Hi everyone,
To keep up to date with the latest new features on the blog as we update them, check out the “New Feature Update” page on the right hand menu.
God bless,
The Being Frank Admin Team
Hi everyone,
To keep up to date with the latest new features on the blog as we update them, check out the “New Feature Update” page on the right hand menu.
God bless,
The Being Frank Admin Team
I know I am a member of the ‘One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic’ Church and I profess it every Sunday. I know God has called me to the one true faith with the fullness of Truth. The Church has the most beautiful theology that has been revealed to us over 2000 years, and will always continue to be the true voice of God in our world.
With my zeal for the Truth and my passion for the Church, coupled with the objective Truths of the Catholic faith, I consistently, and often unknowingly, succumb to the temptation to Catholic triumphalism. This realisation hit me by surprise as I had never heard of Catholic triumphalism until this week.
From the introduction of Return to Rome, Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic, by Francis Beckwith:
‘I hope my Catholic readers will resist any temptation to triumphalism. I, of course, believe that Catholicism is in fact true in all its dogmatic theology, including its views of scripture, ethics, church authority, ecumenical councils, ect. I also believe there are many outstanding and persuasive defenses of Catholicism, authored by minds and souls far greater than mine. But my story, because it is a return, requires a departure. And that departure, to be candid, does not speak well of the early post-Vatican II American Church.’
Francis Beckwith grew up a cradle Catholic, left the Church for quite some time, and this book is the story of his return Home. He goes on to outline some of his unfortunate experiences during that era of the Church in America.
In my flat of wonderfully faithful Protestants, I am most commonly introduced to their guests as, ‘This is our flat mate. He’s Catholic.’ While I am in no way ashamed of this label, and I do not believe it stems from any anti-Catholic feelings they may harbour, I can’t help but think what caused them to label me in this way. In our many discussions on the different facets of the Christian faith, I did not realise that my claims to Truth and the way in which I spoke of them, were my form of Catholic triumphalism. I am sure there are other reasons, positive I hope, but I know now that sometimes my pride was displayed more prominently during our discussions than my faith.
This has served as a good reminder for humility in all aspects of my life, especially when speaking specifically about my faith to others. To truly witness to the Catholic faith requires a humble gentleness that often escapes me. How I live my life speaks so much louder than the words I can say. It is a reminder that I must resist the temptation to a lack of charity in defending my Catholic faith.
Rather obscure Simpon’s reference but I’m sure the fans will be able to tie it in….
Gee this latest Being Frank update has left the contributors page looking rather different. I was almost to confused to post, but fortunately (or unfortunately) for the connected world, I managed to work it out in a nick of time (before morning tea and the early lunch).
So anyway, the main thing I’ve been thinking about this week is so completely unrelated to the blog that I’ve been forced to think about something else to write about. So I started thinking about that news story earlier in the week about the 13 year old boy who just became a father. 13??? 13 year old boys should be thinking about what comics to buy, or what computer games to play, or how not to do homework. Not worry about raising a child. Are the days of idyllic, innocent 13 year olds a thing of the past?
What was also worrying about the whole thing was the mother of said child was herself only 15. Oh and apparently there were other boys (really you don’t become a man until you’ve clocked ‘Doom’ without the cheats) who were claiming to be the father of the child.
Now I’m not saying that a 13 and 15 year old can’t adequately raise a child and I’m sure they will have support in doing so, but does it seem wrong to anyone else that a kids are sexually active at such a young age? 13??
Well, kudos to them for keeping the child.
Following up from last week’s post I found this address given by Pope Benedict to the American Jewish organisations. I think it’s pretty indicative of his position on the matter of holocaust denial.
Dear Friends,
I am pleased to welcome all of you today, and I thank Rabbi Arthur Schneier and Mr Alan Solow for the greetings they have addressed to me on your behalf. I well recall the various occasions, during my visit to the United States last year, when I was able to meet some of you in Washington D.C. and New York. Rabbi Schneier, you graciously received me at Park East Synagogue just hours before your celebration of Pesah. Now, I am glad to have this opportunity to offer you hospitality here in my own home. Such meetings as this enable us to demonstrate our respect for one another. I want you to know that you are all most welcome here today in the house of Peter, the home of the Pope.
I look back with gratitude to the various opportunities I have had over many years to spend time in the company of my Jewish friends. My visits to your communities in Washington and New York, though brief, were experiences of fraternal esteem and sincere friendship. So too was my visit to the Synagogue in Cologne, the first such visit in my Pontificate. It was very moving for me to spend those moments with the Jewish community in the city I know so well, the city which was home to the earliest Jewish settlement in Germany, its roots reaching back to the time of the Roman Empire.
A year later, in May 2006, I visited the extermination camp at Auschwitz-Birkenau. What words can adequately convey that profoundly moving experience? As I walked through the entrance to that place of horror, the scene of such untold suffering, I meditated on the countless number of prisoners, so many of them Jews, who had trodden that same path into captivity at Auschwitz and in all the other prison camps. Those children of Abraham, grief-stricken and degraded, had little to sustain them beyond their faith in the God of their fathers, a faith that we Christians share with you, our brothers and sisters. How can we begin to grasp the enormity of what took place in those infamous prisons? The entire human race feels deep shame at the savage brutality shown to your people at that time. Allow me to recall what I said on that sombre occasion: “The rulers of the Third Reich wanted to crush the entire Jewish people, to cancel it from the register of the peoples of the earth. Thus the words of the Psalm, ‘We are being killed, accounted as sheep for the slaughter’, were fulfilled in a terrifying way.”
Our meeting today occurs in the context of your visit to Italy in conjunction with your annual Leadership Mission to Israel. I too am preparing to visit Israel, a land which is holy for Christians as well as Jews, since the roots of our faith are to be found there. Indeed, the Church draws its sustenance from the root of that good olive tree, the people of Israel, onto which have been grafted the wild olive branches of the Gentiles (cf. Rom 11: 17-24). From the earliest days of Christianity, our identity and every aspect of our life and worship have been intimately bound up with the ancient religion of our fathers in faith.
The two-thousand-year history of the relationship between Judaism and the Church has passed through many different phases, some of them painful to recall. Now that we are able to meet in a spirit of reconciliation, we must not allow past difficulties to hold us back from extending to one another the hand of friendship. Indeed, what family is there that has not been troubled by tensions of one kind or another? The Second Vatican Council’s Declaration “Nostra Aetate” marked a milestone in the journey towards reconciliation, and clearly outlined the principles that have governed the Church’s approach to Christian-Jewish relations ever since. The Church is profoundly and irrevocably committed to reject all anti-Semitism and to continue to build good and lasting relations between our two communities. If there is one particular image which encapsulates this commitment, it is the moment when my beloved predecessor Pope John Paul II stood at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, pleading for God’s forgiveness after all the injustice that the Jewish people have had to suffer. I now make his prayer my own: “God of our fathers, you chose Abraham and his descendants to bring your Name to the Nations: we are deeply saddened by the behaviour of those who in the course of history have caused these children of yours to suffer, and asking your forgiveness we wish to commit ourselves to genuine brotherhood with the people of the Covenant” (26 March 2000).
The hatred and contempt for men, women and children that was manifested in the Shoah was a crime against God and against humanity. This should be clear to everyone, especially to those standing in the tradition of the Holy Scriptures, according to which every human being is created in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26-27). It is beyond question that any denial or minimization of this terrible crime is intolerable and altogether unacceptable. Recently, in a public audience, I reaffirmed that the Shoah must be “a warning for all against forgetfulness, denial or reductionism, because violence committed against one single human being is violence against all” (January 28, 2009).
This terrible chapter in our history must never be forgotten. Remembrance — it is rightly said — is memoria futuri, a warning to us for the future, and a summons to strive for reconciliation. To remember is to do everything in our power to prevent any recurrence of such a catastrophe within the human family by building bridges of lasting friendship. It is my fervent prayer that the memory of this appalling crime will strengthen our determination to heal the wounds that for too long have sullied relations between Christians and Jews. It is my heartfelt desire that the friendship we now enjoy will grow ever stronger, so that the Church’s irrevocable commitment to respectful and harmonious relations with the people of the Covenant will bear fruit in abundance.
Speaking of the Holy Father, I also found this address for Lent 2009. Reading it is probably a good start to prepare for lent. Can one say they prepare for Lent when lent itself is a preparation for something else? I’m not going to get legalisatic or anything…just thought some of you pope loving people might be interested in uniting yourselves more closely to his intentions :)
Our Western culture is pretty set on trying to prolong death (and suffering) as much as possible…(ironically, however, we’re quite happy to kill some…the unborn, the murderer, the ‘unproductive’ invalid). Anyway, not to digress…
I was listening to a great podcast…iPadre…google it, and the priest was talking about funerals and how some people really get ansy at him for not allowing eulogies during the Mass etc, but since he’s a good priest who knows the importance of good catechesis, he has attempted to explain to his flock the role of the various events that take place around a Catholic death, and how integrated, holistic and beautiful the ‘why and how’ of these is. I won’t detail them here, I suggest you go listen to the podcast instead.
However, he does recommend putting it in your will, that you specifically want a requiem Mass, the Wake and proper burial/cremation etc when you die, respecting the beauty of the liturgy in its’ fullness. It’s not uncommon that devout Granny dies and the non-practicing family don’t see this as important. It got me thinking, if I dropped dead tomorrow (and my chances are considerably higher at the moment, indicated by the fact that it’s not safe for me to go to early morning Mass before sunrise – so unfair, the Muslims have their prayer calls at 5am, why can’t I go to Mass? haha).
…yes, so if I dropped dead tomorrow, what would happen at my funeral? And would there also be a wake? Would those closest to me realise how important it was to me that the liturgy was authentic, reverent, correct (for want of a better word)…since the Mass is the source and summit of everything we do, are, pray, eat, drink…
So consider whether it’s something worth mentioning to your nearest and dearest. Maybe they’re not Catholic/not catechized/whatever and amidst the grief of losing you they would really struggle to know what to do… Maybe you can make it easy for them by saying…”Look, if I ever did drop dead, I’d want Fr So-and-So or Fr So-and-so, and this person and that person would be able to help with arranging the Mass, the Wake, the burial etc so that you don’t have to do something that you feel is not your realm of expertise.”
I might sound a little morbid talking about this, but death, in our Catholic tradition is not the end, its a source of hope for eternal life. While the possibility is still very small, how sad would it be to watch your own funeral (if we can do that when we die) be a liturgical shambles. It’s one of the most important Masses you will ever be at…in body, and I imagine in soul and spirit. So why not think about the possibility?
Our continuing coverage of the saga of the priestly dress code for New Zealand priests picks up this week with this article on the NZ Catholic website. Apparently, the NZ Catholic Bishops Conference has agreed that guidelines be recommended to priests around the country (with room for adaptations by the diocesan bishop). These guidelines refer to the wearing of the Roman collar or “some agreed symbol.”
Now, when I read that, I was a bit confused. An “agreed symbol” that identifies these men as priests? Hmmm….something subtle, yet obvious? Something that they could wear every day without it really interfering with their work? Maybe….I dunno…a collar? One that is shaped differently from other people? :)
But no. It turns out that Bishop Cullinane from Palmerston North is (according to the Manawatu Standard) “spearheading” a “national campaign” to get a “new symbol to identify Catholic clergy”.
Sigh.
It seems (from the article) that the good bishop has noted that a number of priests have moved away from the collar, but that no work has been put into finding a replacement. So, my question is – why not just turn around and go back to wearing the collar? Because not all priests have turned away from it, right? Just some. In fact, most of the priests I know wear it as a matter of course.
On another level, let’s not re-litigate the emotive arguments for or against the collar. Let’s also put aside the spiritual, historical and professional dimension. Look at this purely from a marketing and branding point of view. It is fair to say that the Roman collar is incredibly well established as being a point of difference for clergy throughout the…well, Western church anyway. Fact. Is that agreed? If you don’t think so, think about the “gold-cross-on-the-lapel” movement which has gained some traction in recent years. What’s to stop me – a lay man – from putting a gold cross on my lapel? Answer: nothing. My workmates might look at me a bit askew, but nowhere near as much as they would if I showed up in a Roman collar now would they! Why? Because they know that I’m not a priest – and it is priests who wear Roman collars.
Come on guys – this isn’t rocket science!
Why, then, when you’ve invested many man-centuries establishing a brand with such high cut-through and recognition, why (oh why!) would you spend even a cent or minute more trying to do it again? Why?
Are we/they ashamed of this symbol of office? I saw a very interesting letter to the editor in a recent NZ Catholic, written by a priest who asked “why is it that protestant ministers are dressing more like Catholic priests, and our Catholic priests are dressing more like protestant ministers”, or words to that effect.
In short, to the good bishops I say: if it aint broke, don’t waste time and resources trying to “fix” it, lest you really break it! Am I right to say that?

Yesterday was St Valentine’s Day… I hope you were all loved by someone – well you definitely were because Jesus knows, loves and understands you better than anyone right?
What is love anyway? How do you know when you are dating someone if you feel the emotions which entitle you to say “I love you”. Does our society really, truly understand what love is despite all the hype, flowers, cards and sentiment that surround ‘falling in love’.
Love is at the centre of God’s message and the bible in a very solid, non mushy sort of way ( See 1 Cor 13: 13). Surely if God commands us to love it must be a decision or action rather than an emotion – because we can’t control our emotions and feelings all the time, so surely God wouldn’t command us to do something we can’t do.
We are not commanded to feel a certain way. We are commanded to act. Your act of worship in the mass is also an action of love for God – you don’t have to surround going to Church with emotional ‘feel good’ feelings necessarily. Your action of love is in your dedication and self sacrifice.
In his book “The four loves” C.S. Lewis clearly distinguishes agape, the kind of love Christ taught and showed, from storge (natural affection or liking), eros (sexual desire), and philia (friendship). It is agape that is the greatest thing in the world.
Remember God is love BUT you don’t worship love you worship GOD. God is a person – not a force or energy. God is not ‘airy fairy’ or soft.
Recent Comments