I was reading a post from a priest concerned that his homily for the 4th Sunday of Advent was exploring similar themes from 3 years ago.
I do not think priests need to worry about retreading homilies.
First off, if most people are like me, five minutes after we hear a homily we have forgotten it. Priests have the charism of forgetting what people said in the confessional and the laity can do the same with homilies – even a well-crafted one.
Secondly, those in the pew are much like a river where you can never step into the same place. Often something that passes you by one day strikes you on another.
“If you look at a thing 999 times, you are perfectly safe; if you look at it for the 1000th time, you are in danger of seeing it for the first time.” G.K. Chesterton (The Napoleon of Notting Hill)
As to my first point, even if made in jest, there is a reality to it. Still not being able to recall the details of a homily is not the same as not hearing it. I have often been frustrated in reading books and finding that so many of the details have now escaped me. At least this was true until I realized that this was not the same thing as this being a waste of time. There is much that we internalize and process that we are unaware of. We are not made of the stuff of constant epiphanies. It takes time and reprocessing what we know into how we live.
Now as to bad homilies, by all means, retire those.
In the first reading today regarding Elijah and the widow, I think this offers biblical precedent for “Woman make me a sammich.”
As for the second part of the Gospel today I recently read that according to the Talmud, there were thirteen trumpet-shaped receptacles for offerings for the temple. The horns were called a shofar which acted as a funnel into a chest. Each one of these Shofar-chests had an inscription.
So what Jesus is saying is that those who placed money in the treasury as an act of their own aggrandizement ultimately had nothing to shofar it.
This year I had been thinking about the fact that, no matter what, three people love me intensely – the persons of the Holy Trinity.
This morning it got through my thick head on the The Feast of the Holy Archangels, that I need to bump up that number considerably.
Then I saw the picture below and I had to add a caption to it.
I also recently ran across this paragraph when I was re-reading G.K. Chesterton’s “St. Thomas Aquinas”:
I do not know for certain why St. Thomas was called the Angelic Doctor: whether it was that he had an angelic temper, or the intellectuality of an Angel; or whether there was a later legend that he concentrated on Angels–especially on the points of needles. If so, I do not quite understand how this idea arose; history has many examples of an irritating habit of labelling somebody in connection with something, as if he never did any thing else. Who was it who began the inane habit of referring to Dr. Johnson as “our lexicographer”; as if he never did anything but write a dictionary? Why do most people insist on meeting the large and far-reaching mind of Pascal at its very narrowest point: the point at which it was sharpened into a spike by the spite of the Jansenists against the Jesuits? It is just possible, for all I know, that this labelling of Aquinas as a specialist was an obscure depreciation of him as a universalist. For that is a very common trick for the belittling of literary or scientific men.
This might be the most helpful meme I have created.
Here are two answers to get you through life.
Surely whoever designed the official logo for the upcoming synod is trolling us.
Whoever allowed Comic Sans here is surely not a font of wisdom.
Yesterday on social media I had posted:
Sometimes I have a great biting comment as a pun that works on several levels.
I then realize that there is no way my conscience would let me actually post it for its lack of charity. But such a great biting pun.
I will remind Jesus of those occasions when I die. He will probably remind me of the ones I let fly.
Today I was thinking about this quote from Chesterton:
“It may seem a singular observation to say that we are not generous enough to write great satire. This, however, is approximately a very accurate way of describing the case. To write great satire, to attack a man so that he feels the attack and half acknowledges its justice, it is necessary to have a certain intellectual magnanimity which realizes the merits of the opponent as well as his defects. This is, indeed, only another way of putting the simple truth that in order to attack an army we must know not only its weak points, but also its strong points. England in the present season and spirit fails in satire for the same simple reason that it fails in war: it despises the enemy.” – “Pope and the art of satire”Twelve Types 1903
In reaction to this, I think, that if you use humor to attack, it should be too wound so as to heal. Oddly I think of St. John of the Cross’s metaphor of the “sweet cautery” that he uses in Stanza 2 of the “Living Flame of Love” for the Holy Spirit. That there is pain involved in the cautery, but it is used to heal.
Chesterton way of explaining the use of satire is not an exclusive way at looking at the subject. Still, all satire should be written to persuade if it is going to be effective. Some writers have the skills to do this in a more brutal way such as Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”.
Coincidentally, today I listened to two podcasts that both dealt with the subject of humor – linked in the comment section.
I’ve seen this meme pop up more frequently latey. Although I have seen versions of this going back to pretty much when the term selfie came into use.
Today I realized Mary used the first Instagram filter with “indigenous women” mode.
How far can we torture St. Joseph to sell our house?I have been very annoyed by the whole bury a St. Joseph statue to sell your house idea. Even more annoyed to see these kits sold in Catholic stores.
I once wrote a parody that included the idea where you could buy a Jack Bauer and St. Joseph pack and have Jack torture St. Joe until your house sells. While this is a parody form of Reductio ad absurdum, it follows the same logic.
I think of Saint Teresa of Avila relying on this great saint without ever resorting to burying him at all.
“Would that I could persuade all men to be devout to this glorious saint,” wrote St. Teresa in her autobiography, The Life of St. Teresa of Jesus of the Order of Our Lady of Carmel, “for I know by long experience what blessings he can obtain for us from God.”
“It is now very many years since I began asking him for something on his feast, and I always received it,” wrote St. Teresa. “If the petition was in any way amiss, he rectified it for my greater good.” source
Here’s a headline
It included this boilerplate of articles of this type.
“a solemn and ancient form of Catholic worship spoken almost entirely in the Latin language by a priest who faces away from the congregation.”
Just in case you missed this fact:
“Latin intonations are spoken by a priest who mostly faces away from the congregation.”
I was awaiting them saying “The Mass is held at 9 AM by a priest who faces away from the congregation”
This misunderstanding is because so many bishop’s have installed “Adblock Orientum”
The article itself is not totally without merit, just odd emphasis and idiotic headline.