Sunday, October 27, 2013
Seeing Clearly
Many of us cannot distinguish navy blue, black, or dark brown socks inside our room. Only when we get into the sunlight do we see the color distinctions clearly. So also, when we sinners are among ourselves, we do not notice our faults; but in the sunlight of God's presence, we notice them far more clearly.
— from The Holy Land
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
Movie Night!
Don't forget! Movie night at the CK Corral this Friday at around 7:00. We will be watching Pope Pius XII.
Happy Halloween!
As a convert with small children, I often questioned celebrating Halloween. For years I went ahead and let my kiddos restrictively participate. Trying to steer clear of all the scary, gory stuff. Every year I look it up and learn a little more about the origins of Halloween and how better to explain it to my kids ( who were told at one point by kids at school that is was the "devil's B-day" Yikes!) As with any other holiday, it has been secularized and distorted. But by finding out how and why, and learning about it's true origins and meaning, I feel our family can better celebrate it as "Catholics" :)
Summer*The Christian Origins of Halloween:
"Halloween" is a name that means nothing by itself. It is a contraction of "All Hallows Eve," and it designates the vigil of All Hallows Day, more commonly known today as All Saints Day. ("Hallow," as a noun, is an old English word for saint. As a verb, it means to make something holy or to honor it as holy.) All Saints Day, November 1, is a Holy Day of Obligation, and both the feast and the vigil have been celebrated since the early eighth century, when they were instituted by Pope Gregory III in Rome. (A century later, they were extended to the Church at large by Pope Gregory IV.)
The Pagan Origins of Halloween:
Despite concerns among some Catholics and other Christians in recent years about the "pagan origins" of Halloween, there really are none. The first attempts to show some connection between the vigil of All Saints and the Celtic harvest festival of Samhain came over a thousand years after All Saints Day became a universal feast, and there's no evidence whatsoever that Gregory III or Gregory IV was even aware of Samhain.
In Celtic peasant culture, however, elements of the harvest festival survived, even among Christians, just as the Christmas tree owes its origins to pre-Christian Germanic traditions without being a pagan ritual.
In Celtic peasant culture, however, elements of the harvest festival survived, even among Christians, just as the Christmas tree owes its origins to pre-Christian Germanic traditions without being a pagan ritual.
Combining the Pagan and the Christian:
The Celtic elements included lighting bonfires, carving turnips (and, in America, pumpkins), and going from house to house, collecting treats, as carolers do at Christmas. But the "occult" aspects of Halloween—ghosts and demons—actually have their roots in Catholic belief. Christians believed that, at certain times of the year (Christmas is another), the veil separating earth from Purgatory, heaven, and even hell becomes more thin, and the souls in Purgatory (ghosts) and demons can be more readily seen. Thus the tradition of Halloween costumes owes as much, if not more, to Christian belief as to Celtic tradition.
The (First) Anti-Catholic Attack on Halloween:
The current attacks on Halloween aren't the first. In post-Reformation England, All Saints Day and its vigil were suppressed, and the Celtic peasant customs associated with Halloween were outlawed. Christmas and the traditions surrounding it were similarly attacked, and the Puritan Parliament banned Christmas outright in 1647. In America, Puritans outlawed the celebration of both Christmas and Halloween, which were revived largely by German Catholic (in the case of Christmas) and Irish Catholic (in the case of Halloween) immigrants in the 19th century.
The Commercialization of Halloween:
Continued opposition to Halloween was largely an expression of anti-Catholicism (as well as anti-Irish prejudice). But by the early 20th century, Halloween, like Christmas, was becoming highly commercialized. Pre-made costumes, decorations, and special candy all became widely available, and the Christian origins of the holiday were downplayed.
The rise of horror films, and especially the slasher films of the late 70's and 80's, contributed to Halloween's bad reputation, as did the claims of putative Satanists and Wiccans, who created a mythology in which Halloween had been their festival, co-opted later by Christians.
The rise of horror films, and especially the slasher films of the late 70's and 80's, contributed to Halloween's bad reputation, as did the claims of putative Satanists and Wiccans, who created a mythology in which Halloween had been their festival, co-opted later by Christians.
The (Second) Anti-Catholic Attack on Halloween:
A new backlash against Halloween by non-Catholic Christians began in the 1980's, in part because of claims that Halloween was the "Devil's Night"; in part because of urban legends about poisons and razor blades in Halloween candy; and in part because of an explicit opposition to Catholicism. Jack Chick, a rabidly anti-Catholic fundamentalist who distributes Bible tracts in the form of small comic books, helped lead the charge. (For more on Chick's rabid anti-Catholicism and his attack on Halloween, see Halloween, Jack Chick, and Anti-Catholicism.)
By the late 1990's, many Catholic parents, unaware of the anti-Catholic origins of the attack on Halloween, had begun to question Halloween as well, and alternative celebrations became popular.
By the late 1990's, many Catholic parents, unaware of the anti-Catholic origins of the attack on Halloween, had begun to question Halloween as well, and alternative celebrations became popular.
Alternatives to Halloween Activities:
Ironically, one of the most popular Christian alternatives to celebrating Halloween is a secular "Harvest Festival," which has more in common with the Celtic Samhain than it does with the Catholic All Saints Day. There's nothing wrong with celebrating the harvest, but there's no need to strip such a celebration of connections with the Christian liturgical calendar.
Another popular Catholic alternative is an All Saints Party, usually held on Halloween and featuring costumes (of saints rather than ghouls) and candy. At best, though, this is an attempt to Christianize an already Christian holiday.
Another popular Catholic alternative is an All Saints Party, usually held on Halloween and featuring costumes (of saints rather than ghouls) and candy. At best, though, this is an attempt to Christianize an already Christian holiday.
Safety Concerns and the Fear Factor:
Parents are in the best position to decide whether their children can participate safely in Halloween activities, and, in today's world, it's understandable that many choose to err on the side of caution. One concern that's often overblown, however, is the effect that fright might have on children. Some children, of course, are very sensitive, but most love scaring others and being scared themselves (within limits, of course). Any parent knows that the "Boo!" is usually followed by laughter, not only from the child doing the scaring, but from the one being scared. Halloween provides a structured environment for fear.
Making Your Decision:
In the end, the choice is yours to make as a parent. If you choose, as my wife and I do, to let your children participate in Halloween, simply stress the need for physical safety (including checking over their candy when they return home), and explain the Christian origins of Halloween to your children. Before you send them off trick-or-treating, recite together the Prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel, and explain that, as Catholics, we believe in the reality of evil. Tie the vigil explicitly to the Feast of All Saints, and explain to your children why we celebrate that feast, so that they won't view All Saints Day as "the boring day when we have to go to church before we can eat some more candy."
Let's reclaim Halloween for Christians, by returning to its roots in the Catholic Church!
Let's reclaim Halloween for Christians, by returning to its roots in the Catholic Church!
Monday, October 21, 2013
What's the Plan?
Ok so I don't really consider myself a conspiracy theorist, however this seems very likely in my view. It forces me (now rather than later) to think about what my family and I will do when our Constitution is completely dissolved or replaced. Of course CONSTANT prayers for God's Mercy and the intersession of Mary and the Saints are needed! But what of our actions? Shouldn't we have somewhat of a plan? Looking for feedback on the subject:)
Summer*
Conspiracy theorists, be on alert. Hollywood icon Tom Hanks may not have been joking when he said he wanted President Obama to run for a third term — over the prohibitions of the Constitution.
Mr. Hanks, who’s starring in the soon-to-be-released “Captain Phillips” and was in Washington, D.C., this week for a premiere showing at the Newseum, declared his choice for president for 2016: Mr. Obama, The Hill reported.
“I’m voting
for Barack Obama, 2016,” he said. “Yes I am. Four more years.”
Mr. Hanks reportedly laughed while speaking. But do a Bing search on “Obama seeks third term,” and the more than 2 million hits that come back reveal the notion is both widely discussed and widely reported. MSN, for instance, in August reported on an investor — Porter Stansberry — who claims the president is secretly planning a third term.
U.S. News reported on that same Baltimore businessman’s claim in 2012.
Mr. Stansberry — whose past includes convictions for swindling customers with false investment information — sent out a mass email solicitation that landed in even former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s box: “Most people believe the election was all about whether or not Obama will have a second term. But it was not. What was actually at stake was whether or not he will have a third term.”
The 22nd Amendment limits the number of times a president can hold the high office to two terms. That amendment came as a response to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who crossed long-standing U.S. presidential practice — set by George Washington — of serving only two terms. Mr. Roosevelt served for 12 years.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/4/tom-hanks-quips-four-more-years-obama/#ixzz2iOPgjzoW
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Summer*
Conspiracy theorists, be on alert. Hollywood icon Tom Hanks may not have been joking when he said he wanted President Obama to run for a third term — over the prohibitions of the Constitution.
Mr. Hanks, who’s starring in the soon-to-be-released “Captain Phillips” and was in Washington, D.C., this week for a premiere showing at the Newseum, declared his choice for president for 2016: Mr. Obama, The Hill reported.
“I’m voting
for Barack Obama, 2016,” he said. “Yes I am. Four more years.”Mr. Hanks reportedly laughed while speaking. But do a Bing
search on “Obama seeks third term,” and the more than 2 million hits that come back reveal the notion is both widely discussed and widely reported. MSN, for instance, in August reported on an investor — Porter Stansberry — who claims the president is secretly planning a third term.U.S. News reported on that same Baltimore businessman’s claim in 2012.
Mr. Stansberry — whose past includes convictions for swindling customers with false investment
information — sent out a mass email solicitation that landed in even former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s box: “Most people believe the election was all about whether or not Obama will have a second term. But it was not. What was actually at stake was whether or not he will have a third term.”The 22nd Amendment limits the number of times a president can hold the high office to two terms. That amendment came as a response to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who crossed long-standing U.S. presidential practice — set by George Washington — of serving only two terms. Mr. Roosevelt served for 12 years.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/4/tom-hanks-quips-four-more-years-obama/#ixzz2iOPgjzoW
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Time To Admit It: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Control
Sergio Dionisio/Getty
Many people, (including our editor) are wondering why the Catholic Church doesn't just ditch this requirement. They note that most Catholics ignore it, and that most everyone else finds it divisive, or "out-dated." C'mon! It's the 21st century, they say! Don't they SEE that it's STUPID, they scream.
Here's the thing, though: the Catholic Church is the world's biggest and oldest organization. It has buried all of the greatest empires known to man, from the Romans to the Soviets. It has establishments literally all over the world, touching every area of human endeavor. It's given us some of the world's greatest thinkers, from Saint Augustine on down to René Girard. When it does things, it usually has a good reason. Everyone has a right to disagree, but it's not that they're a bunch of crazy old white dudes who are stuck in the Middle Ages.
So, what's going on?
The Church teaches that love, marriage, sex, and procreation are all things that belong together. That's it. But it's pretty important. And though the Church has been teaching this for 2,000 years, it's probably never been as salient as today.
Today's injunctions against birth control were re-affirmed in a 1968 document by Pope Paul VI called Humanae Vitae. He warned of four results if the widespread use of contraceptives was accepted:
- General lowering of moral standards
- A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy
- The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men.
- Government coercion in reproductive matters.
Does that sound familiar?
Because it sure sounds like what's been happening for the past 40 years.
As George Akerloff wrote in Slate over a decade ago,
By making the birth of the child the physical choice of the mother, the sexual revolution has made marriage and child support a social choice of the father.
Instead of two parents being responsible for the children they conceive, an expectation that was held up by social norms and by the law, we now take it for granted that neither parent is necessarily responsible for their children. Men are now considered to be fulfilling their duties merely by paying court-ordered child-support. That's a pretty dramatic lowering of standards for "fatherhood."
People.com
Today's moral lodestar
And if you don't think women are being reduced to objects to satisfy men, welcome to the internet, how long have you been here? Government coercion: just look to China (or America, where a government rule on contraception coverage is the reason why we're talking about this right now).
Is this all due to the Pill? Of course not. But the idea that widely-available contraception hasn't led to dramatic societal change, or that this change has been exclusively to the good, is a much sillier notion than anything the Catholic Church teaches.
So is the notion that it's just OBVIOUSLY SILLY to get your moral cues from a venerable faith (as opposed to what? Britney Spears?).
But let's turn to another aspect of this. The reason our editor thinks Catholics shouldn't be fruitful and multiply doesn't hold up, either. The world's population, he writes, is on an "unsustainable" growth path.
The Population Bureau of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations sees (PDF, h/t Pax Dickinson) the rate of population growth slowing over the next decades and stabilizing around 9 billion in 2050…and holding there until 2300. (And note that the UN, which promotes birth control and abortions around the world, isn't exactly in the be-fruitful-and-multiply camp.)
More broadly, the Malthusian view of population growth has been resilient despite having been proven wrong time and time again and causing lots of unnecessary human suffering. For example, China is headed for a demographic crunch and social dislocation due to its misguided one-child policy.
Human progress is people. Everything that makes life better, from democracy to the economy to the internet to penicillin was either discovered and built by people. More people means more progress. The inventor of the cure for cancer might be someone's fourth child that they decided not to have.
So, just to sum up:
- It's a good idea for people to be fruitful and multiply; and
- Regardless of how you feel about the Church's stance on birth control, it's proven pretty prophetic.
Read more:http://www.businessinsider.com/time-to-admit-it-the-church-has-always-been-right-on-birth-control-2012-2#ixzz2iO7XW7lt
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)