Detaching from the Storms of Life.

There was another storm last night-- I snapped.
Ordinarily, I've come to love thunderstorms. They are a summer staple here in the South, and are usually only a few hours of crashing thunder and blinding lightening that often find me and the husband huddled on the front porch, watching with awe what God can do. Our summers are so hot that these storms are welcome breaks, and it's always sort of exciting when the sky gets really black and ominous and the low rumbles start.
Unfortunately, this year we discovered that me oldest has a real serious fear of thunderstorms. She's the type of kid who doesn't like noises, period. A sensitive, like me, she notices even the slightest whir of a passing car or the far of whistle of a passing train in the distance. These things really bother her in the silence of her pre-sleep "quiet time," so you can imagine that she finds thunder absolutely distressing.
It isn't 30 seconds between the first crack of thunder before she's screaming to us: "MOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!! The STOIM!!!"

Sometimes it bothers my second, most he usually sleeps through it. She, on the other hand, absolutely flips. In the past, we have let her snuggle up between us, her head under the covers, and wait them out. But now that we have storms at least twice a week, I'm starting to get more than a little annoyed at this habit.
Why? It's simple. Because I'm selfish.

I don't get time to myself, and I don't want to be up all night staring at my kids. If this marriage is going to survive, we need some no-kids time to build and nurture what we can't easily nurture with a quickie when I have high risk pregnancies if you know what I mean. Likewise, I need time to THINK. As sensitive as I am to noise and what not, I'm the type of person who needs SILENCE in order to think, pray, and just be still for a while. I find it unbearable to be in the presence of another when I'm trying to journal, or read, or pray. Not always, of course, but when I want to "really" do it. And these days, I want to really do it. Having young children really takes it out of you, and the level of stress due to our ever precarious financial situation etc leads me quickly to the proverbial edge, from which I am only kept by some quiet time in the presence of God when I can listen for that "Still, Small Voice."

Because I don't drive, I don't have the same opportunities other moms have to take some "me time." I do EVERYTHING with other people, even grocery shopping. Come the end of my day, all I can think about is that 1/2 hour to an hour of Bible reading and prayer time I'm going to get before my husband comes sauntering into the living room asking to watch an episode of X Files with me or something.

So, all this to say that I protect that time with everything I've got. I used to get like this about nap time, too.... If something interrupted the silence of naptime, I went on a warpath. It was the only time during the day when BOTH my kids were silent for two hours, and darn it, I was going to take FULL advantage. I realized when my husband came back to work at home that that naptime just COULDN'T be sacred to me anymore-- no matter what happened, I could never seem to keep the entire block of time to myself because someone would always show up at the door, come home, or call. On days where they didn't, one of the kids would sleep less than the other, etc. I went through every phase of anger and frustration, seriously letting a missed or ruined naptime wreck the rest of my day because I was so ANGRY at the injustice of it--- why was it too much to ask, when I give and give and give all day, for 2 stinking hours of perfect silence?
It wasn't until I learned to just take what I got (5 minutes or 2 hours) and roll with it without allowing bitterness to set in that God started, slowly, rewarding me with consolations in other forms... although I wasn't getting my "ME" time, my kids were better behaved, my husband was happier and therefore more pleasant, etc, when I didn't turn into a hellcat when naptime went unprotected and learned to just "go with the flow." learning this was similar to learning how to function with a husband who has different ideas than I do about planning.

When Peter and I were first married, I would get SO angry at him for bouncing out of bed and saying "we're going to to ________________ today! Let's go. Get your shoes on." I was the kind of person who laid out my clothes the night before, packed my purse the night before, and had written down what time I"d be where for weeks in advance in my little black organizer. I don't DO spontaneous. I don't like it. I like to know exactly how much time I have so that I can plan on doing exactly what I want to do. Selfish? Perhaps. I call it sensible. I remember fighting with him viciously for YEARS to maintain my sense of control over my time. I HAD to have two hours to get ready in the morning. I HAD to have knocked off the items on my to-do list. I was inflexible with these things, and OH, how our marriage suffered. Like naptime, it wasn't until I learned to relinquish these control sessions in which I got to plan and organize every minute of my day that God started giving me small consolations-- I found that I really LIKED some of the places my husband randomly took me, and that I really enjoyed some of the moments I had been missing by being so stinking stubborn. I now consider a badge of honor that I can get three persons (myself and the kids) out the door with NO notice in less than ten minutes and not forget anything crucial. I've learned to cope with that, and I've been given the gift of peacefully enjoying my family in that sense.

So why are thunderstorms different? Because they are tailor-made to take away that FINAL sense of "me time" that I get to myself. In the last month, virtually EVERY thunder storm we have had except one has been between the hours of 7-10 pm. Which is exactly the time I have between when I put the kids down and when I turn into a pumpkin if I don't get into bed. It's as if God Himself has ordained these storms to PERFECTLY destroy any semblance of 'alone' time I had planned in order to get something through to me: You cannot have what you want. I have gone through every range of emotions over these things (I'm sure the pregnancy helps) and just could not figure out why God would be so mean to me. HE has the power to let me daughter sleep through these storms, or to remove her fear of them. He doesn't. He has the power to prevent the storms, or to make them occur just 2 hours BEFORE bedtime instead of AT bedtime or in the middle of the night. He doesn't. Ultimately, I have to trust that He is allowing it for a reason, for some greater good, because He IS goodness itself. But just like my kids don't like it when I don't let them run in the street, I'm found, on nights like last night, shaking my fists, stomping my feet, and raging around the house in a temper tantrum that rivals my own children's at the injustice of it all. It might not seem like such a big deal to you, reader. "So what, you have to spend a couple nights a week holding your kid instead of reading a book. Get over it." BUT it is a BIG deal to me, because little by little EVERY night of every week and every day of every week is being given to others until I feel like I have no idea who I am anymore.

Until last night. As I slowly succumbed to the fact that this stinking storm was here to stay (And scheduled to stay all night) and that my daughter wasn't leaving my side, I gave up and just started reading to her. I chose Heidi, because I'm homesick for the alps right now. She ended up being so funny and interesting that I totally forgot how annoyed I was for at least forty minutes. By the time the storm had calmed, she proceeded to amaze me by saying she was planning on being brave in the storm, and asking to go to sleep in her room. She even asked me to turn OFF the nightlight, something she NEVER does. I put her down again, just in time to start my nightly get-in-bed myself routine, thinking that while it really hadn't ended up being ALL that bad, it still wasn't FAIR.

I put on my spelunking headlamp (the kids have our only lamp) and went to read a few pages of St John of the Cross, to see if I could find some answers. And find them I did--- on the tail end of the part I have just figured out. His "system" is to first train the soul to release attachment to any possessions and material things which might be hindering them. LOngtime blog readers will recall how much and how often I have, in the past, struggled with the loss of ALL my possessions-- with the idea that I would have to give up all my stuff. Thankfully, God has granted me absolute serenity in the area of physical material possessions so that I am actually quite at peace with this upcoming move and the fact that, once again, we are going to lose most of our possessions. But what is it about time that makes it different?

St John of the Cross spoke about our attachments in different terms. He wasn't just talking about things. If we can get rid of our attachment to THINGS, then we have achieved the first part of spiritual poverty, and it is a step up the mountain of Carmel. But there is so much more. He demonstrated how, in Numbers, the Israelites were so frustrated with the Manna. They had this bread from heaven-- this perfect bread-- but they clammored for meat and onions and things which this bread was not. Here was bread that nourished them perfectly and was ALWAYS available right when they needed it, but instead of being fully satisfied with it, they wanted more-- and what's worse, they wanted perishable food that they couldn't count on to ALWAYS satisfy. He shows us how it's the same with our attachments to other things besides just material possessions.

We can have extreme attachments to relationships. This is something that I learned to cope with when I first got married-- that ultimately, people are people and will disappoint us, that we can expect them NEVER to hurt us or to always do the right thing. We cannot be so attached to a relationship that we feel we cannot go on if it (the relationship) suddenly were not. Etc. I've seen attachments to relationships utterly demolish people, and I am thankful for the lessons I've learned with regards to detaching from the outcomes of relationships.

The piece I've been missing is that I can have an attachment to my TIME. I can be so attached to knowing that I'm going to be X place at Y time, that it utterly destroys my peace when instead I find that i have no choice to be in Z place instead. Instead, I need to learn to detach COMPLETELY from the outcome of every day and situation, knowing that God, in His wisdom, will have me exactly where He wants me to do be and then being open to what it is that He wants me to do. I truly, TRULY can no longer be my own if He is to live in me. This is great wisdom, but of course I learned it all too late to act on it when my daughter decided to do what she does and need help in a storm. SHE didn't destroy my peace, and neither did God. I did, because I allowed myself to believe that I was going to have a quiet night and nothing was going to deter me from that.

Scripture addresses this directly.

James 4:13-15

13Now listen, you who say, "Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money." 14Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. 15Instead, you ought to say, "If it is the Lord's will, we will live and do this or that."

Thank God for clarity that comes in the morning. Lord, help me to detach not just from possessions but from people and time as well. Take ALL my will.

My inbox: Some questions and answers about Catholicism

I get a LOT of email from people (both friends, acquaintances, and people I have never met) who have an interest in trying to UNDERSTAND Catholicism but who just can't for whatever reason. I'll admit, I am pretty swamped these days with the rigorous demands of being a stay-at-home mom to two toddlers, being about to pop with #3, and my wifely and Carmelite duties. But even in the midst of that, I have a hard time saying no to answering these questions. I know how important it was for ME to have these questions answered when I was pondering the salvation of my Catholic family members. So with that in mind, I give you the latest installment of questions from my inbox:

My dear friend Barbie,

I think of you often and was glad to see your post on facebook this evening. You referred to many of the questions I often contemplate and still struggle with at times concerning your going back to the Catholic church.I love your zeal to live for Jesus and I am happy to have a friend that I can go to freely with my questions. I do not speak as eloquently as you do and I know you are well researched, so please forgive me as I try and formulate my thoughts in a rational way. There is something in my spirit that is troubled by many of the practices of the Catholic church. You gave answers to the questions people ask, but I do not believe it reaches the heart of many of the issues. My first struggle with what you said is that the Catholic church has perfect doctrine. I do not understand this since the Pope is able to change certain doctrine. I do believe the Bible is inerrant. I am unclear if this is something you still believe?? I also have a hard time with your creation vs. evolution argument and believe there are many scientific facts that indeed point to creation. Check out www.answersingenesis.com. I do not understand why there are so many lost and confused Catholics that convert to Christianity. I do agree that denominations are a tool of Satan, but I also believe the church is neither a building or a denomination, but a people who are chosen by Christ, who chose Christ...which, like you said is a combination of both predestination and free choice. I actually can relate more to the church with sinful leaders, than a church that claims perfection but has hidden secrets. Both point to a fallen man. Your right about becoming frustrated with wondering if there is a place where anyone is living as a Christian should. I truly believe that it is in Christ alone that we can hope to be something more than we are as a new creation through Jesus' perfect sacrifice. I know we both love Jesus and you are my sister in Christ, but it scares me that so many in the Catholic church find Mary, but miss Jesus. That is what is the hardest thing to overcome. I know you say that it is a misconception of the Catholic doctrine, but why do so many of the Catholics I know believe it or used to believe it. And isn't the Catechism of the Catholic church adding something to the Holy Scriptures? Sorry, a little lengthy and I am sure I didn't word everything exactly right, but you know I love you and I do want to come to a better understanding.

The woman who wrote this email means a great deal to me. She is one of those rare gems we encounter who wholeheartedly commited herself to Christ and to the family He entrusted her with, and I hope and pray that my answer, albeit brief, will be helpful to her.

First, on the question of Doctrine.
Doctrine is simply the set of beliefs that Catholics must universally hold, and that the Church as an entity has determined to be "True." While all Christians believe that the Bible, in it's entirety, is "True," the thing which (rightly) divides us is doctrine, since doctrine is the interpretation of the Scriptures and Spiritual laws which guide us in our lives of faith. Thus, "purity of doctrine" is a very important thing to have-- we need to be in Churches where they teach the Truth, and we need to, when we see falsehoods being taught as truth, correct them. This was one of my hardest difficulties as a protestant-- I never 100 percent agreed with ANY of my pastors on EVERY issue of biblical relevance. There was always something they believed that I thought was dead wrong. As a Catholic, I can honestly say I no longer have that problem, and I can also say that it is an amazing and glorious thing-- to have achieved perfect unity of the faith with so many of my brothers and sisters in Christ!
So how did the Catholic Church develop the "doctrines of the Catholic faith?"
The beliefs of our Church are based on two things: Holy Scripture, and Holy Tradition. Scripture is the Word of God, handed down to us. Tradition is the teachings of the initial "Fathers of the Faith," handed down to us. In other words, when the Bible is "unclear" or leaves a certain question relatively open to interpretation, we use the interpretation that was at the root of the Christian faith, and that continues to be accepted by those who hold the spiritual authority bestowed upon them by the laying on of hands of the initial apostles, and of course, Christ Himself.
To understand the role of the Pope, we cannot see him as "the guy who makes the rules," but rather as the supreme protector and defender of the Faith we already have--- He may not change or alter doctrine, but may CLARIFY or further explain something which we already hold to be true. (for example, we knew that God was pro-life. It was only as the question of life was examined by theologians over time that HOW THAT PLAYS OUT in our lives was clarified and determined.) Further, the pope is not infallible. He is a human being, a sinner, and like all of us capable of profound error. What the Catholic Church does allow for, however, is that if a question of particular relevance comes up, and the question is examined and thoroughly investigated, the Pope has the ability to represent Christ AND the Church by making an infallible declaration. This is not something that happens regularly, nor is it something that anyone takes "lightly." And while this idea might seem foreign, consider that it resembles something like this: there is a debate amongst Christians in the middle east where Islam is the norm, and the question refers to Christ's actual death. Some Christians, like their muslim counterparts, begin to believe that Christ did not actually DIE on the cross. The question is examined, and the pope might infallibly declare that Christ did, indeed, DIE for our sins and that this an infallible truth. Never does infallibility refer to statements like "we will all wear purple on Thursdays from now on because Jesus says so." Hopefully, that clarifies the question of the Pope's role, how doctrine is determined, and what infallibility actually IS. I absolutely still believe that the Word of God is free of error.

Regarding Creation vs Evolution. I may not have been as clear and concise as I could have been in my last blog, but I will attempt to do so now. As I am about the farthest thing from a scientist that is out there, I will say that I am particularly challenged by the task of explaining this since I really don't know much about it. What I do know is this: There are two "sectors" of understanding when it comes to Christian thought about Evolution. One says that we evolved, the other says that we were created as we are. Both schools of thought have scientists who offer various proofs and explanations for their beliefs. Generally, Christians tend to be pro-Creationist and extremely anti-Evolution, going as far as to take their children out of schools for the sole purpose of avoiding the Evolution scenario, etc.
My earlier statement was simply that within Catholic thought, there is room for dialogue and for the very healthy response that "we just don't know." There is compelling evidence on both sides of the argument (if there weren't, the argument would not exist, right?) which makes a person like me, who examines both sides, sort of scratch my head. What we DO know, as Catholics, is that God created us. Thus IF (and that's a big, HUGE monster IF) evolution DOES exist, God made it and it's a part of His plan. Further, our evolution would have no effect on the reality of the Creation story as it is laid out in the Bible, etc. So basically, Evolution (which is a MAKE OR BREAK deal for many scientifically minded people who would LIKE to believe in God but just can't if Creationism is the only option) can be encouraged to consider that there is nothing in Catholic doctrine that says that Evolution is false, simply that if it does exist, it is a product of God's plan and has no bearing whatsoever on His purpose for us Humans.

Why are so many Catholics lost and confused and converting to nondenominational Christianity? As one of those "lost sheep" myself, I can certainly relate to this question and have had to ponder it myself... what caused me to walk away from the Church? The answer, I think, is a composite of three very serious problems the Church faces. First, the post-Vatican II confusion. Before Vatican II, there was very little "wiggle room" or room for interpretation as far as what being a Catholic meant, what Catholics believed, and what they did. After the second Vatican council, the entire world went into the turmoil of the sixties. Because the council was not EXPLICIT as far as maintaining some of the most basic aspects of the faith, and because of the stress and emphasis placed on lay participation with a TOTAL lack of clarification regarding spiritual authority etc, in a time when ALL authority was put into question, the climate of the last thirty years of Catholic life, particularly in the West, has totally declined. The Seminaries were full to overflowing with people who really have no business becoming priests, thus exacerbating the problem and setting the stage for a climate of "change" which ultimately wounded the Church. Truth suddenly began to be watered down, and watered down, and the influences of protestantism ("everybody think for themselves," etc) seeped in in major ways. This caused confusion among the faithful, many of whom do not regognize the TRUTH the Church teaches "officially" in what they see displayed at their local Parish. Secondly, the sixties and seventies brought with them a rise in the culture of death, the proliferation of methods of Birth Control, and the "Me Generation." These things contributed to the destruction of the family unit and ultimately to the crisis we have in the worldwide Church today--- Children are not being Catechized, and if they ARE being Catechized (taught the faith) they are rarely seeing it lived out in their homes. People have become Cultural Catholics, Catholic by name only, as opposed to living as they are called, For the glory of Christ. Lastly, there has been, in the past few years ,a strong "return" to the Faith and to adherence to scripture in the generation who suffered from their parents' generational failures. These young people are absolutely ON FIRE for Christ, but because of the previous two reasons I just described, are not finding that thirst satiated within the Church because there are so FEW examples of radical Christian living. With the decline of vocations to the Priesthood and in particular to religious life, we find around us so few examples of RADICAL FAITH. Thus, I think many young Catholics are drawn to the easily accessible role models of radical faith they see in their local megachurches, who are actively evangelizing and testifying of their radically changed lives ALL the time.

Finding Mary, but missing Jesus. Devotion to Mary, from a Protestant perspective, makes absolutely no sense unless one examines the doctrine of the Communion of Saints (which I don't have time for right now, but I have blogged about in the past and will continue to blog about in the future) I will say, though, that those who find the REAL Mary: ie. the Woman who bore Christ in her womb and who said "yes" to God every step of the journey of her life, will never miss Christ. The Mary of Scripture and Church Tradition is the Mary who says: "I am with you, now look to my Son." Without exception.
Anyone who finds Mary will find Christ at every step of their relationship with her. YES, there are PLENTY of freaky deaky wierdoes out there who venerate Mary above and beyond the Lord God Almighty. But those people are not practicing the true Faith of Catholicism. If we want to know what the CHURCH teaches about Mary, we need only to look to the Catechism.

Which brings me to the last question: Isn't the Catechism adding to Scripture? The Catechism of the Catholic Church is a statement of Faith that is so in depth it covers absolutely every question of doctrine that has ever been adressed. When protestant Churches are built, created, etc, they MUST post a statement of faith, which is what we use to determine: "Is this a Bible-believing Church that my family can attend?" A bad statement of faith sets off red flags that I don't want to be going there to learn from something outside a source of truth. This is what the Catechism is and does-- it teaches the Faith of Scripture and Traditions of the Church in a systematic way. It is not an addition to scripture but an elaboration on how we are to understand what we read in scripture-- think of it like a Bible Commentary that everyone should know. (in fact, when I win the lottery I will commission someone to create a Catholic Bible that contains ONLY commentary from the Catechism ;))

I hope that all of your questions have been somewhat clearly addressed. As I am sure there will be more, I look forward to hearing from you again and again as I never tire of talking about these things. SO much love!!!

----------------------------

I have a question. How does the passage 1st Timothy 3 about Bishops , Pastors and Decons fit into the preisthood? Since it says husband of one wife. I'm confused and still studying.

On the priesthood and the celibate life. While the subject of the priesthood is an extraordinarily wide reaching one with many things to take into consideration, I will try to be as brief as I can. My temptation, when returning to the Church, was to think of the priest as "officially ordained" Pastors of the Catholic Church. And while that is true, the priesthood is so much more than that.
AMong other things, priests are specifically set apart BY GOD to perpetually offer sacrifices as well as to represent Him on behalf of His Bride. Thus, the priest is spiritually married to the Church, His bride. Because of the Nature of the Holy Trinity, the Priests also share in the Fatherhood of God--- in Spiritually nurturing and Fathering the people of God. Because they are human, believing men, they are also Sons of God and thus, our brothers.
Each of these roles are vital in understanding who they are. You are right, Scripture clearly lays out the specifics that say how a married priest, bishop etc is to act and what can be expected of Him. But because we believe the WHOLE Bible, we must also take into consideration the passages where St Paul, for example, tells us that it is better to be single than to be married. With this in mind, the Church, in her wisdom, makes a distinction between what is blessed and what is "MORE" blessed. We do have married priests in the Catholic Church. (not many, but there are some.) These priests are certainly blessed to have these families. However those priests who are NOT married are certainly MORE blessed to be able to complete their ministerial duties in a far less taxing manner. It's important to stop here and recognize why Priests are more like superheros than pastors. They are on call (and busy!) not just 12 but 24 hours a day, serving the people of God by bringing the sacraments to them. They have MUCH more to do than offer a good sermon once a week (try once a day!) and visit the sick in the congregation. They are literally slaves of the Lord, and as such, those types of responsibilities require the ability to NOT have to spend any precious energy on a wife, or children, who would (and do!) undoubtedly suffer greatly at the rigorous demands of the priestly calling.
So it is not that it would be WRONG for a priest to be married, it is that it is so much BETTER for him not to be married, and as such, the Church holds men to that "HIGHER" calling.

-------------------------
I just wanted to pop in and say I've been watching EWTN and they have 2 programs that oddly addressed the questions I kind of listed in my last message. So I understand how the laws were never meant for gentiles and how our salvation in through trust in Jesus rather than works on the side. I guess the law remains for the Jew though, because how can something be eternal in one covenant and then abandoned in the next? ahh confused lol

I bought a catechism too so I'll be reading from that. However, I did want to ask how you wear a headcovering to church. I'm nervous of doing it, but I feel it is soooo essential, I cannot pray without it...and being in the house of God without one is silly. I don't know if you have a certain style or anything, I don't want all eyes on me ya know? And also...the lady of fatima sightings I believe it was, didn't the apparition say in her 15 promises that if you recite the rosary you are safe from hell, or something to that effect? Isn't this blasphemous? I know most of the rosary is scripture from the bible, I'm just hesitant to pray it...being it isn't straight to Jesus.

Re: headcovering You absolutely do NOT have to wear a chapel veil or mantilla to church if you are interested in fulfilling the biblical mandate to cover your head. In fact, I often don't! mantillas are the traditional Catholic option for women who grew up in the West and were influenced by the traditions of Spain and Italy. In France, where I grew up, women simply wear baboushkas (square scarves folded into a triangle and knotted behind the neck or under the chin) and in most middle eastern areas, women wear long rectangular scarves, loose hijab style, wrapped around the head and neck. If you don't want to stand out, then observe what the women in your parish might be wearing. However, I will say that in most American Churches (unless you attend a predominantly ethnically diverse parish) the women who DO cover will be wearing Chapel Veils (which a friend of mine calls doilies :P) and so that is probably the less conspicuous option. In many parishes, you will be hard pressed to find ANYONE who covers their head, in which case, I say, just go for whatever makes you feel comfortable!

On the Rosary. The Rosary is first, and foremost, a meditation: it is a prayer, yes, but a prayer rooted in placing ourselves in the figurative shoes of Mary as she watched her Son and Savior fulfill his mission. It might take a while to get accustomed to praying the hail mary (Which is a prayer taken directly from Scripture) but you will already feel comfortable praying the Our Father or the Glory Be. In the Rosary, then, we both pray verbally, with our hands, and with your minds.
We both give to God in prayer and receive from Him in meditation. It's like 20 minutes a day of perfect peace and time alone with Him. I have blogged before several times about the Rosary and you can certainly find those blogs in my search bar. But the thing I would say to you is this: God knows your heart. He knows that you desire to worship Him alone, and He knows that you desire also to draw closer to Him. Pray the Rosary a few times, and ask the HOLY spirit to be your guide as you do so. He will let you know if it is something pleasing to Him or not. I agonized for a while between a desire to pray the rosary and a fear that I was doing something spiritually incorrect by doing so. I took my own advice and asked God to guide my rosary meditations, and found the practice to be so fruitful that I recommend it to all I meet. More than any other "method" of prayer, the Rosary is truly COMPLETE in itself. We will always be praying and doing and learning God's will when we pray the rosary, because we are literally step by step WITH Him.

---------------------------------------

I love your blog and when I read it I miss the RCC tons. But every time I try and return, the same problems stop me. I guess this message is more questions than anything..like why do you take the Pope's word as final? Especially when it contradicts the bible. Like the 10 commandments for instance...they're different in the bible than what the church teaches. Sunday is the sabbath in the church whereas the Christians of Jesus' time kept the saturday sabbath and had an extra celebration on sunday. The church says saints get into heaven and become above us, yet the bible says everyone sins and the penalty for sin is death...we're all on the same playing field. Yeshua's blood will cleanse anyone who asks of it, therefore everyone can be a saint, as the bible says. and the first christians lived a jewish lifestyle because the OT is eternal. If it isn't then God is a liar...his holy heritage is a lie. Catholics say homosexuality and abortion is wrong, but they use proof from the OT. How can this be if they only accept certain parts of the OT laws? Paul is a hard read and that's why I believe it was Peter who says to read his words carefully. He never preaches against abandoning the law, but to do so with faith knowing you can no longer earn salvation. The law teaches sin, we can't just give that up because the Church says so.

thanks for your time, if you can respond!


I gather from this email that you are coming from a Messianic believer type of place, and that the "Jewishness" of the Scriptures are not lost on you--and for that, I am grateful, as the relevance of that Jewishness is lost on many people! You said in your later email that you had uncovered some of the answers to these questions but didn't clarify which ones, so in the interest of saving time I will respond not in a point-by-point but to a few of the ones that really stood out to me.

I covered the Pope's role and infallability as well as Catholic Doctrine in the first letter I answered, so I wont go there again.
The question of the Lord's Day Vs the Sabbath is a very important one to people like Seventh Day Adventists, so I would like to recommend this link, which does a fantastic job of laying out the "why" of Catholic Sunday observance. Remember, though, that many Catholics go to mass EVERY day, and are encouraged to make EVERY day holy. ;)

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0403frs.asp

The question of 'who can be a Saint' is a good one--- because there is much confusion about this question. The answer, as you have said, is that ANYONE can be a saint: in fact, the Church teaches that it is the calling of EVERY person who responds to Christ to become a Saint. Those whom the Church has declared a saint are persons who lived such notably Holy lives as to have been distinguished among their peers, and who, from their place in heaven, have visibly affected those on the path to Holiness below. In other words, Saints are those of whom the Church can say definitively that they "have been saved." This doesn't mean that others have NOT, it simply means that we can determine that these have "stayed the course."

With regards to the Old Testament It is very, very important to understand that very few of those "jewish traditions" have been erradicated. Rather, they have simply been modified (over the years but in particular BY THE ORIGINAL CHRISTIANS who walked with Christ Himself) to reflect the reality not just of God the FATHER, but of God the Son and of God the Holy Spirit. The liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church reflects it's jewish counterpart in all it does, however it does not confine itself to what Jews have done and do today, but rather extends itself to glorify the Holy Trinity and to help us enter into the mystery of the reality of Christ's sacrifice, an element which is deeply missing from any Jewish liturgy or tradition. As you study the Catechism of the Church, you will find that the Church does not advocate abandoning the Law in any way, but rather that the Church believes Christ who came to FULFILL the Law (not discarding it) by teaching us the Spirit of the Law and the practical pursuit of the law, which is summed up in this: Love God. Love others.

Hopefully these answers have provided SOME clarification. For those who are serious about the subject of eceumenical dialogue, I strongly recommend the following three books:

The Catholic Survival Guide by Catholic Answers
Catholics and Christians
95 Bible verses that confound Protestants
(although this one is a bit harsh towards protestants and not for the sensitive soul, if you know what I mean. However, it raises some excellent questions over holes in protestant theology...and reminds us that if we really believed the Bible, then quite honestly, we'd all be Catholics. Which is what happened to me!)

May God, who IS Truth, direct our steps always that we might know Him more each day.

Mount Carmel

Happy Feast day of our Lady of Mount Carmel!

For those of you who don't know what we are celebrating today, I give you a little background info, from American Catholic.Org's Saint of The Day feature. (http://www.americancatholic.org/Features/SaintofDay/default.asp?id=1446)


July 16, 2009
Our Lady of Mount Carmel


Hermits lived on Mount Carmel near the Fountain of Elijah (northern Israel) in the 12th century. They had a chapel dedicated to Our Lady. By the 13th century they became known as “Brothers of Our Lady of Mount Carmel.” They soon celebrated a special Mass and Office in honor of Mary. In 1726 it became a celebration of the universal Church under the title of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. For centuries the Carmelites have seen themselves as specially related to Mary. Their great saints and theologians have promoted devotion to her and often championed the mystery of her Immaculate Conception.

St. Teresa of Avila (October 15) called Carmel “the Order of the Virgin.” St. John of the Cross (December 14) credited Mary with saving him from drowning as a child, leading him to Carmel and helping him escape from prison. St. Theresa of the Child Jesus believed that Mary cured her from illness. On her First Communion, she dedicated her life to Mary. During the last days of her life she frequently spoke of Mary.

There is a tradition (which may not be historical) that Mary appeared to St. Simon Stock, a leader of the Carmelites, and gave him a scapular, telling him to promote devotion to it. The scapular is a modified version of Mary’s own garment. It symbolizes her special protection and calls the wearers to consecrate themselves to her in a special way. The scapular reminds us of the gospel call to prayer and penance—a call that Mary models in a splendid way.


Comment:

The Carmelites were known from early on as “Brothers of Our Lady of Mount Carmel.” The title suggests that they saw Mary not only as “mother,” but also as “sister.” The word “sister” is a reminder that Mary is very close to us. She is the daughter of God and therefore can help us be authentic daughters and sons of God. She also can help us grow in appreciation of being sisters and brothers to one another. She leads us to a new realization that all human beings belong to the family of God. When such a conviction grows, there is hope that the human race can find its way to peace.

Quote:

“The various forms of piety toward the Mother of God, which the Church has approved within the limits of sound and orthodox doctrine, according to the dispositions and understanding of the faithful, ensure that while the mother is honored, the Son through whom all things have their being (cf. Colossians 1:15–16) and in whom it has pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell (cf. Colossians 1:19) is rightly known, loved and glorified and his commandments are observed” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, 66).



For me, as a fledgling Carmelite, this is a special feast! It marks the first year of my venture into Carmel, and is a good reminder to be solidary with Carmelites all over the world alongside whom I am journeying towards holiness! I am so thankful for my vocation, and more for (and I might be wrong, but I think I can perceive it) the spiritual fruit that has been borne in my life since heeding the Carmelite call. In the company of such incredible saints as John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, Mariam the Little Arab and Mary Magdalen D'Pazzi, and guided by the Mother of Christ herself, how can I not grow in my spiritual walk?

Just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge the wonder and amazement I felt today when assisting at mass. The homily demonstrated how Mary, who accompanies us by her own sorrows through the sorrows of life as wait in "Joyful Hope" together for the coming of the Kingdom, teaches us to bring those burdens to the altar, and as we do, the Lord takes our offerings of pain and burden, and in exchange we are able to receive from Him perfect peace and all the graces He wishes to give us in the Eucharistic Feast which is prepared at that same altar. I knew this as a protestant, but it was only when returning to the Church and seeing this happen PHYSICALLY on the altar that I was able to grasp the spiritual reality of what was happening up there.

What a bargain! We give up death, sorrow, agony, and despair, and exchange it for Life, joy, grace, and encouragement for the journey. Mass, after mass, after mass. It's just amazing.

Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us all.

A REAL doctor!

So there I was, blue gloves on, armed with two tongue depressors and two little specimen containers, scraping wet poop off my baby's backside to put into the jars and send off to the lab for tests. I have to admit, I felt very "official" with all of these tools at my disposal... being a cloth diapering parent, I'm more than accustomed to spending some serious one-on-one time with my kid's poop.

In comes Annika, happily skipping, and when she saw me, stopped completely in her tracks and stood perfectly still, eyes popping out of her head and gleeful grin on her face.

"WOW, MOMMY!" She exclaimed in wonder. "YOU GROWED UP! You're a REAL doctor! Good job, mommy!"

These kids. They are amazing.

To Care, or Not to Care?

Been watching House, M.D. a lot lately on our date nights. I think we needed something more intellectually stimulating, and we have definitely been served. The show is truly thought provoking in so many ways, and though it periodically has elements that we whole-heartedly disagree with (Lesbian relationships, Atheism, and Drug use, to name a few) it is all done in a relatively tasteful and definitely purposeful way-- it's not explicit for the sake of being explicit but rather witty and intended to make the viewer pause to think.

It also helps that, yet again, my husband is a lot like the main character. Dr House, let's face it, is what society would call a "total jerk." He is callous, unfeeling, unrelenting, brilliant, and totally logical about EVERYTHING. Periodically, the viewer gets a glimpse into "how he got that way," and for the most part, we realize that he has his reasons and that we don't really want him to change... after all, it is his calm, logical nature that helps him to see things as they REALLY are, untainted by his emotional attachments, and thus to be the best Diagnostician in the land.

My husband is (hopefully) not as utterly unfeeling as House is, but he can certainly come off that way-- in fact, it was one of the biggest things we fought over when we were first married. I am a very emotional person, and have glorious ups and devastating downs. He, on the other hand, is mostly pretty steady with a few serious dips which make him appear slightly nasty sometimes. It can be very unnerving to try to "share your feelings" with a man who doesn't really care what those feelings are if they don't do much for the situation at hand. For example: "I'm so frustrated because we don't get time together. " His response: "Well, this week that's the way it has been. Next week I'll make sure to schedule more time with you." And famously, I hear: "Dry it up!"

What's interesting about both is that they certainly HAVE emotions-- they have good days, bad days, things that amuse them more than others, etc. But like Lucius Vorenus in HBO's ROME (another favorite of ours containing Peter's identical twin) we see that it is his willingness to lay aside emotions for philosophical thinking that helps him to continue to do the "right" thing... which, in House's case, means to do his job effectively and save lives.

In one of the episodes we saw last week, (Season 4, Episode 13: No more Mr. Nice Guy,) House encounters a man who is just waaaaay "too" nice.
This bugs House, who of course, goes over to the guy and very deliberately slams his cane down on the guys foot, hoping for a reaction. The guy's wife is furious, but the husband calms her by gently saying "Honey, I'm sure he didn't mean to do it."
The entire episode continues as we discover that the man has syphilis and that it has caused his brain to "change" and make him act a certain way. As the syphilis is treated, then, there is talk of him becoming less nice and more "ordinary." The big question is-- will he? House hopes so, because as House says: "The guy is either perfect or he is sick."

The man's response was, to me, amazing. "I'm sure he didn't mean to do it." How profound. There is a good lesson there-- we learn to assume the best in people, even when we know that they have purposely done the worse. And why? To benefit our own sense of solidarity with the life around us... to give us hope that the world is not as crummy as we know it is. This is Christian "positivity," -- an awareness that though life is Hell, God is good and loves us, ALL the time. Let me elaborate. The man KNEW-- he had seen with his eyes-- that House had purposely hurt him. And yet instead of reacting, he chose the right and said :"I'm sure he didn't mean to do it." This both shook up House, who HAD meant to do it, and reassured the man, who knew he had meant to do it, by placing him on the "upper level" of the playing field. The man had demonstrated that he was the bigger man in the situation, and it unnerved House.

In this particular case, the dynamic between the man and House was fascinating to watch because they represented two sides of this coin: Nice, positive, always loving vs. Cold, callous, and totally disinterested, thus logical, level-headed, and wise. I loved watching the battle because we are called to be both, in a sense.

Nowadays, we are fed this notion that our emotions should feed us and should be our driving force. We are promised that we "deserve happiness" and sold this idea to be "true to ourselves" and follow our dreams.
We see brides and pregnant mommies cajoled and catered to in a manner that conveys that everything is about them. We read in magazines that we should "Express ourselves" and "find ourselves" and "pursue happiness at all costs," "doing what's right for us."

But the man in the episode didn't FEEL happy all the time. I'm sure when House hammered on his foot with his cane he felt sad, hurt, rejected, bewildered, and confused! But he CHOSE to BE happy despite all these things, and that is the key, I think, to this life.

It seems to me that a lot of this stuff stems from the sixties and the rise of feminism. We all can agree that at a basic level, women tend to be more intuitive and emotional and men tend to be more logical and level-headed. We have the hormones to assist us in allowing our emotions to takeover, and they are exacerbated by things like stress, which pumps us full of even more hormones and takes us over the edge. I see in my children, one boy and one girl so far, that my daughter is the one who is all drama and emotional extravagance-- she is either a perfect joy to be around or a moaning, miserable terror. My son, however, spends most of his time doing exactly what he wants-- if he wants a cuddle, he comes to get one and doesn't make me guess. If he wants to be left alone to take apart the bathtub faucet, he gets to work and doesn't ask my opinion.
With the rise of feminism, we have become forced to live in a world where women take jobs that require the emotional "coolness" of men and which, quite frankly, do not suit women for reasons of physical strength and emotional strength (soldiers, firefighters, cops, etc)
Likewise, we have become forced to live in a world that has utterly emasculated men-- asking them to "get in touch" with their emotions and essentially become women. Nowadays we are hard pressed to find a level-headed man who is NOT overcome by his emotions, the last four decades of child rearing have ensured that all our men would know how to both provide financially for their families AND take care of the homes AND parent their children AND maintain a good mood while doing it all while their wives visit spas and take "babymoons" and shopping breaks.
Even in families when this isn't the norm, families who have thankfully attempted to allow their men to be men, I find frequently that the boys and husband are still encouraged constantly-- usually despite themselves-- to "talk" about their feelings, to examine their feelings, and to share them with others. The women (and I've been guilty of this over and over myself!) get together with other women to do the same with each other when their husbands are NOT willing or able to participate.

Entire religious systems (like followers of the New Age philosophy "The Secret," law of attraction, and Scientology) are built around the idea of "personal happiness." Their adherents are encouraged to find happiness by dwelling on their
positive thoughts" ie, the things that make them happy, and acting on those things mentally, emotionally, and physically to bring about more happiness.

But I digress.

The thing is, our emotions have taken front and center in today's world, and that is not a biblical sign of a healthy human being. God, who made tripartite man (Body, Spirit, Soul) and tells us in His Word over and over again how he should order his passions, has laid out a very clear blueprint.

We are: BODY (flesh) SPIRIT (spirit) and SOUL (Mind, will, emotions)
The Spirit, which is breathed to life by our uniting with Christ, should lead, followed by our rightly ordered soul: WILL FIRST, then MIND, and THEN EMOTIONS, followed by our Body, or flesh.
We order our soul thus because it is an act of our WILL to follow the Spirit, and we must use our MIND to control our emotions. If we reverse this order, as the natural world seems to think that we ought, and put our emotions on higher ground than our minds or even our wills, then we find ourselves faltering because our emotions are misleading-- they are neither demonstrative of the "TRUE" story nor helpful in determining a course of action. They simply are.

In the Catechism of the Church, the Church makes a point to remind us that once we are Christians there is virtually NO distinction between spirit and soul-- that is, we are so overcome by the Spirit that it controls our Mind, Will, and Emotions. How wise!

For instance.... I have, in the past, been hurt by a person's distance towards me and acted on that hurt, only to discover later that the person was utterly occupied with something deeply serious that shamed me when I realized that my need to be loved took precedence over their rightful need to be loved at that time. A rightly ordered person would have, instead, followed the Holy Spirit's leading to continue to love that person despite apparent rejection, using their will to submit to the Spirit and be compassionate, using their mind to examine possible reasons for said rejection, and finally, acknowledging that though "hurt feelings" were there, they were not useful for the fulfillment of the task at hand and needed to be put aside. As the situation righted itself, of course, those 'hurt feelings' became FEELINGS of love.

I believe that if people could stop putting so much stock in their HEARTS (Which scripture tells us over and over are deceitful and full of poison) and rather put their stock in the TRUTH (which is, whatever is logical and correct, alongside whatever is what God has said) then we will find ourselves, like House, perfectly detached from all tainting of our actions by our unruly emotions, and instead find ourselves succeeding at living in true joy-- which is a choice to live by every Word that comes from the mouth of God.

In House's case, his emotional detachment allows him to continue to serve people by healing them and remaining uninvolved. And as he does, he is, himself, provided with those emotional "needs" he has-- to love and be loved, etc. His team would do anything for him, and though he would be hard pressed to admit it, he would do anything for his team. There is a solidarity there that defies all ordinary bonds of "caring"-- and it is a gift given to a man who has transcended his emotions.

We trust God, and we believe His Word. What more do we need?

Thus, when we have run out of food, we can boil a pot of water and wait for the neighbor to bring by the rice instead of anxiously laying awake at night?
When we have run out of love, we can continue to serve and wait for the neighbor to show us some love instead of pacing and wondering.

Love is a choice. Being offended is a choice. Emotions are actions.

TLM

I had the opportunity on Friday to go to my first Latin Mass since returning to the Roman Catholic Church over a year ago.
There is a little country church in our area which offers a daily Tridentine Mass, and it's only 20 minutes from where we live. With all of my own enthusiasm for the TLM, you would have thought that I would have been there sooner, but I hadn't, for a number of reasons... the main one being that I don't drive, have two young children who cause me a great deal of stress in quiet, reverent masses, and have a husband who is not particularly drawn to the latin mass.

Let me also say that I find myself, socially, in a bit of an odd spot among Catholics. Having been a "Spirit filled" nondenominational Christian for so long, I consider myself a Charismatic-- I sometimes pray in tongues, I pray mostly spontaneously, and I have seen and been a part of the operation of the "charismatic" gifts. I find it greatly encouraging that there are Charismatics in the Roman Catholic Church who "get" that God wants us in an intimate relationship with him and who is, by nature, both healer, deliverer, and savior.
At the same time, I find myself often identifying with the "Traddie" sector of modern American Catholicism: I prefer the Tridentine Mass, I get aggravated as can be at the liturgical monstrosities that pass at VII masses in most American parishes, I cover my head and think you should, too, and I believe churches are for prayer, liturgy, adoration and silence, not for "catching up."
Since both groups tend to dislike each other, I find it hard to make friends with people from either group.
Instead, my friendships tend to center around people who are conservative, but don't love the latin mass, and who are demonstrably imbued with the Holy Spirit but who might shift uncomfortably if I laid hands on them in a restaurant. :P

So it was with one such Conservative-yet-in-no-way-Traddie friend that I headed to this TLM and I'm so glad I went with her! God could not have given me a better "first time in a long time" partner to take on this particular adventure.

I was breathless from the minute we walked in the door. On the outside, the Church is as plain as can be... just a little country building.
But the TANGIBLE presence of our Lord was overpowering from the minute I stepped through the doors. In fact, I was struck by the fact that while, at my home parish, I am often spiritually affected by the turmoil of battle in the building-- and very aware, sometimes of the presence of something distinctly not-from-God (many of my co-parishioners know exactly what I mean) in THIS building, though, it was literally like breathing in the incense of Heaven. One immediately felt... I don't know. Surrounded by something Holy. So much so that I was immediately reminded of my discalced status and the resounding words of God to Moses-- "remove your shoes, for you are on Holy Ground."

Near the holy water font in the front there was a large basket full of chapel veils for those women who came unprepared. (I probably don't have to tell you how my heart skipped with glee when I saw this pile of headcoverings....it was like.... home!)

I looked nervously around at the people in the pews, wondering if they would think my skirt was too short (it was just below the knee) or that I somehow stuck out, like I wasn't "uber traddie" enough to be there. Fortunately, everyone gave me a warm smile and when we did have a question, everyone was accomodating.

It was mostly women, some children, and a couple of men.
I recognized a few faces from back home, which was nice. The children blew me away-- they all sat in a row, little girls two and up had their heads covered, perfectly still and silent and just.... good. Even the 18 month olds. How these wondermoms get them to do that is beyond me. I'm looking forward to observing more. I know this is how we were growing up in Church, but I have no idea how we were taught to do that. We just were.

We sat down in separate pews (one of the best things about this friend is that she can appreciate the need for solitude in Church) and I began to take in the environment.

Altar (WITH STEPS!! GLORY!) tabernacle, angels with lit candles all around it.
In the back beside the altar, a HUGE statue of St Therese de Lisieux, who seemed to be looking straight into my eyes. I was so comforted by her Carmelite presence in this experience.
There was also an enormous statue of St Michael the Archangel and one of King Louis. The entire set-up was very French... I found out later that this particular priest loves all things French and has done up his rectory in a similar manner, with Fleur de Lys everywhere, etc.

The altar server came up and started setting up for mass, and I reflected for a while on the difference between this altar server (who was not very old at all) and the ones I've been seeing all the time at my home parish-- this one wore a cassock and the crisp black and white comforted me with all of it's familiarity... as opposed to the albs the ones at my church wear. Although young, he was extraordinarily reverent--- gently and carefully placing each item in it's correct position, hands clasped together in prayer position when he wasn't using them, and fully genuflecting towards the tabernacle. I was so moved to see this little kid who was so beautifully trained, and it continued as I watched him, during mass, recite endless prayers and responses IN LATIN, from memory. All kids are capable of this. Thank God some of them are learning how to do it.
He wasn't even THAT spectacular, in the sense that he was a totally average boy his age...
I also noticed, of course, that he was a boy, and I was so happy about that. Altar servers do have a tendency to draw closer to the priests than any other ministry, and it is a God-given gift to them for their vocations discernment. We need more priests, but how will we get them if there are only altar girls and we don't really train our altar boys? St Paul is clear about women approaching the altar, and yet somehow in the Novus Ordo all I ever see around the altar are women-- it was refreshing to have men (and boys, training to be men) leading the Church.
A few weeks ago at Carmelites I had experienced a similar thing with altar servers at the mass we went to: they were so tight, so efficient, so organized and in unison that it truly became like a dance, to me....they worked in pairs and brought this exquisite, divine beauty to the Mass by their very presence... and yet believe me, these were your average modern boys.... weird emo haircuts and all. :)
It was in such stark contrast to the experience I had today at mass, where the alb-clad altar servers were literally talking to each other during the mass, making signs at their parents in the pews, and forgetting at which point to bring up which book, causing the Priest to have to go and get it himself.

Mass began, and I settled into the rhythmic routine of listening to the Latin and joining my prayers to the priests. I IMMEDIATELY realized why so many of my very "Conservative Catholic" friends dislike the Latin Mass. It truly is as if the priest does all the acting and we just get to witness it. Most of the responses are said by the Altar server who is representing the people, and when we DO respond, it is in a quiet murmur, not in a bellowing "Amen!" voice.

I looked around to observe the others. I had brought my 1962 missal, in which I have been faithfully reading the days' traditional Mass Readings since returning to the Church. I don't like the new calendar because it removed so many saints that I truly loved. It also prevents me from being "liturgically" on the same page as my favorite spirtual direction authors (like Fr Gabriel's "Divine Intimacy," which is based around the traditional liturgical calendar.) I used to bring that missal with me to the Novus Ordo at my home Parish. I had highlighted the responses and parts for the N.O and was always annoyed at having to turn like, ten pages to find each response. Now i have two missals, one I bring for the NO and the other I use at home for mass and brought with me to the TLM.
It was such a blessing to be able to experience the RICHNESS of the liturgy, the fullness of it, and not to miss out on anything or "shorten" anything. Nearly everyone there had a missal out too and was following along. This resolves completely the problem of "not understanding" what's going on... we see the Latin on the left and the English on the right, and thus we know exactly what is being said. A few people had out rosaries, and prayed the rosary through the mass. I was grateful to be able to participate fully IN the mass by reading the scriptures and prayers that were read, and meditating on them myself.

In fact, one of the reasons I was so totally thrilled was because St Therese's presence reminded me of the contemplative aspect of participation in the TLM. I would go as far as to say that a person who does not know how to meditate or practice mental prayer would get very little out of the liturgy itself. I find it totally jarring to be jolted out of a meditation by a response, song I must sing, or some such aspect when I am totally "moved" spiritually during the Novus Ordo. It's one of the reasons I flat out refuse to sing before, during, or after communion. For me, there is no possible reason to do so, because what is happening internally is FAR more relevant than any "expression of unity" I can be forced to make with the people to the right or to the left of me, who are supposed to be also internalizing the effects of participation. In other words, I think the TLM is, above all, for contemplative souls. And contemplative souls get there by practice, not by any other means. Thus, I can see how as someone who meditates regularly, the TLM might be a glorious occasion for me to do just that-- to completely internalize the sacrifice of the Cross and all that it means for us without being consistently "reminded" to participate. For people who do NOT easily fall into mental prayer, I can see how the TLM might be excruciatingly painful-- borderline boring. I can see how the people require the timed responses of the Novus Ordo to keep them centered on what is going on at the time. Either way, I was totally edified by this realization--- and so thankful for the TLM and that I was able to attend after all this time of yearning!

I find Latin to be absolutely exhilerating. In deliverance ministry, and in developping this particular calling from a Catholic perspective this year, I have discovered that demons have an extreme distaste for Latin liturgy and also Gregorian Chant, two elements of the Tridentine Mass which, for the most part, are lacking in most Novus Ordo parishes across America. Because of this knowledge, and because of my heart's desire to find co-warriors in the Spiritual battle, you can imagine my joy at being present at a Latin Mass. Most of the responses and postures (although not all!) fell back into place easily, from some deep place in my brain where I had stored them all away. It was a very strange feeling-- on the one hand, I had no confidence in my "knowledge" of what-to-do-next, and on the other, I was totally amazed by the natural way into which I fell into the rhythmic prayer.

The two other things that really stood out from the experience were the incredible efforts of the Priest on behalf of the people, and the solemnity of the occasion. This particular priest suffered from obvious physical pain, and yet here he was, daily choosing to say a mass which required MUCH more of him than simply standing or sitting.

There is a moment, right after the consecration, when the priest elevates the host high above his head and the people are to pray: "My Lord and My God!" Meanwhile, the altar server, with his left hand, lifts the priest's chasuble and with his right hand, rings the bell with great fervor to let us know: This is God come down-- Immanuel. In that moment, my breath was literally taken away. In the last year in which I would have done ANYTHING to come face to face with the Eucharist once I began to truly understand John 6, never had my desire to worship the Host been satiated like it was when it was treated with such perfectly sublime solemnity.

When it came time for us to receive communion, we filed down the line to the altar rail, which remained in place to remind us that the Altar was not something we could just "hang out around," and in this way, we were given, by a priest only, the literal Body and Blood, soul and divinity, of Christ our Lord.
In contrast, today in our home parish, I put my finger on what seems wrong. You see, we are not able to truly participate in the "Agnus Dei" because of the roar of voices still hauling down the aisles to shake hands with every person within ten pews. During this insanity, about 15 or so people from all sides of the Church head up to the Altar and stand around it. It's a veritable wave of people, coming from everywhere, and if you sit in the front can be totally overwhelming. As if this isn't irritating enough, these people then proceed to shake hands with and hug each other, all the way down the line, even though we are supposed to be finishing up the Agnus Dei!This bothers me a great deal-- first, because "EXTRAORDINARY" ministers are those persons who "might" be needed in "extraordinary" circumstances. (Hey, i once got told we couldn't have the latin mass in our parish because it's the "EXTRAORDINARY FORM" of the mass-- so why doesn't the same rule apply for "EXTRAORDINARY" ministers?)
They are not, nor are they intended to be, a staple of the communion table. When consecration occurs, it is THE LORD on that table. All our attention should be focused on Him! And yet He is totally swarmed and minimized by a mass of people who can't even be bothered to kneel around Him. (OK, to be fair, they are told NOT to kneel by our liturgist. True story! Yeah.)

Secondly, it bugs me because I want to receive communion from a priest, and not from a lay person. It irks me to no end when I must receive from an extraordinary minister rather than a priest. Why? Because they aren't priests. My priest brings me the Eucharist. The Eucharist is all the "community" I need.

Seeing that today after the glorious ORDER and reverence and respect which our Lord was shown in the TLM, I just can't comprehend what people are thinking.
Now, the Novus Ordo that I attended in Raleigh recently which was almost all in Latin DID have a profound and lasting effect on me in all these same departments, so before you start worrying that I'm going to enlist with the Pius X people, understand that it's not so much WHICH rite as the rememberance of the Sacred Nature of what we are assisting at and participating in that matters to me and can make or break my Mass experience.

Lastly, I was overjoyed to find ALL the faithful, after mass was over, taking the time to get BACK on their knees and pray the Leo XIII prayers which are sooo important for the wellbeing of the Church in the spiritual combat-- and also to find that no spontaneous bursting into conversation ensued-- people waited until they were OUTSIDE to start babbling to each other about daily life, which is something I think we must do by example if we want to see any changes in that whatsoever in my home parish.

I made it to the parking lot and then absolutely fell apart into a blubbering, grateful, happy mess. During the mass, I distinctly felt a hand on my head at one point, and got the impression that I was being healed. Initially, I thought that it was going to be a physical healing (I've always got this infection going with the pregnancy that I can't seem to get rid of) but I later realized in prayer that it was a Spiritual healing, and that the graces which I received would renew me forever.

My challenge, now, is to find a way to express, in my own Parish which drives me to the extreme opposite emotional place and leaves me, most days, with steam coming out my ears) the Charity and Hope and Faith that God has given us all in the assurance that the gates of hell may not prevail against the Church.

This is not a new battle: Satan has always wanted to desecrate and destroy the sacredness of the mass.
St Athanasius wrote this in the 4th century, but he could have written it today:

"You are the ones who are happy; you who remain within the Church by your Faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which has come down to you from Apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis. No one, ever, will prevail against your Faith, beloved Brothers. And we believe that God will give us our churches back some day.

"Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."

Thank You, Lord, for giving me a glimpse into a place where you are TRULY worshipped in Spirit and Truth--- enlighten us all so that we may worship you better and more.