Saturday, 27 September 2014

February 24, 303 XV


This is part of a longer series on the persecution of Diocletian. One can use the link at the bottom for more posts.

The Romans had done persecutions before. What was the difference? Diocletian helped calm down the stress of financial difficulties.

He increased taxes, built up the army, made it into a military state which were all things that worked before.

What was the difference which caused the persecution of the Catholics?

Two things caused the hatred of the Catholics-one the stress of the people being on the edge of the decline of the civilization.

Second, the return to rejuvenate the glory that was Rome was based on a conservatism, of a system which was outdated, as the new system emerging was feudalism, which was local government, a new idea, as the empire idea was passe.

Rome was twice the size of the old USSR. The empire model was ending fast, the imperial system was old and weary, whereas the local systems were growing.

The Senate was made up of local Roman families, not world travelers, like the emperors or the army.

Rome was reliant on the supply lines, corn from Egypt, and other far trade routes. Over-centralization killed Rome-Rome could not re-invent itself.

A city like Rome has never existed since then, never. A real center of politics, technology, trade and it was increasingly reliant on charismatic leaders like Diocletian.

DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR?

Stress is now in the States. I see it and I feel it. Europeans feel the stress. The infrastructures we take for granted are
crumbling, The same was true in 303. The inside  of the empire was crumbling. Therefore, a scapegoat had to be found.

The Catholics became the scapegoats because they were the largest minority group. They were at least 20% to 30% of the population. They were seen as a threat to the old common good.

There were many Catholics in the military. And, they could command armies, and even become emperor.

But, they did not worship the common gods. They did not worship the State.

They were THE threat to the world order. A huge system which was NOT pagan threatened the system.

Yes! We are on the edge now.

I can see and feel the stress here in America where I write, and abroad in many countries. Stress will lead to persecution. It has all happened before.....

Catholicism could not be adopted by the pagans, as other cults were. Catholicism could not be put into the melting pot.
The West is a melting pot, or has been. And the separation of church and state is ending, as the state will create a religion of secularism.

Are you getting ready?

http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.com/2014/02/if-you-missed-february-24-303.html

Thursday, 18 September 2014

Report: Catholic Identity Conference 2014

For the third consecutive year, the Catholic Identity Conference was held in Weirton, West Virginia, to bring together a broad array of tradition minded Catholics to worship in the Traditional Roman Rite and to share ideas on current issues in the Church.  What follows is a brief report on this year's conference, held 12-14 September.

On Friday, 12 September 2014, Canon Jean-Marie Moreau of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest offered a Solemn High Mass for the Feast of the Most Holy Name of Mary at St. Peter Church in Steubenville, Ohio, to open the Catholic Identity Conference 2014.  Canon Moreau preached on the meaning of the name of Mary and of its power, referencing the lifting of the Siege of Vienna in 1683.

St. Peter Church, in the Diocese of Steubenville, Ohio, just across the Ohio River from Weirton, West Virginia, offers the Traditional Mass every Sunday, however, this was the first Solemn High Mass to be offered at St. Peter's in the age of Summorum Pontificum.  In addition to conference participants, who hailed from as far away as Oregon and Maine, Michigan and Mississippi, the opening Mass was attended by a number of local parishioners.

After Mass, at a hotel in Weirton, Dr. John Rao, of the Roman Forum, set the theme for the conference with a talk examining the strengths and weaknesses of the "Old Evangelization" with an emphasis on personalism, and the problems it created, and continues to create, in the Church.

St. Peter Church
Steubenville, Ohio
The second day of the Conference began with a Low Mass, again offered by Canon Moreau, at Sacred Heart of Mary Church in Weirton, West Virginia.  This church, originally a Polish parish and built in 1967, had never had the Traditional Mass offered on its altar until the first Catholic Identity Conference held in 2012.

After Mass, there was a full day of conference speakers who examined various aspects of both the Old and New Evangelization.  All of the talks were well presented and very informative.  Audio CD's of the conference talks are available for purchase online.  The day culminated with a dinner, at which Fr. Gregory Pendergraft, of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter, gave the keynote address.

The conference concluded on Sunday, Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, after a High Mass offered by Fr. Ladis J. Cizik, a priest of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, at Sacred Heart of Mary Church in Weirton.  Fr. Cizik preached on the centrality of the sign of the cross to the Catholic faith and in the Traditional Mass.  He also blessed the congregation with a relic of the True Cross.

One of the primary objectives of the Conference organizer, Mr. M. Eric Frankovitch, an attorney in Weirton, was to bring together the various strands of Traditionalism, that sometimes seem to be at odds with one another.  In that regard, this year's Conference boasted an impressive array of participants and attendees that included both ordained and lay members and adherents to the following organizations: the Society of Saint Pius X; the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter; the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest; the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate; the Fatima Center; the Knights of Columbus; Juventutem; diocesan clergy from four dioceses; prominent Catholic academics, journalists, and bloggers, as well as parishioners from parishes and chapels of the various traditional orders and diocesan Latin Mass communities.

This was accomplished both in the formal conference talks, and in the informal social gatherings after the conference sessions.  Participants were able to talk with each other, share ideas, and express opinions about the current situation in the Church and in the world.  Needless to say, there was a wide spectrum of ideas, and not everyone agreed with everyone else, but, they all believed in the teachings of the Church on faith and morals, and were willing to listen to other viewpoints regarding problems, potential solutions, and policy.  There was no attempt to silence or marginalize people who have legitimate concerns and who are trying to seek solutions.

Many participants, who had attended previous Catholic Identity Conferences, commented that this was the best Conference to date, and looked forward to building on the contacts and relationships forged at this year's meeting.

Additional photos of the conference, and a brief summary of each of the conference talks, can be found here.


Knights of Columbus Latin Mass

Wednesday, 17 September 2014

American Bishops Encouraging Fast

The International Prayer and Fasting Coalition are being supported by the Catholic Church in America, and I hope in Great Britain.

From September 20th through the 28th, Catholics are encouraged to join all Christians in the world to fast for those who are being persecuted.  The main objects of prayer are the end of persecutions (peace in the world), worldwide conversion to Christianity, and the building of pro-life cultures.

Only a world under Christ can truly be at peace. More and more, countries are hindered in missionary activities, but we can all pray and fast anywhere.

Suggestions for the week are attending daily Mass, saying the rosary daily, attending Adoration, saying the Divine Mercy chaplet daily.

An opening all-day prayer vigil will occur in Washington, D. C.  Watch this space for details.

Here is the official website.

http://iwopf.org/

Saturday, 13 September 2014

First of All..Guild Priorities

Congratulations, in the name of all the members of the Guild, if I may be so bold, to Laurence and Mrs. England on their wedding.

In America, we congratulate the man for getting a lovely bride, and say "Best Wishes" to the new bride.

Interesting custom.

Marriages are to be celebrated with joy and gladness. They symbolize the love of Christ the Bridegroom for His Church, the Bride. Marriage also reminds us of the soul's union with Christ in love. How wonderful that God so identified with our state by making marriage a sacrament.

Mr. and Mrs. England, you may like this.....

http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.com/2014/09/perfection-series-v-part-seven-on.html

May I quote the great St. Bernard as a tribute? I am sure we all wish you both a great life together in Christ.

 from Sermon 74
I. 5. Now bear with my foolishness a little. I want to tell you of my own experience, as I promised. Not that it is of any importance .... I admit that the Word has also come to me-I speak as a fool-and has come many times—But although he has come to me, I have never been conscious of the moment of his coming. I perceived his presence, I remembered afterwards that he had been with me; some times I had a presentiment that he would come, but I was never conscious of his coming or his going. And where he comes from when he visits my soul, and where he goes, and by what means he enters and goes out, I admit that I do not know even now; as John says: 'You do not know where he comes from or where he goes.' There is nothing strange in this, for of him was it said, 'Your foot steps will not be known.' The coming of the Word was not perceptible to my eyes, for he has not color; nor to the ears, for there was no sound; nor yet to my nostrils, for he mingles with the mind, not the air; he has not acted upon the air, but created it. His coming was not tasted by the mouth, for there was not eating or drinking, nor could he be known by the sense of touch, for he is not tangible. How then did he enter? Perhaps he did not enter because he does not come from outside? He is not one of the things which exist outside us. Yet he does not come from within me, for he is good, and I know there is no good in me. I have ascended to the highest in me, and look! the word is towering above that. In my curiosity I have descended to explore my lowest depths, yet I found him even deeper. If I look outside myself, I saw him stretching beyond the furthest I could see; and if I looked within, he was yet further within. Then I knew the truth of what I had read, 'In him we live and move and have our being'. And blessed is the man in whom he has his being, who lives for him and is moved by him.
6. You ask then how I knew he was present, when his ways can in no way be traced? He is life and power, and as soon as he enters in, he awakens my slumbering soul; he stirs and soothes and pierces my heart, for before it was hard as stone, and diseased. So he has begun to pluck out and destroy, to build up and to plant, to water dry places and illuminate dark ones; to open what was closed and to warm what was cold; to make the crooked straight and the rough places smooth, so that my soul may bless the Lord, and all that is within me may praise his holy name. So when the Bridegroom/ the Word, came to me, he never made known his coming any signs, not by sight, not by sound, not by touch. It was not by any movement of his that I recognized his coming; it was not by any of MY senses that I perceived he had penetrated to the depth of my being. Only by the movement of my heart, as I have told did I perceive his presence; and I knew the power of his might cause my faults were put to flight and my human yearnings brought into subjection. I have marvelled at the depth of his wisdom when my secret faults have been revealed and made visible the very slightest amendment of my way of life I have experience his goodness and mercy; in the renewal and remaking of the spirit of my mind, that is of my inmost being, I have perceived the excellence of his glorious beauty, and when I contemplate all these things I am filled with awe and wonder at his manifold greatness.

Thursday, 28 August 2014

A Free School Appeal for South London

I would like to post a link to an appeal website, which sets out a proposal for a free school of Catholic ethos, aiming at parents, teachers and academics in London, south of the Thames:

A Free School for South London

The idea is to get as many responses as possible, and then arrange several meetings this autumn. We are looking for people who would be interested in forming a working group to prepare an application and discuss ideas, those who would be keen to teach, prospective parents, people willing to help out in promotion, etc.

In case anyone isn't aware, free schools are completely funded by the Department of Education, but have considerable freedom in their curricula and may be "faith schools" with a proportion of their intake limited to a specific religious affiliation.

Several disclaimers are in order. Firstly, this doesn't have any official ecclesial or diocesan link, backing or approval. If it goes anywhere it will be a lay initiative. Secondly, it is worth pointing out that while it obviously aims to attract parents of active faith and of a certain churchmanship, the aim is partly evangelical - to start a school that will be a city on a hill and that cannot be hid. And thirdly, it needn't be seen as aggressive, as there are sizeable areas of south London - the whole borough of Bromley, for example - that have no existing secondary Catholic education provision.

If interested, please get in touch. The contact details are on the website.


UPDATE:
There is a meeting planned
for the morning of 
Saturday 18th October
for interested parties.

Further details available from tjwgraham@doctors.net.uk

Humility, Direction, Providence on St. Augustine's Day

For the Catholic, humility is the great step on the road to holiness. No one can be holy without humility, without the death of the ego. One thing shared by many of the Catholic writers on holiness is that humility is found in times of trials, such as the Dark Night.

Saints, from the Evangelists, to St. John Paul II,  have sung the songs of the beauty of humility. Perhaps the most famous treatise on humility is St. Benedict's rule concerning the steps to humility, followed by St. Bernard of Clairvaux's commentary on Benedict's text.

But, in more modern times, we have been given this reminder about humility from one of the earliest sermons of St. John Paul II in his long papacy.

So often today man does not know what is within him, in the depths of his mind and heart. So often he is uncertain about the meaning of his life on this earth. He is assailed by doubt, a doubt which turns into despair. We ask you therefore, we beg you with humility and trust, let Christ speak to man. He alone has words of life, yes, of eternal life.

His words remind me of St. Augustine's great call to know one' self, and that only in self-knowledge can one actually come to know God.


St. John Paul II was lamenting the fact that so few people in the then, 20th Century, did not know themselves, do not know what it means to be human.


Without self-knowledge, one cannot achieve humility. We see so many Catholics wallowing in egotism, unable to really see themselves as they are, not willing to confront sin and the status of creatureliness, which is the truth of our existence.

Only, as St. John Paul II notes, in humility and trust, can we face ourselves, and then, God.  

Self-knowledge is like the rudder in the ship of our soul. Without self-knowledge and humility, there is no control over the direction of our lives. We are literally tossed to and fro. Direction comes from the knowledge of who one is as a human with a soul, which is the form of the body.

Direction is sadly missing in so many lives, as people try this or that identity, rather than knowing themselves as creatures, as children of God.

In order for a Catholic to understand what or Who Providence is, self-knowledge must precede any grasp of how God works in one's life.

One of the reasons why so many Catholics act out their personalities in public, trying this face or that, is that they lack humility, direction, a sense of Providence.

Here is St. Augustine on self-knowledge:
To you, then, Lord, I lie exposed, exactly as I am. I have spoken of what I hope to gain by confessing to you. My confession to you is made not with words of tongue and voice, but with the words of my soul and the clamour of my thought, to which your ear is attuned; for when I am bad, confession to you is simply disgust with myself, but when I am good, confession to you consists in not attributing my goodness to myself, because though you, Lord, bless the person who is just, it is only because you have first made him just when he was sinful. This is why, O Lord, my confession in your presence is silent, yet not altogether silent: there is no noise to it, but it shouts by love.

For it is you, Lord, who judge me. No-one knows what he himself is made of, except his own spirit within him, yet there is still some part of him which remains hidden even from his own spirit; but you, Lord, know everything about a human being because you have made him. And though in your sight I may despise myself and reckon myself dust and ashes, I know something about you which I do not know about myself.


It is true that we now see only a tantalizing reflection in a mirror, and so it is that while I am on pilgrimage far from you I am more present to myself than to you; yet I do know that you cannot be defiled in any way whatever, whereas I do not know which temptations I may have the strength to resist, and to which ones I shall succumb. Our hope is that, because you are trustworthy, you do not allow us to be tempted more fiercely than we can bear, but along with the temptation you ordain the outcome of it, so that we can endure.

Let me, then, confess what I know about myself, and confess too what I do not know, because what I know of myself I know only because you shed light on me, and what I do not know I shall remain ignorant about until my darkness becomes like bright noon before your face.

Tuesday, 26 August 2014

Catholic Identity Conference 2014 - Updated Information


Catholic Identity Conference 2014 will take place in Weirton, West Virginia, 12-14 September 2014, beginning with a Solemn High Mass offered by Canon Jean Marie Moreau of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest on Friday, 12 September, Feast of the Most Holy Name of Mary, and concluding with a High Mass on Sunday, 14 September, Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross.

This year's speakers include:
For additional information and to register, see here.

Knights of Columbus Latin Mass

Monday, 25 August 2014

What God Said to Mary and What Mary Said to God: The Magnificat Part 1




You will find, in Catholic links, resources, books, discourses and literature far better explorations and meditations on the Visitation of Our Lady to St Elizabeth, her cousin, than I can give. Because I am restricting myself to what the Blessed Virgin Mary said to God and what God said to Our Lady, in order to show you that she is indeed like no other creature to have lived, I will not be referring to the words of St Elizabeth to the Mother of God greatly in this post. Aside from this, I have noted St Elizabeth's bold acclamation of Mary as "blessed" and the "mother of my Lord" in the previous piece which should prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mary is who the Church says she is.

That Elizabeth sees in Mary the fulfillment of God's promises is clear, as is the miraculous nature of this maiden's encounter with Elizabeth. Where Mary is, there are miracles! St John the Baptist leaps at the sound of her voice, not merely the presence of his Lord. Mary is 'blessed', Elizabeth deems herself not worthy to receive the Mother of God and Mary, who has believed, is blessed because in her womb all of God's promises will be fulfilled because Jesus is the Saviour. How Elizabeth knows all this...God alone knows!

With that said, the Magnificat is not, so it would appear, directly announced by Our Lady, to God. It is announced 'about Him' to us. It is the praise of God announcement to mankind. It is a hymn of praise to God, but something cried aloud by Mary in the presence of her cousin, in reply to St Elizabeth's offering of praise to the Virgin when she said...

'Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed art thou that hast believed, because those things shall be accomplished that were spoken to thee by the Lord.'

The Magnificat is delivered by the Virgin immediately in response to these words from her cousin. It does not, on paper, look like a prayer. Yet it is sung by monks in monasteries. The Chant of the Church is prayer.

And Mary said:
My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name. And his mercy is from generation unto generations, to them that fear him. He hath shewed might in his arm: he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away. He hath received Israel his servant, being mindful of his mercy:As he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed for ever.

This is a canticle that reveals this biblical figure's complete immersion in the Books and Psalms of the Old Testament and the God Who is revealed within them. A very good resource providing evidence for this can be found here, in a guide that enables readers to go to those parts of Scripture cited in Our Lady's hymn that form its construction, albeit in a hymn which Mary 'said'. Whatever else Mary said to Elizabeth, or to anyone else really, is hidden from us during her visit for three months to her cousin. We must ask why it is that the Gospel writer has included only these words from Our Lady. It is the clear intent of the writer to only include words of Our Lady which enable us to reflect and meditate on her role in Salvation history and upon her. The less that is said, the more intense our meditation on her will be. The less someone says, the more mysterious their presence can be.


Sunday, 24 August 2014

What God Said to Mary and What Mary Said to God: Part 1

Atheists and other denominations of Christianity will generally not have a huge appreciation for the Blessed Virgin Mary, as we Catholics call her. Our Lady is given so many titles, due to the superabundance of virtues given to her by God and because of the multitudinous apparitions she has made throughout history in various places at different times.

Those of other Christian denominations who do not recognise, or who underplay the hugely important role of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Immaculate Queen of all the Saints, or who insist that she can in some way be overlooked, or be left unpraised, not venerated or who maintain that her prayers are ineffective before her Son's Throne, are often those who use biblical passages in order illustrate their particular version of the Christian Faith, which is, in so many ways, a 'reformed' or distorted version of that which the Catholic Church holds as its own.

Therefore, in order to illustrate to readers the importance of Mary, the ever virgin Mother of God, a belief held by the Church since its birth, it would serve us to examine what God said to Mary. Mary, it will be noted, does not feature greatly in the New Testament, even if she is prophecised from even the first of the Old Testament, when God promises that the 'seed of the Woman' will crush the head of the serpent who led, through cunning persuasion, our first parents into sin and disobedience.

The Annunciation


We will recall then that when when an Angel speaks, the Angel is a messenger not of himself, but of Almighty God. The very word, Angel, means Messenger. We can be assured very well that the Blessed Mother of God was close to God in a way in which no other human being can or will be during their earthly life, save her Divine Son, Who was and is God, the Son. There will never be a human being who is like Mary, since, though she was not and is not God she was without sin and perfect in every possible virtue. The only woman we can look at in the history of the World who was ever like Mary was Eve before the Fall. As we give to Christ the name of the New Adam, so we give to Mary the name of the New Eve. Never again will there ever be born a human being who, from the very first moment of their conception, is Immaculate, free from all taint of human sin, who is beyond reproach, pure, sinless and without fault or blemish.


Friday, 22 August 2014

The Transforming Power of Sung Prayer: God's Gift to Man



"Music has power to soothe the savage breast." William Congreve, The Mourning Bride
 "This so-called ‘music,’ they would have to concede, is in some way efficacious to humans. Yet it has no concepts, and makes no propositions; it lacks images, symbols, the stuff of language. It has no power of representation. It has no relation to the world."  Oliver Sacks,The Power of Music *
"Sing unto the LORD with the harp; with the harp, and the voice of a psalm.  With trumpets and sound of cornet make a joyful noise before the LORD, the King." Psalm 98:5,6 (KJV)
"Did you write the book of love,And do you have faith in God above,If the Bible tells you so?Do you believe in rock n'roll,Can music save your mortal soul?Don McLean, American Pie 
This post is a reflection on how music has shaped my devotion to the Church.     There will be links to my favorite music:  liturgical, hymns and other.   I'd be grateful if readers would note in comments their favorite music.   I won't say much about the psychology of music or how music affects the brain.   A lot of work has been done in functional imaging, but I'm not sure we know much more now than when Pythagoras noted the beautiful mathematical relations between harmonious intervals.    However, for those interested in pursuing the subject, I will give references**. 

My first encounter with the power of music in liturgy came at a 40 Hours devotional service. (See Top Down to Jesus) .     I had been preparing for entry into the Church and although on rational grounds I had come to believe in the Resurrection and its implications, there were matters of dogma I found  difficult to understand, particularly that important one, transubstantiation, the change of the substance of the host into the body of Christ.   As the monstrance was carried in during the procession of the 40 Hours service,  Tantum Ergo was played, and I read in the missal
"Præstet fides supplementum, Sensuum defectui."
enough of my high school Latin came back, "faith will supplement the deficiency of the senses", and I realized in my heart, that the wafer, the host, was the body of Christ, that it was mystery beyond science and philosophy, and my eyes filled with tears.

Other liturgical music has struck to my heart in ways no homily or theological text seems to do.    During my first Easter Vigil Mass  The Litany of the Saints was played, and an overwhelming  vision of the history of the Church and all its holy people came to me.    During  Vespers at St. Vincent Archabbey(attended during retreat as Benedictine Oblate) or Evensong services at  the St. Thomas More Anglican Usage Parish,  a great peace and understanding  comes over me as I listen to the strong voices chanting the psalms.  

Other music, not  liturgical--Bach (the B minor Mass,  Jesu Joy of Man's Desiring), Mozart's Requiem, Ralph Vaughan William's Dona Nobis Pacem,  will bring me to thoughts of God.  Hymns  that I want to be played at my funeral have made their mark:  Amazing GraceShall We Gather by the River,  Jerusalem my Happy HomeThe Lord of the Dance (old and corny pieces from evangelical churches, for the most part).   And there are those I play with the instrumental group at Church, It is Well with my Soul, Panis AngelicusMozart's Ave VerumThe King of Love My Shepherd Is. Old 100th and so many others.  (I play the alto clarinet, not well, but enough to provide harmony--a bass voice, since I can't sing on key.***)

One thing should be clear: it isn't the music by itself that is moving, but the total situation:  liturgy, congregation, and the words.   I could read
"Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,That saved a wretch like me.I once was lost but now am found,Was blind, but now I see.T'was Grace that taught my heart to fear.And Grace, my fears relieved.How precious did that Grace appearThe hour I first believed." Liberty Lyrics John Newton 
It would be moving, but it is the combination of the words that reflect my own experience AND the music that brings me to tears of joy.  I could read the verses of Tantum Ergo and Pange Lingua, but it would not be meaningful without the presence of Christ's body, the procession, the Benediction,  and the congregation sharing this experience. 

Am I only being sentimental and not truly devoted to the austere beauty of liturgy in my reaction to this music--too catholic (with a lower-case c)?   Some Church liturgists might think so.
"It is not surprising that Church leaders have doubted whether the feelings which music arouses are truly religious.  Music's power to fan the flames of piety may be more apparent than real..."Anthony Storr, Music and the Mind     
The Hebrews did not worry about music being a distraction from devotion to the Lord.    David danced in the procession to the altar and the psalms say "Sing to the Lord a new song,  play the lute, the lyre and the harp, sound the trumpets".    St. Augustine, entranced by music, was concerned that this power might enable the senses to overcome the intellect in worship:
"So I waver between the danger that lies in gratifying the senses and the benefits which, as I know, can accrue from singing....I am inclined to approve of the custom of singing in church, in order that by indulging the ears weaker spirits may be inspired  with feelings of devotion.  Yet when I find the singing itself more moving than the truth  which it conveys, I confess it is a grievous sin, and at those times I would prefer not to hear the singer(emphasis added)St. Augustine, Confessions
The last sentence in the quote is the foundation for the expulsion of music from the Church in Calvinist sects (read "The Warden" by Anthony Trollope).   I cannot subscribe to that view.  I am one of St. Augustine's weaker spirits.   I believe God gave many many gifts to man in giving him intelligence:  language, mathematics, music, art.   Music has the power to heal the soul (as Oliver Sacks shows inMusicophilia) and to bring one closer to God.   We give joy to God  when we rejoice in music, not only to praise Him, but to rejoice in life (l'Chaim)


*This quote, to show what a strange gift  music is, comes from Arthur C. Clarke's classic "Childhood's End", in which an alien species comes to guide mankind from childhood to maturity.   The very intelligent aliens do not understand the power of music.    They go to a concert,  listen politely and come away wondering.


**REFERENCES.

Robert Jourdain, Music, the Brain and Ecstasy: How Music Captures Our Imagination. 
Oliver Sacks, Musicophilia, Tales of Music and the Brain
Anthony Storr, Music and the Mind

By Bob Kurland, Rational Catholic

Dawkins and the Atheist's Dilemma

Geneticists haven't found a cure for religion yet, 
but I'm sure Richard Dawkins has a final solution in mind.
On a Catholic blog such as this, one needs not delve into the abortion argument in all instances. It is well known that the Church rejects abortion in all circumstances as an offence to God and the direct killing of the innocent. The Church does not claim that the direct killing of the unborn child with Downs Syndrome is worse than the direct killing of the unborn child dispensed with as medical waste for any other reason. The Church defends the dignity of every human life from conception to natural death.

The 'Gaffe'


There will be atheists who will find Richard Dawkins's latest Twitter contribution to be abhorrent and lacking in humanity. There will be other atheists who agree with him and there will be some who are unable to formulate a comprehensive opinion because while they find his opinion objectionable, they cannot gather together a logical response to his argument without an appeal to something which, from Mr Dawkins's point of view, is vague, tenuous or even irrational. We can all gather together a response of kind to Mr Dawkins, but would Dawkins accept it?

For nobody can deny that there is a certain logic in most of Richard Dawkins's statements, however 'off the cuff' they may be. We may not agree with them, but many of them are purely logical if we are totally alone in this Universe, without a Creator in as much good and evil, as we have hitherto known them, no longer exist. I say this not to dignify Richard's position, which is evil, but to suggest that evil can become 'logical' without the existence of a loving God. I have to say that brutal scientific logic has never really impressed me greatly as I have never found either mathematics, economics or science particularly inspiring.  Some people are interesting in how things work and I'm really not. I was not interested in that before I believed in the Catholic Faith and I am not interested in that now.

Scientificism


It has been said before by others that Richard Dawkins is in some ways a great gift to the Church because he keeps on revealing what atheism really is and the moral abyss of nihilism into which it leads. Others will say, in the face of such callous statements that this is not 'my kind of atheism' - because its not really humanism - and yet, ultimately, atheism denies to the one who disagrees with this opinion a logical right of reply because atheism denies an objective reality or objective set of moral truths grounded in divine revelation or even natural law. In atheism, there is no moral truth, only moral opinion. Therefore, before the horror of Richard Dawkins's opinion on the unborn child with Downs Syndrome, the concerned atheist has two places to go - to natural law - or to the God, for what else is there and Who else is there on his side? The atheist may form a 'community' who take issue with Dawkins, but is simply the momentum of the 'community' enough? It is not majority opinion that makes right, right and wrong, wrong.

Can the confirmed atheist really say, 'I am an atheist and I disagree with Richard Dawkins'? He can, of course, say it, since it is a matter of opinion, but ultimately, he cannot confront Mr Dawkins with a convincing logical argument that defeats the repellent point of view he has posited.

All combatants of Richard Dawkins are dealing with an unapologetic rationalist here and a particularly pure kind of rationalism it is as well. And for the theist as well as the atheist, this is why Richard Dawkins is so difficult to meet head on. He poses the eternal questions and asserts his logical answers. For in a godless world, logic really is on his side, if the prevailing human logic of the age asserts that there is 'life' and there is 'life worthy of being called life' and this is what makes the enigma of Richard Dawkins so frightening. He raises a spectre that simply will not be exorcised. Dawkins almost forces the one who does not believe in God into a corner and says, 'You do not like what I say, but logic - my logic - the logic of the scientist - is on my side.' There is no love here. What we understand as compassion has no place here. This is scientificism, yet human life, from our perspective, is not a science.

Moralising Atheists


Or so it at first seems. What did the woman ask? Did she indeed, ask anything? Here is what she said...

"I honestly don't know what I would do if I were pregnant with a kid with Down Syndrome. Real ethical dilmemma."

How did Mr Dawkins reply?

"Abort it and try again. It would be immoral to bring it into the world if you have the choice."

It cold, its brutal, its rational, its logical, its scientific. It was also the kind of reply that was not called for. Literally.

"Some people have Downs Syndrome. Get over it!"
See, the woman expresses a fear of how she would react in a given situation and Dawkins, being a typical man, immediately offers her a solution. A final one at that. The woman has made a statement.

She says, 'I don't know [in situation X] what I would do'. Dawkins immediately tells her what to do! By all accounts, that's a bad move. Here we have the logic of the male. It turns out that Mr Dawkins is something of a patriarch! If it had been directed at me and I had replied, 'Keep it for Heaven's sake! It would be immoral to kill a child just because s/he had Downs Syndrome!' how would she react?

"Abort it and try again", is his reply. This is something of a command, is it not? Somewhat the inversion of 'Go forth and multiply'. Next Mr Dawkins moralises to the woman. That's right. Atheists can moralise, even though there is no objective moral authority but for 'my considered opinion' upon which the atheist draws. In an astonishing assertion, Dawkins insists, "It would be immoral to bring it into the world". Note too, that the unborn child is an 'it'. 'It' should not be allowed to exist. But who says so? By what authority does Dawkins claim that 'it' should not be allowed to exist? 'Into the world' he adds? Whose world is this? Our world? Or Dawkins-world? The Brave New World?


Judgemental atheists


90% of unborn children with Downs are already aborted in this country, so Mr Dawkins touches on something of an open wound in British society. Are the 10% of parents who do not abort their child with Downs choosing a course of action that is 'immoral'? Are they guilty? If so, guilty of what? Bringing 'inferior' human beings into the world?  Making the world genetically less pure? Who is inferior to whom? Can it be empirically proven that this is the case? Is that all we are? Walking genes?

None of this is made clear. Dawkins can draw upon no authority but himself, because for him God does not exist, nor the authority of the Church, nor any other credible moral authority, despite the fact that another atheist may rightfully disagree with him, reaching the opposite conclusion according to his own lights or natural human compassion.

And yet can the 'nice atheist' confront Mr Dawkins with anything here to say, 'You are totally wrong'? Not really. An entire army of atheists can stand up and say, "What a deeply unpleasant thing to say!" But logic does not have to be pleasant. Logic, as Richard has said in his 'apology' does not need to take account of feelings. In the 'law of the jungle', feelings, remember, are for wimps. We are talking here about the 'survival of the fittest'. We're talking about the quality of the 'human species'. For this we can thank Darwinism.

Most atheists argue from a point of empiricism. Yet empiricism doesn't offer to Dawkins any evidence that it would be immoral to bring a child with Downs Syndrome into the world. That is a value judgment. It is not even scientific, unless science imposes a set of human values on the human race and then calls those values science, beyond reproach.

Unless Richard makes a real judgment on Downs Syndrome, or rather, the little one with the condition, what evidence is there concerning the morality of bringing to term a child with an extra chromosome? Unless we are grading human beings upon their inherent 'worth' or 'fitness' from a rather arrogant, subjective position, then there really is none since none of us are perfect genetic creatures.

Neither is there any real empiricism concerning the value of the life of a child with Downs Syndrome, or any condition, like, say, aspergers or epilepsy. Who decides who is genetically 'fit'? Who decides what 'suffering' is? Who quantifies what level of 'suffering' is acceptable in the prospective life of an unborn child or his or her parents and what level of suffering is not? Who decides what cosmetic or real beauty is? Where does this stop? If we are not in possession of an absolute moral stance on the value of every human life, then we cannot really object if Dawkins targets one group, for let's face it, it may as well be gypsies, Jews or people with brown hair. Perception of 'worth', or value to the human species is in this scenario only in the eye of the beholder. Without God Almighty, I would argue that all we're banking on to keep us from pre-born genocide is natural human compassion and reason which may very well let us down. It has before and it does today. This is why 90% of children with Downs Syndrome are aborted.

And yet, who is one atheist to say that the rationale of Dawkins's morality is inferior to the rationale of the 'good atheist'? The atheist can say, 'This is eugenics!" and Mr Dawkins can reply, 'Well, I am a eugenicist. Do you have a problem with that?' He hasn't said that, but he could, if he was more honest. Why? Because even though Richard has made an absolutist statement concerning children with Downs Syndrome, moral absolutes, to the general atheist, do not exist (except when, like Dawkins, they subjectively decide that they do). Why shouldn't he be a eugenicist if there is no objective reality or fixed morality at work in human life? Let's face it, just because the world is inhabited by many atheists, there is no fixed reason why all atheists should subscribe to a fixed morality, but don't say Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot didn't warn you!

The Appeal to Compassion and Human Experience


The appeal to compassion and the lives of children with Downs Syndrome bringing joy into the lives of families is fine, but it does not answer Richard Dawkins's inhuman logic, cold and brutal as it is. He is entitled to his repulsive opinion, however much we think its abhorrent. His view is that this disease should be eliminated. This is based in the assumption - the scientific assumption - that genetic conditions such as this are negative of their own nature. There is only black and white here, a kind of atheistic, scientific fundamentalism as dangerous as the concept of a bloody Islamic Jihad. This is a brutal ideology. Human experience and compassion, natural bonds of love and affection do not come into this school of thought. The only way in which Downs Syndrome can be effectively eliminated is by eliminating the persons who may acquire it in the womb, thus ridding the world of pre-disposed genetic 'imperfection'. In his stated view, it is not compassionate, rather it is immoral to allow an unborn child with Downs Syndrome to be born.

But we do, if we reject this child.
With 90% of unborn children in the United Kingdom, you could say the UK Government is well down this path, with the help of British citizens. Human existence is not 100% logical, nor is it utopian. It is imperfect and flawed. As human beings, we are all imperfect and flawed, but made in God's image and likeness unto the soul. What we see in Dawkins's horrendous 'gaffe' is no 'gaffe' at all, but a perfectly understandable response to a World in which God has been eclipsed by reason and flawed human logic, a World in which human life is not sacred, or valuable in and of itself, a brave new world in which the 'fit' survive and the vulnerable and defenseless are abandoned in pursuit of a vision of genetic perfection that has already, in the 20th century, been discarded as contrary to our very humanity.

While Richard Dawkins issues his 'apologies', as Catholics, we make no apologies for what we believe. We have no reason to apologise for professing the Gospel of Life and of Love. We believe that God loves and made every human being to be cherished and nurtured from conception to natural death. We don't offer any other explanation for our existence but the loving Hand that crafted us in our mother's wombs. We can account very easily for the evil that men do and the evil that men believe in, instead of God. We do not believe that some lives are more valuable than other lives. We believe that God is the beginning and end of our existence. We were not made for nothing.

Atheists: Isn't this the problem?


We believe that Jesus Christ has redeemed our fallen humanity and raised us up to a higher dignity than that which we could ever have imagined. We believe that every child is a gift. What we do with that gift, God leaves up to us. With the support of the British Government, 90% of unborn children with Downs Syndrome are not permitted to see the light of day. Every abortion is a scandal and a crime against God and His children. We pray that we and this country, once so fervently Catholic that it was named 'Our Lady's Dowry' will reject the law of the 'survival of the fittest' and replace it with the law of the protection of the unborn child. Why? Because the law of God calls us to, universally, reject evil and choose good, to refuse death and to embrace life.

You atheists, of course, you knew we believed that already, but in the face of Dawkins's 'gaffe', we see that atheistic 'logic', devoid of faith, or hope, or love, or genuine compassion or justice, can lead an atheist into a belief system that was embraced by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime. It's not really human logic. It is inhuman logic. It's a logic grounded in the pre-conceived, prejudiced, pseudo-scientific beliefs of many inside and outside the scientific community concerning Downs Syndrome, genetics and the application of genetics to human value and worth.

It should have no place in 21st century Britain but abortion figures reveal that it does and it does because the view is clearly prevalent that some people are defective, when the only objectively defective thing to see here is the moral condition of the British. The only way in which Dawkins's view can be deemed rational is if we accept his cruel and inhuman rationale, that some people, subjectively, have more innate value than others and that the others should be discarded. We Catholics do not believe that.

I ask you, atheists: What do you really believe?

Monday, 18 August 2014

Letters to and from The Guild

I write on this blog because I want to send sisterly-love letters, letters from a little sister in Christ, to all my fellow Guild members and readers.

I write because I want to personally give Bones a few pressies in this, his busy time.

I write because I am not afraid.

Be not afraid. Be not confused. God is in charge even though it seems as if the world is exploding.


It may be that we are in that greatest generation prophesied by the Desert Fathers.

The answer to the monks' queries gives me hope.


"The holy Fathers were making predictions about the last generation. 
 
They said, 'What have we ourselves done?' 
 
One of them, the great Abba Ischyrion replied,
'We ourselves have fulfilled the commandments of God.'
 
 The others replied, 'And those who come after us, what will they do?' 
 
He said, 'They will struggle to achieve half our works.' 
 
They said, 'And to those who come after them, what will happen?' 
 
He said,  'THE MEN OF THAT GENERATION WILL NOT ACCOMPLISH ANY
WORKS AT ALL AND TEMPTATION WILL COME UPON THEM; AND THOSE WHO WILL BE
APPROVED IN THAT DAY WILL BE GREATER THAN EITHER US OR OUR FATHERS.'
 
Abba Copres said, 'Blessed is he who bears affliction with thankfulness.'"

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...