Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Conference: Part 6
Here are some scenes of St. Louis Bertram Catholic Chuch in Louisville where our Conference was held. The Parish is presided over by the Dominican Friars:
Friday, July 20, 2012
May They Rest in Peace:
James Holmes, former grad student, goes on a rampage in a movie theater in Colorado.
.
He calls himself The Joker ... a character in the Batman series.
.
.
"You won't kill me out of some misplaced sense of self-righteousness. And I won't kill you, because you're just too much fun. I think you and I are destined to do this forever."
―The Joker to Batman[src]
.
In The Dark Knight, the Joker is depicted as a maniacal criminal mastermind who terrorizes Gotham City and whose goal is to create "a world without rules."
.
Late Friday, the Catholic bishops of Denver issued a statement. “For those who were killed, our hope is the tender mercy of our God,” they said. “‘Neither death nor life,’ reflected St. Paul, ‘can separate us from the love of God.’
For those who were wounded — physically, emotionally and spiritually — our hope is in their recovery and renewal. To them we offer our prayers, our ears to listen, and our hearts to love.”
.
.
He calls himself The Joker ... a character in the Batman series.
.
.
"You won't kill me out of some misplaced sense of self-righteousness. And I won't kill you, because you're just too much fun. I think you and I are destined to do this forever."
―The Joker to Batman[src]
.
In The Dark Knight, the Joker is depicted as a maniacal criminal mastermind who terrorizes Gotham City and whose goal is to create "a world without rules."
.
Late Friday, the Catholic bishops of Denver issued a statement. “For those who were killed, our hope is the tender mercy of our God,” they said. “‘Neither death nor life,’ reflected St. Paul, ‘can separate us from the love of God.’
For those who were wounded — physically, emotionally and spiritually — our hope is in their recovery and renewal. To them we offer our prayers, our ears to listen, and our hearts to love.”
.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
In Light of a recent National Decision:
The following is taken from an essay which appeared in The New York Times. It is not necessarily easy reading but it is certainly worth our perusal:
.
By ROSS DOUTHAT
IN 1998, John Shelby Spong, then the reliably controversial Episcopal bishop of Newark, published a book entitled “Why Christianity Must Change or Die.” Spong was a uniquely radical figure — during his career, he dismissed almost every element of traditional Christian faith as so much superstition — but most recent leaders of the Episcopal Church have shared his premise. Thus their church has spent the last several decades changing and then changing some more, from a sedate pillar of the WASP establishment into one of the most self-consciously progressive Christian bodies in the United States.
As a result, today the Episcopal Church looks roughly how Roman Catholicism would look if Pope Benedict XVI suddenly adopted every reform ever urged on the Vatican by liberal pundits and theologians. [Excellent.] It still has priests and bishops, altars and stained-glass windows. But it is flexible to the point of indifference on dogma, friendly to sexual liberation in almost every form, willing to blend Christianity with other faiths, and eager to downplay theology entirely in favor of secular political causes.
Yet instead of attracting a younger, more open-minded demographic with these changes, the Episcopal Church’s dying has proceeded apace. Last week, while the church’s House of Bishops was approving a rite to bless same-sex unions, Episcopalian church attendance figures for 2000-10 circulated in the religion blogosphere. They showed something between a decline and a collapse: In the last decade, average Sunday attendance dropped 23 percent, and not a single Episcopal diocese in the country saw churchgoing increase.
This decline is the latest chapter in a story dating to the 1960s. The trends unleashed in that era — not only the sexual revolution, but also consumerism and materialism, multiculturalism and relativism — threw all of American Christianity into crisis, and ushered in decades of debate over how to keep the nation’s churches relevant and vital.
Traditional believers, both Protestant and Catholic, have not necessarily thrived in this environment. The most successful Christian bodies have often been politically conservative but theologically shallow, preaching a gospel of health and wealth rather than the full New Testament message.
But if conservative Christianity has often been compromised, liberal Christianity has simply collapsed. Practically every denomination — Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian — that has tried to adapt itself to contemporary liberal values has seen an Episcopal-style plunge in church attendance. Within the Catholic Church, too, the most progressive-minded religious orders have often failed to generate the vocations necessary to sustain themselves.
Both religious and secular liberals have been loath to recognize this crisis. Leaders of liberal churches have alternated between a Monty Python-esque “it’s just a flesh wound!” bravado and a weird self-righteousness about their looming extinction. (In a 2005 interview, the Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop explained that her communion’s members valued “the stewardship of the earth” too highly to reproduce themselves.)
Liberal commentators, meanwhile, consistently hail these forms of Christianity as a model for the future without reckoning with their decline. Few of the outraged critiques of the Vatican’s investigation of progressive nuns mentioned the fact that Rome had intervened because otherwise the orders in question were likely to disappear in a generation. Fewer still noted the consequences of this eclipse: Because progressive Catholicism has failed to inspire a new generation of sisters, Catholic hospitals across the country are passing into the hands of more bottom-line-focused administrators, with inevitable consequences for how they serve the poor. But if liberals need to come to terms with these failures, religious conservatives should not be smug about them. The defining idea of liberal Christianity — that faith should spur social reform as well as personal conversion — has been an immensely positive force in our national life. No one should wish for its extinction, or for a world where Christianity becomes the exclusive property of the political right.
What should be wished for, instead, is that liberal Christianity recovers a religious reason for its own existence. As the liberal Protestant scholar Gary Dorrien has pointed out, the Christianity that animated causes such as the Social Gospel and the civil rights movement was much more dogmatic than present-day liberal faith. Its leaders had a “deep grounding in Bible study, family devotions, personal prayer and worship.” They argued for progressive reform in the context of “a personal transcendent God … the divinity of Christ, the need of personal redemption and the importance of Christian missions.”
Today, by contrast, the leaders of the Episcopal Church and similar bodies often don’t seem to be offering anything you can’t already get from a purely secular liberalism. Which suggests that perhaps they should pause, amid their frantic renovations, and consider not just what they would change about historic Christianity, but what they would defend and offer uncompromisingly to the world.
Absent such a reconsideration, their fate is nearly certain: they will change, and change, and die.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
.
.
By ROSS DOUTHAT
IN 1998, John Shelby Spong, then the reliably controversial Episcopal bishop of Newark, published a book entitled “Why Christianity Must Change or Die.” Spong was a uniquely radical figure — during his career, he dismissed almost every element of traditional Christian faith as so much superstition — but most recent leaders of the Episcopal Church have shared his premise. Thus their church has spent the last several decades changing and then changing some more, from a sedate pillar of the WASP establishment into one of the most self-consciously progressive Christian bodies in the United States.
As a result, today the Episcopal Church looks roughly how Roman Catholicism would look if Pope Benedict XVI suddenly adopted every reform ever urged on the Vatican by liberal pundits and theologians. [Excellent.] It still has priests and bishops, altars and stained-glass windows. But it is flexible to the point of indifference on dogma, friendly to sexual liberation in almost every form, willing to blend Christianity with other faiths, and eager to downplay theology entirely in favor of secular political causes.
Yet instead of attracting a younger, more open-minded demographic with these changes, the Episcopal Church’s dying has proceeded apace. Last week, while the church’s House of Bishops was approving a rite to bless same-sex unions, Episcopalian church attendance figures for 2000-10 circulated in the religion blogosphere. They showed something between a decline and a collapse: In the last decade, average Sunday attendance dropped 23 percent, and not a single Episcopal diocese in the country saw churchgoing increase.
This decline is the latest chapter in a story dating to the 1960s. The trends unleashed in that era — not only the sexual revolution, but also consumerism and materialism, multiculturalism and relativism — threw all of American Christianity into crisis, and ushered in decades of debate over how to keep the nation’s churches relevant and vital.
Traditional believers, both Protestant and Catholic, have not necessarily thrived in this environment. The most successful Christian bodies have often been politically conservative but theologically shallow, preaching a gospel of health and wealth rather than the full New Testament message.
But if conservative Christianity has often been compromised, liberal Christianity has simply collapsed. Practically every denomination — Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian — that has tried to adapt itself to contemporary liberal values has seen an Episcopal-style plunge in church attendance. Within the Catholic Church, too, the most progressive-minded religious orders have often failed to generate the vocations necessary to sustain themselves.
Both religious and secular liberals have been loath to recognize this crisis. Leaders of liberal churches have alternated between a Monty Python-esque “it’s just a flesh wound!” bravado and a weird self-righteousness about their looming extinction. (In a 2005 interview, the Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop explained that her communion’s members valued “the stewardship of the earth” too highly to reproduce themselves.)
Liberal commentators, meanwhile, consistently hail these forms of Christianity as a model for the future without reckoning with their decline. Few of the outraged critiques of the Vatican’s investigation of progressive nuns mentioned the fact that Rome had intervened because otherwise the orders in question were likely to disappear in a generation. Fewer still noted the consequences of this eclipse: Because progressive Catholicism has failed to inspire a new generation of sisters, Catholic hospitals across the country are passing into the hands of more bottom-line-focused administrators, with inevitable consequences for how they serve the poor. But if liberals need to come to terms with these failures, religious conservatives should not be smug about them. The defining idea of liberal Christianity — that faith should spur social reform as well as personal conversion — has been an immensely positive force in our national life. No one should wish for its extinction, or for a world where Christianity becomes the exclusive property of the political right.
What should be wished for, instead, is that liberal Christianity recovers a religious reason for its own existence. As the liberal Protestant scholar Gary Dorrien has pointed out, the Christianity that animated causes such as the Social Gospel and the civil rights movement was much more dogmatic than present-day liberal faith. Its leaders had a “deep grounding in Bible study, family devotions, personal prayer and worship.” They argued for progressive reform in the context of “a personal transcendent God … the divinity of Christ, the need of personal redemption and the importance of Christian missions.”
Today, by contrast, the leaders of the Episcopal Church and similar bodies often don’t seem to be offering anything you can’t already get from a purely secular liberalism. Which suggests that perhaps they should pause, amid their frantic renovations, and consider not just what they would change about historic Christianity, but what they would defend and offer uncompromisingly to the world.
Absent such a reconsideration, their fate is nearly certain: they will change, and change, and die.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Conference in July
Below is a picture of the interior of St. Louis Bertrand Church in Louisville, KY where I just attended a conference titled:
"The Priest as Minister of Reconciliation, Spiritual Father and Moral Teacher".
Excellent conference.
.
Thanks to the Dominican Friars who sponsored the gathering.
.
"The Priest as Minister of Reconciliation, Spiritual Father and Moral Teacher".
Excellent conference.
.
Thanks to the Dominican Friars who sponsored the gathering.
.
Monday, July 16, 2012
Our Ushers are getting younger and younger:
They celebrated their Frist Holy Communion on Mother's Day and now they are our newest, and youngest, Ushers for Sunday Mass.
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Saturday, July 7, 2012
No Vacation from Sunday Mass
Archbishop Thomas Wenski, our former Diocesan Administrator, wrote the following article in his Diocesan Newspaper:
When I was a young seminarian, the rector, before dismissing us for our summer break, would admonish us: remember, guys, there’s no vacation from a vocation. This was certainly wise advice — we were after all still seminarians even when away from the structured environment of the seminary with its fixed times for prayer and daily Mass. And I think this is wise counsel to all of us Catholics even as we plan for vacations that take us away from our homes and parishes. There can be no vacation from our fundamental Christian vocation to holiness. Fidelity to weekly Mass attendance is inextricably linked to that vocation.
When I was bishop in Central Florida, I was edified by those Catholics who came to the many attractions of that area and sought out Sunday Mass even though they were far from their homes. The Basilica Shrine of Mary, Queen of the Universe, still welcomes thousands of such visitors each week. The priests of the Shrine provide an important service to these vacationers in making the Sacrament of Penance readily available to them and providing them the opportunity of participation in Sunday Mass. (And, when I had the occasion to celebrate Mass there, I often met many of you from South Florida at Sunday Mass.)
While there might not be a Shrine Church like Mary, Queen of the Universe, at our particular vacation destination, we too must make every effort to make sure that we attend Mass on Sunday. Participation in the Sunday Eucharist is an obligation for every practicing Catholic — and vacation does not dispense us from this weekly encounter with Christ in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass — for it is only through these sacramental encounters with the Lord that we can grow in the grace necessary to be faithful to our baptismal vocation to holiness.
Finding a place to attend Mass while far from home may often not be easy — but with the help of some advance planning, we can usually find one wherever we may go. The website www.Masstimes.org has a listing of Mass schedules in parishes throughout the United States. Also, most tourist friendly places readily offer information as to the location of the nearest Catholic Church.
As Catholics we belong to more than just our parish — we are members of a universal Church and therefore we are never strangers when we meet with other Catholics to celebrate the great Mystery of our Faith which is the Holy Mass. Vacations are a time of rest — a time to recharge our batteries so to speak. But as we take advantage of our vacation days to spend time with our loved ones and to rest from the everyday demands and routines of work, let us not neglect to also “rest in the Lord” on the day in which we commemorate his love for us in the Sunday Eucharist.
If we are serious about our Christian commitment, we cannot neglect to recharge our spiritual batteries in the central act of our worship, the source and summit of all Christian life: the Mass. There can never be a vacation from our vocation.
.
When I was a young seminarian, the rector, before dismissing us for our summer break, would admonish us: remember, guys, there’s no vacation from a vocation. This was certainly wise advice — we were after all still seminarians even when away from the structured environment of the seminary with its fixed times for prayer and daily Mass. And I think this is wise counsel to all of us Catholics even as we plan for vacations that take us away from our homes and parishes. There can be no vacation from our fundamental Christian vocation to holiness. Fidelity to weekly Mass attendance is inextricably linked to that vocation.
When I was bishop in Central Florida, I was edified by those Catholics who came to the many attractions of that area and sought out Sunday Mass even though they were far from their homes. The Basilica Shrine of Mary, Queen of the Universe, still welcomes thousands of such visitors each week. The priests of the Shrine provide an important service to these vacationers in making the Sacrament of Penance readily available to them and providing them the opportunity of participation in Sunday Mass. (And, when I had the occasion to celebrate Mass there, I often met many of you from South Florida at Sunday Mass.)
While there might not be a Shrine Church like Mary, Queen of the Universe, at our particular vacation destination, we too must make every effort to make sure that we attend Mass on Sunday. Participation in the Sunday Eucharist is an obligation for every practicing Catholic — and vacation does not dispense us from this weekly encounter with Christ in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass — for it is only through these sacramental encounters with the Lord that we can grow in the grace necessary to be faithful to our baptismal vocation to holiness.
Finding a place to attend Mass while far from home may often not be easy — but with the help of some advance planning, we can usually find one wherever we may go. The website www.Masstimes.org has a listing of Mass schedules in parishes throughout the United States. Also, most tourist friendly places readily offer information as to the location of the nearest Catholic Church.
As Catholics we belong to more than just our parish — we are members of a universal Church and therefore we are never strangers when we meet with other Catholics to celebrate the great Mystery of our Faith which is the Holy Mass. Vacations are a time of rest — a time to recharge our batteries so to speak. But as we take advantage of our vacation days to spend time with our loved ones and to rest from the everyday demands and routines of work, let us not neglect to also “rest in the Lord” on the day in which we commemorate his love for us in the Sunday Eucharist.
If we are serious about our Christian commitment, we cannot neglect to recharge our spiritual batteries in the central act of our worship, the source and summit of all Christian life: the Mass. There can never be a vacation from our vocation.
.
Friday, July 6, 2012
Today is the Feast of St. Maria Goretti:
.
Born in Corinaldo, Ancona, Italy, on October 16 1890; her farmworker father moved his family to Ferrier di Conca, near Anzio. Her father died of malaria and her mother had to struggle to feed her children.
In 1902 an eighteen-year-old neighbor, Alexander, grabbed her from her steps and tried to rape her. When Maria said that she would rather died than submit, Alexander began stabbing her with a knife.
As she lay in the hospital, she forgave Alexander before she died. Her death didn't end her forgivness, however.
Alexander was captured and sentenced to thirty years. He was unrepentant until he had a dream that he was in a garden. Maria was there and gave him flowers. When he woke, he was a changed man, repenting of his crime and living a reformed life. When he was released after 27 years he went directly to Maria's mother to beg her forgiveness, which she gave. "If my daughter can forgive him, who am I to withold forgiveness," she said.
When Maria was declared a saint in 1950, Alexander was there in the St. Peter's crowd to celebrate her canonization. She was canonized by Pope Pius XII in 1950 for her purity as model for youth.
She is called a martyr because she fought against Alexander's attempts at sexual assault. However, the most important aspect of her story is her forgiveness of her attacker -- her concern for her enemy extending even beyond death. Her feast day is July 6. St. Maria Goretti is the patroness of youth and for the victims of rape.
Friday Morning Connection from Father Pat (email still down)
Today is Friday, July 6, 2012.
Good Morning.
A thought for the day:
"If you don't need me, well, I came only for sinners anyhow."
The Church’s Gospel text for today: Matthew chapter 9 verses 9-13
… read this first if you can …
In our Scripture this morning we hear the question: "Why does Jesus eat with sinners?" The Pharisees first asked the question, but in a sense they speak for all of us. "Is Christ unaware of what He is doing? Doesn't it mean anything that there are decent people with whom He can associate? His judgment and sense of values must be all wrong."
The only answer to our question is that God deals with people as they are - sinners. We know from Scripture that God got used to this quite early in the world's history, beginning with Adam and Eve. God never argues the point. It is only sinful human beings who pretend to be startled by their own sinfulness. God takes it for granted. So much for granted, in fact, that God designed the key event in all of history to center on this - the Tree, the Cross.
When the Pharisees, or we, protest the kind of company Christ keeps, He doesn't bother to argue. He hardly takes time out from His next bite of food and, in a kind of off-the-shoulder remark, says, "Those who are well do not need a physician, but only those who are sick."
Christ's eating with Matthew and his friends was not just an experiment in public relations. It was no integration gimmick. It was not something artificial. For Him, it was a way of life. After all, He speaks with you, doesn’t He?
God bless,
Father Pat
Good Morning.
A thought for the day:
"If you don't need me, well, I came only for sinners anyhow."
The Church’s Gospel text for today: Matthew chapter 9 verses 9-13
… read this first if you can …
In our Scripture this morning we hear the question: "Why does Jesus eat with sinners?" The Pharisees first asked the question, but in a sense they speak for all of us. "Is Christ unaware of what He is doing? Doesn't it mean anything that there are decent people with whom He can associate? His judgment and sense of values must be all wrong."
The only answer to our question is that God deals with people as they are - sinners. We know from Scripture that God got used to this quite early in the world's history, beginning with Adam and Eve. God never argues the point. It is only sinful human beings who pretend to be startled by their own sinfulness. God takes it for granted. So much for granted, in fact, that God designed the key event in all of history to center on this - the Tree, the Cross.
When the Pharisees, or we, protest the kind of company Christ keeps, He doesn't bother to argue. He hardly takes time out from His next bite of food and, in a kind of off-the-shoulder remark, says, "Those who are well do not need a physician, but only those who are sick."
Christ's eating with Matthew and his friends was not just an experiment in public relations. It was no integration gimmick. It was not something artificial. For Him, it was a way of life. After all, He speaks with you, doesn’t He?
God bless,
Father Pat
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Thursday Morning Connection (my email server is still not functioning)
Today is Thursday, July 5, 2012.
Good Morning.
A thought for the day:
“Society has developed a billion dollar entertainment industry whose prime function is to provide an escape.”
The Church’s Gospel text for today: Matthew chapter 9 verses 1-8
… read this first if you can …
Having read this morning’s Scripture verses, imagine that you were one of those who brought that man to Jesus. Picture the hope that you came with for the healing you wanted for your friend. Then imagine your reaction when the first words Jesus spoke were, "Your sins are forgiven." What would you have felt?
I am intrigued by Jesus' comment to the scribes who objected to his actions. Which is easier to say, "Your sins are forgiven," or "Get up and walk"? These two phrases are descriptive of the kinds of ministry done by the church today. But I found myself wondering if we have put them in the same order that Jesus put them.
Which is easier to say: "Get up and walk" or "Your sins are forgiven"? Perhaps we have been so focused on helping people get up and walk, that we have neglected addressing clearly the emptiness which is filled only by hearing: "Your sins are forgiven." It would appear that the word "sin" does not seem to be relevant in a society that has become the healthiest, longest-lived, most comfortable, and most technologically advanced that the world has ever known.
"Your sins are forgiven." We still need to hear those words. They are words of hope for those whose lives are disfigured by discontent and frustration. They are words of purpose for those who have become warped by the drive to carve out a place in the sun on their terms. They are words of direction for those who have strayed from living the way God intended humanity to live.
They are the words which, over the centuries, have drawn people to the cross of Jesus Christ. In the shadow of that Cross there is a strange sense of peace. There we know that we are loved and accepted -- not because of our brains or wit or good looks or career -- not because we are better than someone else. At the foot of the Cross, His Cross, we know that we are accepted simply for who we are -- irreplaceable and infinitely worthwhile in the eyes of God!
God bless,
Father Pat
Good Morning.
A thought for the day:
“Society has developed a billion dollar entertainment industry whose prime function is to provide an escape.”
The Church’s Gospel text for today: Matthew chapter 9 verses 1-8
… read this first if you can …
Having read this morning’s Scripture verses, imagine that you were one of those who brought that man to Jesus. Picture the hope that you came with for the healing you wanted for your friend. Then imagine your reaction when the first words Jesus spoke were, "Your sins are forgiven." What would you have felt?
I am intrigued by Jesus' comment to the scribes who objected to his actions. Which is easier to say, "Your sins are forgiven," or "Get up and walk"? These two phrases are descriptive of the kinds of ministry done by the church today. But I found myself wondering if we have put them in the same order that Jesus put them.
Which is easier to say: "Get up and walk" or "Your sins are forgiven"? Perhaps we have been so focused on helping people get up and walk, that we have neglected addressing clearly the emptiness which is filled only by hearing: "Your sins are forgiven." It would appear that the word "sin" does not seem to be relevant in a society that has become the healthiest, longest-lived, most comfortable, and most technologically advanced that the world has ever known.
"Your sins are forgiven." We still need to hear those words. They are words of hope for those whose lives are disfigured by discontent and frustration. They are words of purpose for those who have become warped by the drive to carve out a place in the sun on their terms. They are words of direction for those who have strayed from living the way God intended humanity to live.
They are the words which, over the centuries, have drawn people to the cross of Jesus Christ. In the shadow of that Cross there is a strange sense of peace. There we know that we are loved and accepted -- not because of our brains or wit or good looks or career -- not because we are better than someone else. At the foot of the Cross, His Cross, we know that we are accepted simply for who we are -- irreplaceable and infinitely worthwhile in the eyes of God!
God bless,
Father Pat
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Render Unto God . . .
Before a full house in our nation's largest Catholic Church -- Washington, DC's 5,000-seat Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception -- is the homily given at the closing Mass of the US bishops' Fortnight for Freedom by Archbishop Charles Chaput OFM Cap. of Philadelphia....
.
Offer youself these few minutes (16), I think you'll be blessed by his words:
.
Archbishop Charles Chaput -- Fortnight for Freedom Closing Homily from Rocco Palmo on Vimeo.
.
Thoughts for the Holiday
The Fortnight4Freedom (or as is sometimes referred to as: “the Fortnight for Religious Liberty”) comes to a conclusion today. These previous 2 weeks were offered to us U.S. Catholics by our Bishops to concentrate through prayer and reflection on the importance of Religious Freedom in our country, that we might understand why these days are most significant to all that is a Catholic way of life for us. Hopefully we realize that we are called to be pro-active, not just reactive, about Catholicism in America. Today: Celebrate Catholic identity in public life.
American Catholics have too often fallen into a self-defeating pattern. Call it the ghetto syndrome.
The ghetto syndrome started years before the ghetto, in 1634 when Cecil Calvert’s Catholic settlers headed to Maryland on The Ark. They were afraid of upsetting their Protestant crew, so they heard Mass in hiding on their ship. It was a bad way to start. Why should Catholics feel that the Mass is something upsetting and almost shameful? By 1692 Catholicism was illegal in Maryland.
A much bigger wave of Catholic immigrants came at the turn of the 19th to the 20th century, with Europeans fleeing in droves to the United States. They were leaving poverty behind seeking prosperity. But many of them were also leaving deeply Catholic countries behind and entering a thoroughly Protestant one.
Catholics stayed poor at first – and stayed Catholic, too. But as we rose out of the ghetto, too many of us began behaving like those Catholics on The Ark, as if our faith was something very private that might cause offense.
Assimilation is a necessary thing for immigrants, but it is also dangerous. Our desire to be like our neighbors is powerful enough to create a united nation, E Pluribus Unum – but also powerful enough to erode religious identity.
The Old Testament is filled with cautionary tales about assimilation with pagan societies. Catholics today can relate to that.
The children of the first immigrant Catholics had a very rough time of it. They knew they had to drop their accents and change their clothes to fit in. But strong anti-Catholic currents wanted more than that.
The Know Nothings, the American Protective Association, and the Ku Klux Klan spread their mistrust of Catholics far and wide in the 19th century. As recently as the mid-20th century their sentiments were echoed by writers such as Paul Blanshard and the organization, Protestants and Other Americans United for Separation of Church and State (now shortened to “Americans United”).
The theory of inferiority they touted:
• Catholics were intellectually and religiously inferior, because their minds and faith was beholden to the teachings of an Italian pope;
• Catholics were racially inferior, because they came largely from the swarthier Southern European people, not the northern Europeans;
• Catholics were socially inferior, because the Irish and other new immigrants were the unskilled labor of their day.
Some Catholics were cowed into submission by the onslaught; some fought back boldly.
At any rate, the faith was something too powerful to be easily dropped. That took longer. Maybe the turning point came when the new generation was finally grown up and moving into positions of leadership. Many thought it necessary to distance themselves from the “ghetto” they came from.
Take higher education, for instance. In 1970, the nation’s top Catholic university leaders signed the “Land o’ Lakes Statement” that redefined the Catholic mission in education.
No longer were our universities to be places where Catholic intellectuals would mine the rich veins of magisterial teaching and apply Catholic principles to the problems of our day. Now Catholic universities were to be places that evaluated and sifted the teachings of the Church – and often found them wanting. What they would offer their students wasn’t the enduring wisdom of the Church, but whatever was currently popular in academia.
The same ghetto syndrome played out in parochial schools, parish religious-education programs and even liturgical planning. Everything became less jarringly Catholic, and more acceptably “Protestant.”
Hopefully, things are beginning to change.
In our generation, Catholics either believe the Church, and stay in it, or disbelieve the Church, and leave it. Those who stay see its rich teaching as a beautiful answer to the world’s problems. Their experience of the world’s wisdom is more like the woman in last Sunday’s Gospel. “She had suffered greatly at the hands of many doctors and had spent all that she had. Yet she was not helped, but only grew worse.”
Stand up for your Catholic faith. How can we stand by and watch as it erodes at the hands of those who no longer believe. The time for relaxing in our faith is over. As we celebrate the birth of our country today, let us also celebrate a renewed commitment to our Catholic faith.
.
Uh, Oh - yikes - oh, gosh!
My email server has been down for over 24 hours now, so I am posting my Daily Connection for today on my blog:
.
Today is Wednesday, July 4, 2012.
Good Morning.
A thought for the day:
“The Messiah comes knocking at the door of our hearts many times in life and …”
The Church’s Gospel text for today: Matthew chapter 8 verses 28-34
… read this first if you can …
Wally was big for his age--seven years old. Everyone wondered what role the teacher would give him in the annual Christmas play. Especially considering the fact that he was also a slow learner. Perhaps he could pull the curtain. To everyone's surprise the teacher gave Wally the role of the innkeeper. The boy of course was delighted. After all, all he had to learn was one line: "There is no room in the inn." He had that down in no time.
Then came the night for the program. The parents took their places. Every seat in the auditorium was filled. The children entered singing "Oh come all ye faithful." The lights dimmed. A hush moved over the audience. The curtain opened on Scene One. Mary and Joseph entered the stage and walked up to the inn. "Please sir, my wife is not well. Could we have a room for the night?" Wally was ready for his line. He had rehearsed it all night. He began, there is...and he hesitated. He started over again. There is. . .and again his mind went completely blank. Everyone was embarrassed for him but poor Wally just didn't know what to do. Joseph thought he would improvise and started walking away toward the stable on stage left. Seeing him walking away Wally in desperation called out: "Look, there's plenty of room at my house, just come on home with me."
In our Scripture this morning the tragedy isn’t that there is no room for Jesus – there is PLENTY of room for Jesus. The people just don’t want Him there with them. Where we, in our weakness, may want to place the blame ( you know: fear, doubt, lack of faith), the simple truth is – there are some people who do not want the Savior of the World, the Son of God, in their lives.
On this Fourth of July, as we give thanks to Almighty God for the blessing of our country perhaps we might whisper a prayer that we always find a place in this land of the free and home of the brave and offer it to Him, the Word made Flesh. We need Him among us.
God bless,
Father Pat
.
.
Today is Wednesday, July 4, 2012.
Good Morning.
A thought for the day:
“The Messiah comes knocking at the door of our hearts many times in life and …”
The Church’s Gospel text for today: Matthew chapter 8 verses 28-34
… read this first if you can …
Wally was big for his age--seven years old. Everyone wondered what role the teacher would give him in the annual Christmas play. Especially considering the fact that he was also a slow learner. Perhaps he could pull the curtain. To everyone's surprise the teacher gave Wally the role of the innkeeper. The boy of course was delighted. After all, all he had to learn was one line: "There is no room in the inn." He had that down in no time.
Then came the night for the program. The parents took their places. Every seat in the auditorium was filled. The children entered singing "Oh come all ye faithful." The lights dimmed. A hush moved over the audience. The curtain opened on Scene One. Mary and Joseph entered the stage and walked up to the inn. "Please sir, my wife is not well. Could we have a room for the night?" Wally was ready for his line. He had rehearsed it all night. He began, there is...and he hesitated. He started over again. There is. . .and again his mind went completely blank. Everyone was embarrassed for him but poor Wally just didn't know what to do. Joseph thought he would improvise and started walking away toward the stable on stage left. Seeing him walking away Wally in desperation called out: "Look, there's plenty of room at my house, just come on home with me."
In our Scripture this morning the tragedy isn’t that there is no room for Jesus – there is PLENTY of room for Jesus. The people just don’t want Him there with them. Where we, in our weakness, may want to place the blame ( you know: fear, doubt, lack of faith), the simple truth is – there are some people who do not want the Savior of the World, the Son of God, in their lives.
On this Fourth of July, as we give thanks to Almighty God for the blessing of our country perhaps we might whisper a prayer that we always find a place in this land of the free and home of the brave and offer it to Him, the Word made Flesh. We need Him among us.
God bless,
Father Pat
.
Fortnight4Freedom: Day 14 - Final Day
The fact is that men of the present day want
to be able freely to profess their religion in private
and in public. Religious freedom has already been
declared to be a civil right in most constitutions, and
it is solemnly recognized in international documents.
The further fact is that forms of government still exist
under which, even though freedom of religious worship
receives constitutional recognition, the powers of
government are engaged in the effort to deter citizens
from the profession of religion and to make life difficult
and dangerous for religious Communities.
This sacred Synod greets with joy the first of these
two facts, as among the signs of the times. With sorrow,
however, it denounces the other fact, as only
to be deplored. The Synod exhorts Catholics, and it
directs a plea to all men, most carefully to consider
how greatly necessary religious freedom is, especially
in the present condition of the human family.
All nations are coming into even closer unity. Men
of different cultures and religions are being brought
together in closer relationships. There is a growing
consciousness of the personal responsibility that
weighs upon every man. All this is evident.
Consequently, in order that relationships of peace
and harmony may be established and maintained
within the whole of mankind, it is necessary that
religious freedom be everywhere provided with an
effective constitutional guarantee, and that respect be
shown for the high duty and right of man freely to lead
his religious life in society.
Declaration on Religious Liberty
(Dignitatis Humanae), no. 15
December 7, 1965
.
.
Reflection for Day Fourteen:
In concluding its Declaration of Religious Freedom,
the Council rejoices in the fact that religious freedom
has been enshrined in the constitutions of many
countries as well as in international statements. However,
the Council Fathers are well aware that religious
freedom is not guaranteed merely when it is stated on
a piece of paper. It must be exercised by a living body
of people. Moreover, there are actual governments
that act against religious communities, sometime in
the name of religion. The Council Fathers find such
situations appalling and ask that Catholics and all
people of goodwill work to rectify this injustice.
Since the Vatican Council, has religious freedom
improved or deteriorated throughout the world?
What is the relationship between growing religious diversity,
as well as growing interactions among people of different
faiths, and religious liberty?
to be able freely to profess their religion in private
and in public. Religious freedom has already been
declared to be a civil right in most constitutions, and
it is solemnly recognized in international documents.
The further fact is that forms of government still exist
under which, even though freedom of religious worship
receives constitutional recognition, the powers of
government are engaged in the effort to deter citizens
from the profession of religion and to make life difficult
and dangerous for religious Communities.
This sacred Synod greets with joy the first of these
two facts, as among the signs of the times. With sorrow,
however, it denounces the other fact, as only
to be deplored. The Synod exhorts Catholics, and it
directs a plea to all men, most carefully to consider
how greatly necessary religious freedom is, especially
in the present condition of the human family.
All nations are coming into even closer unity. Men
of different cultures and religions are being brought
together in closer relationships. There is a growing
consciousness of the personal responsibility that
weighs upon every man. All this is evident.
Consequently, in order that relationships of peace
and harmony may be established and maintained
within the whole of mankind, it is necessary that
religious freedom be everywhere provided with an
effective constitutional guarantee, and that respect be
shown for the high duty and right of man freely to lead
his religious life in society.
Declaration on Religious Liberty
(Dignitatis Humanae), no. 15
December 7, 1965
.
.
Reflection for Day Fourteen:
In concluding its Declaration of Religious Freedom,
the Council rejoices in the fact that religious freedom
has been enshrined in the constitutions of many
countries as well as in international statements. However,
the Council Fathers are well aware that religious
freedom is not guaranteed merely when it is stated on
a piece of paper. It must be exercised by a living body
of people. Moreover, there are actual governments
that act against religious communities, sometime in
the name of religion. The Council Fathers find such
situations appalling and ask that Catholics and all
people of goodwill work to rectify this injustice.
Since the Vatican Council, has religious freedom
improved or deteriorated throughout the world?
What is the relationship between growing religious diversity,
as well as growing interactions among people of different
faiths, and religious liberty?
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Fortnight4Freedom: Day 13
In turn, where the principle of religious freedom
is not only proclaimed in words or simply incorporated
in law but also given sincere and practical
application, there the Church succeeds in achieving a
stable situation of right as well as of fact and the independence
which is necessary for the fulfillment of her
divine mission. This independence is precisely what
the authorities of the Church claim in society.
At the same time, the Christian faithful, in common
with all other men, possess the civil right not to
be hindered in leading their lives in accordance with
their conscience. Therefore, a harmony exists between
the freedom of the Church and the religious freedom
which is to be recognized as the right of all men and
communities and sanctioned by constitutional law.
Declaration on Religious Liberty
(Dignitatis Humanae), no. 13
December 7, 1965
.
Reflection for Day Thirteen:
While insisting upon the religious freedom of the
Church, the Council Fathers do not wish to give the
impression that in some manner the Catholic Church
is special when it comes to religious liberty. Thus, the
Council first states above that where the principle
of religious liberty is present, the Church is able to
peaceably fulfill her divine mission. It is this amicable
relationship between herself and civil authorities that
the Church always wishes to pursue and ensure.
In the light of this, the Church also champions
the religious and civil rights of all so that all
people can live “their lives in accordance with their
conscience.” In this way there is no conflict with
what the Church demands for herself and what she
demands for others—the freedom to follow one’s
conscience in matters religious. This religious freedom
for all is what the Council once more believes should
be acknowledged and sanctioned within the constitutional
law of countries.
In the United States, religious freedom is protected
in the Constitution, as the Council desires.
Are those constitutional protections enough?
Are they growing stronger or weaker in our society today?
What else, apart from the law, can strengthen or
weaken religious liberty?
What should Catholics do to defend and foster religious liberty
in America today?
What have Catholics done in the past when religious
liberty was threatened?
.
is not only proclaimed in words or simply incorporated
in law but also given sincere and practical
application, there the Church succeeds in achieving a
stable situation of right as well as of fact and the independence
which is necessary for the fulfillment of her
divine mission. This independence is precisely what
the authorities of the Church claim in society.
At the same time, the Christian faithful, in common
with all other men, possess the civil right not to
be hindered in leading their lives in accordance with
their conscience. Therefore, a harmony exists between
the freedom of the Church and the religious freedom
which is to be recognized as the right of all men and
communities and sanctioned by constitutional law.
Declaration on Religious Liberty
(Dignitatis Humanae), no. 13
December 7, 1965
.
Reflection for Day Thirteen:
While insisting upon the religious freedom of the
Church, the Council Fathers do not wish to give the
impression that in some manner the Catholic Church
is special when it comes to religious liberty. Thus, the
Council first states above that where the principle
of religious liberty is present, the Church is able to
peaceably fulfill her divine mission. It is this amicable
relationship between herself and civil authorities that
the Church always wishes to pursue and ensure.
In the light of this, the Church also champions
the religious and civil rights of all so that all
people can live “their lives in accordance with their
conscience.” In this way there is no conflict with
what the Church demands for herself and what she
demands for others—the freedom to follow one’s
conscience in matters religious. This religious freedom
for all is what the Council once more believes should
be acknowledged and sanctioned within the constitutional
law of countries.
In the United States, religious freedom is protected
in the Constitution, as the Council desires.
Are those constitutional protections enough?
Are they growing stronger or weaker in our society today?
What else, apart from the law, can strengthen or
weaken religious liberty?
What should Catholics do to defend and foster religious liberty
in America today?
What have Catholics done in the past when religious
liberty was threatened?
.
Monday, July 2, 2012
Fortnight4Freedom: Day 12
Among the things which concern the good
of the Church and indeed the welfare of society here
on earth—things therefore which are always and
everywhere to be kept secure and defended against
all injury—this certainly is preeminent, namely, that
the Church should enjoy that full measure of freedom
which her care for salvation of men requires. This
freedom is sacred, because the only-begotten Son
endowed with it the Church which He purchased with
His blood. It is so much the property of the Church that
to act against it is to act against the will of God. The
freedom of the Church is the fundamental principle in
what concerns the relations between the Church and
governments and the whole civil order.
Declaration on Religious Liberty
(Dignitatis Humanae), no. 13
December 7, 1965
.
.
Reflection for Day Twelve:
In Chapter I, the Council Fathers considered the
nature of religious freedom from a rational and philosophical
perspective—the dignity and equality of
human beings and the natural right to religious liberty.
In Chapter II, they turn to examining religious
liberty in the light of Christian Revelation.
In this context, the Council Fathers forthrightly
insist that the Church must “enjoy that full measure
of freedom which her care for salvation of men
requires.” Jesus became man, died, and rose from the
dead so that all men and women would come to salvation—
to know the fullness of truth and the fullness of
the Father’s love. This is why the Church’s religious
freedom is “sacred.” Jesus, through the Holy Spirit,
founded the Church as the means by which his saving
message and presence would go forth to all the world.
Only then would Jesus’ Gospel be lived out among
all nations and peoples. Only if the Church is free
can she rightly fulfill her divine commission. This is
why the Church jealously guards her freedom while
simultaneously fostering harmonious, appropriate, and
just relations with various governments throughout
the world.
What present circumstances threaten the freedom
of the Catholic Church particularly?
Are threatsto the Church’s freedom always from without, or do
threats arise from within the Church itself?
What threats in the past has the Church in our country had
to contend with?
.
of the Church and indeed the welfare of society here
on earth—things therefore which are always and
everywhere to be kept secure and defended against
all injury—this certainly is preeminent, namely, that
the Church should enjoy that full measure of freedom
which her care for salvation of men requires. This
freedom is sacred, because the only-begotten Son
endowed with it the Church which He purchased with
His blood. It is so much the property of the Church that
to act against it is to act against the will of God. The
freedom of the Church is the fundamental principle in
what concerns the relations between the Church and
governments and the whole civil order.
Declaration on Religious Liberty
(Dignitatis Humanae), no. 13
December 7, 1965
.
.
Reflection for Day Twelve:
In Chapter I, the Council Fathers considered the
nature of religious freedom from a rational and philosophical
perspective—the dignity and equality of
human beings and the natural right to religious liberty.
In Chapter II, they turn to examining religious
liberty in the light of Christian Revelation.
In this context, the Council Fathers forthrightly
insist that the Church must “enjoy that full measure
of freedom which her care for salvation of men
requires.” Jesus became man, died, and rose from the
dead so that all men and women would come to salvation—
to know the fullness of truth and the fullness of
the Father’s love. This is why the Church’s religious
freedom is “sacred.” Jesus, through the Holy Spirit,
founded the Church as the means by which his saving
message and presence would go forth to all the world.
Only then would Jesus’ Gospel be lived out among
all nations and peoples. Only if the Church is free
can she rightly fulfill her divine commission. This is
why the Church jealously guards her freedom while
simultaneously fostering harmonious, appropriate, and
just relations with various governments throughout
the world.
What present circumstances threaten the freedom
of the Catholic Church particularly?
Are threatsto the Church’s freedom always from without, or do
threats arise from within the Church itself?
What threats in the past has the Church in our country had
to contend with?
.
Fortnight4Freedom: Day 11
Furthermore, society has the right to
defend itself against possible abuses committed on
pretext of freedom of religion. It is the special duty
of government to provide this protection. However,
government is not to act in arbitrary fashion or in an
unfair spirit of partisanship. Its action is to be controlled
by juridical norms which are in conformity with
the objective moral order.
These norms arise out of the need for effective safeguard
of the rights of all citizens and for peaceful settlement
of conflicts of rights. They flow from the need
for an adequate care of genuine public peace, which
comes about when men live together in good order
and in true justice. They come, finally, out of the need
for a proper guardianship of public morality. These
matters constitute the basic component of the common
welfare: they are what is meant by public order.
For the rest, the usages of society are to be the
usages of freedom in their full range. These require
that the freedom of man be respected as far as
possible, and curtailed only when and in so far
as necessary.
Declaration on Religious Liberty
(Dignitatis Humanae), no. 7
December 7, 1965
Reflection for Day Eleven:
The Council Fathers are well aware that, while various
religious groups are meant to live in harmony,
each accepting the equal rights of others, yet, in
reality, conflicts frequently arise between various
religions. This may be due to what a specific religion
holds concerning the nature of its own beliefs in relation
to the beliefs of other religions. While each religious
group has the right to profess that its religious
beliefs are true and that other religious beliefs are
either inadequate or contain erroneous tenets, no
religious group has the right to persecute or seek to
suppress other religious groups. Similar conflict may
arise within a religion, in which case, the cause of
the conflict does not reside in the religious belief as
such, but in a misinterpretation of those beliefs that
prompts misguided attacks on other religious groups.
Given the reality of such religious conflicts, the
Council Fathers acknowledge that the government
is responsible for keeping public order, not by taking
sides, but by enacting just laws and guarding the equal
rights of all.
What causes religious conflicts today?
Do governments always adequately respond to such conflicts?
What distinguishes “public order” (which limits
religious freedom) from an ordinary policy preference
of government (which does not)?
.
defend itself against possible abuses committed on
pretext of freedom of religion. It is the special duty
of government to provide this protection. However,
government is not to act in arbitrary fashion or in an
unfair spirit of partisanship. Its action is to be controlled
by juridical norms which are in conformity with
the objective moral order.
These norms arise out of the need for effective safeguard
of the rights of all citizens and for peaceful settlement
of conflicts of rights. They flow from the need
for an adequate care of genuine public peace, which
comes about when men live together in good order
and in true justice. They come, finally, out of the need
for a proper guardianship of public morality. These
matters constitute the basic component of the common
welfare: they are what is meant by public order.
For the rest, the usages of society are to be the
usages of freedom in their full range. These require
that the freedom of man be respected as far as
possible, and curtailed only when and in so far
as necessary.
Declaration on Religious Liberty
(Dignitatis Humanae), no. 7
December 7, 1965
Reflection for Day Eleven:
The Council Fathers are well aware that, while various
religious groups are meant to live in harmony,
each accepting the equal rights of others, yet, in
reality, conflicts frequently arise between various
religions. This may be due to what a specific religion
holds concerning the nature of its own beliefs in relation
to the beliefs of other religions. While each religious
group has the right to profess that its religious
beliefs are true and that other religious beliefs are
either inadequate or contain erroneous tenets, no
religious group has the right to persecute or seek to
suppress other religious groups. Similar conflict may
arise within a religion, in which case, the cause of
the conflict does not reside in the religious belief as
such, but in a misinterpretation of those beliefs that
prompts misguided attacks on other religious groups.
Given the reality of such religious conflicts, the
Council Fathers acknowledge that the government
is responsible for keeping public order, not by taking
sides, but by enacting just laws and guarding the equal
rights of all.
What causes religious conflicts today?
Do governments always adequately respond to such conflicts?
What distinguishes “public order” (which limits
religious freedom) from an ordinary policy preference
of government (which does not)?
.
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
