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

Archive for May, 2010

31
May

Getting my Fatima facts straight

I like watching the odd documentary, and I have a few recorded now off the Discovery Channel and others that I’m just starting to catch up on. One I watched at the weekend has resulted in more than a few hours researching the apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima.

The documentary was part of a series called “The Nostradamus Effect.” As best as I can figure out, this “Effect” is where there is seeming convergence between multiple prophecies made by different people, thereby corroborating their wider vision. I think. Something like that anyway.

So, this episode was looking at the Three Secrets of Fatima and what they meant or could mean. I knew very little of the “secrets”; I knew only that Our Lady had apparently appeared to three children in Portugal back in the early 20th Century, and that she had apparently given a sign, known as the “Miracle of the Sun“. This is where some 70,000 people noted that the Sun seemed to dance in the sky, right at the time foretold by Our Lady. There are plenty of sceptics about this event, but the Vatican did accept that something supernatural seems to have gone on at that point.

Anywho, Our Lady apparently also provided three “secrets” to the children to help spread a specific message of repentance and turning back to God (always a good idea). The first gave the poor kids a vision of Hell – literally. The second predicted the end of World War I, the beginning of World War II, and warned that if Russia – seat of atheistic Communism – wasn’t consecrated to her Immaculate Heat by the Pope and worldwide bishops simultaneously, then Communism would spread. Which it did.

Then there was the third secret. While the other two were released by Sister Lucia (the last surviving visionary) in 1941, the third was only written down by order of the local bishop in 1943. Sister Lucia did so, and then put it in an envelope, marking that it was to be revealed “after 1960″ when it would be better understood.

This is where the controversy starts. Not only was the secret not released in 1960 (despite being read by the pope), but was not released until the year 2000! And, when it was released, the argument was put forth that it wasn’t the complete text provided by Sister Lucia, and that there was a page missing.

Dun-dun-duhn! Conspiracy alert!

I don’t want to get in to the ins and outs of whether or not there is still a hidden part or “fourth secret” of Fatima. (Although, one small note: I find it hard to reconcile the official interpretation of the Secret by then Cardinal Ratzinger with his comments from 1984 about it being about the “importance of the end times”. In 1984 he says it’s about the end of the world, and in 2000 he says it’s not a prediction, but a commentary on the past? Which is it?)

But I do find these so-called “secrets” and, in fact, other prophecies downright fascinating. I understand (a little) the concept of public and private revelation, but still – don’t you find them intriguing? The concept of Our Lady, or Our Lord, directly appearing and speaking to people with a view to the future? So easy to discount, yet strangely compelling in some cases.

What does that say about us? Shouldn’t we just live in the moment? This is something I’m really trying harder to do. As someone with a wild and somewhat over-active imagination, my default positions is to cast my thoughts way into the future and explore countless possibilities. But, in doing so, I miss the here and now.

So, what is someone like me to make of Fatima? I don’t quite know. What about you? What do you think about such visions? Something to ignore? To pay close attention to? Somewhere in between.

Genuinely interesting stuff, in my opinion!

30
May

Change is afoot

I don’t think anyone has talked about the recent tax changes on this blog yet… Are we happy with them? The budget was actually quite exciting to listen to this year as it did affect a number of different groups. For a start it gave a tax cut to everyone – although the biggest change (a 5% cut) was to the top tax rate on income over $70,000. Overall, I am happy with tax cuts as the people who generate the most tax and income for the country are the ones who are working and earning, but I thought we should have kept the top tax rate a bit higher (maybe a 3% cut as happened to the middle rate) and raised the threshold for that rate to $80,000 or something like that instead.

Increasing GST to 15% was also a big change and one I’m not sure I am happy with. GST applies as a flat tax so increases the price of food and necessities for everyone – which basically means those that can afford to save more of their income benefit and pay less GST as a percentage of their incomes. Such people also might buy capital assets such as houses which don’t have GST on them. I’m not sure increasing the price of necessities with more GST was the way to go.

The companies rate also fell significantly and the trust rate is now the same as the top personal tax rate. That means the obsession New Zealander’s have with sheltering money in trusts and distributing to low income beneficiaries etc. is taken off somewhat – probably a good thing!

People also can’t make as much money off their rental homes by generating losses and applying them to their other income to reduce the amount of tax they pay. That is because they can no longer claim depreciation on buildings. This might stop people buying investment properties so much and give first home buyers a chance in the market? I hope so!

Overall I thought it was a fair budget (apart from the GST thing…) which held something for everyone and aimed to give the right signals. Hopefully it will help generate business in New Zealand and also encourage us to save more!

29
May

“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act”

The above quote by George Orwell seems to capture the situation in which our culture finds itself in the present day.

I managed to attend a few events at which Jason Evert spoke at over the last few days. I found him a truly engaging speaker, and a warm and prayerful personality. Audiences were captivated by him and individuals swarmed to him after the events, desperate to clasp his hand and thank him for telling him the truth. I overheard countless teenagers who might hardly communicate with their parents or peers reveal to him personal situations and problems for which they longed to have advice. In the 75 minutes in which Jason presented, he gained their trust, respect and their gratitude.

Did anyone reading manage to get along to see him? If so, what did you think?

Truth is a funny thing. We can be convinced that we hold or know the truth about something, yet it often takes immense courage to reveal it. I suppose revelation of the truth is always going to be met with persecution, which is why spiritual preparation and prudence is always advised. People asked Jason “what can we now do with this truth?” and his first response was to ensure a strong Eucharistic and Marian prayer life. After all, if we are not sustained by the source of Truth, how can we ever make it known in our culture?

28
May

“Homer? Who is Homer? My name is Guy Incognito.”

A big welcome to the two bloggers on Being Frank!  Hopefully your time here is fruitful for everyone involved.

I was reading through some of the posts this week and feel I have to speak out on a couple of things:

Of all the Catholic Blogs on the Internet, Being Frank is one of the few run by a group of people who hide their real names, although they are clearly all part of an ingroup who all know each other.

Yes I finally made it as part of an in-group!! Hopefully we have a suitably cool clique name.  I feel obliged to correct this statement. It is true that when we first started Being Frank all the contributors did indeed know each other, although perhaps only half were in the ingroup.  After a series of tasks, each more challenging than the last, we integrated the remaining non-ingroup personnel into the ingroup.  However now that we were all in the ingroup battles broke out as different personalities within the ingroup strove to impose themselves upon the ingroup.  After awhile, we began taking snipes at each other through our posts (take that James the LEAST. You like that DUMB Ox?).  Ater that, things became more sinister.  You think Agnes Dei ‘left’? You think On the Road ‘went to join another blog’? Do you really think Tuppence is in ‘Africa’? And what about Peter the hmmm… I forget what it was. Peter the Great? Peter the First? Well let’s just say Peter and The Captain have 4 things in common. G.O.N.E.  In time this ingroup has fragmented into warring factions (sort of like the Protestants), so while it’s true we used to know each other now we know each other the same way an eel knows that elephants exist.  Oh and I don’t really know the 2 newbies.

This is in marked contrast to the practice of the Church which is to use real names.

This is true I guess.  I mean that’s why we had Pope Karol Wojtyla I.  And Pope Ratzinger I. And Pope Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli I. Oh wait – what? The Pope’s don’t use their real names?? Well colour me purple Oprah looks like another sweeping generalisation gone awry.

It tends to foster extravagant and irresponsible posts.

Guilty.  Although I don’t think this will change if I start using my actual name. In fact, it might even be more irresponsible.  Isn’t everything on the internet supposed to be extravagant anyway? What’s the point of putting it on the web if it’s bland and dull.  Would you want to read a blog that peddles boredom? (hmmm maybe there WAS a good reason for the failure of my personal blog)

Why not step up to the practice of Jesus and start using real names ? At least for those running Being Frank.

Jesus’ real name wasn’t even Jesus though was it? And if God was so big on real names why did he bother renaming Abraham or Elijah or Peter.  If you really think what someone calls himself or herself on the internet has anything to do with the message they’re trying to get across, please email me a blank check made out to ‘C.Ash’ (my real name).

So did all the apostles. They used their real names because they were authentic and open and honest

I wish I could be more like the apostles.  Maybe I should have two names so it doesn’t matter which one I use.  Today should I be Simon or Peter.  Nathaniel or Bartholemew. Matthew or Levi. Thomas or Judas Thomas Didymus. Thaddeus or Jude.  Hmmm decisions decisions.

Anyway if real names are so important – fine.  I am Mr Robert Fradolka and I’m 28, a Libra and I like long walks on the beach preferably with my poodle in tow.  Well Labradoodle actually.  I was a born again Christian before I was reborn again as a Buddhist (phew luckily I switched before I got reborn).  But then I finally saw the light and became a Catholic.  There, does that make a difference?

No? Didn’t think so.

27
May

Wax on, wax off…

You know, I love balance. I had fun this week, perfecting the timetable of all timetables – integrating food, exercise and even mass times (it’s very hard to fit in exercise when you also frequent morning mass). I mean, I don’t love the timetable in and of itself, I just love the fact that when I wake up in the morning, I don’t have to think so much about what I’m going to have for lunch, if I need to get meat out for dinner wheather I’m going to subject myself to the pain of an energiser class etc, etc. In other words, because I don’t have to think about those things, I can concentrate on the bigger details of the day.

In lieu of the beginning of a new and balanced life – I’ve decided that my posts will be subject to balance as well (from now on, God-willing). Today I’m going to post on something a bit edgy/ controversial, next week I will post on something less edgy, more spiritual, and continue like this until I get sick of it.

Why?
1. Balance.

2. I did not grow up Catholic and hence I feel I’ve really lost out when it comes to the rich traditions our Church has to offer. For instance, did you know that traditionally, the Church spends three days in prayer to the Holy Trinity (Fri, Sat, Sun) in preparation for the feast of the Holy Trinity on Sunday? Or that the Church prepares for the Feast of Pentecost with a 10 day novena prior? These are things which I’m constantly discovering along my travels as a Catholic and, frankly I want to share them with you all (even the atheists). This is our heritage and our ancestry and it’s always good to have a bit of knowledge about family traditions (and even practice some of the good ones).

At the same time, I like nothing more than a good meaty debate. I may not participate that often (due to the nature of my job and life at this stage) but I’m sure many of you share my zest for a good debate (and have proved it many times on this blog)

So, on with edgy post….just a short poem I thought some of you would enjoy (and I’m sure some of you won’t). Happy reading.

26
May

Being Frank (for the first time)

It is not without trepidation that I take up the reins of the Wednesday post on this illustrious blog – a daunting prospect indeed, so I must ask for your patience while I adjust myself into the saddle.

Anonymity gives a certain freedom and mystique to any writer.  Not freedom from responsibility of course (as the word is popularly misconstrued), but freedom to express the truth – the beautiful, unpopular, oft-misplaced truth that might blacklist a person in most people’s minds (and in most recruitment officers’ books) in our greyscale, relativist society.  But I believe that even anonymous writers need credentials of some sort, so let me introduce myself.

My family converted to Catholicism from a Methodist church when I was quite young, so I can claim the benefits of being a convert, while at the same time having lived most of my life under the blessed guidance of the Church.  My prolonged university career has now reached Masters level, and with my media-related course I am well acquainted with the attitudes, ideas, workings and problems in the popular mass media – particularly in the entertainment industry.  Not wanting to give myself away too much, I’ll end by adding that I am an avid sports fanatic, and love classical music, long walks on the beach, etc.

To me, Being Frank is a breath of fresh air in our stuffy relativist closet of a society.  People say they want freedom, but in the end, only the truth will set us free.  The problem is that too much of society remains wilfully uneducated, and stubbornly inward-looking – neither attitude of which is particularly conducive to discovering the truth.  An agnostic friend of mine dreams of an ‘open forum’ sort of society, where everyone can hold their own views and not be troubled by anyone else with different views.  I hope our society never comes to that.  I hope people will always fight for the freedom to speak the truth.  I hope – and know – that there will always be a voice for truth where it is needed most, whether or not the freedom to express the truth is there too.

Pope John Paul II called for more Catholics in the media.  We can’t just condemn the damage that the secular media is doing; we have to do something about it.

So, I am well aware of the capacious shoes I am stepping into.  But, to be frank (I had to use that line somewhere in this post), I rejoice greatly in being given this opportunity to serve, and I hope I may serve Our Lord, all the faithful readers, and the tradition of Being Frank as well as I possibly can.

25
May

Earth to Mike, Earth to Mike, come in Mike

I was reading the NZ Herald last week, and I couldn’t believe my eyes when I saw this article, which relates how, on his breakfast show, Newstalk ZB presenter Mike Hosking slammed those who were demanding accountability of Mark Hotchin, co-founder of Hanover, failed finance company.

Hosking seems to think that is a case of tall poppy syndrome to demand accountability of a businessman who sets up a finance company, takes millions of dollars of investors money, and then defaults on payments to his investors.

Oh, and after he’s done all that, he continues to live an extravagant and lavish lifestyle while his investors, many of them elderly, are left to bear the brunt of, sometimes, huge financial losses.

Maybe Mike had one too many lattes that morning?

It just seems absolutely insane to me that someone could even think of trying to justify Hotchin’s behavior, let alone attacking those who demand accountability from him.

Surely even the highly manicured Mike Hosking can see that the actions of Hotchin and co aren’t responsible, ethical or moral business practices, and that any person of integrity and character would not be engaged in this sort of disgraceful conduct?