Well, in the matter of Fr. Breen there has been a development. The Bishop of Nashville has had him remove the video from the parish web site. He is also scheduled for another meeting with the Bishop David Choby. Fr. Breen has been silenced once, in 1993 for saying the same things he said on the Parish web site. I'll keep watching this.
Well, the news today is so bad, I decided to mention some things and solicit prayers in reparation and ammendment for them.
The first bad thing: In Alaska the Episcopal Church has elected a new Bishop", he will be "consecrated" by a woman "Bishop". Exept that this will be done in Our Lady of Guadelupe Catholic Church in Ancorage. This will be the simulation of a Sacrament, which is a form of desecration. Techinically, the church shold have to be re-consecrated by the Bishop after this. Why is nothing being done to stop this?
The second sad thing is that a ciborium containing the Blessed Sacrament was stolen from St. Rose of Lima Church in Lackawana County PA. This couted as a desecration of the Blessed Sacrament, and the Church has had to be Re-Consecrated by the Bishop. Nothing else was taken, and the ciborium was not of great value. Some parishoners have worried that it was stolen for the purpose of desecration by Satanists or cultists. I say that the fact that someone stole the Blessed Sacrament from a Church is in itself a Satanic act, whether the perpetrators were conscious of that fact or not.
In Nashville TN a priest by the name of Joseph Patrick Breen has posted a video on his parishes web site that goes beyong contumacy, and into the territory of Heresy and Schism. The Catholic Caveman has posted it on his blog, to expose this sort of thing. That he even thought he could get away with it shows how badly the Body of Christ in the US is plaugued by parasites and disease.
Finally, President Obama authorized and spent millions of dollars to promote the new Kenyan Consitution, which specifies a right to abortion, which was illegal in Kenya. This in itself violated Federal Law. Our governmanet has made great progress towards shedding the idea that we are a Nation of Laws, and that laws bind the government.
For all these things, we need--not collectivly, but individually--to take responsibility, to do penance, to fast and to recieve the Sacraments. The "sins of society" are nothing more than the collective wieght of the sins of individuals. And we know, for our faith teaches us, that we can do penance on behalf of ourselves, and of others, offering our sacrifices and mortifications for the intention of improving our world, by praying for conversion of morals and manners in our society. And if you are thinking that this implies I'm saying it's your fault, in a direct and individual sense, you're right. But before you hate me for it, realize that I'm also saying that it's my fault as well, by sins of commission and omission.
So tonight I pledge, in reparation for my sins, for the reception of a firm purpose of amendment, and for my country, to say 15 decades of the rosary before the Blessed Sacrament.
Yeah, I take this stuff seriously.
TRIUMPHALIST--YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Friday, August 6, 2010
HAPPY TRANSFIGURATION dAY!
MAY YOUR TRANSFIGURATION DAY BE BLESSED AND JOYOUS.
AND MAY THE WONDER THAT FILLED THE APOSTLES FILL YOUR MIND AND YOUR HEART AS YOU THINK ABOUT THE WONDER OF THE INCARNATION OF THE SECOND PERSON OF THE TRINITY.
AND MAY THE WONDER THAT FILLED THE APOSTLES FILL YOUR MIND AND YOUR HEART AS YOU THINK ABOUT THE WONDER OF THE INCARNATION OF THE SECOND PERSON OF THE TRINITY.
What's in a Word--Or maybe I Just Think Too Much
I was reading a book called Evangelical is Not Enough (Thomas Howard, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1984). In this book he made a distinction between the experience of worship and the act of worship, and that made me think.
First, upon examination, this distinction points our something. It expresses a distinction between the subjective and the objective. If we emphasize the "experience of worship" we immediately subjectivise worship, for experience is an internal event. What each individual brings to or takes away from any event is always dependent upon the singularity of personality. Worship then becomes involved with the apprehension (in the philosophical sense) of a unique personality. But if emphasis is laid on the "act of worship" it becomes and objective event. It can be done without the primacy of the subjective I.
Experiencing something is essentially a passive, receptive event, centered necessarily in the self. But acting is the opposite, it is something one does, and outward in it's orientation, an outward flowing event. In acting the emphasis is paradoxically not on the individual who acts, but on the object of action.
This is the hinge upon which the difference between Liturgical and free form worship hangs.
We all know--and have probably heard to the point of nausea--that "liturgy" means the "work of the people", but this is an incomplete definition. The word carries with it connotations of public works or civic duty. Liturgy is an act performed for the public good out of duty--like repairing roads or maintaining bridges (both acts that were considered liturgies in the Hellenic world). Hence liturgical worship is primarily an act.
It's worth while to note that the word Liturgy is plural--it denotes the work of the people, not of a person. Worship that is based on internal experience, that is subjectively rooted in emotion, is essentially incommunicable. One can say one has experienced something, but one cannot give another the same experience. It will always of necessity remain an individual thing, based upon the self. To be liturgical an act of worship must contain elements that are outward directed, that all participants can take part in. The central act of worship must be rooted in an other rather than ones self, so that the whole of the act is open to all participants.
This division also points to the biggest difference in Faith between groups of Christians.
If one defines faith as the experience of being "born again", as an emotional experience of an inward nature faith becomes a passive event. By a passive event, I mean that one is granted an experience (which saints have called both conversion and consolation) and that the content of that experience is and can be known only to ones self. It's not coincidence that Born Again Christianity spring from the confluence of Calvinism and Wesleyan Evangelism on the American Frontier.
If one defines faith as a decision, however, it ceases to become a passive thing--something experienced--and becomes an active thing--something chosen by free will. If faith is scene as a process in which one decides that something is true (in our case thy mysteries of Salvation through and by Christ) and then acts upon that, then faith becomes an activity. It is object in the sense that one has looked to something external to ones self and arrived at a conclusion that leads to action.
A subjective event can arise from an objective action. Certainly the testimony of Saints and Mystics make this clear. And a subjective response is inevitable to anyone who extends devotion beyond rote participation to liturgy. But this is not worship per se, it is the response to worship. We should remember that in these things the spiritual handbooks, writings of the saints and testimony of wise Christians has taught that consolations, subjective experience of worship, are nice but not the point--We are to worship even without them, and in fact especially when we are without them.
After thinking about these things it become clear, to me at least, that an act of worship is much more important than my experience of that act. For if primacy is placed on the act of worship, even in a time of dryness one can offer worship. But if primacy is placed on experience, then one can lose heart, and dryness can lead to despair, a loosing sight of the One who is worshiped.
First, upon examination, this distinction points our something. It expresses a distinction between the subjective and the objective. If we emphasize the "experience of worship" we immediately subjectivise worship, for experience is an internal event. What each individual brings to or takes away from any event is always dependent upon the singularity of personality. Worship then becomes involved with the apprehension (in the philosophical sense) of a unique personality. But if emphasis is laid on the "act of worship" it becomes and objective event. It can be done without the primacy of the subjective I.
Experiencing something is essentially a passive, receptive event, centered necessarily in the self. But acting is the opposite, it is something one does, and outward in it's orientation, an outward flowing event. In acting the emphasis is paradoxically not on the individual who acts, but on the object of action.
This is the hinge upon which the difference between Liturgical and free form worship hangs.
We all know--and have probably heard to the point of nausea--that "liturgy" means the "work of the people", but this is an incomplete definition. The word carries with it connotations of public works or civic duty. Liturgy is an act performed for the public good out of duty--like repairing roads or maintaining bridges (both acts that were considered liturgies in the Hellenic world). Hence liturgical worship is primarily an act.
It's worth while to note that the word Liturgy is plural--it denotes the work of the people, not of a person. Worship that is based on internal experience, that is subjectively rooted in emotion, is essentially incommunicable. One can say one has experienced something, but one cannot give another the same experience. It will always of necessity remain an individual thing, based upon the self. To be liturgical an act of worship must contain elements that are outward directed, that all participants can take part in. The central act of worship must be rooted in an other rather than ones self, so that the whole of the act is open to all participants.
This division also points to the biggest difference in Faith between groups of Christians.
If one defines faith as the experience of being "born again", as an emotional experience of an inward nature faith becomes a passive event. By a passive event, I mean that one is granted an experience (which saints have called both conversion and consolation) and that the content of that experience is and can be known only to ones self. It's not coincidence that Born Again Christianity spring from the confluence of Calvinism and Wesleyan Evangelism on the American Frontier.
If one defines faith as a decision, however, it ceases to become a passive thing--something experienced--and becomes an active thing--something chosen by free will. If faith is scene as a process in which one decides that something is true (in our case thy mysteries of Salvation through and by Christ) and then acts upon that, then faith becomes an activity. It is object in the sense that one has looked to something external to ones self and arrived at a conclusion that leads to action.
A subjective event can arise from an objective action. Certainly the testimony of Saints and Mystics make this clear. And a subjective response is inevitable to anyone who extends devotion beyond rote participation to liturgy. But this is not worship per se, it is the response to worship. We should remember that in these things the spiritual handbooks, writings of the saints and testimony of wise Christians has taught that consolations, subjective experience of worship, are nice but not the point--We are to worship even without them, and in fact especially when we are without them.
After thinking about these things it become clear, to me at least, that an act of worship is much more important than my experience of that act. For if primacy is placed on the act of worship, even in a time of dryness one can offer worship. But if primacy is placed on experience, then one can lose heart, and dryness can lead to despair, a loosing sight of the One who is worshiped.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
There Will Be Sporadic Posting
As I take care of a few things, and try to inculcate good habits in myself.
I sincerely ask all of you who read this to pray for me, especially that I might receive the grace of repentance and a spirit of penance and mortification. I especially solicit your prayers that I might become a prayerful man.
After the passage of time I will return to frequent posting.
I sincerely ask all of you who read this to pray for me, especially that I might receive the grace of repentance and a spirit of penance and mortification. I especially solicit your prayers that I might become a prayerful man.
After the passage of time I will return to frequent posting.
Remember 15 Aug 2010!
On the 15th of this month, St Martin of Tours Catholic Church will celebrate the Solemnity with a Solemn High Mass, in the Extraordinary Form. It will be at 12:30.
Father Paul Beach will be the Celebrant, and Fr. Fredrick Klotter will serve as Deacon. Thera is a Deacon who has Agreed to serve as Subdeacon, but I unfortunately do not know his name!
If you can get here, it's going to be worth it. Louisville has more Hotels, of every budget range, than you can shake a stick at, and there is a plethora of places to eat. So if you are wondering about a road trip in August, here's a great opportunity!
SOLEMNITY OF THE ASSUMPTION
SOLEMN HIGH MASS
12:30 pm, SUNDAY 15 AUGUST, 2010!
St. Martin of Tours Church,
639 S. Shelby St.
Louisville, KY
(502) 582-2827
web site: http://www.louisville-catholic.net/
Father Paul Beach will be the Celebrant, and Fr. Fredrick Klotter will serve as Deacon. Thera is a Deacon who has Agreed to serve as Subdeacon, but I unfortunately do not know his name!
If you can get here, it's going to be worth it. Louisville has more Hotels, of every budget range, than you can shake a stick at, and there is a plethora of places to eat. So if you are wondering about a road trip in August, here's a great opportunity!
SOLEMNITY OF THE ASSUMPTION
SOLEMN HIGH MASS
12:30 pm, SUNDAY 15 AUGUST, 2010!
St. Martin of Tours Church,
639 S. Shelby St.
Louisville, KY
(502) 582-2827
web site: http://www.louisville-catholic.net/
Two Things Stand Out to Me Today
The first is the moral courage of a priest in Texas. It seems that Fr. Michael Rodriguez sent a letter to a local newspaper, the El Paso Times, boldly and plainly stating that Catholics cannot support abortion, and by doing so they separate themselves from the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church. Then he went on to address Homosexual Unions. He stated, in plain language, that homosexual conduct can lead to damnation, and that supporting homosexual unions--in which homosexual conduct plays an intrinsic part--means that they are supporting objectively evil acts, and again separating themselves from the Church.
This courageous stand, of course, will land the Priest in question in some hot water. The will be th usual outcry of people out to "stop the H8' for him to lose his job, be silenced and for his punishment for expressing a contrary attitude. He will also, in all probability, run into problems from within the Church for boldly proclaiming the truth. There will be a backlash, with the Homosexualist H8ters calling for actions against the Church, attempts to revoke it's tax status, etc*. So his Ordinary may well give him some grief over this. Not to mention that the Lavender Mafia will go into high gear. I imagine that this courageous man will never see purple.
The other thing that stand out to me is letter from Anglo-Catholic Bishops in the CofE, saying that some would stay but most are deeply disturbed by what they are seeing in the CofE. They also acknowledge that a fair number will be going to Rome, and that some of them are already in the process. this takes guts, especially considering how enmeshed the CofE is with British politics and the Government. Eratsian Churches do tend to get confusing, when it comes to making individual decisions--especially those that involve paychecks.
*Sort of like they are doing in San Francisco, levying taxes against the Church despite it's tax exempt status in the wake of the Proposition 8 compaign. This is meant to be punitive--even if the Church wins in the Federal Courts, the Expense is very high, and the distraction factor as well. Who says there isn't any Persecution of the church in the US?
This courageous stand, of course, will land the Priest in question in some hot water. The will be th usual outcry of people out to "stop the H8' for him to lose his job, be silenced and for his punishment for expressing a contrary attitude. He will also, in all probability, run into problems from within the Church for boldly proclaiming the truth. There will be a backlash, with the Homosexualist H8ters calling for actions against the Church, attempts to revoke it's tax status, etc*. So his Ordinary may well give him some grief over this. Not to mention that the Lavender Mafia will go into high gear. I imagine that this courageous man will never see purple.
The other thing that stand out to me is letter from Anglo-Catholic Bishops in the CofE, saying that some would stay but most are deeply disturbed by what they are seeing in the CofE. They also acknowledge that a fair number will be going to Rome, and that some of them are already in the process. this takes guts, especially considering how enmeshed the CofE is with British politics and the Government. Eratsian Churches do tend to get confusing, when it comes to making individual decisions--especially those that involve paychecks.
*Sort of like they are doing in San Francisco, levying taxes against the Church despite it's tax exempt status in the wake of the Proposition 8 compaign. This is meant to be punitive--even if the Church wins in the Federal Courts, the Expense is very high, and the distraction factor as well. Who says there isn't any Persecution of the church in the US?
Monday, August 2, 2010
Move along--Nothing to See Here
Seriously! After I read up on the News and various things in the church, I just didn't have anything to say.
Maybe I'm sick or something.
Maybe I'm sick or something.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)