From The Crossroads Initiative:

The Pentecost novena in honor of the Holy Spirit is the oldest of all novenas since it was first made at the direction of Our Lord Himself when He sent His apostles back to Jerusalem to await the coming of the Holy Spirit on the first Pentecost. It is still the only novena officially prescribed by the Church. Addressed to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, it is a powerful plea for the light and strength and love so sorely needed by every Christian.

The Novena begins on the day after the Solemnity of the Ascension, Friday of the 6th Week of Easter, even if the Solemnity of the Ascension is transferred to the 7th Sunday.

Go >here< for the Novena

From the Archdiocese of Washington:

The President’s disclosure that he now accepts so-called “Gay marriage” has received a good bit of political analysis. I am no political prognosticator and this is not a political blog. But when the President invokes Christ and the “golden rule,” to justify his decision, now I think we have something to discuss on a blog like this.

We have discussed at great length the problem with homosexual “marriage” before HERE,  HERE HERE, and HERE) there is no reason restate it all again. Just click through to read those sorts of articles. Further I make reference in this post to Scripture’s consistent teaching forbidding Homosexual acts. I do not set forth all the Scriptures here but you can read what I have set forth more fully here: Biblical Teaching on Homosexual Activity

In this post however lets consider the problematic appeal of the President to Jesus to affirm Gay “marriage.” Specifically Mr Obama said to ABC News:

…In the end the values that I care most deeply about and she [Michele] cares most deeply about is how we treat other people and, you know, I, you know, we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated. And I think that’s what we try to impart to our kids and that’s what motivates me….[1]

It is a common problem today that people often present simplistic portraits of Jesus Christ to support a variety of agendas. And the portraits of Jesus are not only simplistic, they are incomplete (usually intentionally so), and fail to accept that Jesus cannot be reduced to a simple sentence or two.

I would argue this is what the President is doing here. As if to say, “Jesus, was basically a nice and affirming person, who spoke of Love,  and so beautifully and taught us to do unto to others as we would have them do to us. “Surely,” the thinking goes, “this Jesus would affirm and rejoice over two Gay people getting “married.”” It is as if this were all Jesus was or said, “Love…Do unto others”. Never mind that he had some pretty high standards when it came to sexuality (Matt 5:27-30; Matt 15:19; Mk 10:11; Rev 22:15; Rev 21:8) Never mind that he told his apostles he had other things to teach them and would send his Holy Spirit, and never mind that His Holy Spirit inspired the Epistles writers like Paul to speak clearly in the ancient Biblical tradition about the sinfulness of homosexual activity, fornication, and adultery [2]  “Never mind all that,” says the modern world, and our President, “I chose the Jesus who said only, ‘God is love, and be kind to one another.’”

And this is the textbook definition of heresy, to pick or choose. The English word derives from the Greek word hairesis, meaning to chose.

The essence of orthodoxy is in the balance [3, 4] and maintaining the tensions inherent in Jesus and the Christian message.  The essence of heresy is to pick and choose. And, as author Ross Douthat has ably demonstrated in his book Bad Religion – How we became a nation of heretics, there is a lot of heresy being peddled today. Heresy picks one, or perhaps several teachings, and emphasizes them in exclusion to other teachings which balance and complete them. And to be fair, as Douthat points out, heresy is not just a problem on the left side of the political or theological aisle. The right does it as well (e.g. prosperity gospel, easy justification for war etc).

The modern tendency on the left, from which the President speaks has been to reduce Jesus to a rather harmless hippie who went about talking about love and inclusion and healed people. Gone from this harmless and politically correct  Jesus are volumes of verses that help complete the picture: a Messiah who claimed authority in our lives, who spoke quite clearly of sin, yes even sexual sin, and who warned repeatedly of the coming judgment, and the reality not only heaven, but of hell.

But Jesus is not either of these descriptions alone, he is both. Orthodoxy is in the balance, not choosing one or the other or tipping in one direction.

In a masterful description, Ross Douthot shows the paradoxes and the necessary balances about Jesus and the faith with which true orthodoxy must wrestle and hold in tension:

Christianity is a paradoxical religion because the Jew of Nazareth is a paradoxical character. No figure in history or fiction contains as many multitudes as the New Testament’s Jesus. He’s a celibate ascetic who enjoys dining with publicans and changing water into wine at weddings. He’s an apocalyptic prophet one moment, a wise ethicist the next. He’s a fierce critic of Jewish religious law who insists that he’s actually fulfilling rather than subverting it. He preaches a reversal of every social hierarchy while deliberately avoiding explicitly political claims. He promises to set parents against children and then disallows divorce; he consorts with prostitutes while denouncing even lustful thoughts. He makes wild claims about his own relationship to God, and perhaps his own divinity, without displaying any of the usual signs of megalomania or madness. He can be egalitarian and hierarchical, gentle and impatient, extraordinarily charitable and extraordinarily judgmental. He sets impossible standards and then forgives the worst of sinners. He blesses the peacemakers and then promises that he’s brought not peace but the sword. He’s superhuman one moment; the next he’s weeping. And of course the accounts of his resurrection only heighten these paradoxes, by introducing a post-crucifixion Jesus who is somehow neither a resuscitated body nor a flitting ghost but something even stranger still—a being at once fleshly and supernatural, recognizable and transfigured, bearing the wounds of the crucifixion even as he passes easily through walls. (Kindle Edition Loc. 3005-16)

Douthat goes on to conclude:

The boast of Christian orthodoxy, as codified by the councils of the early Church and expounded in the Creeds, has always been its fidelity to the whole of Jesus…..[Where heresy says which one] Both, says orthodoxy….The goal of the great heresies, on the other hand, has often been to extract from the tensions of the gospel narratives a more consistent, streamlined, and noncontradictory Jesus. (Ibid).

Indeed a remarkable passage, even if I might quibble with a few words (e.g. the standards of Jesus moral vision are not “impossible” with grace). I would highly recommend the book and will be commenting on it some more in days ahead.

Disclaimer! - In saying the President is exemplifying heresy (i.e. pick and chose Christianity), I am alleging material heresy,  but I am not call him a heretic. It is not my role or in my competency to to declare someone a formal heretic.

But the President is clearly proclaiming a very partial and thus reconstructed Christ. The real Christ is, as Douthat ably notes, far more complicated and far less vague than the President would have us think. And there is far more to his teaching than the “Golden Rule.”

Another form of heresy common today is to pick and chose Scripture. The usual approach, especially in terms of homosexuality and sexual matters in general, is to reduce the entire New Testament to the verbal utterances of Jesus alone, a kind of “red letter” reductionism. This of course, denies the inspiration of the entire New Testament and, in effect, says that Acts, all the Epistles, and Revelation are not the Word of God, are not inspired, and may safely be ignored.

But this is heresy since we cannot pick and choose the books of the Bible, we cannot tear out pages, or cross out lines. Orthodoxy is to accept the whole of the Sacred Text, and to consider its claims with reference to the whole of Scripture and in keeping with its trajectory. For a Catholic, of course this is done in union with the Magisterium and Sacred Tradition.

Many supporters of homosexual behavior adopt this heresy by saying, “Jesus never said a word about or against Homosexuality.” True, but he also never said a word about a lot of things: drinking to excess, beating one’s wife, he never forbade ethnic humor, or said people should wear clothes, He never declared how big and how much money should be spent on the military etc, whether Government should provide welfare etc. Since Jesus did not say out of his own mouth we cannot beat our wives then it must be okay to beat them? Of course not. An argument from silence is very poor and unhelpful.

Further it is heresy to say divine revelation closed with the ascension of Jesus. Rather it continues unto the death of the last apostle. The Epistles are every bit the Word of the Lord, and authored by the Same Holy Spirit as are the Gospels. We cannot pick and choose what we like.

To be clear, the reading of Scripture is not a purely mechanistic endeavor. For example, merely pulling proof texts out of thin air, and out of context is wrong, for that too is often heresy – picking one thing, forgetting the rest.

Rather, Scripture is to be read in a way which respects the overall trajectory of the Scriptures as God leads his people through stages to Christ. Therefore certain things are operative early in Scripture (e.g. certain feasts, dietary laws and punitive measures) that later fall away or are fulfilled. Thus Passover is fulfilled and subsumed into the Eucharist, Jesus cancels dietary laws by declaring all foods clean, the application of stoning and other severe punishments are curtailed etc. But all these organic developments take place in Scripture itself, and can be observed there.

However, there ARE teachings (notably the Divine Moral Law) that remain unchanged and are continuously articulated at every stage of Biblical revelation. They do not undergo change or fall away.

Regarding sexuality, at no stage in the Old Testament all the way through to the end of the New Testament, is fornication or adultery affirmed. The same is true for homosexual acts. At no stage, anywhere in Sacred Scripture are homosexual acts or fornication, or adultery ever affirmed, nor are these acts described as anything but sinful (e.g. Leviticus 18: 22; Lev 20:13; Gen 19; 1 Corinthians 6-9; 1 Tim 1:8-11; Rom 1:19ff, inter al).

Thus orthodoxy, which holds to the whole and does not pick and choose Scripture, must in every way accept and announce that these are sinful acts, sinful enough to exclude one from the Kingdom if they are not repented of (e.g. 1 Cor 6:9).

Simply ushering in a “Jesus is love” argument cannot override texts like these. For the same Scripture which says, God is love, also contains these teachings forbidding extra-marital sex and a host of other moral teachings. The Biblical record sees no essential conflict in saying both “God is love” and “Fornication, Adultery, and Homosexual acts are sinfully wrong.” Thus neither should we have a problem. Orthodoxy says “both.”  Heresy says, “there is tension here and I am going to resolve it by picking the concept I like and excluding the other.”

The orthodox approach accepts the tension and sees a Christ who loves sinners (us) and holds them close, but who also summons us to repentance and a life that is increasingly free from sin and conformed to the truth by his grace .

I don’t know how the President will fare politically, but he has flunked theology and is, if you ask me (and even if you don’t) refashioned Jesus for his own purpose.

As for comments, I would rather not debate the whole Gay Marriage issue and/or the sinfulness of homosexuality. We’ve done that here before and the Church teaching is clear and is not going to change. I am most interested in comments that zero in on the problem of heresy – pick and choose Christianity and how it relates not only to this issue but others as well. But you decide.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3ol8rB4Rp8

By Patrick J. Buchanan:

It took Joe Biden’s public embrace of same-sex marriage to smoke him out.

But after Joe told David Gregory of “Meet the Press” he was “absolutely comfortable” with homosexuals marrying, Barack Obama could not maintain his credibility with the cultural elite if he stuck with the biblical view that God ordained marriage as solely between a man and woman. The biblical view had to go.

Obama had to move, or look like a malingerer in secularism’s next great moral advance into post-Christian America.

Consider. Obama had an appearance coming up on “The View,” where Whoopi Goldberg would have demanded to know why he lacked the courage of Biden’s convictions. He has a $40,000-a-plate fundraiser at George Clooney’s, where the Hollywood crowd would want to know why he does not end discrimination against homosexuals.

He has appearances lined up before gay activists raising millions for his campaign. Monday, his press secretary was pilloried for his feeble defense of Obama’s now-abandoned position.

His hand was forced. Yet the stand Obama took could cost him his presidency. Same-sex marriage may yet be a bridge too far, even for a dying Christian America.

On the plus side for Obama, his decision is producing hosannas from the elites and an infusion of cash from those who see same-sex marriage as the great moral and civil rights issue of our time.

But Obama may also have just solved Mitt Romney’s big problem: How does Mitt get all those evangelical Christians and cultural conservatives not only to vote for him but to work for him?

Obama, by declaring that homosexual marriages should be on the same legal and moral plane as traditional marriage, just took command of the forces of anti-Christian secularism in America’s Kulturkampf. And Nov. 6, 2012, is shaping up as the Antietam of the culture war.

Obama’s second problem is that he may soon be seen as America’s champion of same-sex marriage, but an ineffectual advocate. For Obama can do nothing, as of now, to impose homosexual marriageon the American people.

Thirty-one states have voted to outlaw it. A constitutional amendment supporting same-sex marriage could not win a majority of either house of Congress, let alone the necessary two-thirds of both.

Hence, Obama is going to spend six months winning cheers by calling for same-sex marriage. But the price of those cheers will be the rallying of millions of opponents of homosexual marriage, who will fight this battle where they are winning it, at the state level.

Only six states have approved homosexual marriage, while 30 have imposed a constitutional ban. In North Carolina, a ban not only on same-sex marriage but also civil unions, though opposed by Obama and Bill Clinton, carried on Tuesday with 61 percent of the vote.

Republican turnout in North Carolina’s primary was up half a million, the highest in history. And this is a state Obama carried in 2008, a state whose largest city, Charlotte, will host Obama’s convention.

Even in liberal California in 2008, while John McCain was getting a smaller share of the vote than Barry Goldwater in 1964, Proposition 8, restricting marriage to men and women, won.

How does Obama propose to win this battle?

He has one path to victory — the Supreme Court.

The New York Times, declaring that homosexuals’ right to marry is “too precious and too fragile to be left up to the whim of states and the tearing winds of modern partisan politics,” is looking to the court as the last, best hope to impose same-sex marriage on the nation.

Can’t trust voters, can’t trust elected legislators, can’t trust Congress. Homosexual marriage, says the Times, is too important to be left to democratic decision. The republic must be commanded to accept it by unelected judges who serve for life and against whom the people have no political recourse.

That process of judicial tyranny has begun. A California judge has overturned the decision of California’s voters to ban gay marriage, and his ruling is headed for the high court.

The Supreme Court thus will tell us whether this issue is to be decided democratically by voters and their elected state and federal legislators, or dictatorially by themselves.

Four liberal activists on the Supreme Court — Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor — are probably ready to declare that homosexual marriage is a constitutional right, as their predecessors declared abortion to be a constitutional right.

But Obama needs one more justice. If elected, he will get it, and same-sex marriage will be forced on all of America. If Romney wins, the Supreme Court will likely leave the issue of same-sex marriage to be decided by the people and their elected representatives.

Thus everything is up for grabs this November: the House, the Senate, the presidency, the Supreme Court and whether we still call the United States of America God’s country.

Game on!

From Fr. Z:

Timothy Card. Dolan, President of the USCCB on Pres. Obama’s endorsement of unnatural unions as if they were marriage.

From the site of the USCCB with my emphases:

Cardinal Dolan: President Obama’s Remarks On Marriage ‘Deeply Saddening’

May 9, 2012
WASHINGTON—Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), issued the following statement:

President Obama’s comments today in support of the redefinition of marriage are deeply saddening. As I stated in my public letter to the President on September 20, 2011, the Catholic Bishops stand ready to affirm every positive measure taken by the President and the Administration to strengthen marriage and the family. However, we cannot be silent in the face of words or actions that would undermine the institution of marriage, the very cornerstone of our society. The people of this country, especially our children, deserve better. Unfortunately, President Obama’s words today are not surprising since they follow upon various actions already taken by his Administration that erode or ignore the unique meaning of marriage. I pray for the President every day, and will continue to pray that he and his Administration act justly to uphold and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman. May we all work to promote and protect marriage and by so doing serve the true good of all persons.

What Pres. Obama did today, under the false guise of being “Christian” to people of the same sex who want to “marry” each other, as if that relationship could ever be like a true marriage, is tear at the very bonds of society.

The USCCB was correct to make a statement.

Remember to follow Card. Dolan on Twitter.  Read THIS, immediately after following ME on Twitter!

BTW… I picked up the link to Card. Dolan’s statement from his Twitter feed.  FWIW.

From Fr. Z:

With the endorsement of the amendment for the State Constitution of North Carolina, I thought that the true “ground zero” for the same-sex debate would now be Minnesota.  It will also now be every ballot in every state in November.

From FNC:

President Obama on Wednesday endorsed same-sex marriages, becoming the first sitting U.S. president to take that position following days of speculation about his “evolving” stance on the issue.
The president used a hastily called TV interview to make his position clear.
“At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama told ABC News.

[...]

BUT WAIT… THERE’s MORE.

In endorsing unnatural sex, Obama invoked Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross.

“This is something that, you know, [Michelle and I have] talked about over the years and she, you know, she feels the same way, she feels the same way that I do. And that is that, in the end the values that I care most deeply about and she cares most deeply about is how we treat other people and, you know, I, you know, we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated…”

Christ’s Sacrifice?  The “Golden Rule”?

Christians understand that both are reflections of sacrificial love, charity, the former the ultimate example of the God man, the later human and earthly which echoes the former (cf. Luke 10:25-28).

Obama instrumentalized the Lord’s Sacrifice, the ultimate act of the love which is charity, to promote unnatural sex and the overturning of one of our most important societal bonds.

We, according to charity, must act for the true good of the other. It is not for the true good of another person to help them to sin or to undermine Christian morals.  But that is exactly what Obama is doing. This is an astounding example of both scandal and blasphemy.   It is beyond absurd to to invoke the Lord’s Sacrifice in an attempt to violate our human nature and God’s laws.

Obama invoked the Sacrifice of the Cross for the sake of justifying the destruction of the definition of “marriage”, as if that is “good” for people.  It is NOT for the good of anyone, because it promotes and condones a sin that cries to heaven.

We cannot wish that people sin.
We cannot help them sin.
We cannot tell them that sin is good.
We cannot give them the means to sin so that they will sin.
We cannot defend the sins of others.

In charity, we must treat people with the affliction of sex-sex attraction according to their God-given dignity.  In charity, we can NEVER condone their sinful acts.

It is the sin that we repudiate, not the people.

It can NEVER… NEVER be an act of Christian charity to call evil acts good, or to condone them, or to say that they are acceptable, or publicly to undermine morals that stem from our human nature.  It can NEVER… NEVER… be a matter of “Golden Rule”, which is rooted in the true sacrificial love which is charity, to promote a change in the definition of marriage so that “same-sex marriage” can be marriage’s equivalent in any way.

What the President did was vile.  Even though everyone knew that was his position, how vile to hear it framed in that way, publicly given voice.

He is an embarrassment to the United States.  He is actively tearing at one of society’s most important social bonds. What he did is harmful to our country and to every citizen of every age, even those of same-sex attractions.  It was NOT a reflection of either charity or the Golden Rule in any Christian sense.   The Golden Rule does NOT mean “you do what you want and I’ll do what I want”.

Pres. Obama MUST be voted out of office.

St. Augustine teaches about charity, about real love, in his commentaries on the First Letter of John.  Augustine describes three kinds of love.  He explains that the greatest way of earthly love is enemy love, true charity for those who wish you ill and harm you.

I pray that I will be able to come to this sort of charity, in which I – may God have mercy on me and give me grace- fail so very often.

From Archdiocese of Washington:

As a pastor I get asked every now and then, “Why are there not more miracles in our day, like there were in the Bible?” I suppose there are two answers we could explore.

One of the answers must surely be that we do not really expect miracles.

Another answer is that when they do happen we often dismiss them by rationalizing them, or chalking them up to coincidence or to some unknown reason that scientists will surely be able to explain some day.

The bottom line is that we are not living in an age of faith. And faith is to miracles as cause is to effect.

Many say, “If I saw miracles I would believe.” But the biblical answer is, unless you believe, you will not see miracles.

Consider and excerpt of the first reading from Monday of this week:

At Lystra there was a crippled man, lame from birth, who had never walked. He listened to Paul speaking, who looked intently at him, saw that he had the faith to be healed, and called out in a loud voice, “Stand up straight on your feet.” He jumped up and began to walk about. Acts 14:7-10

Note that Paul was able to heal the crippled man because he saw he had the faith to be healed. Faith precedes miracles. There are many places in the Scriptures where faith and miracles are linked:

1. When Jesus had gone indoors, the blind men came to him, and he asked them, “Do you believe that I am able to do this?” “Yes, Lord,” they replied. Then he touched their eyes and said, “According to your faith will it be done to you”; and their sight was restored. (Matt 9:28-29
2. “O unbelieving generation,” Jesus replied, “how long shall I stay with you? How long shall I put up with you? Bring the boy to me.” So they brought him. When the spirit saw Jesus, it immediately threw the boy into a convulsion. He fell to the ground and rolled around, foaming at the mouth. Jesus asked the boy’s father, “How long has he been like this?” “From childhood,” he answered. “It has often thrown him into fire or water to kill him. But if you can do anything, take pity on us and help us.” “‘If you can’?” said Jesus. “Everything is possible for him who believes.” Immediately the boy’s father exclaimed, “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!” …Jesus rebuked the evil spirit. “You deaf and mute spirit,” he said, “I command you, come out of him and never enter him again.” (Mk 9:19-29)
3. Then the disciples came to Jesus in private and asked, “Why couldn’t we drive [the Demon] out?” He replied, “Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.” (Matt 17:19-20
4. Jesus said to him, “Receive your sight; your faith has healed you.” (Lk 18:42)
5. Jesus turned and saw her. “Take heart, daughter,” he said, “your faith has healed you.” And the woman was healed from that moment. (Matt 9:22)
6. Jesus could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. He was amazed at their lack of faith. (Mk 6:5-6)
7. Then Jesus answered, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour. (Matt 15:28)
8. “Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road. (Mark 10:52
9. Then he said to him, “Rise and go; your faith has made you well.” (Luke 17:19)

And on and on the quotes could go.

The key point is that faith is the essential ingredient for miracles. There must be faith not only on the part of the one who works it, but even more so on the part of the one who receives the miracle. For it may sometimes happen that the one through whom the miracle is accomplished, has only poor faith, but the one receiving it has the faith to be healed, and thus God grants it.

Of this I have (to my shame) been a witness.  But, I will say I have grown. For on some occasions in my priesthood God has worked miraculous cures when I was sent to anoint the sick or to pray over and with people.

1. On one occasion, many years ago I was sent to anoint a man near death. He was filled with cancer, in the pancreas, liver and bone. No hope said the doctors. His daughter sent me with the confident expectation that I could heal him. But, truthfully, I went more with the intention of giving “last rites” in order to prepare him for death. But God was not defeated by me, the faith of that man and his daughter prevailed. The next day his vitals changed and the surprised doctors found no trace of cancer in subsequent scans. He lived on another ten years and I always called him Lazarus.
2. On other occasion a few years ago, I was summoned early one morning to the hospital. The doctors had announced a certain end for a parishioner and her tearful relatives were gathered in a death watch. The decision had been reached to pull the breathing tube, and the doctors offered no hope and were “sure” the woman would die in moments after the tube was pulled. But this woman had surprised us before. And by now, I had learned my lesson, that God was in charge, no matter what the doctors said. And I told that family just before I anointed her, not to be so sure what would happen or when, that God was in charge, and that people don’t necessarily go right away even when the doctors say so. And when I finished the anointing, I prayed, “Lord, If you want to, you can heal her, I know you can” and the Amens murmured among the family.” Next morning, Mrs. J was up for breakfast, issuing orders to family and stating that hospital food was disagreeable to her.
3. And I want also to give God the glory for the many miracles he has worked in terms of spiritual healing, healings in my own life and soul, healing in the lives of many I have known. Deliverance from anxiety and depression, deliverance from anger and addiction; the sudden and miraculous capacity to forgive, or to let go of crippling grief; the gradual healing to go from serious sins to freedom, to go from tepidity to deeper and deeper love of God. Yes, I walked along side of many who exhibit miraculous healing, of this same healing I too am a witness. And the healing defies any rational explanation.

Yes, even a little faith, mustard seed faith. Just the faith that says, “Father Pope, will you pray for me?” Or, “Father I will pray for you.” Faith the size of a mustard seed. If I take one step God takes two. The miracles are many.

The gift to be sought – Perhaps in times like these where we often do not expect miracles or dismiss them too easily when they occur, the gift to be sought is the gift of the fear of the Lord.

At its heart, the fear of the Lord is the awareness of the wonderful things God is always doing in our life from moment to moment. It is the gift of wonder and awe before the displayed majesty of our God, and a desire not to offend him out of love and respect.

And frankly, one way we might offend against his glory is to walk right past the glories he is doingfrom moment to moment, being ungrateful, unaware, and seeing as routine, the magnificence of what he does. The color purple, the magnificent stars, the quirky yet wonderful people in our life, indeed, our very own existence, all these and countless other wonders are on daily display. And seeing them for the miraculous gift they are begins to open our minds to the possibility of miracles too.

The gift of the fear of the Lord helps to increase our awareness of God and our faith in Him. And faith is the door to even greater miracles.

Are you ready for a miracle? The Lord has a related question for us: Do you believe that I can do this? (Matt 9:28)

It is true, God sometimes says no, and we have discussed that HERE before. But perhaps we ought also to check our attitude, and ask why we might be quick to presume he will say no or has said no. Scripture says, “Ye have not because ye ask not” (James 4:2). Why not ask with confidence and leave the answer up to God.

Why are there fewer miracles today? You tell me.

From Catholic Phoenix:

WARNING:  This is likely to annoy and/or offend anyone and/or everyone at some point.  Just thought I’d get that out of the way.

As a sacristan at my local parish, I enjoy a unique view of things.  Many weekends, you will find me doing my best to not interfere with Father’s work at the altar, thereby invalidating the Mass, or at least keeping my servers alert, attentive, and reverent in the performance of their duties.  Other weekends, I enjoy just being one of the regular folks, participating in the Mass with the balance of the lay faithful.

On occasion, I will venture out to other parishes, becoming a “Roamin’ Catholic.”  What I find out there sometimes sets my blood boiling, and at best leaves me scratching my head, and at its worst, leaves me poorly disposed to receive Our Lord in the Eucharist.  Below are just a few of my observations of a “typical” Sunday in the provinces:

I often find my problems begin at, well, the beginning.  Before the Mass has even started.  Unless it happens to be Good Friday, remember that Jesus is in the room!  When one and in fact, many, come in to prepare for Mass, please, keep your conversations with your neighbor, your husband, wife, children, whoever, to a dull roar.  Most are only in the church for that one hour (unless Father heads down a homiletic rabbit hole, then it could stretch to a whole hour and fifteen), and if folks are not going to spend that time in prayer prior to Mass, then it would be nice if they would respect their neighbor enough to sit in reflective silence (perhaps it might cause one to actually hear the voice of God).

During the processional hymn, please, sing already!  It’s terrible when the only voice you hear is your own, or the music director.  Do not worry about whether or not you can sound like a rock star, make a joyful noise unto the Lord!  Join the choirs of angels, and your voice will be fine.

While we are talking about music, let us walk down this path for a minute, and I promise to stay off it until the very end.  The music in Mass should help us join in the worship of God, not help one’s own voice andor instrument to be exalted (amplified?) above all else.   Guitars and drum sets have little or no place in the Mass.  Just saying.  Also, don’t want to hear Matt Maher, John Michael whoever, Bob Jones, Bob Denver, Steely Dan, or anyone singing their version of Psalms 1-150.  The Psalmist was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and that should be enough.  There is a time for praise music.  Mass is not that place.

Hands.  Keep them to yourself.  Unless you are a ministerial priest (i.e., ordained priest or bishop), hands clasped in front of you, or at your side is what is appropriate.  You say there is nothing in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal that forbids waving and gesticulating?  You are right.  However, please show me where it says that you should do it.

When the priest or deacon says “The Lord be with you”, just say, “and also with you”, or after Advent 2011, “and with your spirit” or “et cum spiritu tuo”.  Keep your hands still!  It’s not appropriate!

Join in the prayers where appropriate- at the end of the OT and Epistle readings, say with conviction, “The Word of the Lord”, and after the Gospel, “Praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ”!  Sing the responses to the Psalm!

Participate in the Mass!  During the Creed, when the priest says “by the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man”, bow!  Not a little head nod, like you heard a bit of music you like, but really bow, in reverence.  Remember at Christmas we genuflect–give a good bow the other weeks of the year!

During the Offertory- again, keep your hands to yourself- you are not the priest!  You are not standing in persona Christi!  The priest’s orans position refers to Christ on the Cross.

Now my biggest one- the Our Father!  Here it comes!  This was inspired by my friend Amy, who posts recently on her blog about her own frustrations.  Father Z lent his own voice to the schola recently as well .  If you find you must hold hands with nary anyone who comes near you, make sure it’s okay with them.  Don’t grab my hand, or slap my arm with the dead-fish hand.  Please and thank you.  I understand that some priests invite everyone to hold hands during the Our Father.  I would probably not attend Mass again there should I experience such a thing.  Amy talks of germs and such, and just in general, her whole phobia of random strangers touching her.  I don’t have such issues, but what I do have issue with is when our focus is taken away from Christ, who is truly present before us, so that we can hold hands with our neighbor, not to mention the odd fellow who wants to come across the aisle.

I often get really upset at the “passing of the peace”.  I understand the priest or deacon encourages us to share a sign of peace, but really, when the rest of Mass is disrupted by this glad-handing, coming across two, three, four rows and across the aisle again detracts from what comes next:  our reception of the Eucharist.  Keep it simple, keep it close, please.  Short range peace-passing only.

So, we’ve finally gotten through the Communion Rite (I will save my thoughts on EM’s for a later rant!), and now, Father has given the final blessing, the deacon has exhorted us to “go in peace to love and serve the Lord” (is that one or two alleluias at the Vigil? Inside joke, can’t help myself), and the exodus begins.  No sooner does the recessional pass, and people are killing themselves to get out the door, stumbling over those that might, oh, wait a minute for the music to end, to possibly say a prayer of thanksgiving for the privilege of worshiping God, and that He might protect our priests and bishops.  Once the music ends, the prayerful applause breaks out for the choir.  Why? For doing the job they volunteered for, or got paid for?  (Wait–this is a Catholic Church, so it’s definitely the job they volunteered for.)  They were there to worship God as well.  But please, after it’s all said and done, if you just have to get out of the pew, would you mind going the other way?  I’m just going to be a moment, but I’d like that moment, thank you.

So, that for the moment concludes my Mass rant.  Stay tuned next time, as we dig further into bad form during the worship of Our Lord.

Pax on all your houses.

From the Catholic Phoenix:

In a move already denounced by Catholic bishops & other leading religious conservatives, St. Sincerus University, the nation’s 84^th largest Catholic university, has invited Satan to deliver its commencement speech later this month. Also known as the Prince of Darkness, Lucifer, &, more popularly, the Devil, Satan is a divisive figure among Catholics & other Christians. Several Catholic universities have upset religious conservatives in recent years by inviting controversial figures to deliver commencement speeches, as when the University of Notre Dame, the nation’s largest Catholic University, invited President Barack Obama, who supports a woman’s right to abortion, in 2009. The invitation to Satan by SSU president Fr. Thad Despereaux comes at a time when many Catholics are highly critical of the Obama administration’s attempts to reform health care, which some claim would force Catholic institutions to violate their Church’s teachings by providing contraceptives as part of their health insurance plans. Fr. Despereaux, in comments made to the Daily Sham, SSU’s student newspaper, said that having Satan on campus gives bold witness to a central Catholic principle that God can be found in all things. “The continuing politicization of the faith indicates just how important it is for us to build bridges,” Fr. Despereaux said. “Our whole mission as a university is to bring people together. Satan is badly misunderstood by many people, & we hope to show our graduates that stereotypes, & the hatred they engender, have no place on a Catholic campus. As Catholics we are to hate hate.”

On-campus reactions at SSU have been favorable, as faculty & students alike have applauded the university’s open-mindedness in issuing the invitation. Dr. Sophia Greengrass, Director of the university’s Wiccan Institute, called the invitation a brave attempt to promote the university’s academic integrity in the face of “fascist attempts by the male hierarchy to impose its limited & limiting dogmas,” while Declan Spencer, a Religious Studies major studying the mythical underpinnings of religious language, said he hoped to meet Satan & thank him for his contributions to world culture.  Some faculty, however, have questioned the wisdom of the invitation. “Satan doesn’t actually exist,” said Fr. Eddie Cheever, Professor of Early Christian Literature, “so it will be interesting to hear what he says. Or doesn’t say.” And Professor David Evans, known for his support of traditional Church teachings, said the invitation further reflects the administration’s attempts to distance itself from the Church.  “It does make sense, given the administration’s recent policies,” he said, noting Fr. Despereaux’s endorsement of Phallic Fridays, in which students erect large phallic sculptures around the SSU chapel, cover them with latex, & ironically sing hymns to the fertility god Priapus, as well as the popular Religion-less Lent, instituted last year, in which Catholic students were urged to give up prayer & mass attendance during Lent.

As of this afternoon, Satan has not publicly responded to the invitation, though Prof. Evans suggested that since he is already quite at home at SSU, there is little doubt that he will accept.

From NEWS.VA:

American Bishops from states as diverse as Montana, Oregon and Alaska are in Rome this week for their regular visits ad limina apostolorum, ‘to the threshold of the Apostles’. “The ad limina apostolorum is a time for each Bishop to re-connect with the Holy Father and the See of Peter,” said Bishop George Leo Thomas of Helena, Montana. He said the visit reminds Bishops of the “apostolic foundations” of their ministry, and serves as a retreat for the prelates.

Bishop Thomas spoke to Christopher Wells about the efforts made in his diocese to promote the New Evangelisation. “We’re beginning, first of all, by mobilising the diocesan clergy. They’re really the key to bringing the vision of the New Evangelisation to the people. So our presbyteral council – our priest council in our own diocese – and I are working together to create a very concerted plan in this upcoming Year of Faith, that would help each Catholic reclaim his or her own baptismal promise and identity as a Catholic, and then to very courageously invite others to see and taste the goodness of the Lord.”

He said, “My message, of course over and over again, is: No more ‘camouflage Catholics’ in our diocese! Mediocrity, the lukewarm spirit, is an enemy of the Church.” But, he added, his message is a very positive one: “The Church in the Northwest is very intentional, very dynamic… So I see it as a springtime in the Church.”

Bishop Thomas concluded with a call to Catholics throughout the world: “One thing that I would certainly want to share with the people of our own diocese, but certainly across the country and the world, and that is to take seriously your own individual call to holiness your personal encounter with Christ, and to remain very steeped in the sacramental life of the Church. It is an emancipating and joyful life as a Catholic.”

Listen to the full interview of Bishop George Leo Thomas with Christopher Wells by going >here<

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw-reRnH5Dg