 31 October and 1 and 2 November are called, colloquially (not officially), "Hallowtide" or the "Days of the Dead" because on these days we pray for or remember those who've left this world. The days of the dead center around All Saints' Day (also known as All Hallows') on November 1, when we celebrate all the Saints in Heaven. On the day after All Hallows', we remember the saved souls who are in Purgatory being cleansed of the temporal effects of their sins before they can enter Heaven. The day that comes before All Hallows', though, is one on which we unofficially remember the damned and the reality of Hell. The schema, then, for the Days of the Dead looks like this:
The earliest form of All Saints' (or "All Hallows'") was first celebrated in the 300s, but originally took place on 13 May, as it still does in some Eastern Church es. The Feast first commemorated only the martyrs, but came to include all of the Saints by 741. It was transferred to 1 November in 844 when Pope Gregory III consecrated a chapel in St. Peter's Basilica to All Saints (so much for the theory that the day was fixed on 1 November because of a bunch of Irish pagans had harvest festivals at that time). All Souls' has its origins in A.D. 1048 when the Bishop of Cluny decreed that the Benedictines of Cluny pray for the souls in Purgatory on this day. The practice spread until Pope Sylvester II recommended it for the entire Latin Church. The Vigil of, or evening before, All Hallows' ("Hallows' Eve," or "Hallowe'en") came, in Irish popular piety, to be a day of remembering the dead who are neither in Purgatory or Heaven, but are damned, and these customs spread to many parts of the world. Thus we have the popular focus of Hallowe'en as the reality of Hell, hence its scary character and focus on evil and how to avoid it, the sad fate of the souls of the damned, etc. 1 How, or even whether, to celebrate Hallowe'en is a controversial topic in traditional circles. One hears too often that "Hallowe'en is a pagan holiday" -- an impossibility because "Hallowe'en," as said, means "All Hallows' Evening" which is as Catholic a holiday as one can get. Some say that the holiday actually stems from Samhain, a pagan Celtic celebration, or is Satanic, but this isn't true, either, any more than Christmas "stems from" the Druids' Yule, though popular customs that predated the Church may be involved in our celebrations (it is rather amusing that October 31 is also "Reformation Day" in Protestant circles -- the day to recall Luther's having nailed his 95 Theses to Wittenberg's cathedral door -- but Protestants who reject "Hallowe'en" because pagans used to do things on October 31 don't object to commemorating that event on this day). Some traditional Catholics, objecting to the definite secularization of the holiday and to the myth that the entire thing is "pagan" to begin with, refuse to celebrate it in any way at all, etc. Other traditional Catholics celebrate it without qualm, though keeping it Catholic and staying far away from some of the ugliness that surrounds the day in the secular world. However one decides to spend the day, it is hoped that the facts are kept straight, and that Catholics refrain from judging other Catholics who decide to celebrate differently. For those who do want to celebrate Hallowe'en, customs of this day are a mixture of Catholic popular devotions, and French, Irish, and English customs all mixed together. From the French we get the custom of dressing up, which originated during the time of the Black Death when artistic renderings of the dead known as the "Danse Macabre," were popular. These "Dances of Death" were also acted out by people who dressed as the dead. Later, these practices were moved to Hallowe'en when the Irish and French began to intermarry in America. From the Irish come the carved Jack-o-lanterns, which were originally carved turnips. The legend surrounding the Jack-o-Lantern is this:
And when you carve up your pumpkin, keep the seeds to roast! Here's a recipe:
From the English Catholics we get begging from door to door, the earlier and more pure form of "trick-or-treating." Children would go about begging their neighbors for a "Soul Cake," for which they would say a prayer for those neighbors' dead. Instead of knocking on a door and saying the threatening, "Trick-or-treat" (or the ugly "Trick-or-treat, smell my feet, give me something good to eat"), children would say either:
or
While Soul Cakes were originally a type of shortbread, it is said that a clever medieval cook wanted to make Soul Cakes designed to remind people of eternity, so she cut a hole in the middle of round cakes before frying them, thereby inventing donuts! Fresh plain cake donuts would be a nice food to eat on this day.
Other customary foods for All Hallows' Eve include cider, nuts, popcorn, and apples -- best eaten around a bonfire or fireplace! Another Hallowe'en custom is the old Celtic "bobbing for apples." To do this, fill a large tub two thirds full with water and float apples in it. Children take turns trying to pick up one of the floating apples using only their mouths (hands are not allowed and must be held or tied behind the back!) -- very tricky to do! The first to do so wins a prize (some say he will be the first one to marry someday). You can make the game more fun by carving an initial into the bottom of each apple, letting that initial indicate the name of the person each apple-bobber will marry, and/or using different colored apples with different assigned meanings or prizes. (You can play a dry version of this game by tying the stems of the apples to strings and suspending them. If you do this, carve any initials at the tops of the apples. Of course, all of this sort of thing is a parlor game and should never be taken seriously or cross the line into divination!). ...and tell scary stories! If you want the perfect poems to relate to your children on this day, see Little Orphant Annie, The Raven, The Stolen Child, and the Wreck of the Hesperus. And here are those poems and some stories for you to download in Microsoft Word .doc format:
After teaching your children about the frightening realities of Hell and the fate of the damned, reassure them by telling them that the Evil One has already been conquered! Satan has no real power over those who are in Christ, and mocking him and his minions is a way of demonstrating this; teach your children how to call on the power of Christ and His Church to protect themselves from their snares. Warn them that magic (the art of performing actions beyond the power of man with the aid of powers other than the Divine) is real, that there is no such thing as "white magic," that playing with the occult -- whether by divination, necromancy, the casting of spells, playing with Ouija boards, etc. -- is an invitation to demons to respond, and that it is from demons that magic gets any power it has. Remember St. Michael to them, teach them about the power of sacramentals and prayers that ward off evil when piously used (the Sign of the Cross, Holy Water, blessed salt, the Crucifix, the St. Benedict Medal, St. Anthony's Brief, etc.), teach them to call on the Holy Name of Jesus when they are afraid, etc. And please pray to all the Saints that they might intercede and bring pagans and witches to Christ so they might know the peace that comes from knowing that God loves them so much that He allowed Himself to take on a human nature, to suffer, and to die for them.. |
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Hallowe'en (courtesy of www.fisheaters.com)
then carved Crosses on the trunk so the Devil couldn't get back down. He bargained with the Evil One, saying he would remove the Crosses only if the Devil would promise not to take his soul to Hell; to this, the Devil agreed. 
Friday, October 29, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
PS Some thoughts on fairness and Careerism.
I am not sure if there is such a word as careerism. Don't know if I heard it said or if it just seemed to sound about right when thinking about vocations to family. I have not bothered to look it up because whether it is a word or not is of no import as I will explain what I mean by it and in so doing give you the definition of it as I see it.
In my previous post I talked about population decline and the brave new world we live in. Part of that discussion touched on women in the work force and the impact a woman choosing a career path has on the number of children she is likely to have, on population and on family. This part of the post actual came from a debate that took place between myself and a few other women on the issue of career versus family and why women had to choose between the two and men did not. Some of the women found it unreasonable and unfair that this should be the case. They argued that it was because of short sighted social attitudes and by extension a lack of effective social policy. Oh were it that simple! If only we could just throw a little public policy, and public money, and correct all the perceived injustices in our societies! But just because a segment of society perceives an injustice does that make something an injustice? Here are some examples of possible perceived injustices that my girlfriend Alane and I came up with that we might want to try and fix with a little social policy and public money.
When talking about choices between career and family I only very briefly touched on something which I would now like to expound upon a little. I mentioned that one rarely sees male CEOs of companies who were also devoted, dedicated husbands and fathers. They may have a child or two but their lives are pretty much tied to their careers, because that is what it takes to be the best in any given career. This is the danger and, I believe, inevitable trapping of careerism.
Careerists are very different from those who are dedicated to being good at what they do. A careerist is someone who has come to define themselves by the success or failure of their career, for whom their career is their life! All that they do, all that they are is based on how well they succeed in their given career. In the end a careerist serves his/her career first, at the expense of all else, sometimes even life itself.
Our culture promotes this, it applauds this, it feeds this. How many times have you heard someone say, "my work is my life" "my career is my whole world." This is all is quite sad, and even sadder when the person saying it is a mother or father.
What is the purpose and end of work? Well depending on who you talk to there will be varying answers. I believe that the purpose and end of work has always been to provide for and care for your family and yourself. I think it is important that you get some satisfaction in the work you do, and I think that if you can find work that can be rewarding and enjoyable as well as provide for your family that is great. I am not advocating that we should suffer miserably and unnecessarily in our chosen profession, not at all. But I do think that once you are spending all of your quality time and energy devoting it to your profession at the expense of time spent nurturing and caring for your family you have allowed yourself to be dangerously side tracked into careerism.
Culturally we have lost sight of what is truly important, men and women alike. I think one of the reasons why a career seems so appealing to women is that they watch men virtually abandon their families for the sake of, greater career opportunities, public acclamation, peer adulation, more status, more money, etc, and with seemingly no consequences. People talk about how history remembers so and so, and their successes, and sometimes their failure. We talk about how so an so will be remembered in the annals of history for their great successes. But really who cares. Does it mean that the great historical figure has lead a better life than the person who fathered/mothered children to become good people who went on to have families who themselves were good and caring people and so on. Who really has the greater legacy?
Many of these great successful men have wives who have made a choice to stay home and care for their families so that their husbands can pursue their careers. And in some cases men have chosen to stay home with the children while their wives go out and pursue their careers. I would say that if it is unfair for a woman to be expected to stay home and essentially bring up her children by herself, it is just as much unfair for her to expect her husband to go it alone while she goes off to "fulfill herself" through her career.
It is a sad statement of how truly lost we are when we need a career to feel fulfilled. When we cannot find fulfillment it caring for our families, helping to guide our children, being companions and helpers to our mates. True fulfillment, I believe, can only be found in taking the time to commune with God and discern what he is calling you to. And that may very well be to a profession, but it certainly would not be to a professional life that would pull you away from your vocation as husband and father, or wife and mother.
So while it may seem unfair to some that women have to make the choice between career and family, as it may seem unfair that some people have green eyes while others do not, fairness really is not the issue is it? The issue I believe is truly about the difference between what we should do and what we want to do, what is best for our families as opposed to what seems best for our wants. Only in recent decades have we seen women have doors open to them, career opportunities made available to them, that have never been before and instead of taking the time to truly discern a life's vocation we have gone clamoring right behind so many men making all the same mistakes that they have been making. We are wanting to make many of the same selfish sacrifices. How unoriginal!
Who do you think is more fulfilled?
God Bless,
Dominique
In my previous post I talked about population decline and the brave new world we live in. Part of that discussion touched on women in the work force and the impact a woman choosing a career path has on the number of children she is likely to have, on population and on family. This part of the post actual came from a debate that took place between myself and a few other women on the issue of career versus family and why women had to choose between the two and men did not. Some of the women found it unreasonable and unfair that this should be the case. They argued that it was because of short sighted social attitudes and by extension a lack of effective social policy. Oh were it that simple! If only we could just throw a little public policy, and public money, and correct all the perceived injustices in our societies! But just because a segment of society perceives an injustice does that make something an injustice? Here are some examples of possible perceived injustices that my girlfriend Alane and I came up with that we might want to try and fix with a little social policy and public money.
- while people sunburn and black people don't (and if they do not nearly as quickly and it does not look nearly as bad)
- my daughter and husband have beautiful singing voices and I don't
- I know many people who are much faster runners than I am
- my friend Jocelyn is a much better cook than I am
- my friend Alane plays many musical instruments, she is gifted and I am not
- my sister is a wonderful painter and I am not
- I have several friends who have much more money than I do
- One of our friends is a multi millionaire.
- My friend Thea can knit a baptismal gown and I cannot
- I know people who speak five or more languages, I only speak three
- etc, etc, etc,
When talking about choices between career and family I only very briefly touched on something which I would now like to expound upon a little. I mentioned that one rarely sees male CEOs of companies who were also devoted, dedicated husbands and fathers. They may have a child or two but their lives are pretty much tied to their careers, because that is what it takes to be the best in any given career. This is the danger and, I believe, inevitable trapping of careerism.
Careerists are very different from those who are dedicated to being good at what they do. A careerist is someone who has come to define themselves by the success or failure of their career, for whom their career is their life! All that they do, all that they are is based on how well they succeed in their given career. In the end a careerist serves his/her career first, at the expense of all else, sometimes even life itself.
Our culture promotes this, it applauds this, it feeds this. How many times have you heard someone say, "my work is my life" "my career is my whole world." This is all is quite sad, and even sadder when the person saying it is a mother or father.
What is the purpose and end of work? Well depending on who you talk to there will be varying answers. I believe that the purpose and end of work has always been to provide for and care for your family and yourself. I think it is important that you get some satisfaction in the work you do, and I think that if you can find work that can be rewarding and enjoyable as well as provide for your family that is great. I am not advocating that we should suffer miserably and unnecessarily in our chosen profession, not at all. But I do think that once you are spending all of your quality time and energy devoting it to your profession at the expense of time spent nurturing and caring for your family you have allowed yourself to be dangerously side tracked into careerism.
Culturally we have lost sight of what is truly important, men and women alike. I think one of the reasons why a career seems so appealing to women is that they watch men virtually abandon their families for the sake of, greater career opportunities, public acclamation, peer adulation, more status, more money, etc, and with seemingly no consequences. People talk about how history remembers so and so, and their successes, and sometimes their failure. We talk about how so an so will be remembered in the annals of history for their great successes. But really who cares. Does it mean that the great historical figure has lead a better life than the person who fathered/mothered children to become good people who went on to have families who themselves were good and caring people and so on. Who really has the greater legacy?
Many of these great successful men have wives who have made a choice to stay home and care for their families so that their husbands can pursue their careers. And in some cases men have chosen to stay home with the children while their wives go out and pursue their careers. I would say that if it is unfair for a woman to be expected to stay home and essentially bring up her children by herself, it is just as much unfair for her to expect her husband to go it alone while she goes off to "fulfill herself" through her career.
It is a sad statement of how truly lost we are when we need a career to feel fulfilled. When we cannot find fulfillment it caring for our families, helping to guide our children, being companions and helpers to our mates. True fulfillment, I believe, can only be found in taking the time to commune with God and discern what he is calling you to. And that may very well be to a profession, but it certainly would not be to a professional life that would pull you away from your vocation as husband and father, or wife and mother.
So while it may seem unfair to some that women have to make the choice between career and family, as it may seem unfair that some people have green eyes while others do not, fairness really is not the issue is it? The issue I believe is truly about the difference between what we should do and what we want to do, what is best for our families as opposed to what seems best for our wants. Only in recent decades have we seen women have doors open to them, career opportunities made available to them, that have never been before and instead of taking the time to truly discern a life's vocation we have gone clamoring right behind so many men making all the same mistakes that they have been making. We are wanting to make many of the same selfish sacrifices. How unoriginal!
Who do you think is more fulfilled?
God Bless,
Dominique
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
God is dead and our populations are dying!
If we look at what has been happening in parts of Asia where there have been government imposed limits on family size. Singapore is now looking at a fertility rate of 1.1 which is so far below the replacement rate that there is little likelihood they will be able to pull it back up again. So what does this mean? Well is means that we are looking at a population that is essentially dying! And what will happen as the aging population ceases to be able to work and there are not enough young people to sustain care for this population? I shudder to think, in a society where abortion and infanticide was the means of choice to reduce their population it does not take much mental gymnastics to imagine a viable means for decreasing the aging population.
When we talk about replacement rates we are referring to the number of children per woman, on average, necessary for a population to replace itself. That is, for a society to maintain a level in the work force to sustain the economy, and in societies that are dependent on government funded programs to care for those who cannot care for themselves to sustain the tax base to run said programs. If the fertility rate falls below replacement rate then there is cause for concern.
In a recent New York Times article "As Populations Change a chance for younger Nations" by Ted C. Fishman author of “Shock of Gray: The Aging of the World’s Population and How It Pits Young Against Old, Child Against Parent, Worker Against Boss, Company Against Rival and Nation Against Nation,” outlines for us some of these concerns. One of them is how to care for our aging population. In other words if our younger population is out numbered by the aging populations who will provide for the care necessary for them? The other concern is the economy. An aging workforce is a workforce that will struggle to keep up in a global economy. "The globalization of the economy is accelerating because the world is rapidly aging, and at the same time the pace of global aging is quickened by the speed and scope of globalization. These intertwined dynamics also bear on the international competition for wealth and power. The high costs of keeping our aging population healthy and out of poverty has caused the United States and other rich democracies to lose their economic and political footing. Countries on the rise amass wealth and geopolitical clout by refusing to bear those costs. Older countries lose work to younger countries."
Immigration while an immediate aid for declining fertility rates in rapidly aging countries, in turn harm those countries from which young people are emigrating. Case in point, says Fishman is Spain and Ecuador. Of course, immigration for one country means emigration from another — and an older population left behind. Spain, which rivals Japan as the world’s oldest country, was for much of the 20th century one of the youngest nations in the West. Before 2000, it had virtually no foreign-born residents. Today, nearly 12 percent of Spain’s population is foreign born. Among the arrivals are hundreds of thousands of Ecuadoreans (many of them female caregivers for elderly Spanish) whose absence at home increases the median age of Ecuador’s population. More than one in 10 Ecuadoreans has left in search of work, and the loss of so many of the country’s youngest and most enterprising workers means Ecuador has little chance of developing. Recently, its president initiated the Welcome Home Program to lure emigrants back with tax breaks and money to start businesses.
So as people in the environmental movements continue to cry about the need for population control and tell developing nations to forgo industrialization because they need to be responsible for the environment, as the Al Gore's and James Cameron's tell us all to live with less and have less children while they own millions of dollars worth of property and vehicles for families of two, let us spend some time thinking of the legacy we will be leaving behind! I suppose if one loves nature more than humanity the idea of less humans and more nature is not so bad, and for some of these people that is exactly what is the goal. Let us rid the world of the scourge that is humanity so that nature can thrive!
In their rush to decrease the rate of growth of populations nations have used various methods. It is agreed that some of the main reasons for a decline in population replacement and of aging populations are the following: growth in wealth, urbanization (it is harder to have big families in urban areas because the higher cost of living), increase in family planning through contraception and abortion, and more women going onto higher education and entering the work force and waiting to have children until after they have established a career. Barbara Kay argues Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/20/barbara-kay-the-coming-demographic-crisis-%E2%80%94-too-much-school-not-enough-babies/#ixzz13UNm5aDr
Sunday, October 24, 2010
A moment in time
I find myself more and more yearning for calm and a true charity toward others in my aging. I used to think that as we get older we get more tolerant, less uptight, and more ready to let things go....apparently that is not part of my aging process!
To be fair, I do find myself better able to let things go in some important areas of my life, for example in my marriage. Well at least more of the time than I did in my youth anyway! My husband and I have overtime grown better at resolving our conflicts than we ever were, and I believe that that is due in part to our ability to just let things slide that we used to jump on. It is also due in larger part to God's Divine Mercy and Grace in our lives. Though we are by no means near good at it, but better is nothing to sneeze at.es
With my children I find that I am not nearly as patient and laid back as I once was, for some things anyway, but then I find that it is such as tenuous dynamic with teenagers and preteens than with toddlers and young children. And of course looking at the world through my current eyes, the eyes of an old pregnant lady who is struggling with severe nausea, tolerance is not something that comes easy to me about anything these days!!! But even factoring that in, and I would not say that I am an old curmudgeon, at least not yet, I do find some things more and more difficult to be tolerant about, or to be immediately forgiving of.
I got to thinking about this today after losing my temper while I was standing in line waiting to go to confession before Mass. One Mass had just ended and people were mulling out of the sanctuary and the noise level was almost deafening.
The Mass that our family attends is a noon High Mass and we often get there about half an hour early as our older boys serve and one assists the sacristan and helps to set up the alter for the High Mass. So it is quite common for us to be there as the earlier Mass is getting out. Usually around this time one of the men who attends the noon Mass begins to pray the Rosary out loud. This sometimes helps to remind those leaving that there are people there who are either still praying or who have arrived early in order to spend quiet time in God's real presence to pray.
Anyway I digress. As I stood in line waiting and praying, trying to take some time to reflect upon my difficult week, a week of vacillating between feeling sorry for myself, feeling angry at my children's failings in their household duties (and at my own,) and losing sight of God's many Blessings and great Mercies in my life, I found myself getting distracted by the noise. All of a sudden I was not thinking of my failings, I was focusing on the failings of all these people, most complete strangers, who were seemingly oblivious to where they were and of the fact that there were people there who desperately yearned for the silence and peace of a quiet church before Mass. I forgot about my own failings and instead could not seem to let go of a growing anger at these noise makers. What made matters worse, I thought to myself, was there was a priest, standing there in the sanctuary, chatting away with a parishioner. Oh that just made me fume, how on earth can we expect lay people understand that this a sacred place, a place which is deserving of the greatest reverence, chit chatting about who knows what. Why can't he go to his office to chat? Why not the breezeway, why not the Hall where there was at that moment a social going on with refreshments?
By the time I got into the confessional I was confessing anger and lack of charity toward neighbour that had more to do with my disposition at that very moment and the swell of emotion just prior to entering the confessional than all the instances throughout the previous two weeks!
As I walked away, acutely aware of my stumbling I began to think of the level of self righteousness involved in feeling as angry as I was. Don't get me wrong, I do think there are times when it is appropriate to be offended by the ignorance of others, but to stand in judgement, to find oneself fuming with anger at what one might perceive to be blatant disrespect, is not right, is not charitable, is not what I believe we are called to. After all it was not that long ago that I was one of those people chatting and even gossiping in the presence of our Lord. So what are we to do in such situations? Is it reasonable to spend our time and energy dwelling on and condemning others?
No I do not believe so. I wish that our Bishops and our Priests would foster a greater reverence for the Sacred spaces that are our churches. We might pray for a conversion of heart of the faithful, and a greater interest in coming to understand the Mass and the Real Presence of Christ in the Tabernacle. But I must also pray for a more charitable disposition toward my neighbour. I need to stop thinking and assuming that it is out of disrespect that many people behave the way they do in Christ's presence. I need to remember that our faithful are not taught reverence and our catholic culture has been so busy over the last several decades trying to make the Faith more down to earth, more palatable, more relevant, that we have pushed the Sacred right out of the picture. In our local parish Christ has been ushered out into a seperate room, the Jesus closet as my children call it. I think it is ironic that in the same church we have two glass enclosed areas, a crying room and a room to put the tabernacle. It is no wonder that so many forget where they are and in Whose presence they are.
Everywhere we turn there are places to socialize, cafes, community centres, Church halls, bowling alleys, friends' homes, gyms, book clubs, dance clubs, pubs, and the list goes on. But how many truly Sacred spaces do we have? How many spaces are there where we are able to spend time in God's presence, in His Real presence? If you are Catholic then it is really and truly only in our churches, before Christ in the Tabernacle. What a gift that is! What a miracle! What an opportunity to be able to reach out, in time, and join with all the angels in Heaven and commune with the true and living God! And would that gift not be better appreciated in a spirit of charity and prayer rather than judgement and condemnation?
God Bless,
Dominique
To be fair, I do find myself better able to let things go in some important areas of my life, for example in my marriage. Well at least more of the time than I did in my youth anyway! My husband and I have overtime grown better at resolving our conflicts than we ever were, and I believe that that is due in part to our ability to just let things slide that we used to jump on. It is also due in larger part to God's Divine Mercy and Grace in our lives. Though we are by no means near good at it, but better is nothing to sneeze at.es
With my children I find that I am not nearly as patient and laid back as I once was, for some things anyway, but then I find that it is such as tenuous dynamic with teenagers and preteens than with toddlers and young children. And of course looking at the world through my current eyes, the eyes of an old pregnant lady who is struggling with severe nausea, tolerance is not something that comes easy to me about anything these days!!! But even factoring that in, and I would not say that I am an old curmudgeon, at least not yet, I do find some things more and more difficult to be tolerant about, or to be immediately forgiving of.
I got to thinking about this today after losing my temper while I was standing in line waiting to go to confession before Mass. One Mass had just ended and people were mulling out of the sanctuary and the noise level was almost deafening.
The Mass that our family attends is a noon High Mass and we often get there about half an hour early as our older boys serve and one assists the sacristan and helps to set up the alter for the High Mass. So it is quite common for us to be there as the earlier Mass is getting out. Usually around this time one of the men who attends the noon Mass begins to pray the Rosary out loud. This sometimes helps to remind those leaving that there are people there who are either still praying or who have arrived early in order to spend quiet time in God's real presence to pray.
Anyway I digress. As I stood in line waiting and praying, trying to take some time to reflect upon my difficult week, a week of vacillating between feeling sorry for myself, feeling angry at my children's failings in their household duties (and at my own,) and losing sight of God's many Blessings and great Mercies in my life, I found myself getting distracted by the noise. All of a sudden I was not thinking of my failings, I was focusing on the failings of all these people, most complete strangers, who were seemingly oblivious to where they were and of the fact that there were people there who desperately yearned for the silence and peace of a quiet church before Mass. I forgot about my own failings and instead could not seem to let go of a growing anger at these noise makers. What made matters worse, I thought to myself, was there was a priest, standing there in the sanctuary, chatting away with a parishioner. Oh that just made me fume, how on earth can we expect lay people understand that this a sacred place, a place which is deserving of the greatest reverence, chit chatting about who knows what. Why can't he go to his office to chat? Why not the breezeway, why not the Hall where there was at that moment a social going on with refreshments?
By the time I got into the confessional I was confessing anger and lack of charity toward neighbour that had more to do with my disposition at that very moment and the swell of emotion just prior to entering the confessional than all the instances throughout the previous two weeks!
As I walked away, acutely aware of my stumbling I began to think of the level of self righteousness involved in feeling as angry as I was. Don't get me wrong, I do think there are times when it is appropriate to be offended by the ignorance of others, but to stand in judgement, to find oneself fuming with anger at what one might perceive to be blatant disrespect, is not right, is not charitable, is not what I believe we are called to. After all it was not that long ago that I was one of those people chatting and even gossiping in the presence of our Lord. So what are we to do in such situations? Is it reasonable to spend our time and energy dwelling on and condemning others?
No I do not believe so. I wish that our Bishops and our Priests would foster a greater reverence for the Sacred spaces that are our churches. We might pray for a conversion of heart of the faithful, and a greater interest in coming to understand the Mass and the Real Presence of Christ in the Tabernacle. But I must also pray for a more charitable disposition toward my neighbour. I need to stop thinking and assuming that it is out of disrespect that many people behave the way they do in Christ's presence. I need to remember that our faithful are not taught reverence and our catholic culture has been so busy over the last several decades trying to make the Faith more down to earth, more palatable, more relevant, that we have pushed the Sacred right out of the picture. In our local parish Christ has been ushered out into a seperate room, the Jesus closet as my children call it. I think it is ironic that in the same church we have two glass enclosed areas, a crying room and a room to put the tabernacle. It is no wonder that so many forget where they are and in Whose presence they are.
Everywhere we turn there are places to socialize, cafes, community centres, Church halls, bowling alleys, friends' homes, gyms, book clubs, dance clubs, pubs, and the list goes on. But how many truly Sacred spaces do we have? How many spaces are there where we are able to spend time in God's presence, in His Real presence? If you are Catholic then it is really and truly only in our churches, before Christ in the Tabernacle. What a gift that is! What a miracle! What an opportunity to be able to reach out, in time, and join with all the angels in Heaven and commune with the true and living God! And would that gift not be better appreciated in a spirit of charity and prayer rather than judgement and condemnation?
God Bless,
Dominique
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)