I have complained in the past just how aesthetically awful so many Catholic websites are. There has certainly been progress, but most parish websites seem to have a design ethic older than the Church.
So it is with some pleasure to point out a site that is beautiful, easy to navigate, and renders nicely in multiple resolutions.
So thumbs way up for the new Word on Fire site.
Now maybe we should have a prayer campaign for the Vatican’s web designer(s).
Via Rich at Over the Rhine and Into the Tiber with “Kick the Bucket”
The Archdiocese of Cincinnati is discouraging its employees from taking the ice bucket challenge for the ALS Association over the group’s embrace of embryonic stem cell research. Instead, would-be bucketeers should send donations to the John Paul II Medical Research Institute. Here’s a snippet from the Cincinnati Enquirer’s story:
“We appreciate the compassion that has caused so many people to engage in this,” Andriacco said. “But it’s a well established moral principle that a good end is not enough. The means to that ends must be morally licit.”
An embryo must be destroyed to harvest its stem cells, Andriacco said. Many Catholics relate that to abortion.
The Archdiocese asks that any money raised is sent instead to the John Paul II Medical Research Institute in Iowa City, Iowa, where the research is only conducted using adult stem cells.
Rigg and Tom Otten, principal of Elder High School, plan to take the ice-bucket challenge — for the research institute — Thursday morning at Elder, Andriacco said.
The idea behind this campaign is rather brilliant. Appeal first to the vanity of celebrities to get the ball rolling and than the vanity of others as they post their own YouTube videos of this. This is selfie charity.
So much for not letting your left hand know what your right hand is doing, since that can never go viral. Add a bit of shaming to get others to follow and you have a nicely crafted campaign that so far has raised over 40 million dollars. Even if the ALS Association supported totally ethical research, selfie charity is still unfortunate. The mixture of imposed penance, doing something good, broadcasting your penance for the cause, and then the chain-letter aspect of getting others to join in is perfect in a Madison Avenue sense, but otherwise unfortunate. Just wonder how this will escalate with other charitable causes? We have already seen the Fire Challenge, what’s next?
John Paul II Medical Research Institute, Donation page
On the funny side of this:
Barren, Minnesota: Inspired by a viral charity challenge that involves achieving a monetary goal and ice buckets, the St. Bartholomew youth group issued a “boiling bucket of glop” challenge: donate or collect donations of $100 to their Fall mission trip to Appalachia, and one of the youth group members will get dunked with a boiling bucket of glop. They earned $3.27. …
You’ve seen all the USCCB Sword Swallowing Challenge videos by now. Everyone from Catholic celebrities like The Curt Jester writer Jeff Miller, Fr. Robert Barron, and Jeff Cavins, to your friends have posted videos of themselves slowly dropping swords down their throats to help raise money for the USCCB. …
Thanks Eye of the Tiber, if I am a Catholic celebrity I am suddenly being tempted towards selfie charity. Where is my web cam and YouTube account?
“Pope Calls For New Crusade”
Thomas L. McDonald’s reply to this Vox headline is all you need to know about the strong amount of idiocy condenced down to a headline and spilled into a story.
As for Vox I already knew to avoid it like the plague, but to make sure I went and got a Voxcination so I can be totally immune to their anti-Catholic link-bait headlines.
I have sometimes heard the comment from various priests that they can not remember the confessions they hear and very quickly forget them. Now whether this is a genuine charism of the priesthood or something more akin to hearing the same things over and over and tuning it out I don’t know.
I do have personal experience with something related, but certainly not a charism. That is within minutes of hearing a homily I pretty much have forgotten it. If there was a pop quiz at the end of the Mass I would almost certainly fail it. It is really quite annoying to try to recall what was said and to experience liturgical amnesia. No doubt much of it is my fault as my mind wanders during Mass moving from distraction to distraction. Although I also suspect I seek distractions during homilies because what is being said is not thought-provoking, but distraction-provoking. Sometimes a homily will momentarily grab my attention such as like yesterday when the Gospel concerned the Canaanite woman. Unfortunately in cases such as this it is because of the numerous ways the preaching about this can go wrong and it seems all those ways are explored. There are riches in the Church Fathers regarding this passage, especially Augustine, but instead the explanation was rather confusing. Maybe it is a blessing that most homilies in my experience are easily forgotten.
I also hope they never have a pop quiz about all three readings for the Sunday Mass. I could probably get the Gospel correct as I have other sources such as podcast homilies, blog posts, and Church news to help reinforce what the Gospel was for that date in the Liturgical Year. But if called to reference the Old Testament reading I would be very hard-pressed to recall what it was. That also goes for the New Testament letters. This is really embarrassing as I really do want to be able to reflect on these passages and to discern the reason the Church picked out the three readings in some connected theme.
So I am not very happy with having liturgical amnesia regarding the readings and the homily. Now if only I could have liturgical amnesia regarding most of the hymns used.
This version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week from 9 to 17 August 2014.
The Weekly Francis is a compilation of the Holy Father’s writings, speeches, etc which I also post at Jimmy Akin’s The Weekly Francis. Jimmy Akin came up with this idea when he started “The Weekly Benedict” and I have taken over curation of it.
Angelus
Homilies
Letters
Speeches
Papal Tweets
Last week I had posted about how speaking about sin and repentance was so lacking in homilies I have heard. So this story caught my eye:
PORTLAND, Ore. –– A chapter of a nationally-recognized Christian group that seeks to reach children with the gospel of Jesus Christ is under fire for teaching kids the biblical doctrine of sin and eternal judgment, in addition to sharing about the love and mercy of God.
The Portland chapter of Child Evangelism Fellowship (CEF) is facing resistance from some area residents as they conduct voluntary summer camps in the area and plan on hosting after-school Bible studies in local public schools. The problem? CEF teaches children that each person is a sinner in need of the Savior.
Those who oppose the group assert that because of this, CEF does not present “Jesus loves you” mainstream Christianity, and claim that the organization is “hardcore evangelical fundamental.”
“They pretend to be a mainstream Christian Bible study when in fact they’re a very old school fundamentalist sect,” resident Kaye Schmitt told local television station KATU.
Robert Aughenbaugh also told reporters this week that preaching to children about sin might give them feelings of fear and shame.
Aughenbaugh, Schmitt and others have organized a group called Protect Portland Children, which seeks to speak out against CEF’s message and influence parents not to allow their children to attend its events. It has set up a Facebook page that has so far generated over 800 likes. It’s profile photograph is of a child holding a sign that reads “I am not a sinner.”
This is the type of story where I carefully check to see that the source was not a parody site. Or at least not intentionally one.
Now as to the details of the story I have no idea how CEF presents their message or how prudently it is presented.
“We do teach about sin,” Esteves stated, “[But] we’re not nasty. We’re not high pressure. We’re not negative, but we teach what the Bible teaches that every human being is a sinner in need of a savior.”
Still I think it is illustrative of a general trend. Where self-esteem trumps everything so really there is no need of a redeemer in the first place. Having negative feelings towards something you have done must be banished as unhealthy. It is like the former Catholics who speak of “Catholic guilt.” This “guilt” which they have pushed to the ground not realizing it was a sign of a functioning conscience. When moral relativity holds the day there must be no trespass by a properly (or even improperly) formed conscience. If somebody experiences “fear and shame” for something they did, than it could be the beginning of wisdom and a properly understood “fear of the Lord.” That must be prevented at all cost. Esteem was once tied to merit, but like many concepts now has been set adrift as its own like rights and responsibilities.
Scrupulosity and Jansenism are both errors. As is to call yourself a sinner like Uriah Heep called himself humble. As is the tendency to admit your a sinner, but to excuse it because “you are only human” as if the saints were something else. Detection of sinfulness seems to come easier when we look at others more exacting than ourselves. King David was obviously shocked when was revolted by a story of wrongdoing only to have the Prophet Samuel tell him “You are the man!” There seems to be a thousand ways to go wrong in regards to understanding our own sin, but Jesus never taught about a wide gate with lots of foot traffic. Hard as it is to come to an understanding of personal sins like King David did, it seems even harder to repent of them.
One of the things I love about being Catholic is the deepness of thought and necessary distinctions. My first thought on seeing the little girl with the “I am not a sinner” was to wonder if she was not yet of age of reason and also not yet fully culpable of sin? If so maybe a “I have Concupiscence” would have been more fitting. I wonder if a Facebook page with a teenager holding the same sign would have got an equally positive reaction? If anybody thinks young children above the age of reason can’t sin they must have quited different observational and personal experiences than myself.
This version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week from 3 to 10 August 2014.
The Weekly Francis is a compilation of the Holy Father’s writings, speeches, etc which I also post at Jimmy Akin’s The Weekly Francis. Jimmy Akin came up with this idea when he started “The Weekly Benedict” and I have taken over curation of it.
Angelus
General Audiences
Messages
Speeches
Papal Tweets
In the theological turmoil that followed the Second Vatican Council, the theory of the “fundamental option” is among the most pernicious developments. Fundamental option separates specific moral actions from a more general – fundamental – orientation of life. It holds, therefore, that specific sins do not bear on the status of one’s soul, or on the destination of one’s soul after death. All that matters for salvation, in this view, is that one “fundamentally” lives for God rather than evil.
One theological casualty of fundamental option theory is mortal sin, which has long been defined by the Church as a grave wrong committed with full knowledge of the attendant evil and deliberate consent of the will. Instead, the theory holds that mortal sin is not a specific action, but an orientation that lies at the deepest level of freedom within an individual who rejects God. But given the gravity of such a rejection, the theory holds that such an orientation is nearly impossible for those of sound mind. If an individual makes the fundamental option for God, then his actions, no matter how grave, cannot be mortal sins – or damnable offenses – because, at root, the person means well.
From a post by David G. Bonagura, Jr. at The Catholic Thing
Since I first read this post it has been rolling around in my mind along with some other thoughts. It seems to me that the fundamental option theory has really become the default view. While you hardly ever hear someone speak of it by its name, you often hear a view derived from it. It sounds so reasonable to suppose that since you are generally a good person that lapses really don’t affect your salvation. Many that would not hold to universalism do hold to a personalism when it comes to salvation. Fundamental option theory has become kind of a “once saved, always saved” for Catholics. The “Here I am Lord” centrality where God is lucky to have us.
So I can certainly identify this in the culture and among Catholics. Worse though is how often I find that I can identify this in myself. That I want to bargain with God as Abraham did.
“Lord I use to have all these serious sins. Can I be saved if I have whittled them down to five serious sins?”, “No, well how about four serious sins”, “Well then, how about three grave sins?”
It becomes quite easy to transmute the Call to Holiness to the call to be good enough. To dismiss Jesus’ call for us to be holy as the Father is holy as just hyperbole. To hear the Parable of the Tares and think “Well tough luck on those tares, being of the wheat myself.” To separate out the intention to be good from my actual actions. So easy to resign yourself to the purgative way without doing much purging, much less advancing in the states of perfection. To be satisfied with spiritual mediocrity on the way to joining the Laodicean and causing a gag reflex in Jesus.
It is quite annoying to start out writing a post about others holding the heretical fundamental optional theory and then realizing that you are not immune from it either. Like Saint John Henry Newman looking at his face in the mirror and realizing he was an Monophysite. At least for him it ended well.
The fundamental option theory also seems to be the hidden hand behind the majority of homilies I hear. Going to a number of Catholic parishes in my diocese I get a fair sampling even if not statically significant. The majority of homilies I have heard are of the “Dog that did not bark” variety. What is missing is significant. Now everybody has their hobby-horse sins that they want excoriated during the homily. Hobby-horse sins are almost always those sins we hold others to have and that we think ourselves free of. I want to go more general than that. What I find missing (except in the scriptural readings) is any mention of sin, repentance, growing in holiness, and salvation. Listening to a homily I am usually totally unscathed in regards to realizing I had something to repent of. Really I am a target-rich environment for being properly scathed.
There is such a generic country club feeling to so many homilies. That we are all part of the club. More thought seems to be given to what topical joke can be used to start or end the homily than any actual serious reflection on the readings. Much less any call for conversion. That we even showed up to Mass is suppose to be to our credit instead of seeing that “We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.”
Now sometimes we hear that the homily is suppose to “To comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” I have even heard this phrase used in a homily. Much more comforting than afflicting going on. Interestingly the quote was first used in regards to journalism. Still I don’t want to put all the blame on the homily since it is rather silly to think that we are suppose to get all that the Church teaches condensed down to under ten minutes on Sunday.
The default theology of the fundamental option theory goes hand-in-hand with why their are lines to Communion and not to Confession (in most places and I love seeing the exceptions). If we are good enough with those good intentions not much need for the confessional. No need to repent if our sins are just not that important and besides God will understand.
So who is the geekiest Catholic Apologist? No doubt it is Catholic Answer’s Jimmy Akin who has just released a new blog Let’s Watch Doctor Who! subtitled “Reviewing every Doctor Who TV story … from the beginning!”
Now I just love cheesy SF and this creates a good excuse to watch the series from the start. Besides I have exhausted all the episodes of Mystery Science Theater 3000 available for streaming on Netflix. Fortunately most of the episodes of Dr. Who are available for streaming on Netflix, except part of the first season. Although I ordered the DVDs of it and now have it for viewing.
In one of those strange coincidences I happened to see this image for the first time today.
William Hartnell was the first Dr. Who and of course St. John Vianney’s feast day was yesterday.
SF Author John C. Wright was asked to write an essay for the new First Peter Five explaining how his faith influenced his science fiction writing.
Few men have ever hated Christ as much as I have, before turning to love Him. Before I was a Catholic, I was an atheist, and not an atheist who kept his opinions to himself, but a vituperative, proselytizing, aggressive, evangelist of atheism who sought at every opportunity to spread the Bad News that God was dead and Christians were fools.
There is much to be enjoyed in this essay, but I really liked this point.
I wrote stories with nakedly religious endings of pure hope when I was an atheist because the story logic required such an ending. Likewise, I wrote stories with a nakedly atheist ending of pure despair when I was a Christian because the story logic required such an ending.
Such an excellent point especially since message fiction is getting so prevalent in science fiction. Agenda before story which can never go right.
In other John C. Wright news, he announced today that Tor Books has agreed to publish the remaining books in the Count to the Eschaton Sequence. Great news as I have read an enjoyed the first three books and await “The Architect of Aeons” to be released next year. So it is good to know that the full series will be published.
So I commend Tor Books for doing this. Now if only they would stop the message fiction outbursts on their blog and the stupidity of topics like “Post-Binary Gender in SF.”