|
Vatican, May. 9, 2008 (CWNews.com) - At a midday meeting on May 9 with the leader of the Armenian Apostolic Church, Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) looked forward to Pentecost Sunday and said, "we will pray in a particular way for the unity of the Church." ... "Striving for Christian unity is an act of obedient trust in the work of the Holy Spirit." |
The headlines of MX Melbourne today asks the question: what are we willing to pay for the future generation? The issue lies with government plans to share the burden of paid maternity leaves to the public, to the tune of $5.70 per week for those who earn about $50,000 AUD per year. The comments included in the report seemed to come only from those who consider the idea unfair to them, i.e., single people. Lack of reflection is evident. They have not considered that they did not pay for their own public education and healthcare. Nor do they consider who will pay for their public healthcare and pension. They have not considered the people those babies will become. Nor do they consider who will care for them in hospitals, drive them around in buses and trains, serve them in restaurants, health clubs, libraries, cinemas, banks and various places of recreation.
Just as long as they don't ask my kids for services and tax dollars.
Luckily, that doesn't mean I stop reading. News and other blogs, mostly. Here, for example, is a sad case of a Catholic judging a Catholic convert (from Protestantism). Jimmy Akin happens to be an inspiring Catholic writer/blogger, whose lucid writing is always a welcome light when .. well.. emotional mayhem is ensuing around religious discussions. He understands the catechism very, very well, likewise canon law (though not a canon lawyer himself, I think), the Church Fathers, and of course, Holy Scripture.
Why on earth would anyone decide that being a Catholic convert is not Catholic enough? I don't really get it. After all, we're all converts. Not one of us was born a Catholic, not one of us was born a saint (with the exception of the Blessed Mother and, in a way, St. John the Baptist, filled with the Holy Spirit in the womb of his mother). We are also called to conversion everyday, and in a special way during Lent. The problem isn't in a convert like Jimmy Akin (or Mark Shea, or Scott Hahn). The problem is the pride of Catholics who have become Pharisees, whose distrust of converts to Catholicism outweighs their charity and trust in God's gracious call for all his children into the fullness of truth.
Am I a convert, you might ask? Oh, yes I am. Ideally, right after every trespass against God and against even the least of his children.
It is incredible how AIDS is both taken seriously and not seriously enough. In this typical example, with a global warming spin on it, there's the rightly somber tone that says "this is a serious problem that needs to be fixed!" And then the supposed solutions (after considering how long it will be before modern medicine can find a vaccine) are listed as such:
| "He said it was important to strengthen preventative measures proven to work, like condoms and circumcision, and continue to investigate other more hopeful avenues, like microbicide sex gels and anti-viral drugs to block infection." |
Apparently, they don't take human beings seriously enough to consider that they might actually be capable of simply abstaining from sexually promiscuous lifestyles. Nor do they take the risks seriously enough to consider that the supposedly small risk of HIV contraction in spite of condoms is compounded by the unabated promiscuity that modern day morals and their apologists are tolerating, and, in effect, promoting.
There is something seriously wrong about this unwillingness to face the unpleasant and fatal truth: AIDS kills, and sexual promiscuity is a major vehicle of contraction.
I realized with some horror a few days ago that I do not pray enough for those who dissent from the Catholic faith, and/or oppress Catholics/Christians. Sometimes, the grace of God shines through and I do pray, but rarely so, since I have made myself dense through an excessively but unnecessarily busy life.
Well.. here's one to pray for. Bishop Kevin Dowling from South Africa needs prayers. His concerns over the HIV epidemic is not the problem. It is commendable, but he doesn't realize that promoting condom use promotes HIV transmission. Condoms are only effective by a percentage that fluctuates somewhere between 85-95%, it seems, and the increased use of condoms means a compounding of the chances of HIV contraction. He imagines the pope as the Pharisees who refuses to lift a finger, and himself as the non-Pharisee who practices genuine compassion. Pray that he realizes before it is too late that, rather than saving these women, he is instead pushing them onto the path of greater harm.
Authority has always been the key issue when it comes to the fullness of truth among Christians. Truth is a person, of course, and that person, Jesus Christ, is unassailable. But while he does not leave us orphans, he is not here in the person. So what do we do when Biblical scholars call into question the inspiration of canonical Scripture?
| Michael Holmes, a professor at Bethel University, doesn't consider the story [of the adulterous woman] inspired Scripture. But he said he would include the story in the Bible, because of its long history and because the verses bear the marks of an authentic story about Jesus. |
I'm not quite sure how one can be certain that it is an authentic story about Jesus if one is also certain that it is not inspired Scripture. But, moving on..
|
Such judgments raise questions about what words like canonicity and inspiration mean for evangelicals. If we reserve the word inspired for the text in the earliest manuscripts, yet accept that other material (such as the pericope adulterae) should be included in our biblical canon, are we implying that select biblical passages may be canonical yet not inspired? If so, what should we do with this distinction? Biblical scholars do agree on two things: The Bible story should be set apart with a note, and Christians should be cautious when reading the passage for their personal devotions. |
While these scholars (and those in the comment box of CT) may have had (or continue) to grapple with such issues, I think I'll just be grateful that Mother Church can resolve this for me. I have constant recourse to the teaching authority of the Church (the Magisterium) so as to free me from such worries. Almost as if (gasp) I had recourse to the authority of Christ in the Body. But why should this present any difficulty? After all, where does authority lie if not in that Body, the Church, the pillar and foundation of the Truth? (Timothy 3:16)
I love conversion stories, and I don't think it's the same thing over and over again. Jennifer's story is particularly thought-provoking in both simple and profound terms. He shares his train of insights that led him ultimately to the Catholic Church, and the path they took is striking.
He ponders the implications of human intervention in the form of Biblical translation, exegesis and preaching, and our own private judgment. And not only does he experience contradictions from different exegetes (whom we assume are all baptized, sincere and prayerful Christians), he actually sees that this is a non-trivial problem. But ultimately, the marvel in this story is the grace of God, who prompts a hunger for truth, uses a skeptic's quest for the truth, and brings him home.
[Link found via the Catholic Converts blog.]
The American Papist provides good reports. He's got Days 1 and 2 covered, including transcripts of interviews, reactions from the public, photos, etc. It appears that Papa is making waves, in that calm, academically serene manner of his. May his mission be a great occasion of grace. Veni Sancte Spiritus!
My Latin may be mistaken, but this piece about truth is, to my thinking, as accurate as it is timely. Dr. Stan Williams is on to something that the sound byte generation really needs to ponder.
This is an inspiring story about perhaps the greatest guitar player ever, the hard knocks of life, and finding hope.
A group of Christians coming from different backgrounds, confessions, Churches and denominations are pushing for one date for Easter. The people behind OneDate.org are aiming for something small but hardly significant, so that all Christians may at least give common witness to the resurrection of Christ. The website offers some thoughtful insights as well as the historical background concerning the different dates used by the Church in the East and in the West. Well worth a look.
On the other hand, what divides us can bring one to tears, particularly in light of how petty it all looks when you consider the gravity of division's affront to the Lord's will, and when you think about how small those nitpicks look when compared against the mountain of common Christian witness. Not to say that those differences should be swept under the rug; this cannot be done because we serve the Lord who is Truth, and cannot thereby lie about the differences. But neither is it proper to treat other sincere Christians as enemies. There is only one real Enemy here, and, boy, is he pleased with the fruits of division: pride, paranoia, pharisaic tendencies, enmity, rudeness, polemics, hatred, in-fighting, contrariness -- all of which pervert the Church that Christ built.
As an Anglican bishop teaches, (among other things) baking your own bread at home (which I do most days) has its advantages. Apart from saving money and providing freshly baked bread, there is in the baking a sense of relaxation, of having accomplished something tangible -- especially if I bake in the morning (the Filipino pan de sal today).
Bloggers, fire up your ovens! :-)
And so the attenuation continues, for those who embrace progressiveness instead of orthodoxy:
| "Ms. Vosper has written a book, published this week – With or Without God: Why the Way We Live is More Important than What We Believe – in which she argues that the Christian church, in the form in which it exists today, has outlived its viability and either it sheds its no-longer credible myths, doctrines and dogmas, or it's toast." |
And so continues the scattering of those who refuse to gather with the stewards (faithful or not) who were told: "he who hears you, hears me; he who rejects you.." and so on..
Somewhat disturbing. He may be on to something when he points out how we are not to ignore the needs of the present in this world, but it seems to me that his conclusions go too far -- and off the edge of orthodoxy. I don't know about the actual book he wrote, but this article, which I assume to be a summary of sorts, does not seem to mention the book of Revelations at all. Now that's very odd if you're talking about last things.
Msgr. Cormac Burke tackles the popular notion of self-esteem as espoused in western society today. I am not yet done reading, but what I've read so far is rather insightful, and probably quite apt.
Dave Armstrong presents his latest book on the Church fathers. Click on the cover page graphic to take a closer look. Dave is one of my all-time favorite blogger-writers. He is particularly thorough and rational in his apologetics, and I must say that he has exploited electronic media well: he sells his works online -- which means a convenient and quick turnaround of requested titles. Visit Dave's site for great writing in electronic form, such as his bargain of $15 for eleven e-books. The book in the graphic is available in print or as an e-book via the Lulu Marketplace.
This is good news, or it should be for most people. For others, they'll have to find something else to panic about.
Something in Catherine Deveney's rant in The Age about Easter struck me as a little funny. No, I don't mean that this comedienne who refers to herself as Catholic actually delivered a good joke. She prophetically said something that turns out to be rather funny. Early on, she claims that "Easter's never really taken off. Two thousand years and it's still the B team of religious celebrations."
That certainly was a gaff for a Catholic to make, but I'm glad that I encountered it, since it elicited some rather good insights. I pray that other readers made the same connections.
Mass is a big thing among Catholics. It is an ever-present requirement for Catholics to celebrate the Eucharist each Sunday, and a handful of major feasts during the year. Mass is also the singular vehicle of Catholic prayer, including weddings, funerals, ordinations, thanksgiving, and petitions. And yet each and every Mass revolves around the Eucharist: the consecration of bread and wine which are transubstantiated into the very body and blood of our Lord. At the very heart of this mystery is, no surprise here, the paschal sacrifice: Christ on the cross, once for all made, which elicits a major annual celebration during, no surprise again, the Easter Triduum. What of baptism, the first of sacraments? It is indeed an Easter sacrament, for in the waters of baptism, as Christ dies, we die, and as Christ rises from the dead, so do we. And let's not forget the very aspirations of Catholics, in taking up our daily crosses and dying to ourselves and to sin, for hope in Christ's promises of, no surprise again, our resurrection.
So although we Christians are wont to lose sight of the big picture, Easter is an opportunity to reaffirm, in faith, hope and love, what we believe, although it should not occur only on this occasion, but in every single day. But in a special way, Easter connects us to what the Lord has destined us for, and it connects our every celebration of the Eucharist. It is thus with confidence that we can assure Catholics who see nothing spectacular about Easter: it is most spectacular, in fact. Just take a closer, more prayerful look.
Don't you just love having one of those "aha!" moments? I had one while watching "Jesus of Nazareth" on DVD the other night. It was that scene when the case of the adulteress was brought before our Lord:
| And the scribes and the Pharisees bring unto him a woman taken in adultery: and they set her in the midst, And said to him: Master, this woman was even now taken in adultery. Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such a one. But what sayest thou? And this they said tempting him, that they might accuse him. But Jesus bowing himself down, wrote with his finger on the ground. When therefore they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said to them: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again stooping down, he wrote on the ground. But they hearing this, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest. And Jesus alone remained, and the woman standing in the midst. Then Jesus lifting up himself, said to her: Woman, where are they that accused thee? Hath no man condemned thee? Who said: No man, Lord. And Jesus said: Neither will I condemn thee. Go, and now sin no more. |
The "aha" moment was not about the Lord's brilliant answer to the scribes and Pharisees. It was when I considered both how the Law of Moses did indeed prescribe capital punishment and how the Lord showed the woman mercy. It's easy enough to thus conclude that the Law of Moses was mistaken, but crashes into the wall of the Law being both inspired by the Holy Spirit and assured by the Lord's own words: "amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5) Shocking as it sounds to 21st century Catholic sensibilities, there really is such a thing as mortal sin. But this is a death that the Lord does not take pleasure in, "but that the wicked turn from his way, and live" rather than die: for God is love. But the Lord is also just, and there is no other way to look at it: mortal sin is mortal, and that is the objective truth about the nature of mortal sin.
However, Christ is the Father's mercy. In him, justice is not set aside, but he himself expiates for the sin. When he said "He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone," that, too is truthful. Mortal punishment is merited by mortal sin, but no more is such punishment ours to mete out. It is his alone, and in his mercy and love, he metes it out on himself on the cross. His sacrifice is all the more incredible when we truly consider how our sins nailed him to that cross, and that this horrible death was our just punishment -- except that he took them from us unto himself instead.
And there is the "aha" -- and so we must pay earnest attention to our Lord's words to us: "Neither will I condemn thee. Go, and now sin no more." And in each mortal sin we commit, we must remember that the same death is earned, but the same mercy is offered to us, again and again. And if we persist in such sinfulness, how utterly ungrateful we are, and how cheap we make the sacrifice Christ made on the cross for us. Becoming then numb to the graciousness of this mercy, we risk scorning its worth in innocent blood, making us callous, devoid of gratitude and, in pride, greeting such mercy with contempt instead.
Lord, may I never scorn your mercy! May I cling to your cross tightly, and respond to you in love -- then do with me as you will, only never let me leave your wounded side!
