Verdad! |
||||
|
"Americans are a free people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity." - President George W. Bush, State of the Union, January 28, 2003 Blogs I Read Pro Deo et patria LT SMASH Catholic and Enjoying It! Thrown Back jessnjim Ad Orientem Fr. Todd Reitmeyer Ad Altare Dei Magisterial Fidelity After Abortion |
Friday, June 27
I'll be on Vacation in Central Maine through July 5th. Happy Fourth of July! posted by Michael Lee on 6/27/2003 03:33:00 PM | link | Thursday, June 26
Someone very close to my heart, in commenting on my post below about the "grip and grin," indicated that I might have said something uncharitable. This is of course a euphemism for my wife showing me how a few lines in my “grip and grin” post come across as mean-spirited and suggesting that I may want to revisit my phraseology, lest I be misunderstood. It's a good thing she likes to read my writing.
The line: Recently I joined my parish’s liturgy committee in a personal effort to be a voice of reason against the trend in my parish to make Mass more “vibrant,” a term, no doubt, if left unchecked has the potential to lead to further liturgical abuse. While I will remain a member of the committee until they kick me off, what I’ve come to realize is the laity are not (and never will be) the real answer to the emptiness we are trying to fill when we subject ourselves to community building gestures such as the “grip and grin.”
So let me be clear. I did not intend those lines above to convey anything other than the passion for this topic that I feel in my heart. Sometimes, though, I forget how easy the written word can be misinterpreted. Therefore, she was right, and I am sorry.
As I have blogged about before (here and here on May 2nd and 3rd), I joined the Liturgy Committee because I felt very strongly that the Mass did not need to be made "vibrant;" that it was not ours to make "vibrant." That I still feel very strongly about. However all the meetings I have attended with the 14 or so other members our committee is blessed to have, resulted in a firm affirmation that overall we all share this view. Perhaps not to a fine detail, but nonetheless, we agree on the important concept.
Therefore please do not interpret the above comment as an indication our committee is in strife or that I am single-handedly trying to block everything that doesn't meet my agenda. Absolutely and emphatically not. In fact, just the opposite is true; our committee sincerely cares about invigorating people's faith in Doctrine through strong evangelization. My point about being the voice of reason coupled with the follow on comment that I'll stay until they kick me off was a inappropriate attempt at humor.
That said, the only voice my fellow committee members will hear from me will be my heart poured out into my desire that we always remain faithful to the way the Church intends Mass to be celebrated. And as for my tenure, well, I'll stay on the committee until we collectively decide our mission is complete or that it's time for new faces to carry the flame forward. posted by Michael Lee on 6/26/2003 10:15:00 PM | link |
I must admit I'm having a very difficult time these days when it comes to my own thoughts and views on the sex abuse scandal in the Church. On the one hand I am naturally defensive in favor of the Church on this issue, especially when confronted by people who draw their conclusions based on Boston Globe (or insert any other major media outlet) reporting.
On the other hand, I am morally outraged and spiritually disgusted that the men who run the Church have let it get to this point. One issue I find difficult to reconcile in this mess is how priests can remain faithful to the seal of the confessional (should the guilty actually confess) while at the same time ensuring those who are guilty are justly dealt with in this world, and removed from the temptation to further harm themselves and others. It is difficult for me to grapple with how we have to actually discuss topics like zero tolerance regarding sexual abuse when that should have always gone without saying.
Then there is a divisive issue like the Frank Keating resignation last week. On the one hand, I did not hold the man in particularly high regard for either the remarks that sparked his resignation, nor those where he suggested Martin Luther as a model for reform. Now I don't know the man personally, so I don't know if he was misquoted or not, or if his words were taken out of context in the National Catholic Register article I blogged about earlier. Yet at the same time, I find it very frustrating that the very man charged with leading an independent panel to help steer the Church out of the crisis, appears not to fully accept the Catholic teaching.
This evening I was particularly upset upon reading this Deal Hudson's, Crisis Magazine's Editor, weekly email. Usually, he takes a very tough stance on the abuse crisis, defends the Church and holds the bishops accountable. Yet, this week he gave Keating a pass - actually he presented the other side of Keating's story - without a word about some of the more distressing comments Keating made earlier about Church doctrine. On the one hand I cannot imagine the frustration Keating was dealing with at his level, when every day I see the unfolding disaster in the paper, on TV and over the Internet. Yet, Deal went on in his article to advocate a replacement for Keating who was faithful to the Church, etc., etc., etc. I couldn't agree more, especially since I contended earlier that had Keating been truly faithful to the Church's doctrine, it would have been much more difficult to oust him based only on the mafia's comment.
Now to be sure, I'm not so naive to think for one minute that there aren't bishops who are day in and day out trying to thwart this panel's work. Nor am I so adrift as to believe that we, as a Church, are facing anything less than an all out crisis of fidelity (as I've said before) and perhaps more importantly leadership. In fact, I believe firmly, that had solid spiritual leadership, based on fidelity to the Church and Jesus Christ, been the principle motivator for the bishops over the past 50 years, then today this crisis would be nothing but a bad dream. Instead, the crisis looms because we are plagued by a group of tormented souls, all of whom are unable or unwilling to be the spiritual leaders they are called to be. Some are unable or unwilling to get out of the way of the investigation and so continue to obfuscate. Others, are unwilling or unable to demonstrate the Love necessary to call their fellow bishops on the carpet and out them.
I suppose this is a tough time for us all, and I make no claim that I am having any harder time than anyone else. I especially know that my frustration with this process can only pale in comparison to those who have been directly affected. I welcome any comments to help bring this into a clearer focus for me. posted by Michael Lee on 6/26/2003 10:13:00 PM | link |
Here's a few interesting op ed links with some comments of my own.
The National Review Online's White House Correspondent, Byron York, has more news/opinions on the centrifuge pieces found in Iraq. For my own self-motivated reasons, I didn't read his post before coming to my own conclusions earlier.
Jay Nordlinger, also of National Review Online, chimes in on the Affirmative Action decision this week, as well as other Impromptus. While much of his points on this issue are no surprise, what makes his writing so interesting, is the sources he finds. Take for example his reference to Maureen Dowd's piece in yesterday's New York Times. Now I have never held this woman in high regard intellectually or morally, but her latest salvo perfectly summarized exactly why both the Democratic Left and the New York Times are such shameful institutions. You really have to read the article. Register if you need to, but read it. If there is one thing the Democratic Left hates more than anything else, it is someone who is sure.
The truly horrendous part about Ms. Dowd’s Op Ed, which Mr. Nordlinger alludes to well, actually has nothing to do with her, frankly because we have all come to expect such vitriol. No, it is the unfortunate fact that it is very unlikely any black person, whose integrity and dignity have been offended both by Ms. Dowd and the US Supreme Court, will rise to the occasion to publicly rebuke both (or either) on a national level.
And this just in. In another defeat for the family, and in the second consecutive unbelievable decision, the US Supreme Court today struck down the Texas Law which considers homosexual sodomy illegal. In considering the issue, I obviously side with Texas and those who sought to uphold this law based on several criteria – all of which are pointed out in the story. First, nowhere in the Constitution is there a personal guarantee to the privacy of every individual. Furthermore, it is not the US Supreme Court’s role to engage in social engineering on behalf of special interest groups. I also believe, wholeheartedly, in the slippery slope argument Senator Santorum articulated and was so ridiculed for making. At least he had the courage to say it on a national stage and thankfully his party stood by him.
It's only Thursday, and I'm ready to put this week behind me. posted by Michael Lee on 6/26/2003 02:57:00 PM | link |
Since the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom on May 1st of this year, I have largely quit paying attention to the news. In fact by the time Saddam's statue fell on April 7th, I was happy to see the war was coming to a rapid conclusion. Like many who supported the war from the start, on all of its merits, I was disappointed (not surprised) to see the hypocritical media and world Left immediately re-focus on the Weapons of Mass Destruction. Not long after May 1st, the presidential candidates all began suggesting, insinuating and inferring that perhaps George W. Bush had lied or misled the American public. The key words being “suggesting,” “insinuating” and “inferring,” as not a single one of them - save the hapless Howard Dean - had the intestinal fortitude to come forward and say outright and unequivocally, that indeed GWB had lied.
Why? Simple, because those who were in the know about Iraq before the War - i.e. Kerry, Lieberman, Gephardt, and ostensibly Kucinich - knew full well that the evidence was clear regarding the presence of WMD in Iraq. Furthermore, it is clear they new and understood this to be true given the three real contenders - Kerry, Lieberman and Gephardt - voted to give GWB the power to take whatever measures were necessary to remove the threat. Now granted, Dean wasn't privy to the information that our senators and congressman were, nor was Sharpton or the rest of the bunch, but even had they been, Dean had already committed himself to prostrating before the dredges of the liberal movement. Sharpton, well, is a political joke, and is not even worth devoting more time than this to discuss.
Well, yesterday, the centrifuge (that part of a nuclear power plant or weapons lab that enriches uranium to weapons grade levels) was found buried in the back yard of an Iraqi scientist's home. Immediately and unnamed government source - no doubt from the State Department - immediately went on record saying "this is not a smoking gun. This is not evidence of an ongoing uranium enrichment program."
It's not? I seem to recall that Iraq was forbidden under international law to have any nuclear material or processing capability. If the discovery of the very piece of the nuclear plant that turns uranium into the weapons grade material necessary to create a bomb is not evidence of a smoking gun, then what is? Furthermore, as was the case over the past few days, the rhetoric from the left has turned from GWB lied and misled the American public, to the CIA and administration Hawks misled the President. Yes, it is sad to say, the left still considers the President to be a dope, unable to discern anything for himself.
Unfortunately, we all know the answer. NOTHING will satisfy those who opposed the war from the beginning. Nothing, including when the artillery shells full of anthrax or VX Nerve Gas are indeed found, will constitute a "smoking gun." Wait and see - it will happen, and the immediate response from the Saddam apologists will be along the lines of "well this is fine, but since he didn't use them against anyone, they didn't constitute a real threat." Blah blah blah.
For those of us who believed it was the right and moral action for the United States and her coalition to take, every time the left opens their collective mouth is good news. For each subsequent time someone comes out with a hair brained statement along the lines of what was said about the discovered nuclear centrifuge not constituting a smoking gun, the Democratic Party’s ability to credibly challenge GWB in 2004, grows less and less significant.
And with the way it is going now, the election will be a true joy to watch. posted by Michael Lee on 6/26/2003 10:21:00 AM | link |
Surfing the blogs today a little bit at lunch and I found the following post on Fr. Rob Johansen's site. Granted, I'm close to a year late, but better now than never.
This is a very interesting, and exceedingly important issue he is raising. While I agree with his stance (thus the link to his page), I am even more reassured of the responses he received. The issue: should we "grip and grin" before the Mass. That is, should the congregation be asked to stand and greet one another so, as my parish says, "that there may be no stranger among us."
Personally I have been opposed to this form of “community” from the first time I was subjected to the practice during my first assignment in the Air Force. Since then, I've seen it haphazardly implemented in various parishes across the country and world from Okinawa, Japan to Vicenza, Italy and a whole myriad of US States in between.
Fr. Rob makes the perfect point on this issue. The Mass builds community through the Sacrifice as well as individual and communal prayer. The fact that we are gathered together as a catholic – “universal” – community to celebrate Christ’s ultimate sacrifice, where we offer him our devotion and prayers, our petitions and sins, is in itself the most powerful community building experience any Catholic can possibly receive.
The contention I have always had, even when I wasn’t paying much attention to the Mass, is that by being asked to stand and greet each other, an act that obviously makes many people very uncomfortable, the act becomes a detriment to the very purpose it was implemented. Furthermore, as Fr. Rob points out, in the moments before Mass, I want to be able to pray in silence and focus my mind on what is about to happen. That is why we come to the Mass in the first place. The minute we are socially pressured into talking and greeting one another is the minute we have unnecessarily redirected our attention away from our purpose.
This is just one level of abuse present at so many parishes, something another Priest blogger, Fr. Jeffrey Keys calls “the next level of abuse.” What I find perhaps most troubling is that while we as a community of believers are so focused (rightly so) on the sex-abuse scandal that has borne itself out like a festering sore, we are apparently oblivious to the virus that runs in the Church’s veins. Indeed, the very fabric of our faith – the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass – is being torn apart right in front of our eyes through liturgical abuse brought on by creeping modernism and political liberalism. While not always blatant, nonetheless each chip erodes away at the foundation.
Recently I joined my parish’s liturgy committee in a personal effort to be a voice of reason against the trend in my parish to make Mass more “vibrant,” a term, no doubt, if left unchecked has the potential to lead to further liturgical abuse. While I will remain a member of the committee until they kick me off, what I’ve come to realize is the laity are not (and never will be) the real answer to the emptiness we are trying to fill when we subject ourselves to community building gestures such as the “grip and grin.” We can only be a catalyst of change – the necessary and proverbial fire under the priests’ ***. The simple and apparently obvious fact is that the reason these “next level abuses” are becoming so prevalent is because many of the devoted and well-intentioned faithful lack a true understanding of the faith and the Mass. This, coupled with many priests who are reeling from the negative attention and scandal, has created an environment where lay groups can advocate “taking control away from the Bishops” and think of themselves as a legitimate Catholic movement; an environment where the inmates are suddenly running the asylum. It’s not a pretty analogy – but it fits.
The “community” Fr. Rob’s parish sought last year, and also sought in so many others throughout the country, can (as he makes clear) only come from Jesus Christ and His real presence in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. If Catholics continue to grow more clouded in their knowledge of the manner in which the Mass should be celebrated, it will become ever more incumbent on our priests, our spiritual leaders, to instruct the faithful and to “feed my lambs” (See JN 21: 15-17), with the proper method proscribed by the Church for the past 2000 years. The Mass is a Sacrifice – the ultimate Sacrifice – that we are blessed to take part in. We should endeavor to take part correctly in the manner that is most pleasing to God.
So what is my solution? It’s clearly easier said than done I know, and will take considerable charity and patience, but our role as members of the laity is to “lobby” the pastor and his associates to truly be our spiritual leaders. Our role, in fact our right, as Catholics (clergy and laity alike) is to a true Mass, and if the only hope we have of receiving this is to beg, plead, cajole, or just plain demand that the priests take back the reigns on the Mass, less they become a side show to liturgical dance and the cabaret club band posing as music ministers, then we must do so.
It will not necessarily be easy, and it will no doubt take time. But, the result will be well worth all the effort we can muster. As the great theologian, F.J. Sheed, wrote in his phenomenal book, Theology For Beginners,
“Truth is light too. Not to see it is to be in darkness, to see it wrong is to be in double darkness…. To be stumbling along in the dark, happy in the knowledge that our guides can see, is not all the same thing as walking in the light.” – (p. 4) posted by Michael Lee on 6/26/2003 09:29:00 AM | link | Monday, June 23
Bill Cork has pity on those who see the supernatural in distorted reflections. I sympathize with the skepticism expressed by him and others, having felt it myself prior to my visit. Furthermore, as I'm not a qualified miracle investigator, I have no idea how or why the image is there.
Having seen the image and been present among the mass of people who gathered to take a look, I can say without a doubt that those who were there when I visited were among the people who read scripture and who regularly take part in Mass and celebrate the Eucharist. I also have faith that the people there during the hour I visited are also the ones who pray regularly for those who have no faith, who have lost their faith in troubled times or who do not know the joy of taking part in the True Miracle. I am sure there was more than one prayer offered for all these souls and more.
It's one thing to express skepticism. It's another to seemingly pass judgment on the fidelity and intentions of those who wanted to see for themselves. If that distorted image, coupled with the prayers from anyone present at the hospital, caused so much as one person in the thousands that have visited to grow in their faith, to yearn for the True Miracle or to pick up the scripture, then it was well worth the trip. posted by Michael Lee on 6/23/2003 09:05:00 AM | link | |
|||
