Friday, December 28, 2007

Sex in Heaven by Peter Kreeft

"Human sexuality is that image, and human sexuality is a foretaste of that self-giving, that losing and finding the self, that oneness-in-manyness that is the heart of the life and joy of the Trinity."

Looking over Professor Kreeft's site, I also found his talk, Sex in Heaven, which has been of particular interest to me as I have been reading and meditating upon the meaning and importance of marriage in realtion to the Eucharist and the Mass. An expanded, audio version of this article is also found on Professor Kreeft's site:










Powered by Podbean.com


In Christ's peace and joy,


Robin

Read More...

The Meaning of Christmas: Look Deeper by Peter Kreeft

"...history too symbolizes, or points beyond itself, for God
wrote three books, not just one: nature and history as well
as Scripture. The story of history is composed not only of
“events,” but of words, signs and symbols. This is unfamil-
iar to us only because we have lost a sense of depth and ex-
changed it for a flat, one-dimensional, “bottom-line” mental-
ity in which everything means only one thing."

This is the same Truth found in the Jewish Feasts/Sacrifices fulfilled by Jesus. They, too, have three meanings: Nature, Historical, and Scriptural. Notice also the symbolic meaning which the Gospel of John so amply teached us as well.

Enjoy!

I found this great meditation on Catholic Education Resources:

The Meaning of Christmas: Look Deeper


In Christ's peace and joy,

Robin

Read More...

Saturday, December 22, 2007

Jewish Oral Law: Tradition!

Although the Written Law was considered complete, traditional Jewish teaching is that Moses also received a second set of laws called Torah She'bi-al peh: the Oral Law. Accompanying the Written Law, the Oral Law gave the finer details on how the Written Law was to be fulfilled.


Cheryl Dickow at Catholic Exchange has written an article, Our Jewish Roots: Oral Law, (linked) on the Jewish Oral Law which explains what mishnah and the Talmud is all about. An excellent and informative article. I remmember that this question came up in my class on the Jewish and Scriuptural Roots of the Mass series.

May all of our preparations for Christmas, both spiritual and physical, leave us longing to welcome God from on high into our hearts and our lives!

A Blessed and Merry Christmas to all!

Robin

Read More...

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Free Online Advent Study

I have embedded the video here for your convenience--Just click on the Read More link to see it, and the link to the article can be found at Catholic Exchange.

I hope you find it helpful--I know I am! May we all be blessed this Advent with a greater depth of love for our coming Savior!

In Christ's peace and joy,

Robin



Read More...

Monday, December 03, 2007

Why I See Red When I See Pink Ribbons

From Lifenews.com by Dr. Joel Brind (Bold emphases added by me--rhl)

October was a little different, as pink ribbons seemed to be more abundant than pumpkins. It was National Breast Cancer Awareness Month again, and for the Breast Cancer establishment -- Komen Race for the Cure, the National Breast Cancer Coalition (NBCC), et al. -- it's almost like Christmas season is for Macy's and Target.

That's when these organizations make their big pitch for donations, and that pitch is usually some variation of the following: "(1)We don't know what causes breast cancer, (2) most women who get breast cancer have no known risk factors for the disease and (3)there's no cure for breast cancer, so you'd better give us all the money you can so we can find a cure before the disease gets YOU!"

The lies are numbered for the convenience of the reader, who might just be wondering why, with a such an actual, widespread, life-threatening disease, and such a genuine need for research and education about it, those dedicated to fight it need to rely on a pack of lies to raise the funds to do so.

Wonder no further, for the reason is political correctness: Most breast cancer is attributable to "women's liberation" and the changes in childbearing patterns it has wrought.



So the breast cancer advocates-- like NBCC president Fran Visco are out there again in the media, decrying all the "misinformation out there," even as they spread it around it themselves.

Speaking about a new survey conducted by the NBCC, Visco told the Chicago Tribune that "we need to educate, not just raise awareness." Among the bits of "misinformation out there" according to the NBCC survey, is that "(M)ost women believe breast cancer can be prevented." Christopher Wanjek, writing for Live Science's Bad Medicine website, actually calls this his number 3 "myth." He also calls a variation of this widespread belief: "Risk factors are mostly to blame", his number 1 "myth". He elaborates: "More than two-thirds of women with breast cancer have no known risk factors for the disease."
Here are the real facts:
1) We do know what causes most breast cancer. About half the breast cancer in the US is attributable to delaying first childbirth until after age 25 or 30, or forever. The younger a woman is when she has her first child, the lower her lifetime risk. For a pregnant teenager, the proverbial silver lining of her cloud is the fact that, if she continues the pregnancy and gives birth at term, she will reduce her lifetime breast cancer risk by at least two-thirds, compared to having her first child at age 30 or older. Breast feeding her children lowers a woman's risk still further.

But postponing childbearing denies a woman the natural protection her children give her even while still in the womb. Even worse, what she may do to avoid childbearing adds to her risk, i.e., years of taking contraceptive steroids (be they in birth control pill, patch, implantable, injectable or ring form), and abortion.

Actually, abortion is the single most avoidable cause of breast cancer (even though Wanjek calls "Abortions cause breast cancer" his number 5 "myth").

No, that doesn't mean that most women who have an abortion will get breast cancer, or that most women who get breast cancer have had an abortion. It just means that the effect of abortion is so strong that choosing abortion even once causes a measurable increase in breast cancer risk. Contrast this to, say, taking hormone replacement therapy or the pill, where it takes years of daily use—thousands of pills—to make a measurable difference in risk. In a normal pregnancy, a woman is exposed to far more estrogen—which stimulates the multiplication of breast cells—than any pills or normal cycles provide. If the pregnancy is not allowed to go to term (or at least 32 weeks gestation), a woman is left with more places for cancer to start. But a full-term pregnancy matures the breast tissue into cells which can make milk, but can no longer multiply. So a full-term pregnancy leaves a woman's breasts with fewer places for cancer to start, and permanent protection against breast cancer.

2) Most women in the general population do have known risk factors for breast cancer, let alone those who actually get the disease. Just for starters, about 75% of American women have taken birth control pills, a risk factor which even the World Health Organization (finally!) acknowledges. Not to mention that a substantial proportion of American women have had an abortion.

3) Here's some really good news: Most cases of breast cancer—about 80%—are actually cured! In fact, at least half of all newly diagnosed cases of breast cancer are stage 0 or stage 1, which are cured over 95% of the time, and without mastectomy!

Of course, the best news of all is that breast cancer is largely avoidable. Avoiding abortion is the simplest way to reduce the risk. And that's also one reason why there really is "a lot of misinformation out there."

Read More...

Spe Salvi - Online


Thanks to the Curt Jester, Jeff Miller, Pope Benedict XVI's new encyclical on hope, Spe Salvi, is now available for free in audio for those of us who have more time to listen than to read.

To download, right click and "Save (Target/Link) As."

Spe Salvi - m4a file

Spe Salvi - mp3

Jeff also graciously permits his readers to use his Advent Wreath and counter.

Thank you, Jeff!

Read More...

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

The Papal Triple Crown and the Jewish High Priest's Miter

Taken from Singing in the Reign, Michael Barber's and Dr. Brant Pitre's blog, above title is link to article.

by Dr. Brant Pitre


In order to celebrate the feast of Christ the King (the final day of the liturgical year, celebrated yesterday), I wanted to post just a brief piece of background on the Papal Triple Crown (frequently referred to as the papal "tiara"). Although it is little known, this crown has its roots (surprise!) in ancient Judaism. In particular, we find a direct parallel in the miter that was worn by the Jewish high priest!


Josephus--himself a first-century Jewish priest--gives us a detailed description of the High Priest's miter:

" The high priest's miter was the same that we described before, and was wrought like that of all the other priests; above which there was another, with swathes of blue embroidered, and round it was a golden crown polished, of three rows, one above another ; out of which arose a cup of gold..." (Josephus, Antiquities, 3.172; trans. Whiston, p. 90)

This liturgical head-gear was based on the description of the high priest's miter found in the book of Exodus:

"And you shall make a plate of pure gold, and engrave on it, like the engraving of a signet, "Holy to the LORD." And you shall fasten it on the miter (LXX mitras ) by a lace of blue; it shall be on the front of the mitre. It shall be upon Aaron's forehead..." (Exodus 28:36-38)

With such descriptions, we find the Jewish background for description of Christ as high-priestly Son of Man in the Van Eyck triptych I attached above (see picture). We also discover the background for the Catholic tradition that the Pope, as the successor to Peter, is not simply the chief bishop, but the High Priestly Vicar of Christ. I'm only speculating--perhaps someone could confirm this--but could the triple crown signify the threefold office: (1) Priest, (2) Prophet, and (3) King?

Along these lines, one day Michael and I will do a post on how Peter is depicted as the new High Priest in the Gospel of Matthew. For now, I will simply note the contrast between the confession of Peter at Caeasarea Philippi and the (anti-)confession of the Jewish High Priest Caiaphas at Jesus' Trial before the Sanhedrin:

Caiaphas, the old High Priest

"Tell us if you are the Christ,
the Son of God" (Matt 26:63)

Peter, the New High Priest

"You are the Christ,
the Son of the living God" (Matt 16:16)

Long live Christ the King and Priest!!!

Read More...

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

EWTN Jewish Roots of the Mass Pt 1 Video

Click on the "Read More" link for the video.





If you liked this one, Part 3 of the series is also online here, and Part 4 here.

Read More...

Thursday, November 08, 2007

Nicean Blues Video

Click on the Read More Link for video. (Title above links to the singer's blog)


Read More...

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

The Man of the Century Has Died...to Virtual Silence

by Michael Ledeen
He was a Polish Jew, born Victor Spielman, which he changed to Victor Grayevsky after he found that “Spielman” was just too Jewish for an ambitious young Pole. He went to school in Kazakhstan, then returned to Poland at the end of the war, where he joined the Communist Party and made a bit of a name for himself as a journalist. In the mid-fifties he followed his parents and sister to Israel, where he ran a lot of the broadcasting to the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe.

And so? And so, he was arguably one of the most important men of the twentieth century, for he was the person who obtained the advance text of Khrushchev’s Secret Speech, the one delivered in February, 1956, the one that laid out the crimes of Stalin for the leaders of the Soviet Communist Party. That text was a turning point in the Cold War. Grayevsky gave it to the Israeli Embassy, where it was copied and sent to Israel. The Shin Bet intelligence service delivered it by courier to James Jesus Angleton, the head of CIA counterintelligence (and the CIA’s liaison with the Israelis), who gave it to CIA chief Allen Dulles, who gave it to President Eisenhower.

Read the rest of the story at Michael Ledeen's blog.

Read More...

Saturday, November 03, 2007

On Right and Wrong

"You can’t choose right and wrong, you’ve got to choose between right and wrong."

Reading the interview with Justice Clarence in Imprimis , Justice Thomas said,

"You can’t choose right and wrong, you’ve got to choose between right and wrong. There’s a wonderful encyclical by Pope John Paul where he talks about the mistake that Adam and Eve made. They thought they could choose right and wrong as opposed to choosing between the two. Modern nihilists and relativists think that we can decide or make up right and wrong. People like my grandfather understood that there was right and wrong, as certain as that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. And they made their choices between the two."
I think this is where my confusion with the idea of the "gray" area comes from. Maybe "gray area" is used in two different ways. Too often, I know, the term "gray area" is used, but what is meant is that right and wrong has evolved or changed. This is not possible, because God is immutable, unchangeable, and right and wrong is intrinsically rooted in His Deity.

To my way of thinking, the "gray area" is figuring out how new technology and ideas relate to right and wrong as revealed to us in the past. Ideas and technologies may, in and of themselves, be inherently "right" or "wrong," but many times, they may, in fact, be neutral--it is our reasons for developing or using them that make them either right or wrong. The scenario gets really murky when we begin to dissemble as to the real reasons that we are doing or promoting something, sometimes leaving even ourselves in the dark as to our own true motivations. (This is the reason that the Sacrament of Penance is so important on a regular basis, as it promotes an examen of conscience, accountable to one who is in persona Christi.)


The intricacies of the gray area, then, are not that man determines right or wrong, but that his intentions and use of ideas and technologies can render them either right or wrong.


Mother Church, our bishops, and priests often seem to fear telling us right from wrong, but that is wrong. There are always circumstances that must be taken into account but right and wrong never changes, and properly formed consciences seek knowledge of all aspects of situations before choosing action. Holy Mother Church should forthrightly name right right and call wrong wrong, while simultaneously putting forth the reasons and ways in which the intentions behind the ideas and technologies in question may be right or wrong.


Life is sacred, and the willful taking of innocent life is always wrong, and passing laws which make such murder legal is wrong and will jeopardize our salvation, whether we have or perform an abortion, pay for one, draft the law, vote for it, or vote for those who vote for it. Then, there must be discussion as what we should do if faced with a slate of candidates who all support abortion. The same goes for all other moral issues.


There needs to be a return to civility in the Public Square where we can discuss political issues, without name-calling. We need to be able to discuss the rectitude of actions, ideas, and technologies, based upon faith and reason--always with humility and open to the fact that circumstances and motivation may change, even though right and wrong, like God, never do.

Read More...

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Movie Review: "Bella" -- MUST SEE!

This is an article about the pro-life movie, "Bella," that I mentioned in our last Little Rock meeting. Links to Houston theaters' showing "Bella!"

Justin Cardinal Rigali , Archbishop of Philadelphia, has been urging those in his archdiocese to see the new film “Bella” and has even asked his parishes to host screenings. He says that “Bella” is a small film that needs the church’s help to spread its big message.

Click here to read an article about Cardinal Rigali's support for this movie.

Read More...

Movie: "The Golden Compass"
DON'T SEE!

Edith mentioned this movie as one NOT to support by seeing, and send to fellow believers with children and grandchildren.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watch a video of the Catholic League's Bill Donohue discussing this issue here.

A film called "The Golden Compass" opens December 7. It is based on the first book of a trilogy titled His Dark Materials. The author of this children's fantasy is Philip Pullman, a noted English atheist. It is his objective to bash Christianity and promote atheism. To kids. "The Golden Compass" is a film version of the book by that name, and it is being toned down so that Catholics, as well as Protestants, are not enraged.

The second book of the trilogy, The Subtle Knife, is more overt in its hatred of Christianity than the first book, and the third entry, The Amber Spyglass, is even more blatant. Because "The Golden Compass" is based on the least offensive of the three books, and because it is being further watered down for the big screen, some might wonder why parents should be wary of the film.


The Catholic League wants Christians to stay away from this movie precisely because it knows that the film is bait for the books: unsuspecting parents who take their children to see the movie may be impelled to buy the three books as a Christmas present. And no parent who wants to bring their children up in the faith will want any part of these books.

"The Golden Compass: Agenda Unmasked" is the Catholic League's response. It provides information about the film, "The Golden Compass," and details what book reviewers have said about Pullman's books; a synopsis of his trilogy is also included.

Please get the word out.


Read More...

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Dr. Brant Pitre Video, End Times, Pt. 1

Click on the Read More Link for video.


Read More...

Dr. Brant Pitre Video, End Times, Pt. 2

Click on the Read More Link for video.




Read More...

Pitre Video, Origins of the Bible, Pt 1

Click on the Read More Link for video.




Read More...

Pitre Video, Origins of the Bible, Pt 2

Dr. Pitre discusses sola scriptura in this one.
Click on the Read More Link for video.



Read More...

Friday, October 26, 2007

7 Jewish Feasts Handout



Read More...

John Chapter 11: Link & Handout

The Raising of Lazarus from the Dead


Click on the Read More Link for the Chapter 11 Handout.


HANDOUT CHAPTER 11

Time-line summary of Jesus’ friendship with Lazarus and his sisters:

  • Martha invites Jesus to stay at her house. She cooks dinner for Him and His disciples sometime during the first two years of His ministry [Luke 10:38-42]. Notice Lazarus is not mentioned.

  • Jesus relationship with this family must have continued during each of His visits to Jerusalem during His approximately 3-year ministry because John 11:6 describes Jesus as having a loving relationship with this family: “Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.”

  • Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead sometime between late winter and early spring of 30AD [John 11]

  • Six days before the Passover [Saturday], probably circa March 30AD [John 12:1], Jesus and the Apostles have a special Sabbath dinner with the family and Mary anoints His body, prefiguring His death and burial [John 12:1-12]

  • Wednesday of that same week, two days before Passover* [Matthew 26:2; Mark 14:1-3] Jesus the guest of honor at a dinner at the house of Simon the Leper in Bethany. [Matthew 26:6-12; Mark 14:3-8].

*Note: The concept of a mathematical 0 place value did not exist in the first century AD so counting any sequence began with the first item [day, or hour, etc] of any list as #1 and the last item in the list as the last number in the sequence. This is why Scripture says Jesus was in the tomb three days, from Friday to Sunday, instead of two days as we would count the days. When Mark records that it was two days before the Passover that Jesus had dinner in Bethany [Mark 14:1] we know that day is Wednesday because John tells us in John 12:1 that the day before Passion [Palm] Sunday is 6 days before Passover which is Nisan 14 and which would be a Thursday [Saturday = day #1; Sunday = day #2; Monday = day #3; Tuesday = day #4; Wednesday = day #5; Thursday = day #6. Jesus is crucified on the 7th day from entering Bethany on Friday.]

You may remember Thomas as the Apostle who said he could not believe in the resurrection of Jesus unless he touched the wounds in His hands, but in John 11:26, the Apostle Thomas declared that he is ready to die with Christ. There an irony as well as a prophetic aspect to Thomas’ declaration.

  1. St. Paul teaches that all Christians have died with Christ: “But we believe that if we died with Christ, then we shall live with him too.” Romans 6:8 and “for the love of Christ overwhelms us when we consider that if one man died for all, then all have died; his purpose in dying for all humanity was that those who live should live not any more for themselves but for him who died and was raised to life for them.” 2 Corinthians 5:14-15

  2. Thomas like Jesus’ disciple Stephen, the first Christian martyr, and like many other believers will follow Christ in death. Thomas would be martyred for Christ at the altar of his Church in India. Only the Apostle John would not die a violent death.

Thomas’ story is an inspiration for all of us: We may stumble and we may fall, but so long as we repent and acknowledge Christ as Lord and Savior He will forgive us and empower us to be a conduit through the works of God can change the world!

Read More...

Franz Jägerstätter: Martyr and Model (Beatified 10/26/07)

(Long but well worth the read...) By William Doino Jr. (originally posted on First Things' On the Square blog)

A parade of people—relatives, friends, spiritual advisers, even his own bishop—pleaded with Jägerstätter to change his mind. Some did not disagree with his anti-Nazi convictions or his moral stance; they simply argued he could not be held guilty in the eyes of God if he offered minimal cooperation under such duress, given the extreme alternative. Jägerstätter, however, saw things differently. He believed Christians were called precisely to meet the highest possible standards—“be thou perfect,” said Our Lord—even at the cost of one’s life, if fundamental Christian principles were at stake. Serving Germany in a nonmilitary post would simply make it easier for someone else to commit war crimes. He could not participate in the Nazi death machine, even indirectly.

Thursday, October 25, 2007, 6:41 AM Tomorrow, on October 26, the Catholic hero Franz Jägerstätter will be beatified in Linz, Austria. Executed in 1943 for refusing to serve in Hitler’s army, Jägerstätter was once known only to his relatives and neighbors—many of whom considered him mad.

Born out of wedlock in 1907 in the tiny village of St. Radegund, his natural father was killed in the Great War. His mother eventually married a farmer named Jägerstätter, who adopted him. A Catholic from birth, Franz didn’t always follow church teaching. Rumor has it that he lived something of a wild life—possibly even fathering an illegitimate child—before reclaiming his faith and marrying. In 1956, the American sociologist Gordon Zahn, then researching a book in Germany on another subject, came across Jägerstätter’s story. Transfixed, he thought it worthy of a serious biography and visited Austria to write it. After recovering Jägerstätter’s papers and interviewing surviving relatives and friends—including two priests who served as his spiritual counselors—Zahn published In Solitary Witness: The Life and Death of Franz Jägerstätter (1964).

The book has since been translated into various languages, and it had a significant impact on the Church’s support for conscientious objectors. As the biography reveals, Franz Jägerstätter was the unlikeliest of heroes. He was “a relatively untutored man from a remote and isolated rural village,” writes Zahn. Moreover, he was “a married man with a wife and children for whom he was responsible and whose future welfare he was morally bound to consider.” In 1936, Jägerstätter and his new bride, Franziska Schwaninger, traveled to Rome for their honeymoon. The visit ended with a papal blessing in St. Peter’s Square, from Pope Pius XI, and from that moment forward Jägerstätter appears to have undergone a spiritual reawakening.

Returning home to St. Radegund, he became a daily communicant and lay member of the Franciscan Third Order. He memorized the Bible and began emulating the lives of the saints. Working as the sexton of his parish, he arranged services for the local villagers, refusing any payment for his work. He fasted, performed penance, and gave alms to the poor, even as he struggled to earn a decent living for himself. About this time, his godson, just a teenager, lost his father unexpectedly, and Jägerstätter wrote the boy a moving letter, describing his own life as a troubled quest for God:

Soon you, too, will be experiencing the storms of youth. But in this respect we humans are not all the same. To some they come sooner, to others later; to some, they burst forth in full fury, while to others the onset is weak. Should it be that temptation is ever so strong that you feel you must give in to sin, give some thought then to eternity. For it often happens that a man risks his temporal and eternal happiness for a few seconds of pleasure. No one can know whether he will ever again have an opportunity to confess or if God will give him the grace to repent of his sin. Death can surprise us at any minute, and in an accident one very seldom has time enough to awaken repentance and sorrow. This much I can tell you from my own experience."


After Hitler’s forces annexed Austria, completing the Anschluss, Jägerstätter was the lone voice in his village to oppose it and was appalled by the willingness of his many countrymen, including high-level prelates, to aquiesce. “I believe there could scarcely be a sadder hour for the true Christian faith in our country,” he wrote, “than this hour when one watches in silence while this error spreads its ever- widening influence.” Commenting on the Austrian plebiscite, which gave approval to the Anschluss, he lamented: “I believe that what took place in the spring of 1938 was not much different from what happened that Holy Thursday 1,900 years ago when the crowd was given a free choice between the innocent Savior and the criminal Barabbas.”

Jägerstätter himself became an outspoken opponent of the Nazi regime and refused all cooperation. When a storm destroyed his crops, he declined any assistance from Germany. He stopped attending social events to avoid heated arguments with Nazi apologists. As the takeover of Austria proceeded, Jägerstätter knew he would be asked to collaborate at some point. In early 1943, it came: He was ordered to appear at the induction center at Enns, where he declared his intention not to serve. The next day, he was hauled off to a military prison at Linz, to await his fate. “All he knew when he arrived,” writes Zahn, “was that he was subject to summary execution at any moment.”

A parade of people—relatives, friends, spiritual advisers, even his own bishop—pleaded with Jägerstätter to change his mind. Some did not disagree with his anti-Nazi convictions or his moral stance; they simply argued he could not be held guilty in the eyes of God if he offered minimal cooperation under such duress, given the extreme alternative. Jägerstätter, however, saw things differently. He believed Christians were called precisely to meet the highest possible standards—“be thou perfect,” said Our Lord—even at the cost of one’s life, if fundamental Christian principles were at stake. Serving Germany in a nonmilitary post would simply make it easier for someone else to commit war crimes. He could not participate in the Nazi death machine, even indirectly.

He would not be swayed:
“Since the death of Christ, almost every century has seen the persecution of Christians; there have always been heroes and martyrs who gave their lives—often in horrible ways—for Christ and their faith. If we hope to reach our goal someday, then we, too, must become heroes of the faith.” Indeed, he added, “the important thing is to fear God more than man.”


After several months of imprisonment in Linz, Jägerstätter was taken to Berlin, where he stood military trial. According to witnesses, Jägerstätter was quite eloquent in his defense, but he was sentenced to death for sedition. On August 9, 1943, Jägerstätter was informed he would be beheaded that day. His last words as he was taken to the gallows were ones of peace, testifying to his faith: “I am completely bound in inner union with the Lord.” The prison chaplain who ministered to him that day later remarked, “I can say with certainty that this simple man is the only saint I have met in my lifetime.”

During his ordeal, many of Jägerstätter’s neighbors considered his act unnecessary and foolish, a sentiment that remained long after his death. Zahn, who interviewed Jägerstätter’s critics, examines all the explanations offered to question Jägerstätter’s sacrifice—that he was selfish, reckless, spiritually vainglorious, or even disturbed—and makes a convincing case that none of them hold. The most unfair charge is that Jägerstätter put himself above his family. “I have faith that God will still give me a sign if some other course would be better,” he wrote, as he struggled to find a solution to his dilemma.

Images of the Passion filled his mind: “Christ, too, prayed on the Mount of Olives that the Heavenly Father might permit the chalice of sorrow to pass from His lips—but we must never forget this part of his prayer: ‘Lord, not my will be done but rather Thine.’” In the end, however, after it became clear that Jägerstätter would be asked to betray his conscience, there was only one path he could take, a hard and narrow path chosen by the very few: Better to die for Christ than scandalize his faith and family by becoming a Nazi.

The letters and statements he made to his wife and family at this time show the anguish his decision brought; he was overwhelmed with the sense that he was abandoning them and feared reprisals against them lay ahead. But Jägerstätter knew that God was watching and would ultimately avenge his elect, and so expressed hope of a reunion yet to come: “I will surely beg the dear God, if I am permitted to enter heaven soon, that he may also set aside a little place in heaven for all of you.” And again to his daughters: “I greet you, my dear little girls. May the child Jesus and the dear Mother of Heaven protect you until we see one another again.”

Because his country’s establishment did not choose the path of martyrdom, his witness has been contrasted unfavorably to that of the Catholic hierarchy. Jägerstätter, however, was not a critic of the episcopacy, much less the Magisterium. In fact, he was a strong defender of the papacy and cited the authoritative teachings of Rome—particularly the famous anti-Nazi encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge (1937)—as a rebuke to the Catholics around him.
“Many have not forgotten what the Holy Father said in an encyclical several years ago about National Socialism,” he wrote in 1942, contemplating his line of action, “that it is actually more of a danger than Communism. Since Rome has not to this day rescinded that statement, I believe it cannot possibly be a crime or a sin for a Catholic simply to refuse the present military service even though he knows this will mean certain death.”


Similarly, Jägerstätter’s resolute Catholicism shines through his statements about the Eucharist and the scandal of distributing it to certain notorious communicants:
“In Germany, before Hitler came to power, it was once a matter of policy to refuse Holy Communion to Nazis. And what is the situation today in this Greater
German Reich? Many approach the Communion rail with apparently no spiritual misgivings even though they are members of the Nazi Party and, in addition, permit their children to join the Party or even turn them over to Nazi educators for formation. . . . If one gives a little thought to this, there are times when
he will want to cry out.”


So much has been said about Jägerstätter’s witness that the driving force behind that witness has sometimes been obscured. Jägerstätter was not a free-floating Christian individualist. He was a committed Catholic who saw himself as working with, not against, the Church. He was not so much a “solitary witness” as he was a Catholic in solidarity with the Church Militant. His conscience was formed in light of, and not outside, official Catholic teaching.

Since his cause was set into motion, predictably—and perhaps unavoidably—Jägerstätter has become a kind of political football, both in his home country and outside it. During the Vietnam War, he was invoked by its opponents as the ideal Christian, a prophet whose time had arrived. (Daniel Ellsberg actually said that Jägerstätter’s story influenced his decision to release the Pentagon Papers.) Similarly, many pacifists have found in Jägerstätter a kindred soul. Zahn himself is a pacifist who refused service during World War II, serving instead in a work camp. Today, Jägerstätter is often cited by those who oppose the Iraq War. As a result, some Catholics, particularly those serving in the military, fear that he has been used to indict all military action.

But, in fact, Jägerstätter was not an unqualified opponent of the military or war, properly waged. To its credit, the Catholic Peace Fellowship, which sponsors many conscientious objectors, acknowledges: Franz Jägerstätter . . . can rightly be considered a conscientious objector. But he was not a total conscientious objector. He did not refuse to participate in any and all wars. He was a selective conscientious objector, one who refused to participate in wars that are unjust.

We don’t know how Franz Jägerstätter learned about the Catholic Church’s teaching on just war. Perhaps he heard about it in a homily. Perhaps he read about it in a catechism. Perhaps he came across it in some other book on Catholic teaching. In any case, we know that Jägerstätter refused to join the [German] military because, as he wrote to his godson, it was an “unjust war.” The implication is that he would have participated in a just war. One gets the sense from his letters and personal reflections in his diaries that he would have readily fought in a war in 1938 against Nazi Germany had the Austrian government called upon its citizens to resist instead of buckling under pressure to erect a puppet regime and serve Hitler’s expansionist purposes.

In his Catholic Martyrs of the Twentieth Century, Robert Royal devotes an entire section to Jägerstätter’s martyrdom; and in his influential book on the Catholic just-war tradition, Tranquillitas Ordinis, George Weigel compares Jägerstätter to Alexandr Solzhenitsyn. The wide differences among Jägerstätter’s Catholic supporters reveals that he is actually a unifying figure, a Catholic who transcends politics and calls all members of the Church back to Christ.

There is a profound lesson in Franz Jägerstätter’s life and martyrdom. It compels us to be brutally honest with ourselves, teaches us never to bow to the powers of this world, and challenges us to live an authentic Christian life. Among the last words Jägerstätter wrote are these:
Just as the man who thinks only of this world does everything possible to make life here easier and better, so must we, too, who believe in the eternal kingdom, risk everything in order to receive a great reward there. Just as those believe in National Socialism tell themselves that their struggle is for survival, so must we, too, convince ourselves that our struggle is for the eternal kingdom. But with this difference: We need no rifles or pistols for ours, but instead, spiritual weapons—and the foremost among these is prayer. . . . Through prayer, we constantly implore new grace from God, since without God’s help and grace it would be impossible for us to preserve the Faith and be true to His commandments. . . . Let us love our enemies, bless those who curse us, pray for those who persecute us. For love will conquer and will endure for all eternity. And happy are they who live and die in God’s love.


William Doino Jr. writes for Inside the Vatican and published an 80,000-word annotated bibliography on Pius XII in The Pius War: Responses to the Critics of Pius XII (Lexington Books, 2004).

Read More...

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Knowing the Good Shepherd

Pope Benedict's talk on Saint Ambrose says what I was trying to verbalize, but better! Here it is as unofficially translated by zenit.org !

Click on the Read More link (below summary) for the full talk. Emphasis in red added by me. Robin

He (St. Augustine) had learned precisely from Ambrose “to listen inwardly,” this diligence in reading sacred Scripture in a prayerful attitude, in order to truly receive it in one’s heart, and to assimilate the word of God.


Dear brothers and sisters:

The saintly Bishop Ambrose, of whom I will speak to you today, died during the night in Milan between April 3-4, 397. It was the dawn of Holy Saturday. The day before, toward 5 p.m., he began to pray as he was lying in bed with his arms open in the form of the cross. That is how he participated in the solemn Easter triduum, in the death and resurrection of Our Lord. “We saw him moving his lips,” testified Paulinus, the faithful deacon who was invited by Augustine to write Ambrose’s biography entitled “Vita,” “but his voice could not be heard.”

Suddenly, the situation seemed to come to an end. Honoratus, bishop of Vercelli, who helped Ambrose and who slept upstairs from him, was awakened by a voice that repeated: “Get up, quick! Ambrose is approaching death.” Honoratus immediately went downstairs, Paulinus recounted, “and offered the saint the Body of the Lord. After having taken it, Ambrose surrendered his spirit, carrying with him viaticum. Thus, his soul, strengthened by virtue of that food, now enjoys the company of angels” (”Vita,” 47).

On that Good Friday of 397, the open arms of the dying Ambrose expressed his mystical participation in the death and resurrection of Our Lord. This was his last catechesis: Without speaking a word, he spoke with the testimony of life.

Ambrose was not old when he died. He was not even 60, for he was born around 340 in Trier, where his father was prefect of the Gauls. The family was Christian. When his father died, and he was still a boy, his mother brought him to Rome to prepare him for a civil career, giving him a solid rhetorical and juridical education. Around 370, he was sent to govern the provinces of Emilia and Liguria, with headquarters in Milan. It was precisely there where the struggle between orthodox Christians and Arians was seething, especially after the death of Auxentius, the Arian bishop. Ambrose intervened to pacify those of both factions, and his authority was such that, despite the fact that he was nothing more than a simple catechumen, he was acclaimed by the people as bishop of Milan.

Until that moment, Ambrose had been the highest magistrate of the Roman Empire in northern Italy. Highly prepared culturally, but deficient in knowledge of Scriptures, the new bishop began to study them energetically. He learned to study and comment on the Bible from the works of Origen, the undisputed master of the school of Alexandria. In this way, Ambrose brought to the Latin environment the practice of meditating on Scriptures initiated by Origen, beginning the practice of “lectio divina” in the West.

The method of “lectio” soon guided the preaching and writing of Ambrose, which emerged precisely from prayerful listening to the word of God. A famous opening from one Ambrosian catechesis distinctly demonstrates how the holy bishop applied the Old Testament to Christian life: “When we read the histories of the patriarchs and the maxims of Proverbs, we come face to face with morality,” the bishop of Milan told his catechumens and neophytes, “in order that, educated by these, you can then accustom yourselves to enter into the life of the fathers and to follow the path of obedience to the divine precepts” (”I misteri,” 1,1).

In other words, neophytes and catechumens, in the opinion of the bishop, after having learned the art of living morally, could then consider themselves prepared for the great mysteries of Christ. In this way, the preaching of Ambrose, which represents the heart of his prodigious literary work, originates from the reading of sacred books (”The Patriarchs,” the historical books, and “Proverbs,” the sapiential books), to live in conformity with divine revelation.

It is evident that the personal testimony of the preacher, and the exemplarity of the Christian community, conditions the efficacy of any preaching. From this point of view a passage from St. Augustine’s “Confessions” is significant. Augustine had come to Milan as a professor of rhetoric; he was a skeptic, not a Christian. He was looking, but he wasn’t able to truly encounter the Christian truth. For the young African rhetorician, skeptical and desperate, it was not the beautiful homilies of Ambrose that converted him — despite the fact that he appreciated them immensely. Rather, it was the testimony of the bishop and the Church in Milan, which prayed and sang, united as a single body. It was a Church capable of resisting the bullying of the emperor and his mother, who had demanded again the expropriation of a Church building for Arian ceremonies in early 386.

In the building that was to be expropriated, Augustine wrote, “the devout people of Milan stayed put, ready to die with their own bishop.” This testimony in the “Confessions” is invaluable, because it shows that something was moving deep within Augustine. He continued, “Despite the fact that we were still spiritually lukewarm, we participated as well in the fervor of the entire population” (”Confessions” 9, 7).

From the life and example of Bishop Ambrose, Augustine learned to believe and to preach. We can refer to a famous sermon of the African, (St. Augustine) which deserved to be cited many centuries later in No. 25 of the dogmatic constitution “Dei Verbum”:

“All the clergy must hold fast to the sacred Scriptures through diligent sacred reading and careful study, especially the priests of Christ and others, such as deacons and catechists who are legitimately active in the ministry of the word. This is to be done so that none of them will become,”
and here is where Augustine is quoted,
“‘an empty preacher of the word of God outwardly, who is not a listener to it inwardly.’”
He had learned precisely from Ambrose “to listen inwardly,” this diligence in reading sacred Scripture in a prayerful attitude, in order to truly receive it in one’s heart, and to assimilate the word of God.

Dear brothers and sisters: I would like to present to you a type of “patristic icon” that, seen in the light of what we have just said, effectively represents the heart of Ambrosian doctrine. In the same book of “Confessions,” Augustine recounts his meeting with Ambrose, certainly a meeting of great importance for the history of the Church. He writes in the text that when he came to see the bishop of Milan, the latter was always surrounded by hordes of people with problems, whom he tried to help. There was always a long line of people waiting to speak to Ambrose, looking for comfort and hope. When Ambrose was not with these people — and this only happened for short periods of time — he was either filling his body with the food necessary to live, or filling his spirit with reading. In this respect Augustine praises Ambrose, because Ambrose read Scriptures with his mouth closed, and only with his eyes (cf. “Confessions,” 6,3).

In the early centuries of Christianity, reading Scripture was thought of strictly in terms of being proclaimed, and reading aloud facilitated understanding, even for the one who was reading it. The fact that Ambrose could read through the pages only with his eyes was for Augustine a singular capacity for reading and being familiar with Scripture. In this reading — in which the heart seeks to understand the word of God — this is the “icon” we are talking about. Here one can see the method of Ambrosian catechesis: Scripture itself, profoundly assimilated, suggests the content of what one must announce in order to achieve conversion of hearts.

Thus, according to the teachings of Ambrose and Augustine, catechesis is inseparable from the testimony of life. The catechist may also avail himself of what I wrote in “Introduction to Christianity” about theologians. Educators of the faith cannot run the risk of looking like some sort of clown, who is simply playing a role. Rather, using an image from Origen, a writer who was particularly appreciated by Ambrose, he should be like the beloved disciple, who rested his head on the Master’s heart and there learned how to think, speak and act. In the end, the true disciple is he who proclaims the Gospel in the most credible and effective manner.

Like John the Apostle, Bishop Ambrose, who never tired of repeating “Omnia Christus est nobis!” — Christ is everything for us! — remained an authentic witness for the Lord. With these same words, full of love for Jesus, we will conclude our catechesis:

“Omnia Christus est nobis! If you want to heal a wound, he is the physician; if you burn with fever, he is the fountain; if you are oppressed by iniquity, he is justice; if you need help, he is strength; if you fear death, he is life; if you desire heaven, he is the way; if you are in darkness, he is the light. … Taste and see how good the Lord is. Blessed is the man who hopes in him!”
(”De virginitate,” 16,99). We also hope in Christ. In this way we will be blessed and will live in peace.

Read More...

Sunday, October 21, 2007

John Chapter 10: Agape Bible Study Link and Handout

Old Testament background of the Good Shepherd Discourse:


Click on the Read More Link for the Chapter 10 Handout.


Chapter 10 (continued), The Good Shepherd Discourse

HANDOUT CHAPTER 10

Holy men in the Old Testament who were shepherds and were close to God

1) Abel, son of Adam was a shepherd who “found favor with God” (Genesis 4)

2) Abraham in Genesis 21 is described as a chieftain with many herds of sheep

3) Jacob is a shepherd for his uncle Laban in Genesis 30

4) Joseph was shepherding his father Jacob’s flocks in Genesis 37

5) Moses went from prince of Egypt to shepherd of Midian in Exodus 3

6) David was a shepherd of his father’s flocks in 1 Samuel 16:11

7) Amos the Judean shepherd was God’s prophet to the Northern Kingdom of Israel in Amos 1:1

In Weldon Keller’s book A Shepherd Looks at Psalms 23 [Zondervan Publishing, 1997], he gives some very interesting insights into the habits of sheep of a flock that can be compared to Jesus and His representatives the priests who shepherd His flock, the Church:

  • Sheep depend on the shepherd for their wellbeing.
  • Sheep are sociable animals who travel together in a large flock but not too close together; they like their personal space.
  • Sometimes they loose their connection to the flock and tend to stray which can lead to disaster.
  • Often sheep are unaware of the dangers of the world. At the beginning of the spring just before sheering when the streams and rivers are full and running deep the shepherd must keep the sheep away from swiftly moving water. Sometimes it is even necessary for the shepherd to dam up a portion of the stream so his animals can drink [Palms 23:2b “He leads me beside streams of still water…”]. If the shepherd doesn’t protect them in this way the sheep in their thirst will wade out into the swiftly moving water and when their thick wool coats absorb too much water they will fall over and drown.
  • The sheep learn the sound of the voice of their shepherd so that when he calls to them they will come only to him but will run from the voice of a stranger.

In John 10:11-13 Jesus identifies Himself as the “good shepherd”:

I AM the good shepherd: the good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep. The hired man, since he is not the shepherd and the sheep do not belong to him, abandons the sheep as soon as he sees a wolf coming, and runs away, and then the wolf attacks and scatters the sheep; he runs away because he is only a hired man and has no concern for the sheep.

This is the first of 5 times that St. John will repeat Christ’s willingness to lay down His life for His sheep:

1) 10:11

“I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep.”

2) 10:15

“I know the Father; and I lay down my life for my sheep.”

3) 10:17

“The Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again.”

4) 10: 18a

“No one takes it from me; I lay it down of my own free will.”

5) 10: 18b

“and as I have power to lay it down so I have power to take it up again…”


M. Hunt copyright 2001


Read More...

John Chapter 9: Agape Bible Study Link and Handout


THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD DISCOURSE, continued:

The Healing of the Man Born Blind

Click on the Read More Link for the Chapter 9 Handout.

HANDOUT CHAPTER 9

Typology of Moses and Jesus

MOSES

JESUS

An evil king/Pharaoh tried to kill him as a baby: Exodus 1:22

King Herod tried to kill baby Jesus: Matthew 2:16

He was hidden from the evil king/Pharaoh: Exodus 2:2

An angel said to hide the child from the evil King Herod: Matthew 2:13

Moses was sent into Egypt to preserve his life: Exodus 2:3-4

Jesus was taken into Egypt to preserve His life: Matthew 2:13-15

He was saved by women: his mother: Exodus 2:3; Miriam 2:4; Pharaoh's daughter 2:5-10

Saved and helped by His mother, Mary: Matthew 2:14

Pharaoh's daughter adopted Moses: Exodus 2:10

Joseph adopted Jesus: Matthew 1:25

Moses became a prince of Egypt: Exodus 2:10

Jesus is the Prince of Peace: Isaiah 9:5; Matthew 28:18; Luke 2:14

Long period of silence from childhood to adulthood

Long period of silence from childhood to adulthood

Moses had a secret identity

Messianic secret = Jesus the Son of God

He tried to save a Hebrew kinsman: Exodus 2:11-12

Jesus came to save His Hebrew kinsman first: Mark 7:26-28

Went from being a prince to a pauper: Exodus 2:15-19

Went from being God to being man: John 1:1-3; Mark 6:3

Saved women at a well: Exodus 2:15-19

Saved a woman at a well: John chapter 4

Became a shepherd: Exodus 3:1

He is the Good Shepherd: John 10:11

Moses' mission was to redeem Israel from slavery to Egypt

Jesus' mission is to redeem mankind from slavery to sin

Moses was loved and supported in his ministry by his sister Miriam [in Hebrew, Miryam]

Jesus was loved and supported in his ministry by His mother Mary [in Hebrew, Miryam]

He was often rejected by his own people

Jesus was often rejected by His own people

Moses will give God's law on the mountain of Sinai: Exodus 20:1-31:18; 34:1-35

Jesus will give the new law from the Mt. of Beatitudes: Matthew chapter 5

Moses spent 40 days fasting on the mountain: 24:18;34:28

Jesus spent 40 days fasting in the desert wilderness: Matthew 4:2

Moses performs signs/ miracles

Jesus performs signs/miracles

Moses offered his life for the salvation of his people after the sin of the Golden Calf: Exodus 32:33-33

Jesus offered His life for the salvation of the world: Isaiah 53:12; Romans 5:12; 6:10; 2 Corinthians 5:15-21; Colossians 1:19-20; 2:14-15; 1 John 1:7; 2:2; etc.

Moses is the prophet of the Old Covenant Church

Jesus is the prophet, priest, and King of a New and everlasting Covenant = the universal Catholic Church [note catholic means universal]

Michal Hunt, copyright 2003, revised 2005


Read More...

John Chapter 8: Agape Bible Study Link and Handout


Click on the Read More Link for the Chapter 8 Handout.


HANDOUT CHAPTER 8

John 8:12-20: The Light of the World Discourse [Jesus’ witness to Himself]
+ + +

Verses 12-20 cover three basic topics:

  1. Jesus as “The Light”
  2. Jesus’ witness to himself
  3. The question of judgment

There is also an obvious parallel between this discussion of Jesus and the Pharisees and His earlier verbal duel with them in chapter 7:

John Ch. 7


John Ch. 8

7:27-28

Where did Jesus come from?—His origins

8:14

7:33-35

Where is Jesus going?

8:21

7:24

Judgment by human standards

8:15

7:28

Knowing Jesus and the One who sent Him

8:19

7:30

The inability to arrest Him because the hour had not yet come

8:20

John 8:12 “When Jesus spoke to the people again, he said: ‘I am the light of the world; anyone who follows me will not be walking in the dark but will have the light of life.”

Once again we have Jesus identifying Himself with the significant and symbolic words: I AM, ego ami, which reminds us of Yahweh’s revelation of Himself to Moses 3 times as I AM in Exodus 3:13-14. In John’s Gospel Jesus will use these words 26 times and in 7 different metaphors [each used with a predicate nominative]:

1 - 6:35

I AM the bread of life”

2 - 8:12

“I AM the light of the world”

3 - 10:7

“I AM the gate for the sheep”

4 - 10:11

“I AM the good shepherd”

5 - 11:25

“I AM the resurrection and the life”

6 - 14:6

“I AM the way and the truth and the life”

7 - 15:1

“I AM the true vine”

In Matthew’s Gospel the disciples are told “You are the light of the world.” There is no contradiction because the disciples, like John the Baptist, are the light of the world only as they reflect Jesus Christ, the true Light.


Read More...