tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35102572024-02-18T21:54:36.243-05:00Disputations''For true and false will in no better way be revealed and uncovered than in resistance to a contradiction.'' -- St. Thomas AquinasTomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.comBlogger3605125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-62823761727288092342020-09-19T15:33:00.001-04:002020-09-19T15:33:49.884-04:00The Mystery of Suffering<p> In one of her letters, St. Catherine of Siena said -- well, she said basically the same thing in more than one letter, but I'm quoting Letter T5/G225 to Francesco da Montalcino:</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">And whatever [God] gives or permits us, whether pain or illness, in whatever way, he gives and permits it with great mystery, to make us holy and to give us what we need to be saved.</p><p>The translator, Suzanne Noffke, OP, adds this note after the word "mystery":</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">This is the concept of "mystery" (<i>mistero</i>) which is so dear to Catherine, always carrying a sense of the sacramental, of the intimate interaction of God with humanity.</p><p>Of course "mystery" and "sacrament" are two different terms for the same thing:</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span class="textsm">The Greek word <em>mysterion </em>was translated into Latin by two terms: <em>mysterium </em>and <em>sacramentum</em>. In later usage the term <em>sacramentum </em>emphasizes the visible sign of the hidden reality of salvation which was indicated by the term <em>mysterium</em>.
In this sense, Christ himself is the mystery of salvation: "For there
is no other mystery of God, except Christ." The saving work of his holy
and sanctifying humanity is the sacrament of salvation, which is
revealed and active in the Church's sacraments (which the Eastern
Churches also call "the holy mysteries"). The seven sacraments are the
signs and instruments by which the Holy Spirit spreads the grace of
Christ the head throughout the Church which is his Body. The Church,
then, both contains and communicates the invisible grace she signifies.
It is in this analogical sense, that the Church is called a "sacrament." - <a href="http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/774.htm">CCC 774</a></span></p><p><span class="textsm"> I don't think there's a sense analogical enough for me call pain or illness a "sacrament." But if pain or illness is something physical in which I find God present, and in that experience He gives me what I need to be saved....<br /></span></p>Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-79946432216663644002020-09-19T11:19:00.000-04:002020-09-19T11:19:06.839-04:00A Very Certain Pharisee<p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><a href="https://bible.usccb.org/bible/readings/091720.cfm">A certain Pharisee</a> invited Jesus to dine with him, and he entered the Pharisee’s house and reclined at table.<br /><br />Now there was a sinful woman in the city who learned that he was at table in the house of the Pharisee. Bringing an alabaster flask of ointment, she stood behind him at his feet weeping and began to bathe his feet with her tears. Then she wiped them with her hair, kissed them, and anointed them with the ointment.<br /><br />When the Pharisee who had invited him saw this he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would know who and what sort of woman this is who is touching him, that she is a sinner.”</p><p>Isn't that last bit strange? A sinful woman crashes a Pharisee's party, then cries, wipes, kisses, and anoints all over the feet of his out-of-town guest, and what does the Pharisee say to himself?<br /></p><p>"Now here's something you don't see every day."? No.</p><p>"Note to self: In future, prevent guests from being assaulted by notorious sinners."? No.</p><p>"What the heck is she doing?"? No.</p><p>All he manages is, "<i>She's</i> a sinner, so <i>he's</i> no prophet."</p><p>That's heavy duty interpretive bias. That's some kind of certainty about what's happening, even though what's happening is surely nothing he has ever seen before.</p><p>In Simon the Pharisee's mind, this sinful woman is securely categorized as "sinner," and nothing and nobody is going to earn her a reconsideration. He looks at her and sees nothing but <span style="color: red;"><b>SINNER</b></span>. He doesn't see her penitence. He doesn't see her adoration. In fact, that <span style="color: red;"><b>SINNER </b></span>is so strong it blinds him to everything it touches, including Simon's guest. (Though apparently Simon's house, to say nothing of himself, remains pure.)</p><p>St. Luke doesn't tell us how Simon responded to Jesus' rebuke, so we might hope that he himself wound up penitent and adoring. As we might hope for ourselves, if and when we happen to be too certain of our own righteousness and the sinfulness of another.<br /></p>Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-6871053998150625932020-07-31T08:02:00.001-04:002020-07-31T08:02:10.607-04:00On an unrelated note I am always surprised when people don’t care whether something they say is true. Often enough, it doesn’t even seem to occur to people to ask themselves whether something they say is true, as though the fact they find a thought in their head establishes its truth. Though I suppose being oblivious to the question is better, in some ways, than being indifferent.<div><br /></div><div>As a people myself, I may well do what I criticize here. If and when I do, I’d like to think it’s only because I’m oblivious.</div>Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-19821206785905758312020-07-26T14:09:00.001-04:002020-07-26T14:09:44.541-04:00What price the Kingdom?I noticed this morning the man who found buried treasure happened to have just enough wealth to buy the field, and the merchant happened to have just enough wealth to buy the pearl.<div><br /></div><div>That’s the thing about “all that you have.” It sounds like a lot— but it’s not more than you have. Even if all you have is two mites.</div>Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-56604611774797157772020-07-26T09:21:00.001-04:002020-07-26T09:21:21.213-04:00Free gifts!<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">“On the part of the things proposed to </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05752c.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">faith</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> for </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02408b.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">belief</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">, two things are requisite on our part: first that they be penetrated or grasped by the </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08066a.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">intellect</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">, and this belongs to the </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06553a.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">gift</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> of understanding. Secondly, it is necessary that</span><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09580c.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">man</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> should judge these things aright, that he should esteem that he ought to adhere to these things, and to withdraw from their opposites: and this judgment, with regard to Divine things belong to the </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06553a.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">gift</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> of wisdom, but with regard to </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04470a.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">created</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> things, belongs to the </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06553a.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">gift</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> of </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">knowledge</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">, and as to its application to </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07762a.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">individual</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> actions, belongs to the </span><a href="https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06553a.htm" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; color: darkblue; font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none;">gift</a><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> of counsel.”<br /></span><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span></div><div><font face="verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: white; caret-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); font-size: 14px;">— ST II-II, 8, vi</span></font></div>Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-56427456234893558652020-07-13T21:33:00.004-04:002020-07-13T21:44:32.235-04:00The Christian Two-Step<div>I think I almost figured something out today.</div><div></div><div><br /></div><div>As St. Paul <a href="http://http://www.usccb.org/bible/romans6:8">teaches</a>:</div><div><br /><div style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">If, then, we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him. We know that Christ, raised from the dead, dies no more; death no longer has power over him. As to his death, he died to sin once and for all; as to his life, he lives for God. Consequently, you too must think of yourselves as being dead to sin and living for God in Christ Jesus.</div></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">"Dead to sin and living for God." Stealing from Bl. Columba Marmion, this is the linchpin of my lesson on Baptism when I've taught that session in RCIA. To become a Christian has two essential dimensions: Die to sin. Live for God.</div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">I got that part. Death/Life. Descent/Ascent. Exitus/Reditus. Into the Jordan/Up from the Jordan. The movement of the Christian, imitating the movement of Christ.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><a name="53006011"><br /></a></div><div style="text-align: left;">And I am not unaware that we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death.</div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><a name="53006003"><br /></a></div><div style="text-align: left;">But I'm still working on the dying part.</div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: left;"><i>Being </i>dead to sin is easy. Being dead is no effort at all. It's <i>becoming </i>dead that stings. And the death-to-sin of the Christian isn't an easy, peacefully in the night kind of death. It's a crucifixion. The old man doesn't go quietly, he kicks and screams and pleads and hangs on longer than most executioners are willing to wait.</div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">St. Paul says we must think of ourselves as dead to sin, but of course that's not enough. We must really be dead to sin, and you don't get to be dead to sin just by thinking it, or saying it. You have to actually do it. As St. Paul goes on to say:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">Therefore, sin must not reign over your mortal bodies so that you obey their desires.</div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">You overthrow sin by dying to sin. You do that by taking up your cross every day and following your Master.</div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">"Die to sin" is Christian ascesis. "Live for God" is Christian apotheosis. It's the daily, the constant movement of the Christian; one step, then the other, along the road to Golgotha and eternal life.</div></div>Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-71599213395454715642020-06-21T10:37:00.000-04:002020-06-21T10:37:33.501-04:00To You I have entrusted my cause<div>Today's <a href="http://www.usccb.org/bible/jeremiah/20:10">first reading </a>from Jeremiah includes this plea:</div><div><br /></div><div style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">O LORD of hosts, you who test the just,<br />
who probe mind and heart,<br />
let me witness the vengeance you take on them,<br />
for to you I have entrusted my cause.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">That might seem inconsistent with the idea of taking up your cross and following the Lamb of God without resisting your enemies.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">What I heard, though, is not about the suffering of Jeremiah's enemies, it's about the justice of God. Jeremiah doesn't know when his persecutors "will be put to utter shame, to lasting, unforgettable confusion," but he knows it will certainly happen. He doesn't want to witness it for his personal triumph over all those who were his friends -- well, maybe a little, but the real point is, for Jeremiah to witness it means he's still alive when it happens, which means it happens relatively soon. When you're praying to a God for Whom a thousand years are like yesterday, no more than a watch in the night, it doesn't hurt to ask that He not wait a thousand years to effect His justice in the world.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Moreover, Jeremiah has entrusted his cause to the LORD Who tests the just. He's sure he's aced the test, but it's not official until the test results are posted. When the wicked lose their power, the poor will not only be rescued, they can be certain that they themselves are just before the LORD if they follow Jeremiah's example.<br /></div>Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-20480735552607051852020-02-05T08:28:00.001-05:002020-02-05T08:34:13.370-05:00Where was I?I was talking with God last night, and it seemed what I was looking for was the Broadway Prayer, about which I first wrote seventeen years ago (!) and haven't given a lot of thought to since.<br />
<br />
In case the details have slipped your mind as well, let me <a href="https://disputations.blogspot.com/2002/09/#82163316">quote myself</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Fr. Clement Burns, OP, preaches something he calls "the Broadway
Prayer," for use when a person or situation in your life weighs heavily
on your heart.
<br />
<br />
The steps of the Broadway Prayer are:<br />
<blockquote>
<ol>
<li><b>Thank God for the person.</b>
Put his name up in lights (hence "Broadway") and celebrate the good
that God has placed in him. It doesn't matter whether you feel
particularly thankful. "Dear God, thank you for my neighbor. Thank you
for the love she has for your creation [which she shows by keeping two
dozen cats]. Thank you for her enthusiasm [which keeps her up till 2
a.m. on weekends] and her sense of humor [marked by that braying
laugh]."</li>
<li><b>Ask God to change the person in some observable way.</b>
Of course, the way you think the person should change may not be the
way God thinks he should. You just pray for what you think is best, and
leave the rest to God. The important point, for this prayer, is that the
change be something you will be able to detect. "I pray that my mother
may stop spitting tobacco juice on the rugs and shooting at squirrels
from my porch."</li>
<li><b>Thank God for changing the person.</b> Take a
moment to imagine the person changed in the way you have asked, then
thank God for it. "Thank you, Lord, for helping him to stop insulting
Norwegians in my presence."</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-22464167396210423442017-09-23T12:16:00.002-04:002017-09-23T12:20:03.723-04:00The handle of his wrongI came across Epictetus a couple of times this week, which is unexpected since he's been dead for a while now. First was a link to <a href="http://existentialcomics.com/comic/151">an old Existential Comic</a> that explains why there are so few First World Stoics these days. Second was a reference, in <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-joy-of-destruction/article/2009685">a Joseph Bottum <i>Weekly Standard</i> column</a>, to Epictetus's "two handles" metaphor, which I quote from <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/dep/dep102.htm">an online translation</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Everything has two handles, one by which you can carry it, the other
by which you cannot. If your brother wrongs you, do not take it by that<span style="color: green;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"> </span></span>handle, the handle of his wrong, for you cannot carry it by that, but
rather by the other handle—that he is a brother, brought up with you,
and then you will take it by the handle that you can carry by.</blockquote>
Bottum was writing about American political discourse, but Catholic discourse is also rife with taking the handle of your brother's wrong. The fact that he is wrong is often treated as more relevant, more fundamental, even more certain than the fact that he is your brother.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-72407431597471864992017-01-07T23:04:00.000-05:002017-01-07T23:09:34.069-05:00A word or two, if I mayOne of the nice things about having a blog you never update that no one reads is you can post whatever you like. I like words, and I came across two in the last few months I'd like to remember.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nondenotative"><i>Nondenotative </i></a>means "not denotative." I'll go ahead and use it to mean "of or relating to words that do not denote anything," then distinguish different kinds of nondenotative speech:<br />
<ul>
<li>gibberish (word-like sounds)</li>
<li><a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/double%E2%80%93talk">double-talk</a> (speech that sounds like it denotes some meaning, but on reflection or review doesn't)</li>
<li>speech that objectively denotes some meaning but that is spoken in a particular instance without a subjective intent to denote anything...</li>
<ul>
<li>...and without a subjective intent to connote something</li>
<li>...but with a subjective intent to connote something</li>
</ul>
</ul>
There may be some cases in which you'd want to take that last kind of nondenotative speech seriously but not literally. <br />
<ul><ul>
</ul>
</ul>
<a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obnubilate"><i>Obnubilate</i></a> means "becloud, obscure." Clouds can obnubilate the sun, polite words can obnubilate true intent, awkward mannerisms can obnubilate intelligence. If William Strunk's dictum, "Omit needless words," were universally adopted, "obnubilate" would be omitted from the dictionary.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-81199712621956868672016-12-15T09:36:00.000-05:002016-12-15T09:36:23.777-05:00Hello I must be going<i>Dusts off Blogger password. Checks out the news in the Catholic blogosphere.</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_xgCsTeKR8Q/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_xgCsTeKR8Q?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-28262612099155583412016-10-08T12:13:00.000-04:002016-10-08T12:13:13.283-04:00Leaders of strong character"...as women, we are disgusted by Mr. Trump's treatment of individuals, women, in particular... America will only be a great nation when we have leaders of strong character who will defend both unborn children and the dignity of women." - Marjorie Dannenfelser, President, Susan B. Anthony List, January 2016<br />
<br />
"" - Marjorie Dannenfelser, Chairwoman, Trump Pro-Life Coalition, October 2016Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-39241552085234010592016-08-27T18:02:00.001-04:002016-08-27T18:02:45.326-04:00Sign of the times<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjerF0KJfuNtjFh1Hyuhl1Tf8g_tNmEGTSk_kLBX8hA61cjfoir8p4U0fkDoHG1hAYLLFF4NFHx3yOfnZHEyCaZkdYh2vGo57AzahGHd1kbKG-7QtkR31C5PAslC42l5Pttn3uRgA/s1600/IMG_0536.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjerF0KJfuNtjFh1Hyuhl1Tf8g_tNmEGTSk_kLBX8hA61cjfoir8p4U0fkDoHG1hAYLLFF4NFHx3yOfnZHEyCaZkdYh2vGo57AzahGHd1kbKG-7QtkR31C5PAslC42l5Pttn3uRgA/s320/IMG_0536.JPG" width="240" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-55631075164873372292016-08-23T11:49:00.002-04:002016-08-23T11:50:21.196-04:00They is us"Us vs. Them" think<strike>ers</strike><span style="color: red;">ing</span> in the Church tear<span style="color: red;">s</span> at that unity for which Jesus prayed.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-1348501409977482572016-07-14T13:05:00.001-04:002016-07-14T13:05:21.449-04:00Zen Diagram<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjprr_a-rPhiXeuEeBMab-BdNz0JWdo2IVwK4BTL_0BfcIM_afyHKK3kvHK1f-Ci1QjH-ridmpPm26v6cLOGNaNR0hdm_4gSYyYBpD4PU6wnFVX3hA1u0IgEBaLqHLF8mxM0iMRaQ/s1600/ZenDiagram.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="299" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjprr_a-rPhiXeuEeBMab-BdNz0JWdo2IVwK4BTL_0BfcIM_afyHKK3kvHK1f-Ci1QjH-ridmpPm26v6cLOGNaNR0hdm_4gSYyYBpD4PU6wnFVX3hA1u0IgEBaLqHLF8mxM0iMRaQ/s320/ZenDiagram.gif" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-89157983768648015482016-04-17T16:04:00.003-04:002016-04-17T16:06:08.033-04:00Corrigere delinquentem magis ad severitatemToday was the last RCIA session of the year, and I finally achieved my goal of not saying anything. (Or at least nothing that anyone could think was intended to be instructive. After the presenter joked about not being sure whether a turn of phrase she used came from our pastor or the Pope, I said, "The Pope is less busy. He'll return your email." And when the RCIA director asked if I had any parting comments, I said, "See you next week." (You know, Mass.) Other than that, silence.)
The closest I came to having an audible thought was while looking at the list of the spiritual works of mercy:<br />
<ul>
<li>To instruct the ignorant </li>
<li>To counsel the doubtful </li>
<li>To admonish sinners </li>
<li>To patiently bear with those who annoy us </li>
<li>To forgive offenses willingly </li>
<li>To comfort the afflicted </li>
<li>To pray for the living and the dead</li>
</ul>
This middle one is more often expressed as, "To bear wrongs patiently." The presenter went with this version as being more concrete -- and besides, St. Thomas <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3032.htm#article2">renders it</a> "to bear with those who trouble and annoy us" (<a href="http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/sth3027.html"><i>portare onerosos et graves</i></a>).<br />
<br />
Another catechist offered a variation on the old joke that admonishing sinners seems to come naturally to people, and I imagined an amended list:<br />
<ul>
<li>To admonish the ignorant </li>
<li>To admonish the doubtful </li>
<li>To admonish sinners </li>
<li>To admonish those who annoy us</li>
<li>To admonish prior to forgiving offenses </li>
<li>To admonish the afflicted </li>
<li>To admonish the living and the dead</li>
</ul>
In an uncharacteristic moment of prudence, I kept this to myself. This particular crew of baby Catholics doesn't strike me as likely to weaponize the catechism. But let me try this here:<br />
<br />
One item on the second list is merciful. At first glance, though, it looks like the other six items, none of which is merciful. It may similarly be difficult to be altogether sure whether a particular instance of admonishment is merciful.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-16762977862865789932016-04-10T08:12:00.001-04:002016-04-11T07:56:41.666-04:00An icon, not an idol"The natural order has been so imbued with the redemptive grace of Jesus," Pope Francis <a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf">writes</a>, "that '<a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P3V.HTM">a valid matrimonial contract</a> cannot exist between the baptized without it being by that fact a sacrament.' [AL 75]<br />
<br />
Marriage is a natural sign of the Trinity, present from creation ("God created mankind in his image; in the image of God he created them; <a href="http://usccb.org/bible/genesis/1:27">male and female he created them</a>." "The LORD God said: 'It is not good for the man to be alone. <a href="https://www.blogger.com/usccb.org/bible/genesis/2:18">I will make a helper suited to him</a>.'"). AL 11 extends the sign from the married couple to the human family:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The couple that loves and begets life is a true, living icon – not an idol like those of stone or gold prohibited by the Decalogue – capable of revealing God the Creator and Saviour. For this reason, fruitful love becomes a symbol of God’s inner life.... [T]he couple’s fruitful relationship becomes an image for understanding and describing the mystery of God himself, for in the Christian vision of the Trinity, God is contemplated as Father, Son and Spirit of love.</blockquote>
The love of God, perfect and complete in itself, overflows into this perfectly gratuitous creation we are all a part of, that all of creation may give glory to God, joining according to the nature we've been given in that one eternal act of love. In a similar way, the love of a family is to overflow into the rest of creation, drawing a similar response -- although, since the family is an icon, not an idol, the love with which creation responds to the family's own love isn't returned to the family itself, but through the family returns to the Source of all love.<br />
<br />
All that is simply what families are, necessarily, from the very nature of things as God created them.<br />
<br />
To that, Christian families -- which is to say, fruitful Christian (and therefore sacramental) marriages -- add the supernatural sign of the union of Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh, and His Church. This is so, not through God's act of creation, but through His act of redemption, through Jesus' passion, death, and resurrection. That is simply what Christian families are, necessarily. Ephesians 5:21-33 may be best known for, "<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="57005022">Wives should be subordinate to their husbands</a>," but the key is verse 32: "<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="57005032">This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church.</a>" And as the Church as a whole is to proclaim the Gospel to every creature, so the domestic church of the Christian family is to proclaim the Gospel to every creature it encounters. A Christian family, based on a marriage that can only exist as a sign that effects the grace it signifies, is to demonstrate -- not just among its members, but to all who encounter it -- the sacrificial and salvific love that held Jesus to the cross and brought Him forth from the grave on the third day.<br />
<hr width="25%" align="left">
<i>It's not really up to us whether our particular love or marriage is actually fruitful. The will to be fruitful is what we can provide; the rest is in God's hands.</i>Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-59612483683047990542016-04-09T13:17:00.003-04:002016-04-09T13:18:18.043-04:00Love is patientIn p. 91 of <i><a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf">Amoris laetitia</a></i>, Pope Francis discusses St. Paul's teaching that <a href="http://usccb.org/bible/1corinthians/13:4">love is "patient"</a> (in Greek,
<i>makrothyméi</i>):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This
does not simply have to do with “enduring all
things”, because we find that idea expressed at
the end of <a href="http://usccb.org/bible/1corinthians/13:7"> the seventh verse</a>. Its meaning is
clarified by the Greek translation of the Old
Testament, where we read that God is “slow to
anger” (
<a href="http://usccb.org/bible/exodus/34:6">Ex 34:6</a>;
<a href="http://usccb.org/bible/numbers/14:18">Num 14:18</a>). It refers, then,
to the quality of one who does not act on impulse and avoids giving offense. We find this
quality in the God of the Covenant, who calls
us to imitate him also within the life of the
family. Saint Paul’s texts using this word need
to be read in the light of the Book of Wisdom
(cf. <a href="http://usccb.org/bible/wisdom/11:23">11:23</a>; <a href="http://usccb.org/bible/wisdom/12:2">12:2</a>, <a href="http://usccb.org/bible/wisdom/12:15">15-18</a>), which extols God’s restraint, as leaving open the possibility of repentance, yet insists on his power, as revealed in
his acts of mercy. God’s “patience”, shown in
his mercy towards sinners, is a sign of his real
power.</blockquote>
Someone who is impotent to change things is not <i>makrothyméi</i> when they endure them without complaint (which is not to knock endurance without complaint). Off of which thought I riff thusly:<br />
<br />
Sheep are not sheeplike. A thing can only be like something else, something it is also in some way unlike. While it is good for a sheep to do things sheep do, it's not remarkable, much less virtuous or praiseworthy or glorious, because the sheep lacks the capacity to do anything else.<br />
<br />
We praise Jesus as the Lamb of God because He is also the Lion of Judah. He is a lamb-like lion, and we glorify Him for it.<br />
<br />
Moreover, we are called to follow Him, in this as in all He has revealed to us. There aren't many aspects of our lives in which we have more real power than in the relationships within our own families. If this seems more evident in familial relationships that lack love -- the cold and distant father, the son who breaks his mother's heart -- that speaks to St. Paul's point that love is patient, that for the good of the beloved it forebears even the legitimate exercise of power.<br />
<br />
Parents need to be patient in this sense with their children, so that they can learn to make the right choice when their parents aren't there to make it for them. Spouses, too, need to be patient, not only so we don't "end up incapable of living together,
antisocial, unable to control our impulses, and
our families will become battlegrounds [AL 92]," but to leave room for the other to grow in love for us. Husbands and wives who are always corrected right away will not develop the habit of correcting themselves; not only will they remain dependent and immature, they aren't given the opportunity to show love for their wives and husbands that correcting themselves affords. Impatience, even without anger, hurts both the lover and the beloved.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-34795760850686905222016-02-20T14:54:00.001-05:002016-02-20T14:54:11.128-05:00Counseling the counselorsI'm not particularly interested in the Pope's answer, but let's look at this question he was <a href="http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/full-text-of-pope-francis-in-flight-interview-from-mexico-to-rome-85821/">recently asked:</a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Holy Father, for several weeks there’s been a lot of concern in many Latin American countries but also in Europe regarding the Zika virus. The greatest risk would be for pregnant women. There is anguish. Some authorities have proposed abortion, or else to avoiding pregnancy. As regards avoiding pregnancy, on this issue, can the Church take into consideration the concept of “the lesser of two evils?”
</blockquote>
The principle of the lesser of two evils holds that, if someone else is intent on committing evil, you may counsel them to commit a lesser evil instead. You might counsel someone to get revenge in a less violent manner than they're intent on, for example.<br />
<br />
The principle doesn't say <i>committing </i>the lesser evil is morally acceptable -- evil is never morally acceptable -- it says <i>counseling </i>the lesser evil is, under some circumstances, morally acceptable. And yes, that means that counseling someone to commit evil isn't always evil. Counseling someone to sin isn't a field to go boldly marching through, and moral theologians don't all agree on exactly where and when you're allowed to step on that field.<br />
<br />
Given that, what was the question again?<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Some authorities have proposed abortion, or else to avoiding pregnancy.
As regards avoiding pregnancy, on this issue, can the Church take into
consideration the concept of “the lesser of two evils?”</blockquote>
It frames abortion as the greater evil and avoiding pregnancy as the lesser evil. We could stop there, since avoiding pregnancy isn't evil per se. But let's take "avoiding pregnancy" as a euphemism for "having contraceptive sex," which is evil per se, and a lesser evil than abortion.<br />
<br />
The question becomes: Is it acceptable to counsel women to have contraceptive sex rather than abortions?<br />
<br />
Which is kind of a screwy question, in a few different ways. For one, notice how the whole Zika virus angle is gone. We can stick it back in, but before we do, notice that it's still a pertinent question. Having a baby with microcephaly is not the only circumstance women say, "If I get pregnant in this circumstance, I will get an abortion." The Zika virus may make the issue newsworthy, but not new.<br />
<br />
Okay, I'll restore the newsworthy angle: Is it acceptable to counsel women to have contraceptive sex rather than have an abortion if their baby has microcephaly?<br />
<br />
This makes explicit the fact that the greater evil is conditional. If a child is conceived, and if that child has microcephaly, then the mother will abort her child. Does the principle of the lesser of two evils apply when the greater evil is uncertain?<br />
<br />
I don't know. In my ignorance, I'll propose that the conditional evil can be treated like a near occasion of sin. Abortion doesn't necessarily follow having sex, but there's certainly a risk that it will. This is similar (the question being, is it similar enough) to, "An act of gluttony doesn't necessarily follow my going to an all-you-can-eat buffet, but there's certainly a risk that it will."<sup>1</sup><br />
<br />
Now, it is not morally acceptable to counsel committing a lesser sin to avoid a near occasion of a greater sin; that's simply counseling doing evil to achieve good. It might, then, be likewise morally unacceptable to counsel committing a lesser sin to avoid the chance of committing a greater sin.<br />
<br />
Even if not, though, notice that the question violates one of the key conditions of the lesser of two evils principle. The evils are not mutually exclusive. Contraceptive sex may still produce a child. Can you counsel committing a lesser evil today, not to <i>avoid </i>the risk of committing a greater evil tomorrow, but merely to <i>reduce </i>that risk? I don't insist I know the answer, but we do seem to be getting farther from the central idea of the principle of the lesser of two evils.<br />
<br />
Moreover, the principle of the lesser of two evils only applies when the counselor is morally certain the counseled will commit evil. If the greater evil would be committed tomorrow, it can be asked how morally certain that evil is; the counselor has until tomorrow to talk the counseled out of the evil. In the case of abortion, the counselor has until an unknown hour on an unknown future day. I'm not suggesting that you can never be morally certain, just that you aren't necessarily always morally certain, even when a woman says, "If I knew my baby had microcephaly, I'd definitely get an abortion."<br />
<br />
Which brings me to my big point about the question: The principle of the lesser of two evils applies only in specific contexts, with a specific counselor and a specific counseled. It does not apply to what "some authorities have proposed." It doesn't cover blanket recommendations or PSAs. I might be allowed to tell my friend, "If you can't be good, be careful," but I can't tell the world, because there are people in the world who can be good.<br />
<br />
Which also means the answer to the question the Pope was asked can't be, "Yes," even if the principle of the lesser of two evils might apply. There is no way that answer would be heard as anything other than a blanket PSA allowing the use of contraception until the Zika virus is completely eradicated. In the event, of course, he didn't answer, "Yes," and it was still heard as "Contraceptives could be permissible to avoid Zika," to quote February 19th's front page <i>Washington Post </i>headline.<br />
<br />
<hr align="left" width="25%" />
1. To go into this a little more: With a conditional evil, it's, "If X occurs, I am morally certain of
doing Y"; the chance lies with X, while Y is certain. With a near
occasion of sin, it's, "In the presence of X, I am likely to do Y" the
chance lies with Y, while X is certain.<br />
<br />
Suppose you flip a coin, and win if it comes up heads. An occasion of sin is analogous to your flipping a coin with heads on on side and tails on the other; the odds of your winning depend on how fair the coin is. A conditional evil is analogous to your randomly picking a coin that has either heads or tails on both sides, and then flipping it; the odds of your winning depend on how many of each kind of trick coin you chose from.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-52081768228667663962016-02-14T12:33:00.001-05:002016-02-15T11:18:14.399-05:00Seriously, though, why "fear"?I wrote a lot of words <a href="http://disputations.blogspot.com/2016/02/fear-of-lord.html">yesterday</a> about understanding the gift of the Holy Spirit we call "the fear of the Lord" as the fear of offending the Lord -- not that God is offended in the sense of being miffed or hurt or indignant, but that we have acted toward Him in a way we ought not.<br />
<br />
Here let me risk yet more words to suggest why it's nevertheless proper to call this gift "the fear of the Lord," rather than, for example, "the fear of offending the Lord."<br />
<br />
We use the word "fear" in different ways. Sometimes it refers to a general disposition ("I fear spiders"), sometimes to a specific experience ("I fear that spider, crawling toward me on the floor"). Sometimes it refers to a passion ("I fear that spider"), sometimes to an intellectual apprehension ("I fear the Russians won't receive this news complacently"). All proper uses share two things in common: first, it relates to something we don't want; second, the thing we don't want hasn't happened yet. In fewer words, "<a href="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2041.htm#article2">the object of fear is a future evil</a>."<br />
<br />
If you grant me that much, then you should grant me that, with respect to our relationship to God, the servile fear of punishment (of doing something wrong because of what will happen to be) and the filial fear of fault (of doing something wrong because it's the wrong thing to do) are both, properly speaking, fear. They both have a future evil for an object.<br />
<br />
I propose that the primary reason the expression "the fear of the Lord" strikes us as so odd is that we tend to think of the Lord the way we think of created things. The future evils associated with created things generally are evils of punishment, or suffering, or loss; they're evils that happen to us or those we love. We are more attentive toward, and therefore more fearful about, our own good than the good of other created things -- which is not altogether improper even for Christians, since most created things were made subject to us, and the other persons who are subjects with us have (in general) no more right to do evil to us than we to them. (In Christ, we recognize a duty toward others that purely natural reason might not see, but we still have a right to self-defense, for example.)<br />
<br />
In short, most of the time we use the word "fear," it's in a manner analogous to the servile fear of God's punishment. So when we hear "fear of the Lord," we assume servile fear is meant.<br />
<br />
But God is unlike created things, in this way as in so many others. In the way we relate to God, what matters first and foremost is God in Himself. As the Act of Contrition has it, God is "all good and deserving of all my love." Of the two evils associated with my acting contrary to His will -- the fault itself and the consequent punishment -- the fault is far and away the worse. God is, so to speak, the first Subject of our relationship with Him, and only after everything that relates to God in Himself is attended to does what relates to us come into play.<br />
<br />
In short, filial fear is the proper primary sense of the word "fear" when we apply it to God. We just don't realize it because we're used to talking about fear in relation to created things.<br />
<br />
We might even go further and say that God is so good, so holy, that the distinction between offending Him and being punished for offending Him -- the distinction between filial fear and servile fear -- is more academic than practical. Then "the fear of the Lord" is a perfectly apt expression; as God told Moses, "<a href="http://www.usccb.org/bible/ex/33:20">No one can see Me and live</a>." We fear God the way we fear a flood; it's just not in our nature to survive either one.<br />
<br />
Recall, though, that St. Thomas called the combined fear of punishment and of fault "initial fear." The message of the Incarnation is that Jesus provides a way for us to the Father, to participate in His eternal life and see Him <a href="http://usccb.org/bible/1corinthians/13:12">face to face</a>. This is why the first and least gift of the Holy Spirit is a gift of filial fear, purified of fear of punishment. God can do no more for us than Jesus did for us on the Cross; in the light of the Gospel, the punishments for our transgressions fade to nothing -- or are even welcomed, to glorify God's justice and offer partial atonement (the welcoming part comes from the writings of the saints, not my own personal testimony).Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-17528167113819163212016-02-13T15:37:00.003-05:002016-04-18T17:00:38.012-04:00Fear of the LordOne of my Lenten self-improvement projects is to use my gifts of the Holy Spirit more. The seven gifts are listed in <a href="http://drbo.org/chapter/27011.htm">Isaiah 11:2-3</a> (I'll throw in verse 1 for some context):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
And there shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse,<br />
and a flower shall rise up out of his root.<br />
And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him:<br />
the spirit of <span style="color: red;">wisdom</span>,
and of <span style="color: red;">understanding</span>,<br />
the spirit of <span style="color: red;">counsel</span>, and of <span style="color: red;">fortitude</span>,<br />
the
spirit of <span style="color: red;">knowledge</span>, and of <span style="color: red;">godliness</span>.<br />
And he shall be filled with the spirit of the <span style="color: red;">fear of the Lord</span>. </blockquote>
<br />
The Douay Rheims has "godliness" for the gift traditionally called piety. Every Christian receives these gifts when they are baptized (although someone keeps telling our deacons it happens at Confirmation). The Catechism of the Catholic Church offers <a href="http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1830.htm">a brief explanation</a> of their purpose:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="text">The moral life of Christians is sustained by the
gifts of the Holy Spirit. These are permanent dispositions which make
man docile in following the promptings of the Holy Spirit.</span></blockquote>
<span class="text">If you want to see what the gifts look like in action, I suppose you should watch someone who is docile in following the promptings of the Holy Spirit. Of myself, I'd say I'm not particularly docile, though I wish I were, though I'm pretty sure I wouldn't enjoy the process of becoming that way. Docile in following the promptings of the Holy Spirit means stubborn in resisting contrary promptings, which means death to self, and that sounds painful.</span><br />
<span class="text"><br /></span>
<span class="text">Which, I gather, is where fear of the Lord comes in. You'll note it's the last gift listed in the passage in Isaiah, and yet as the Bible says in a <a href="http://www.usccb.org/bible/psalms/111:10">couple</a> of <a href="http://www.usccb.org/bible/proverbs/9:10">places</a>, the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. (It also says the fear of the Lord is the <a href="http://www.usccb.org/bible/sirach/1:16">crown of wisdom</a> and the <a href="http://www.usccb.org/bible/proverbs/1:7">beginning of knowledge</a>.) St Augustine <a href="http://newadvent.org/fathers/16011.htm">suggests</a> Isaiah's ordering "begins with the more excellent,"<sup>1</sup> making fear of the Lord the humblest, which explains both why it's the beginning of the other gifts (you've got to work your way to the top) and why it's not a particularly welcome gift. Who wants to be humble?</span><br />
<br />
It's hard to say much about the fear of the Lord without apologizing for, if not backpedaling away from, that word "fear." "We aren't <i>afraid </i>of God," I hasten to tell you, "we're afraid of offending him." Which makes sense, sort of, as long as no one notices how close that is to, "We aren't <i>afraid </i>of the lion. We're afraid of waking him up."<br />
<br />
Close, but St. Thomas can help us distinguish between them. Following Peter Lombard, he proposes <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3019.htm#article2">four kinds of fear</a> we might have relative to God:<br />
<ul>
<li><b>human or worldly fear</b>, which draws away from God in fear of the evils (as we see them) we would suffer if we stay close to Him</li>
<li><b>servile fear</b>, which draws us toward God out of fear of punishment (basically the same motive as human fear, only we're more afraid of what will happen to us if we don't follow God's commandments than if we do)</li>
<li><b>filial or chaste fear</b>, which draws us toward God out of fear of committing a fault</li>
<li><b>initial fear</b>, which is a mixture of servile and filial fear</li>
</ul>
St. Thomas says <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3019.htm#article9">the fear of the Lord that is a gift of the Holy Spirit is filial fear</a>. With filial fear, we're afraid of doing something wrong, not because of any particular consequence, but simply because it's wrong If we love God (Who, by the way, infuses us with the virtue of charity with which to love Him as well as the gifts to do it well), we don't want to do wrong by him. It's sort of like how someone might say, "I'm afraid my father won't like his birthday present." They aren't afraid their father will beat him if he doesn't like it, they're afraid of missing an opportunity to please him.<br />
<br />
That's the difference between fear of the Lord and fear of the sleeping lion. Unless I'm a zookeeper and the lion is in desperate need of rest, I'm not afraid of injuring our relationship by waking him up; I'm afraid of getting mauled, which is analogous to a servile fear of God.<br />
<br />
Being afraid of doing something is an incentive against doing it. I offend God by doing something He doesn't want me to do or not doing something He wants me to do. If I have a filial fear of the Lord, then I'm motivated to do what He wants me to do and to not do what He doesn't want me to do.<br />
<br />
Now go back to the CCC's description of the gifts of the Holy Spirit: "These are permanent dispositions which make
man docile in following the promptings of the Holy Spirit." The fear of the Lord doesn't in itself tell me what God wants me to do, but it does motivate me to do it. In this sense, it is the first or beginning of the gifts; by it, I want to be docile in following the promptings of the Holy Spirit.
<br />
<hr align="left" width="25%" />
1.St. Augustine contrasts Isaiah's more excellent to less excellent ordering with Jesus' less excellent to more excellent ordering in the Beatitudes. Hence:<br />
<ul>
<li>Wisdom <--> "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called children of God. "<!------><!------><!------><!------></--></li>
<li>Understanding <--> "Blessed are the clean of heart: for they shall see God."<!------><!------><!------><!------></--></li>
<li>Counsel <--> "Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy."<!------><!------><!------><!------></--></li>
<li>Fortitude <--> "Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill."<!------><!------><!------><!------></--></li>
<li>Knowledge <--> "Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted."<!------><!------><!------><!------></--></li>
<li>Piety <--> "Blessed are the meek: for they shall possess the land."<!------><!------><!------><!------></--></li>
<li>Fear of the Lord <--> "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."<!------><!------><!------><!------></--></li>
</ul>
The different sortings make sense, too. Isaiah was prophesying the coming of Christ (the most excellent emptying Himself) and Jesus was preaching salvation (how the least excellent can be raised up to life with God). Note also what this suggests about how our possession and use of these gifts makes us like Christ.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-74585944853856864692016-02-10T09:26:00.003-05:002016-02-10T09:26:30.190-05:00Before you doThink of your family. Think of your friends. Think of yourself, in one week.<br />
<br />
Don't give up coffee for Lent.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-85556777969320599722016-01-03T14:28:00.001-05:002016-01-03T14:28:07.440-05:00I confessI am not particularly incensed about the state of the Liturgy. I have the luxury of living in a parish where the Mass is generally by the book (apart from a few idiosyncrasies that don't bother me, like a communal Hail Mary to conclude the Prayers of the Faithful; we also get the occasional "Folks, the Lord be with you," and I offer it up). When I see something that I happen to know is contrary to the book, I don't usually get too het up, since it's rarely done out of malice or wickedness.<br />
<br />
As far as what's in the book itself, that's not something I concern myself too much about either. I've said <a href="http://disputations.blogspot.com/2007/04/quod-est-veritas-now-i-want-all-of-you.html">for years</a>, just tell me my lines and my blocking.<br />
<br />
But if I had to write a post of complaint about one aspect of how the Ordinary Form is ordinarily celebrated at my parish, the complaint would center on the Confeitor. Specifically, the "Confeitor," the two words "I confess," which are often spoken only by the priest, as a signal to the congregation to join in at "to Almighty God." (Depending on the celebrant's cadence, we might hold off until, "and to you, my brothers and sisters.")<br />
<br />
I will suggest that, on the whole, it's good for our spiritual health to say the words "I confess" out loud, to other people.<br />
<br />
I'll go a little further and say that, while I'm American enough to appreciate the efficiency of the Ordinary Form, there is something of value in having the priest recite his Confeitor to the congregation, followed by the congregation reciting it to the priest (and the rest of the congregation). It makes it clearer that the Confeitor isn't just the prayer the book says to pray at this point, it's an actual confession, usable as evidence against us if God had a mind to. I would guess it particularly doesn't hurt a spiritually healthy priest to say it all by himself, at the beginning of a Mass he is offering.<br />
<br />
(A similar congregational delay happens at the beginning of the Credo. Saying "I believe" out loud, to other people, is if anything more important than saying "I confess," but at least we get a few more "I believe"s later on.)Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-15338454923420745332015-12-21T07:17:00.000-05:002015-12-21T07:17:34.506-05:0030 minute lesson plan on the Dogma of the Trinity<ul>
<li>18 minutes saying how difficult and mysterious a subject this is</li>
<li>9 minutes saying how hard it is to see what difference the dogma makes in your day-to-day life</li>
<li>3 minutes reading <a href="http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p2.htm#253">CCC 253-255</a> out loud</li>
</ul>
Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3510257.post-71660836118999792792015-11-07T08:44:00.002-05:002015-11-07T08:44:35.724-05:00Lending a handAt RCIA last week, it was observed that it's kind of hard to know how to get to know Jesus, when He's not here physically to see and hear and touch. I proposed this allegory (it's too convoluted to be a metaphor):<br />
<br />
Suppose you fall into a deep ditch in the dark. (I didn't say why you might be wandering around deep ditches in the dark; you either recognize that as the human condition in a nutshell, or you don't.) It's too muddy and slippery to pull yourself out. Then a voice says, "Here, take my hand," and you see the hand reaching down to grasp yours and pull you out.<br />
<br />
At that moment, you don't know the person who's helping you. You don't have any idea of what they're like, except that they're willing to pull you out of a deep ditch in the dark. Once you're out of the ditch, though, you hope to get to know them quite well.<br />
<br />
For the person who doesn't yet know Jesus, the Church -- the Body of Christ -- is like the hand and the voice, we are here physically and can be seen and heard and touched. ("Is like"? Wait, is this a simile?) We are supposed to draw others to Christ, so they can know Him and love Him themselves.<br />
<br />
For the person still in that ditch, it may not yet quite be faith by which they're willing to listen to us and to come and see what we say we have, Who we say we have to show them. It might be trust or curiosity (those old <a href="http://disputations.blogspot.com/2012/08/forming-intentional-disciples-pt-3.html">thresholds of conversion</a>). But our Incarnate God did leave an incarnate Church, and the more we in the Church live in a way we would only live if we believe what we preach, the more that person might suspect we really do have Someone they should meet. Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.com1