned some things about myself as well and it took some of the dread out of the idea of fasting in general. The next time I'm inspired to fast or a regular fast day comes up I'll remember this time and just plunge in (at least I hope so).

A Well Designed Logo

BL logo
Originally uploaded by Julie D..

I always wondered why the BL school colors are black and white. Its a nice combination and stands out among the other schools but it is odd. It never occurred to me to wonder about the logo itself until Hannah told me that a teacher actually filled them in on the origin.

Bishop Lynch High School originally was founded by Dominicans. In the winter they wear white robes with a black cape, fastened at the throat (see the resemblance in the logo?). I bet you can guess the colors ... that's right, black and white. I just love it when a logo design actually means something!

Fasting for Terri

Alexa at Domestic Excellence and Specialty Housekeeping talks about fasting in general and the fact that Terri Schiavo's husband again has the legal nod to starve her to death. Alexa is fasting for Terri and invites anyone so inclined to join her. Time to put my prayers where my mouth is ... from 1:00 p.m. today to 1:00 p.m. tomorrow. Anyone else?

The Traitor's Kiss

LUKE 22-47-53
This scene is the famous betrayal by Judas. William Barclay tells us just how significant the traitor's kiss was.

When a disciple met a beloved Rabbi, he laid his right hand on the Rabbi's left shoulder and his left hand on the right shoulder and kissed him. It was the kiss of a disciple to a beloved master that Judas used as a sign of betrayal.

This makes Jesus' words, "Judas, would you betray the Son of man with a kiss?" even more poignant. The Navarre Bible points out that there also is an implication of trying to save Judas in these words. I never had contemplated Judas' long companionship with Jesus in terms of the constant forgiveness that Jesus was offering but it becomes clear when reading this.

In contemplating this sad betrayal by an apostle, Jesus treats Judas in a very gentle way and yet shows up the malice and ugliness of his treachery; for the last time he tries to win Judas back.

... "Even to Judas," St. Thomas More comments, "God gave many opportunities of coming to his senses. He did not deny him companionship. He did not take away from him the dignity of his apostleship. He did not even take the purse-strings from him, even though he was a thief. He admitted the traitor to the fellowship of his beloved disciples at the last supper. He deigned to stoop down at the feet of the betrayer and to wash his feet with his most innocent and sacred hands Judas' dirty feet, a fit symbol of his filthy mind [...]. Finally when Judas, coming with his crew to seize him, offered him a kiss, a kiss that was in fact the terrible token of his treachery, Christ received him calmly and gently ... if we see anyone wandering wildly from the right road, let us hope that he will one day return to the path, and meanwhile let us pray humbly and incessantly that God will hold out to him chances to come to his senses, and likewise that with God's help he will eagerly seize them..."

What Happens When You ...

1) have nothing to do

2) own a sharp knife

3) have a large lime

4) own a patient cat

5) drink too much tequila

6) and it's football season?




Originally uploaded by Julie D..

Conscience

I'm working my way through Fundamentals of the Faith by Peter Kreeft. This book is a series of essays in Christian apologetics. I'm toward the beginning but so far I believe it would be valuable to every sort of Christian, not just Catholics.

ARGUMENT FOR GOD'S EXISTANCE
I always perk up my ears most at arguments to prove God's existance. As the daughter of two atheists I'm always looking for that key bit of logic that will open their minds just a little to even bother to wonder if God is real. I hadn't read the argument about conscience before but it really hit home. Conscience, God's little internal beacon of right and wrong, is an interesting angle and one that hadn't occured to me before.

Nearly everyone will admit not only the existance of conscience but also its authority. In this age of rebellion against and doubt about nearly every authority, in this age in which the very word authority has changed from a word of respect to a word of scorn, one authority remains: an individual's conscience. Almost no one will say that one ought to sin against one's conscience, disobey one's conscience. Disobey the church, the state, parents, authority figures, but do not disobey your conscience. Thus people usually admit, though not usually in these words, the absolute moral authority and binding obligation of conscience.

Such people are usually surprised and pleased to find out that Saint Thomas Aquinas, of all people, agrees with them to such an extent that he says if a Catholic comes to believe the Church is in error in some essential, officially defined doctrine, it is a mortal sin against conscience, a sin of hypocrisy, for him to remain in the Church and call himself a Catholic, but only a venial sin against knowledge for him to leave the church in honest but partly culpable error...

Of course, we do not always hear that voice aright. Our consciences can err. That is why the first obligation we have, in conscience, is to form our conscience by seeking the truth, especially the truth about whether God has revealed to us clear moral maps (Scripture and Church). If so, whenever our conscience seems to tell us to disobey those maps, it is not working properly, and we can now that by conscience itself if only we remember that conscience is more than just immediate feelings.

INFORMED BY TRUTH
I think its interesting that once we admit our conscience is so important our first obligation is to ensure it is informed by truth. It makes me think of a brother-in-law who left the Church and is obviously still angry at it, seeking confrontation about religion at every opportunity within the family. It also makes me think of people I know who vehemently disagree with those Church teachings that are most at odds with modern society (I'll bet you know which ones). They are constantly trying to change things to be more up to date and then complaining and disgruntled when that doesn't happen.

In these cases it seems as if they are acting based on what they want not over what they have found to be true through study and seeking. I also have a friend who is a self described "liberal" but who is an honest seeker. She disagrees with some Church teachings but couldn't bring herself to leave the Eucharist, something I am totally in sympathy with. In an effort to reconcile her conscience with her Church she started reading various apologetic works by faithful Catholic authors. Now she is much more at peace with the Church teachings. She has an understanding of the logic that led to them. She no longer rails against them but can see them more as a legitimate viewpoint, even if she does not fully agree.

God speaks to each of us in different ways but the constant is that internal beacon, our conscience. Our obligation is to make sure we give it the full truth upon which to act. That is the only way we will each find our own way of following that beacon homeward.

Interesting Reading

Pillars of Unbelief

Just as we have pillars of Christian faith, the saints, so are there individuals who have become pillars of unbelief. Peter Kreeft discusses six modern thinkers with an enormous impact on everyday life, and with great harm to the Christian mind:

* Machiavelli - inventor of "the new morality"
* Kant - subjectivizer of Truth
* Nietzsche - self-proclaimed "Anti-Christ"
* Freud - founder of the "sexual revolution"
* Marx - false Moses for the masses, and
* Sartre - apostle of absurdity.

(Originally written for National Catholic Register, Jan-Feb. 1988)

I just found these at Peter Kreeft's website. I don't know much about these philosophers beyond the average stereotypes so this is going to be an interesting overview.