I wrote this on the fly when I saw some snow falling outside my window at school. I was alone, so none of the students would interrupt. Here is the result. Its a little rough, since I haven't added to it or anything.
"Snowflakes"
Forgetful flakes falling fast,
Falling forward, then forgotten.
Running right along the sky,
Right along, settlin' down.
Settle there, failing friend,
For friends fail few fellows,
And few fellows fail their friends
About Me
- Ibid
- I was born, I'm currently living, and will eventually die. After that I face my judgment, and we'll talk then.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Life Issues at the Movies: Part II
Bella (2006)
“A Love Story that goes beyond Romance.”
That was one of the taglines for the surprise hit independent film of 2006. Bella, however, is not really a Pro-Life movie. It’s not a movie that argues the Pro-Life cause through arguments between its characters. Rather, it saturates the viewer with depictions of life, showing the beauty that can be found in living, loving, and learning, but especially in the closeness of the family. It is all about how one day, one instant, changes one’s life forever. There are choices, plenty of them, but what are the right ones?
The movie tells the story of a former soccer star, Jose (Eduardo Verastegui) and a waitress, Nina (Tammy Blanchard) who work for Jose’s brother’s restaurant. Nina is broken, fired from the job at the restaurant, and pregnant. Jose goes after her, and the two travel through New York City, arriving eventually at Jose’s family, and there both of them are reminded what it means to live. The family is not tearing each other apart, is not seeking to destroy itself, is patient, is kind, and is indeed love. It is this encounter that reminds Jose of his family, and an encounter that forces Nina to face her life, and she turns and embraces it.
A great story, a beautiful depiction of families, particularly Latino families (I don’t know about you, but all the Latino families I have met resemble the family in Bella more than a broken street family of some other movie), but what does that have to do with the Pro-Life movement? There is a pregnant unwed mother in it, but isn’t it a stretch to link that plot point and the family eating dinner together? After all Ibid, you did say this wasn’t really a Pro-Life movie.
Point taken, fair reader. However, remember that I was saying the movie is not a Pro-Life movie because it doesn’t have characters arguing the two sides of the debate. It is a pro-life movie in the sense that the movie has the story of life perpetually in the background. It is Pro-Life in the sense that life, not just the life of the unborn but life of the living, is more important than any selfish human goals. Death is a tragedy.
It is interesting to note that Jose’s attempts to turn Nina away from having an abortion are not through moral persuasions or rational arguments. The movie is not about arguments; it is about touching people through example. Disturbingly, Nina seems to know that the child inside of her is a real life. In fact, her reason for an abortion is more to keep the unborn child from suffering in her own terrible world (New York City is not a forgiving place for single mothers). Jose suggests adoption, but Nina rejects it, suggesting that abandoning the child in that way would be worse than having the abortion. It is only later in the movie that she realizes why Jose is so supportive of adoptions. This discussion of abortions and adoptions occurs on the train out of the city, a sort of exodus away from the trap that is the city, into the suburbs where there is love and family. It seems that it is a sort of confession, a sort of necessary first step in a direction of honesty for Nina.
This turn towards honesty is one that every person in today’s world, whether they are a single pregnant mom or a married man or a priest or a Satanist (although Satanists are not necessarily people I would condone in any way), desperately needs. It is purgation, a sort of T. S. Eliot “Ash Wednesday” conversion from no hope (“Because I do not hope to turn again”) to an almost reluctant realization that there is no other way (“Although I do not hope to turn again”). This honesty is the only way to live, and only when faced with the really real world can we appreciate what we have and what we’ve lost. It is a message for not only the Pro-Choice armies, but the legions of the Pro-Lifers and the rest of the world as well.
“A Love Story that goes beyond Romance.”
That was one of the taglines for the surprise hit independent film of 2006. Bella, however, is not really a Pro-Life movie. It’s not a movie that argues the Pro-Life cause through arguments between its characters. Rather, it saturates the viewer with depictions of life, showing the beauty that can be found in living, loving, and learning, but especially in the closeness of the family. It is all about how one day, one instant, changes one’s life forever. There are choices, plenty of them, but what are the right ones?
The movie tells the story of a former soccer star, Jose (Eduardo Verastegui) and a waitress, Nina (Tammy Blanchard) who work for Jose’s brother’s restaurant. Nina is broken, fired from the job at the restaurant, and pregnant. Jose goes after her, and the two travel through New York City, arriving eventually at Jose’s family, and there both of them are reminded what it means to live. The family is not tearing each other apart, is not seeking to destroy itself, is patient, is kind, and is indeed love. It is this encounter that reminds Jose of his family, and an encounter that forces Nina to face her life, and she turns and embraces it.
A great story, a beautiful depiction of families, particularly Latino families (I don’t know about you, but all the Latino families I have met resemble the family in Bella more than a broken street family of some other movie), but what does that have to do with the Pro-Life movement? There is a pregnant unwed mother in it, but isn’t it a stretch to link that plot point and the family eating dinner together? After all Ibid, you did say this wasn’t really a Pro-Life movie.
Point taken, fair reader. However, remember that I was saying the movie is not a Pro-Life movie because it doesn’t have characters arguing the two sides of the debate. It is a pro-life movie in the sense that the movie has the story of life perpetually in the background. It is Pro-Life in the sense that life, not just the life of the unborn but life of the living, is more important than any selfish human goals. Death is a tragedy.
It is interesting to note that Jose’s attempts to turn Nina away from having an abortion are not through moral persuasions or rational arguments. The movie is not about arguments; it is about touching people through example. Disturbingly, Nina seems to know that the child inside of her is a real life. In fact, her reason for an abortion is more to keep the unborn child from suffering in her own terrible world (New York City is not a forgiving place for single mothers). Jose suggests adoption, but Nina rejects it, suggesting that abandoning the child in that way would be worse than having the abortion. It is only later in the movie that she realizes why Jose is so supportive of adoptions. This discussion of abortions and adoptions occurs on the train out of the city, a sort of exodus away from the trap that is the city, into the suburbs where there is love and family. It seems that it is a sort of confession, a sort of necessary first step in a direction of honesty for Nina.
This turn towards honesty is one that every person in today’s world, whether they are a single pregnant mom or a married man or a priest or a Satanist (although Satanists are not necessarily people I would condone in any way), desperately needs. It is purgation, a sort of T. S. Eliot “Ash Wednesday” conversion from no hope (“Because I do not hope to turn again”) to an almost reluctant realization that there is no other way (“Although I do not hope to turn again”). This honesty is the only way to live, and only when faced with the really real world can we appreciate what we have and what we’ve lost. It is a message for not only the Pro-Choice armies, but the legions of the Pro-Lifers and the rest of the world as well.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
LIfe Issues at the Movies: Part 1
For the next few posts on this blog, I will examine the treatment of life issues in what has become the most prevalent medium of culture: Movies. Though there is firm competition from television for this position, movies have, over the last 100 years, proved their staying power. Thus, if one desires to reach a wide audience, one should make a movie. This is the mentality behind several independent film companies and filmmakers, and it is also behind the movies to be discussed in the coming posts.
Unfortunately, there are few films that portray the pro-life cause. Besides the fact that contraception is almost universally accepted as the norm not only in Hollywood, but throughout the United States as a whole, falling on one side or another in the debates concerning life opens the door for the challenge most filmmakers cannot afford to face: debates. However, there are some films that have portrayed one side or another of the debate. These films, some against life, some for it, will be the focus of this blog up until the March For Life on January 22. Hopefully they will be interesting and enlightening for all readers.
The Sea Inside (2004)
Few movies touch on the subject of euthanasia, just as few movies touch on the subject of abortion. Even fewer movies center around either of these two atrocities. The Sea Inside, however, does just that, focusing its scope on the life of Ramon Sampedro (played by Javier Bardem), a Spaniard who shocked his native Spain, and the world, with his vocal desire to end his own life. Sampedro became a paraplegic after diving into too shallow of water on the coast of his native Spain. He spent the next 30 years of his life trying to argue that he should be allowed to “die with dignity” (the universal euthanasia call heard around the world) while living with his brother’s family. He eventually succeeded in his venture, providing a hero to the “right to die” movement.
Director Alejandro Amenabar hoped to paint a sympathetic portrait of the man and his cause, throwing his support with Sampedro. He wanted, however, to make the movie more than just an argument for or against euthanasia. Rather, he wanted to tell the story of the man. In that regard, he does succeed. The story in the film is a moving one, and the characters are compelling. However, the central story of the desire to die permeates the film, overwhelming any other facet, such as the love or joy Ramon experiences, of the storyline.
The movie does present both positions in the debate, with several characters arguing against Ramon about his desire to end his life. Ramon, however, is a rationalist, a man who will not accept any argument if it cannot be proved through rational means. In one scene, he tries to get his nephew to tell him why, rationally, he (Ramon) should allow him (the nephew) to watch a soccer game on the TV in Ramon’s room. Ramon makes the comment that he will only allow him to view the game if there is a rational reason. The love of rationality also appears in Ramon’s argument with a paraplegic priest, who is trying to convince him to abandon his fight for death. The priest’s arguments are not helped by the fact that the same priest had appeared on TV previous to their meeting and commented on how Ramon’s family must not love him, much to the anger of Ramon’s sister-in-law Manuela, who does everything she can to take care of her brother-in-law. The arguments on both sides are rather stale, and it ends more with two angry men than with two agreeing parties. Likewise, Ramon’s brother and father are against his pre-natural death, with the brother arguing that he, as the older brother, would not allow any killing in his house. The father makes the incredibly moving point that it is hard to loose a son, but even harder when the son tells you he wants to die. Even the people who are there to support Ramon in his quest for death (the RDD [Right to Die with Dignity, I believe] representative who has Ramon’s case; the attorney who helps with his case and then helps publish a collection of Ramon’s poetry) all reflect some reservation in supporting Ramon’s request to die. The attorney even contemplates dieing herself, but does not (the deleted scenes on the DVD expound upon this rather well, adding a sort of beauty to her story, but were unfortunately cut for time.
On the other hand, these counter arguments seem to fail when pitted against Ramon, who is perpetually shown as the hero of the tale. Every claim brought against him is knocked aside, followed by another argument for the right to life and the right to death. Even his own self doubt of his cause, a nightmare at night where he wonders “Why? Why? Why can’t the others change, Manuela ? Why can’t I make due with this life? Why? Why do I want to die?” is discarded in the morning. It seems he is, as his friends and family insist, “thickheaded.”
Ramon’s argument throughout the film is that he has no dignity living the way he does, with no movement except his head. Even when others touch his life and seem to make him enjoy living, it is more of a spark of joy, rather than a flame of happiness. The character comes across as sad, distant, even bitter. He rejects love, claiming that those who really love him are the ones who would help him get what he wants (i.e., help him die). In the end, however, it seems that no one is truly happy to see him go. The only one who eagerly yearns for the end of his life is Ramon himself. However, even Ramon has moments where he almost, almost recants, only to push on even harder. In the end, he succeeds, sipping some water with cyanide in it, thus ending his life.
What this film shows is that even men so obsessed with death like Sampedro can be made into heroes. The follower of the Gospel of Life might see the movie as disturbing, and rightly so (I’m pretty sure it got an “O,” that is, “morally objectionable,” rating by the USCCB), for it is a disturbing movie. Sampedro does not believe there is any purpose to his life, nor an afterlife. There could be one, he muses, but probably not. He has spiraled to a strange despair, for he hates his life, but relishes in the beauty he does see. He is a man who has given up, not as much run away, as some characters hint at in the beginning of the film. He has abandoned himself to his obsession with death, and thus provided a tragedy for the world, not a sort of canonization, as the Pro-Choice followers would hold.
Where lies the success in such a story? Is there really a freedom to end your own life? Is that even a freedom? This continual reasoning, followed through, leads to a mess of disorder, where any authority at all is diminished. It becomes a matter of what I want for myself, not what would be better for the common good, or even those who love me. The world slips into a hellish wasteland, burnt and charred in its own disgust.
This, it seems, is the goal and unfortunate result of this “right to die” movement.
Therein lies the horror. We are still a society of Mr. Kurtzes, dead and hollow, only left to murmur to ourselves “The horror, the horror.”
Unfortunately, there are few films that portray the pro-life cause. Besides the fact that contraception is almost universally accepted as the norm not only in Hollywood, but throughout the United States as a whole, falling on one side or another in the debates concerning life opens the door for the challenge most filmmakers cannot afford to face: debates. However, there are some films that have portrayed one side or another of the debate. These films, some against life, some for it, will be the focus of this blog up until the March For Life on January 22. Hopefully they will be interesting and enlightening for all readers.
The Sea Inside (2004)
Few movies touch on the subject of euthanasia, just as few movies touch on the subject of abortion. Even fewer movies center around either of these two atrocities. The Sea Inside, however, does just that, focusing its scope on the life of Ramon Sampedro (played by Javier Bardem), a Spaniard who shocked his native Spain, and the world, with his vocal desire to end his own life. Sampedro became a paraplegic after diving into too shallow of water on the coast of his native Spain. He spent the next 30 years of his life trying to argue that he should be allowed to “die with dignity” (the universal euthanasia call heard around the world) while living with his brother’s family. He eventually succeeded in his venture, providing a hero to the “right to die” movement.
Director Alejandro Amenabar hoped to paint a sympathetic portrait of the man and his cause, throwing his support with Sampedro. He wanted, however, to make the movie more than just an argument for or against euthanasia. Rather, he wanted to tell the story of the man. In that regard, he does succeed. The story in the film is a moving one, and the characters are compelling. However, the central story of the desire to die permeates the film, overwhelming any other facet, such as the love or joy Ramon experiences, of the storyline.
The movie does present both positions in the debate, with several characters arguing against Ramon about his desire to end his life. Ramon, however, is a rationalist, a man who will not accept any argument if it cannot be proved through rational means. In one scene, he tries to get his nephew to tell him why, rationally, he (Ramon) should allow him (the nephew) to watch a soccer game on the TV in Ramon’s room. Ramon makes the comment that he will only allow him to view the game if there is a rational reason. The love of rationality also appears in Ramon’s argument with a paraplegic priest, who is trying to convince him to abandon his fight for death. The priest’s arguments are not helped by the fact that the same priest had appeared on TV previous to their meeting and commented on how Ramon’s family must not love him, much to the anger of Ramon’s sister-in-law Manuela, who does everything she can to take care of her brother-in-law. The arguments on both sides are rather stale, and it ends more with two angry men than with two agreeing parties. Likewise, Ramon’s brother and father are against his pre-natural death, with the brother arguing that he, as the older brother, would not allow any killing in his house. The father makes the incredibly moving point that it is hard to loose a son, but even harder when the son tells you he wants to die. Even the people who are there to support Ramon in his quest for death (the RDD [Right to Die with Dignity, I believe] representative who has Ramon’s case; the attorney who helps with his case and then helps publish a collection of Ramon’s poetry) all reflect some reservation in supporting Ramon’s request to die. The attorney even contemplates dieing herself, but does not (the deleted scenes on the DVD expound upon this rather well, adding a sort of beauty to her story, but were unfortunately cut for time.
On the other hand, these counter arguments seem to fail when pitted against Ramon, who is perpetually shown as the hero of the tale. Every claim brought against him is knocked aside, followed by another argument for the right to life and the right to death. Even his own self doubt of his cause, a nightmare at night where he wonders “Why? Why? Why can’t the others change, Manuela ? Why can’t I make due with this life? Why? Why do I want to die?” is discarded in the morning. It seems he is, as his friends and family insist, “thickheaded.”
Ramon’s argument throughout the film is that he has no dignity living the way he does, with no movement except his head. Even when others touch his life and seem to make him enjoy living, it is more of a spark of joy, rather than a flame of happiness. The character comes across as sad, distant, even bitter. He rejects love, claiming that those who really love him are the ones who would help him get what he wants (i.e., help him die). In the end, however, it seems that no one is truly happy to see him go. The only one who eagerly yearns for the end of his life is Ramon himself. However, even Ramon has moments where he almost, almost recants, only to push on even harder. In the end, he succeeds, sipping some water with cyanide in it, thus ending his life.
What this film shows is that even men so obsessed with death like Sampedro can be made into heroes. The follower of the Gospel of Life might see the movie as disturbing, and rightly so (I’m pretty sure it got an “O,” that is, “morally objectionable,” rating by the USCCB), for it is a disturbing movie. Sampedro does not believe there is any purpose to his life, nor an afterlife. There could be one, he muses, but probably not. He has spiraled to a strange despair, for he hates his life, but relishes in the beauty he does see. He is a man who has given up, not as much run away, as some characters hint at in the beginning of the film. He has abandoned himself to his obsession with death, and thus provided a tragedy for the world, not a sort of canonization, as the Pro-Choice followers would hold.
Where lies the success in such a story? Is there really a freedom to end your own life? Is that even a freedom? This continual reasoning, followed through, leads to a mess of disorder, where any authority at all is diminished. It becomes a matter of what I want for myself, not what would be better for the common good, or even those who love me. The world slips into a hellish wasteland, burnt and charred in its own disgust.
This, it seems, is the goal and unfortunate result of this “right to die” movement.
Therein lies the horror. We are still a society of Mr. Kurtzes, dead and hollow, only left to murmur to ourselves “The horror, the horror.”
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
A NEW YEARS POEM
I decided to have my reflection this year be in metrical form.
Try and keep up, would you now deary, thank you.
“New Years 2008”
Another year is closing, another one dawning,
And somewhere, out there, someone is yawning.
Some major big changes happened this year,
So shut up your singing and lend me your ear
(I’m sorry to bother you, but I think you should hear).
I wrote a big thesis, it weighs a ton
But during the writing, boy I sure had fun.
I have a BA, (but its sort of BS),
Since I majored in English and History, I guess)
Worked through the summer, then got a real job
Teaching some youngsters, most of ‘em slobs!
(I don’t mean that jab. Please, no tears and sobs)
I visit my friend, and strain for a life,
Outside of teaching and grading and dodging the scythe
(And yes, I’m still single, and still have no wife)
And thus I look forward to the New Year ahead.
Will it be lively, or will it be dead.
(With Dems in charge, I’m voting for dead)
Lets hope it gets better, rather than worse,
And maybe a sports team will throw off its curse,
And maybe I’ll find out my vocation
And spend some time during summer vacation
Traveling round to places so cool,
And maybe the College will get a new pool.
(Non Sequitor, I know, but it rhymes with “cool”)
So here’s to the prayers for luck and success,
And blessings and blessings and all of the rest.
Happy New Year to you, and yes, you too.
I’ll see you on the flip side, East-side of this zoo.
Try and keep up, would you now deary, thank you.
“New Years 2008”
Another year is closing, another one dawning,
And somewhere, out there, someone is yawning.
Some major big changes happened this year,
So shut up your singing and lend me your ear
(I’m sorry to bother you, but I think you should hear).
I wrote a big thesis, it weighs a ton
But during the writing, boy I sure had fun.
I have a BA, (but its sort of BS),
Since I majored in English and History, I guess)
Worked through the summer, then got a real job
Teaching some youngsters, most of ‘em slobs!
(I don’t mean that jab. Please, no tears and sobs)
I visit my friend, and strain for a life,
Outside of teaching and grading and dodging the scythe
(And yes, I’m still single, and still have no wife)
And thus I look forward to the New Year ahead.
Will it be lively, or will it be dead.
(With Dems in charge, I’m voting for dead)
Lets hope it gets better, rather than worse,
And maybe a sports team will throw off its curse,
And maybe I’ll find out my vocation
And spend some time during summer vacation
Traveling round to places so cool,
And maybe the College will get a new pool.
(Non Sequitor, I know, but it rhymes with “cool”)
So here’s to the prayers for luck and success,
And blessings and blessings and all of the rest.
Happy New Year to you, and yes, you too.
I’ll see you on the flip side, East-side of this zoo.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Christmas Reflection 2008
The time has come once again for my clichéd Christmas reflection. I know you have been looking forward to this moment all year, some probably hoping I would forget, and thus, here it is: My Christmas Reflection. Small children should probably leave the theater. One of my favorite Christmas songs is “White Christmas.” If sung well, the vocals are haunting, the music pleasant, and the words comforting. “I’m dreaming of a White Christmas / Just like the ones I used to know.” The words speak to me, although the second line of the song, quoted above, is the sole exception. I cannot remember a White Christmas because I’ve never had one. I’ve dreamed and hoped for them, sure, but I’ve never actually had a real White Christmas (flurries don’t count).
This brings up the distressing situation of this reflection. This year has had record low temperatures around the world. Snow has fallen around the country. Even Malibu had snow last week. Malibu, California! You know, with the beaches, and palm trees, and girls running around in bikinis? Yeah, they got freaking snow. So did up north (which has been getting it since November). But guess who hasn’t gotten any snow. That’s right, the DC area. Oh we’ve had plenty of precipitation and low temperatures, but not at the same time. While everywhere else was freezing and being smothered in snowdrifts, we were drowning in rain (uncomfortably 35 degree rain). It’s sort of unfair, seemingly unjust, and all around depressing. Which brings me to my next topic.
For many, Christmas is a depressing time of year. Suicides skyrocket during this time of year. Maybe it’s because people are lonely. They found out their spouse has been cheating on them, they got laid off, their girl/boyfriend dumped them, they realize they are dying, or they just realize that they miss home. Whatever the reason, people decide it is the time around Christmas that would be the best time to take their life.
This does not have to be the case. It shows a real distress among our world. Christmas has become a superficial day, not one of hope and love, but one of stress or partying. This is not Christmas. New Years, maybe, but not Christmas. This is the time devoted to Christ’s birth. This is a time to remember that God became Man to save us. He didn’t have to, but he did. It is the focal point of history, the poetic climax, the answer to all philosophy, the solution to the sciences, and the summit of Theology. This reality is incompatible with the modern consumer, and by extension, the suicide, mentality.
Pope Benedict XVI, several years before he became pope, collected some homilies and thoughts concerning Christmas into two different books. These two books, in turn, were collected recently into the book entitled The Blessing of Christmas. At one point in the book, Ratzinger notes the following concerning Christmas and the suffering Christian:
"If God exists, then there is no meaningless time, no time devoid of significance. Every moment has its value, even if all I an do is to endure my illness in silence. If God exists, then there is always something to hope for, even where no human voice can any longer summon me to hope. And old age and retirement are no longer the last stage of my life, a position from which all I can do is look backwards: for something greater always lies ahead, and it is precisely the time of an apparent uselessness that can be the highest form of human ripening. Christian hope does not devalue time. On the contrary, it means that every moment of life possesses its own value; it means that we can accept the present and that we out to live it to the full because everything we have accepted in our heart will remain." (Joseph Ratzinger [Pope Benedict XVI], The Blessing of Christmas, p. 26)
This is the meaning of Christmas, having faith and hope on God’s promises, and loving Him for those very same promises. Those who have abandon hope take their own lives, but those who hold fast to that faith, hope, and charity not only keep their lives, but find their lives anew, flourishing in the darkness of winter.
May you have a Merry Christmas.
God Bless,
Ibid
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
MCing "Midnight" Mass
I'm MCing "Midnight" Mass at my parish. I say "Midnight" because the Mass is actually at 7:30 pm, but will have the Midnight readings, etc. And I'm MCing it. It won't be the first Mass I've MCed at my parish (I did it for the Corpus Christi Mass and procession last year), but it will be the first I've done without Fr. C, who's a bastion of tradition, a great priest, and rather willing to let me serve Mass like at the College.
Fr. S is a little more apathetic, so maybe I'll be able to MC a good Mass on Christmas as well.
So here's my reason for posting: Any Suggestions? I want to have the Mass be the most beautiful it can be. I have a limited idea of what fits well at a Christmas Midnight Mass.
Well, let the suggestions begin!
Fr. S is a little more apathetic, so maybe I'll be able to MC a good Mass on Christmas as well.
So here's my reason for posting: Any Suggestions? I want to have the Mass be the most beautiful it can be. I have a limited idea of what fits well at a Christmas Midnight Mass.
Well, let the suggestions begin!
Monday, November 24, 2008
My Brother
My Brother just got accepted to the College. Now, I know he probably wants to go somewhere else, but I'm hoping he'll go there. Over the last year he has flipped over about 5 different majors, and I'm prettys ure once he gets to college he'll change his mind again.
I want him to go to the College. I think he would like it there, would have a lot of fun, and would get the intellectual and spiritual burst he needs. Also, it will give him two years of time to change his mind regarding majors.
Or he might go somewhere else. He's a big boy. He can make his own decisions.
I want him to go to the College. I think he would like it there, would have a lot of fun, and would get the intellectual and spiritual burst he needs. Also, it will give him two years of time to change his mind regarding majors.
Or he might go somewhere else. He's a big boy. He can make his own decisions.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Apologia pro Novus Ordo Missae part 3
This is the final part of my defense of the Novus Ordo, now known as the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite (thanks BXVI!). The previous two parts, available here and here respectively, dealt with popular misconceptions and near heretical thoughts in dealing with the Mass post-Vatican II. This third and final part also deals with misconceptions, but this error is rarer than the previous points discussed. Due to a shortage of time, I did not cover this discussion in my Apologetics junior year (almost 2 years ago now), but I knew I had to at least learn about the controversy when I found several discussions of it when looking for discussions about the Novus Ordo online. The discussion centers around Antiquarianism, and the arguments here have some pretty good points. Is this the proof needed to condemn the Novus Ordo Missae?
Antiquarianism is the claim that ancient rituals are more suitable for worship and the liturgy by the very fact that they are old. It is widely held to be a heresy, defined as such by Pope Pius XII in his encyclical Mediator Dei. An ultra-traditionalist usually argues that the changes in the liturgy that are contained in the Novus Ordo are clear examples of this heresy. They cite a passage from Mediator Dei that seems to describe many of the changes brought about in the Novus Ordo:
It seems clear that the document is attacking directly what the Novus Ordo has brought about. How often does one go to a modern Catholic church and see an altar that looks more like a table than the folding tables in the parish hall? When was the last time black was readily used during funerals or on All Soul’s Day? Has anyone not entered a church with a resurrected Jesus coming off of the cross or another church seemingly devoid of all religious images? How close to polyphonic music is the music in a modern gospel Mass or your typical folk Mass? These changes seem to have taken place, despite the expressed statements against it of a previous pope.
However when one reads the rest of the encyclical, one notices that Pius XII is condemning something different than the changes mentioned above. Pius XII is rather condemning the act making such changes without the approval of the Holy See. Pope Pius clearly says in that same encyclical that what he is condemning is the abuse of one’s authority. He says in another place that, “It follows from this that the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification” (58). He states later in that Paragraph, “Private individuals, therefore, even though they be clerics, may not be left to decide for themselves in these holy and venerable matters” (Ibid.). Clearly it is a matter of authority. If the Holy See, the Pope with a Pontifical council, decides that it is ok for the liturgy to be in the vernacular, it is different than if Fr. X, a random pastor at a random parish, decides to put everything in the vernacular. This also works in reverse. If Fr. S, a more traditionally minded priest than Fr. X, becomes pastor and decides to pray some prayers of the Mass, but changes them to the prayers in older missals, without any Episcopal approval. The condemnation is a double edged sword, hitting both ultra-traditionalist and ultra-liberals in one foul swipe.
Antiquarianism is the claim that ancient rituals are more suitable for worship and the liturgy by the very fact that they are old. It is widely held to be a heresy, defined as such by Pope Pius XII in his encyclical Mediator Dei. An ultra-traditionalist usually argues that the changes in the liturgy that are contained in the Novus Ordo are clear examples of this heresy. They cite a passage from Mediator Dei that seems to describe many of the changes brought about in the Novus Ordo:
One would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored
to its primitive tableform; were he to want black excluded as a color for the
liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in
Churches; were he to order the crucifix so designed that the divine Redeemer's
body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings; and lastly were he to disdain and
reject polyphonic music or singing in parts, even where it conforms to
regulations issued by the Holy See. (62)
It seems clear that the document is attacking directly what the Novus Ordo has brought about. How often does one go to a modern Catholic church and see an altar that looks more like a table than the folding tables in the parish hall? When was the last time black was readily used during funerals or on All Soul’s Day? Has anyone not entered a church with a resurrected Jesus coming off of the cross or another church seemingly devoid of all religious images? How close to polyphonic music is the music in a modern gospel Mass or your typical folk Mass? These changes seem to have taken place, despite the expressed statements against it of a previous pope.
However when one reads the rest of the encyclical, one notices that Pius XII is condemning something different than the changes mentioned above. Pius XII is rather condemning the act making such changes without the approval of the Holy See. Pope Pius clearly says in that same encyclical that what he is condemning is the abuse of one’s authority. He says in another place that, “It follows from this that the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification” (58). He states later in that Paragraph, “Private individuals, therefore, even though they be clerics, may not be left to decide for themselves in these holy and venerable matters” (Ibid.). Clearly it is a matter of authority. If the Holy See, the Pope with a Pontifical council, decides that it is ok for the liturgy to be in the vernacular, it is different than if Fr. X, a random pastor at a random parish, decides to put everything in the vernacular. This also works in reverse. If Fr. S, a more traditionally minded priest than Fr. X, becomes pastor and decides to pray some prayers of the Mass, but changes them to the prayers in older missals, without any Episcopal approval. The condemnation is a double edged sword, hitting both ultra-traditionalist and ultra-liberals in one foul swipe.
Any reasonable Catholic, ultra-traditionalist or otherwise, would say that many of the changes in the Novus Ordo were approved by the Holy See, if not by explicit consent at least silently. Those changes were brought about by the Holy See using the legitimate authority such an office holds. Also, the changes themselves, it seems, were made, or rather brought back, not simply because they were older and therefore better, but because some theological learning could be gained by their inclusion in the Mass. There was a clear design in the Fathers’ mind when the Ordinary form was being promulgated. What might have little significance before was brought into the light. What was overemphasized before was lessened. Thus, some changes, indeed some integral to the structure of the Novus Ordo Missae, are not examples of Antiquarianism despite their similarity to that which is referred to in Mediator Dei.
Thank you for reading these posts. For those who are in support of the Ordinary Form, I hope you have learned more about the Mass and have gone away with a deeper love of this Holy Sacrifice. For those who came to bash the Novus Ordo, I hope you have been convinced of the error of your ways. Either way, let me know if you would like any more information, if I made any mistakes, or if you just want to say hi. Thank you again.
Thank you for reading these posts. For those who are in support of the Ordinary Form, I hope you have learned more about the Mass and have gone away with a deeper love of this Holy Sacrifice. For those who came to bash the Novus Ordo, I hope you have been convinced of the error of your ways. Either way, let me know if you would like any more information, if I made any mistakes, or if you just want to say hi. Thank you again.
Ibid
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Another death
A Tragedy to our world!
No, not Obama winning the presidential seat (although I think I offended some of my students when I said I didn't like Obama, and was sad that he won). I'm talking about another death, the passing of another celebrity close to my heart.
Michael Crichton. Author extrodinaire.
Michael Crichton has written some of the coolest books I have ever read, including Jurassic Park, one of my all time favorites. He also, in case you didn't know, created the TV show ER. How bout that?
We all must go, but he was only 66. One wonders what wonders and works he still had in him. Was he working on another great novel? What whirlled in that man's brain?
I guess we'll never know for sure.
But we can hope he makes it to heaven. It is, after all, the month of Holy Souls.
No, not Obama winning the presidential seat (although I think I offended some of my students when I said I didn't like Obama, and was sad that he won). I'm talking about another death, the passing of another celebrity close to my heart.
Michael Crichton. Author extrodinaire.
Michael Crichton has written some of the coolest books I have ever read, including Jurassic Park, one of my all time favorites. He also, in case you didn't know, created the TV show ER. How bout that?
We all must go, but he was only 66. One wonders what wonders and works he still had in him. Was he working on another great novel? What whirlled in that man's brain?
I guess we'll never know for sure.
But we can hope he makes it to heaven. It is, after all, the month of Holy Souls.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Awesome
Pro Lifers! We have a true warrior in the fight for life. The toughest warrior this side of Texas.
Chuck Norris.
I'm not making it up. Check it out.
Chuck Norris.
I'm not making it up. Check it out.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
He's at it again
Remember that crazy messed up professor who wants to desecrate consecrated Hosts?
He's at it again.
CNA's covered the story.
Please pray for him.
He's at it again.
CNA's covered the story.
Please pray for him.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Mournig a legend
One of the deadliest diseases of our day is one of the more ancient ones: cancer. Cancer is a broad category of disease, especially since it affects multiple parts of the body. All of us know either a friend or reletive or a reletive of a friend that has/has had cancer. For some, its curable. For others, it is a slow path towards the end of this life.
Celebrities are not immune from the horror and sadness that is cancer. One such celebrity is Paul Newman, actor extrodinaire. Mr. Newman has had cancer for a while, but it recently took a rapid turn for the worse. He died last Friday.
Paul Newman was, as far as I can tell, that odd sort of Hollywood actor who hated Hollywood. He loved acting, but he hated the Hollywood world, that sort of elitist capsule of people who would rather sun by a swimming than meet people. Mr. Newman, on the other hand would go out and help people. Many people know of Newman's Own, the company of salad dressings and other delectables founded by Paul and his wife. The proceeds from the sales of those products go to charity. Not some of the proceeds. All of them. The Newmans get nothing from it.
The world will miss the man, not only for such awesome roles in movies that will never fade from the cultural imagination (Cool Hand Luke, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Cars), but also for his work in helping others.
Here's the link to a rather good article about Paul Newman.
May his soul rest in peace. Amen.
Paul Newman was, as far as I can tell, that odd sort of Hollywood actor who hated Hollywood. He loved acting, but he hated the Hollywood world, that sort of elitist capsule of people who would rather sun by a swimming than meet people. Mr. Newman, on the other hand would go out and help people. Many people know of Newman's Own, the company of salad dressings and other delectables founded by Paul and his wife. The proceeds from the sales of those products go to charity. Not some of the proceeds. All of them. The Newmans get nothing from it.
The world will miss the man, not only for such awesome roles in movies that will never fade from the cultural imagination (Cool Hand Luke, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Cars), but also for his work in helping others.
Here's the link to a rather good article about Paul Newman.
May his soul rest in peace. Amen.
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
First day of teaching
Tired. . . Sweaty. . . Satisfied. . .
Today was the first day of the rest of my life. IT was the day that would define me as an adult. It was my first day of teaching.
Class went well. I survived, and so did the kids. It was hot (no AC + broken fan = hot, thirsty kids and a sweaty teacher) and sometimes awkward, but we made it. Tomorrow will be more of the same, with me doing intro stuff with the other half of the 8th grade.
Its only 1/2 days this week, so we'll see what happens next week, when we get together for the whole day. . .
Keep up the prayers.
Today was the first day of the rest of my life. IT was the day that would define me as an adult. It was my first day of teaching.
Class went well. I survived, and so did the kids. It was hot (no AC + broken fan = hot, thirsty kids and a sweaty teacher) and sometimes awkward, but we made it. Tomorrow will be more of the same, with me doing intro stuff with the other half of the 8th grade.
Its only 1/2 days this week, so we'll see what happens next week, when we get together for the whole day. . .
Keep up the prayers.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
X-Collegiates
Is it a porn site??????
Is it a talk show site?????
Is it both?????
Hope for the talk show bit, because its my friends from college, and they are butt ugly. . .
But anyway, hopefully it will be interesting, maybe even not too boring.
Listen in. The podcasts will appear on this blog.
Or just follow their link on the left side of this blog page.
Is it a talk show site?????
Is it both?????
Hope for the talk show bit, because its my friends from college, and they are butt ugly. . .
But anyway, hopefully it will be interesting, maybe even not too boring.
Listen in. The podcasts will appear on this blog.
Or just follow their link on the left side of this blog page.
Monday, August 11, 2008
Birthdays and such
Today is my birthday. I have officially turned 22, although I've stopped counting at 21. What is the point of being older than 21? Senior citizen discounts, I guess. Although, is that really worth getting older?
Regardless, it happens to us all. Here I am, on the threshold of a new year in my life, and as I stare at the vast marble notebook before me, I am curious as to what exactly will happen. I know that I have a rather exciting year ahead of me, what with teaching et al. Who knows what will, in fact, happen. Maybe I'll find riches, being able to settle down and read/write for the rest of my life. Actually, I wouldn't want that. If I come into great wealth, I think I'll get a doctorate first, and then teach college, and then retire and read and write.
Maybe I'll find love, or it will find me, or let me catch it, or something. Maybe I'll save someone's life without realizing it. Maybe I'll win awards and honors and have my name be something grand.
Maybe I should do what is best for me right now, that is, live every second of my life like it was my last, like at any second I could meet Him who made me, He who is the eternal judge and knows what will happen to me.
It is amazing what freedom can do to one's head.
So I enter this life. Maybe I'll get published in a journal, or maybe I'll have my students listen to me. Maybe I'll write the Great American novel, or maybe I'll read it myself, penned by the hands of my friends. I know that something great is coming. As Mr. Akers, one of my professors during my semester in Rome (the original purpose for this blog, if I'm not mistaken), wisely stated, this generation is bound to produce great things. When there is the slaughter of the innocent, particularly the infants and the unborn, in otherwords, when life is cut short by the hands of men, great things come about and great men arise. God uses tragedy to shine his light through his instruments. Moses was the product of this. Jesus, the Light of the World, came from this background of horror (think slaughter of the Holy Innocents at the hand of King Herod). The Holocaust produced great heros, Saints, and Martyrs. We can only hope to follow in their footsteps, and yet it seems like we are doing just that. We are the next generation of the Church. We are the immediate successors in the world. We hold in our grasps the salvation of the world, torn apart by death and violence, infidelity and promuscuity, lies and betrayals.
This is what I face this year. This is what awaits me this coming year.
However, as mentioned before, I have a sign.
In Hoc Signum Vinces. In this Sign, Conquer.
Regardless, it happens to us all. Here I am, on the threshold of a new year in my life, and as I stare at the vast marble notebook before me, I am curious as to what exactly will happen. I know that I have a rather exciting year ahead of me, what with teaching et al. Who knows what will, in fact, happen. Maybe I'll find riches, being able to settle down and read/write for the rest of my life. Actually, I wouldn't want that. If I come into great wealth, I think I'll get a doctorate first, and then teach college, and then retire and read and write.
Maybe I'll find love, or it will find me, or let me catch it, or something. Maybe I'll save someone's life without realizing it. Maybe I'll win awards and honors and have my name be something grand.
Maybe I should do what is best for me right now, that is, live every second of my life like it was my last, like at any second I could meet Him who made me, He who is the eternal judge and knows what will happen to me.
It is amazing what freedom can do to one's head.
So I enter this life. Maybe I'll get published in a journal, or maybe I'll have my students listen to me. Maybe I'll write the Great American novel, or maybe I'll read it myself, penned by the hands of my friends. I know that something great is coming. As Mr. Akers, one of my professors during my semester in Rome (the original purpose for this blog, if I'm not mistaken), wisely stated, this generation is bound to produce great things. When there is the slaughter of the innocent, particularly the infants and the unborn, in otherwords, when life is cut short by the hands of men, great things come about and great men arise. God uses tragedy to shine his light through his instruments. Moses was the product of this. Jesus, the Light of the World, came from this background of horror (think slaughter of the Holy Innocents at the hand of King Herod). The Holocaust produced great heros, Saints, and Martyrs. We can only hope to follow in their footsteps, and yet it seems like we are doing just that. We are the next generation of the Church. We are the immediate successors in the world. We hold in our grasps the salvation of the world, torn apart by death and violence, infidelity and promuscuity, lies and betrayals.
This is what I face this year. This is what awaits me this coming year.
However, as mentioned before, I have a sign.
In Hoc Signum Vinces. In this Sign, Conquer.
Tuesday, August 05, 2008
Random thoughts
I noticed that most of the most recent blog posts have been of a religious nature (minus the immediately previous one). I never intended that to be the case. Religion was to be one of the topics of discussion, but it was by no means to be the central point of posting. Hence this post. It is a post concerning several things, to bring back the randomness of the blog, and thereby reaffirm its AWESOMENESS!
Topic I - The upcoming elections
I have remained silent on political matters simply because they are not what excite me (albeit, I haven't really posted on what does excite me, but that's besides the point). Politics is too corrupt and confusing, filled with muddy waters and depressing disappointments as promises are broken. Plus the two main candidates, BO and JMC, really don't appeal to me. I definitely don't want BO to win such a seat of power, with his sly charms and tricky workaround answers to problems, nor do I really want JMC, who doesn't seem to have much to offer either. BO will probably win (one of my friends noted that BO's followers still love him even when he walks all over them) and all us conservatives are going to cry themselves to sleep. However, even if JMC wins, we conservatives will cry, for he is not very conservative, even though he is supposed to represent the relatively conservative party. The conservative candidates, it seems, are to be found in third parties only, not in the major ones. At work, the majority of my coworkers lean on the BO side side of things, and see JMC as the stupider of the candidates. However, BO does tend to tug on people's hearts with his elegant words. Why else would he admit to his adoring supporters in Lansing, Michigan that there is nowhere he would rather be on his birthday (it was his birthday that day) than Lansing, Michigan?
We'll see what I do come election time.
Topic II - Classroom management
For those of you who have not heard, I am one of the newest employees of Mt. Calvary Parish Catholic School in Forrestville, MD. I am the new 6-8th grade Language Arts teacher, in charge of teaching the future how to read, write, and speak the English language.
Its a pretty steep task.
My classroom is an ugly shade of sea green, with matching shades. I am working on making the classroom look cooler, hanging posters, etc. Maybe, if you're nice, I'll post pictures. . .
Hmm, this isn't very random. Maybe I'll think of something else later.
Topic I - The upcoming elections
I have remained silent on political matters simply because they are not what excite me (albeit, I haven't really posted on what does excite me, but that's besides the point). Politics is too corrupt and confusing, filled with muddy waters and depressing disappointments as promises are broken. Plus the two main candidates, BO and JMC, really don't appeal to me. I definitely don't want BO to win such a seat of power, with his sly charms and tricky workaround answers to problems, nor do I really want JMC, who doesn't seem to have much to offer either. BO will probably win (one of my friends noted that BO's followers still love him even when he walks all over them) and all us conservatives are going to cry themselves to sleep. However, even if JMC wins, we conservatives will cry, for he is not very conservative, even though he is supposed to represent the relatively conservative party. The conservative candidates, it seems, are to be found in third parties only, not in the major ones. At work, the majority of my coworkers lean on the BO side side of things, and see JMC as the stupider of the candidates. However, BO does tend to tug on people's hearts with his elegant words. Why else would he admit to his adoring supporters in Lansing, Michigan that there is nowhere he would rather be on his birthday (it was his birthday that day) than Lansing, Michigan?
We'll see what I do come election time.
Topic II - Classroom management
For those of you who have not heard, I am one of the newest employees of Mt. Calvary Parish Catholic School in Forrestville, MD. I am the new 6-8th grade Language Arts teacher, in charge of teaching the future how to read, write, and speak the English language.
Its a pretty steep task.
My classroom is an ugly shade of sea green, with matching shades. I am working on making the classroom look cooler, hanging posters, etc. Maybe, if you're nice, I'll post pictures. . .
Hmm, this isn't very random. Maybe I'll think of something else later.
Saturday, August 02, 2008
What is it?
FINALLY! A CRYPTOZOOLOGY POST!!!!!!!
Something washed ashore of a beach the other day in Montauk, New York. Nobody is sure exactly what it is. Some say a turtle without a shell. Others say a dog that's been pickled by the ocean. Jeff Corwin, Animal Planet host, holds its a rotten raccoon. Others say it is a new creature, a monster worthy of MONSTER QUEST.
The picture doesn't help much.
I hope somebody was smart enough to gather some DNA stuff from the thing. Or maybe take a better picture?
Something washed ashore of a beach the other day in Montauk, New York. Nobody is sure exactly what it is. Some say a turtle without a shell. Others say a dog that's been pickled by the ocean. Jeff Corwin, Animal Planet host, holds its a rotten raccoon. Others say it is a new creature, a monster worthy of MONSTER QUEST.
The picture doesn't help much.
I hope somebody was smart enough to gather some DNA stuff from the thing. Or maybe take a better picture?
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
"Poetry soars to the heavens"
The English-speaking Catholic world is alive with talk of the new translation of the Roman Missal (Ordinary form). The translation has, according to numerous Catholic news reports, been approved by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the USCCB, which had earlier stated qualms with some of the translation suggestions. It will more closely follow the Latin original, translating things like "Et cum spiritu tuo" as "and with your spirit," rather than "and Also with you." There are other ones too, one in particular actually removes the need for the second part of my post: Apologia pro Novus Ordo Missae.
The changes will not take effect for a while, a good thing, so as to avoid the liturgical and linguistic confusion that followed the promulgation of the Mass in the vernacular following Vatican II.
The full article can be here or one can read a blog post on it by Fr. Cusick, a priest I know, here.
I'm excited. Hopefully it will cut down on the number of people raising their hands with the priest when they say "and also with you."
But some people never change.
The changes will not take effect for a while, a good thing, so as to avoid the liturgical and linguistic confusion that followed the promulgation of the Mass in the vernacular following Vatican II.
The full article can be here or one can read a blog post on it by Fr. Cusick, a priest I know, here.
I'm excited. Hopefully it will cut down on the number of people raising their hands with the priest when they say "and also with you."
But some people never change.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
More things to make you say: "What the. . . ?"
More updates involving this story. Read it here, if you want the details.
Long Story short, the University of Minnesota will not remove the biology professor in question.
(Slams head against the wall)
Long Story short, the University of Minnesota will not remove the biology professor in question.
(Slams head against the wall)
Thursday, July 17, 2008
What the. . . ? continued
Here's the latest article update concerning Dr. Dr. Paul Zachary Myers, the biology professor who has threatened to desecrate consecrated hosts.
He claims to have them. . .
Storm Heaven, my friends! Please!
He claims to have them. . .
Storm Heaven, my friends! Please!
Professor who threatened desecration claims to have consecrated Hosts
P.Z. Myers
.- University of Minnesota Morris biology professor and science blogger Dr. Paul Zachary Myers, who last week threatened to desecrate the Eucharist and to broadcast the act on the internet, says he has acquired Eucharistic Hosts consecrated at a Catholic Mass.
Prof. Myers explained in an e-mail to CNA that he has received the Eucharist from several people. “So far, the crackers I have received have been given to me in person or sent to my home address.”
Myers has been derisively referring to the Eucharist as a “cracker.” He began his desecration campaign on his scienceblogs.com blog “Pharyngula” in reaction to an incident at the University of Central Florida in which a student senator allegedly held the Eucharist hostage.
When asked by CNA whether he considered taking consecrated Hosts from a Catholic church to be theft, he replied:
“I'm not taking the crackers from any church. I'm not interested in attending church, nor would I misrepresent myself as a Catholic to receive it.
“It is freely handed out to people taking communion in the church. The people who are sending me crackers have received it openly,” he wrote.
Myers also could not see how others could consider taking a consecrated Host to be theft. “No. This ‘theft’ nonsense is a rationalization people are making up to justify hysteria.”
Myers said the reason to abuse a Host is “to expose the witch-hunt tactics of extremist Catholics like Bill Donohue.”
CNA asked Myers if he had received any “intellectually worthy” replies to his desecration threat, to which he responded “No.” “It's your job to give me one. ‘I will pray for you,’ ‘you must hate Catholics,’ and ‘why don't you desecrate a Koran?’, which are the most common messages I'm being sent, are not rational.
He noted that his blog Pharyngula has an open comments policy where critiques are already posted.
On Friday the Catholic League reported that Thomas E. Foley, a Virginia delegate to the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Minneapolis has asked that increased security be considered for the event in light of Myers’ threat to acquire and desecrate the Eucharist.
“I just felt security at the Republican National Convention ought to look at him and his followers,” Foley told CNA in a phone interview on Wednesday morning. He reported that he had not received an update about his request.
Voicing his concerns about Myers, Foley said: “What I think he has done, he’s loaded a cyberpistol and he’s cocked it and he’s left it on the table. He may have set something in motion that no one can stop. It was irresponsible, a hell of a thing to do.”
Foley explained that he thought Myers should not be able to incite such acts with “impunity,” saying that he was especially disturbed by the comments posted on Myers’ blog. He said it was “eye-opening” to read the people who supported Myers’ action. Even at his age of 63, Foley said, he had never “personally encountered such bigotry.”
He also objected to Myers’ recent description of Catholic League President Bill Donohue as “braying,” which Foley, a self-described Irish Catholic, claimed was “a great insult for the Irish.”
Foley said he believes Myers was telling his readers to acquire a consecrated Host at Mass, which Foley thought would result in disruptions.
“What’s he telling them to do? Consecrated Hosts are not just lying around,” he said to CNA, noting that the only other possible way to secure a Host would be to accost a priest, nun, or layman taking the Sacrament to the sick. Even E-bay, Foley emphasized, has prevented the sale of consecrated Hosts.
Foley said he thinks Myers’ actions have ended his career. “Who can listen to him lecture on science without thinking ‘Polly wants a cracker’?” he asked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)