|
|
|
|
go here to buy my stock photography Alan Creech
my recent posts |::
summer activities stuff |::
my family faith communities |:: vineyard central blogs i read |::
aaron klinefelter
|
technorati tags > christian humor, catholic humor, james martin sj :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: May 30, 2008 >> 10:33 AM most sacred heart  This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord. I will place my law within them, and write it on their hearts; I will be their God, and they shall be my people. –Jeremiah 31:33 Today is the Solemnity of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. I like it. I like that particular icon of the Sacred Heart a lot. You can find it here. A detailed description of the icon with all it's symbolism explained can be found here. Very interesting. Here is a little piece of that description, about the image of the Sacred Heart itself, in the center... The Sacred Heart in the center of the image is topped with a flame signifying God’s passionate love for humankind. The heart bears within it the symbols of Christ’s Passion; the cross, the crown of thorns, the nails, the spear that pierced His side, and the reed with a sponge. The heart shows a slash on the side from the spear, symbolizing the Lord’s anguish caused by the rejection of His Word by His people. The chalice is positioned to catch the Blood of Christ, brought to us in the Eucharist.Great image - just a very helpful devotion to the deep, loving heart of Jesus - a great way of meditating on how much He loves us and what that love did/does for us. The small Latin phrase at the bottom, which you can't see in this image well enough, says cor ad cor loquitor - hearts speaks to heart. It would do us well to regularly meditate on this amazing truth, that His desire is for His Heart to "speak" directly to our hearts - to transform us into His Image. technorati tags > sacred heart, jesus Labels: catholic, spiritual formation :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: May 20, 2008 >> 8:50 PM confirmed  Well, as of tonight, one journey is over. This is my family receiving the Sacrament of Confirmation - being received into full communion with the Catholic Church. Thier sponsors (or proxies thereof) are behind them. Our friend, my spiritual director, Fr. Louis Lipps, is presiding there. It was a very simple, sparsely attended daily Mass today at 5:30pm. I like that it was simple this way. I'm very proud of my children today. They said "yes" to Jesus. They received more of His Grace to live that "yes." I love my wife, but I'm not so much "proud" of her as happy for her that this part of the road is over and now we can settle in and live it out. Things will not be perfect now. Difficulty is not over. We shouldn't think it is. One journey has ended... and another begun. Labels: catholic, church, family, personal :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: May 19, 2008 >> 3:31 PM too long delayed Here's a very timely and interesting quote from Fr. Karl Rahner that I ran into a little while back. I don't really feel the need to comment further. It's just a good quote and I thought I'd share it here ...the Church is today caught up in a transformation. Probably this has been too long delayed. For people used to think it a special Christian virtue, the salvation of an imperiled world, intransigently to insist on what had always been the case; and therefore this transformation is now coming very suddenly, and with all the typical features and dangers that arise when something in itself necessary has to be "caught up with" too quickly. Yes a transformation of this kind is necessary if the Church does not want to remain the Church of the peasant and petit-bourgeois classes particular to late European modernity, with ever decreasing membership, but instead to become a Church for the kind of society that has a future. This transformation in the Church is difficult because is has begun too late. It involves the danger of betraying the true substance of Christianity. It is painful. It brings the different levels of the Church, which are at different stages in their awareness, into conflict with each other. But it cannot be avoided – indeed it is still not being engaged in with anything like sufficient seriousness. technorati tags > church, catholic church, change in the church, karl rahner Labels: catholic, church, rahner :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: May 14, 2008 >> 11:16 AM the faithful  I hear this from time to time, and it never fails to bother me. The terms "faithful Catholic" and conversely, "unfaithful Catholic" are thrown around a good bit, especially in the blogosphere. They are almost always used by Catholics in the very conservative arena to describe either themselves (the faithful) or to describe Catholics, well maybe they're Catholics, who have issues with some of what the Catholic Church teaches, some of it's theology or practice (the unfaithful).Very simplistically speaking, the story goes that if you put all your beebees, all your mental trust, without reservation of any kind, into the Magisterial basket - if there is no point of doctrine that you simply cannot assent to (as it is presently stated and understood) - if the Catechism is quite enough for you, no more discussion or struggle needed - then you are... a faithful Catholic. On the other hand, if you hear or read what the Magisterium has laid out there and on some points you just can't grab hold - if you (just as an example) simply cannot accept the presently stated and understood concept of mortal sin (even though you've theologically struggled through this and have over-thoughtfully and prayerfully come to your position) - if you aren't very fond of some of your Church's present disciplines (having come to the conclusion that some of them can be, in fact, harmful instead of helpful) - if, perhaps, you feel free to open your mouth and speak your conscientious thoughts and convictions and they happen to run contrary to the present letter of Catholic Magisterial teaching - then you are, pour soul, one of the unfaithful. Some of you can see why this would bother me. Part of it is because, guess where I end up on this set of scales? Go ahead, guess. Never mind, I'll tell you - I am, apparently, an unfaithful Catholic. Some might even say that makes me not a Catholic at all. They might say I'm a Protestant already in my thoughts and actions so I might as well just go ahead and be one. Maybe they're right. I wonder that sometimes myself. Interesting thought. Is there not room for what some call a faithful dissent in some areas? I mean a dissent (as I see it, an inability to assent with good conscience) that is prayerful, thoughtful, educated and conscientious - not one that is apathetic or born of a desire to engage in some inordinate behavior or because you are swept away by the worldly culture around you. Also, not a dissent that is all about carrying picket signs or causing a whole bunch of trouble. I mean being a thinker, one who needs to, and is perhaps called to, work things out and not simply accept the status quo without question. This is what seems like it could be a healthy dissent. Maybe we should stop calling it "dissent" at all, that word having such a negative connotation in this discussion. It's definitionally correct I suppose - assent vs. dissent and all that. I guess my point is that "dissent" in this arena doesn't need to mean that you hate the Church and you want to blow it all up in favor of some wild, opposite alternative. This is how it's characterized sometimes though, which is unfortunate. Perhaps I'm just taking seriously my part in the Sensus Fidelium - the sense of the faithful - realizing that the Holy Spirit of Truth lives in, acts in and speaks to me as a member of the mystical Body of Christ... too. The protection we have from God from going over the cliff as far as error is concerned is more complicated than just, "the Pope said it, that settles it." The members of the Body who don't wear collars are not simply faceless, spiritless, sheep. We are all incorporated into Jesus, and are the fullness of Him who fills all things in all places (Eph. 1:22-23). And no, I'm not talking about sitting around making it all up for ourselves. If you think that's what I'm talking about, well, you can think what you like, but it's not nearly what I'm referring to. Things in this broken, human world are not that cut and dry. They are complicated. The Church and everything that makes her tick, is complicated. The Holy Spirit and how He works in the Church and in the world is not entirely quantifiable. Yes, He may have given us certain assurances that we wouldn't ultimately go over the edge, but all manner of things can happen before that. We (Catholics) get all manner of flack from some quarters of the Protestant world about how we have contradicted ourselves over the years, about how we will never give a straight answer about how the Catholic Church has, or has not, been wrong here and there down through the centuries. Can we just give somebody a straight-up answer that yes, the Catholic Church has been wrong, has grown and changed and developed and corrected itself many, many different times. I just said it. It doesn't bother me. It doesn't make my head spin. Are there contradictory stances within her? Sure. What do you expect? Have Popes contradicted each other - even? Certainly they have. Like I said - a broken mess, all of us. Yeah, yeah, I know all the definitions... Holy Spirit... infallibility... teaching authority... et cetera. Some of it is troublesome, I'll hand you that on a platter, but that doesn't negate it all. Even if, as I see it, some of it is not that well defined, or is too defined, it still doesn't take the whole house down. It doesn't have to. I've wandered in this essay. It's already too long for a decent blog post. I'm even fairly afraid to post it, how about that? I'm really not looking for a big argument. I'm certainly not looking to be scolded by anyone. OK, there are my insecurities out on the table. Oh, and I'm not looking to institute any clown Masses any time soon either - holy crap! What I'm talking about is a little deeper and more complex than that. One more thought I had was that, practically speaking (and this is worth taking into consideration, and not just from a populist viewpoint), in the sensus fidelium arena, unless you want to take on a sort of fortress, we're the tiny remnant of true Catholic Christianity attitude, the vast majority of Catholics in the United States (and I doubt it's only the US, but that's all we hear about mostly) are unfaithful Catholics. That's most members of most parishes, and it can't all be chalked up to "bad catachesis" or "those pitiful seminaries after Vatican II." There are probably a lot of factors. I'm not trying to define them here. What I might be saying, at least in part, is that some of this is not bad - some of it is perhaps about the Holy Spirit slowly working a correction in through the People of God. Please don't hem me into some liberal corner either. I just said what I said. I didn't say what you're thinking I said. That I have to say that is pretty funny anyway. OK, that's enough of this. If I post this it'll be a tiny miracle - we can attribute it to the intercession of Thomas Merton, how about that monk-fans? Pax vobiscum. technorati tags > church, catholic church, faithful catholics, unfaithful catholics, sensus fidelium, faithful dissent :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: May 05, 2008 >> 2:40 PM on may 5th or thereabouts Get ready for some prime blog rehash! You've got to dip back into your archives sometimes to keep things rollin' you know. So here we go. I went back to several previous May 5th posts, or as close to May 5th as I could get. One is an awesome two-part series which is very relevant to (and seeded mind you) my recent post about union with God. There's another soteriological post in the list too - woo hoo! What can I tell you - these are the things I think and wrestle around with in my mind. I may have even evolved a little more since some of this, but I think it's still good. Some of the comments are interesting too - if you get froggy, try to read them as well - even if they say there are (0) comments, they're there.
technorati tags > union with god, christian mysticism, soteriology, theology, salvation Labels: catholic, liturgical prayer, liturgy, spiritual formation, theology :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: April 25, 2008 >> 10:14 AM me and my story  I was poking around yesterday and found a podcast that was done fairly recently, interviewing myself about my recent story as well as talking about some other interesting things about church life, etc. I realize that some of you may not have heard me talk about this, not in this way at least. As I listened to it again last night, it became apparent to me that I "sound" much different than I "read" sometimes. My friends Kevin Rains and D.G. Hollums are doing a podcast called Praxis (nice logo, yeah that was me, hire me). I was apparently their inaugural show, very cool. You can take a listen to that here. While you're over there you can subscribe to the podcast I'm sure. Peace.Labels: catholic, church, emerging church, personal :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: April 24, 2008 >> 10:24 PM church, money, future conversation Well, this ought to be interesting. There's a bit of a blog-versation going on among some of my friends about the future of the church, how it conducts itself, how and where churches come together for worship, how ministers/pastors/priests are supported by their communities - all in light of possible coming monetary problems, financial crisis, etc. You can check their musings out first if you like to keep in stride...
I spent quite a few years with my mouth wide open about how large church buildings that depend on quite a bit of money and ministers who depend on salaries that suck the life out of a congregation are bad for the Church as a whole - that they put our focus on the wrong things and help perpetuate a way of being Christian which is not quite what I'm thinking Jesus intended. Now, some may think, here I am in the biggest, richest, most opulent ecclesiastical institution of them all - shut up! I guess technically they'd be right. Nothing like Rome for some gold and stained glass and seeeeeriously whoopdeedoo vestments. Right. Nothing like the Vatican's stash. Right. And those Cathedrals! Holy, well holy cathedral Batman! Show me the MONAAAAY! Rome doesn't fund local Catholic parishes by the way - just thought I'd through that in there. There's a lot of medieval mess in all that. There's a ton of leftover, as Jason mentioned, deeply "Christendom" ideas floating around this ancient church. And yes, I believe it's a problem, one not easily or quickly solved. Some of the defense behind some of these things is a sort of anti-Gnostic, matter and things here on earth are important, beauty draws us to contemplate God, He is worthy of something amazing and cool like that kind of thing. Can you see where that's coming from without me having to write another book on it? I can see some of it, but not all of it. I can understand an attitude that God in His infinite wonder and wants to reflect that around us in a context of worship - sacred space and all that. I get that. I love beautiful spaces. I'd rather be in a beautiful, sacred space than in a corny, goofy lookin' space. We're human. We're of this earth. It matters. BUT, how much does it matter? In what way does it matter? I think we've too easily answered these questions. We've adopted answers that aren't "our" answers over the years and unfortunately they have stuck with us and we've developed apologies for them. How about the beauty of simplicity? Can I get some Franciscan love up in this joint? Is Jesus really looking for golden thrones and million dollar sanctuaries? It seems odd for a God who once tried to convince us that He doesn't dwell structures built by human hands - doesn't it? It does. Oh, I know, the Blessed Sacrament (pardon me for a second guys) - yes, I do believe in His Real Presence in the Sacrament. But then there's that animal stall in Bethlehem, those dirty streets He walked on, the humble, normal house he lived in - all that. This is only part of my point. To me, opulence and finery are a very surface way of getting the point across, of showing respect. It's not evil, necessarily, but it's also not necessary. Simple, normal, regular, how about that? Things seem to be moving in a direction that might cause us all to have to rethink what we spend, what we build, how we pay our staff, etc. Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, whatever - things will change and we will all have to face it sooner or later. This all makes me remember a story an old Priest told me about something a friend said to him who had spent a lot of time in Rome, that the best thing that could happen to the Catholic Church is for an oppressive government to take over and strip it of all it's wealth, tear the external institution down and push it back into the catacombs. OK, the catacombs part was my creative addition, but you get my point. And it's not only the Catholic Church but much of the rest of the whole Church - let us all lose the ability to own buildings, to pay our leaders or our tax exemptions. Bring it! Where would our focus be then? Maybe on the Kingdom of God, something novel like that. It's time for some Body of Christ creativity. Maybe we should start practicing now - maybe. Lord have mercy. technorati tags > church, church buildings, church and money Labels: catholic, church, emerging church :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: April 21, 2008 >> 11:16 AM pope > scandal > priesthood  "See ya later, byyye, byye" - Well, the Pope has left us. The big visit is over. Whheewww, I'z gettin' worried that he was 'gonna show up and start askin' me questions. I was spared! OK, I wasn't really worried about that, but it sounded funny anyway. I didn't wear myself watching every little bit of the coverage. I caught some here and there. Don't take that to mean anything except that I'm just not "star-struck" by His Holiness I guess. I do like this Pope. I've said that before, for the most part. I do believe he has surprised many people who thought he'd be a certain kind of Pope. I said this before - a gentle mystic at heart, I think so.I was duly impressed by his straight-on dealing with the sex-abuse scandal mess. Of course that doesn't quite finish the job, but he needed to do that, he knew that, and he did some important things. Meeting with victims was big I think. Again, lots more needs to happen, I'm not even sure what, but big things. And all that not just in the ranks of the hierarchy - if general population Catholics would just get how awful this was/is, that would be nice. There's still too much mental sweeping under the carpet. We don't want to get it, so we come up with ways to say that it wasn't as bad as the evil media makes it, etc., etc. Yeah, just stop, look at it square in the face, take upon your soul what some of these victims have gone through, be quiet and pray. I've heard wind of many people equating mandatory priestly celibacy with the cause for all that. If you know me, you know I'm not fan at all of the present discipline of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. I honestly think it's a bad thing for the Church in its present mandatory form. But I don't think you can pin this sex abuse business on that discipline. This is two different arenas. There are many very good reasons to lift that discipline tomorrow. I personally think the Holy Spirit is saddened by it. And again, should there be celibate clergy? Sure, but only for those to whom the celibacy charism is given, and guess what? that's doesn't equal all who are or who are called to be Priests. Enough of that. I think a deeper reason and at least partial "cause" that has lead us to this point over years and years and years is this: the development in the Catholic Church of a super-human, super-spiritual view of the Priesthood and Religious life, especially a Monastic vocation. There has been, and still is to a large extent, a view of that kind of vocational life as one that is on another level of existence. If one becomes a Priest or a Monk, one will be made so holy that pesky problems like, say a homosexual orientation or a a sexual attraction to children, will likely be melted away in the swirling mass of, well, whatever it is that one believes would sweep such a thing away and take care of such problems. Mind you, this is a very brief statement of a theory I have about this. It would be difficult to go into it fully here. And I'm not saying this is the sole reason for the problem. I'm saying I believe this kind of view has been a part of it. These men naively believe they will be "healed" and it doesn't happen and there you have a bigger problem. I really doubt many, if anyone, is trying to be sneaky and hide in the Priesthood in order to be a predator. Someone may have, I don't know, but I don't think that's enough people to talk about. I think there was/is a sincere, yet unfortunately mistaken, notion that their sickness will be "hidden," aka "swallowed up" in their vocation and they won't have to deal with it again - not so much. No one Sacrament is going to substitute for years of inner spiritual formation that must be done on many fronts and in many ways. It cannot, even Holy Orders, even the Eucharist alone. So, how we can foster a better, more human, less "super holy" view of these kinds of vocations (they're not the only vocations given by the Holy Spirit in the Church), I'm not sure. It'll take a lot, I'll tell you that, and probably a long time. I pray it happens though, in whatever varied ways it needs to happen. Just some thoughts on a Monday morning. Pax vobiscum. technorati tags > pope benedict xvi, catholic sex abuse scandal, catholic priesthood Labels: catholic, leadership, spiritual formation :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: April 14, 2008 >> 9:36 PM and then there's... That's a silly title isn't it? Yes, it is. You're right. You have no idea what the post is about really so you don't know whether it'll be worth reading. Hell, I don't know yet if it'll be worth writing, so I feel your pain. On being a theo-blogger: I don't know what to say about it really. In my blogging history, I guess I've been considered a theological and ecclesiological thinker. People seem to like what I have to say about certain things. A few might think I'm a nut, but whatever, maybe they're right a little bit. I've appreciated being able to write things that connect with people over the years. I do actually plan to take a lot of these things, and some more, and publish them in the form of a book one day. That might be fun. Anyway, I want to keep doing this, but honestly, as a Catholic it's a little harder to know what to say. That might sound odd, with the rich, deep well that is the world of Catholic theology. I'm not, nor am I trying to be, some kind of official "Catholic theologian." I doubt I'll ever be one of those. I tend to skip around a little more in the mystical theology arena anyway. I guess that's a bit more "open." I doubt I'll be winning any Catholic blogger awards any time soon either. That's fine. I'll just be a blogger, who's a Christian, who's a Catholic - that'll work I reckon. On doing "ministry" in the Church: This one has got me stimied. I'm so stimied, uhh, I'm not even sure what to say. Only scattered phrases come to mind... Too much. Closed. Who has time for that? I have bills to pay. Why? Why not? Too long, too hard. I'm not quite sure what to do with myself. To a degree, I know my giftings and my potential. I know what I have done and, again - to a degree, what I can do (by His Grace in and through me). Don't get me wrong, being a Lector, a Cantor, or even a Eucharistic Minister is great. I've done all these things in the past and will probably end up doing one or more of them in the future - but this is not quite what I'm talking about. It'll be an interesting road. I know where part of it will lead already. That hasn't changed. That call, for me, is undeniable - a rural monastic community which acts as a place of contemplative formation, learning, and refreshing retreat - a different sort of monastery - I look forward to that. I guess that's it tonight. My life is weird right now. It feels very weird. I don't even know why or what that means altogether. I'm trying to move along with it, trying to cope, hopefully more than cope. Labels: blogging, catholic, personal :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: April 04, 2008 >> 1:23 AM into one body The reading from Mid-morning prayer this morning in the Office... It was in one Spirit that all of us, whether Jew or Greek, slave or free, were baptized into one body. All of us have been given to drink of the one Spirit.I'm not too keen on Catholics gearing this to say "...oh, and that one Body is us, only us and the rest of you are out of luck." I know, I know - "it's your Church that says these things, deal with it buddy, or you need to get out" - oh, and, AND (from the Catholics), "You may not like it but we ARE THE one true Church, and that's just it, deal with it buddy, bend your neck or get out." That mess just pisses me off so don't say that. I know this too (I'm real smart by the way) - not all Protestants think like that or would say that AND not all Catholics would say anything like that. I know that so don't start. But it IS out there and it's common enough to take note of, and it's hard for me, in my present circumstance, not to take note. I know also that many Catholics, especially converts from Protestant Churches it seems, take great comfort in the "One True Church" thing. This is why many of them converted. They are convinced this is the only way to go, that nothing else is really legitimate, so the choice is fairly limited. I understand the excitement something like this can instill. I get the great value placed on the ancient nature of the Catholic Church and all it has kept intact for nearly 2,000 years. I understand that this has also been the fuel that has reignited the fire in many a cradle Catholic as well. I see and understand these things. I want to say, though, that I think there are other ways one can be a Catholic Christian, other reasons to love the Catholic Church than because of any exclusivity claims. Personally, I have to look past the exclusivity claims, whether they are made by the Church authorities or by her members, in order that they don't overshadow what love I have for Catholic Christianity which is not based in this thinking. The whole Church, all of us, every institutional expression, every so-called non-institutional expression, and every individual member, is screwed up. We are collectively not ideally what we were designed to be. I believe there are ancient, True, beautiful, and amazing things in the Catholic Church that have been more fully maintained than in many other strains of the Body of Christ. There are things, I believe, that have been forgotten or lost in the Catholic arena as well - yes eeeeven in the Catholic Church. Even inside the beauty, there is some ugliness. Sure, like I said, I believe there is a certain fullness to be found in the big old walls of the Catholic Church. Does this mean to me that there is none of that fullness found anywhere else ecclesiastically speaking? It doesn't mean that to me. Perhaps, you may say, as a Protestant or as a Catholic, that I need to rethink my deal. Look, I'm always rethinking my deal. I'm always trying to listen to God and sense the Holy Spirit. I believe I have a decent ability to "hear God" leading me in my life. I can certainly miss it. I'm a part of the broken Body of Christ. Even though there may be a certain fullness here or there, some things forgotten or lost in this or that place, we are ALL still a part of this broken, yet to be fully transformed Body. One of the best things we could probably do along the way is at least recognize that and live with each other on that level, as the diversely scattered fellow members of the One Body of Christ. Oh, all you members of the Body, Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Coptic, etc. - please pray for my Dad if you think about it. He's in the hospital (fine right now), but he has developed a couple more major artery blockages and will need another bypass surgery soon. Thanks. Peace to you. technorati tags > body of christ, the church, catholic church Labels: catholic, church, ecumenism :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: March 27, 2008 >> 12:33 PM easter time > et cetera Well, Easter is here, still with us, finally. Was Lent 80 days this time or what? Lots of Alleluias and all that. Once again, I really have yet to feel an Alleluia in my soul. Perhaps I don't have to, but it would be nice. Rainy, rainy day in Kentucky today, as Bryan has already pointed out. We have some thunderstorms moving through. I love them too. I remember sitting on our porch when I was a kid, with my Dad, watching and listening to them. I want a porch or deck now that I can do that on. Soon, perhaps. I may invite some of you to the "deck raising." I love the rain actually. I know, generally speaking, it's considered "dreary" and "depressing," but I like a good rain. Look, I don't have to have rain to be depressed. I'm good at that in all weather - seriously people. I love the sound of it. I love the smell of it - have you not smelled rain? You just want to breathe your lungs full of it. Once upon a time I remember telling friends of mine when they asked me, "Why don't you go back to the Catholic Church?" - I remember telling them, "I don't think I could do it - just too much to wade through." That was my standard answer. Well, I'm sort of coming face to face with that - have been for the last year nearly. I have to tell you, I'm finding that I was right to a certain extent. There is certainly some shit to wade through. It could be simpler. Some days I wonder what I have undertaken, especially for my family. It could be a LOT simpler for those who are already committed Christians from other traditions. And yes, I know I've done my share of whining about all this, and I'm probably not finished. For some reason, I thought I'd be done with the process by now. I thought we'd all be done with it by now. I thought amiss. My courage is no longer fading. I fear it is gone. Yeah - not 'gonna be on Journey Home any time soon I don't reckon - ha. Grace and Peace to you. technorati tags > spring, rain, easter, catholic reversion Labels: catholic, easter, reversion, weather :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: March 20, 2008 >> 10:43 AM holy thursday thoughts Holy Thursday - the culmination of Lent, the beginning of the three big days of Easter. I think I'm actually looking forward to going to Mass tonight. Here's what's not much to look forward to: not being there with anyone else who looks forward to it. Liz has to work tonight, so I'll be dragging the three kids that live at home now along with me. Yes, I'm making them go. This WILL be as much of a family thing as I can get it to be. But that's not pleasant at all for me really. They'll survive I'm thinkin'. They may even be fed in some way that even they are not acutely aware of. I pray that will be so. We'll be taking part in the whole Triduum liturgy, so there will be ample opportunity for something to sink in. I admit, I have sentimental affection for the Holy Week liturgies, from younger days. I would be very pleasantly surprised if any of what I'll be participating in this week comes close to measuring up to those notions in my head and heart. They don't have to. I know that. It would just be nice. I also have this odd juxtaposition in my head between this year and last year about this time. Last year at the Easter Vigil, the community I lead and our friends as the local St. Patrick's Anglican church worshipped together. I was wearing an alb and stole and preaching the homily. This year, not so much. There is, in that, an odd mixture of comfort at being "back home" and the discomfort of the feeling of loss. I ask for Grace to learn how to deal with that. Tonight - the Mass of the Lord's Supper - the initiation of the Holy Eucharist that we still share. Thanksgiving. I am thankful for the Eucharist. At every Mass, this is my highlight - feasting on His Mystical and Sacramental Presence - tangibly taking Him into myself - saying yes to His offering of Himself to me, to all of us. Do I understand it? Not totally. Do you? Let me answer that for you - No. Do we need to fully understand it in order to share in it? I would hope not. Is there some faith that is required? I think so - just as in hearing Him in His Word - for that to actually affect us, we need to mix what is heard with faith. In the Eucharist as well, it seems, we need to mix with faith our reception of the Sacrament in order for Grace to be "activated" inside us. I'm not sure we can neatly quantify this faith, number it and lay it out. Faith in... the fact that He IS present, really present, Sacramentally; His love for us and desire to heal us from our brokenness; the fact that some kind of real substantive transformation will happen in us as we receive Him and His Life in this way. I pray His Presence will permeate me, my family and all of you during these holy days, and continue to do so even when the days aren't called holy. technorati tags > holy thursday, eucharist, holy week Labels: catholic, easter, liturgy :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: February 06, 2008 >> 1:27 PM ashes, ashes, we've all fallen down I just thought that was cleaver, so there. Which mean, probably, that somebody's said it before at some point - oh well. It's Ash Wednesday - that means the beginning of the liturgical season of Lent. Today - I feel nothing. Maybe that's good. It's not about feeling anything I don't guess. I wonder, when I speak in a rather colloquial manner, do certain people tune me out as possibly someone who has little of substance to say? Interesting question in the middle of my thought-train there. So, like I said, Lent begins today and even though I don't feel anything about it really, I do have a couple of thoughts...
technorati tags > lent, liturgy, catholicism, lenten disciplines Labels: catholic, church, lent, liturgy :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: January 25, 2008 >> 12:02 PM once upon a time... Once upon a time...
technorati tags > blogging, catholic church, fly fishing Labels: blogging, catholic, fishing, personal, reversion :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: January 17, 2008 >> 11:48 AM jekyll & hyde OK, please do yourself a favor and go read this. It's a fairly lengthy blog post by Fr. Al Kimel about our views of God's love, forgiveness, how we look at sin, etc. He's mostly interacting with thoughts expressed in a book by Dominican theologian Fr. Herbert McCabe. I've added a new book to my wish list now. Good stuff. It will be challenging for some to read, but it's good. I snagged this particular quote from Fr. Alvin's post, just to wet the appetite... "It is very odd that people should think that when we do good God will reward us and when we do evil he will punish us. I mean it is very odd that Christians should think this, that God deals out to us what we deserve. … I don't believe in God if that's what he is, and it is very odd that any Christian should, since there is so much in the gospels to tell us differently. You could say that the main theme of the preaching of Jesus is that God isn’t like that at all" (God, Christ and Us, p. 11) technorati tags > god's love, forgiveness, sin :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: January 12, 2008 >> 12:15 AM what we discern Reading some interesting posts and comment threads over at Internet Monk has made me think about some things. I have to take opportunities like this to blog, even on the weekends, and roll with them, as they come sparingly of late. My thoughts this morning are revolving around the notion of why one would choose to "convert" from one church tradition to another, especially from being a Protestant of some sort to the Catholic Church. I'm thinking mostly about the discernment of such a thing, such a leading. As most of you regular readers and friends know, last June I made the definite step of "reverting" to the Catholic Church. Reverted in that I was a Catholic Christian before, moved into other Christian territory for about 18 years, then came back. A little detail of my history that many of you also know, but some may not, is that I was not raised in the Catholic Church, in a Catholic family at all. My parents are both from Protestant families, one Methodist and the other grew up with a mixed influence of both "hard-shell" or Primitive Baptist and Pentecostal Holiness traditions. He, my Dad, never embraced either. So, I wasn't raised in any church. I'll skip the whole story, but influence upon influence, some intentional, some "accidental" lead me to wake up spiritually at the age of 12 and start seeking - which ended in going through Instructions with a Priest and being Baptized, Confirmed and receiving Communion in the Catholic Church at 13. There's that. I think that was relevant somehow, we'll see. Anyway, I eventually drifted (this is how I see it sort of) into independent charismatic realms and then into very active ministry and life inside what is known as the emerging church. At one point when we had (my Southern Baptist wife and I) started going to a charismatic church, getting more involved after a while, I a very distinct and memorable spiritual experience as I heard the Lord saying to me (not audible, burning bush, stay with me here), "I want you over here for a while so I can teach you some things." The "over here" was in that church, as opposed to being Catholic at the time. I cried, literally, even though I was sort of in that church, I didn't want to not be Catholic - "why?" Everything I heard Him saying inside myself was very gentle and calm - "I just want you over here for a while" - well, I didn't really want to, and I had taken a long time before that, and some after probably, to think and pray through this thing, and finally said, "OK, I'll go." Some of you harder-core Catholics might be checking out about now, thinking that God would never lead anyone out of the Catholic Church. Oh well, I'll risk saying that I still have no reason not to believe that was a genuine leading, instruction from God. I'll say this as well: Accompanying that instruction was the distinct notion that I would likely return someday, but had no idea how long this journey would be or what I was going to be taught where I was going to be. I have often said, especially of my days in the indy charismatic/word-faith world, that I think I learned as much "what not to" as "what to." Yes, definitely. Now, I didn't say I only learned negative things, that wouldn't be accurate at all. I grew. I was formed in ways that I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have been formed in another place, in obvious ways and in ways that are probably still a mystery to even me. And mind you, I never became one of those anti-Catholic, "now I'm really born again" types who leave the Catholic Church and wage war on her as the whore of Babylon or some nonsense like that. I was the very odd defender of Catholicism among my friends, and often ended up explaining more clearly some things that are often misunderstood about some aspects of Catholic doctrine to many people. What's the point? Am I writing an auto-biography here? It's certainly auto-biographical. But my point is continued with this part of the story: Over several years probably my longing for the deep, ancient faith of the Catholic Church grew, re-emerged as it were. I'm not sure it ever really went away, but there were just other things going on at different points along the path. That longing grew and manifested itself in many ways - in what I read, how I prayed, the way I wanted to worship, etc. This drawing back into the ancient ways of the Faith bore some fruit in my planting a small church which grew more and more catholic as it developed over the years. We became more and more liturgical in our worship and lifestyle. We came to be known as some kind of liturgical example of how a sort of "emerging" church could grab hold of such things for reasons deeper than just being cool for the young folk. Eventually, the voice and leading of the Holy Spirit inside me (here we are again) began sounding like this: "It's time to go back home." And that's a paraphrase, in a way, because the instruction this time was much more subtle as a "voice" and much stronger as a "feeling" and a longing. It took me more than a year, I know, to actually make the decision. I prayed, talked to my wife, to other close friends/mentors, had people praying for us. It wouldn't go away. I think I was hoping that it would for the sake of my faith community and my family. Finally it seemed clear that, indeed, it was time to return. Whatever assignment I had in other places, whatever schola He had been taking me through, was at an end. Phase 3 time? I suppose so. Let me make clear, too, that a big part, in this case, of my discernment process was wound up with what Liz was also hearing and sensing. I remember continually asking her, "are you sure this is something you're not sensing any big No's about?" We talked and talked and sometimes argued about it, worked it out, and basically it came down to, "I'm fine - I have no problem with this." That was a big help in my process of hearing myself. I was open to her getting a big giant NO in her insides. That would have been, at least, a big red flag for me. But that didn't happen - still isn't happening even with all the frustration we've been through in this whole entry process (God have mercy). THE POINT: I discerned these things. I heard the voice of the Lord leading me. I listened to what I believed was God, in both these callings, and in many others along the way. Who ultimately discerned that these leadings/instructions were genuine? Short answer - Me. And this is the same answer for you, and for anyone else. Ultimately, we have to discern within ourselves what is this or what is that or what is nothing. Hopefully, we are well-formed enough to be able to hear clearly enough (who is perfectly-formed or hears perfectly clearly?). When is it obvious to us that God is doing something, that God is leading us to do something or go somewhere? Some things are more obvious than others. "God said I should kill my whole family because He wants them in heaven for a job." Uuhh, no He did not say that. Obvious. Now, some Catholics may think it's just as obvious that I didn't hear God leading me into other Christian territory for whatever time or reasons. I'm sure some reasons could be given, but ultimately, no, it's not so obvious. If someone is lead into the Catholic Church by the Holy Spirit, we'll say, "follow the Spirit" - what if someone is lead into another Christian communion? Hmmm, see, it's not that easy. Follow the Spirit, but whatever direction you believe you're being led, be careful that you're not following a whim, emotions, external surface-level attractions, etc. Pray, take time to discern, consult those you trust or those more mature than you if you can. Once again, though, ultimately we will be convinced or not convinced of something within ourselves. That's not individualism, that's just how it ultimately works. Our conscience, however it is formed, is going to be followed - if you're the type of person who tries to follow your conscience. So, this was really about discernment, but it was placed inside my own story. I'm sure many of you have similar stories you could tell. This deals specifically with the somewhat hairy issue of Catholic/Protestant goings on, but it doesn't have to be that. I'll say this, as a Catholic - we need to be careful that our logic doesn't backfire on us if we're talking to someone about "following the Lord's leading to come into communion with the Catholic Church" above anything. Are we willing to admit that the same Lord may well sometimes be leading some of us into other areas of the whole Church for some reason? I doubt some will have room for that. I'm pretty sure I have room for it. Do I believe there is a fullness in the Catholic Church that is fairly unique in the Body of Christ? I do actually. But God is not limited as we are. God cannot be boxed. Our own Church teaches us that God is not even bound by the Sacraments. Theologically that gets complicated but well, God is complicated, ya think? In this presently limited realm in which we live and move, we have to do the best we can to hear correctly, to discern rightly, and to go in the direction we believe we're being led. God help all of us. technorati tags > catholic church, spiritual discernment, conscience Labels: catholic, personal, reversion, spiritual formation :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: January 01, 2008 >> 1:55 PM mary, mother of God, the incarnation, and us  Today is the Solemnity of Mary, the Mother of God. Why? Because she's special and played a unique and special role in the economy of our Salvation. Because in the ancient Tradition of the Church, she has been considered the Mother of God and our Mother.Why now, during the Christmas season? When else? If there is an appropriate time for such a feast day, this is it. Because this is the season in which the Incarnation became a reality with her cooperation. She became His Mother at Christmas. Part of, if not most of, the significance of Mary in the whole story, our whole story, is that she is one of us. She is not God, or a god (really, she's not). Anyone who treats her as such or thinks of her in that way is out of the orthodox theological park. Back to this: She is us - our hope that we too can be totally immersed in the Essence of God, fully transformed into His Image. In our understanding of the Communion of Saints, we believe she has a special place among all those Saints that have passed over into the heavenly dimension. We believe that they can still pray for us ("help" us). So, she can certainly help us, intercede for us. Today is a day we can especially honor her and ask for her intercession. Why is a holy day of obligation with an attached penalty of mortal sin? Wow, I won't even try to fully answer that as I'd like to. I'll say this. I believe it's unfortunate that these days have a load of guilt attached to them. It's not necessary. Sure, maybe a good many Catholics won't go to Mass on holy days if the "obligation" and fear weren't attached to it -- annnd, so what? It's about fear. Will I go to Mass tonight? Sure, we're going. Am I going because I'm afraid the Life of God will be ripped out of my insides if I don't? God forbid - God forbid. Does this take some kind of power or honor away from Jesus or the rest of the Godhead? If it does for you, then back off Mary and re-assess how you think of her. It shouldn't. It doesn't have to. It doesn't for me. As I alluded to before, the point of Mary is Jesus. There would be no honor for Mary if she weren't HIS Mother, if she wasn't made pure and holy BY HIM. Any place she has of honor or veneration has been given to her BY HIM. If your Mary does not point to her Son, then your Mary needs a re-haul. Your view of her needs re-hauling actually, but you get my point. This is my Son, and the Son of God, look at Him with your whole being. Whatever glory shining from my face comes from He Who IS Light. Let's hear her saying that. technorati tags > mary, mother of god, virgin mary, incarnation Labels: catholic, liturgy, mary, theology :::
:::
permalink ::: e-mail me ::: December 31, 2007 >> 11:58 AM alan's 2008 predictions > and beyond  I was reading Michael Spencer's predictions for 2008 and some of those in his comments, so I thought I'd take a stab at a few here. I don't usually think about things like this but this should be interesting and fun anyway. A prediction to start off with about these predictions: Some of these may just be me being a smart-ass - beware!
|
008
123
