Sunday, May 29, 2011

That your joy may be complete...

I was doing some preparation for today's Mass when I stumbled upone this quote from St Fancis de Sales:
The one has great need and capacity to receive, the other great abundance and inclination to bestow. Nothing is more suited to indigence than affluence; and the kinder affluence is, the stronger its inclination to give. The more needy indigence is, the more eager it is to be satiated. The meeting then, of affluence and indigence is sweet and happy; and we could scarcely say which should enjoy the more contentment, abundance to be communicated, or deficiency to be filled, had not our Lord told us that it is a more blessed thing to give than to receive.
— St. Francis de Sales

Just imagine the joy that fills your heart when you recieve Our Lord after having prepared well for doing so. This joy is nothing compared to the great joy that we will recieve upon entering His presence; this joy, again, is small compared to the joy He has in giving Himself to you, to us; to me.

As my Parish Priest constantly reiterates: "If He could give you more than Himself, He would; but He can't becuase He's infinite and you can't get more than infintie."

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Prayer Requests - 6th Week of Easter

I've been quite slack with this.
I'm going to try to be less slack.
This list will be updated on Moday or Tuesday



PRAYERS OF THE WEEK
  • Staff and Students at Notre Dame, particularly for fidelity to the Magesteium
  • Rod & Eileen
  • My upcoming trip to NY
  • A freind's friend who lost her baby
  • For Pregnancy Assistance, the Respect Life Office and all other pro-life goups
  • For the workers of PepsiCo and those of Senomyx, as well as all other commercial companies that continue to disrespect Human Life, believing that it's possible to destory life in order to build it up
  •  For Cazza, who is flat-out in Melbourne
  • Lauren, who just moved house
  • The year 12s and Uni kidz doing/about to start exams
  • Pastor Duong Kim Khai, Tran Thi Thuy and Nguyen Thanh Tamand the 4 other Vietnamese Christians who are to go on trial in their country for "trying to overthow the Government" (ie, asking for fair payment for the land that they used to own that was forcibly sold by said governemnt.) If convicted, they face either life imprisonment or the death penalty
  • Frs Doug, Roman, John Sebastian, Micheal, Don, Jean-Noel.
  • Archbishop Hickey, Bishop Sproxton
  • The new bishop-elects, particularly those in Australia.
  • Bishop Finn and Fr. Ratigan of the Diocese of Kansas City
  • The intentions of the Emmanuel Girls' household
  • Paul, particularly for the ability to clearly discerne what he's being called to do and the courage to follow that through
  • For Helen and all her intentions
  • The Sweeny family and all their needs and intentions

The Missal

There once was a young boy named Bill who lived somwhere in the US at the time of the New Missal, a copy of which he recieved for his tenth birthday in 1963. He wrote his name and address on the cover page of his new Missal.

Young Bill would serve regularly at his parish, learning Latin in order to respond to the priest who celebrated Mass.

Bill went to a Jesuit Uni, taking core units in philosophy and relgious studies.

Bill now lives in LA with his wife and pet parrot, working as an engineer, desiging internet type equipment.
Bill enjoys reading, opera and the occasional round of golf.

Bill's Missal is now in Australia, being used by a nineteen year old theology student who occasionally goes to TLM on Sundays.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Coke or Pepsi?

You all know I'm a die-hard Pepsi-Max fan.

Or, rather, you all knew that I was a die-hard Pepsi-Max fan.

I, Kelly, do hereby give up Pepsi-Max and all other PepsiCo products until such time as that company severs ties with Senomyx, a company that uses cells from 'electively aborted' babies.

Thatisall.

Thursday, May 26, 2011

That awkward moment when...

your Doomsday Prophesy turns out to be false.




Go and check out this post.
The Badger Catholic: Awkward
Do it
Now.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Change of Worlds

I've been trying lately to phrase things more positively lately. Instead of saying "I don't know where that is because I've lived South of the River too long," I have been trying to say 'the same thing but different.'

It's amazing how changing your words can change the attitude of others to your situation.





How you express your woundedness can cause a marginalisation of the Other. We must sit among the Others, binding and unbinding our wounds one at a time.

I may already have mentioned this is someother post, but I'm going to say it again here. This is a story from the Talmud that Henri Nouwen quotes in The Wounded Healer:
Rabbi Yoshua ben Levi came upon Elijah the prophet while he was standing at the entrance of Rabbi Simeron ben Yohai's cave... He asked Elijah, "When will the Messiah come?" Elijah replied,
"Go and ask him yourself."
"Where is he?"
"Sitting at the gates of the city."
"How shall I know him?"
"He is sitting among the poor covered with wounds. The others unbind all their wounds at the same time andthen bind them up again. But he unbinds one at a time and binds it up again, saying to himself, 'Perhaps I shall be needed: if so I must always be ready so as not to delay for a moment.'"
Here, Nouwen speaks about being a wounded, yet healing minister.
Pause and consider the story so far. Seriously, just stop for a few minutes, turn away from the screen and just think for a few minutes. Maybe grab a pen and paper and jot down some of your thoughts.




Nouwen then goes on to quote the rest of the story."

When Elijah had expalined to him how he could find the Messiah sitting among the poor at the gates of the city, Rabbi Joshua ben Levi went to the Messiah and said to him:
"Peace unto you my master and teacher."
The Messiah answered, "Peace unto you, son of Levi."
He asked, "When is the Master coming?"
"Today," he answered.
Rabbi Yoshua returned to Elijah, who asked, "What did he tell you?"
"He indeed has decieved me, for he said 'Today I am coming' and he has not come."
Wlijah said, "This is what he told you: 'Today if you would listen to His voice.'"







Oh that today you would listen to His voice!
Harden not your hearts as at Meribah,
As on that day at Massah in the desert
When your ancestors tried me, though they saw My work. 

I am, I love, I hate, I dream,

This video was created by the L'Arche community in Toronto, Canada.

Fill in the blanks for yourself in the comment box below.

Sunday, May 22, 2011

Shout Out

Just a quick shout out to my linux/chrome using reader from the USA.

Hi.

May God bless you!

Deo Gratias! Brave Bishop in Malta.

Praised be to God for Bsp Grech of the diocese of Gozo in Malta.

Here is copypasta from CatholicCulture.org:

Malta: bishop says dissenting Catholics should not receive Communion   May 20, 2011

Preaching less than two weeks before a nationwide referendum on the legalization of divorce, the head of one of Malta’s two dioceses said that dissenting Catholics should not receive Holy Communion.
“Beware of the wolf in sheep’s clothing. And the wolf is now saying he is Catholic,” said Bishop Mario Grech of Gozo in what Maltese journalists describe as a reference to a pro-divorce Catholic organization. “This is a falsity, this is deceit. I am ready to dialogue with everyone but do not be false, do not lie … If you are not in communion with Christ’s teachings, you are not in communion with the Church and you cannot receive Communion.”
“To be politically correct and not tell things as they are will lead us to be sorry,” he added. “There are the brigands among us who are utilizing every means possible to lead the flock astray. They are going after marriage, and then other things will follow.”
During his April 2010 apostolic journey to Malta, Pope Benedict urged the nation’s citizens to defend the indissolubility of marriage.
“Your nation should continue to stand up for the indissolubility of marriage as a natural institution as well as a sacramental one, and for the true nature of the family, just as it does for the sacredness of human life from conception to natural death and for the proper respect owed to religious freedom in ways that bring authentic integral development to individuals and society,” he said upon arriving in the nation.

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Things That Cause Tears.

Onions.
Abortions.
This article has it all.
 The Onion is not a place I generally recommend, but this article is hilarious and sad and well written and makes a good point - all at the same time!

Knowing the Faith.

Over at CatholicCulture at the beginning of the month, Dr. Jeff Mirus posted a piece entitled How Do We Know Our Faith?


Below are some quotes to get you thinking, but go and read the whole piece, especially if you were  raptured earlier today - you have enternity.


Now this response brings us to a critical point. The primary issue here is not differing assertions about Mary. The primary issue is this: How do we know? My correspondent makes two enormous epistemological assumptions: First, that everything we can know about these matters is in Scripture (“Nowhere in the Bible does it say she was not a sinner”). Second, whatever Scripture says it says plainly and obviously (“Show me where it says that…. Read Luke 1:46-47… Read Hebrews 4:15”). Yet when we follow her references, we see that they are insufficient to prove her case. And we might well ask, how can mere flesh and blood assert a definitive meaning for a passage of Scripture anyway?

...

As human persons, of course, we have a terrible propensity to take things for granted. Once we take them for granted, we find it difficult to see how anyone else could question our convictions, for they appear to us to be obvious and certain. What I said at the outset is true: This is very, very hard for us. But in matters which concern God, do we not owe a little more effort? We ought to begin that effort by asking how we know the things we claim to believe, whether they arise from traditional sources or modern nihilism. The question can be frightening; it can disrupt our relationships and destroy our sense of security. Even among Catholics it can challenge our commitments and incur the wrath of the lukewarm. But to fail to ask is to accept mediocrity. To fail to ask is to deny what it means to be fully human. And to fail to ask is to turn our backs on God.
Go on. Go read the whole thing.

Left Behind

BREAKING NEWS: THE RAPTURE HAS HAPPENED AND ALL PRACTICING  CATHOLICS HAVE BEEN LEFT BEHIND

Earth, 8pm, Saturday May 21st
Exclusive report by Left-Behind-Catholic-Blogger Kelly Clark.


In an exclusive on the 'phone interview, this Catholic Blogger had the chance to speak with one of her judges-to-be and friend-when-he-was-on-earth, Thomas.

According to Tom, "the coverage here [in Heaven] is better. There were some rooms in my house back there where there was no coverage at all, so it's got that going for it."

When asked how it felt to know that he'd soon be judging me, Tom replied, that "they told all of us not to read the news papers so that our opinion wouldn't be biased," but it appears the Powers at Be do not seem to consider telephone conversations to be a bias-provoking mechanism.

It seems that Baptised Catholics who no longer attend regular Sunday Mass and the agnostics are among the Saved, though no practicing Catholic is reported to be among the 144,000.


"For those left behind, the apocolypse has just begun."

Friday, May 20, 2011

For the Record

Peter is being ripped to sheds over the Morris affair.

Both Peters: the Editor and the Sheopherd.

The following is an aCatholica comentary on the editorial published in this week's Record [in black] (the Catholic newspaper for the Archdiocese of Perth) with my own [comments] and emphases.




The removal by Pope Benedict of Bishop William Morris from the diocese that had been placed into his care for the Catholic faith in 1993 has been major news throughout the Catholic world over the last fortnight.

An irony here is that nobody -- either from supporters or detractors -- is sucked in by any suggestion that this was a voluntary process or, as officially stated, an 'early retirement'. This was an offer he couldn't refuse. [Three things. 1) That's not what irony is. 2) I think you'll find that "The Holy Father removed Bishop William M. Morris from the pastoral care of the diocese of Toowoomba, Australia." (VIS news, May 2nd).  3) You're making it sound as though he didn't have any choice in the matter at all; he had lots.]

While the removal was almost unprecedented in Australia, it not-so-surprisingly illuminated fault lines within the Church which all reasonably well-informed observers have known about for decades. To use somewhat technical language, the fault-line is sometimes described as the one which runs between the hermeneutic of continuity on the one hand and a mentality which can be described, on the other, as a hermeneutic of discontinuity. [Guess who holds which.]

Good to set these things out from the get-go just in case the reader might be inclined to think that any concerns about the 'removal' [removal not 'removal'] are reasonable. [What? I'm not sure how this comment and paragraph go together...]

At the end of the day, however, the issue under debate was the simple fact that in the Catholic Church every Bishop, a successor to the apostles, is obliged by sacred oath to teach what the Catholic Church teaches - period. [As Fr Z is prone to saying, 'Do I hear an 'Amen!'?']

The hermeneutic of continuity is an outlook which sees the history of the Church from Christ up until now as an organic and constantly developing unity which takes into account the person and teachings of Christ, Scripture, two millennia of Catholic faith and practice and the defined body of teaching called the magisterium. It accepts as a matter of faith that some things can’t change, no matter what the popular view such as, for example, the belief in Christ’s divinity.


Again, setting out the territory. What's to come is to be seen as important as the belief in Christ's divinity. [Not quite what Peter said. It seems more to be a reference to earlier, more famous herisies.]

Such things are, in effect, the constellations in the night sky by which the ordinary Catholic man or woman can safely navigate because they do not change position. [Safely because the Church holds "the totality or fullness of the means of salvation," (Ad Gentes 6) "she proclaims the fullness of the faith" (CCC 868)]
The hermeneutic of discontinuity, conversely, is more a mentality that tends to regard much of the Church prior to the Second Vatican Council as somehow deficient and which seeks to obscure, change or reverse some or much Church teaching, not excluding the dogmatically defined magisterium, usually in matters to do with the sanctity of human life and gender, but also extending to issues such as ecclesiology, liturgy, and in specific instances such as the ordination of women. [A good definition, imo.] It usually seeks to do so in accord with moral relativism and the values predominantly to be found in popular culture. It often confuses the individual sinfulness or failings of members of the Church throughout history with the actual faith of the Church.

Ah! Moral Relativism! Will we see how this much used rhetorical weapon applies here? [Oh noes! That phrase that they always use!! People might start thinking they use it for a reason; quick let's use a rhetorical question with the word rhetorical in it! (This is irony.)]

One mentality is informed by two millennia of constant belief and practice, often heroically witnessed to by martyrdom, the other by the mass media and the fashionable theories that abound in our culture.

Such a withering critique! Does it have anything to do with this issue? [Yes. Everything.]

On the side of the essential unity of Church belief and teaching from Christ up until the present is Pope Benedict; on the side of changing Church teaching and practice to suit some values of majority opinion, sadly, was Bishop Morris.

Note, just in case you missed it, 'majority opinion' is used in a perjorative sense. Did you pick that up? [What's that? Peter the Editor thinks that being Catholic involves sideing with the Pope? How terrible!!]

The arguments surrounding the dismissal of Bishop Morris are therefore also about ecclesiology, which is to say they are about the Church: among these being questions such as what is the Church, who constitutes it, who has authority to define what are the essential beliefs which distinguish Christianity, especially Catholicism, from other beliefs and philosophies and who, if anyone, has the power to change Church teaching? This is why the arguments surrounding the dismissal of Bishop Morris are fundamental in nature; they are neither irrelevant nor obscure. They also have direct consequences for Catholic youth, for Catholic marriages, and for Catholic family life.

Stretch that bow, editor! Why not include climate change for good measure! [Because what Bsp Morris wrote had very little to do with climate change and a lot to do with "Catholic youth ... Catholic marriages, and ...Catholic family life."]

Although he is undoubtedly a good man and shares much in common with fellow members of the Church, Bishop Morris’ first problem was that he didn’t understand that. [Evidence that this is a charitable piece on Peter's part.]
The problem for Bishop Morris, in the end, was that given the two positions he had to make a choice - his way or the Catholic Church way.

Popularly depicted as 'my way or the highway'. [Yup. But better said as "How about you reconsider your position on these topics; your current position is quite contrary to what Christ has taught us and therefore not inline with your role. If you continue in this manner, you may be liable for false advertising."]

The problem for the Church was how to handle a Bishop well down the road in effectively promoting what might now reasonably be called heresy in his diocese.

Just as 'moral relativism', thrown in without justification, it's an odds-on certainty in this sort of writing that you can always count on 'heresy'.[I want to comment about how this sentence doesn't even make sense, but I won't. Instead, I'll assume that you mean that the use of the terms 'moral relativism' and 'heresy' are both and equally unjustified. 'Moral relativism' fits so unbelievably well that ... you don't believe it. 'Heresy' fits IFF (if and only if) Bsp Morris said or taught against anything difinitavely defined by the Church. He did, at least implicitly, on at least one occasion. (See link to the Pastoral Letter below.)]  No one, who has has any recognisable authority in the church, has suggested +Morris preached heresy, but why let that stop you? You're on a roll, there are certain things you have to say, certain nuts that need sledgehammers. [This is irony.]

As The Australian’s columnist Christopher Pearson (also a convert to Catholicism) wrote shortly after the story broke, Bishop Morris had already sown consternation in his diocese with his 2006 pastoral letter. [Again, see below for this.] Seeking comment on how to respond to a shortage of priestly vocations in the diocese of Toowoomba, the Bishop canvassed possibilities including the ordination of women priests and recognising the validity of Anglican, Lutheran and Uniting Church Orders. [It's funny how there were almost no vocations to the priesthood while he had the 'pastoral care' of the the diocese.] He did this although he should have known that the Church had already definitively ruled these out.

'Canvassed possibilities'!? [Yup. vexilla regis has the full original Pastoral Letter from 2006 here.]

In 1994, Pope John Paul II declared authoritatively as the Vicar of Christ in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis that the Church had no power to ordain women priests. A year later, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, under the future Pope Benedict XVI, clarified John Paul II’s teaching as 'to be held definitively as belonging to the deposit of faith.'

Like 'Christ's divinity' you mean? [What are you saying about Our Lord's divinity? Why 'Christ's divinity' and not Christ's divinity? Because, yeah, pretty much "likeChrist's divinity" in that it's not going to be changed.]  So now we not only have 'creeping infallibility' but 'anticipatory infallibility'? [Kate at Australia Incognita has a good exposition of the notion of 'creeping infalibility' here. As for 'anticipatory infallibility,' I'm not even sure what that's supposed to mean, given the broad meaning of the former phrase.]

Official Church teachings and various statements on the validity or otherwise of the Orders of other Christian denominations are numerous, date back centuries and were, in some instances, reaffirmed by the CDF (under the future Pope Benedict XVI) as recently as 1998 as definitive. To suppose that such teachings could be dropped or changed by the Church was never anything more than mere fantasy. [As the Chaplain at NDFreo said today "Ah, come one! You think you can change the Great Holy Mother Church? You must be dreaming!] And whether critics were in a majority or a minority in the diocese of Toowoomba is immaterial. The truth of the Gospel never depends on numbers.

Which is why a phrase like 'sown consternation in his diocese' needs no evidence let alone counter-evidence. [Even if it was only sworn in the mind and heart of one of his sheep, it is too much. (Cf. Mt 18:6, Mk 9:42, Lk 17:2)]

Bishop Morris has been portrayed (not surprisingly) by organisations such as the National Council of Priests of Australia as the innocent and unjustly treated victim of a dogmatic, pharisaical mindset under Pope Benedict and Rome (the usual conspiracy theory in the NCPA world of billabong theology where no fresh water appears to have flowed in since 1968).

Never underestimate the power of parenthesis! [They are really handy for adding information to your sentence that is not needed (but can be helpful by means of clarification.)] [Again, this is irony.]

But as reported in this edition of The Record he was actually treated with the utmost delicacy, discretion and respect by two Popes and three Vatican dicasteries. He was given more than ten years to resolve the issues and, remaining immovable, still stubbornly resisted repeated requests for his resignation.

How do you know that? Where's the record? How can you verify such speculation about how he was treated and how he responded? You can't. You (like the rest of us) just 'assume' and 'speculate' in a way that satisfies what you thought all along.[Have you even done any reading about the issue? There's plenty of information about it out there. *See UPDATE at the bottom of this post.] In the best of Western democratic tradtiions that is far from good enough. [It's a good thing that the Church is not a democarcy, isn't it?]

One other problem seems to have eluded Bishop Morris. Catholic spouses and families everywhere face an unprecedented onslaught against their faith, their values and their children from a modern anti-culture predicated on the idea that there are really no more moral rules and no real consequences: one should do whatever one wants.

AKA the dreaded 'moral relativism' in another name. [Yup.]

As the simple people of faith ...

Do you believe this? [Don't you?]

... do their best to lead the at-times difficult Christian life of fidelity to Jesus and everything He taught, they do not need bishops who will obscure the way or who become obstacles to the heroic vocation of Christian marriage and family. In fact, they are, sadly, better off without them. One might say that they need a Bishop who can be a rock. One of the two Bishops at the heart of this controversy is undoubtedly that.

Who was the other guy? I guess that's a secret too. [Hardly, 'the other guy' is the successor to Peter, the Rock.]


UPDATE (kinda): The Record has stories here and here which outline some of the sources of info that they have. Also, seriously, just read around a bit.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Grace: Tangible or Intangilbe?

Grace has both tangible and intangible expressions.

Ordinarily, grace is works intangibly to sanctify us and conform us to God’s likeness; however this can be accomplished (or revealed) through tangible, concrete acts. We call these two actions of grace gratia gratum faciens and gratia gratis data, respectively.

Actual grace - gratia gratis data - is that grace which is freely given in and through concrete acts that allows one to be built up in grace; that is to say, friendship with God. Actual grace is the tangible expression of the loving help of God.

In the Old Testament, the Hebrew term hesed (defined in class as “a basic posture that incarnates itself in deeds of kindness and friendship.”) is a close approximation of our understanding of actual grace. Hesed, according the same author that gave the above definition, “points to unpredictable, surprising acts of kindness.” A prime example such unpredictable, unexpected acts of kindness is Jonathan bringing himself “into a sacred covenant with” David. (1 Sam 20:8) Jonathon, through no hint of David and totally beyond expectations for the King’s son, “stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his armour, and even his sword and his bow and his girdle.”(1 Sam 18:4) Jonathon’s kindness to David brings both of them into a closer relationship with God. (Cf Sam 20)

The Hebrew term hanan is said to mean benevolence, mercy, responding to need and forgiveness. An example of this benevolence is the granting of children by God to Jacob. (Cf Gen 33:5) In other places (Cf Jer 20:11, Is 63:1, Zeph 3:17) God – the giver of grace – is portrayed as a “mighty warrior,” one who is in our midst responding to our needs, one who saves. Sanctifying grace - gratia gratum faciens­, literally ‘grace pleasing to make’ – is given to us by God

The word charis, found in the New Testament and in the Septuagint, is a word taken to mean grace. This word covers both sanctifying grace and actual grace. Saint Paul writes that God “has mercy upon whomever he wills, and he hardens the heart of whomever he wills.” (Rom 9:18)  This fits well with our understanding of grace as mercy and as a free gift. This mercy is an inner, less tangible expression of grace; it is expressed by the Epistle writers as a healing of the wounds caused by sin (gratia sanans) and an elevating of the human (gratia elevens.) Although grace elevates the human, it does not replace human nature; rather, grace always perfects nature (gracia perfecit naturan non supplet.)

Grace, the free gift of God’s self to us in order that we might be like Him, is expressed both tangibly and intangibly.

Thursday, May 12, 2011

What if Jesus was already here?