Please click here to vote for us in the Catholic New Media Awards 2009 - thanks!

Archive for October, 2006

31
Oct

Horizontalism

Cardinal Arinze“The liturgy is not the property of anyone– neither the celebrant nor the community in which the mysteries are celebrated. The sacred liturgy is not a domain in which free exploration reigns. Liturgical abuses can be traced to the undue place given to spontaneity, or creativity, or perhaps a false idea of liberty, or even that error that goes by the name of ‘horizontalism,’ which consists in placing man at the center of the liturgical celebration instead of directing attention upward, that is toward Christ.”

The Prefect for the Congregation of Divine Worship, Cardinal Arinze, Oct 27 2006
—————————————————————————————-
Cardinal Ratzinger (BXVI)

“The most important thing today is that we should regain respect for the Liturgy and for the fact that it is not to be manipulated. Things have got so far that groups are cobbling the Sunday Liturgy together for themselves.” Pope Benedict XVI when he was Cardinal, 2001
—————————————————————————–
What Cardinal Arinze and the Pope are outlining here is linked to my previous post ‘Headless Chicken’. When Christ is The Holy Sacrifice of the Massseparated from the Church we get horizontalism in the Liturgy – where we stop looking at Our Lord and start looking at each other.
It is great to have deep friendships with our brothers and sisters in Christ, but what is not great is when, at Mass, we end up looking at each other rather than focusing on the sacrifice of Christ that is taking place on the Altar, and properly particpating in that act of worship and love of God.
The beauty of the traditional lay-out of the Catholic Church is that the whole congregation is looking towards Our Lord – everyone united in prayer looking towards Heaven.
Cardinal Arinze also rebuked priests who take an “overtly egocentric” approach to the liturgy, violating the norms of the Church by “banalization, desacralization, and secularization of the liturgy”. He also criticized priests whose “false humility” leads them to “share their role with the laity.”
When we understand what the Mass is we can begin to understand why it is important not to “play” with it. The Mass is the re-presentation of the Sacrifice of Calvary to the Father, in the form of the Last Supper. It is not the renewal or re-enactment of the Last Supper. It is the un-bloody re-presentation of Christ’s saving offering, offered by the Church to the Father, and from this the graces of salvation are poured out on us.  So first and foremost, the Mass is a sacrifice, and secondly it is a communion with the victim who is immolated in that sacrifice – and that Communion is brought about by consuming the Immaculate Victim, which in turn draws us all into communion with one another…
I would like to use this post to encourage everybody to ask themselves (under inspiration of Cardinal Arinze) whether they truly respect the Liturgy (Mass) as the medium through which the salvation is applied to us – or whether they see it as a cultural expression where everybody gets to share a meal together.
“To speak of the Eucharist as the community meal is to cheapen it, for its price was the death of Christ” – Pope Benedict XVI when he was Cardinal, 1981.

30
Oct

Words without meaning

Why is it that we seem to be happy with not knowing what the words we use actually mean?

Let me give you an example. My workplace (like many of yours I suspect) has sections of it decked out in decorations for Halloween – from cobwebs to coffins. Moreover, tomorrow night I will no doubt have a bunch of kids from the neighbourhood knocking at our door asking for lollies because they’re wearing a plastic mask of a ghoul bought from The Warehouse for $4.99.

Now some of you reading this will no doubt comment on the evil nature of Halloween, and others will probably argue that it is just harmless fun. But I personally think that Halloween is sad. I say it is sad because it is another example of the ignorance modern society seems to have towards the meaning behind words in our vocabulary.

Of the aforementioned actors (i.e. my work mates, the trick-or-treaters and The Warehouse stock buyers), how many do you think really understand the word “Halloween”? How many know the history behind the event? I would wager not many. My work mates will write it off as a reason to have fun in a “scary movie” kind of way. The trick-or-treaters will see it as a reason to get dressed up and get some free lollies. And The Warehouse (and co.) will see it as a way to make money by selling gimmicks that meet the needs of the first two groups.

Maybe some of them do know? Maybe they know that the word is derived from the fact that tomorrow is All Hallows Eve – or All Saints Day eve. Maybe they know that November 1st is that day when we celebrate those who have gone before us and are now in Heaven after setting themselves up as role models for the rest of us? That’s why there’s heaps of saint decorations up at my work, and there will no doubt be kids coming by on Wednesday night to ask for a prayer, and The Warehouse is going to be stocking halos and Saint pictures from tomorrow.

Ahem.

Maybe not.

Maybe the root cause of some of the communication issues we face in spreading the Good News is that people are perfectly happy using words that they don’t really understand. Any ideas on how to change that?

29
Oct

All’s Fair in Love and War?

Something that has always vaguely puzzled me is how come war “heroes” are regarded as such even though they killed people in war.  Are you allowed to kill people in war as a special exception to the commandment “thou shall not kill?”  

Customary International Law and the Geneva Conventions certainly say the killing of a combatant by another combatant in an international armed conflict is not murder, and is legal.  It’s an odd concept really that at international law we have all these rules about how we might kill each other and conduct wars against each other.  The use of force is illegal unless in self defence.  Fundamentally, you must always distinguish between civilians and combatants once you’re at war.  If you are going to kill civilians (collateral damage) the military advantage or military necessity must outweigh the loss of innocent life.  You can use certain weapons but not others that cause unnecessary or superfluous suffering.  Not that you would notice that countries have agreed to any rules at all if you watch the news! 

So are we justified as Catholics in going to war?  The catechism of the Catholic Church states on legitimate defence that: 

2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. “The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not.”65 


2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
 


If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.66 


2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.     

 

The theory of “Just War” is thought to have been first developed by St Augustine.  He writes of the right of rulers to declare a just war to maintain peace.  St Thomas thought a sovereign has the lawful right of recourse to “the sword” to defend its people against internal strife by punishing those that do evil for the common good, justified by St Paul in verse 4 of Chapter 13 in the letter to the Romans.  Moral theologians have taught that “only an injury so grave that it outweighs the risks and losses of war is a justification for making war”.  The second Vatican Council justified “the right of a nation to defend itself by a discriminate and proportionate use of force as a last resort”.   

 

Modern age warfare with its massive destruction capabilities has come along since the era of the bible.  It’s quite scary what we can do to each other.  Obviously we should avoid war if at all possible, but could we have stood back and let Hitler kill so many people because we didn’t want to use armed force?  Would the Iraq war have been justified if it had turned out they really did have nuclear weapons and were a threat to world peace and security?  Would you feel justified pulling the trigger of a gun and killing another human being? 

Or is this all a little heavy for a Sunday afternoon!! 

 

27
Oct

Musings V (I think it’s up to V)

Apologies for the brevity of the post this week. I’ll be sitting the biggest exam of my life on Monday (quite literally as it’s 6 hours long!), so it’s been pretty full on preparing for that at the moment. Let me know if you want a post about international financial reporting standards though.

A couple of things in the news this week caught my attention and got me wondering about what is wrong with society these days. Would link to them but that would require having links in the first place (does anyone have these links?).

1.) The stabbing of that 14 year old outside Avondale College by a fellow youth.
2.) Those boys in Aussie who made a DVD of their abuse of a girl.

What are young people on these days? How can they not think of the consequences of their actions? In the case of number 2, how could they even think that this would be a good idea?

Sometimes it almost seems like it could be a good idea for God to turn everyone into good people. Sure we’d all be robots, but I think I’d make quite an attractive robot.

Right, back to study now.

26
Oct

In need of a pick-me-up

I’m feeling weary this week. My prayers have been of the “*SIGH* Lord I don’t even know where to start…” variety. It’s not that anything in particular has happened, more that nothing in particular has happened.

I try to find the beauty of God’s creation, but as students throw their babies out the window, tensions rise in Sudan, my cricketers lose embarrasingly, my football team loses to dirty Man U and Michael J Fox shakes uncontrollably on TV, it’s hard to keep the faith!

It’s all a bit much sometimes, and every now and then I wonder if it’s supposed to be this difficult? Did God give us life so we’d struggle, battle daily and generally suffer under the weight of it all? I know Catholics cop a fair amount of stick for “suffering is worship” but really it’s all a bit too hard isn’t it?

But then I take a deep breath (have an 11am whiskey) and realise a) it could be a lot worse, b) I’m being a little overdramatic, c) my boys beat Pakistan and are through to the semis, and d) it’s not about suffering, it’s about living God’s love, and true love has ups and downs – but coming through the other side makes it stronger, and therefore worth it.

“Nothing worthwhile in life is easy,” me darling mother says. I love God and am grateful I know Him through the Catholic Church, but let’s just say if I make it through this week the relationship will be strengthened, and apparently very worthwhile!

25
Oct

Culture of death?

I know it’s come up before in this forum, and just wanted to throw a couple of ideas out there…

It’s not uncommon to hear people advocating the idea of martyrdom, or even suggesting that they’d welcome the chance to be a martyr.

I really struggle with such statements, because it seems to me that the desire to be a martyr is oxymoronic: a true martyr could never desire the fate! When we make such statements, it seems, we cheapen martyrdom and those who have suffered it on our behalf.

A martyr is, by definition, someone who truly values the gift of life, and recognizes it as God-given; who is faced with an untenable situation, and chooses to lay down their own life in the service of a cause they value even more highly.

It seems a slight paradox is in play when we reflect on the question: those who truly cherish life enough to become martyrs, to be giving up something so valuable to them, are also those least likely to contemplate/anticipate martyrdom as a glorious end.

When we voice a wish to be martyrs, on the other hand, perhaps we need to refocus, and put some real perspective on the beautiful gift that is life.

24
Oct

Headless Chicken?

When debating the teachings of the Church it is common to hear the argumentative separation of Jesus (the Head) from the Catholic Church (the Body) by stating that the teachings of the Catholic Church are somehow separate or different to the teachings of Jesus. As a body the head can never be separated (without deadly consequences)…

 
 The teachings of the Church ARE the teachings of Christ… they cannot be separated… The Church is the mystical body of Christ, all its members are being guided and directed by Christ the head, this was set forth by St. Paul in various passages, especially in Ephesians 4:4-13 (cf. John 15:5-8). The doctrine may be summarized as follows (www.newadvent.org)

 
? The members of the Church are bound together by a supernatural life given to them by Christ through the sacraments. Christ is the centre and source of life to whom we are all united, and who gives each one the gifts appropriate for his position in the body. These graces, form it into an ordered whole, whose parts are bound together like a system of ligaments and joints (Colossians 2:19).

 
? Through them, too, the Church has its growth and increase, growing in extension as it spreads through the world, and intensively as the individual Christian develops in himself the likeness of Christ.

 
? In virtue of this union the Church is the fullness or complement (pleroma) of Christ (Ephesians 1:23). It forms one whole with Him; and the Apostle even speaks of the Church as “Christ” (1 Cor. 12:12).
? This union between head and members is conserved and nourished by the Holy Eucharist. Through this sacrament our incorporation into the Body of Christ is outwardly symbolized and inwardly actualized; “We being many are one bread, one body; for we all partake of the one bread” (1 Cor. 10:17).

 
Perhaps it would be easier to accept and take on board all the teachings of the Church if people better understood they are Christ’s teachings – that if Our Lord was on earth bodily in front of us now he would be saying the exact same things… because the teachings are His, what we are taught now is taught to us by the Living God through the body of His Church which He is head!