Worth a Thousand Words

Fence taken by Hey Jules.

Not that I can relate to this personally as the weather just turned an unseasonable 65+ degrees today. I notice that nobody's complaining.

Catholic Media Review is Bursting at the Seams with Great Stuff

I had great hopes for this group media review spot y'all but I am being blown away at the quality and quantity of great writing that is flowing like fine wine over there.

I really didn't expect it to become one of my favorite places for checking out reviews on books and movies. Every time I check it (and that's a lot since I'm working on getting the place set up) there is something else that I have to read or print out for evening perusal. If nothing else, I'm having a great time (and it's all about me right?).

Well, I'm here Jesus, but I'm not happy about it! [Updated]

Nice way to start off a prayer session isn't it?

After about two weeks of spending a certain time each morning in prayer, sometimes getting nice feelings, sometimes getting a bit of enlightenment, sometimes just being there peacefully ... this morning I was in full revolt.

It probably was the first time I've ever come to prayer feeling as like a rebellious kid about to have a tantrum. Oh, I've been mad at God before but this was different. I didn't even have anything in particular that I'd rather have been doing, except anything but be there.

I thought of Fr. Dubay in his series on contemplation which I just finished yesterday. He said that those who practice deep prayer want to spend more and more time with the Beloved. As if I needed the confirmation, but obviously I could check any "deep prayer" off my list.

I'd start a prayer and then stop and look at all the books in the bookcase that I could be reading instead. I'd look at the morning psalm in my recently purchased Christian Prayer, read it through, flip around in a desultory fashion, and think about something (anything) else. Usually I care that I'm being distracted, catch myself and go back to meditation, but this was a seeking out of distractions. Aaargh.

I flipped around the Bible and came to passage after passage that I had marked during my CHRP discernment to be Lay Director. I remembered that glorious time when prayer was so easy, when I could almost actually hear Jesus' voice in the little thoughts that would float in unasked ... that came up with comments in a tone I'd never have used on myself. Well guess what. I didn't care about that now. (Yep, I was in a mood.)

I thought of the many wise people who have pointed out that we need relationship with God and just as you treasure time with your husband you will treasure this time with God. You know what? Sometimes I don't feel like being with Tom. And, sometimes he doesn't feel like being with me.

Yes, I know that God is bigger than all that. Obviously I was much, much smaller than all that ... and I knew it. In the back of my mind, intellectually, I knew it. But I didn't even have enough feelings about it to feel embarrassed or ashamed. It was a fact. I knew it. But I didn't feel it.

And then, in all my flipping, I read this, written by today's saint, Elizabeth Ann Seton:

O Father, the first rule of our dear Savior's life was to do your will. Let his will of the present moment be the first rule of our daily life and work, with no other desire but for its most full and compete accomplishment. Help us to follow it faithfully, so that doing what you wish we will be pleasing to you.

I paused.

The present moment.

I thought back to this article the first part of which was in last week's bulletin ... about meditating, ruminating on God's word.

I thought about relationship.

I thought about the present moment ... talking to God.

I thought about Jesus in my mind's eye. And I started talking. Not to him as God but to him as my brother, as a person, in relationship. I said, "Listen, I'm sorry because I know I've got a lousy attitude and I'm wasting your time here."

Into my head floated the thought, "But you showed up."

"Oh, right," I thought. "How like me to start making excuses right off the bat. Sheez, I am hopeless."

I continued, "Jesus, I know I don't have to feel anything but I am really sorry that I don't even care that I don't care. But there you go, that's where I'm at."

Again the thought, "But you showed up."

Again I dismissed my easy propensity to deflect blame.

I did have the grace to offer prayer for others, especially those most on my heart (and y'all know who you are), figuring that I didn't need to waste all my time.

The timer beeped and I bounded out of there.

Later, washing dishes, making lunches, getting dressed, I kept thinking about that stray thought. "But you showed up."

I suddenly thought of something I'd read (can't remember where or who) that said that we are much harder on ourselves sometimes than our friends would be or that God would ever be.

"But you showed up."

Finally, I got it. I did show up. Before, I wouldn't have bothered spending time at prayer. I'd have said that I had too much to do, didn't have the time, and that I'd make that prayer time up later (famous last words, right?).

However, that option hadn't crossed my mind. I'd been rebellious and snarky as all get out. But I had been there. Even simply going through the motion, I had been there.

That little bit of progress was head and shoulders above anything I've attempted in prayer for the past year, folks. (Yes, I'm baring all, that's for sure.)

It could have been with a better attitude. It could have been with a more open heart. But I was there. Giving God the time to work on me, regardless of my mood, and what's more ... He actually did it.

He did it.

I know that no time at prayer is ever wasted, but this is the first time I've ever thought about the fact that in spite of myself and my best efforts to rebel, God uses that time anyway. Fruitfully.

But he's ever faithful. And all it took was the slightest bit of faithfulness on my part to give him the chance he needed.

How do I feel now?

Grateful.

UPDATE
This morning when I showed up and had that mental moment of quieting my mind down before I began what we would formally recognize as prayer, I got this sense of underlying humor, laughter, and a dig in the ribs. "Oh so nice to see you! And how are we feeling today, missie?"

I am telling you, it was a definite change to begin that time in a fit of giggles.

A Little Useless Information

It is a very sad thing that nowadays there is so little useless information. -- Oscar Wilde

George Washington had to borrow money to go to his own inauguration.

The Book of Useless Information

Worth a Thousand Words

Scottish Not British from Flickr Scotland

Mark Your Calendars

January is pro-life month in a big way!

First of all, we've got the last "First Friday Fast" this week.

Secondly, there is the March for Life on Saturday, January 19. I'll be meeting Mark Windsor and Laura before the 10:00 Mass and then we'll participate in the March to the Federal Courthouse where Roe vs. Wade was originally filed.

I've never done anything like this before so it will be a first for me ... and I'm rather nervous. But what's life without new challenges, right? And this is for the best reason of all ... life.

If anyone else wants to join in, let me know and I'll get the particulars to you about where we're meeting up.

Worth a Thousand Words

One of many images of Reynard Fox to be found at BiblioOdyssey.

Spiritual Resolutions?

And Mary kept all these things,
reflecting on them in her heart.
Luke 2:19

Madelyn asks, "Anything forthcoming on spiritual resolutions?"

The smart aleck's answer (and that would be me) would be that I resolve to sin less and love God more. Big help that answer is, right?

Perhaps if I didn't make that resolution so often it would have more impact when I am making it more.

Seriously though, lately I have been finding the greatest step toward that goal is my determination to have quiet prayer time every morning. So far I have managed to do that for two weeks running. I get up and read the paper, then grab a cup of coffee and go shut myself into the spare bedroom where I have a timer and my bible. The timer is set for 20 minutes, turned with the face away from me (no peeking!) and then I do my best to pray using Scripture. I have had much encouragement to do this from various sources and have to say that I have an overall peace that I do not have otherwise. Sometimes I hit a phrase that echoes in my head and heart and I think about it, sometimes I keep reading the entire time, and sometimes I battle distractions continually. However, I try to always remember that just making the effort is sometimes what God wants, what He will use to teach us.

I will post some of the things that have inspired me to make this attempt and that have come up to encourage me when that 20 minutes seemed like something that I could just as well skip. First up are Stevie's comments about Fr. L's homily from yesterday as I was equally struck, right down to wanting to stand up and clap (yes, Stevie and I are soul-mates and CRHP sisters, so that's the way that goes).

... I was very appreciative of Fr. J's great homily today (so much so that I wanted to stand up and clap when he was done) which gave me a new perspective on this awesome verse. The main message that I got from it was to take time out of our busy schedules each day to ponder in our own hearts what Jesus has done for us and in us so that we can see Him working and moving in our lives. This is something that I really need to do. I don't do the New Year's resolution thing. I know that I won't stick to it which leads to disappointment in myself and I don't need that in my life - especially right now. But, it is the time of year that lends itself to reflection on what we need to change or improve and this is one area of my life that I know needs improvement. Fr. J. just gave me a little more motivation and direction for this quiet time.

Charismatic?

A couple of comments lately made me remember this post from a while back (now that I am looking I can see I wrote this in 2004 .... that seems so long ago doesn't it?). If I am "on fire" or a good witness for what God has done for me, I think that quite a bit of it can be credited to what you read about right here ...


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."

I Am Legend: Light Up the Darkness

It is difficult to know how to review these without spoiling them

In brief, I can say that there are some definite parallels between them and yet they have a completely different feel. Both are cautionary tales about man's meddling with things that he should not. Both leave Robert Neville as the sole survivor of an insidious disease that either kills the infected or completely changes any survivors into monsters which prey upon normal people. In the book the people look normal but actually are regular cross-hating, garlic-shunning, sunlight-hating vampires. In the movie, the people become animalistic monsters that the girls and I dubbed "zom-pires" as they seemed a strange mixture between fast moving zombies and vampires.

The book, written in 1954, is fairly typical of a genre of science fiction of the time. The details of Neville's life are told completely from his thoughts. Between the daily details of making stakes to kill vampires, teaching himself science to try to identify what has caused the disease, and his struggles with loneliness, there are flashbacks from his dreams which fill in what happened to his wife and daughter. Neville was a worker in a plant before the disaster, not a high level intellectual at all, and thus is more of an "every man" than one would expect. I actually found this quite interesting and was riveted right up until the last chapter, which surprised me by entirely changing the entire tenor of the book for me. I will not say more because the I don't want to give away plot points. As I say, they are often parallel to the movie, but made for different reasons with different results which provides quite an interesting contrast when considering both presentations of the story.

The movie is also of its time and turns the scenario into an action-thriller which nonetheless remains strongly life-affirming and redemptive. The movie functions well as a tale of the end-of-the-world (images of abandoned New York are still flashing into my head two days after seeing the movie), an action/horror movie (those zomb-pires are freaky strong and scary with lots of sharp teeth and ear piercing howls), and a story that illustrates what is good about man as exemplified in Robert Neville. Neville in this scenario is a high level scientist who did not cause the disease but is dedicated to finding a cure and carries on his experimentation daily in a thorough fashion. Flashbacks are provided in dreams which fill us in on his family and what left New York City in the disastrous state in which it is presented.

The elements that bring the movie most strongly to life are the detailed touches such as herds of deer in New York, "renting" DVDs each day, a scene with Shrek (of all the unlikely things), and Robert Neville's stubborn dedication to finding a cure for the disease. This seems nonsensical at one point as the disease clearly has won and one wonders why he bothers. However, this is brought into focus by his telling of his hero Bob Marley's reason for putting on a concert two days after being shot by a gunman.

The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off, why should I? Light up the darkness.

All things considered I much preferred the movie to the book. That is not to say that there are not plot holes or flaws in the movie that some such as Roger Ebert have complained about. There is still running water for example. However, these also are things that the original book didn't bother explaining. The author, for all his dedication to various details of survival, left completely unexplained such things as running water, electricity, getting gas for the car. Movie viewers are unlikely to mind either.

The point of the movie is to tell the story and it does so in a compelling fashion. Well done indeed and it is going on my list of the year's best movies.

Note: Although this movie is PG-13 it is definitely horrifying in many of the situations and not suitable for younger children. Hannah and Rose saw a family with a boy of about 8 or 9 sitting near them. Thankfully, after about half an hour they left. I think that is just about the time that Neville is setting off with his flashlight ... a sequence so very suspenseful that I spent much of the time breathing deeply and deliberately looking around the audience just to break the tension. With that said, the violence is quick and not prolonged so that there are not scenes of a disturbingly graphic nature. It was quite well done in implying those scenes or showing them quickly enough that one is carried on in the action.

Cross-posted at Catholic Media Review.

Did Deacon Greg Miss His Calling?

After months of waiting and wondering, last night I finally got to see the movie version of "Sweeney Todd." I'd seen the stage production years ago, with Angela Lansbury and George Hearn, and knew to expect something different with Johnny Depp wielding the razor. It is different. Very different. It's a brooding, disturbing, urgent, ominous, grisly, sweeping "Sweeney."

And it's also something I never expected: heartbreaking.

It's a story of revenge, and like all of these kinds of tales, the moral is the same: revenge begets revenge. (Or, as "Othello" puts it, "Sin will pluck on sin.") The grudges we nurse can destroy us -- even more so, when we believe that settling those grudges will, in fact, redeem us. When Sweeney throws back his head and sings, "I will have salvation," he's not talking about going to heaven, but to hell. And hell consumes, almost literally, the second half of the story, with bodies being burned and chimneys belching black smoke and corpses piling up like the last scene of "Hamlet."

Definitely Deacon Greg should have been a movie reviewer. Read the rest for his thoughtful and compelling commentary. I already was dying to see this and ... darn it ... this just makes it worse!

Cross-posted at Catholic Media Review

The crying children, the music, the way people are dressed ... distractions at Mass

As we participate in the Eucharist, not only do we participate in Christ's sacrifice on Calvary but we are called to share in that sacrifice. Just knowing this should change how we view everything that irks us at Mass. Are you:

• Suffering mental anguish -- like a crown of thorns is weighted upon your head?
• Weighed down by worldly concerns -- like the weight of the cross is on you?
• Feeling powerless -- like you are nailed to a cross?

If we take away a sacrificial attitude toward the Eucharist, we are likely to fail to see the connection between our lives and what we do at Mass. We are apt to sit in judgment, waiting to be entertained (whether we are conservative or liberal, what we want to see differs but the attitude is the same). When we fail to bring a sacrificial attitude to the Eucharist, our participation seems at times to be modeled more after Herod's banquet, where Simone's dance cost the Baptist his head, than after the Last Supper of Our Lord, where there was every indication that partaking in this banquet was likely to cost the disciples their own lives. (Indeed, ten of the twelve were martyred, Judas took his own life, and John survived being boiled alive in a cauldron of oil.) ...

Participation in the Eucharist requires that we die to ourselves and live in Christ. If we want to get the most out of the Eucharist, then sacrifice is the key. This is what has been lost on many of us and if we want to reclaim all the spiritual riches that are available to us we must relearn what it means not only to "offer it up" but indeed to offer ourselves up.

Now I want to be clear that what I am proposing in this book is not the "victim-ism" that was sometimes prevalent in the older spirituality of "offering it up." In every situation we are free to choose how we will respond to an event: we can blame someone else for what is happening, or we can feel powerless and do nothing. It is my contention that neither of these responses is Christ-like. The experience of "offering up" our lives to God needs to be a positive and co-redemptive act. Thankfully, with God's help we are all capable of freely choosing to respond in this fashion.

How to Get the Most Out of the Eucharist
by Michael Dubruiel

There are things that will drive anyone to distraction at Mass and new convert Will Duquette and his family are dealing with noisy children, specifically. Anyone who is annoyed at Mass would do well to go read his reflections found here, here, and here. He and his family are dealing with their distractions in a mood of charity and common sense that many of us would do well to emulate. They are providing an excellent example of a positive, co-redemptive way to offer up oneself during the Mass.

I, personally, tend to reflect upon the fact that the first Masses were held in households, especially during the times when the Church was under extreme persecution. You would have had children crying, animals wandering around, flies and fleas abounding, and many other distractions that we do not have to think about today. Keep your eye on the prize, I often remind myself. I am here to worship and meet Christ in the Eucharist and so are all these other people, whatever distractions they may offer. I dare not let myself think of the times I, unwittingly, have been a distraction to others. Because, of course, I'm perfect, right? Ha!

Seventh Day of Christmas: Optional Memorial of

The last day of the year is also the feast of St. Sylvester — bishop of Rome in 314. Constantine gave him the Lateran Palace, which became the cathedral church of Rome. Many legends exist about Sylvester. He supposedly cured Constantine from leprosy and later baptized him on his deathbed.

New Year's Eve, along with its innocent gaiety, is really a day for serious reflection. On the eve of the civil New Year the children may join their parents in a holy hour, in prayer and thanksgiving for the gifts and benefits which God has given them in the past year, and to pray for necessary graces in the forthcoming civil year.

Read more at Catholic Culture.

Be Careful What You Ask For

I believe in signs. I believe that prayers are often answered. I believe that God will indulge us from time to time because we are precious to Him and He delights in our delights. But I hope I've finally learned to stop asking for what is freely given in His own time.

formation has a good and thoughtful post about "baiting God" or, in other words, asking for a sign. I especially love being reminded that God delights in us and will give treats as an indulgence. That takes me back to "relationship" and it is too easy for me to forget that at times. Especially at this time of year, I think that increased awareness of God in our lives is so interesting to think over.

That post made me cast back my mind to a time when I didn't believe, asked for a sign, and wound up ponying up first ... only to be given a whopper of a sign.

I think back to a time when we didn't ask for a sign but got a miraculous one anyway.

I think of a time when I was being hounded by God (yes, hounded and haunted and hunted and pestered to distraction) in discernment of my role for the Christ Renews His Parish team. I mean to say the Holy Spirit used scripture, that "small, still voice," people's offhanded comments, and more to whap me upside the head. On one hand, once I figured out what was going on, I was pleased. On the other hand, I was considerably freaked out. Not easy to accomplish simultaneously, but I managed without any problem at all.

Those are just the big examples, not the small instances that pop up here and there, usually when I least expect it. I really tend not to ask for signs as I figure that if I am "listening" or aware enough then I'll hopefully see things unfolding (as with Rose's college choice ... at one point it was like standing in the middle of the runway looking at the airplane circling overhead and feeling that God was standing there signalling where to land ... truly amazing). Not that I don't need a good whap with that holy 2x4 every so often. I also have a dread of getting in the habit of treating God like a vending machine (insert one prayer, receive one sign) because that completely ignores the relationship and so much more about our lives of faith.

Well, Well, We've Got Two Extra Chapters of Daniel in the Bible

Peter Paul Rubens. Daniel in the Lions' Den.

"We" meaning Catholics. I knew there were books the Protestants didn't include such as Tobit (and what a shame that is ... it is fantastic and a favorite of mine). However, this morning, having forgotten to pick up my Magnificat for the daily Mass readings and having already set my timer (to be sure I put in some quantity as well as quality time with God) ... I just did a Bible flip and wound up at chapter 14 of Daniel. Really great and I found it quite absorbing. Specifically I was at verse 13 and I will paraphrase the story (read it here). The king shows Daniel a living dragon, says it is a god and tells him to worship it. Daniel disposes of the dragon quite elegantly, the mob protests his getting rid of a god (as well as another one from earlier in the chapter) and the king responds by tossing Daniel in a den of hungry lions. They leave him in there for 7 days and I was most impressed by the level of detail. For instance, God sends an angel to the prophet Habukkuk to bring Daniel something to eat. When Habukkuk tells the angel that he doesn't have any idea where either Babylon or the den are, the angel seizes him by the crown of his head and whisks him by his hair off to feed Daniel. I just loved that. Picking up my brand new Archaeological Study Bible (which has an adamant "yay Protestant Biblical books choice!" cheering section of the introduction) I was curious to see what they might have for entries on those pages. Surprise, surprise, surprise! The Book of Daniel didn't end at all as I expected with the story of Susannah in chapter 13 and Daniel exposing various false gods in chapter 14. The Protestant Bible only goes to chapter 12. And here is why.

The Hebrew and Aramaic sections of the Book of Daniel thus far dealt with, are the only ones found in the Hebrew Bible and recognized by Protestants as sacred and canonical. But besides those sections, the Vulgate, the Greek translations of Daniel (Septuagint and Theodotion) together with other ancient and modern versions, contain three important portions, which are deuterocanonical. These are:

• the Prayer of Azarias and the Song of the Three Children, usual}y inserted in the third chapter between the twenty-third and the twenty-fourth verses;
• the history of Susanna, found as ch. xiii, at the end of the book;
• the history of the destruction of Bel and the dragon, terminating the book as ch. xiv.

The first of these fragments (Dan., iii, 24-90) consists of a prayer in which Azarias, standing in the midst of the furnace, asks that God may deliver him and his companions, Ananias and Misael, and put their enemies to shame (verses 24-45); a brief notice of the fact that the Angel of the Lord saved the Three Children from all harm, whereas the flame consumed the Chaldeans above the furnace (46-50); and a doxology (52-56) leading on to the hymn familiarly known as the "Benedicite" (57-90). The second fragment (ch. xiii) tells the history of Susanna. ... The last deuterocanonical part of Daniel (ch. xiv) contains the narrative of the destruction of Bel and the dragon. ... The Greek is, indeed the oldest form under which these deutero-canonical parts of the Book of Daniel have come down to us; but this is no decisive proof that they were composed in that language. In fact, the greater probability is in favour of a Hebrew original no longer extant. It is plain that the view which regards these three fragments as not originally written in Greek makes it easier to suppose that they were from the beginning integrant parts of the book. Yet, it does not settle the question of their date and authorship. It is readily granted by conservative scholars (Vigouroux, Gilly, etc.) that the last two are probably from a different and later author than the rest of the book. On the other hand, it is maintained by nearly all Catholic writers, that the Prayer of Azarias and the Song of the Three Children cannot be dissociated from the preceding and the following context in Dan., iii, and that therefore they should be referred to the time of Daniel, if not to that Prophet himself. In reality, there are well nigh insuperable difficulties to such an early date for Dan., iii, 24-90, so that this fragment also, like the other two, should most likely be ascribed to some unknown Jewish author who lived long after the Exile. Lastly, although the deuterocanonical portions of Daniel seem to contain anachronisms, they should not be treated -- as was done by St Jerome -- as mere fables. More sober scholarship will readily admit that they embody oral or written traditions not altogether devoid of historical value. But, whatever may be thought concerning these literary or historical questions, there cannot be the least doubt that in decreeing the sacred and canonical character of these fragments the Council of Trent proclaimed the ancient and morally unanimous belief of the Church of God.

No matter which Bible you use, do go read chapters 13 and 14 of Daniel. I found them both to be ripping stories and (most important of all) to have some good food for thought. As a side note, I checked the Archaeological Study Bible out of the library for several weeks before adding it to my Christmas wish list. All the notes, articles, and commentary are about such things as historical/cultural notes, archaeological discoveries, artifacts, and more. If you go to their site they have sample pdfs to examine. I use it in conjunction with my The Catholic Study Bible or, in the case of my current reading of Romans, the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible.

Dean Koontz and His Catholic Faith

March Hare mentioned, upon reading this quote, that she didn't realize Dean Koontz was Catholic.

For those whom it may interest, here is an interesting interview with Dean Koontz where he talks about his faith with Tim Drake.

The Curt Jester Reviews "In This House of Brede"

This book is certainly no pious stereotype of perfect contemplative nuns, but instead a book that reads more like an autobiography than a novel. The characters in the story are so real that you forget you are reading a novel. From the abbess down to the novices each person described could easily find their counterpart in real life.

Read the whole review. Y'all know that I am a fan and it is nice to see that Jeff enjoyed the book also.

Something I rarely see mentioned about Godden's books but that one commenter pointed out is that Godden's books often have unsettling elements which can often be painful to think about. I think about the way that the youngest child is ignored practically to the point of abuse in Thursday's Children, the way that Lovejoy's mother has abandoned her in An Episode of Sparrows, Philipa's secret in In This House of Brede. I haven't read all of Godden's books but I think that the only one that I have read where I can't remember something of the sort included is The Kitchen Madonna.

I think it is because Godden doesn't sugar-coat life. She shows the worst side of human behavior and we find it painful because we know just how it would feel to be treated like that. However, she also shows the best side and it is a redemptive side that I find extremely rewarding. For me, this mirrors life and I think that Godden does it with a subtle yet sure touch. Perhaps most amazing thing is that Godden manages to show those bad qualities in extremely good, non-offensive prose. That is an art that is lost on many modern writers.

When Atheism Backfires

Michael Coren (found via Brandywine Books) writes about the "banality of atheism" pushing him to investigate faith to see if there was something more worthwhile to be found. Lo and behold, he has been a Christian now for 20 years. With the advent of the so-called new crop of atheists, he hasn't found their arguments much different than the old ones.

Then, just recently, the tarnished old arguments from the flimsy and trendy were re-published in new editions by the likes of Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins and we were all supposed to run away and hide. So I read them. Then began to laugh. It's the emperor and his new clothes. Naked, quite naked.

Nothing new here. Nothing clever or challenging, either.

Busting with errors, hysterical, clumsy, nasty and obviously incredibly frightened. Suddenly, I realize what's going on. It's that God again, helping to strengthen my faith. "The best they can do," He's saying, "is blast you with the same old nonsense they threw at you when you first thought of coming my way."

We have all heard the objections to Christianity that are continually trotted out by those who fancy themselves the first to pose such questions. Heck, I used to believe a couple of them myself. However, I wish I'd have had someone on hand who could have disposed of those objections with the simple logic shown by Coren. I especially appreciated his responses to the questions of "If God were good, He would make Himself obvious" and "Why do bad things happen to good people?" Go see what he says.

All this made me realize that I tend to store up what I consider the deal-breakers for doubters' objections to faith. Coren now has provided what will become my first salvo to those particular questions I mentioned above.

As to the question of Christianity being an invention and necessity for the weak to be able to get by in life, my favorite is still that comment by former atheist John C. Wright:

To those of you who think religion is a self-delusion based on wish-fulfillment, all I can remark is that this religion does not fulfill my wishes. My wishes, if we are being honest, would run to polygamy, self-righteousness, vengeance and violence: a Viking religion would suit me better, or maybe something along Aztec lines. The Hall of Valhalla, where you feast all night and battle all day, or the paradise of the Mohammedans, where you have seventy-two dark-eyed virgins to abuse, fulfills more wishes of base creatures like me than any place where they neither marry nor are given in marriage. This turn-the-other cheek jazz might be based any number of psychological appeals or spiritual insights, but one thing it is not based on is wish-fulfillment.

An absurd and difficult religion! If it were not true, no one would bother with it.

As to the supposedly scandalous accusations about the crimes committed in the name of Christianity, we all wish those were not true but it is undeniable that the Church is made up of people, which is to say ... sinners. Which always turns my thoughts to this quote which says it all.

The church is always God hung between two thieves. Thus, no one should be surprised or shocked at how badly the church has betrayed the gospel and how much it continues to do so today. It has never done very well. Conversely, however, nobody should deny the good the church has done either. It has carried grace, produced saints, morally challenged the planet, and made, however imperfectly, a house for God to dwell in on this earth.

To be connected with the church is to be associated with scoundrels, warmongers, fakes, child-molesters, murderers, adulterers and hypocrites of every description. It also, at the same time, identifies you with saints and the finest persons of heroic soul within every time, country, race and gender. To be a member of the church is to carry the mantle of both the worst sin and the finest heroism of the soul ... because the church always looks exactly as it looked at the original crucifixion, God hung among thieves.

Ronald Rolheiser

Leave It to God to Use You

The basic thing is that I never ask myself what the result of any action will be--that is God's concern. The only question I keep asking myself in life is: what should I do at this particular moment? What should I say? All you can do is to be at every single moment as true as you can be with all the power in your being--and then leave it to God to use you, even despite yourself.

Beginning to Pray by Anthony Bloom

I had to revised my conversion story slightly. A specific part that I never spelled out is that Hannah came home and started pushing us to go to weekly Mass because her religion teacher in kindergarten, Mrs. McDaniel (a woman whose vocation clearly is to teach kindergarten, she is amazing), asked the children who went every week. She then told those who didn't raise their hands that they needed to go home and tell their parents they should be going to Mass every week. As we all know, Hannah went right home, obeyed orders, and ... well, the rest is history.

A couple of weeks ago I glimpsed Mrs. McDaniel at Mass as I sometimes do and realized that I never had thanked her. For her that was a routine part of teaching religion, but considering people's touchy feelings these days (yes, even at a Catholic school), I know that she was taking a risk in telling those little children to go home and push their parents to go to Mass. Of course, I am so very grateful that she did as it changed my life completely as well as that of our family.

I began thinking that I needed to tell her what a difference she had made, but she was always too quick in slipping out the door. Yesterday, at the 11:00 Christmas Mass, she came in. I thought, "Ok, today I am going to be so quick, I am going to catch and tell her." Then she sat down in the pew in front of me. In the place directly in front of me.

I wasn't going to lose a chance like that. I tapped her on the shoulder, meaning to ask her to stay after Mass so I could talk to her. Instead, the whole story poured out (abbreviated and very quickly) into her startled ears. She put her hands to her face, tears came to her eyes, she hugged me. As so often happens, of course, she had no idea that God used her to plant that very specific seed in the one determined person that Tom and I would not disappoint ... our little Hannah.

At the end of Mass, she turned to me again and told me that she had needed so very much to hear that message of making a difference, that I had no idea of what it meant. True enough, I didn't. However, I had that thought suddenly planted about staying alert to thank her and then she sat right in front of me with friends, where I never see her sit. This Christmas gift was coming from a bigger place than me. God never stops moving, never stops working, especially at Christmas Mass.

If you enjoy this blog, then Mrs. McDaniel has touched you too. Aren't we all happy she did her job so well, that she cared enough to send those little children home with that message for their parents? There is no telling how many people's lives she has touched through her devoted teaching of kindergarteners through the years. I am simply the one who was there to speak the words at that moment. I am positive there are many, many, many others who owe Mrs. McDaniel a large debt of thanks also.

On all their behalves let me say again, "Thank you, Mrs. McDaniel!"

I'm Out of Here ...

... until after Christmas! My prayer is that everyone has a very Merry and blessed Christmas everyone and I'll be back on Boxing Day (a.k.a. Dec. 26)!