I'm doing something I've never done before, which is start up the old computer while watching morning Mass on TV, so that I can criticize the sermon that I just heard.
For those not Catholic, here's the structure. There are usually two Bible readings during Mass, plus excerpts from one of the Psalms. The sermon (or homily) follows a reading from the Gospel. Those of you not Catholic can probably grasp quicker than it seems some priests do that the sermon follows the Gospel so that the priest can EXPLAIN THE GOSPEL.
I just listened to a sermon by a priest who I thought knows better, but obviously does not, that was one of the worst I have listened to. It referenced the Gospel not at ALL, except for a lame sentence added at the end. Instead, it sounded like a New Age sermon touting healing miracles.
How did this mistake happen? Here's the problem. Catholics correctly uplift and celebrate saints on their special days. It is correct because people need to hear practical real life inspiration by those who have been demonstrated to be in sanctified service to the Lord God. So I didn't mind mention of the virtues and life story of "today's saint." However, it went on too long, and then to my horror, as I expected the priest to FINALLY get around to um, you know, MENTION THE GOSPEL, he went into a detailed awe struck ridiculous detailing of the medical "miracle" of modern people who have been "cured" by their belief in the saint.
As a result we heard allllllllll about the doctors, the patient, the big old cancer boo-boo, about some nun who sucked on cigars to help a leper patient, blah, blah, blah. I'm glad I don't have breakfast before Mass because I'd have hurled.
I consider it a SIN to be a priest and to give a sermon that does not even mention, say nothing of actually explaining, the GOSPEL. The sermon in a Catholic Church is not a pep talk on whatever subject the priest thinks would be hip (or someone tells him to do, as I know happens). It is also, as the Gospel, a SACRED part of the Mass, as in the sermon the priest is actually imitating both Christ and his disciples, by EXPLAINING GOD.
Worse, if it can get any worse, the lack of connection between the Gospel reading and the blah blah blah about the people who have miraculous cures, help out the down and out, etc creates a false idea about the Gospel message in people's minds. They assume they are linked and they are not!
The Gospel today, about Lydia, who heard Paul, believed, was baptized and saved, was not about Lydia thinking "Hm, here are holy people. I better believe in them in case I need a miraculous cure someday." It is the OPPOSITE because many early believers had nothing but martyrdom for their faith to look forward to. Lydia believed because she knew the Truth, through the Holy Spirit, when she heard it. She didn't "invest" in "this God" in case Paul and the others would cough up a miracle, or "in case" she needed a miraculous cure. Yet, incredibly, this priest let that impression linger, and even basically said so at the end (the old saw that you never know who might come along with miraculous power, blah, blah, blah).
Look, you don't breathe air because you think someday a tank of oxygen might cure you in illness, do you? Each day you take a breath and think to yourself, "Well, I better keep breathing just in case one day I am sick and only a tank of oxygen falling out of the sky will save me." No, duh, you breathe each day because 1) you need to and 2) it is the correct thing to do all on its own (ie. the truth). Likewise you don't believe in God in case some miracle is needed someday, or because someone may OR MAY NOT have had a miraculous cure! You believe in God because like the air, God is the ever present reality.
Heaven help us. Do we not have enough problems?
Priests, you better make sure that your sermons address the Gospel. If not, why are you there?
Prayers for the priests who are somehow keeping their sanctified purpose in the midst of those who seem determined to lead them astray. Do not follow "self agenda" sermon giving priests as your example. You are there because of the Gospel and you are indeed even alive because of the Gospel. You better be helping the people understand THAT Gospel in each and every sermon that you give, period.
Showing posts with label Saint life example. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Saint life example. Show all posts
Monday, May 10, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
understanding Bible: sin definition case study
I started out planning to blog about something else (which I will), but I came across this historical information that will help you in your faith & reasoning development. In the past few postings I've mentioned how the Bible states that even foolish thoughts, and then of course obviously mean and unrighteous thoughts, are sins, even if no one takes action on them. I explained that and gave the scripture references in previous posts some time ago.
Well, I know that one of the things you need to think about is: how has accurate and complete understanding of the Bible diminished so much over the two thousand years of Christianity that my explaining the Bible has this information has become a news flash? Something that very, very, VERY few pastors and other moral leaders know about or if they do, even mention? Why does no one warn their flock that even foolish thoughts are considered by God to be sins?
Before you, or anyone, can answer that question, you need to "fact find." Young people (yes, hi there, I think of you fondly as always), the scientific method and the use of problem solving logic means that like a detective, you trace how far in history from the time of the Bible writings to the present that awareness of this particular admonishment in the Bible exists in both the religious and secular consciousness.
Thus I want to give you an example of how, while leafing through my prayerbook, I came across written evidence that just over three hundred years after Jesus Christ lived that people still knew full well and embraced the Bible teaching that foolish and sinful thoughts are actual sins. So while I'm not planning to spend time studying this for you, I thought, hey! What a perfect example to show you how to reconstruct how modern thought has gone so wrong. So the first step is to trace since the time of Jesus, using impeccable written factual sources (not imaginings of false prophets and 'psychics') what people actually thought and did regarding the topic that you are studying, in this case how the Bible states that foolish and sinful thoughts are sins, even if no actions follow.
Here is some background of the person I am going to quote. Ambrose was born around the year 320 AD (and thus was born nearly three hundred years after Jesus Christ was crucified and resurrected) into a upper class family in the Roman Empire. Ambrose's family had been Christian for several generations. Ambrose had in his family tree, in fact, a Christian martyr, St. Soteris. Ambrose and his family received classic legal education, so they were well educated and prepared for high civil office, so Ambrose became a lawyer and a governor. When a local bishop died, Ambrose was sent to help sort out arguments among the people about who should be appointed bishop in the place of the deceased. As he addressed the crowd on this subject a child in the crowd called out that Ambrose himself should become bishop! The crowd agreed and the two arguing sides with their respective candidates fell into agreement about Ambrose (who was shocked and did not want to be the bishop). He was well on his way up the lawyer and government "career ladder," and was still studying and deepening his own individual faith. But because the people wanted him so badly and basically drafted him, he was baptized, received the holy orders of priesthood, and was consecrated Bishop of Milan (Italy) all within a month of time! He was very obviously a pious and sanctifying man from the start (the people's instinct was correct!) He gave to the Church and the poor his considerable personal wealth, he sorted through the problem of the genuinely poor from those who were shams, he studied scripture and doctrine for twenty three years, was a prolific author and being a priest, as all bishops are, Ambrose celebrated Mass (the Holy Eucharist) every day. He even raised the three grandchildren of a friend.
With that as background, seeing this was a holy man who didn't even in fact seek out fame or a livelihood due to his sanctity, here is what he wrote, with his opinion of his own sinfulness! This is a long prayer he wrote that he recited before celebrating the Holy Eucharist (the "Lord's Supper") in daily Mass and I include here the opening of the prayer and the places where you see evidence of the realization of those times that all people are considered prone to sin, including of mere thoughts that are foolish or unworthy:
O Gracious Lord Jesus Christ, I, a sinner, presuming not on my own merits, but trusting to Thy mercy and goodness, fear and tremble in drawing near to the Table on which is spread Thy Banquet of all delights. For I have defiled both my heart and body with many sins, and have not kept a strict guard over my mind and my tongue....
...To Thee, O Lord, I show my wounds, to Thee I lay bare my shame. I know that my sins are many and great, on account of which I am filled with fear. But I trust in Thy mercy, for it is unbounded...
...Hearken unto me, for my hope is in Thee; have mercy on me, who am full of misery and sin, Thou who wilt never cease to let flow the fountain of mercy. Hail, Thou saving Victim, offered for me and for all mankind on the tree of the cross...
Remember, O Lord, Thy creature, whom Thou hast redeemed with Thy Blood. I am grieved because I have sinned, I desire to make amends for what I have done. Take away from me therefore, O most merciful Father, all my iniquities and offences, that, being purified both in soul and body, I may worthily partake in the Holy of Holies...
...I purpose to partake, may be to me the full remission of my sins, the perfect cleansing of my offences, the means of driving away all evil thoughts and of renewing all holy desires, and the advancement of works pleasing to Thee...
Do you see how often this obviously holy man (remember, the crowd proclaimed him when he had no clue of wanting to leave a high career for the sanctified priesthood) emphasizes and repeatedly confesses and asks for help for his sins of thoughts????
If you ever wonder what holy people confess to God, that is what it is. Truly holy and sanctified people continue to "renew all holy desires" by acknowledging that all humans have foolish, evil and sinful thoughts. This is the genuine humility before God that ALL believers should have, which is the acknowledgment that even the holiest of people have, due to being broken vessel human beings, regardless of their level of faith, have to mindfully struggle against having even silly and mean or vain thoughts, say nothing of how profound a sin that thinking, even idly and fleetingly, thoughts about sinful matters are.
So, young people, and others, this is how you can see that no, we don't "lack evidence" of "what the church was like" and "what people believed" "back then" in "Biblical times." This lawyer/governor who became priest/bishop only a few hundred years after Christ left plenty of written evidence of his thoughts and what the people believed, and what they retained of their understanding of the Bible, both Old and New Testament. The notion that even idle, foolish and sinful thoughts are actual sins (as the Bible states) was a hot forefront belief several hundred years after Christ.
Thus, young people, and others, you now have a piece of your investigation, if you were doing so, that for certain in the four century that the knowledge that bad and foolish thoughts are sin was well known and frequently meditated about and prayed regarding, including DAILY by this Bishop of Milan, Ambrose.
Those of you new to studying the saints, let me explain that they were not tucked away in a corner. Ambrose, while he was living, was studied by many who would become great saints themselves. Further, while there was no email, ha, or post office, there was indeed snail mail and these people were all in correspondence. So if you continue your investigations you will see that a writing by a priest or bishop was never a "personal" so called "interpretation of scripture." This was the prevailing belief, kept intact from Old Testament times and the times of Jesus, that foolish and bad thoughts are indeed sins.
I hope that you have found this helpful both in further understanding what I have been reminding people about what the scriptures actually say, but also as you can see that you don't have to imagine and make stuff up, but you can look at written agenda-free evidence to deduce what people knew and believed, and how the word of God is preserved, and when parts of it started to fall out of public consciousness. Here we have filled in the blanks of several hundred years, knowing that the early Christians were keenly aware of what the Israelites knew and what those who followed Jesus knew, which is that God states that foolish, bad, mean and/or sinful thoughts are indeed actual sins, whether actual action follows or not.
Well, I know that one of the things you need to think about is: how has accurate and complete understanding of the Bible diminished so much over the two thousand years of Christianity that my explaining the Bible has this information has become a news flash? Something that very, very, VERY few pastors and other moral leaders know about or if they do, even mention? Why does no one warn their flock that even foolish thoughts are considered by God to be sins?
Before you, or anyone, can answer that question, you need to "fact find." Young people (yes, hi there, I think of you fondly as always), the scientific method and the use of problem solving logic means that like a detective, you trace how far in history from the time of the Bible writings to the present that awareness of this particular admonishment in the Bible exists in both the religious and secular consciousness.
Thus I want to give you an example of how, while leafing through my prayerbook, I came across written evidence that just over three hundred years after Jesus Christ lived that people still knew full well and embraced the Bible teaching that foolish and sinful thoughts are actual sins. So while I'm not planning to spend time studying this for you, I thought, hey! What a perfect example to show you how to reconstruct how modern thought has gone so wrong. So the first step is to trace since the time of Jesus, using impeccable written factual sources (not imaginings of false prophets and 'psychics') what people actually thought and did regarding the topic that you are studying, in this case how the Bible states that foolish and sinful thoughts are sins, even if no actions follow.
Here is some background of the person I am going to quote. Ambrose was born around the year 320 AD (and thus was born nearly three hundred years after Jesus Christ was crucified and resurrected) into a upper class family in the Roman Empire. Ambrose's family had been Christian for several generations. Ambrose had in his family tree, in fact, a Christian martyr, St. Soteris. Ambrose and his family received classic legal education, so they were well educated and prepared for high civil office, so Ambrose became a lawyer and a governor. When a local bishop died, Ambrose was sent to help sort out arguments among the people about who should be appointed bishop in the place of the deceased. As he addressed the crowd on this subject a child in the crowd called out that Ambrose himself should become bishop! The crowd agreed and the two arguing sides with their respective candidates fell into agreement about Ambrose (who was shocked and did not want to be the bishop). He was well on his way up the lawyer and government "career ladder," and was still studying and deepening his own individual faith. But because the people wanted him so badly and basically drafted him, he was baptized, received the holy orders of priesthood, and was consecrated Bishop of Milan (Italy) all within a month of time! He was very obviously a pious and sanctifying man from the start (the people's instinct was correct!) He gave to the Church and the poor his considerable personal wealth, he sorted through the problem of the genuinely poor from those who were shams, he studied scripture and doctrine for twenty three years, was a prolific author and being a priest, as all bishops are, Ambrose celebrated Mass (the Holy Eucharist) every day. He even raised the three grandchildren of a friend.
With that as background, seeing this was a holy man who didn't even in fact seek out fame or a livelihood due to his sanctity, here is what he wrote, with his opinion of his own sinfulness! This is a long prayer he wrote that he recited before celebrating the Holy Eucharist (the "Lord's Supper") in daily Mass and I include here the opening of the prayer and the places where you see evidence of the realization of those times that all people are considered prone to sin, including of mere thoughts that are foolish or unworthy:
O Gracious Lord Jesus Christ, I, a sinner, presuming not on my own merits, but trusting to Thy mercy and goodness, fear and tremble in drawing near to the Table on which is spread Thy Banquet of all delights. For I have defiled both my heart and body with many sins, and have not kept a strict guard over my mind and my tongue....
...To Thee, O Lord, I show my wounds, to Thee I lay bare my shame. I know that my sins are many and great, on account of which I am filled with fear. But I trust in Thy mercy, for it is unbounded...
...Hearken unto me, for my hope is in Thee; have mercy on me, who am full of misery and sin, Thou who wilt never cease to let flow the fountain of mercy. Hail, Thou saving Victim, offered for me and for all mankind on the tree of the cross...
Remember, O Lord, Thy creature, whom Thou hast redeemed with Thy Blood. I am grieved because I have sinned, I desire to make amends for what I have done. Take away from me therefore, O most merciful Father, all my iniquities and offences, that, being purified both in soul and body, I may worthily partake in the Holy of Holies...
...I purpose to partake, may be to me the full remission of my sins, the perfect cleansing of my offences, the means of driving away all evil thoughts and of renewing all holy desires, and the advancement of works pleasing to Thee...
Do you see how often this obviously holy man (remember, the crowd proclaimed him when he had no clue of wanting to leave a high career for the sanctified priesthood) emphasizes and repeatedly confesses and asks for help for his sins of thoughts????
If you ever wonder what holy people confess to God, that is what it is. Truly holy and sanctified people continue to "renew all holy desires" by acknowledging that all humans have foolish, evil and sinful thoughts. This is the genuine humility before God that ALL believers should have, which is the acknowledgment that even the holiest of people have, due to being broken vessel human beings, regardless of their level of faith, have to mindfully struggle against having even silly and mean or vain thoughts, say nothing of how profound a sin that thinking, even idly and fleetingly, thoughts about sinful matters are.
So, young people, and others, this is how you can see that no, we don't "lack evidence" of "what the church was like" and "what people believed" "back then" in "Biblical times." This lawyer/governor who became priest/bishop only a few hundred years after Christ left plenty of written evidence of his thoughts and what the people believed, and what they retained of their understanding of the Bible, both Old and New Testament. The notion that even idle, foolish and sinful thoughts are actual sins (as the Bible states) was a hot forefront belief several hundred years after Christ.
Thus, young people, and others, you now have a piece of your investigation, if you were doing so, that for certain in the four century that the knowledge that bad and foolish thoughts are sin was well known and frequently meditated about and prayed regarding, including DAILY by this Bishop of Milan, Ambrose.
Those of you new to studying the saints, let me explain that they were not tucked away in a corner. Ambrose, while he was living, was studied by many who would become great saints themselves. Further, while there was no email, ha, or post office, there was indeed snail mail and these people were all in correspondence. So if you continue your investigations you will see that a writing by a priest or bishop was never a "personal" so called "interpretation of scripture." This was the prevailing belief, kept intact from Old Testament times and the times of Jesus, that foolish and bad thoughts are indeed sins.
I hope that you have found this helpful both in further understanding what I have been reminding people about what the scriptures actually say, but also as you can see that you don't have to imagine and make stuff up, but you can look at written agenda-free evidence to deduce what people knew and believed, and how the word of God is preserved, and when parts of it started to fall out of public consciousness. Here we have filled in the blanks of several hundred years, knowing that the early Christians were keenly aware of what the Israelites knew and what those who followed Jesus knew, which is that God states that foolish, bad, mean and/or sinful thoughts are indeed actual sins, whether actual action follows or not.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Understanding God: advice and role models
In my previous post in the series “understanding God” I explained how the error of predestination is the result of misunderstanding the attribute of God’s all knowingness. I want to dovetail a related concept here, just to build upon this basis of understanding.
God is impossible to fully understand, not because he keeps part of himself secret, but because his vastness of “perspective” is genuinely unknowable. In fact, the more that the great religious minds have come to know God, the more they are in awe of all that is unknowable by the human mind, which is bounded by limitations of matter, energy and time. Saint Thomas Aquinas is the shining example of the saint who most used intellectual and logic capabilities to explain faith and through the centuries many have revered and studied him for precisely that reason. He is the one who has brought generation after generation to God through “the human mind.” Thomas Aquinas left volumes of writings, all based on faith and logic through reasoning, which are treasures today. Still, what was the thing that enraptured him so much that ultimately he stopped writing? It was the mystery of God in the Holy Mass, specifically in the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. The way that God reveals himself, physically and spiritually, in the Holy Mass, in all its mystery and simplicity was what gave Aquinas more understanding, and at the same time more awe of the mystery, than any intellectual progress in understanding God.
Before I continue on my main point, let me make an aside. Many people outside of the Catholic Church misunderstand why Catholics venerate the saints so much. There are two reasons, one of which is related to how we understand being part of their community, the “communion of saints,” even as they are already in heaven and we are still alive here on earth. The other reason that I want to explain to you is that the saints are teachers and role models, not just as examples of holiness and redemption, but also in the many varied ways that each of them grew in their understanding of God. There are many techniques, for lack of a better word, for individuals to better understand God and often one or two saints are role models that a person can relate to in their progress themselves toward understanding God. St. Thomas Aquinas has for centuries been the inspiration for those who desired or needed to approach their understanding of God through a rigorous path of logic and reasoning. He is one of the thirty-three Doctors of the Church. Yet in direct proportion to his logic, reasoning and intellectual approach to God, Aquinas also had an intense and mystical communion directly with God, one that yielded miraculous fruits. Thus one of his titles is “The Common Doctor,” for he leads the average person to reason their way to God, while another of his titles is “The Angelic Doctor,” for his mystical qualities are comparable to how the angels themselves know God. I cannot recommend St Thomas Aquinas highly enough, therefore, to modern generations for veneration and role modeling in emulating his intellectual approach, and being inspired by the divine gifts that he, in parallel, received.
In his prologue to his best known work, The Summa Theologica, he wrote: Since the teacher of Catholic truth must instruct not only the advanced but also the beginners, according to the word of St. Paul (1 Cor. 3:1-2), “as to little ones in Christ, I fed you with milk, not with solid food…” so that the purpose and intent of this work is to treat those things that pertain to the Christian religion in a manner suitable to the instruction of beginners…with confidence in the divine help, try to present the contents of sacred doctrine as briefly and clearly as the matter allows.
Father Rengers in his book “The 33 Doctors of the Church” comments that “St. Thomas, who fought fro and is remembered for his emphasis on the place of reason in theology, relied primarily on the guiding hand of divine love” and quotes St. Thomas, “Ardor precedes illumination, for a knowledge of truth is bestowed by the ardor of charity.”
Just as another aside, Shiite Muslims have a similar understanding of saints with Catholics, where they understand that saints are to be revered, but not worshipped, and that saints are the role models for not only their virtue but also their methods of learning about God and teaching accordingly.
Therefore, St. Thomas Aquinas, who has such an intellectual approach to teaching about God, role models and articulates two important things to bear in mind,. One is to always remember that “baby steps” are needed in understanding and teaching about God, not demonstrations of one’s supposed intellectual prowess and “sophistication” of thought. He critiques previous works as being too difficult and agenda driven for many to learn from, and that is a problem that moderns are especially vulnerable toward. Indeed there is an entire industry of very marginal people writing books about God and faith who have little if any solid factual education, particularly in Christianity, yet peddle to the public books filled with the most bizarre and arcane claptrap, presented as “lofty” and sophisticated “spiritual insight.” In contrast, the greatest “expert” in God in modern times, Thomas Aquinas, always built his writings on solid intellect and baby steps, ensuring that neither his doctrine nor the readership goes even one inch astray. When Aquinas taught he started with the basics, from truly the very beginning, such as why God created humans, and what are the attributes of heaven, not with sweeping declarations of his “personal revelation” and condescending “wisdom.” The true geniuses, especially those on the subject of God and faith, are always remarkably humble and allow only one step at a time on solid factual and theological foundation that is not of their own invention.
The second thing that Aquinas role models and articulates is that when writing about God, one cannot, no matter how intellectual, write from a perspective of no love. No one can accurately discuss or represent God if one does not have or actively aspire to having love of God. At the face of this, moderns might object that loving God presents then “bias” into written works about God, but on examination that is ridiculous. God is love and all of love comes from God. One cannot genuinely write about God, including in a strictly intellectual way, without having love of God, “ardor” as St Thomas calls it or at the very least is seeking to have love of God, acknowledging that as his or her objective in writing and study. To attempt to write about God without loving God as God exists (and not how you wish him to be) is like a chemist trying to write about chemistry but not believing in hydrogen, or a physician writing about the treatment of wounds and refusing to believe that bandages exist, or a home builder who seeks to build a shelter but refuses to believe there is such a thing as walls and a roof. Thus one cannot explain or study God without feeling love of God as he is, since ultimately the sum total of understanding God is understanding and feeling love of God. One can no more understand God without loving God than one can hope for rain in a drought yet not believe in water.
So to understand God one must take baby steps based on sound and factual basis of reasoning, but one must also have love of God in one’s heart as one’s motivation, even if that love is painfully imperfect at first. One other error that moderns make is the excessive focus on God, specifically in Jesus Christ, as some sort of symbol of unconditional “love,” a love that excuses sin, and is not actually directed toward genuine love of God or genuine, rather than self serving, loving charity of neighbor. If one reads the Gospels, yes, Jesus preaches a great deal about love and charity, but he also in equal measure dishes out a great deal of criticism and reminder of the penalty of failure and of a continually sinful and godless life, which will end in being burned as the chaff. Moderns, ever since the so-called hedonistic “Love Generation,” ignore the reality of what Jesus taught about God and instead portray Jesus as some sort of pastel colored ever forgiving and ever accepting love machine. In order to write intellectually honest and correct works about God, one must have genuine love of God as either one’s reality or one’s objective, and not an agenda driven self serving interpretation of the “endless boundaries” of God’s love.
For example, many of the saints loved to read about God and write about God. But there is a remarkable difference between their motivations and the motivations of many today. The saints loved to read about God because they loved God, not because they were trying to analyze, dissect and understand him with the intent of controlling his powers. For example, when one is truly in love one wants to know more about the object of one’s love because love creates the desire to know more and immerse one’s self in the loved one’s milieu. One should not, however, wish to read more and more about one’s loved one as a way to manipulate and control him or her. Thus one who is well balanced seeks to read about God because one loves God, or wishes to love God or love him even more, and not to wrest imaginary “secrets” out of God as a way to accomplish some sort of secondary agenda in one’s life.
Likewise the saints loved to write about God because, again, they loved God and wished to share their love of God with others. Similarly, many moderns also misunderstand and misuse their own motivations for writing about God. Far too many, especially in the so-called New Age arena, write about God in order to show off their supposed enlightenment and cash in on it. I’m not saying that one cannot charge money for a book, to earn a living or to at least break even in the cost of publication. What I am saying is that too many so called “spiritual” writers write about God or their New Age “spirit” as ways to self promote. They often proclaim their “humility” while at the same time puffing up their possession of spiritual “insight” and “gifts.” Thus you have New Age Hindus or Buddhists or whatever actually writing and marketing books about Jesus Christ, and then doing the “talk show circuit” as “spiritual experts.”
Think again about my example of the chemist who wants to write a chemistry book but does not believe in the existence of hydrogen. Would you want to read anything that he or she has to say? Would you want to conduct any of his or her experiments? I mean, go ahead, light up that cigarette since hydrogen does not exist, LOL. That would be irresponsible and crazy enough, to be a chemist who does not believe in the existence of hydrogen and teaches accordingly. However, imagine this. Suppose it is a biologist who writes that chemistry book and the biologist is both is not a chemist, but also does not believe in hydrogen! So that author would not even be an irresponsible expert; he or she would be an irresponsible non-expert, a uneducated intruder into the field of chemistry.
Now imagine that a biologist writes a book about chemistry where not only do they not believe in hydrogen, but they think that neon has been treated “unfairly” and does not get sufficient “attention,” and thus pushes a “neon agenda” throughout their chemistry book. “It’s not fair that neon is an inert gas,” the author thinks, and decides to insert neon into many equations and chemical reactions in the place of the actual element that occurs there. They do not believe in hydrogen, and they think that neo does not get enough attention. Thus they teach that the chemical formula for water, H2O, is actually Ne2O. Need some water? Smash some neon and oxygen together!
To understand God one must understand God the way God actually is, based on the facts of God’s interaction with the faithful and his inspired words on the subject, not on how someone wants God to be in order to enable their own agendas. The saints are the reliable way who show the genuine path to understanding and loving God, and that is why thousands of these role models exist. The saints have all come to God in a myriad of lifestyles and life experiences, so there’s a saint that resonates somewhere for anyone in any station of life. However, they all come together in one commonality, which is orthodox and reliable, faith and reasoning based understanding and love of God. None of them, no matter where they came from in life, “made up” out of their own minds their own theology and their own “interpretation” of God. They found their way on their own paths to the same God; they did not invent different Gods as the result of “going their own way.” I cannot believe how foolish people are today when some of them basically say they are finding the “right” God who “suits their needs.” I’m sorry, but there’s only one God, the powerfully eternally consistent one, who is waiting when your life is over and you are judged, and it’s not the “convenient” God who was “best suited to your lifestyle.” God is God and the same God, no matter what people are doing on earth, or even if this planet is blown to smithereens. God never changes and it does not matter one iota if you think that God is not “suitable to your present needs.”
To summarize, just as one learns how to drive a car from someone who knows how to drive, one can rely on studying one or more of the saints for ideas about how to better understand God and make him real in your life. Do not let “the blind lead the blind.” People used to read about and study the saints so that they would have ideas and role models about how to learn about God, not to follow the saints to the stake, LOL. Many saints were not martyrs and had even ordinary and non-dramatic lives, with the problems and challenges that all average people encounter in life.
Let me give an example of how that works best, and how that might be misunderstood. St. Paul has been through the centuries one of the most frequently role modeled of the saints, but there is a correct way to role model St. Paul and an incorrect way to role model St. Paul. Remember that Paul, when he was still Saul and a violent persecutor of Christians, was an ardent believer in God. Saul was extremely God fearing and very studious in his Jewish faith. It was this love of God that became extremist zealotry which motivated his erroneous persecution of Christians. In a way Saul was like the Pharisees who persecuted Jesus because obviously the Pharisees believed very much in God. So both Saul and the Pharisees were filled to overflowing with belief in God’s existence and in the tenets of their faith. In a way Saul was better than the Pharisees because he was not a hypocrite. Saul did not have the material and prestigious benefits of the wealth of the priesthood, for example; he was a tent maker. However, obviously Saul was worse off than those Pharisees who only argued with Jesus but who personally did not seek his death, leaving that to the other Pharisees. Saul did not argue with Christians; he sought to arrest them and have them killed. Then Saul was thrown from his horse on the way to Damascus by the light and the voice of the resurrected Christ, and he was converted.
Therefore St. Paul has been a role model for many generations of Christians who relate to several aspects of his life: his belief in God but disbelief in Jesus, his dramatic conversion rather than one based on gradual study, his transformation from a destroyer of a faith to a planter of churches, and his suffering for the faith through many trials and pains after his conversion to Christianity. However, I have noticed that St. Paul has been somewhat popular as a modern role model for those who did not believe in God at all. I’m not saying that such moderns are not welcome to use St. Paul as a role model, far from it, I welcome it. But I need to point out that an important aspect of understanding St. Paul is that he always was a God fearing pious believer. The resurrected Christ’s confrontation with him did not prove to Saul that God existed, since Saul always believed that, but was irrefutable proof of the identity of Jesus Christ as specifically the Savior and the Messiah. Moderns who do not believe in God but seek him through St. Paul’s role modeling tend to make one mistake accordingly. Moderns who do not believe in God and role model themselves after St. Paul tend to maintain an inner weakness toward disbelief and pagan practices. This is because St. Paul does not offer in his own life a refuting of total disbelief or of pagan superstitions because he himself had no need of that witness and testimony in his own life, since he always believed in God.
Thus selection of a “role model” saint is very important to proper faith formation. People who have no belief in God or cultist pagan New Age temptations are often better off emulating saints who grew up in pagan households who then converted. They can surely, and should, venerate and honor St. Paul studying, as all aspiring and actual Christians should, his life and his writings. But for moral support and for approaching God through the proven path that is most near one’s own actual situation in life, one should look at the other saints for guidance and both moral and intellectual support. For example St Justin Martyr is one of the best known and helpful of the saints to those who come from a disbelieving, pagan, or excessively secularized pseudo-intellectual background. Justin Martyr lived circa 100-165 and was of a very educated pagan family. As a pagan teacher of philosophy, rhetoric, history and poetry he was inspired by an old man who had met to study Christian Scripture. He became a Christian at the age of thirty, debated with pagan philosophers, and opened a school of philosophy. Justin Martyr was raised as a child, became an intellectual, a teacher and ultimately converted when paganism was by far the majority, and Christianity was the radical, persecuted minority. Thus someone with a very godless background, especially one that was intellectual, can especially relate to Justin Martyr and his existing writings.
For many generations Christian men, whose vocation was to have an average married life with children looked to St. Joseph, spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary and stepfather to Jesus, for their path and inspiration, even though Joseph authored no testimonies or sacred literature. During the generations where many did not read or write, who were poor, and who attempted only to do the best they could for their families, the deeds of St. Joseph, his obedience to God, and his love of Jesus were all the inspiration that they needed. They read about the Apostles, studied the Bible and their catechism, but they simply loved St. Joseph. I still remember the time when millions of men looked to St. Joseph for their support and strength, finding God through St. Joseph’s humble and unique example. Oddly we live in times where people buy St. Joseph statues and bury them in the ground upside down so that they can have “better luck” in selling their real estate properties. Maybe that has not been the right approach to God, no? St. Joseph is often forgotten except as a pagan practice to shill someone’s real estate. How sadly the times have changed. As St. Joseph has fallen away as a role model for the average Christian man, we have a real estate crisis (where his statue was used for pagan purposes, not totally a coincidence) plus we have the epidemic of stepfathers and “boyfriends of the mother” brutalizing and killing infants. A generation of humans is very much like the saints that they emulate, and, to their detriment, the saints that they ignore or defy in role modeling. I can think of no more stark example, except for the degrading of God himself, of the downfall of an entire category of humans (men) and their falling away from the best human role model they ever had, St. Joseph, spouse of Mary and step father to Jesus.
Thus to better understand God it is obvious that hundreds and indeed thousands of saints who have already found their way there can and must provide role modeling and example setting to people from a full diversity of life experience and perspective.
Further, one does not better understand God by omitting one’s God given intellect and believing any baloney that anyone makes up and sells to you, including your own self delusion. Far from abandoning reason and intellect, Christianity, Islam and Judaism are rich in the opportunities to use your brain, not put it in mothballs (or some other chemicals).
Additionally, love of God, even if it is unknown to you or painfully incomplete, must be your motivation for seeking to understand God. Motivations other than love of God all lead to truncated, misleading or dead ends and great error in interpretation. Likewise, however, the love of God must be understood correctly, and not as human labeling of weakness or hedonism as being justified by some open ended sloppy agenda based philosophy of supposed “love.” God’s love is infinitely strong and infinitely pure, and one cannot understand God if one has an unwillingness to understand that. God is both understanding and forgiving, but one must also remember that God’s purity of love is never compromised. Thus that which is stained and full of sin, no matter how much God “loves all his children,” cannot enter heaven.
The many paths to finding the one true God as demonstrated by the thousands of saints, both famous and mostly unknown, demonstrates again that God wishes all to find him, and does not “predestine” anyone to heaven or hell. Like evolution and natural selection has developed many thousands of species of birds in nature, for example, each person finds the same God in their own heart and soul through various paths. What is important to remember is, however, that the paths are all real and grounded on actuality, not self invented delusion. The saints demonstrate that people can and do come to God in various directions at various times in their lives: some were child saints, holy at even a small age, while others became saints late in life after much error and sinfulness. Obviously if people were “predestined” God would not have allowed such many examples of those who individually find sanctity and role model to others. Just to close this topic, here is the statement of the Catholic Church doctrine regarding predestination:
1037. God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of the faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:
Father, accept this offering
From your whole family
Grant us your peace in this life,
Save us from final damnation,
And count us among those you have chosen.
God is impossible to fully understand, not because he keeps part of himself secret, but because his vastness of “perspective” is genuinely unknowable. In fact, the more that the great religious minds have come to know God, the more they are in awe of all that is unknowable by the human mind, which is bounded by limitations of matter, energy and time. Saint Thomas Aquinas is the shining example of the saint who most used intellectual and logic capabilities to explain faith and through the centuries many have revered and studied him for precisely that reason. He is the one who has brought generation after generation to God through “the human mind.” Thomas Aquinas left volumes of writings, all based on faith and logic through reasoning, which are treasures today. Still, what was the thing that enraptured him so much that ultimately he stopped writing? It was the mystery of God in the Holy Mass, specifically in the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. The way that God reveals himself, physically and spiritually, in the Holy Mass, in all its mystery and simplicity was what gave Aquinas more understanding, and at the same time more awe of the mystery, than any intellectual progress in understanding God.
Before I continue on my main point, let me make an aside. Many people outside of the Catholic Church misunderstand why Catholics venerate the saints so much. There are two reasons, one of which is related to how we understand being part of their community, the “communion of saints,” even as they are already in heaven and we are still alive here on earth. The other reason that I want to explain to you is that the saints are teachers and role models, not just as examples of holiness and redemption, but also in the many varied ways that each of them grew in their understanding of God. There are many techniques, for lack of a better word, for individuals to better understand God and often one or two saints are role models that a person can relate to in their progress themselves toward understanding God. St. Thomas Aquinas has for centuries been the inspiration for those who desired or needed to approach their understanding of God through a rigorous path of logic and reasoning. He is one of the thirty-three Doctors of the Church. Yet in direct proportion to his logic, reasoning and intellectual approach to God, Aquinas also had an intense and mystical communion directly with God, one that yielded miraculous fruits. Thus one of his titles is “The Common Doctor,” for he leads the average person to reason their way to God, while another of his titles is “The Angelic Doctor,” for his mystical qualities are comparable to how the angels themselves know God. I cannot recommend St Thomas Aquinas highly enough, therefore, to modern generations for veneration and role modeling in emulating his intellectual approach, and being inspired by the divine gifts that he, in parallel, received.
In his prologue to his best known work, The Summa Theologica, he wrote: Since the teacher of Catholic truth must instruct not only the advanced but also the beginners, according to the word of St. Paul (1 Cor. 3:1-2), “as to little ones in Christ, I fed you with milk, not with solid food…” so that the purpose and intent of this work is to treat those things that pertain to the Christian religion in a manner suitable to the instruction of beginners…with confidence in the divine help, try to present the contents of sacred doctrine as briefly and clearly as the matter allows.
Father Rengers in his book “The 33 Doctors of the Church” comments that “St. Thomas, who fought fro and is remembered for his emphasis on the place of reason in theology, relied primarily on the guiding hand of divine love” and quotes St. Thomas, “Ardor precedes illumination, for a knowledge of truth is bestowed by the ardor of charity.”
Just as another aside, Shiite Muslims have a similar understanding of saints with Catholics, where they understand that saints are to be revered, but not worshipped, and that saints are the role models for not only their virtue but also their methods of learning about God and teaching accordingly.
Therefore, St. Thomas Aquinas, who has such an intellectual approach to teaching about God, role models and articulates two important things to bear in mind,. One is to always remember that “baby steps” are needed in understanding and teaching about God, not demonstrations of one’s supposed intellectual prowess and “sophistication” of thought. He critiques previous works as being too difficult and agenda driven for many to learn from, and that is a problem that moderns are especially vulnerable toward. Indeed there is an entire industry of very marginal people writing books about God and faith who have little if any solid factual education, particularly in Christianity, yet peddle to the public books filled with the most bizarre and arcane claptrap, presented as “lofty” and sophisticated “spiritual insight.” In contrast, the greatest “expert” in God in modern times, Thomas Aquinas, always built his writings on solid intellect and baby steps, ensuring that neither his doctrine nor the readership goes even one inch astray. When Aquinas taught he started with the basics, from truly the very beginning, such as why God created humans, and what are the attributes of heaven, not with sweeping declarations of his “personal revelation” and condescending “wisdom.” The true geniuses, especially those on the subject of God and faith, are always remarkably humble and allow only one step at a time on solid factual and theological foundation that is not of their own invention.
The second thing that Aquinas role models and articulates is that when writing about God, one cannot, no matter how intellectual, write from a perspective of no love. No one can accurately discuss or represent God if one does not have or actively aspire to having love of God. At the face of this, moderns might object that loving God presents then “bias” into written works about God, but on examination that is ridiculous. God is love and all of love comes from God. One cannot genuinely write about God, including in a strictly intellectual way, without having love of God, “ardor” as St Thomas calls it or at the very least is seeking to have love of God, acknowledging that as his or her objective in writing and study. To attempt to write about God without loving God as God exists (and not how you wish him to be) is like a chemist trying to write about chemistry but not believing in hydrogen, or a physician writing about the treatment of wounds and refusing to believe that bandages exist, or a home builder who seeks to build a shelter but refuses to believe there is such a thing as walls and a roof. Thus one cannot explain or study God without feeling love of God as he is, since ultimately the sum total of understanding God is understanding and feeling love of God. One can no more understand God without loving God than one can hope for rain in a drought yet not believe in water.
So to understand God one must take baby steps based on sound and factual basis of reasoning, but one must also have love of God in one’s heart as one’s motivation, even if that love is painfully imperfect at first. One other error that moderns make is the excessive focus on God, specifically in Jesus Christ, as some sort of symbol of unconditional “love,” a love that excuses sin, and is not actually directed toward genuine love of God or genuine, rather than self serving, loving charity of neighbor. If one reads the Gospels, yes, Jesus preaches a great deal about love and charity, but he also in equal measure dishes out a great deal of criticism and reminder of the penalty of failure and of a continually sinful and godless life, which will end in being burned as the chaff. Moderns, ever since the so-called hedonistic “Love Generation,” ignore the reality of what Jesus taught about God and instead portray Jesus as some sort of pastel colored ever forgiving and ever accepting love machine. In order to write intellectually honest and correct works about God, one must have genuine love of God as either one’s reality or one’s objective, and not an agenda driven self serving interpretation of the “endless boundaries” of God’s love.
For example, many of the saints loved to read about God and write about God. But there is a remarkable difference between their motivations and the motivations of many today. The saints loved to read about God because they loved God, not because they were trying to analyze, dissect and understand him with the intent of controlling his powers. For example, when one is truly in love one wants to know more about the object of one’s love because love creates the desire to know more and immerse one’s self in the loved one’s milieu. One should not, however, wish to read more and more about one’s loved one as a way to manipulate and control him or her. Thus one who is well balanced seeks to read about God because one loves God, or wishes to love God or love him even more, and not to wrest imaginary “secrets” out of God as a way to accomplish some sort of secondary agenda in one’s life.
Likewise the saints loved to write about God because, again, they loved God and wished to share their love of God with others. Similarly, many moderns also misunderstand and misuse their own motivations for writing about God. Far too many, especially in the so-called New Age arena, write about God in order to show off their supposed enlightenment and cash in on it. I’m not saying that one cannot charge money for a book, to earn a living or to at least break even in the cost of publication. What I am saying is that too many so called “spiritual” writers write about God or their New Age “spirit” as ways to self promote. They often proclaim their “humility” while at the same time puffing up their possession of spiritual “insight” and “gifts.” Thus you have New Age Hindus or Buddhists or whatever actually writing and marketing books about Jesus Christ, and then doing the “talk show circuit” as “spiritual experts.”
Think again about my example of the chemist who wants to write a chemistry book but does not believe in the existence of hydrogen. Would you want to read anything that he or she has to say? Would you want to conduct any of his or her experiments? I mean, go ahead, light up that cigarette since hydrogen does not exist, LOL. That would be irresponsible and crazy enough, to be a chemist who does not believe in the existence of hydrogen and teaches accordingly. However, imagine this. Suppose it is a biologist who writes that chemistry book and the biologist is both is not a chemist, but also does not believe in hydrogen! So that author would not even be an irresponsible expert; he or she would be an irresponsible non-expert, a uneducated intruder into the field of chemistry.
Now imagine that a biologist writes a book about chemistry where not only do they not believe in hydrogen, but they think that neon has been treated “unfairly” and does not get sufficient “attention,” and thus pushes a “neon agenda” throughout their chemistry book. “It’s not fair that neon is an inert gas,” the author thinks, and decides to insert neon into many equations and chemical reactions in the place of the actual element that occurs there. They do not believe in hydrogen, and they think that neo does not get enough attention. Thus they teach that the chemical formula for water, H2O, is actually Ne2O. Need some water? Smash some neon and oxygen together!
To understand God one must understand God the way God actually is, based on the facts of God’s interaction with the faithful and his inspired words on the subject, not on how someone wants God to be in order to enable their own agendas. The saints are the reliable way who show the genuine path to understanding and loving God, and that is why thousands of these role models exist. The saints have all come to God in a myriad of lifestyles and life experiences, so there’s a saint that resonates somewhere for anyone in any station of life. However, they all come together in one commonality, which is orthodox and reliable, faith and reasoning based understanding and love of God. None of them, no matter where they came from in life, “made up” out of their own minds their own theology and their own “interpretation” of God. They found their way on their own paths to the same God; they did not invent different Gods as the result of “going their own way.” I cannot believe how foolish people are today when some of them basically say they are finding the “right” God who “suits their needs.” I’m sorry, but there’s only one God, the powerfully eternally consistent one, who is waiting when your life is over and you are judged, and it’s not the “convenient” God who was “best suited to your lifestyle.” God is God and the same God, no matter what people are doing on earth, or even if this planet is blown to smithereens. God never changes and it does not matter one iota if you think that God is not “suitable to your present needs.”
To summarize, just as one learns how to drive a car from someone who knows how to drive, one can rely on studying one or more of the saints for ideas about how to better understand God and make him real in your life. Do not let “the blind lead the blind.” People used to read about and study the saints so that they would have ideas and role models about how to learn about God, not to follow the saints to the stake, LOL. Many saints were not martyrs and had even ordinary and non-dramatic lives, with the problems and challenges that all average people encounter in life.
Let me give an example of how that works best, and how that might be misunderstood. St. Paul has been through the centuries one of the most frequently role modeled of the saints, but there is a correct way to role model St. Paul and an incorrect way to role model St. Paul. Remember that Paul, when he was still Saul and a violent persecutor of Christians, was an ardent believer in God. Saul was extremely God fearing and very studious in his Jewish faith. It was this love of God that became extremist zealotry which motivated his erroneous persecution of Christians. In a way Saul was like the Pharisees who persecuted Jesus because obviously the Pharisees believed very much in God. So both Saul and the Pharisees were filled to overflowing with belief in God’s existence and in the tenets of their faith. In a way Saul was better than the Pharisees because he was not a hypocrite. Saul did not have the material and prestigious benefits of the wealth of the priesthood, for example; he was a tent maker. However, obviously Saul was worse off than those Pharisees who only argued with Jesus but who personally did not seek his death, leaving that to the other Pharisees. Saul did not argue with Christians; he sought to arrest them and have them killed. Then Saul was thrown from his horse on the way to Damascus by the light and the voice of the resurrected Christ, and he was converted.
Therefore St. Paul has been a role model for many generations of Christians who relate to several aspects of his life: his belief in God but disbelief in Jesus, his dramatic conversion rather than one based on gradual study, his transformation from a destroyer of a faith to a planter of churches, and his suffering for the faith through many trials and pains after his conversion to Christianity. However, I have noticed that St. Paul has been somewhat popular as a modern role model for those who did not believe in God at all. I’m not saying that such moderns are not welcome to use St. Paul as a role model, far from it, I welcome it. But I need to point out that an important aspect of understanding St. Paul is that he always was a God fearing pious believer. The resurrected Christ’s confrontation with him did not prove to Saul that God existed, since Saul always believed that, but was irrefutable proof of the identity of Jesus Christ as specifically the Savior and the Messiah. Moderns who do not believe in God but seek him through St. Paul’s role modeling tend to make one mistake accordingly. Moderns who do not believe in God and role model themselves after St. Paul tend to maintain an inner weakness toward disbelief and pagan practices. This is because St. Paul does not offer in his own life a refuting of total disbelief or of pagan superstitions because he himself had no need of that witness and testimony in his own life, since he always believed in God.
Thus selection of a “role model” saint is very important to proper faith formation. People who have no belief in God or cultist pagan New Age temptations are often better off emulating saints who grew up in pagan households who then converted. They can surely, and should, venerate and honor St. Paul studying, as all aspiring and actual Christians should, his life and his writings. But for moral support and for approaching God through the proven path that is most near one’s own actual situation in life, one should look at the other saints for guidance and both moral and intellectual support. For example St Justin Martyr is one of the best known and helpful of the saints to those who come from a disbelieving, pagan, or excessively secularized pseudo-intellectual background. Justin Martyr lived circa 100-165 and was of a very educated pagan family. As a pagan teacher of philosophy, rhetoric, history and poetry he was inspired by an old man who had met to study Christian Scripture. He became a Christian at the age of thirty, debated with pagan philosophers, and opened a school of philosophy. Justin Martyr was raised as a child, became an intellectual, a teacher and ultimately converted when paganism was by far the majority, and Christianity was the radical, persecuted minority. Thus someone with a very godless background, especially one that was intellectual, can especially relate to Justin Martyr and his existing writings.
For many generations Christian men, whose vocation was to have an average married life with children looked to St. Joseph, spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary and stepfather to Jesus, for their path and inspiration, even though Joseph authored no testimonies or sacred literature. During the generations where many did not read or write, who were poor, and who attempted only to do the best they could for their families, the deeds of St. Joseph, his obedience to God, and his love of Jesus were all the inspiration that they needed. They read about the Apostles, studied the Bible and their catechism, but they simply loved St. Joseph. I still remember the time when millions of men looked to St. Joseph for their support and strength, finding God through St. Joseph’s humble and unique example. Oddly we live in times where people buy St. Joseph statues and bury them in the ground upside down so that they can have “better luck” in selling their real estate properties. Maybe that has not been the right approach to God, no? St. Joseph is often forgotten except as a pagan practice to shill someone’s real estate. How sadly the times have changed. As St. Joseph has fallen away as a role model for the average Christian man, we have a real estate crisis (where his statue was used for pagan purposes, not totally a coincidence) plus we have the epidemic of stepfathers and “boyfriends of the mother” brutalizing and killing infants. A generation of humans is very much like the saints that they emulate, and, to their detriment, the saints that they ignore or defy in role modeling. I can think of no more stark example, except for the degrading of God himself, of the downfall of an entire category of humans (men) and their falling away from the best human role model they ever had, St. Joseph, spouse of Mary and step father to Jesus.
Thus to better understand God it is obvious that hundreds and indeed thousands of saints who have already found their way there can and must provide role modeling and example setting to people from a full diversity of life experience and perspective.
Further, one does not better understand God by omitting one’s God given intellect and believing any baloney that anyone makes up and sells to you, including your own self delusion. Far from abandoning reason and intellect, Christianity, Islam and Judaism are rich in the opportunities to use your brain, not put it in mothballs (or some other chemicals).
Additionally, love of God, even if it is unknown to you or painfully incomplete, must be your motivation for seeking to understand God. Motivations other than love of God all lead to truncated, misleading or dead ends and great error in interpretation. Likewise, however, the love of God must be understood correctly, and not as human labeling of weakness or hedonism as being justified by some open ended sloppy agenda based philosophy of supposed “love.” God’s love is infinitely strong and infinitely pure, and one cannot understand God if one has an unwillingness to understand that. God is both understanding and forgiving, but one must also remember that God’s purity of love is never compromised. Thus that which is stained and full of sin, no matter how much God “loves all his children,” cannot enter heaven.
The many paths to finding the one true God as demonstrated by the thousands of saints, both famous and mostly unknown, demonstrates again that God wishes all to find him, and does not “predestine” anyone to heaven or hell. Like evolution and natural selection has developed many thousands of species of birds in nature, for example, each person finds the same God in their own heart and soul through various paths. What is important to remember is, however, that the paths are all real and grounded on actuality, not self invented delusion. The saints demonstrate that people can and do come to God in various directions at various times in their lives: some were child saints, holy at even a small age, while others became saints late in life after much error and sinfulness. Obviously if people were “predestined” God would not have allowed such many examples of those who individually find sanctity and role model to others. Just to close this topic, here is the statement of the Catholic Church doctrine regarding predestination:
1037. God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of the faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:
Father, accept this offering
From your whole family
Grant us your peace in this life,
Save us from final damnation,
And count us among those you have chosen.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
The Nativity of Jesus brought great danger
Even in the time of joy of Advent, with the anticipation of the birth of Jesus Christ, and the wonder and glory of the actual Nativity, one must keep a very important grim reality in mind, if one is to truly understand God, the gift of Jesus Christ, and humans’ own behavior.
The best way to do this is to recall the following while celebrating Christmas. While the faithful celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ over at least a long weekend, most likely a week, and of course many celebrate throughout the month or more, the actual Infant Jesus and the Holy Family, Joseph and Mary, barely had a day to celebrate his birth. One might assume that I mean the temporary lodging in the stable and the poverty of the Lord’s birth, but no that is not what I mean.
Matthew 2:1-3, 7-8, 11-13, 16
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of King Herod, behold, Magi came from the East to Jerusalem, saying, “Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the East and have come to worship him.” But when King Herod heard this, he was troubled, and so was all Jerusalem [comment: meaning the powerful in his court and among the priests] with him.
Then Herod summoned the Magi secretly, and carefully ascertained from them the time when the star had appeared to them. And sending them to Bethlehem, he said, “Go and make careful inquiry concerning the child, and when you have found him, bring me word, that I too may go and worship him.”
And entering the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and falling down they worshipped him… And being warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they went back to their country by another way. But when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph, saying, “Arise, and take the child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and remain there until I tell thee. For Herod will seek the child to destroy him.”
Then Herod, seeing that he had been tricked by the Magi, was exceedingly angry; and he sent and slew all the boys in Bethlehem and all its neighborhood who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had carefully ascertained from the Magi.
Then was fulfilled what was spoken through Jeremiahs the prophet, A voice was heard in Rama, weeping and loud lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be comforted, because they are no more.
Yes, within mere days of the birth of Jesus, angels warned both the Magi, who had innocently given Herod the news of the Savior’s birth, and Joseph to flee for Herod planned to kill Jesus. So much faster than we have our tree, our gifts, and our dinner, the Holy Family had to run to save the life of the newborn Jesus.
What is worse, Herod had no way of knowing that the angels had warned the Magi and Joseph, so when he got no further information from the Magi, he decided to have killed every innocent baby who MIGHT be Jesus. Thus he had all infant boys under the age of two in two villages cruelly slain by sword. Imagine the innocent families who had no knowledge of anything having soldiers storm into their village, declaring war on their baby boys and spitting them on swords right in front of the mothers.
Because Herod had no way of knowing that the Holy Family had been warned by angels and fled, he did not pursue them, thinking they were still in the region. Thus those baby infants were the first martyrs of the Church, and are honored three days after the Nativity of Jesus Christ, on December 28. Herod in his deep and dark evil killed every little baby boy who “might” have been Jesus, and thus never thought to mount a pursuit of the Holy Family (since he knew not who they were but yes, think about it, his agents could have found out). But he thought he “took care of the problem” by slaughtering every little baby boy in those two villages under the age of two.
Imagine being Joseph and Mary. Many focus on the Holy Family being away from their home when Jesus was born, and being poor having to be in the stable. But mere days after the birth of Jesus they were fleeing the soldiers of King Herod who came with slaughtering swords, so at Christmas one must also remember the dire peril they were in, and the sacrifice of the innocent babies, who distracted Herod and thus saved Jesus from pursuit.
One cannot really understand the gift of Jesus from God without understanding this slaughter at the mere rumor of his arrival. This is something older children, and most certainly adults, must understand and remember in order to truly appreciate the risk and the grace of the gift of the Infant Jesus to a world ensnared by the most wicked of sin.
From Christian Prayer, the Liturgy of the Holy Hours:
December 28
Holy Innocents, Martyrs
Come let us worship the newborn Christ who crowns with joy these children who died for him.
Clothed in white robes, they will walk with me, says the Lord, for they are worthy.
These children cry out their praises to the Lord; by their death they have proclaimed what they could not preach with their infant voices.
From the mouths of children and babies at the breast you have found praise to foil your enemies.
The just are the friends of God.
They live with him forever.
-The just are the friends of God.
They live with him forever.
God himself is their reward.
-They live with him for ever.
Glory to the Father…
-The just are…
At the king’s command these innocent babies and little children were put to death; they died for Christ, and now in the glory of heaven as they follow him, the sinless Lamb, they sing for ever. Glory to you O Lord.
…The Holy Innocents gave witness not by words but by their life’s blood,
-give us strength to be your witnesses before men, both by words and by actions.
They were not ready for battle but you made them fit to win the palm of victory,
-now that we are prepared for victory, do not let us despair.
…You rewarded the child martyrs with the first share in your kingdom,
-do not let us be cast out from the unending heavenly banquet.
You knew persecution and exile as a child,
-protect all children whose lives are in danger from famine, war and disasters.
Our Father…
You see, Catholics do not worship the infant martyrs, but they remember them, 2000 years after they, through no choice of their own, were slaughtered as the first martyrs. We also allow ourselves to imagine their joy and reward from God, as they would have been the "first" into heaven to learn of the arrival of the Messiah and their role.
Understanding the Holy Innocents, Martyrs helps you to understand the Catholic attitude toward saints. They honor and revere with great solemnity the reality that the Infant Jesus had to flee with his family mere days after birth to save his life, a life that was put at risk by naive Wise Men with enthusiastic and worshipful big mouths. Honoring these little baby saints reminds us all that martyrdom at the hands of evil humans accompanies the arrival of good. This is one reason the Catholic Church often references the blood of martyrs, not because they are gory or wishing for such a fate, which is so obviously unjust. The newborn Jesus' life was preserved as innocents were slaughtered by their own people sent by their own King and his evil insecurity.
December 28 is a very important day to me, it always has been, for this reason, to honor the Holy Innocents and their grieving families, and to explain to people to recall that the gift by God of Jesus to humanity was not just someone who “understood poverty,” but whose very life was at risk at the hands of the very people he came to save. This, incidentally, is why fictionalized ex-Bible accounts of the boy Jesus performing miracles is not true; after the slaughter of the Holy Innocents it is not as though the Holy Family exactly proclaimed any miracle working of Jesus and thus might draw down not only on themselves but others another slaughter such as had taken place days after his birth.
Many wish that the spirituality of Christmas could be enhanced. Well, a first step is learning the facts that Jesus had less time in the manger than the average family has a long weekend of Christmas celebration, before he had to flee, and the Holy Innocents became the first martyrs even before one word was preached, and John the Baptist would have been only six months old himself.
I hope that you have found this helpful.
The best way to do this is to recall the following while celebrating Christmas. While the faithful celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ over at least a long weekend, most likely a week, and of course many celebrate throughout the month or more, the actual Infant Jesus and the Holy Family, Joseph and Mary, barely had a day to celebrate his birth. One might assume that I mean the temporary lodging in the stable and the poverty of the Lord’s birth, but no that is not what I mean.
Matthew 2:1-3, 7-8, 11-13, 16
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of King Herod, behold, Magi came from the East to Jerusalem, saying, “Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the East and have come to worship him.” But when King Herod heard this, he was troubled, and so was all Jerusalem [comment: meaning the powerful in his court and among the priests] with him.
Then Herod summoned the Magi secretly, and carefully ascertained from them the time when the star had appeared to them. And sending them to Bethlehem, he said, “Go and make careful inquiry concerning the child, and when you have found him, bring me word, that I too may go and worship him.”
And entering the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and falling down they worshipped him… And being warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they went back to their country by another way. But when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph, saying, “Arise, and take the child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and remain there until I tell thee. For Herod will seek the child to destroy him.”
Then Herod, seeing that he had been tricked by the Magi, was exceedingly angry; and he sent and slew all the boys in Bethlehem and all its neighborhood who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had carefully ascertained from the Magi.
Then was fulfilled what was spoken through Jeremiahs the prophet, A voice was heard in Rama, weeping and loud lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be comforted, because they are no more.
Yes, within mere days of the birth of Jesus, angels warned both the Magi, who had innocently given Herod the news of the Savior’s birth, and Joseph to flee for Herod planned to kill Jesus. So much faster than we have our tree, our gifts, and our dinner, the Holy Family had to run to save the life of the newborn Jesus.
What is worse, Herod had no way of knowing that the angels had warned the Magi and Joseph, so when he got no further information from the Magi, he decided to have killed every innocent baby who MIGHT be Jesus. Thus he had all infant boys under the age of two in two villages cruelly slain by sword. Imagine the innocent families who had no knowledge of anything having soldiers storm into their village, declaring war on their baby boys and spitting them on swords right in front of the mothers.
Because Herod had no way of knowing that the Holy Family had been warned by angels and fled, he did not pursue them, thinking they were still in the region. Thus those baby infants were the first martyrs of the Church, and are honored three days after the Nativity of Jesus Christ, on December 28. Herod in his deep and dark evil killed every little baby boy who “might” have been Jesus, and thus never thought to mount a pursuit of the Holy Family (since he knew not who they were but yes, think about it, his agents could have found out). But he thought he “took care of the problem” by slaughtering every little baby boy in those two villages under the age of two.
Imagine being Joseph and Mary. Many focus on the Holy Family being away from their home when Jesus was born, and being poor having to be in the stable. But mere days after the birth of Jesus they were fleeing the soldiers of King Herod who came with slaughtering swords, so at Christmas one must also remember the dire peril they were in, and the sacrifice of the innocent babies, who distracted Herod and thus saved Jesus from pursuit.
One cannot really understand the gift of Jesus from God without understanding this slaughter at the mere rumor of his arrival. This is something older children, and most certainly adults, must understand and remember in order to truly appreciate the risk and the grace of the gift of the Infant Jesus to a world ensnared by the most wicked of sin.
From Christian Prayer, the Liturgy of the Holy Hours:
December 28
Holy Innocents, Martyrs
Come let us worship the newborn Christ who crowns with joy these children who died for him.
Clothed in white robes, they will walk with me, says the Lord, for they are worthy.
These children cry out their praises to the Lord; by their death they have proclaimed what they could not preach with their infant voices.
From the mouths of children and babies at the breast you have found praise to foil your enemies.
The just are the friends of God.
They live with him forever.
-The just are the friends of God.
They live with him forever.
God himself is their reward.
-They live with him for ever.
Glory to the Father…
-The just are…
At the king’s command these innocent babies and little children were put to death; they died for Christ, and now in the glory of heaven as they follow him, the sinless Lamb, they sing for ever. Glory to you O Lord.
…The Holy Innocents gave witness not by words but by their life’s blood,
-give us strength to be your witnesses before men, both by words and by actions.
They were not ready for battle but you made them fit to win the palm of victory,
-now that we are prepared for victory, do not let us despair.
…You rewarded the child martyrs with the first share in your kingdom,
-do not let us be cast out from the unending heavenly banquet.
You knew persecution and exile as a child,
-protect all children whose lives are in danger from famine, war and disasters.
Our Father…
You see, Catholics do not worship the infant martyrs, but they remember them, 2000 years after they, through no choice of their own, were slaughtered as the first martyrs. We also allow ourselves to imagine their joy and reward from God, as they would have been the "first" into heaven to learn of the arrival of the Messiah and their role.
Understanding the Holy Innocents, Martyrs helps you to understand the Catholic attitude toward saints. They honor and revere with great solemnity the reality that the Infant Jesus had to flee with his family mere days after birth to save his life, a life that was put at risk by naive Wise Men with enthusiastic and worshipful big mouths. Honoring these little baby saints reminds us all that martyrdom at the hands of evil humans accompanies the arrival of good. This is one reason the Catholic Church often references the blood of martyrs, not because they are gory or wishing for such a fate, which is so obviously unjust. The newborn Jesus' life was preserved as innocents were slaughtered by their own people sent by their own King and his evil insecurity.
December 28 is a very important day to me, it always has been, for this reason, to honor the Holy Innocents and their grieving families, and to explain to people to recall that the gift by God of Jesus to humanity was not just someone who “understood poverty,” but whose very life was at risk at the hands of the very people he came to save. This, incidentally, is why fictionalized ex-Bible accounts of the boy Jesus performing miracles is not true; after the slaughter of the Holy Innocents it is not as though the Holy Family exactly proclaimed any miracle working of Jesus and thus might draw down not only on themselves but others another slaughter such as had taken place days after his birth.
Many wish that the spirituality of Christmas could be enhanced. Well, a first step is learning the facts that Jesus had less time in the manger than the average family has a long weekend of Christmas celebration, before he had to flee, and the Holy Innocents became the first martyrs even before one word was preached, and John the Baptist would have been only six months old himself.
I hope that you have found this helpful.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Profile of a lesser known saint
From "Dictionary of Saints" by John J. Delaney, Doubleday.
Vici, Blessed Antony (1381-1461)
Of religious parents, he was born at Stroncone, Italy
became a Franciscan lay brother when twelve,
and despite ill health remained religious the rest of his life.
He was deputy master of novices
under B. Thomas of Florence at Fiesole
when he was twenty-six, and in 1421 he
accompanied Thomas on a papal mission to suppress
the heretical Fraticelli in Siena and Sicily,
a mission that lasted ten years.
In 1431, Bl. Antony retired to the friary
of the Carceri near Assisi and spent
the next thirty years there living in great austerity.
He was sent to St. Damian Friary in Assisi
in 1460 and died there on February 8.
Numerous miracles by him were recorded
after his death, and his cult was
confirmed in 1687. He is known as
Bl. Antony of Stroncone.
(February 7)
Vici, Blessed Antony (1381-1461)
Of religious parents, he was born at Stroncone, Italy
became a Franciscan lay brother when twelve,
and despite ill health remained religious the rest of his life.
He was deputy master of novices
under B. Thomas of Florence at Fiesole
when he was twenty-six, and in 1421 he
accompanied Thomas on a papal mission to suppress
the heretical Fraticelli in Siena and Sicily,
a mission that lasted ten years.
In 1431, Bl. Antony retired to the friary
of the Carceri near Assisi and spent
the next thirty years there living in great austerity.
He was sent to St. Damian Friary in Assisi
in 1460 and died there on February 8.
Numerous miracles by him were recorded
after his death, and his cult was
confirmed in 1687. He is known as
Bl. Antony of Stroncone.
(February 7)
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Interesting St. Augustine sermon quote re belief
Still researching my original topic. Anyway, I wanted to share this quote from the great St. Augustine (354-430) from one of his sermons. I want to use it as a way to illustrate some of the faith and reason interpretive skills I've been teaching. He said:
The Church is spread throughout the whole world: all nations have the Church. Let no one deceive you; it is true, it is the Catholic Church. Christ we have not seen, but we have her; let us believe as regards Him. The Apostles, on the contrary, saw Him, but they believed as regards her. (Sermon 238).
Rather than just gliding over these sentences and thinking, "Well, that's a nice statement of faith," analyze it like a scholar. You can glean these observations by doing so:
1. During the 4Th century every nation (that is, all the nations that were known of at that time in history) had at least a few Catholic present.
2. Therefore, people who state that the faith does not exist are incorrect, because obviously there is a shared belief that has penetrated every nation, whether it be a small presence or a large one, the point is that the common belief is unified through all nations in some degree.
3. The basic premise of faith is the ability to believe what one has not physically seen, so he reiterates that the Catholic Church is the "see-able" part of the faith, since obviously they cannot see Jesus Christ, who passed from the earth several hundred years previously.
4. The Apostles had the ability to see Jesus Christ in person, while they had to "have faith" in the future Catholic Church.
See, from a few sentences you can get solid facts about Church and societal conditions at this time in faith history plus a very interesting observation about faith. I'm not sure many people have thought about the fact that the Apostles "had" Jesus right in front of them; they had to have "faith" in the future Catholic Church. People today have the Catholic Church, and have to have "faith" in Jesus, who they do not have physically present in their midst (and will not until the End of Days).
Slowing down and reading what someone writes, whether clerical or a layperson, from a point in time and not just glossing over it as just another thing to say gives real insights about not only that person's beliefs and assertions, but actually kind of a spyglass back into that point of time in human and faith history. This is similar to what I wrote two postings ago about St. Jerome's letter suggesting the making of alphabet blocks. Reading a saint's letters tell you something valuable about 1) his idea for a child's instruction and 2) this was a girl child he was advising, so it's not like the stereotype that no one cared about teaching and educating young girls at all. Without having an agenda he wrote this letter giving kindly advice to family friends, and thus modern readers get a glimpse into the much more nuanced behavior and attitudes of the 4Th century than people often assume.
The Church is spread throughout the whole world: all nations have the Church. Let no one deceive you; it is true, it is the Catholic Church. Christ we have not seen, but we have her; let us believe as regards Him. The Apostles, on the contrary, saw Him, but they believed as regards her. (Sermon 238).
Rather than just gliding over these sentences and thinking, "Well, that's a nice statement of faith," analyze it like a scholar. You can glean these observations by doing so:
1. During the 4Th century every nation (that is, all the nations that were known of at that time in history) had at least a few Catholic present.
2. Therefore, people who state that the faith does not exist are incorrect, because obviously there is a shared belief that has penetrated every nation, whether it be a small presence or a large one, the point is that the common belief is unified through all nations in some degree.
3. The basic premise of faith is the ability to believe what one has not physically seen, so he reiterates that the Catholic Church is the "see-able" part of the faith, since obviously they cannot see Jesus Christ, who passed from the earth several hundred years previously.
4. The Apostles had the ability to see Jesus Christ in person, while they had to "have faith" in the future Catholic Church.
See, from a few sentences you can get solid facts about Church and societal conditions at this time in faith history plus a very interesting observation about faith. I'm not sure many people have thought about the fact that the Apostles "had" Jesus right in front of them; they had to have "faith" in the future Catholic Church. People today have the Catholic Church, and have to have "faith" in Jesus, who they do not have physically present in their midst (and will not until the End of Days).
Slowing down and reading what someone writes, whether clerical or a layperson, from a point in time and not just glossing over it as just another thing to say gives real insights about not only that person's beliefs and assertions, but actually kind of a spyglass back into that point of time in human and faith history. This is similar to what I wrote two postings ago about St. Jerome's letter suggesting the making of alphabet blocks. Reading a saint's letters tell you something valuable about 1) his idea for a child's instruction and 2) this was a girl child he was advising, so it's not like the stereotype that no one cared about teaching and educating young girls at all. Without having an agenda he wrote this letter giving kindly advice to family friends, and thus modern readers get a glimpse into the much more nuanced behavior and attitudes of the 4Th century than people often assume.
Bishop saved household money to build hospital
Still researching, and came across this. I mention it because one of the favorite ignorant loud mouth accusations against the Catholic Church is that her bishops live large on the hog. Actually, throughout the centuries, bishops, and even Popes, have been known to live very austerely, and with the money they save on household expenses (including the basics of food and fuel for heat and light) have done great things.
A specific example is St. John Chrysostom, who lived from 347-407 AD. In the book I am reading it states "As for himself, St. John built a great hospital with the money he had saved on household expenses in his first year as bishop."
Now, people are going to say mean and ignorant things no matter what the truth may be. But I wanted to remind faithful readers that there is a several thousand year history of severe "budgeting" and sacrifice by not only those who minister to the poor, but indeed bishops and Popes who scrimped and lived in privation in order to donate what they had to great causes for the needy. So like me you can ignore the mean mouths who predictably comment on news stories that mention the Catholic Church how fat and rich everyone is, since that's far from true, and in fact, is the opposite of one of the longest traditions of individuals scrimping on basics in order to feed the poor, build hospitals and establish charitable foundations with their "saved household money." And no, it's not because they got a large expense account; they often went without food, candles for lighting, or wood for heating.
A specific example is St. John Chrysostom, who lived from 347-407 AD. In the book I am reading it states "As for himself, St. John built a great hospital with the money he had saved on household expenses in his first year as bishop."
Now, people are going to say mean and ignorant things no matter what the truth may be. But I wanted to remind faithful readers that there is a several thousand year history of severe "budgeting" and sacrifice by not only those who minister to the poor, but indeed bishops and Popes who scrimped and lived in privation in order to donate what they had to great causes for the needy. So like me you can ignore the mean mouths who predictably comment on news stories that mention the Catholic Church how fat and rich everyone is, since that's far from true, and in fact, is the opposite of one of the longest traditions of individuals scrimping on basics in order to feed the poor, build hospitals and establish charitable foundations with their "saved household money." And no, it's not because they got a large expense account; they often went without food, candles for lighting, or wood for heating.
Saint recommends child's alphabet play letters
While researching something just now, I can across something so cool. St. Jerome, who lived from 342-420 AD and is one of the great doctors of the church, wrote a letter with this advice for educating an infant:
"Have letters made for her, of boxwood or ivory, and let them be called by their names. Let her play with them, and let the play be part of her instruction..."
He was one of the great Doctors of the Church, and here in latter part of the 4Th century, he is advising her parents about how to make and use what we call today alphabet blocks, except he's suggesting carving each of the actual letters. Far from being isolated from family life and understanding raising children, many saints showed great wisdom and heart in how children should be kindly raised.
"Have letters made for her, of boxwood or ivory, and let them be called by their names. Let her play with them, and let the play be part of her instruction..."
He was one of the great Doctors of the Church, and here in latter part of the 4Th century, he is advising her parents about how to make and use what we call today alphabet blocks, except he's suggesting carving each of the actual letters. Far from being isolated from family life and understanding raising children, many saints showed great wisdom and heart in how children should be kindly raised.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
That lost Brazil balloon priest
I better not see how "saintly" he was because he lost his life doing a stupid balloon stunt to "raise money for a trucker's spiritual rest stop."
Shut up and stop the secular drama! He wasted what could have been a long life of ministering to the poor by doing this stunt.
Those who encouraged him should be ashamed and beg God for mercy. You should have donated to his beloved cause so that he NOT go up in the balloon, rather than pledging for him to go and risk his life. How stupid! Don't think that God is unaware that there was a hidden motivation having to do with the giggle factor of a men's "rest stop" along the road with this whole fund raising "idea."
If he was really saintly instead of a chump to the instigators he would have taken two chairs and a blanket or umbrella to a trucker's rest stop one day a week and sat and listened to confessions. That is how the real saints of old time did it. They didn't 'raise money' with 'stunts' for built facilities. They sat in huts, under blankets or out in the open and listened to confessions for hour after hour. THEY were there, not the building. A PRIEST hearing confession brings people to God, not a building. Another dead and wasted priest and another trucker homo joke. God's not laughing.
Shut up and stop the secular drama! He wasted what could have been a long life of ministering to the poor by doing this stunt.
Those who encouraged him should be ashamed and beg God for mercy. You should have donated to his beloved cause so that he NOT go up in the balloon, rather than pledging for him to go and risk his life. How stupid! Don't think that God is unaware that there was a hidden motivation having to do with the giggle factor of a men's "rest stop" along the road with this whole fund raising "idea."
If he was really saintly instead of a chump to the instigators he would have taken two chairs and a blanket or umbrella to a trucker's rest stop one day a week and sat and listened to confessions. That is how the real saints of old time did it. They didn't 'raise money' with 'stunts' for built facilities. They sat in huts, under blankets or out in the open and listened to confessions for hour after hour. THEY were there, not the building. A PRIEST hearing confession brings people to God, not a building. Another dead and wasted priest and another trucker homo joke. God's not laughing.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Beatrice Da Silva Meneses (1424-90)
Daughter of a count and sister of a saint.
Raised in the household of the Princess of Portugal.
Accompanied the princess to Spain when the princess married there.
She became disenchanted with court life, especially after being falsely imprisoned by the very princess she had served.
She left the court and became a Cistercian nun.
She founded the Congregation of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Queen Isabella donated a castle to her for her congregation.
From Delaney "Dictionary of Saints."
Aren't all these real people so marvelous? Have you begun to see what a range of individual life circumstances bring people to life as a holy person, blessed, or saint? And how sanctity were their priorities, not the details of the "simple life" or "how Jesus would have lived?" These were real people who all turned to God as their highest priority and who then organized their life and gifts around their decision.
Raised in the household of the Princess of Portugal.
Accompanied the princess to Spain when the princess married there.
She became disenchanted with court life, especially after being falsely imprisoned by the very princess she had served.
She left the court and became a Cistercian nun.
She founded the Congregation of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Queen Isabella donated a castle to her for her congregation.
From Delaney "Dictionary of Saints."
Aren't all these real people so marvelous? Have you begun to see what a range of individual life circumstances bring people to life as a holy person, blessed, or saint? And how sanctity were their priorities, not the details of the "simple life" or "how Jesus would have lived?" These were real people who all turned to God as their highest priority and who then organized their life and gifts around their decision.
Margaret of Cortona (1247-97)
Daughter of an Italian farmer.
Her mother died when Margaret was seven.
Her father remarried and her stepmother was unsympathetic.
She ran away to be a mistress to a young nobleman.
She bore him a son and lived in great luxury.
9 years after she went to live with him he was murdered.
She decided to change her life.
She made a public confession of her sins at a Church where she sought the aid of the Friars Minor.
But her father refused to take her back in the home.
She and her son were taken in by two ladies.
She became a Franciscan tertiary and had three years of despair and forced on herself too many penances and mortifications (her priest spiritual advisors worked constantly to moderate her away from such self imposed harshness).
She had a brief period as a recluse.
She then started to devote herself to the care of the sick and the poor.
She began to see visions of Christ.
She started acting as a peacemaker, even among prelates.
She received approval from a Bishop to form a religious community to care for the sick poor.
She founded a hospital and a confraternity to support it.
Vicious gossips accused her of improper relationships with the friars.
She was transferred to Siena until it was proved the vicious gossip was lies.
Her holiness soon became apparent to all.
She converted many sinners.
She was sought after by people from all over Italy, France, and Spain for her spiritual advice and her healing powers.
When she died she was acclaimed a saint at once.
Her mother died when Margaret was seven.
Her father remarried and her stepmother was unsympathetic.
She ran away to be a mistress to a young nobleman.
She bore him a son and lived in great luxury.
9 years after she went to live with him he was murdered.
She decided to change her life.
She made a public confession of her sins at a Church where she sought the aid of the Friars Minor.
But her father refused to take her back in the home.
She and her son were taken in by two ladies.
She became a Franciscan tertiary and had three years of despair and forced on herself too many penances and mortifications (her priest spiritual advisors worked constantly to moderate her away from such self imposed harshness).
She had a brief period as a recluse.
She then started to devote herself to the care of the sick and the poor.
She began to see visions of Christ.
She started acting as a peacemaker, even among prelates.
She received approval from a Bishop to form a religious community to care for the sick poor.
She founded a hospital and a confraternity to support it.
Vicious gossips accused her of improper relationships with the friars.
She was transferred to Siena until it was proved the vicious gossip was lies.
Her holiness soon became apparent to all.
She converted many sinners.
She was sought after by people from all over Italy, France, and Spain for her spiritual advice and her healing powers.
When she died she was acclaimed a saint at once.
Blessed Margaret Colonna (circa 1254-80)
Daughter of a prince and born in Rome.
Orphaned as a child and raised by her two brothers.
Refused marriage.
Tried to join the Poor Clares of Assisi but she could not join them due to her severe illness.
She returned to the family castle and turned it into a convent for the Poor Clares.
Her brother had became a Cardinal and provided Franciscan rule for the convent.
She suffered from cancer the last seven years of her life.
She was reported to have performed miracles.
Orphaned as a child and raised by her two brothers.
Refused marriage.
Tried to join the Poor Clares of Assisi but she could not join them due to her severe illness.
She returned to the family castle and turned it into a convent for the Poor Clares.
Her brother had became a Cardinal and provided Franciscan rule for the convent.
She suffered from cancer the last seven years of her life.
She was reported to have performed miracles.
Blessed Philippa Mareri (died 1236)
Born of a wealthy landowner.
Her family, especially her brother, tried to force her into a marriage.
When they persisted she ran away.
She became a hermit with a group of followers.
Her brother relented and gave her a house for her community.
Blessed Roger Todi became their spiritual director.
Philippa was elected abbess.
She was credited with numerous miracles.
Her family, especially her brother, tried to force her into a marriage.
When they persisted she ran away.
She became a hermit with a group of followers.
Her brother relented and gave her a house for her community.
Blessed Roger Todi became their spiritual director.
Philippa was elected abbess.
She was credited with numerous miracles.
Margaret the Barefooted (died circa 1395)
Born of a poor family in Italy.
Married at 15.
Was abused by her husband for years.
Responded to the ill treatment by praying for years and performing acts of penance in patience.
Received her name because she would go barefoot when begging for alms on behalf of those even poorer than herself.
Married at 15.
Was abused by her husband for years.
Responded to the ill treatment by praying for years and performing acts of penance in patience.
Received her name because she would go barefoot when begging for alms on behalf of those even poorer than herself.
Anne (circa 840-918)
Born in Constantinople of wealthy parents.
The Emperor agreed with her parents that she should be forced into a marriage.
She fled to Egypt to avoid the marriage.
She became a hermit for the last twenty-two years of her life.
(She is thought to have possibly been martyred for her faith).
From Delaney "Dictionary of Saints"
By the way, notice that she's one of many examples of women who fled marriage and intimate relations. Celibacy was embraced by many men and women by choice prior to these last few decades of "anything goes."
The Emperor agreed with her parents that she should be forced into a marriage.
She fled to Egypt to avoid the marriage.
She became a hermit for the last twenty-two years of her life.
(She is thought to have possibly been martyred for her faith).
From Delaney "Dictionary of Saints"
By the way, notice that she's one of many examples of women who fled marriage and intimate relations. Celibacy was embraced by many men and women by choice prior to these last few decades of "anything goes."
Dominic of Silos (circa 1000-73)
Born in Navarre, Spain, of peasant parents.
Was a shepherd in his youth.
Became a Benedictine monk.
Became prior.
Was driven from the monastery into exile when he refused to cede its lands to the king.
Went to a different monastery and became its abbot.
He reformed that monastery and turned it into one of the leading spiritual houses in Spain.
The monastery's scriptorium produced outstanding Christian art.
He helped to rescue Christian slaves from the Moors.
He was credited with miracles of healing.
Was a shepherd in his youth.
Became a Benedictine monk.
Became prior.
Was driven from the monastery into exile when he refused to cede its lands to the king.
Went to a different monastery and became its abbot.
He reformed that monastery and turned it into one of the leading spiritual houses in Spain.
The monastery's scriptorium produced outstanding Christian art.
He helped to rescue Christian slaves from the Moors.
He was credited with miracles of healing.
Blessed Dodo (died 1231)
His father forced him against his will to marry.
His father died.
Dodo became a monk (Premonstratensian) when his mother and his wife entered a convent.
He lived as a hermit for four years.
He became known for his healing powers and visions.
The stigmata were found on his body after his death.
(He died in an accident where a wall fell upon him).
His father died.
Dodo became a monk (Premonstratensian) when his mother and his wife entered a convent.
He lived as a hermit for four years.
He became known for his healing powers and visions.
The stigmata were found on his body after his death.
(He died in an accident where a wall fell upon him).
Bertulf (died circa 705)
Born of pagan parents in Germany.
Went to Flanders and was converted to Christianity.
Became a steward to a Count.
Accompanied the count on a pilgrimage to Rome.
When the count and his wife died they left to him their estate.
He founded a monastery and retired to it.
Remained at the monastery until his death.
All these examples from Delaney "Dictionary of Saints."
Went to Flanders and was converted to Christianity.
Became a steward to a Count.
Accompanied the count on a pilgrimage to Rome.
When the count and his wife died they left to him their estate.
He founded a monastery and retired to it.
Remained at the monastery until his death.
All these examples from Delaney "Dictionary of Saints."
Berthold (circa 1090-1142)
Born on the shores of Lake Constance.
Married.
Upon the death of his wife in 1120 he became a Benedictine monk.
Became a prior, and then an abbot.
Established his area as a center of spirituality.
Built a hospice and a hospital.
Known for holiness, austerity, and concern for the poor.
Known for a preacher and confessor and several miracles attributed to him.
Married.
Upon the death of his wife in 1120 he became a Benedictine monk.
Became a prior, and then an abbot.
Established his area as a center of spirituality.
Built a hospice and a hospital.
Known for holiness, austerity, and concern for the poor.
Known for a preacher and confessor and several miracles attributed to him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
