The angel of the Lord declared unto Mary…And she conceived of the Holy Spirit.
Behold the Handmaid of the Lord…Be it done unto me according to your word.
And the Word became flesh…And dwelt among us.
Pray for us, O Holy Mother of God…That we may be made worthy of the promise of Christ.
Pour forth, we beseech You, O Lord, Your grace into our hearts, that we to whom the Incarnation of Christ, Your Son, was made known by the message of an angel, may by His passion and cross be brought to the glory of His Resurrection, through the same Christ out Lord. Amen.
Normally I attend 5:30 PM Mass at the Mission San Diego. Because it ends at about 6:00 we always pray the Angelus after the final blessing, except during Easter then we pray the Regina Coeli. That was the last thing on my mind today as we received the final blessing from our priest. The only thing I thought about was how perfect it is to pray the Angelus on the Solemnity of the Annunciation and how the events of history are represented in the prayer.
While the focus of the Annunciation is on Christ, I can not resist expressing my love for His mother. My love affair with her had a rocky start coming out of a Protestant denomination in my mid-twenties. As a Protestant, I never gave the Mother of God a second thought; she was completely eclipsed by the Lord. As I slowly subjected my thinking to the teachings of the Roman Church my affection slowly grew and grew. The first leap out of Protestant thinking came from an argument I first heard from Scott Hahn. He pointed out that as a Christian we are called to imitate Christ. In our imitation of Christ we need to honor Mary as Jesus honored her as His mother. That was not hard to swallow either theologically or morally. Praying the Hail Mary was not hard to swallow either because it comes straight out of Holy Scripture. Then I began to pray the Rosary regularly. Getting to know the mysteries of the Rosary and meditating on them while praying the Rosary warmed me up to Mary even more. After discussions with my dad it was pointed out to me that everything Jesus has as a person came from Mary. All His DNA is Mary’s DNA. That would give her a special distinction among mankind. She is the only person that ever lived that shares the exact DNA of God Himself. My latest development in the way I view the Mother of God came as the result of reading Roy Schoeman’s book Salvation Is From the Jews. The last chapter of his book is a collection of conversion stories of Jews becoming Roman Catholics. It appeared that Mary was critical for a disproportionately large number of Jewish conversions to Christianity. It occurred to me (with the help of some discussions with my dad, again) that Mary would be very important to devout Jews because she is the personification of the perfect Jewish state (which may merit a post in itself)!
The gravity of the Incarnation goes much deeper than the I portrays (of course). God came down to Earth and became one of us! That gives dignity to every man, woman and child that ever lived no matter how degenerate, debased or repugnant they are or were. They now share the same form and likeness of All-Mighty God. God never wanted to be a snowy plover or a humpback whale or any kind of animal. Humans were the only creatures He willed to be His own. Now all of mankind, whether Christian or not, can say, “I am like the Most High.”
Finally I will leave with a poem by John Donne, who I was introduced to in college and immediately fell in love with.
Annunciation
Salvation to all that will is nigh,
That all, which always is all everywhere,
Which can not sin, and yet all sin must bear,
Which can not die, yet cannot choose but die,
Lo, faithful Virgin, yields himself to lie
In prison, in thy womb; and though he there
Can take no sin, nor thou give, yet he ‘will wear
Taken from thence, flesh, which death’s force may try.
Ere by the spheres time was created, thou
Wast in his mind, who is thy son, and brother,
Whom thou conceiv’st, conceived; yea thou art now
Thy maker’s maker, and thy father’s mother,
Thou’ hast light in dark; and shutt’st in little room,
Immensity cloistered in thy dear womb.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Kingdom of Heaven
I love the movie Kingdom of Heaven. It combines my three favorite subjects in the whole world: the Church; the military and history. I was thinking about that movie and modern popular culture in America this past weekend. For all of my love of the movie, there are things about it that just drive me up the wall. My opinion is that if you are going to make a movie based on historical events then get the history right! The producers got so much of it right that it would be easy to overlook what they got wrong. The costumes were right, the major events were (for the most part) right, the weapons were right, the tactics were right and the characters were (mostly) right.
One thing I found particularly offensive was the portrayal of the monastic orders of knights. A major blunder was that none of the characters portrayed as Templar knights were actually Templar knights in real life. Teutonic knights were portrayed as little more than thugs and henchmen better suited to make an appearance in a mob movie. The Templar knights were delivered as riotous, undisciplined war mongers, and the Hospitalar knights were made to be seen as irreligious!? One of the main characters (a Hospitaller) made a statement, "I put no stock in religion..." That kind of a statement would never have been found on the lips of a man who took vows in a religious order of knighthood. Another error that I found offensive took place during a conversation between two men overlooking a bunch of Muslims praying on the beach. It was explained that Muslims were allowed their prayers as long as they payed the tax. That sounds suspiciously like the dihmmi required by Muslims for Christians and Jews (and Hindus in Muslim controlled areas of India) to pay in order to keep practicing their religion. I am not personally aware of any Christian ever exacting that type of a tax on another (we prefer that you convert!). Finally, one more scene I wish to point out for its errors occurred after the Battle of the Horns of Hattin (in which the Christian forces were completely destroyed). In the movie the king of Jerusalem and his chief lieutenant were taken prisoner. That really did happen in history, but what did not happen was Saladin offering a glass of water to the king who passed it to Reginald of Chatillon who subsequently had his throat slit for taking the cup which his king refused. What did happen (as was customary) was the prisoners were offered to convert to Islam and gain a place in Saladin's kingdom. All refused and Reginald immediately called for Saladin's conversion to Christianity at which point he was decapitated. The morning after the battle was over 230 militant knights chose to remain true to Christ and suffered the same fate (all who were given the option chose not to convert).
This may all sound trivial and the rantings of someone who is too obsessed with the details, but it's not! What we are witnessing is the attempt to defame the Church and elevate Islam to something that it is not (a religion on the same level as Christianity and Judaism). The movie was obviously researched extensively, otherwise how could they get it right that the siege of Jerusalem lasted three days, the defense was mounted by Balian of Ibelin and the safe passage of all Christians to Christian held land was the result of the siege after the threat of burning the Muslim holy places forced a parlay. How can you get all that right without knowing that the Templars were the most disciplined military force in the whole Middle East or that the Hospitallers prayed the Liturgy of the Hours and attended Mass every day? The point is that modern popular culture wants to defame the Roman Catholic Church as much as it can and one way to do that is make everything that was bad the fault of the Pope or his agents and everything that was good the credit of secular rulers. This is because the Church speaks out against sexual promiscuity, drug use, abortion, the death penalty, unabated greed, homosexuality, relativism and any number of other degenerate behaviors while lifting up Christ, heterosexual monogamy, family life, regular church attendance, chastity, the Sacramental life, civic and social justice, etc, etc.
One thing I found particularly offensive was the portrayal of the monastic orders of knights. A major blunder was that none of the characters portrayed as Templar knights were actually Templar knights in real life. Teutonic knights were portrayed as little more than thugs and henchmen better suited to make an appearance in a mob movie. The Templar knights were delivered as riotous, undisciplined war mongers, and the Hospitalar knights were made to be seen as irreligious!? One of the main characters (a Hospitaller) made a statement, "I put no stock in religion..." That kind of a statement would never have been found on the lips of a man who took vows in a religious order of knighthood. Another error that I found offensive took place during a conversation between two men overlooking a bunch of Muslims praying on the beach. It was explained that Muslims were allowed their prayers as long as they payed the tax. That sounds suspiciously like the dihmmi required by Muslims for Christians and Jews (and Hindus in Muslim controlled areas of India) to pay in order to keep practicing their religion. I am not personally aware of any Christian ever exacting that type of a tax on another (we prefer that you convert!). Finally, one more scene I wish to point out for its errors occurred after the Battle of the Horns of Hattin (in which the Christian forces were completely destroyed). In the movie the king of Jerusalem and his chief lieutenant were taken prisoner. That really did happen in history, but what did not happen was Saladin offering a glass of water to the king who passed it to Reginald of Chatillon who subsequently had his throat slit for taking the cup which his king refused. What did happen (as was customary) was the prisoners were offered to convert to Islam and gain a place in Saladin's kingdom. All refused and Reginald immediately called for Saladin's conversion to Christianity at which point he was decapitated. The morning after the battle was over 230 militant knights chose to remain true to Christ and suffered the same fate (all who were given the option chose not to convert).
This may all sound trivial and the rantings of someone who is too obsessed with the details, but it's not! What we are witnessing is the attempt to defame the Church and elevate Islam to something that it is not (a religion on the same level as Christianity and Judaism). The movie was obviously researched extensively, otherwise how could they get it right that the siege of Jerusalem lasted three days, the defense was mounted by Balian of Ibelin and the safe passage of all Christians to Christian held land was the result of the siege after the threat of burning the Muslim holy places forced a parlay. How can you get all that right without knowing that the Templars were the most disciplined military force in the whole Middle East or that the Hospitallers prayed the Liturgy of the Hours and attended Mass every day? The point is that modern popular culture wants to defame the Roman Catholic Church as much as it can and one way to do that is make everything that was bad the fault of the Pope or his agents and everything that was good the credit of secular rulers. This is because the Church speaks out against sexual promiscuity, drug use, abortion, the death penalty, unabated greed, homosexuality, relativism and any number of other degenerate behaviors while lifting up Christ, heterosexual monogamy, family life, regular church attendance, chastity, the Sacramental life, civic and social justice, etc, etc.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Happy Easter! The Lord is Risen!
The church I attend is just a couple blocks away from the stadium the San Diego Chargers play in and when I drove up today it was just like Sundays during football season. The streets were completely devoid of parking spaces. I had to park in a mall parking lot and walk about a quarter of a mile to church. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining about it, I wish that happened more than just on Easter and Christmas. As I drove down the freeway to get there I was brimming with joy! Easter is my favorite holiday all year. There is always a tinge of pain though. I had a dream a couple years ago that I get a reminder of when I drive up and down Highway 125 through Spring Valley (east of San Diego). It reminds me of the dream because it looks similar to the landscape I had in the dream. In my dream I rounded the corner of a valley that a city was nestled in and a wall surrounded it like a medieval European city. Right at the center of the city were two cathedrals directly facing each other on opposite sides of the valley, one was Roman Catholic and the other was Eastern Orthodox. I took the dream to mean that God will reunite the two and they will strengthen each other. That might just be wishful thinking and the dream might not have been from God at all. Only time will tell.
My personal opinion is that the two churches need each other. I have frequently wondered how I could put into words the way I feel about the two churches. I finally came up with an analogy that works for me today. The Eastern Church is sensational and the Western Church is focused on the interior journey. I do not mean the East is superficial, melodramatic or unconcerned with the interior life. I mean the East has such a rich tradition with the incense, iconostasis, elaborate vestments, singing the Divine Liturgy, lots of candles and so on, while the Western Church is really bare bones. The Liturgy is relatively brief, the altar is frequently minimally decorated, sometimes there is not any singing at all. I do not point out the differences to make a statement that one is better than the other, one is just different than the other. It is like the difference between Christmas and Easter to me, one is more an inward expression and the other is more an outward expression of worship. It took me years of regular attendance of Mass to find what I have discovered in the Roman Liturgy (and years of praying the Hours). I find it quite a subtle journey and spirituality, but I sure like it a lot!
My personal opinion is that the two churches need each other. I have frequently wondered how I could put into words the way I feel about the two churches. I finally came up with an analogy that works for me today. The Eastern Church is sensational and the Western Church is focused on the interior journey. I do not mean the East is superficial, melodramatic or unconcerned with the interior life. I mean the East has such a rich tradition with the incense, iconostasis, elaborate vestments, singing the Divine Liturgy, lots of candles and so on, while the Western Church is really bare bones. The Liturgy is relatively brief, the altar is frequently minimally decorated, sometimes there is not any singing at all. I do not point out the differences to make a statement that one is better than the other, one is just different than the other. It is like the difference between Christmas and Easter to me, one is more an inward expression and the other is more an outward expression of worship. It took me years of regular attendance of Mass to find what I have discovered in the Roman Liturgy (and years of praying the Hours). I find it quite a subtle journey and spirituality, but I sure like it a lot!
Thursday, March 13, 2008
The Beauty of the Roman Mass
The Roman Liturgy of the Mass is a beautiful thing. The depth of the mystery I experience grows on me continuously. It is a mystery for several reasons (and I am certain that I can not name them all). The first that always comes to mind is that as we celebrate the Mass we transcend time so we are present at the sacrifice Jesus made on Calvary. We also make a quick journey through the history of our salvation, beginning with the fall of mankind up to the Eucharist and the reception of God’s blessings with the command to evangelize the whole world. This is not something the Roman Catholic Church just made up one day. This is the way the first Christians worshiped their God, the liturgical format was something inherited by the Church from Israel because the first Christians were all Israelites. The classical interpretation of the Song of Songs is God’s approach to Israel and Israel’s response to the advances of their God. What a perfect metaphor! Beginning with the fall of man God has been approaching mankind as a lover attempts to seduce his object of desire. God seduces us. He approaches us and our response to His advance is prayer (as the Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser so eloquently put it). When I first converted to Roman Catholicism I had no understanding of the significance of the Liturgy. At first I looked forward to the homily, then I preferred the Liturgy of the Word to the homily, but now (as I feel I am more mature in my approach to worship) the part I love the most begins with the offertory and lasts until the reception of the Eucharist. The Liturgy continues to be a call and response, a sort of dialogue between our Creator and the congregation. God initially declares His love for us by proclaiming, through His regent, that He will manifest Himself to the congregation and the congregation answers with the affirmation of His holiness, “Blessed be God forever!” So at the conclusion, being filled with the Word, we are sent into the world to fulfill our Christian vocations.
One of the books I recently read was the Pope’s “The Spirit of the Liturgy.” One of the things that surprised me was his references to paganism. It shouldn’t have though. In the beginning of the book the Pope pointed out that the entire cosmos is subject to the Christ. Of course it is and those who observe the norms of the cosmos witness the testament of God. According to the Pope the first day of Creation was the 25th of March, which was also the day of Abraham’s sacrifice, which was also the day of the Annunciation and the day of the Resurrection! Wow! This is also why we used to always pray facing east: the New Heaven and New Earth have not yet come. The sun has not yet reached its zenith, he said. So we pray facing east, towards the Son. In all this is the marriage of three different aspects of Christian worship. The Jewish liturgical practices were married to the Christian liturgical practices in the presents of the Lord in the Eucharist through the norms of liturgical practice. That is why following the liturgical norms are so important and why it is a serious matter to deviate or add things expressly forbidden or ignore things expressly required.
One of the books I recently read was the Pope’s “The Spirit of the Liturgy.” One of the things that surprised me was his references to paganism. It shouldn’t have though. In the beginning of the book the Pope pointed out that the entire cosmos is subject to the Christ. Of course it is and those who observe the norms of the cosmos witness the testament of God. According to the Pope the first day of Creation was the 25th of March, which was also the day of Abraham’s sacrifice, which was also the day of the Annunciation and the day of the Resurrection! Wow! This is also why we used to always pray facing east: the New Heaven and New Earth have not yet come. The sun has not yet reached its zenith, he said. So we pray facing east, towards the Son. In all this is the marriage of three different aspects of Christian worship. The Jewish liturgical practices were married to the Christian liturgical practices in the presents of the Lord in the Eucharist through the norms of liturgical practice. That is why following the liturgical norms are so important and why it is a serious matter to deviate or add things expressly forbidden or ignore things expressly required.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
