Totus Tuus Opus Dei
Totus Tuus Opus Dei. Totally Yours Work of God.
This section of the website received its name from the inspirational theme of Karol Wojtyla, or better known as Pope John Paul II, combined with the longstanding devoted efforts of the Opus Dei organization, founded by Saint Josemaría Escrivá. The symbiosis seemed mutual; the Pope clearly proclaiming Mary, Mother of Jesus, as critically significant in the salvation of souls, of which every single thought and action that mortal man encounters to be totally entrusted to her. As Mary said: "I am the handmade of the Lord, be it done unto me according to thy word", so too does each member of the "Work of God" group proclaim. Clearly the entire spectrum of salvation history includes Mary's example of complete submission in one way, shape, or form. Despite repeated attempts by other faith beliefs, several of which are so-called "Christian", there can rationally be no separation here; one cannot acknowledge the goal of seeking God without incorporating Mary as role model.
And aren't we lucky? To be living in an age where this example has already been made. The challenge therefore seems little; the chance almost non-existent. Even the classically trained scientific mind would have to agree that for modern man, given the overly ripe fruits of apostolic labor over the past two thousand plus years, we would have to be complete fools not to be spiritually aware and on the road to heaven. Yet...we must be fools.
30% of Catholics attend Mass. 12% attend Confession. 83% practice contraception. 91% of Matrimonial recipients fail to come back to celebrate the Eucharist. Our "honeymoon cafe" includes picking and choosing what we want on the Church's "menu", and resting peacefully at night with no heavy conscience, simply because...as Archie Bunker says, "All the kids is doin' it!"
Totus Tuus Opus Dei is designed to shed light on such issues, both concrete and controversial. This section's objective is to encourage the pure and holy, while chastising the corrupt and evil. It has long been the opinion of Andrew Ostrowski that only through real-time idea sharing and controversial debate does actual growth and learning take place.
Imagine a world where everyone thought the same. Well, Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison. In the meantime, let's make sure we are on the right path to get there...
This section of the website received its name from the inspirational theme of Karol Wojtyla, or better known as Pope John Paul II, combined with the longstanding devoted efforts of the Opus Dei organization, founded by Saint Josemaría Escrivá. The symbiosis seemed mutual; the Pope clearly proclaiming Mary, Mother of Jesus, as critically significant in the salvation of souls, of which every single thought and action that mortal man encounters to be totally entrusted to her. As Mary said: "I am the handmade of the Lord, be it done unto me according to thy word", so too does each member of the "Work of God" group proclaim. Clearly the entire spectrum of salvation history includes Mary's example of complete submission in one way, shape, or form. Despite repeated attempts by other faith beliefs, several of which are so-called "Christian", there can rationally be no separation here; one cannot acknowledge the goal of seeking God without incorporating Mary as role model.
And aren't we lucky? To be living in an age where this example has already been made. The challenge therefore seems little; the chance almost non-existent. Even the classically trained scientific mind would have to agree that for modern man, given the overly ripe fruits of apostolic labor over the past two thousand plus years, we would have to be complete fools not to be spiritually aware and on the road to heaven. Yet...we must be fools.
30% of Catholics attend Mass. 12% attend Confession. 83% practice contraception. 91% of Matrimonial recipients fail to come back to celebrate the Eucharist. Our "honeymoon cafe" includes picking and choosing what we want on the Church's "menu", and resting peacefully at night with no heavy conscience, simply because...as Archie Bunker says, "All the kids is doin' it!"
Totus Tuus Opus Dei is designed to shed light on such issues, both concrete and controversial. This section's objective is to encourage the pure and holy, while chastising the corrupt and evil. It has long been the opinion of Andrew Ostrowski that only through real-time idea sharing and controversial debate does actual growth and learning take place.
Imagine a world where everyone thought the same. Well, Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison. In the meantime, let's make sure we are on the right path to get there...
READ
|
LISTEN
|
|
Grace Inside the Mass Eucharistic Adoration Liberation Theology Contraception Lourdes Priestly Marriage and Misuse Confession Who Goes to Heaven? How is your Way of the Cross? Do Animals have Souls? Incarnation and Reincarnation |
 |
Does your medicine cabinet contain Grace?
That little-known heavenly stress-buster might even work better than aspirin.
Published in the Staten Island Advance 06/04/2005
And just as the famous John Denver song goes, we "talk of poems, prayers, and promises, and things that we believe in." Everybody learned about the three "R's" of our schooldays, but what about those three "P's"?
Enter that age-old concept we all heard about but never fully understood: Grace.
Perhaps better pointed out in the familiar poetic lyrics sung so often:
Amazing grace! How sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me! I once was lost,
but now am found; Was blind, but now I see.
What is grace? Where do I pick it up? But more importantly, what do I want it for? These are typical questions asked by the average person.
Let's have some fun. Make believe you're a newspaper reporter standing on the street corner. Your goal is to conduct a random sampling of responses from passers-by. You ask: "Excuse me sir/madam, plain and simple, can you tell me what troubles you?" You'd better be equipped with a thick notebook and plenty of ink, because as recent studies indicate, an increasing number of people are burdened with the stresses of mental anguish.
"My husband's brother is suing us over their mother's estate money which we want, meanwhile my 17 year old daughter has left us and moved into an apartment with her boyfriend", one might say. "That %#A&*#! Why does he get an easy life, financial security, and always seems to be in a good mood while I have to sweat it out day to day working 7am to 7pm and can barely manage my bills! What, just because I don't pray, that's ridiculous!", adds another.
Grace is defined as: the exercise of love, kindness, mercy, and favor toward Man; the mercy of God, a state of acceptance with God. Indeed the key word is acceptance. Why does God seem to accept one person with his favor while apparently rejecting another, as in the examples above?
A principle tenet of Hinduism states that whatever your actions were yesterday is determining what you are doing today, and today's actions will determine what you will do tomorrow. Therefore following this logic, it is no wonder then why spiritual figures such as Jesus have extolled the values of daily prayer and meditation. Trying your best today yields fruits for tomorrow, and if done continually, you're fueling up with God's gift of grace as icing on the cake.
However, the collapsing domino effect, where crisis follows crisis, is a very real part of many people's lives. But why? It wouldn't take a rocket scientist to understand the reasons for so much distress. Even a layman's analysis of things would find most people caught up in the "web" of the secular world 6 out of 7 days per week. "What am I going to wear tonight?" "Food, food, food, my life's passion!" "Of course I'm going to the Giants game on Sunday, who cares if I skip Mass?" These are everyday expressions among people.
Worship and prayer? Most people attend to it about 1 hour per week while at religious services such as the Catholic Mass. But flocking to the Church, Synagogue, or Temple of worship only occasionally doesn't seem to cut the beef with God, as many theologians argue.
Martin Luther, for example, believed that human beings had to first have faith in order to reap the rewards of grace. This was sort of a pre-requisite to what could be fully bestowed upon them from God. Faith + "works" is another big proponent of many religious beliefs. For most people, faith is more or less an easy term to comprehend. The average person defines faith as "just believing in something". Works are usually associated with doing good deeds. But there is an added dimension to this equation which often gets forgotten: Want.
Do We Want It?
For example, in Theravada Buddhism, the principal teaching is that a believer must actively seek out grace starting from their inner heart. There must be a fervent desire so much so that it encompasses every thought of the person, every "ounce" of their mind. Without the desire for grace, human life becomes tediously meaningless. There is no blessing from God, no overseer offering guidance through life's ups and downs. It is up to each individual to want it.
"But I go to Mass now and then and I do favors for people from time to time, isn't that good enough to earn grace so I can go to heaven?" asks a typical person. Most priests, ministers, and religious leaders would applaud even the smallest efforts to further one's personal relationship with God in this day and age.
However, simply going through the motions may not be good enough. An individual must show a steady "wanting" for grace it seems. They must be "clothed in Christ" as St. Paul said (Gal 3:27) and offer more than "lip service" (Is 29:13).
Prayer
Probably the best way to begin receiving grace is through simple prayer. Most people who are "graced" seem to be in touch with God, so to speak. Reciting the Our Father, excerpts from the Book of Psalms, or some other common prayers on a daily basis is their strategy.
For example, Judaism's Birkat Ha-Mazon is the grace prayer said after meals. Or as Jesus put it: "When you pray, go to your room and shut your door. Then your Father, who sees what others don't, will repay you." Mt 6:6
This is not to say that we must take on the role of the Cistercian monks who dedicate the majority of their day to prayerful meditation. But they indeed set a perfect example. Merely taking some quality time to think about one's life is actually a form of prayer. Any type of introspective reflection allows an individual to "touch" their inner soul, which is controlled by the conscience.
So that stretch of time during the work week between each Saturday or Sunday worship service, for example, really means something significant. "Yeah, Sunday is nice, I go to Church, I'm in a good mood, but by Tuesday night I'm getting into arguments and got this big chip on my shoulder", one might say.
Nobody's perfect. Human life has always been marked by success and failure. These are inseparable, according to modern-day sociologists. We trip, we stumble over, we get up on our feet again, we succeed, we fall down again, and so on and so forth.
But there seems to be an ever so slight edge that people with grace have. Whether it was the late Mr. Rogers who seemed to be totally at peace during his famous children's TV show, or our own grandmothers who always welcomed us with a heavenly smile and perhaps a cup of cocoa, people with grace appear to exemplify perfection. In short, if you've got grace, you're a marked man or woman!
Promises
"I give you my word, whatever you ask for in prayer, it shall be done for you." Mk 11:24 quoting Jesus.
The "driving directions" to grace have come from numerous notable figures throughout the ages. From Greece's Aristotle to India's Gandhi, and from John F. Kennedy to the current Pope, grace has been a sought after prize.
"I know, to banish anger altogether is a difficult task. It cannot be achieved solely through personal effort. It can be done only by God's grace." - Mohandas Gandhi
Personally, this writer's favorite quote comes from Jesus when he said: "What father would hand his son a scorpion when he asks for an egg?" Lk 11:12. Therefore, sincerely asking for grace usually means you'll get it.
The promise has been made clear. The problem, argue many religious thinkers, seems to be motivation.
The 90-Day Grace Diet
Forget Scarsdale, Atkins, and South Beach, your interviewee on the street corner wants a solution to their inner problems.
"I stopped going to mass after awhile because I didn't see quick results, I lost interest and still have the same day to day problems" the average person would argue.
Grace, however, is not found in a one-stop shopping club. It can't be picked up on a supermarket shelf, bought over the internet, or sprinkled on your morning cereal. There's no pill you can take to get it.
Receiving the gift of God's grace requires a continuous effort on our part. It means first getting in touch with oneself through contemplative prayer, be it five minutes worth before bedtime or for a lifetime. Just like a diet, you have to keep it up. A desire for perfection should be the ultimate goal. As Christ stated: "Be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect." Mt 5:48
Sure it's tough to achieve perfection, everybody's got troubles of some sort. However, it is precisely one's effort and intention to do so that bestows grace, not the end result. Therefore, trying is the key.
So putting aside the pain killers and opting for prayers might find God's grace on your doorstep. Perhaps Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. summed it up best: "You only need a heart full of grace."
Published in the Staten Island Advance 06/04/2005
And just as the famous John Denver song goes, we "talk of poems, prayers, and promises, and things that we believe in." Everybody learned about the three "R's" of our schooldays, but what about those three "P's"?
Enter that age-old concept we all heard about but never fully understood: Grace.
Perhaps better pointed out in the familiar poetic lyrics sung so often:
Amazing grace! How sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me! I once was lost,
but now am found; Was blind, but now I see.
What is grace? Where do I pick it up? But more importantly, what do I want it for? These are typical questions asked by the average person.
Let's have some fun. Make believe you're a newspaper reporter standing on the street corner. Your goal is to conduct a random sampling of responses from passers-by. You ask: "Excuse me sir/madam, plain and simple, can you tell me what troubles you?" You'd better be equipped with a thick notebook and plenty of ink, because as recent studies indicate, an increasing number of people are burdened with the stresses of mental anguish.
"My husband's brother is suing us over their mother's estate money which we want, meanwhile my 17 year old daughter has left us and moved into an apartment with her boyfriend", one might say. "That %#A&*#! Why does he get an easy life, financial security, and always seems to be in a good mood while I have to sweat it out day to day working 7am to 7pm and can barely manage my bills! What, just because I don't pray, that's ridiculous!", adds another.
Grace is defined as: the exercise of love, kindness, mercy, and favor toward Man; the mercy of God, a state of acceptance with God. Indeed the key word is acceptance. Why does God seem to accept one person with his favor while apparently rejecting another, as in the examples above?
A principle tenet of Hinduism states that whatever your actions were yesterday is determining what you are doing today, and today's actions will determine what you will do tomorrow. Therefore following this logic, it is no wonder then why spiritual figures such as Jesus have extolled the values of daily prayer and meditation. Trying your best today yields fruits for tomorrow, and if done continually, you're fueling up with God's gift of grace as icing on the cake.
However, the collapsing domino effect, where crisis follows crisis, is a very real part of many people's lives. But why? It wouldn't take a rocket scientist to understand the reasons for so much distress. Even a layman's analysis of things would find most people caught up in the "web" of the secular world 6 out of 7 days per week. "What am I going to wear tonight?" "Food, food, food, my life's passion!" "Of course I'm going to the Giants game on Sunday, who cares if I skip Mass?" These are everyday expressions among people.
Worship and prayer? Most people attend to it about 1 hour per week while at religious services such as the Catholic Mass. But flocking to the Church, Synagogue, or Temple of worship only occasionally doesn't seem to cut the beef with God, as many theologians argue.
Martin Luther, for example, believed that human beings had to first have faith in order to reap the rewards of grace. This was sort of a pre-requisite to what could be fully bestowed upon them from God. Faith + "works" is another big proponent of many religious beliefs. For most people, faith is more or less an easy term to comprehend. The average person defines faith as "just believing in something". Works are usually associated with doing good deeds. But there is an added dimension to this equation which often gets forgotten: Want.
Do We Want It?
For example, in Theravada Buddhism, the principal teaching is that a believer must actively seek out grace starting from their inner heart. There must be a fervent desire so much so that it encompasses every thought of the person, every "ounce" of their mind. Without the desire for grace, human life becomes tediously meaningless. There is no blessing from God, no overseer offering guidance through life's ups and downs. It is up to each individual to want it.
"But I go to Mass now and then and I do favors for people from time to time, isn't that good enough to earn grace so I can go to heaven?" asks a typical person. Most priests, ministers, and religious leaders would applaud even the smallest efforts to further one's personal relationship with God in this day and age.
However, simply going through the motions may not be good enough. An individual must show a steady "wanting" for grace it seems. They must be "clothed in Christ" as St. Paul said (Gal 3:27) and offer more than "lip service" (Is 29:13).
Prayer
Probably the best way to begin receiving grace is through simple prayer. Most people who are "graced" seem to be in touch with God, so to speak. Reciting the Our Father, excerpts from the Book of Psalms, or some other common prayers on a daily basis is their strategy.
For example, Judaism's Birkat Ha-Mazon is the grace prayer said after meals. Or as Jesus put it: "When you pray, go to your room and shut your door. Then your Father, who sees what others don't, will repay you." Mt 6:6
This is not to say that we must take on the role of the Cistercian monks who dedicate the majority of their day to prayerful meditation. But they indeed set a perfect example. Merely taking some quality time to think about one's life is actually a form of prayer. Any type of introspective reflection allows an individual to "touch" their inner soul, which is controlled by the conscience.
So that stretch of time during the work week between each Saturday or Sunday worship service, for example, really means something significant. "Yeah, Sunday is nice, I go to Church, I'm in a good mood, but by Tuesday night I'm getting into arguments and got this big chip on my shoulder", one might say.
Nobody's perfect. Human life has always been marked by success and failure. These are inseparable, according to modern-day sociologists. We trip, we stumble over, we get up on our feet again, we succeed, we fall down again, and so on and so forth.
But there seems to be an ever so slight edge that people with grace have. Whether it was the late Mr. Rogers who seemed to be totally at peace during his famous children's TV show, or our own grandmothers who always welcomed us with a heavenly smile and perhaps a cup of cocoa, people with grace appear to exemplify perfection. In short, if you've got grace, you're a marked man or woman!
Promises
"I give you my word, whatever you ask for in prayer, it shall be done for you." Mk 11:24 quoting Jesus.
The "driving directions" to grace have come from numerous notable figures throughout the ages. From Greece's Aristotle to India's Gandhi, and from John F. Kennedy to the current Pope, grace has been a sought after prize.
"I know, to banish anger altogether is a difficult task. It cannot be achieved solely through personal effort. It can be done only by God's grace." - Mohandas Gandhi
Personally, this writer's favorite quote comes from Jesus when he said: "What father would hand his son a scorpion when he asks for an egg?" Lk 11:12. Therefore, sincerely asking for grace usually means you'll get it.
The promise has been made clear. The problem, argue many religious thinkers, seems to be motivation.
The 90-Day Grace Diet
Forget Scarsdale, Atkins, and South Beach, your interviewee on the street corner wants a solution to their inner problems.
"I stopped going to mass after awhile because I didn't see quick results, I lost interest and still have the same day to day problems" the average person would argue.
Grace, however, is not found in a one-stop shopping club. It can't be picked up on a supermarket shelf, bought over the internet, or sprinkled on your morning cereal. There's no pill you can take to get it.
Receiving the gift of God's grace requires a continuous effort on our part. It means first getting in touch with oneself through contemplative prayer, be it five minutes worth before bedtime or for a lifetime. Just like a diet, you have to keep it up. A desire for perfection should be the ultimate goal. As Christ stated: "Be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect." Mt 5:48
Sure it's tough to achieve perfection, everybody's got troubles of some sort. However, it is precisely one's effort and intention to do so that bestows grace, not the end result. Therefore, trying is the key.
So putting aside the pain killers and opting for prayers might find God's grace on your doorstep. Perhaps Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. summed it up best: "You only need a heart full of grace."
Inside the Mass
Published in the Staten Island Advance 07/19/2003
"Please join us in singing our opening hymn, Come Christians, Join to Sing" announced boldly by the Cantor. The congregation following her lead-in, organ pipes from above resounding their brilliance. The choral splendor and sheer magnificence of voices in unison proclaim strongly what is about to transpire. The Mass has begun.
I took the opportunity to reflect on the Catholic Mass, its age-old and much revered tradition. A tradition steeped in celebration, intrigue, and mystery. So often these aspects allude us, lost or not readily recognized. What is exactly going on here, in this most transcendent of events?
The priest opens the Mass with a prayer, inviting the entire body of the Church, its congregation, to once again remember the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. And this is the essence of the Mass, what is about to unfold, reaching back thousands of years. What was celebrated in the remote caves of the Catacombs of Rome is celebrated still today. This is tradition in its truest form.
Donning multi-colored vestments throughout the year, the Church operates on a liturgical calendar, signifying events associated with the life of Christ. From the Advent Wreath to the Paschal Candle, the visual "connection" is made for all to see.
Glory to God in the highest, and peace to his people on Earth...
The familiar words of the much-loved Gloria set the tone. The congregation announcing as "one body" this bold proclamation. How often, I thought, are its words reflected on, really and truly taken to heart?... You are seated at the right hand of the Father, receive our prayer. These are not just words sounding good together, for the Catholic there is substantial meaning behind them, a depth reaching into the soul of the believer.
A kind of etherealness now begins to develop. The parishioners sense that something special is indeed underway. This is no ordinary gathering of people for some ordinary event. Something was definitely happening here.
As the congregation listens to the Liturgy of the Word in Scripture readings, that certain liturgical pattern evident in colors once again becomes clear in writing. One can follow the progression in the events of Christ's life from reading to reading, week to week. Supporting Old Testament writings clearly provide a critical link, as the Cantor gathers the congregation for the Responsorial Psalm, taken from the Bible's Book of Psalms. The Homily follows.
The Church gives us the opportunity to truly state our beliefs in the Nicene Creed:
...On the third day he rose again, in fulfillment of the Scriptures...
This all-important profession of the Catholic faith is paramount if one is to partake in the Mass, in all its facets. But how many of us meditate on this sacred and profound belief? To be the driving force living within us from which all activity flows. This is the Catholic objective.
The Offertory
Offered from the congregation, the bread and wine are presented. In just minutes, the climax of the Mass will occur - Consecration.
Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth. Pleni sunt coeli et terra gloria tua. Hosanna in excelsis. Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini. Hosanna in excelsis.
Rendering this ancient Latin text truly becomes uplifting in the "Holy, holy, holy". One's senses are put to the test here. At this point, I find myself completely absorbed in the Mass, in what is about to take place. I think to myself: "I do not want to leave, but to stay forever. Feed me perpetually and give me drink, and never end."
Consecration
Citing the Eucharistic Prayer, the priest once again performs exactly what was performed over 2000 years ago. Just as Christ broke the bread, so does the 21st century Catholic priest. Nothing has changed. My past recollections of actually standing in the Upper Room in Jerusalem, the site of the Last Supper, saturate my mind. To think it is all happening again before our very eyes certainly is captivating. Exploring this mystery is no small task. One must focus on what is transpiring and truly contemplate on it to understand.
He took the bread, gave it to his disciples and said: Take this all of you and eat it, this is my body which will be given up for you, and...this is the blood of the new and everlasting covenant shed for all so that sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of me.
Interestingly, there is no symbolism here, as a symbol only represents. Rather, for the Catholic this is the body and blood of Christ. Death of his body on the cross, giving his life as a ransom for many, only to rise again and conquer sin. Just to be worthy of receiving the Holy Eucharist I thought. This was the task at hand, the true quest.
Hand in hand, many parishioners bind themselves to one another spiritually with the recital of the Lord's prayer, the Our Father. This hallmark, having been recited first by Christ in a small cave dwelling on the Mount of Olives, is perhaps the most definitive prayer known to all. The embodiment of Christian unity is heard and now before my very eyes. One Church, one people under God. Truly awe inspiring.
I leave you peace, my peace I give to you...
This interactive phase of the Mass clearly points out the importance of Catholic unity, of sharing among others what Christ shares with us, and lends to the familiar adage: there is strength in numbers. Just as the vine spreads its branches, we are to spread his peace.
Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed...
How privileged to be able to surrender myself completely, this unworthy and imperfect soul. This, the biggest of gifts one can bestow, is being bestowed on me. How honored we are to receive the Holy Eucharist, the living presence of Christ within us.
As the meditation hymn is heard, a tranquil and contemplative aura arises. As I look around, from one face to another, soul to soul, all are in communication with the Father. This truly is the deep spiritual dimension of the Mass, the personal prayer of the faithful, their invocations, thankfulness, and humility. Worries about everyday activities seem meaningless in this meditative phase. For the Catholic, true meaning comes from abandoning the "self" and striving for unison with the Father through the example of Jesus. "I am witnessing a different dimension" as I remark to myself while looking around. Here I am "seeing" what cannot be seen by the naked eye, the spiritual realm.
Concluding with a final prayer, the congregation bows their heads for the blessing and departure:
The Mass has ended, let us go in peace to love and serve the Lord. Alleluia, Alleluia.
The Cantor once again leading the parishioners with a recessional hymn, Immaculate Mary. Voices soar as rays of brilliant sunlight stream through the stained glass windows of the Saints above. The distinct aroma of frankincense and myrrh fills the air, its gray smoky puffs rising to the heavens it seems. And through it all, the message is clearly conveyed: this has not really ended, and will never end.
As I exit, mixed feelings overcome me. I am jubilant yet I am sad. Jubilant having once again celebrated the Mass, the celebration of Christ's life, death, and resurrection. Jubilant upon receiving the Holy Eucharist, sacrificed for me, for I again feel a sense of renewal, a spiritual refreshment. Jubilant to serve as an example to others, a true Catholic, to put into words and actions what I have witnessed and experienced over the past hour.
And sad that it has ended for the moment, that I must wait anxiously and steadfastly for the next celebration of this tremendous Catholic faith.
"Please join us in singing our opening hymn, Come Christians, Join to Sing" announced boldly by the Cantor. The congregation following her lead-in, organ pipes from above resounding their brilliance. The choral splendor and sheer magnificence of voices in unison proclaim strongly what is about to transpire. The Mass has begun.
I took the opportunity to reflect on the Catholic Mass, its age-old and much revered tradition. A tradition steeped in celebration, intrigue, and mystery. So often these aspects allude us, lost or not readily recognized. What is exactly going on here, in this most transcendent of events?
The priest opens the Mass with a prayer, inviting the entire body of the Church, its congregation, to once again remember the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. And this is the essence of the Mass, what is about to unfold, reaching back thousands of years. What was celebrated in the remote caves of the Catacombs of Rome is celebrated still today. This is tradition in its truest form.
Donning multi-colored vestments throughout the year, the Church operates on a liturgical calendar, signifying events associated with the life of Christ. From the Advent Wreath to the Paschal Candle, the visual "connection" is made for all to see.
Glory to God in the highest, and peace to his people on Earth...
The familiar words of the much-loved Gloria set the tone. The congregation announcing as "one body" this bold proclamation. How often, I thought, are its words reflected on, really and truly taken to heart?... You are seated at the right hand of the Father, receive our prayer. These are not just words sounding good together, for the Catholic there is substantial meaning behind them, a depth reaching into the soul of the believer.
A kind of etherealness now begins to develop. The parishioners sense that something special is indeed underway. This is no ordinary gathering of people for some ordinary event. Something was definitely happening here.
As the congregation listens to the Liturgy of the Word in Scripture readings, that certain liturgical pattern evident in colors once again becomes clear in writing. One can follow the progression in the events of Christ's life from reading to reading, week to week. Supporting Old Testament writings clearly provide a critical link, as the Cantor gathers the congregation for the Responsorial Psalm, taken from the Bible's Book of Psalms. The Homily follows.
The Church gives us the opportunity to truly state our beliefs in the Nicene Creed:
...On the third day he rose again, in fulfillment of the Scriptures...
This all-important profession of the Catholic faith is paramount if one is to partake in the Mass, in all its facets. But how many of us meditate on this sacred and profound belief? To be the driving force living within us from which all activity flows. This is the Catholic objective.
The Offertory
Offered from the congregation, the bread and wine are presented. In just minutes, the climax of the Mass will occur - Consecration.
Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth. Pleni sunt coeli et terra gloria tua. Hosanna in excelsis. Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini. Hosanna in excelsis.
Rendering this ancient Latin text truly becomes uplifting in the "Holy, holy, holy". One's senses are put to the test here. At this point, I find myself completely absorbed in the Mass, in what is about to take place. I think to myself: "I do not want to leave, but to stay forever. Feed me perpetually and give me drink, and never end."
Consecration
Citing the Eucharistic Prayer, the priest once again performs exactly what was performed over 2000 years ago. Just as Christ broke the bread, so does the 21st century Catholic priest. Nothing has changed. My past recollections of actually standing in the Upper Room in Jerusalem, the site of the Last Supper, saturate my mind. To think it is all happening again before our very eyes certainly is captivating. Exploring this mystery is no small task. One must focus on what is transpiring and truly contemplate on it to understand.
He took the bread, gave it to his disciples and said: Take this all of you and eat it, this is my body which will be given up for you, and...this is the blood of the new and everlasting covenant shed for all so that sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of me.
Interestingly, there is no symbolism here, as a symbol only represents. Rather, for the Catholic this is the body and blood of Christ. Death of his body on the cross, giving his life as a ransom for many, only to rise again and conquer sin. Just to be worthy of receiving the Holy Eucharist I thought. This was the task at hand, the true quest.
Hand in hand, many parishioners bind themselves to one another spiritually with the recital of the Lord's prayer, the Our Father. This hallmark, having been recited first by Christ in a small cave dwelling on the Mount of Olives, is perhaps the most definitive prayer known to all. The embodiment of Christian unity is heard and now before my very eyes. One Church, one people under God. Truly awe inspiring.
I leave you peace, my peace I give to you...
This interactive phase of the Mass clearly points out the importance of Catholic unity, of sharing among others what Christ shares with us, and lends to the familiar adage: there is strength in numbers. Just as the vine spreads its branches, we are to spread his peace.
Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed...
How privileged to be able to surrender myself completely, this unworthy and imperfect soul. This, the biggest of gifts one can bestow, is being bestowed on me. How honored we are to receive the Holy Eucharist, the living presence of Christ within us.
As the meditation hymn is heard, a tranquil and contemplative aura arises. As I look around, from one face to another, soul to soul, all are in communication with the Father. This truly is the deep spiritual dimension of the Mass, the personal prayer of the faithful, their invocations, thankfulness, and humility. Worries about everyday activities seem meaningless in this meditative phase. For the Catholic, true meaning comes from abandoning the "self" and striving for unison with the Father through the example of Jesus. "I am witnessing a different dimension" as I remark to myself while looking around. Here I am "seeing" what cannot be seen by the naked eye, the spiritual realm.
Concluding with a final prayer, the congregation bows their heads for the blessing and departure:
The Mass has ended, let us go in peace to love and serve the Lord. Alleluia, Alleluia.
The Cantor once again leading the parishioners with a recessional hymn, Immaculate Mary. Voices soar as rays of brilliant sunlight stream through the stained glass windows of the Saints above. The distinct aroma of frankincense and myrrh fills the air, its gray smoky puffs rising to the heavens it seems. And through it all, the message is clearly conveyed: this has not really ended, and will never end.
As I exit, mixed feelings overcome me. I am jubilant yet I am sad. Jubilant having once again celebrated the Mass, the celebration of Christ's life, death, and resurrection. Jubilant upon receiving the Holy Eucharist, sacrificed for me, for I again feel a sense of renewal, a spiritual refreshment. Jubilant to serve as an example to others, a true Catholic, to put into words and actions what I have witnessed and experienced over the past hour.
And sad that it has ended for the moment, that I must wait anxiously and steadfastly for the next celebration of this tremendous Catholic faith.
Eucharistic Adoration
"This is my body which is being given up for you". The most significant words said at the Mass, yet are we listening? Apparently not. Oddly enough, we come to Mass because we think that going to Mass is part of being a Catholic, which it is. But what we fail to realize is the very reason why we are there, which is to celebrate the Eucharist. This most critical part of the Mass, via transubstantiation, is given equal weight on our scale as we see it. So we don't mind hearing the Gospel, but we might be hesitant to get up and receive Communion. We like to sing the opening hymn, but we can't wait to leave immediately after getting the wafer to beat the crowds. And, we think nothing of standing on line with a soul full of sin to receive Christ's body, having last been to confession when we were ten years old. Where is our respect for this essential part of the Mass? Is it so trivial that we merely go through the motions as we're "supposed" to, stick out our tongue or hand and think "slap, jack, thank you very much"? When we kneel down after receiving Holy Communion (for those of us that have an extra 3 minutes to spare out of our prioritizing secular schedule), do we actually say a prayer? Or, are we getting set for...the beach? Have you ever noticed how people dress when they go to Mass and receive the Eucharist? Gone are the days of yesteryear when such an occasion meant putting on your "Sunday best". But today, this is classified as "old fashioned". Too many of today's church going-women simply defy all respect by wearing black lycra "second-skin" low cut tops that show enough cleavage to rival the Himalayan mountains. And the men, forget about it, even the ushers who are visible for all to see are donning themselves in the local pro baseball team's jersey, volleyball-like shorts with bold stripes, and open toe thongs on their sockless feet. What does this say about our attitude? Is going to Mass then really any different than going to your local picnic, barbeque, or beach party? It is no wonder then why there is so much moral collapse in this country. We are free to choose who we worship and how of course, yet the irony is that we think we are not doing anything wrong when in fact we are. What then happens to a society when its people fail to comprehend a wrong, sleep peacefully at night none the wiser, and teach their children to do likewise? How does that song go by Barry McGuire?
Liberation Theology
Originally a concept which on the surface appeared quite promising, Liberation Theology has seen its fruition...and then unfortunately began to take over as the juggernaut of society's moral and ethical framework, spinning out of control and ending up as a Marxist ideology. Essentially, the most criticized aspect of liberation theology is the notion that our longstanding Catholic values should be adjusted depending on the world's zeitgeist. Proponents argue that this adjustment is no different than that made by Vatican II. Opponents, however, argue that by allowing secular needs and wants to be the determinants of Catholicism's rules and regulations, we are in effect becoming an earthly Church based in potentially sinful doctrine. Humans are by nature prone to sin in thoughts and actions, as evidenced in the creation story and clearly witnessed throughout history. In fact, the very reason why there was a Messiah in the first place was due to the fact that we are prone to sin. If Adam and Eve did not disobey God, Christ would have never had a cause to come and we'd be living in a utopian, heavenly society. Therefore it would be absolutely ludicrous to place moral and ethical decision making in the hands of the people, which extreme liberation theologists want to do. Of course, how then do we weigh what we should adjust and what we should retain? The answer usually comes after an extremely lengthy thought process and consequential consideration. But we need to be honest in stating the fact that there are other factors involved in such critical decision making. It would be nice and easy to simply lay down a law and say that everyone has to obey it, and if you don't, it's goodbye. But it's not so easy, and at times the Church has been, and probably rightfully so, criticized for hypocrisy.
Natural Family Planning (NFP) would be one example of an issue that was developed from liberation theology. Traditionally, the Church taught that any form of contraception was sinful because it runs contradictory to the sanctity of the procreative process and defeats it. Of course, it would not take a rocket scientist to foresee a potential problem, namely, that parishioners would become increasingly turned off by such a policy given secular society's domineering influence. The Natural Family Planning technique seemed like the strategic move to retain parishioners. Of course, in fairness to the Church, it should be realized that decisions were made in light of the fact that we are indeed humans. If we were machines, it would be easy to press a button and say 'do this, and don't do that'. The objective was to gradually introduce a revised policy as a last means approach, while retaining the original policy on contraception. However, because the original policy is scarcely verbalized, its enforcement eventually withers and becomes replaced by the revised policy. This revised process put forth by the Church, very quietly it might be added, allows a married couple to have sexual relations without the chance of conceiving, according to the biological cycle of the woman. No physical contraceptive device is present, technically in accordance with the church’s earlier policy. However, a number of arch conservative theologians in the church, many of whom belong to the Opus Dei organization, point out that because of the pressures of the liberation theological policy changes, hypocritical outcomes envelop in actuality. In the NFP case, it may be argued that the couple is indeed practicing contraception being that they are intentionally circumventing the procreative process, no different than using a physical contraceptive.
Yet, with issues such as this, sadly it often becomes too hard for us to comply with longstanding Catholic values. But we still want to be called a 'Catholic', for example. After all, everybody else is liberating their theology, why not go along with the crowd? Even some of our bedrock faiths, regrettably, are yielding to pressure. Perhaps Saint Thomas More, in replying to Lord Cromwell's popular question, sums it up in this discourse: "...dammit, Thomas, look at these names! Why can't you do as I did and come with us, for fellowship?!"
..."And when we die, and you are sent to heaven for doing your conscience, and I am sent to hell for not doing mine, will you come with me, for fellowship?" Liberation theology asks us point blank: To what degree are you willing to live your life according to the original teachings of Christ?
Natural Family Planning (NFP) would be one example of an issue that was developed from liberation theology. Traditionally, the Church taught that any form of contraception was sinful because it runs contradictory to the sanctity of the procreative process and defeats it. Of course, it would not take a rocket scientist to foresee a potential problem, namely, that parishioners would become increasingly turned off by such a policy given secular society's domineering influence. The Natural Family Planning technique seemed like the strategic move to retain parishioners. Of course, in fairness to the Church, it should be realized that decisions were made in light of the fact that we are indeed humans. If we were machines, it would be easy to press a button and say 'do this, and don't do that'. The objective was to gradually introduce a revised policy as a last means approach, while retaining the original policy on contraception. However, because the original policy is scarcely verbalized, its enforcement eventually withers and becomes replaced by the revised policy. This revised process put forth by the Church, very quietly it might be added, allows a married couple to have sexual relations without the chance of conceiving, according to the biological cycle of the woman. No physical contraceptive device is present, technically in accordance with the church’s earlier policy. However, a number of arch conservative theologians in the church, many of whom belong to the Opus Dei organization, point out that because of the pressures of the liberation theological policy changes, hypocritical outcomes envelop in actuality. In the NFP case, it may be argued that the couple is indeed practicing contraception being that they are intentionally circumventing the procreative process, no different than using a physical contraceptive.
Yet, with issues such as this, sadly it often becomes too hard for us to comply with longstanding Catholic values. But we still want to be called a 'Catholic', for example. After all, everybody else is liberating their theology, why not go along with the crowd? Even some of our bedrock faiths, regrettably, are yielding to pressure. Perhaps Saint Thomas More, in replying to Lord Cromwell's popular question, sums it up in this discourse: "...dammit, Thomas, look at these names! Why can't you do as I did and come with us, for fellowship?!"
..."And when we die, and you are sent to heaven for doing your conscience, and I am sent to hell for not doing mine, will you come with me, for fellowship?" Liberation theology asks us point blank: To what degree are you willing to live your life according to the original teachings of Christ?
Con vs. Contra-ception
In our complex world of love, hate, mixed emotions, and everything else piled on top, it is often difficult to follow a true Christian example. One of the biggest questions asked by many involves the use of prophylactics, or contraceptive devices. Are they ok? Would Christ approve? Tough questions for a touchy matter.
Indeed various religious leaders have spoken out in the past, some offering "roadmaps" through this foggy terrain of morality, the conscience, and what the definition of love is. Pope Benedict XVI, for example, upholds the traditional teachings of the Catholic church against contraception, much as his predecessor did, the great John Paul II. The transmission of life, he argues, is sanctified through the procreative process.
But putting this personal and "hush-hush, don't talk about it" topic under a microscope unfolds some controversy. The disagreeing question is: Where is the fine line drawn between life and love?
Deeply devoted to the sanctity of life, most opposed to prophylactics argue that the gift of giving life is precisely that, a gift from God. The love of conception has been unfortunately substituted with the loving of the conception process, they conclude, and argue that we should be weighing the sanctity of the life-giving process more. If we are indeed created in God's image, then the process we use to create should also be worthy of holiness, as they point out.
Some theologians stress that behind all the red tape associated with this modern day conflict, it is a couple's intention, not action, that lies at the moral truth of the matter. In our topsy-turvy world of love, recent studies indicate that the most enduring relationships are marked with purity, fidelity, and reverence for God.
Surveying the world's major religions, it overwhelmingly becomes evident that according to these faiths, any method that circumvents the procreative process is not consistent with being in pursuit of a God-like path. It is seen as precisely a calculated escape, a deliberate act to get around the gift which the Creator has given to mankind. Quite precisely, according to the tenets of these religions, these circumventing methods are not a part of the divine concept for life, be it in the traditional practices of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and basically all other religions, which teach that the act of copulation is meant to bring a new soul in God's image into the world, exclusively. Indeed this is one of the primary reasons why many people dislike Westernized versions of religion and see them as hypocritical, because they purport to be universally based in God yet exhibit meta-ethical relativism.
One may pose the question: why is there a problem using the procreative process exclusively for bringing a life into the world? Contemporary culture unfortunately does not accept that and automatically scoffs at the idea, often without even having a reason. That instinctual scoff is perhaps because of conditioning through generations of ignorance, lack of faith-based livelihoods, poor intellect, peer pressure, and failure on the part of religious institutions to exercise instruction on the topic to their parishioners. Perhaps failure so much so that some religious institutions have granted it permissible for couples to "consummate" their marriages via the use of a contraceptive. However, as opponents ask, are those receiving, for example, the Sacrament of Matrimony responsible, mature adults fully understanding of the two (2) Sacraments they have just received, Matrimony and Eucharist, placing their faith and trust in God unconditionally as they bring a new life and soul into the world? Would they then not hold life to be more meaningful, cherishing their children all the more, like rare pearls? Indeed comparative theologians have cited the irony in a couple receiving two Sacraments and being showered with Grace, and then resorting to a contraceptive only hours later. The couple may argue: “Well, aren’t we being responsible people by planning when to have a child? It would be irresponsible of us not to do so.” According to traditional Christian teaching, that is totally correct. But according to the same teaching, it does not give the couple permission to then circumvent procreation. Rather, according to the teaching, if one is a truly responsible Christian, realization of what this means and appreciation of the sanctity of the procreative process then becomes apparent.
A significant number of Catholics seem to think that periodic use of contraceptives, for example, once every month or two, is okay, and reason that since they are only occasionally using them and not regularly, they can still be considered good Catholics and thus feel no guilt. This is perhaps the biggest, most hidden tragedy in the Church today, where mature, intelligent parishioner couples, receiving little or no continual reinforcement of the Church’s traditional teachings on contraception, added with the fact that they are being constantly bombarded by secular influence, little by little compromise the Church’s core teaching and assume their own rationale, all the while as they smile and shake the hand of their parish priest. What then becomes of the traditional teachings of Christ? They become extinct. Arguably, it is one thing to arbitrarily decide when to give life and when not to, but to arbitrarily decide, via use of a contraceptive, is quite another. Logically speaking, the latter decision would thus be entirely disrespectful to the Creator, who's creation (Man) has now misaligned the very process which brought him about. Interestingly, to show you how distant we've grown, did you know that the early Christian church regarded sexual relations as exclusively reserved for having children, respecting the process under God? Unfortunately many couples today think that non-procreative relations are a "normal requirement" of marriage. However, in all of religion's traditional teachings, abstinence from sexual relations outside of responsible procreation has been the norm. In fact, from Catholicism's very beginnings up until the 1950's, the typical Catholic couple abstained from these relations until ready to bear children. And even as late as the Victorian era, the norm was for couples to occupy separate bedrooms. So, looking at history, for a millenium and a half, it was actually considered abnormal to do what, unfortunately, is considered normal today.
Historically, abstinence, which means refraining from sexual activity outside of making a responsible decision to procreate, has been the most promising solution. Why? Because, as traditional faith practices tell us, it not only implies a couple's degree of humility in the eyes of God, but is also an acknowledgement of respect for the Creator's creation process and, somewhat more practically, places tremendous value on their child's life when the couple eventually decides to procreate. Children born this way are therefore treasured like rare pearls. Life thus becomes more meaningful.
According to the traditional teachings of Christianity, contraception functions to aid the intention for a no-life outcome. What people forget to realize is that by intentionally not bringing a life into the world, they also simultaneously prevent a soul from being brought into the world. This is the most serious problem with contraception, and one that takes precedence over abortion, which seems to receive all the attention. For where does a new life and soul begin, in conception, or in a couple's intention? Arguably, a child's life and soul begins in a couple's intention.
Indeed this is unfortunately ignored in this world of ours. The most mature approach, as higher credible faiths teach, is that the couple should embrace God's precious gift, use it for what he intended it for, not cheat the process with so-called "reason", and love each other just as he would and not as we would, with purity, fidelity, and reverence. Perhaps this means bearing our cross at times, our wants and needs, as George Harrison so aptly expressed, and submitting our life to God. One cannot conditionally accept, but rather must put away the self, and unconditionally take on the Creator's self. The couple must abandon themselves and take on the spiritual self in the flesh, for instance, following the example of the Holy Family. Sincerely, is it reasonable to assume that Mary and Joseph would support the "natural family planning" technique? Probably not, as they would ask: "Are your ways God's ways or Man's?" Additionally, Christ himself provides us with the definitive answer in Mt 5:28, indicating the mere thought of any act outside of responsible procreation is sinful. Notice that he indicates that you don't even have to commit the physical act, it is what's in your mind, your intention that counts against you. He also spent much time and effort focusing on the plight of the poor and lowly, people whose lives meant nothing in the culture they lived in. Surely so much attention paid to these "worthless" people, such as in the Beatitudes, was indicative of him valuing their lives. Since he placed life as being quite meaningful in the eyes of God, it would follow then that any stage of life is equally meaningful, not only the fetus in the wound as abortion opponents argue for, but the male-female procreative process which gives life itself, which even the mere notion of is glorified by God.
So, theologians ask: Where is the respect for God's gift? Where is the respect and upholding of the Sanctity of Life? And what of a Fear of the Lord? Who is Man to circumvent a solution to God's plan? What kind of faithful people have we become? Some faiths seem to say: "No, we won't go that far for fear of losing the parishioners." But, who is the real loser here? And how will we answer to the Father?
A basic tenet of all the world's religions is that one cannot accept a principle and do otherwise. No servant serves two Masters, as the saying goes. Perhaps the best solution, as higher faith beliefs teach, is for a couple to realize the sanctity of the procreative act in abstaining from sexual relations unless a responsible, conscious decision is made to give life to a new soul, under God.
Indeed various religious leaders have spoken out in the past, some offering "roadmaps" through this foggy terrain of morality, the conscience, and what the definition of love is. Pope Benedict XVI, for example, upholds the traditional teachings of the Catholic church against contraception, much as his predecessor did, the great John Paul II. The transmission of life, he argues, is sanctified through the procreative process.
But putting this personal and "hush-hush, don't talk about it" topic under a microscope unfolds some controversy. The disagreeing question is: Where is the fine line drawn between life and love?
Deeply devoted to the sanctity of life, most opposed to prophylactics argue that the gift of giving life is precisely that, a gift from God. The love of conception has been unfortunately substituted with the loving of the conception process, they conclude, and argue that we should be weighing the sanctity of the life-giving process more. If we are indeed created in God's image, then the process we use to create should also be worthy of holiness, as they point out.
Some theologians stress that behind all the red tape associated with this modern day conflict, it is a couple's intention, not action, that lies at the moral truth of the matter. In our topsy-turvy world of love, recent studies indicate that the most enduring relationships are marked with purity, fidelity, and reverence for God.
Surveying the world's major religions, it overwhelmingly becomes evident that according to these faiths, any method that circumvents the procreative process is not consistent with being in pursuit of a God-like path. It is seen as precisely a calculated escape, a deliberate act to get around the gift which the Creator has given to mankind. Quite precisely, according to the tenets of these religions, these circumventing methods are not a part of the divine concept for life, be it in the traditional practices of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and basically all other religions, which teach that the act of copulation is meant to bring a new soul in God's image into the world, exclusively. Indeed this is one of the primary reasons why many people dislike Westernized versions of religion and see them as hypocritical, because they purport to be universally based in God yet exhibit meta-ethical relativism.
One may pose the question: why is there a problem using the procreative process exclusively for bringing a life into the world? Contemporary culture unfortunately does not accept that and automatically scoffs at the idea, often without even having a reason. That instinctual scoff is perhaps because of conditioning through generations of ignorance, lack of faith-based livelihoods, poor intellect, peer pressure, and failure on the part of religious institutions to exercise instruction on the topic to their parishioners. Perhaps failure so much so that some religious institutions have granted it permissible for couples to "consummate" their marriages via the use of a contraceptive. However, as opponents ask, are those receiving, for example, the Sacrament of Matrimony responsible, mature adults fully understanding of the two (2) Sacraments they have just received, Matrimony and Eucharist, placing their faith and trust in God unconditionally as they bring a new life and soul into the world? Would they then not hold life to be more meaningful, cherishing their children all the more, like rare pearls? Indeed comparative theologians have cited the irony in a couple receiving two Sacraments and being showered with Grace, and then resorting to a contraceptive only hours later. The couple may argue: “Well, aren’t we being responsible people by planning when to have a child? It would be irresponsible of us not to do so.” According to traditional Christian teaching, that is totally correct. But according to the same teaching, it does not give the couple permission to then circumvent procreation. Rather, according to the teaching, if one is a truly responsible Christian, realization of what this means and appreciation of the sanctity of the procreative process then becomes apparent.
A significant number of Catholics seem to think that periodic use of contraceptives, for example, once every month or two, is okay, and reason that since they are only occasionally using them and not regularly, they can still be considered good Catholics and thus feel no guilt. This is perhaps the biggest, most hidden tragedy in the Church today, where mature, intelligent parishioner couples, receiving little or no continual reinforcement of the Church’s traditional teachings on contraception, added with the fact that they are being constantly bombarded by secular influence, little by little compromise the Church’s core teaching and assume their own rationale, all the while as they smile and shake the hand of their parish priest. What then becomes of the traditional teachings of Christ? They become extinct. Arguably, it is one thing to arbitrarily decide when to give life and when not to, but to arbitrarily decide, via use of a contraceptive, is quite another. Logically speaking, the latter decision would thus be entirely disrespectful to the Creator, who's creation (Man) has now misaligned the very process which brought him about. Interestingly, to show you how distant we've grown, did you know that the early Christian church regarded sexual relations as exclusively reserved for having children, respecting the process under God? Unfortunately many couples today think that non-procreative relations are a "normal requirement" of marriage. However, in all of religion's traditional teachings, abstinence from sexual relations outside of responsible procreation has been the norm. In fact, from Catholicism's very beginnings up until the 1950's, the typical Catholic couple abstained from these relations until ready to bear children. And even as late as the Victorian era, the norm was for couples to occupy separate bedrooms. So, looking at history, for a millenium and a half, it was actually considered abnormal to do what, unfortunately, is considered normal today.
Historically, abstinence, which means refraining from sexual activity outside of making a responsible decision to procreate, has been the most promising solution. Why? Because, as traditional faith practices tell us, it not only implies a couple's degree of humility in the eyes of God, but is also an acknowledgement of respect for the Creator's creation process and, somewhat more practically, places tremendous value on their child's life when the couple eventually decides to procreate. Children born this way are therefore treasured like rare pearls. Life thus becomes more meaningful.
According to the traditional teachings of Christianity, contraception functions to aid the intention for a no-life outcome. What people forget to realize is that by intentionally not bringing a life into the world, they also simultaneously prevent a soul from being brought into the world. This is the most serious problem with contraception, and one that takes precedence over abortion, which seems to receive all the attention. For where does a new life and soul begin, in conception, or in a couple's intention? Arguably, a child's life and soul begins in a couple's intention.
Indeed this is unfortunately ignored in this world of ours. The most mature approach, as higher credible faiths teach, is that the couple should embrace God's precious gift, use it for what he intended it for, not cheat the process with so-called "reason", and love each other just as he would and not as we would, with purity, fidelity, and reverence. Perhaps this means bearing our cross at times, our wants and needs, as George Harrison so aptly expressed, and submitting our life to God. One cannot conditionally accept, but rather must put away the self, and unconditionally take on the Creator's self. The couple must abandon themselves and take on the spiritual self in the flesh, for instance, following the example of the Holy Family. Sincerely, is it reasonable to assume that Mary and Joseph would support the "natural family planning" technique? Probably not, as they would ask: "Are your ways God's ways or Man's?" Additionally, Christ himself provides us with the definitive answer in Mt 5:28, indicating the mere thought of any act outside of responsible procreation is sinful. Notice that he indicates that you don't even have to commit the physical act, it is what's in your mind, your intention that counts against you. He also spent much time and effort focusing on the plight of the poor and lowly, people whose lives meant nothing in the culture they lived in. Surely so much attention paid to these "worthless" people, such as in the Beatitudes, was indicative of him valuing their lives. Since he placed life as being quite meaningful in the eyes of God, it would follow then that any stage of life is equally meaningful, not only the fetus in the wound as abortion opponents argue for, but the male-female procreative process which gives life itself, which even the mere notion of is glorified by God.
So, theologians ask: Where is the respect for God's gift? Where is the respect and upholding of the Sanctity of Life? And what of a Fear of the Lord? Who is Man to circumvent a solution to God's plan? What kind of faithful people have we become? Some faiths seem to say: "No, we won't go that far for fear of losing the parishioners." But, who is the real loser here? And how will we answer to the Father?
A basic tenet of all the world's religions is that one cannot accept a principle and do otherwise. No servant serves two Masters, as the saying goes. Perhaps the best solution, as higher faith beliefs teach, is for a couple to realize the sanctity of the procreative act in abstaining from sexual relations unless a responsible, conscious decision is made to give life to a new soul, under God.
Virgin Mary, Lady of Lourdes
Apparitions to St. Bernadette reveal Our Lady's message to the world
Published in the Staten Island Advance 05/19/2001
Nestled in the majestic Pyrenee mountains of southern France, and just a short distance from the Spanish border, lies the tiny and humble village of Lourdes. Here, in 1858, one of the most significant and powerful series of events in Christian spirituality occurred.
I had the privilege to visit Lourdes on four occasions. During each of those visits, it became evident that the solemn and miraculous atmosphere engulfs all who come to see. This was real. Something, I thought, definitely was happening here.
In February of 1858, a young village girl of 14 years in age, Bernadette Soubirous, was chosen by the Virgin Mary, Mother of Jesus, to serve as the recipient of God's message to the world. How much more significant could it get?, I thought. Describing the experience of standing directly where this young girl stood with the Mother of Jesus looking overhead leaves one truly in awe.
As the visitor arrives at the grand Basilica of Our Lady of Lourdes, first impressions become quite overwhelming in beauty. The Upper Basilica stands tall for all to see, and was the first of three Basilicas to be constructed directly over the site of the apparitions.
Flanking the Basilica runs the River Gave, and as the pilgrim continues the journey on foot along the river, the most sacred of sites emerges. At first, multitudes of people from virtually every country in the world take part in candlelight processions signaling the significance of the Grotto of Massabielle. Here, the Virgin Mary appeared to Bernadette a total of eighteen times between February and July of 1858.
The story of Bernadette seems as amazing as the apparitions of Mary herself. Born into poverty in 1844, she was the eldest of four children. At age 11, she contracted cholera which left her in poor health for the rest of her life. To contribute to her family's meager income, she worked as a farmhand, and it was here that young Bernadette received the foundation of her faith. While tending sheep, she prayed the rosary alone.
On Thursday, February 11th, 1858, accompanied by her sister and a friend, Bernadette went to a nearby rocky hillside called Massabielle to collect firewood. Removing her socks in order to cross the River Gave, she heard a noise like a great gust of wind, and looking up the hillside, she recounts: "I saw a Lady dressed in white, she wore a white dress, an equally white veil, a blue belt and a yellow rose on each foot". Bernadette made the Sign of the Cross and prayed the Rosary with the Lady. Though others were present during Mary's appearances only to Bernadette, it should be understood that she alone was chosen as the messenger to carry out God's plan.
What it must have been like, I thought, as I stood on the river bank and contemplatively gazed across to the Grotto. Here was a teenage girl of strong faith being immersed in this startling experience. How did it affect her life? How could it have changed my life if I was in her place?
"I am here to tell you what I saw, not to make you believe", Bernadette explained. Three days later the young Bernadette felt an inner force drawing her to Massabielle. Despite her parents order that she not go there, Bernadette once again returned to the rocky hillside. The Lady again appeared, and the Rosary was recited.
Again, almost impulsively now, Bernadette returned to the sacred site. For the first time, Mary spoke: "I do not promise to make you happy in this world but in the other".
Several visits later, surrounded by 150 people, the Virgin Mary revealed her most important message to Bernadette: "Penance, Penance, Penance! Pray to God for sinners".
What is Mary trying to tell us here? As in the simplicity and obedience of Bernadette, we too should seek to attain the ideals of a child. Untouched by the "grown-up" world, almost sinless. Perhaps, by asking for God's intercessions for others, we gain ground in our quest for spiritual perfection. As Bernadette was the chosen example, we too can be examples to others.
The next day, three hundred people were present. Bernadette recounts: "She told me to go and drink of the spring, but I only found a little muddy water". Digging and digging with her bare hands, the fourth attempt finally revealed the flow of the heavenly water.
The first Miracle: Over one thousand five hundred people assemble at Massabielle. A local woman, Catherine Latapie, plunges her dislocated arm into the waters of the Spring. Her arm and her hand regain their movement.
Even the most skeptic among us would be perplexed. Analysis of the Spring water compared to the nearby river water is like night and day. Upon first glance, one would think that the Spring is simply a "vein" of the main River Gave, which is a mere 200 feet away. But it is not. Rather, the Spring water which Our Lady gave is the purest, most refreshingly clear water one can imagine. I saw it with my own eyes. I witnessed others running their hands through it, bottling it to aid ailing friends back home, and bathing in its baths.
I had the opportunity to immerse my entire body in the miraculous waters of the sanctuary. This is truly a deeply spiritual experience. Reciting a prayer, one is lowered into the water, which maintains a 12° C temperature year round. Amazingly, it is far from cold. Emerging from the experience is almost indescribable. A sense of physical and spiritual vigor encompasses the pilgrim. A new life begins.
Since this first miracle, the crowds then became larger and larger. Our Lady soon gave Bernadette a request: "Go, tell the priests to come here in procession and to build a chapel here."
The obedient Bernadette did as the Lady instructed. The Parish priest of Lourdes then asked to know only one thing: the lady's name.
Our Lady finally reveals her name. Bernadette recounts: "She lifted up her eyes to heaven, joined her hands in prayer, and said to me: Que soy era Immaculada Concepciou", which are the exact words in the local dialect, meaning 'I am the Immaculate Conception'.
"Following the example of Jesus, I will carry the Cross with courage and generosity" noted Bernadette as she entered into the order of the Sisters of Charity. Rather than put herself into the spotlight, there she willingly sought the most menial of jobs, taking the name Sister Marie-Bernard, after her patron saint.
Always delicate and of poor health, Bernadette Soubirous died at the age of 35, whispering: "Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for me". On December 8th, 1933, Pope Pius XI declared Bernadette as "Saint".
As the sun began to set over the high surrounding mountain peaks, with the misty cloud cover stepping down into the valley, I turned to see once again the high Church bells of the Upper Basilica of Our Lady of Lourdes. There was no doubt in my mind, none whatsoever, that this place was truly special. The magnitude of events that took place here surpassed the majesty of the mountains themselves. Mary's message was clear.
Published in the Staten Island Advance 05/19/2001
Nestled in the majestic Pyrenee mountains of southern France, and just a short distance from the Spanish border, lies the tiny and humble village of Lourdes. Here, in 1858, one of the most significant and powerful series of events in Christian spirituality occurred.
I had the privilege to visit Lourdes on four occasions. During each of those visits, it became evident that the solemn and miraculous atmosphere engulfs all who come to see. This was real. Something, I thought, definitely was happening here.
In February of 1858, a young village girl of 14 years in age, Bernadette Soubirous, was chosen by the Virgin Mary, Mother of Jesus, to serve as the recipient of God's message to the world. How much more significant could it get?, I thought. Describing the experience of standing directly where this young girl stood with the Mother of Jesus looking overhead leaves one truly in awe.
As the visitor arrives at the grand Basilica of Our Lady of Lourdes, first impressions become quite overwhelming in beauty. The Upper Basilica stands tall for all to see, and was the first of three Basilicas to be constructed directly over the site of the apparitions.
Flanking the Basilica runs the River Gave, and as the pilgrim continues the journey on foot along the river, the most sacred of sites emerges. At first, multitudes of people from virtually every country in the world take part in candlelight processions signaling the significance of the Grotto of Massabielle. Here, the Virgin Mary appeared to Bernadette a total of eighteen times between February and July of 1858.
The story of Bernadette seems as amazing as the apparitions of Mary herself. Born into poverty in 1844, she was the eldest of four children. At age 11, she contracted cholera which left her in poor health for the rest of her life. To contribute to her family's meager income, she worked as a farmhand, and it was here that young Bernadette received the foundation of her faith. While tending sheep, she prayed the rosary alone.
On Thursday, February 11th, 1858, accompanied by her sister and a friend, Bernadette went to a nearby rocky hillside called Massabielle to collect firewood. Removing her socks in order to cross the River Gave, she heard a noise like a great gust of wind, and looking up the hillside, she recounts: "I saw a Lady dressed in white, she wore a white dress, an equally white veil, a blue belt and a yellow rose on each foot". Bernadette made the Sign of the Cross and prayed the Rosary with the Lady. Though others were present during Mary's appearances only to Bernadette, it should be understood that she alone was chosen as the messenger to carry out God's plan.
What it must have been like, I thought, as I stood on the river bank and contemplatively gazed across to the Grotto. Here was a teenage girl of strong faith being immersed in this startling experience. How did it affect her life? How could it have changed my life if I was in her place?
"I am here to tell you what I saw, not to make you believe", Bernadette explained. Three days later the young Bernadette felt an inner force drawing her to Massabielle. Despite her parents order that she not go there, Bernadette once again returned to the rocky hillside. The Lady again appeared, and the Rosary was recited.
Again, almost impulsively now, Bernadette returned to the sacred site. For the first time, Mary spoke: "I do not promise to make you happy in this world but in the other".
Several visits later, surrounded by 150 people, the Virgin Mary revealed her most important message to Bernadette: "Penance, Penance, Penance! Pray to God for sinners".
What is Mary trying to tell us here? As in the simplicity and obedience of Bernadette, we too should seek to attain the ideals of a child. Untouched by the "grown-up" world, almost sinless. Perhaps, by asking for God's intercessions for others, we gain ground in our quest for spiritual perfection. As Bernadette was the chosen example, we too can be examples to others.
The next day, three hundred people were present. Bernadette recounts: "She told me to go and drink of the spring, but I only found a little muddy water". Digging and digging with her bare hands, the fourth attempt finally revealed the flow of the heavenly water.
The first Miracle: Over one thousand five hundred people assemble at Massabielle. A local woman, Catherine Latapie, plunges her dislocated arm into the waters of the Spring. Her arm and her hand regain their movement.
Even the most skeptic among us would be perplexed. Analysis of the Spring water compared to the nearby river water is like night and day. Upon first glance, one would think that the Spring is simply a "vein" of the main River Gave, which is a mere 200 feet away. But it is not. Rather, the Spring water which Our Lady gave is the purest, most refreshingly clear water one can imagine. I saw it with my own eyes. I witnessed others running their hands through it, bottling it to aid ailing friends back home, and bathing in its baths.
I had the opportunity to immerse my entire body in the miraculous waters of the sanctuary. This is truly a deeply spiritual experience. Reciting a prayer, one is lowered into the water, which maintains a 12° C temperature year round. Amazingly, it is far from cold. Emerging from the experience is almost indescribable. A sense of physical and spiritual vigor encompasses the pilgrim. A new life begins.
Since this first miracle, the crowds then became larger and larger. Our Lady soon gave Bernadette a request: "Go, tell the priests to come here in procession and to build a chapel here."
The obedient Bernadette did as the Lady instructed. The Parish priest of Lourdes then asked to know only one thing: the lady's name.
Our Lady finally reveals her name. Bernadette recounts: "She lifted up her eyes to heaven, joined her hands in prayer, and said to me: Que soy era Immaculada Concepciou", which are the exact words in the local dialect, meaning 'I am the Immaculate Conception'.
"Following the example of Jesus, I will carry the Cross with courage and generosity" noted Bernadette as she entered into the order of the Sisters of Charity. Rather than put herself into the spotlight, there she willingly sought the most menial of jobs, taking the name Sister Marie-Bernard, after her patron saint.
Always delicate and of poor health, Bernadette Soubirous died at the age of 35, whispering: "Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for me". On December 8th, 1933, Pope Pius XI declared Bernadette as "Saint".
As the sun began to set over the high surrounding mountain peaks, with the misty cloud cover stepping down into the valley, I turned to see once again the high Church bells of the Upper Basilica of Our Lady of Lourdes. There was no doubt in my mind, none whatsoever, that this place was truly special. The magnitude of events that took place here surpassed the majesty of the mountains themselves. Mary's message was clear.
Priestly Marriage and Misuse
The breaking news made headlines all over the world. Fr. Cutie, of the Archdiocese of Miami, Florida, was caught making out with a woman on the beach. The incident ignited an uproar amongst both opponents and proponents of priestly chastity and celibacy, and seemed to confirm that after 2000 years of Catholicism...we still have thick skulls. Unbelievably, very few people seem to understand why the Catholic church requires its priests to take these vows, which do not allow the priest to focus his love and affection on a single individual or even several. "Poor Fr. so and so, he should be able to get married and have kids" or "Why can't they be allowed to get married? They can still say Mass" say the average passersby.
Perhaps we need a refresher course in Christianity 101 to answer these questions and burn the data once and for all onto the CD in our mind. Despite the bewildering attitude taken by many people, there is indeed a logical reason behind all of the church's guidelines and teachings, including this one. Let's pose a hypothetical and say for a moment that all priests can take a spouse. Now, remembering that a big part of marriage is each spouse's sacrificial commitment to one another, that would mean that Fr. so and so would need to give a significant amount of his time, energy, and devotion to his wife. Time is not limitless obviously, there are only so many hours in a day. Practically speaking, it would be logical to conclude then that the amount of time, energy, and devotion the married priest would be feasibly giving to his church would be substantially reduced. And considering that the church, which is made up of thousands of parishioners in a typical parish, is the top priority on a priest's job duty description, how could it be reasonably possible for a married priest to fulfill and carry out his #1 job duty? It would be virtually impossible.
The solution and rightfully logical one is precisely what the church teaches. Rather than the priest giving his time, energy, love, and devotion to an individual as a married person does, the priest gives these efforts to the entire church. No single person or persons receive more of these efforts, but rather it is as if the priest is "married to the church"; everybody is his spouse in a way. And talk about how tough it is for two people to carry out their matrimonial vows, try multiplying that exponentially, and now you know how difficult it is for the priest! When all is said and done, isn't it Christ who the priest is really identifying with? It is often said that Christ was the true priest, well, it would logically follow then that those called to represent him live and act as he did. And this is the reason why the Catholic church institutes the vows of chastity and celibacy for its priests.
Abuse. Plain and simply put, it was the biggest scar on an otherwise near-immaculate record. Obviously a major downfall for the church, the actions of a few seemed to disproportionally stain the many. The sex scandal can certainly not be overlooked or mildly forgiven, but what it did do regretfully was perhaps equally as bad as the actions themselves, and that was to portray the majority of Catholic priests as having some kind of perversion. Have you ever seen the Twilight Zone's episode "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street"?, where something odd happens in an otherwise nice neighborhood where everybody trusts everybody else? Eventually, because the oddity was clearly abnormal, all the neighbors started suspecting and blaming each other. And pretty soon, every neighbor was labeled as "guilty" because of this oddity. Are we then like these neighbors, suspecting every priest we see of sexual abuse of minors? It seems the media have nothing better to do than insinuate and infer this. And we of course, simple minded and entirely "innocent" ourselves, are quick to point the finger because, yes, evil has a distinct way of capitalizing on a situation as it tries to capsize the ship. Haven't you noticed?
People seem to think that priests are in some sort of excepted class to human nature, entirely different than the normal human, having different urges and drives. Nothing could be further from the truth. The average priest is no different than your next door neighbor. They have the same needs and wants as you do. The difference between his life's actions and yours is simply that he is scrutinized and you're not. Do we have sexual abuse in our society? Of course. Do we have infidelity? Of course. But you never hear about the local Joe who commits these acts. And if you do, it's gone and forgotten about in a few days. People also seem to think that the Catholic church, because it seems close to God, is on "Cloud 9" and is not supposed to have the day to day problems that a normal organization has. Wrong. The Catholic church is made up of people, and just like any organization, whenever you have a group of 3 or more individuals in a company, you are bound to encounter a problem. This is pure industrial psychology and there are no exceptions. Until a group of heavenly angels take over the Vatican, we should understand that humans can make mistakes.
Perhaps we need a refresher course in Christianity 101 to answer these questions and burn the data once and for all onto the CD in our mind. Despite the bewildering attitude taken by many people, there is indeed a logical reason behind all of the church's guidelines and teachings, including this one. Let's pose a hypothetical and say for a moment that all priests can take a spouse. Now, remembering that a big part of marriage is each spouse's sacrificial commitment to one another, that would mean that Fr. so and so would need to give a significant amount of his time, energy, and devotion to his wife. Time is not limitless obviously, there are only so many hours in a day. Practically speaking, it would be logical to conclude then that the amount of time, energy, and devotion the married priest would be feasibly giving to his church would be substantially reduced. And considering that the church, which is made up of thousands of parishioners in a typical parish, is the top priority on a priest's job duty description, how could it be reasonably possible for a married priest to fulfill and carry out his #1 job duty? It would be virtually impossible.
The solution and rightfully logical one is precisely what the church teaches. Rather than the priest giving his time, energy, love, and devotion to an individual as a married person does, the priest gives these efforts to the entire church. No single person or persons receive more of these efforts, but rather it is as if the priest is "married to the church"; everybody is his spouse in a way. And talk about how tough it is for two people to carry out their matrimonial vows, try multiplying that exponentially, and now you know how difficult it is for the priest! When all is said and done, isn't it Christ who the priest is really identifying with? It is often said that Christ was the true priest, well, it would logically follow then that those called to represent him live and act as he did. And this is the reason why the Catholic church institutes the vows of chastity and celibacy for its priests.
Abuse. Plain and simply put, it was the biggest scar on an otherwise near-immaculate record. Obviously a major downfall for the church, the actions of a few seemed to disproportionally stain the many. The sex scandal can certainly not be overlooked or mildly forgiven, but what it did do regretfully was perhaps equally as bad as the actions themselves, and that was to portray the majority of Catholic priests as having some kind of perversion. Have you ever seen the Twilight Zone's episode "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street"?, where something odd happens in an otherwise nice neighborhood where everybody trusts everybody else? Eventually, because the oddity was clearly abnormal, all the neighbors started suspecting and blaming each other. And pretty soon, every neighbor was labeled as "guilty" because of this oddity. Are we then like these neighbors, suspecting every priest we see of sexual abuse of minors? It seems the media have nothing better to do than insinuate and infer this. And we of course, simple minded and entirely "innocent" ourselves, are quick to point the finger because, yes, evil has a distinct way of capitalizing on a situation as it tries to capsize the ship. Haven't you noticed?
People seem to think that priests are in some sort of excepted class to human nature, entirely different than the normal human, having different urges and drives. Nothing could be further from the truth. The average priest is no different than your next door neighbor. They have the same needs and wants as you do. The difference between his life's actions and yours is simply that he is scrutinized and you're not. Do we have sexual abuse in our society? Of course. Do we have infidelity? Of course. But you never hear about the local Joe who commits these acts. And if you do, it's gone and forgotten about in a few days. People also seem to think that the Catholic church, because it seems close to God, is on "Cloud 9" and is not supposed to have the day to day problems that a normal organization has. Wrong. The Catholic church is made up of people, and just like any organization, whenever you have a group of 3 or more individuals in a company, you are bound to encounter a problem. This is pure industrial psychology and there are no exceptions. Until a group of heavenly angels take over the Vatican, we should understand that humans can make mistakes.
Going to Confession?
ANCIENT AND UNPOPULAR SACRAMENT FINDING REVIVAL IN A MODERN WORLD
Published in the Staten Island Advance 12/27/2003
"Only the penitent man will pass. The penitent man kneels before God!" whispered the rough and gutsy Indiana Jones in his all-too-familiar style, barely saving his head from severing as he pursued the Grail.
Penitence and Reconciliation, the two words are mutually symbiotic. It is a perfect balance at work: our own personal apology to God for our human mistakes combined with his understanding and conscience-cleansing power. And what power it is.
I recently had the opportunity to receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation, or Confession as it is also known. It is usually offered at all Catholic churches on a weekly basis. I thought to myself, what was it about this special institution created by Christ himself that could lift virtually any burden off of my shoulders? I had to explore.
The power to forgive is divine in origin, it being a benevolent act of God the Creator. Christ, in the human form of God, utilized this forgiving power in his ministry on earth. Before he departed this world, he specifically delegated this power to his apostles, clearly conveying the importance of this "sin-buster".
It's a Saturday afternoon, and as the distinct line of people form in the Church pews, I see around me the "status" of each confessor. A mother bringing her two young children, carefully instructing them on what to do. A middle-aged man kneeling in prayer, in meditative preparation. An elderly woman with eyes closed and lips moving, firmly grasping her rosary. And surprisingly, quickly entering was none other than a UPS driver, dressed in his brown uniform, here seeking forgiveness and then dashing off on his deliveries.
What is it about this Sacrament? What is it that draws people from all walks of life to seek purity in their soul in this one-on-one meeting?
In order to fully reap the rewards of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, one must first take a few minutes to truthfully admit to themselves any burdensome weight on their conscience. This may or may not meet the definition of "sin", but the Sacrament is also known to be quite a soul lifter-upper.
Many times, the subtlest of sins may go unnoticed. Remarkably though, it is only through Confession that we become aware of them. There is something about the human introspective ability in prayer that allows these subtleties to be "seen".
Where the sin is obvious, one can "feel" it on the shoulders. The burden builds and inevitably becomes compounded if not alleviated through this profound Sacrament. And isn't it wonderful, I thought, to be able to rid myself of sin and feel as a child again. Innocent, pure, and guilt free, if only for awhile.
"Bless me Father for I have sinned, it has been two months since my last confession." This is the typical opening used by the confessor, and a good one at that. In these words, not only does the repentant person request to be healed, but an acknowledgement of a time lapse becomes evident.
This is important because inevitably human failure through sin arises continuously. The Church suggests a one month's interim in receiving the Sacrament to counter this.
For myself, I am a month "overdue", and I feel the weight on my shoulders. Just as an athlete fine-tunes his physique and can spot his body's conditioning level, so too can the confessor spot his soul's conditioning level. Reconciliation is the fine-tuning mechanism, the "weight bench" for the soul.
The dialogue is simple. The repentant person speaks plainly of what his or her transgressions are. This is no strict formal process. Rather, the dialogue between priest and confessor is good-natured, constructive, and reciprocative.
It is paramount to be completely candid, showing humility and submissiveness to God. And this is precisely the most difficult aspect to fathom.
It would not take a rocket scientist to figure out that many people are hesitant to go to Confession. "I feel embarrassed about revealing my faults to my parish priest", or "Why can't I just pray to God myself and ask for forgiveness?" These are a few of the typical reasons given.
The Church understands these normal inhibitions, and that is why it becomes essential to fully grasp what truly takes place in the Sacrament.
Remembering that Christ himself forgave others and instilled this divine power in his apostles, it is critical to understand who exactly forgives us at the moment of absolution.
"Whatever you bind on Earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth will be loose in heaven. As the Father has sent me, so I send you. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained."
These were Christ's words of instruction given to his apostles, who were to use this divine power and convey it upon their successors, our priests.
In actuality, it follows then that at the precise moment of absolution, it is indeed Christ himself who is forgiving us.
Realizing this, my inhibitions to confess seem to vanish, as I ask myself: "Should I feel embarrassed and not go to Confession, or should I submit myself totally and seek purity and perfection?" I chose the latter.
Penance
At the conclusion of the discussion, the priest will ask the confessor to recite some prayers and perhaps to think and act in a more Christ-like manner, always striving to be better and better.
Act of Contrition
Before being absolved of sin, the priest may ask the confessor to recite an act of contrition. Its purpose is entirely constructive and signifies that the person is truly admonishing their sin and seeking to be made pure again:
"O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended you. I detest all my sins because of your just punishment and firmly resolve, with the help of your grace, to sin no more. "
Absolution
The priest concludes: "By the power vested in me, I absolve you of your sin in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen."
I rise from my knees, and opening the curtain of the confessional, I return to the church pew to fall prostrate again. Meditatively and fervently, I say my penance and think of what has just happened.
A tremendous sense of renewal and rebirth invades my soul. I am totally one with God and myself with no "sack of sin" on my shoulders. I am purified.
I have taken my place in line with the others and submitted my inner conscience to Christ. The sin that has entered my soul because of my human fragility, has now exited. What greater grace can be bestowed upon me?
Indiana Jones ended up making it through. Where others were beheaded, he lived. Perhaps by receiving the Sacrament of Reconciliation, we too can make it through, despite the beheading blades of sin.
Published in the Staten Island Advance 12/27/2003
"Only the penitent man will pass. The penitent man kneels before God!" whispered the rough and gutsy Indiana Jones in his all-too-familiar style, barely saving his head from severing as he pursued the Grail.
Penitence and Reconciliation, the two words are mutually symbiotic. It is a perfect balance at work: our own personal apology to God for our human mistakes combined with his understanding and conscience-cleansing power. And what power it is.
I recently had the opportunity to receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation, or Confession as it is also known. It is usually offered at all Catholic churches on a weekly basis. I thought to myself, what was it about this special institution created by Christ himself that could lift virtually any burden off of my shoulders? I had to explore.
The power to forgive is divine in origin, it being a benevolent act of God the Creator. Christ, in the human form of God, utilized this forgiving power in his ministry on earth. Before he departed this world, he specifically delegated this power to his apostles, clearly conveying the importance of this "sin-buster".
It's a Saturday afternoon, and as the distinct line of people form in the Church pews, I see around me the "status" of each confessor. A mother bringing her two young children, carefully instructing them on what to do. A middle-aged man kneeling in prayer, in meditative preparation. An elderly woman with eyes closed and lips moving, firmly grasping her rosary. And surprisingly, quickly entering was none other than a UPS driver, dressed in his brown uniform, here seeking forgiveness and then dashing off on his deliveries.
What is it about this Sacrament? What is it that draws people from all walks of life to seek purity in their soul in this one-on-one meeting?
In order to fully reap the rewards of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, one must first take a few minutes to truthfully admit to themselves any burdensome weight on their conscience. This may or may not meet the definition of "sin", but the Sacrament is also known to be quite a soul lifter-upper.
Many times, the subtlest of sins may go unnoticed. Remarkably though, it is only through Confession that we become aware of them. There is something about the human introspective ability in prayer that allows these subtleties to be "seen".
Where the sin is obvious, one can "feel" it on the shoulders. The burden builds and inevitably becomes compounded if not alleviated through this profound Sacrament. And isn't it wonderful, I thought, to be able to rid myself of sin and feel as a child again. Innocent, pure, and guilt free, if only for awhile.
"Bless me Father for I have sinned, it has been two months since my last confession." This is the typical opening used by the confessor, and a good one at that. In these words, not only does the repentant person request to be healed, but an acknowledgement of a time lapse becomes evident.
This is important because inevitably human failure through sin arises continuously. The Church suggests a one month's interim in receiving the Sacrament to counter this.
For myself, I am a month "overdue", and I feel the weight on my shoulders. Just as an athlete fine-tunes his physique and can spot his body's conditioning level, so too can the confessor spot his soul's conditioning level. Reconciliation is the fine-tuning mechanism, the "weight bench" for the soul.
The dialogue is simple. The repentant person speaks plainly of what his or her transgressions are. This is no strict formal process. Rather, the dialogue between priest and confessor is good-natured, constructive, and reciprocative.
It is paramount to be completely candid, showing humility and submissiveness to God. And this is precisely the most difficult aspect to fathom.
It would not take a rocket scientist to figure out that many people are hesitant to go to Confession. "I feel embarrassed about revealing my faults to my parish priest", or "Why can't I just pray to God myself and ask for forgiveness?" These are a few of the typical reasons given.
The Church understands these normal inhibitions, and that is why it becomes essential to fully grasp what truly takes place in the Sacrament.
Remembering that Christ himself forgave others and instilled this divine power in his apostles, it is critical to understand who exactly forgives us at the moment of absolution.
"Whatever you bind on Earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth will be loose in heaven. As the Father has sent me, so I send you. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained."
These were Christ's words of instruction given to his apostles, who were to use this divine power and convey it upon their successors, our priests.
In actuality, it follows then that at the precise moment of absolution, it is indeed Christ himself who is forgiving us.
Realizing this, my inhibitions to confess seem to vanish, as I ask myself: "Should I feel embarrassed and not go to Confession, or should I submit myself totally and seek purity and perfection?" I chose the latter.
Penance
At the conclusion of the discussion, the priest will ask the confessor to recite some prayers and perhaps to think and act in a more Christ-like manner, always striving to be better and better.
Act of Contrition
Before being absolved of sin, the priest may ask the confessor to recite an act of contrition. Its purpose is entirely constructive and signifies that the person is truly admonishing their sin and seeking to be made pure again:
"O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended you. I detest all my sins because of your just punishment and firmly resolve, with the help of your grace, to sin no more. "
Absolution
The priest concludes: "By the power vested in me, I absolve you of your sin in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen."
I rise from my knees, and opening the curtain of the confessional, I return to the church pew to fall prostrate again. Meditatively and fervently, I say my penance and think of what has just happened.
A tremendous sense of renewal and rebirth invades my soul. I am totally one with God and myself with no "sack of sin" on my shoulders. I am purified.
I have taken my place in line with the others and submitted my inner conscience to Christ. The sin that has entered my soul because of my human fragility, has now exited. What greater grace can be bestowed upon me?
Indiana Jones ended up making it through. Where others were beheaded, he lived. Perhaps by receiving the Sacrament of Reconciliation, we too can make it through, despite the beheading blades of sin.
Who Goes to Heaven?
Who goes to Heaven? Perhaps the most mind boggling, puzzling, and bickered over question throughout all of the ages. Even in the days of the gods and goddesses, debate ensued over who was worthy enough to be favored by Apollo, Zeus, Ra, and a host of other fabrications we created to ensure that something awaited us after death. Would heaven be reserved for only the very elite, rulers, kings, and aristocracy, or would there be any hope for the lowly, the poor and destitute? What transpired over time was a metamorphosis of thinking on the topic, and one that now places emphasis not on one's status, but on one's soul.
What greater seemingly paradoxical statement was there than when Christ said that even repentant prostitutes will be entering the kingdom of heaven before some of the so-called religious leaders. But more relevant to the average person concerns the question as to whether people of certain faiths, or even those of no faith, get to go to heaven. Will you see your neighbor in heaven, that loud-mouthed, foul-tongued, dirty-minded fellow? Or more subtly, how about your friend, a nice person, but with absolutely no spirituality, faith, or interest in such? The answer may be that we do not know...and that we do know. To justify the first part of our answer may be quite easy. Nobody's ever gone to heaven and come back with a photo album and some wonderful stories to share, giving us a firsthand account that they met so and so in heaven. We have no scientific factual evidence under a glass case in a museum to claim that a person did or did not go to heaven. Based on empirical evidence, we would have to say that we simply do not know who goes to heaven (if we somehow leap from empirical and assume that there is a heaven). For someone to claim that they know for a fact that so and so is in heaven or isn't in heaven is absurd. How then do we know who goes to heaven and who doesn't? Which brings us to the second part of our answer...we do know.
To justify our answer to this, we must first understand exactly what heaven is, and even before doing so, put the evidence on the table justifying the existence of heaven in the first place. If you were a prosecuting attorney in a courtroom, you would probably lose your case arguing against the existence of heaven. Why? Because believe it or not, objectively speaking, there is actually ample proof that heaven does indeed exist. To discover this, let's first assume there's no heaven. "You've been given a great gift, a chance to see what the world would be like without you" as Clarence said to George Bailey in It's a Wonderful Life. Okay, there's no heaven, no hell, and nothing in between. Now, let's try to then justify what has transpired, factually and historically keep in mind, over the past two thousand years. Let's begin with the apostolic movement, immediately after Jesus of Nazareth was put to death, which was an historic fact recorded in history as evidenced in the Titulus Crucis. What transpired after Jesus' death, or more precisely after he resurrected which in itself justifies the movement's cause and logically affirms the truth of Christ's resurrection, was for this bunch of guys to basically drop everything and travel to the ends of the then-known world to spread the Gospel. Now, who in their right mind would set out on a mission through hell and high water, in the face of persecuting peoples, risking life and limb which most of them lost which they knew they probably would, to try to sell a new religion if it wasn't really true? One would have to be a complete idiot to embark on such a foolish mission. You may offer a defense and say, well, some people are idiots. True, but twelve in a bunch? Highly unlikely. And they obviously knew what they were in for. Remember that their world was not as permissive as ours. A radical new preacher in town was seen as a threat to the status quo. Clearly proven is the very tragic fact that most of the apostles met horrendous deaths at the hands of the people. Peter was crucified upside down, Andrew was crucified on an X-shaped cross, someone threw a spear at Thomas, James was thrown down a set of stairs and bashed in the head with stones until his brains spilled out, Bartholomew was crucified head-down, James son of Zebedee had his head cut off, and a score of others such as the great Paul who was beheaded, and Stephen who was stoned to death. Now, ask yourself, would you do what they did for a fake story? Of course not. You'd have to be absolutely crazy to preach a story that wasn't true. Therefore, Jesus must have in fact resurrected and appeared to them so much so that they were willing to die in proclaiming what they knew. Wouldn't you be bouncing off the walls in astonishment ready to go into overdrive if suddenly a dead friend appeared to you and spoke to you? This is precisley what happend to the apostles, and proof that Christ resurrected. We're not finished yet, but let's back up a bit and look at the first witnesses to the resurrected Christ. Remember, in our courtroom scenario, we are trying to debunk the resurrection (so far we have been unable to). Who were the first witnesses? Mary the mother of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, who went to the tomb to anoint the body. Now, if the apostles secretly stole Jesus' body and were trying to fake the story of his resurrection, they most definitely would not use women as their proving witnesses. In that day and age, a woman's word meant nothing, they had absolutely no clout. You would not try to prove something with a woman's testimony. Why then, are women mentioned as the first witnesses to the resurrection? Because the story simply must be true. So true and so phenomenal that any and all rationality would be trampled under foot and replaced with pure zeal. And lastly, our prosecutor's last dying effort to win the case against the resurrection...how about the Marion apparitions? Let's take a look at just two of them. Was Bernadette Soubirous on some kind of hallucinogenic drug, or perhaps she wanted to draw publicity to her household and pick up some income? We are referring of course to the story of Our Lady of Lourdes. It's difficult to rule out miracles as the cause when thousands of canes, wheelchairs, and crutches are dumped by their owners after having drank and bathed in the spring of Massabielle, which Bernadette was instructed by the apparition of Mary to dig and expose. Was this kid the recipient of a mere stroke of luck while playing in the dirt, and then devising a scheme to claim that its origin was divine? It's legally possible mister prosecutor, but far fetched. Especially when your faced with the story of Our Lady of Fatima, where not one, but three little children, Lucia, Jacinta, and Francisco, aged 10, 9, and 7, all reported seeing Mary. And as a finishing nail to shut this case closed, not only was the apparition a fact, but thousands of onlookers witnessed its proof when they were instructed by Lucia, via Mary, to behold the miracle of the sun. Thousands of people saw this, thousands. Certainly proof that it was in fact true...therefore, whether it be the apostolic movement, the first witnesses, or the reports of children and adult onlookers, the case for the existence of an out-of-body, other-than-worldly entity is quite strong. If the entity, typically referred to as a "soul" in our case, exists, one must conclude that logically life somehow exists after we die. Are we randomly floating bodies of energy? Maybe, but these instances kind of point the finger towards a conscious, fully aware state of being. Thus, our indirect proof that heaven exists.
Most people's idea and visualization of heaven is probably pretty much accurate; they picture it as a place of everlasting goodness, warmth, and love. Heaven is thought to be sort of our reward for behaving a certain way during life. It is the ultimate in bliss that one can imagine. We then need to realize that the heavenly realm's "admission ticket" has been somewhat altered and adapted over the ages because we, in all of our human capacity, want to ensure that we get there, so we do our best to condition our culture to make sure we indeed get there. In essence, we sort of trick ourselves into believing that if we act a certain way, we will receive a certain result. Understanding the reality of our mindsets' tendencies is important, because it sheds light on why there is so much debate on who goes to heaven.
Given this fact, today's typical justification is "Well, as long as you're a good person". What then is a "good person"? Does this mean that if you hold the door open for an old lady as often as possible, you will go to heaven? Does this mean as long as you're a nice guy and don't curse then you will go to heaven? If you observe historical answers to these questions, you might be quite surprised to notice the differences. For example, consider the spectators in the Coliseum of ancient Rome, (more so at the Circus Maximus). Our automatic assumption is that these people, because of the horrific death sport they were cheering on, would not go to heaven. Were these bad, evil minded people? The answer is probably not; rather they were probably regular, everyday citizens who occasionally did kind deeds for their neighbors and were sociable. In short, they were just like us. So the example has indeed been set; you need not merely be just a "good person", as these spectators were, to gain entry into heaven. We also have to remember that humans, being rather weak, are prone to sin and thus have constant obstacles to hurdle in order to remain in a state of grace, thereby gaining entry into heaven. So it therefore becomes necessary to have some sort of structural model in place to keep us in line. That structure is usually associated with following a role model such as Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, etc. and subsequent religious institutions such as the Catholic Church. But at best, even the most fervent religious person has to combat sinful tendencies. And it is a virtual rarity to find a person of no faith or spirituality who is immune to sin. This is the reality of our nature. So if you were a betting person, your best bet to get to heaven would be to develop at least some degree of spirituality. Usually the more you develop, the better your chances.
But what about that little 10 year old child living up in a remote Himalayan village or with some lost jungle tribe who never became exposed to religion? If he were to die, will he go to heaven? Of course we can offer intricate explanation as above, but essentially it may boil down to God. Do we know this boy and what goes through his mind? We think we know our friends, our family, even our spouse very well. In fact, we know only 1% of a person's true inner self, the rest is based on our best guess in response to their actions. For example, in August of 1966 every sane person considered Charles Whitman, the University of Texas sniper, to be an absolutely evil person for killing 16 people. It was later discovered that Whitman in fact had a brain tumor which directly caused his malevolent actions. Will you see the Coliseum spectator in heaven? Will you see the Pope in heaven? It appears we cannot say that a particular person won't go to heaven...and at the same time we cannot say that a particular person will go to heaven. All we know is ourselves and how we can look to others for example.
On a final note, one may ask, "Well, if heaven exists and I can go there, why doesn't it make itself clearly known so there would be no doubt in anybody's mind?" Excellent question, and justifiably a credible one. It is true that if we definitely knew that heaven was real, a lot of tears would be eliminated. Wakes would probably be parties, and funerals would probably be extravaganzas, all filled with joy and laughter that the deceased is now in a better place. Then why aren't we shown real proof of heaven more often, why aren't angels coming down once a month, going on national T.V., and reminding us not to sin? Wouldn't this make us better people, eliminate hatred and greed, and guarantee us a reward if we're good? Why must we be teased by heaven's existence being so mysterious and not definitively known?
The answer, although instinctively appearing illogical, actually turns out to be perfectly justifiable. Consider that we are dealing with the extreme ultimate culmination of life's journey. Heaven is far, far above anything we contemplate on earth. It is the greatest concept we could possibly envision, at the very top of our chain of goals. When you train for a marathon, you begin several months beforehand, gradually perfecting yourself, until you actually run the big race. The fruits of your laborious training pay off as you finish with a well-deserved and rewarding best time. You've earned your reward and afterwards you're completely ecstatic. During your training though, did you feel that ecstasy, did you know that reward? No. You only hoped you would at the end of the big race. Life then, is our "training" period, in which we try to perfect ourselves so that our goal, heaven, is reached. Just as the marathon runner catches small glimpses of his ultimate goal by gauging results in little 5k races, monthly blood and VO2Max tests, and body fat percentage tests, let's say, so does mankind catch glimpses of heaven by gauging his life's thoughts and actions, key "tests" and determinants on achieving the ultimate goal. So, it becomes important to understand that the reward is directly proportional to the efforts made to achieve it. You wouldn't expect a fantastic reward for a feeble effort, would you? Where would the challenge be to "train" if you knew you would win anyway? Therefore, since heaven is the ultimate reward we could possibly imagine, it stands to reason that, logically, no glimpses should be given to the candidate because the reward is so good. Yet, given this fact, still we are given glimpses now and then, such as with the Marion apparitions as described above. So, in actuality, heaven does make itself clearly known.
What greater seemingly paradoxical statement was there than when Christ said that even repentant prostitutes will be entering the kingdom of heaven before some of the so-called religious leaders. But more relevant to the average person concerns the question as to whether people of certain faiths, or even those of no faith, get to go to heaven. Will you see your neighbor in heaven, that loud-mouthed, foul-tongued, dirty-minded fellow? Or more subtly, how about your friend, a nice person, but with absolutely no spirituality, faith, or interest in such? The answer may be that we do not know...and that we do know. To justify the first part of our answer may be quite easy. Nobody's ever gone to heaven and come back with a photo album and some wonderful stories to share, giving us a firsthand account that they met so and so in heaven. We have no scientific factual evidence under a glass case in a museum to claim that a person did or did not go to heaven. Based on empirical evidence, we would have to say that we simply do not know who goes to heaven (if we somehow leap from empirical and assume that there is a heaven). For someone to claim that they know for a fact that so and so is in heaven or isn't in heaven is absurd. How then do we know who goes to heaven and who doesn't? Which brings us to the second part of our answer...we do know.
To justify our answer to this, we must first understand exactly what heaven is, and even before doing so, put the evidence on the table justifying the existence of heaven in the first place. If you were a prosecuting attorney in a courtroom, you would probably lose your case arguing against the existence of heaven. Why? Because believe it or not, objectively speaking, there is actually ample proof that heaven does indeed exist. To discover this, let's first assume there's no heaven. "You've been given a great gift, a chance to see what the world would be like without you" as Clarence said to George Bailey in It's a Wonderful Life. Okay, there's no heaven, no hell, and nothing in between. Now, let's try to then justify what has transpired, factually and historically keep in mind, over the past two thousand years. Let's begin with the apostolic movement, immediately after Jesus of Nazareth was put to death, which was an historic fact recorded in history as evidenced in the Titulus Crucis. What transpired after Jesus' death, or more precisely after he resurrected which in itself justifies the movement's cause and logically affirms the truth of Christ's resurrection, was for this bunch of guys to basically drop everything and travel to the ends of the then-known world to spread the Gospel. Now, who in their right mind would set out on a mission through hell and high water, in the face of persecuting peoples, risking life and limb which most of them lost which they knew they probably would, to try to sell a new religion if it wasn't really true? One would have to be a complete idiot to embark on such a foolish mission. You may offer a defense and say, well, some people are idiots. True, but twelve in a bunch? Highly unlikely. And they obviously knew what they were in for. Remember that their world was not as permissive as ours. A radical new preacher in town was seen as a threat to the status quo. Clearly proven is the very tragic fact that most of the apostles met horrendous deaths at the hands of the people. Peter was crucified upside down, Andrew was crucified on an X-shaped cross, someone threw a spear at Thomas, James was thrown down a set of stairs and bashed in the head with stones until his brains spilled out, Bartholomew was crucified head-down, James son of Zebedee had his head cut off, and a score of others such as the great Paul who was beheaded, and Stephen who was stoned to death. Now, ask yourself, would you do what they did for a fake story? Of course not. You'd have to be absolutely crazy to preach a story that wasn't true. Therefore, Jesus must have in fact resurrected and appeared to them so much so that they were willing to die in proclaiming what they knew. Wouldn't you be bouncing off the walls in astonishment ready to go into overdrive if suddenly a dead friend appeared to you and spoke to you? This is precisley what happend to the apostles, and proof that Christ resurrected. We're not finished yet, but let's back up a bit and look at the first witnesses to the resurrected Christ. Remember, in our courtroom scenario, we are trying to debunk the resurrection (so far we have been unable to). Who were the first witnesses? Mary the mother of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, who went to the tomb to anoint the body. Now, if the apostles secretly stole Jesus' body and were trying to fake the story of his resurrection, they most definitely would not use women as their proving witnesses. In that day and age, a woman's word meant nothing, they had absolutely no clout. You would not try to prove something with a woman's testimony. Why then, are women mentioned as the first witnesses to the resurrection? Because the story simply must be true. So true and so phenomenal that any and all rationality would be trampled under foot and replaced with pure zeal. And lastly, our prosecutor's last dying effort to win the case against the resurrection...how about the Marion apparitions? Let's take a look at just two of them. Was Bernadette Soubirous on some kind of hallucinogenic drug, or perhaps she wanted to draw publicity to her household and pick up some income? We are referring of course to the story of Our Lady of Lourdes. It's difficult to rule out miracles as the cause when thousands of canes, wheelchairs, and crutches are dumped by their owners after having drank and bathed in the spring of Massabielle, which Bernadette was instructed by the apparition of Mary to dig and expose. Was this kid the recipient of a mere stroke of luck while playing in the dirt, and then devising a scheme to claim that its origin was divine? It's legally possible mister prosecutor, but far fetched. Especially when your faced with the story of Our Lady of Fatima, where not one, but three little children, Lucia, Jacinta, and Francisco, aged 10, 9, and 7, all reported seeing Mary. And as a finishing nail to shut this case closed, not only was the apparition a fact, but thousands of onlookers witnessed its proof when they were instructed by Lucia, via Mary, to behold the miracle of the sun. Thousands of people saw this, thousands. Certainly proof that it was in fact true...therefore, whether it be the apostolic movement, the first witnesses, or the reports of children and adult onlookers, the case for the existence of an out-of-body, other-than-worldly entity is quite strong. If the entity, typically referred to as a "soul" in our case, exists, one must conclude that logically life somehow exists after we die. Are we randomly floating bodies of energy? Maybe, but these instances kind of point the finger towards a conscious, fully aware state of being. Thus, our indirect proof that heaven exists.
Most people's idea and visualization of heaven is probably pretty much accurate; they picture it as a place of everlasting goodness, warmth, and love. Heaven is thought to be sort of our reward for behaving a certain way during life. It is the ultimate in bliss that one can imagine. We then need to realize that the heavenly realm's "admission ticket" has been somewhat altered and adapted over the ages because we, in all of our human capacity, want to ensure that we get there, so we do our best to condition our culture to make sure we indeed get there. In essence, we sort of trick ourselves into believing that if we act a certain way, we will receive a certain result. Understanding the reality of our mindsets' tendencies is important, because it sheds light on why there is so much debate on who goes to heaven.
Given this fact, today's typical justification is "Well, as long as you're a good person". What then is a "good person"? Does this mean that if you hold the door open for an old lady as often as possible, you will go to heaven? Does this mean as long as you're a nice guy and don't curse then you will go to heaven? If you observe historical answers to these questions, you might be quite surprised to notice the differences. For example, consider the spectators in the Coliseum of ancient Rome, (more so at the Circus Maximus). Our automatic assumption is that these people, because of the horrific death sport they were cheering on, would not go to heaven. Were these bad, evil minded people? The answer is probably not; rather they were probably regular, everyday citizens who occasionally did kind deeds for their neighbors and were sociable. In short, they were just like us. So the example has indeed been set; you need not merely be just a "good person", as these spectators were, to gain entry into heaven. We also have to remember that humans, being rather weak, are prone to sin and thus have constant obstacles to hurdle in order to remain in a state of grace, thereby gaining entry into heaven. So it therefore becomes necessary to have some sort of structural model in place to keep us in line. That structure is usually associated with following a role model such as Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, etc. and subsequent religious institutions such as the Catholic Church. But at best, even the most fervent religious person has to combat sinful tendencies. And it is a virtual rarity to find a person of no faith or spirituality who is immune to sin. This is the reality of our nature. So if you were a betting person, your best bet to get to heaven would be to develop at least some degree of spirituality. Usually the more you develop, the better your chances.
But what about that little 10 year old child living up in a remote Himalayan village or with some lost jungle tribe who never became exposed to religion? If he were to die, will he go to heaven? Of course we can offer intricate explanation as above, but essentially it may boil down to God. Do we know this boy and what goes through his mind? We think we know our friends, our family, even our spouse very well. In fact, we know only 1% of a person's true inner self, the rest is based on our best guess in response to their actions. For example, in August of 1966 every sane person considered Charles Whitman, the University of Texas sniper, to be an absolutely evil person for killing 16 people. It was later discovered that Whitman in fact had a brain tumor which directly caused his malevolent actions. Will you see the Coliseum spectator in heaven? Will you see the Pope in heaven? It appears we cannot say that a particular person won't go to heaven...and at the same time we cannot say that a particular person will go to heaven. All we know is ourselves and how we can look to others for example.
On a final note, one may ask, "Well, if heaven exists and I can go there, why doesn't it make itself clearly known so there would be no doubt in anybody's mind?" Excellent question, and justifiably a credible one. It is true that if we definitely knew that heaven was real, a lot of tears would be eliminated. Wakes would probably be parties, and funerals would probably be extravaganzas, all filled with joy and laughter that the deceased is now in a better place. Then why aren't we shown real proof of heaven more often, why aren't angels coming down once a month, going on national T.V., and reminding us not to sin? Wouldn't this make us better people, eliminate hatred and greed, and guarantee us a reward if we're good? Why must we be teased by heaven's existence being so mysterious and not definitively known?
The answer, although instinctively appearing illogical, actually turns out to be perfectly justifiable. Consider that we are dealing with the extreme ultimate culmination of life's journey. Heaven is far, far above anything we contemplate on earth. It is the greatest concept we could possibly envision, at the very top of our chain of goals. When you train for a marathon, you begin several months beforehand, gradually perfecting yourself, until you actually run the big race. The fruits of your laborious training pay off as you finish with a well-deserved and rewarding best time. You've earned your reward and afterwards you're completely ecstatic. During your training though, did you feel that ecstasy, did you know that reward? No. You only hoped you would at the end of the big race. Life then, is our "training" period, in which we try to perfect ourselves so that our goal, heaven, is reached. Just as the marathon runner catches small glimpses of his ultimate goal by gauging results in little 5k races, monthly blood and VO2Max tests, and body fat percentage tests, let's say, so does mankind catch glimpses of heaven by gauging his life's thoughts and actions, key "tests" and determinants on achieving the ultimate goal. So, it becomes important to understand that the reward is directly proportional to the efforts made to achieve it. You wouldn't expect a fantastic reward for a feeble effort, would you? Where would the challenge be to "train" if you knew you would win anyway? Therefore, since heaven is the ultimate reward we could possibly imagine, it stands to reason that, logically, no glimpses should be given to the candidate because the reward is so good. Yet, given this fact, still we are given glimpses now and then, such as with the Marion apparitions as described above. So, in actuality, heaven does make itself clearly known.
How is Your Way of the Cross?
I. JESUS IS CONDEMNED TO DEATH – Imagine that you are standing on the Lithostrotos, or “Pavement” stones in the Fortress Antonia, the site where Christ was scourged, spat at, crowned with thorns, and condemned by Pontius Pilate. You need not look for stains from the pools of blood that were left on that fateful day, rather, they’re already “in the air” as soon as you arrive. You look to John Paul II as an example and ask yourself: “How often have you too been scourged for defending what is right and unpopular?”
II. JESUS CARRIES HIS CROSS - “Ecce Homo” (Behold the Man) said Pilate as he presented the cross-carrying Jesus to the approving crowd. Be truthful, do you find yourself going along with the crowd on issues like abortion and contraception, or do you resist giving in to “the popular vote?”
III. JESUS FALLS THE FIRST TIME - A white-stoned Polish Chapel marks the third station. Obviously out of energy and burning his own muscle cells, Jesus succumbs to the weight of the Cross. Are you willing to fall down and get hurt in defense of Christ because of controversy, rejection, or unpopularity?
IV. JESUS MEETS HIS AFFLICTED MOTHER - Just before the long climb up the Via Dolorosa, you can only imagine what facial expression Mary had at the sight of her son. When was the last time you examined your life and said: “Would my mother be proud of me, am I doing things according to God’s will?”
V. SIMON OF CYRENE IS FORCED TO HELP CARRY THE CROSS - Rather than having their “prize” cheated from them, the Roman soldiers pressed an onlooker into service. How often do you give up your luxuries for the benefit of another? Are you donating enough to charities and your local church?
VI. VERONICA WIPES THE FACE OF JESUS – Veronica must have been like a “needle in the haystack” for showing care and compassion as she wiped the bloody sweat from Christ’s face. Be honest and ask yourself: are you more like the needle or more like the haystack?
VII. JESUS FALLS THE SECOND TIME - Inside this tiny Franciscan chapel is an ancient Roman column marking the “Judgment Gate” where Jesus’ death notice was placed for all to see as they entered and exited the city. What do you want your own obituary (your death notice) to say when it’s published in the newspaper?
VIII. JESUS MEETS THE WOMEN OF JERUSALEM - “Don’t weep for me, but rather weep for your children” as Christ told these women. He means your children. What are you doing about it?
IX. JESUS FALLS THE THIRD TIME - Christ would have easily been able to see the rock of Calvary in the short distance. Yet, he got up again on his own and continued towards his death. Is your soul prepared for death?
X. JESUS IS STRIPPED OF HIS GARMENTS – The reason Jesus’ clothes were stripped was to humiliate him because the body was considered sacred and needed to be covered. How then do you feel about television movies displaying nudity and encouraging sins of the flesh? Do you treat your body as the Temple of the Holy Spirit?
XI. JESUS IS NAILED TO THE CROSS - Left wrist - - nailed. Right wrist - - nailed. Two feet crossed - - nailed. Sign posted - - INRI (Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews). All because he chose to do good rather than to do bad. Do you have symbolic “nail holes” in your hands and in your feet? If not, then why not?
XII. JESUS DIES ON THE CROSS – You are standing on Calvary and reminded of the coldness of Christ’s death, that it was not the scourging, or crowning with thorns, or weight of the cross that made him suffer so much. Rather, it was our own sin. He still suffers today. Are your sins contributing to his suffering?
XIII. JESUS IS TAKEN DOWN FROM THE CROSS – You remind yourself of the late John Paul II’s funeral. He was glorified because he tried his best to be perfect like Christ. Are you trying your best to do the same?
XIV. JESUS IS PLACED IN THE SEPULCHER - Wishing only to enter, to roll the stone closed behind you, and then to live there forever. This is Christendom’s most holy site. When you die, will your soul have enough electricity to light up your way, or will you be left behind with the millions who chose not to live for Christ?
II. JESUS CARRIES HIS CROSS - “Ecce Homo” (Behold the Man) said Pilate as he presented the cross-carrying Jesus to the approving crowd. Be truthful, do you find yourself going along with the crowd on issues like abortion and contraception, or do you resist giving in to “the popular vote?”
III. JESUS FALLS THE FIRST TIME - A white-stoned Polish Chapel marks the third station. Obviously out of energy and burning his own muscle cells, Jesus succumbs to the weight of the Cross. Are you willing to fall down and get hurt in defense of Christ because of controversy, rejection, or unpopularity?
IV. JESUS MEETS HIS AFFLICTED MOTHER - Just before the long climb up the Via Dolorosa, you can only imagine what facial expression Mary had at the sight of her son. When was the last time you examined your life and said: “Would my mother be proud of me, am I doing things according to God’s will?”
V. SIMON OF CYRENE IS FORCED TO HELP CARRY THE CROSS - Rather than having their “prize” cheated from them, the Roman soldiers pressed an onlooker into service. How often do you give up your luxuries for the benefit of another? Are you donating enough to charities and your local church?
VI. VERONICA WIPES THE FACE OF JESUS – Veronica must have been like a “needle in the haystack” for showing care and compassion as she wiped the bloody sweat from Christ’s face. Be honest and ask yourself: are you more like the needle or more like the haystack?
VII. JESUS FALLS THE SECOND TIME - Inside this tiny Franciscan chapel is an ancient Roman column marking the “Judgment Gate” where Jesus’ death notice was placed for all to see as they entered and exited the city. What do you want your own obituary (your death notice) to say when it’s published in the newspaper?
VIII. JESUS MEETS THE WOMEN OF JERUSALEM - “Don’t weep for me, but rather weep for your children” as Christ told these women. He means your children. What are you doing about it?
IX. JESUS FALLS THE THIRD TIME - Christ would have easily been able to see the rock of Calvary in the short distance. Yet, he got up again on his own and continued towards his death. Is your soul prepared for death?
X. JESUS IS STRIPPED OF HIS GARMENTS – The reason Jesus’ clothes were stripped was to humiliate him because the body was considered sacred and needed to be covered. How then do you feel about television movies displaying nudity and encouraging sins of the flesh? Do you treat your body as the Temple of the Holy Spirit?
XI. JESUS IS NAILED TO THE CROSS - Left wrist - - nailed. Right wrist - - nailed. Two feet crossed - - nailed. Sign posted - - INRI (Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews). All because he chose to do good rather than to do bad. Do you have symbolic “nail holes” in your hands and in your feet? If not, then why not?
XII. JESUS DIES ON THE CROSS – You are standing on Calvary and reminded of the coldness of Christ’s death, that it was not the scourging, or crowning with thorns, or weight of the cross that made him suffer so much. Rather, it was our own sin. He still suffers today. Are your sins contributing to his suffering?
XIII. JESUS IS TAKEN DOWN FROM THE CROSS – You remind yourself of the late John Paul II’s funeral. He was glorified because he tried his best to be perfect like Christ. Are you trying your best to do the same?
XIV. JESUS IS PLACED IN THE SEPULCHER - Wishing only to enter, to roll the stone closed behind you, and then to live there forever. This is Christendom’s most holy site. When you die, will your soul have enough electricity to light up your way, or will you be left behind with the millions who chose not to live for Christ?
Do Animals have Souls?
This story first broke headlines in Germany several years ago, before the age of public internet, and was later translated and scanned by a Florida tabloid, of all places. However, the story itself remained verbatim and intact.
>Terrified twins Hans and Herbert Willner struggled to survive in 30 feet of icy black water and seemed seconds away from dying before being miraculously rescued - by the whimpering ghost of their faithful collie Fritz.
The boys' panic-stricken parents and half a dozen stunned strangers watched wide-eyed as the powerful pooch appeared from out of nowhere to save the screaming youngsters as they were going down for the third time.
"I'm glad there were plenty of witnesses or we would be laughingstocks for telling what we saw", said shaken dad Dietrich Willner. "I have never believed in ghosts, but Fritz pulled our babies from the lake - and he's been dead for nearly a year."
The courageous collie was an adored member of the Willner's Hamburg, Germany household for nine years before dying of a kidney ailment last summer.
"He was so gentle", recalled the twins' mom Marlene. "The boys rode him around like a pony when they were little and Fritz loved it. Once when they were 3 or 4, Herbert fell in a neighbor's swimming pool. Fritz jumped in and pulled him to the side, then lifted him out by his shirt." A year later the whopping hound broke his leg and three ribs when he ran in front of a speeding car to shove Hans out of the way.
"That dog was their guardian angel", Marlene recalled with affection.
But Fritz' most heart-stopping feat came months after he was dead and buried, while the 10 year olds and their parents were camping at the Lake of Constance near the Austrian border.
"All through the drive to the lake, the twins kept saying that Fritz was with them in the back seat", said their dentist dad. We didn't pay much attention because we knew how much they missed him."
On the third day of their vacation, the rambunctious boys slipped out of their cabin and paddled a rubber raft far out into the lake. When the craft sprung a fast leak, the shrieking schoolboys were left fighting for their lives in the choppy water.
"We heard people screaming and ran outside", Dietrich said. "We could see Hans and Herbert in their little red capes bobbing up and down way out there. My heart was in my throat. I ran toward the water and started in after them and suddenly Fritz was there, swimming to shore with the boys in tow. He brought them all the way to the beach and dropped them off, and while we were tending to them he just disappeared. He didn't run off, he just disappeared."
Police said a rescue team arrived minutes later and seven witnesses described the hair-raising rescue.
"They all reported the same thing", said policeman Irmin Michler. "There was a nurse, a local pharmacist, and several teenagers. They all said a big brown collie just appeared, saved the boys and then vanished, so I guess that's exactly what happened."
Said a happy Herbert from his hospital bed, "Fritz came back and got us. He wouldn't let us die because we're too young."<
Do animals have souls? We never think about this possibility, do we? Traditionally we have been geared to focus exclusively on the souls of mankind, and justifiably so, as there is so much at stake and so much we hope to gain after we die. There simply may never have been the opportunity to even consider if animals, or other life forms, have such a thing as a soul. Most people think that heaven exists, that is a fact. However, they are basing this decision primarily on their "gut feeling", what they have learned from their school, faith, tradition, and perhaps some degree of wishful thinking. But if asked, most would also welcome the chance to be reunited with their beloved pets if that possibility existed. If only we knew more about heaven and the soul, perhaps we could be sure. But perhaps we can...
First, we would need to define and almost visualize our perception of heaven. Based on the best thinking thus far, heaven seems to be a state of being where our souls aspire to end up, a sort of eternal Shangri-la or blissful coexistence with all that is good. We do not take on some sort of phantom ghostly appearance, but actually are quite vividly alive, hundreds of times more conscious and aware of the truth than we could ever hope to imagine to be as mortal humans. Imagine the bluest of skies you've ever seen. Now, picture that 100x more vividly. This is a near impossibility due to our conditioned upbringing, yet we actually can if we tried hard enough. So we agree that heaven is this ultra vivid and wonderful place where all things are possible (they must be, because we were dead, and now we are alive). It would logically follow then, that since heaven is such a wonderful place where there exists only love and all-things that are good, and being that all things are possible with God, then it would be reasonable to conclude that our beloved pets will be there with us. The trouble we have in understanding this often comes because we don't take the time to ponder what in essence the soul is. What is the soul? Is it our conscience? If so why does it have a body? To realize what we are dealing with first requires a reading of the book of Genesis. It is important to note that originally the body and soul of Man were probably easily recognized as being one. The distinction developed simply due to Man's free will to disobey God as in the Adam and Eve story. Now, magnify and multiply that separation to today, and the result is exactly what it is, a foggy and totally unclear concept of what the soul is. We are so used to "the body", that we simply forgot that we have a "soul" too. And as the old saying goes, out of sight, out of mind.
The Garden of Eden can be likened to heaven on Earth. The decision to disobey God by "eating the apple" was made by us, not by the animals. Technically, you would therefore not be wrong by further concluding that animals should have an automatic entry into heaven since they have no elevated conscience to choose right from wrong such as humans have. And, haven't we concluded that heaven is a place where all is good and happy, and absolutely limitless in the scope of what this goodness and happiness entails? The treasured moments you spend with your puppy, or the cuddling up you do with your cat, clearly affecting you as you reciprocate your devotion to one another, are these then just nice memories we will have in heaven? Would it not bring at least a mild tear to your eye to recall them when you're in heaven, wishing they were still with you? Of course! This is a no-brainer. It stands to reason then, based on all of what heaven is and the infinite power of God, that we most definitely will be re-united with our beloved pets in heaven! We as humans have a very, very, very limited scope of what the heavenly realm is, in part due to our limited cognitive ability, the intangibility of the concept itself, and just plain constant conditioning and bombardment of secular society (the tangible part of life). However, we can take a sneak peek at discovering that our animals actually do have souls instead of being shocked when we see them in heaven by doing a bit of dedicated research, such as reading the Bible, studying the life of St. Francis of Assisi, and using our intuition at putting this jigsaw puzzle together.
Fr. Jack Wintz, O.F.M. has written a wonderful book specifically on this topic, called "Will I See My Dog in Heaven?". In the book, Fr. Wintz cites several reasons and "proofs" that God desires the whole family of creation to be included in his plan of salvation. One of them revolves around St. Francis' beloved poem called Canticle of the Creatures, in which Francis invites "Brother Sun" and "Sister Moon," "Brother Wind" and "Sister Water," "Brother Fire" and "Sister Mother Earth" to join him in praising God for all the beautiful creatures God has made. If animals were of no significance in the overall picture, then St. Francis would most certainly not have devoted so much time to them. Additionally, if you read the story of Noah's Ark in the biblical book of Genesis, God instructs Noah to take pairs of every living creature with him on the Ark. Let's emphasize "every", not just the ones that would benefit Man. You also see that God makes a solemn covenant not only with Noah but with all the animals and other creatures stating that "Never again shall all bodily creatures be destroyed by the waters of a flood" Gn 9:11. Why would God include other living things in his covenant if they really didn't matter? To the contrary, they apparently do matter, and it goes to show that God's perspective on salvation is vastly broader than our own.
Some people may also say that heaven is unlike anything we know here on earth, that our pets do not have souls, and that our awareness in heaven transcends even the most affectionate, loving degree that any human can have while here on earth. In other words, once in heaven, we aren't even aware that we had a loving pet because we are in a higher state of conscious love. Although it may seem empirically logical, I would strongly disagree with this because it basically nullifies any affectionate worth that we displayed while on earth. That is to say, your deep down love for your pet would be left out of your heavenly recollection. This does not seem to make sense simply because humanity's highest claim to its self worth, what sets it apart from other life forms, is its ability to love and reason. Therefore, it stands to reason that this highest merit must bear some presence in heaven, not merely be only a pre-requisite.
Surely such profound love for our pets will find a place with them in heaven. To the extent that our affections and good deeds for them transcend the notion of being reunited, I simply disagree. What then is human love, but a pre-requisite to some abstract form of heavenly love where we have forgotten this human-pet relationship? I think not. Our lives now, in all of their goodness and love, are directly reflective of heaven to come. I disagree with those who say that the entire scope of our affections for a pet is merely only a positive "checkmark in the box". For a human to expend their greatest effort at caring and loving a pet is the maximum they know. Why then should they be robbed of the fruits of their love by not seeing their pets in heaven? For what is heaven, but the fulfillment of the maximum efforts at humanly love? Therefore, by exhibiting these heavenly traits while on earth, we are actually directly promoting the heavenly state, not something transcending them. Heaven is real, it is among us every day in our everyday actions. This is no prerequisite rehearsal.
For argument's sake, let's assume animals do not have souls and when they die, that's it, they die. Now, think of the most loving, affectionate, caring individual towards an animal that you can imagine. Let's say this person goes through life perfectly, avoids sin, and is the classic "ideal" candidate for heaven. The person dies and is now in the heavenly realm. According to some apparently astute religious beliefs, including some mainstream Christian denominations, this person would be in a heavenly state which transcended any love they had for their pet. Sound logical? Yes, but there's a problem. These same faith beliefs fall short of saying that this person will see their pet in heaven. Here's the problem. Now, if you're this person and you are in a heavenly state of pure bliss, do you have the ability to recall that you loved your pet while on earth? If the answer is yes, then wouldn't you be somewhat sad that your pet is not allowed in heaven? I would be. Is there sadness in heaven? No. Therefore that scenario would not make sense. On the flip side, while in heaven let's say you don't have the ability to recall your affections for your pet, that it has been erased somehow in your heavenly mind, that you are somehow above and beyond that memory. If this is the case, it doesn't put too much clout on the earthly love you had for your pet, merely categorizing it as a pre-requisite which isn't retained in heaven. So much earthly affection, care, and love; merely an un-retained pre-requisite? That would be ridiculous thinking and certainly does not make sense either. As you can see, and I invite you to brainstorm this issue yourself, it makes perfect sense and follows logical reason that we in fact will see our beloved animals in heaven.
One may ask, "Well, if I had such a deeply affectionate relationship with my pet, in short, I loved my dog, and that represented goodness and happiness to me, then why can't I have my Lamborghini in heaven too?" Good question! Who decides to what degree a "loved" other-than-human thing goes to heaven? Arguably, one can say indeed other things are in heaven. Christ himself promised his apostles: "I tell you, I will not drink this fruit of the vine from now until the day when I drink it new with you in my Father's reign" Mt 26:29. Clearly he is referring to wine. Therefore we must conclude that wine is present in heaven, yes? If wine is, how about cheese, and doughnuts, and my comfortable pair of dungarees, and how about that guy's Lamborghini? One could actually make a plausible argument for such items. However, opening up a discussion on these as well as our pets is precisely how we then come to understand why heaven (as well as purgatory and hell) is an eternal repository of souls surrounded by an environment which is exponentially full of good things (or bad things if in hell).
Out of all of my dearest uncles, my uncle Ben was my favorite. His love for painting was very apparent, as I often recall the discussions we used to have at our family's annual Christmas gathering. I have dabbled in this form of artistic expression too, so his brush stroke tips were always welcomed. He has been deceased now for many years, but I have always pondered the question: "I wonder if my uncle Ben is painting?" And the answer always comes back as "Of course he is. This is something that he loved doing dearly, how could he not be painting?!" So spend some time, think, and pose the question to yourself. You'll then discover why some things, including your pets, will never really die.
>Terrified twins Hans and Herbert Willner struggled to survive in 30 feet of icy black water and seemed seconds away from dying before being miraculously rescued - by the whimpering ghost of their faithful collie Fritz.
The boys' panic-stricken parents and half a dozen stunned strangers watched wide-eyed as the powerful pooch appeared from out of nowhere to save the screaming youngsters as they were going down for the third time.
"I'm glad there were plenty of witnesses or we would be laughingstocks for telling what we saw", said shaken dad Dietrich Willner. "I have never believed in ghosts, but Fritz pulled our babies from the lake - and he's been dead for nearly a year."
The courageous collie was an adored member of the Willner's Hamburg, Germany household for nine years before dying of a kidney ailment last summer.
"He was so gentle", recalled the twins' mom Marlene. "The boys rode him around like a pony when they were little and Fritz loved it. Once when they were 3 or 4, Herbert fell in a neighbor's swimming pool. Fritz jumped in and pulled him to the side, then lifted him out by his shirt." A year later the whopping hound broke his leg and three ribs when he ran in front of a speeding car to shove Hans out of the way.
"That dog was their guardian angel", Marlene recalled with affection.
But Fritz' most heart-stopping feat came months after he was dead and buried, while the 10 year olds and their parents were camping at the Lake of Constance near the Austrian border.
"All through the drive to the lake, the twins kept saying that Fritz was with them in the back seat", said their dentist dad. We didn't pay much attention because we knew how much they missed him."
On the third day of their vacation, the rambunctious boys slipped out of their cabin and paddled a rubber raft far out into the lake. When the craft sprung a fast leak, the shrieking schoolboys were left fighting for their lives in the choppy water.
"We heard people screaming and ran outside", Dietrich said. "We could see Hans and Herbert in their little red capes bobbing up and down way out there. My heart was in my throat. I ran toward the water and started in after them and suddenly Fritz was there, swimming to shore with the boys in tow. He brought them all the way to the beach and dropped them off, and while we were tending to them he just disappeared. He didn't run off, he just disappeared."
Police said a rescue team arrived minutes later and seven witnesses described the hair-raising rescue.
"They all reported the same thing", said policeman Irmin Michler. "There was a nurse, a local pharmacist, and several teenagers. They all said a big brown collie just appeared, saved the boys and then vanished, so I guess that's exactly what happened."
Said a happy Herbert from his hospital bed, "Fritz came back and got us. He wouldn't let us die because we're too young."<
Do animals have souls? We never think about this possibility, do we? Traditionally we have been geared to focus exclusively on the souls of mankind, and justifiably so, as there is so much at stake and so much we hope to gain after we die. There simply may never have been the opportunity to even consider if animals, or other life forms, have such a thing as a soul. Most people think that heaven exists, that is a fact. However, they are basing this decision primarily on their "gut feeling", what they have learned from their school, faith, tradition, and perhaps some degree of wishful thinking. But if asked, most would also welcome the chance to be reunited with their beloved pets if that possibility existed. If only we knew more about heaven and the soul, perhaps we could be sure. But perhaps we can...
First, we would need to define and almost visualize our perception of heaven. Based on the best thinking thus far, heaven seems to be a state of being where our souls aspire to end up, a sort of eternal Shangri-la or blissful coexistence with all that is good. We do not take on some sort of phantom ghostly appearance, but actually are quite vividly alive, hundreds of times more conscious and aware of the truth than we could ever hope to imagine to be as mortal humans. Imagine the bluest of skies you've ever seen. Now, picture that 100x more vividly. This is a near impossibility due to our conditioned upbringing, yet we actually can if we tried hard enough. So we agree that heaven is this ultra vivid and wonderful place where all things are possible (they must be, because we were dead, and now we are alive). It would logically follow then, that since heaven is such a wonderful place where there exists only love and all-things that are good, and being that all things are possible with God, then it would be reasonable to conclude that our beloved pets will be there with us. The trouble we have in understanding this often comes because we don't take the time to ponder what in essence the soul is. What is the soul? Is it our conscience? If so why does it have a body? To realize what we are dealing with first requires a reading of the book of Genesis. It is important to note that originally the body and soul of Man were probably easily recognized as being one. The distinction developed simply due to Man's free will to disobey God as in the Adam and Eve story. Now, magnify and multiply that separation to today, and the result is exactly what it is, a foggy and totally unclear concept of what the soul is. We are so used to "the body", that we simply forgot that we have a "soul" too. And as the old saying goes, out of sight, out of mind.
The Garden of Eden can be likened to heaven on Earth. The decision to disobey God by "eating the apple" was made by us, not by the animals. Technically, you would therefore not be wrong by further concluding that animals should have an automatic entry into heaven since they have no elevated conscience to choose right from wrong such as humans have. And, haven't we concluded that heaven is a place where all is good and happy, and absolutely limitless in the scope of what this goodness and happiness entails? The treasured moments you spend with your puppy, or the cuddling up you do with your cat, clearly affecting you as you reciprocate your devotion to one another, are these then just nice memories we will have in heaven? Would it not bring at least a mild tear to your eye to recall them when you're in heaven, wishing they were still with you? Of course! This is a no-brainer. It stands to reason then, based on all of what heaven is and the infinite power of God, that we most definitely will be re-united with our beloved pets in heaven! We as humans have a very, very, very limited scope of what the heavenly realm is, in part due to our limited cognitive ability, the intangibility of the concept itself, and just plain constant conditioning and bombardment of secular society (the tangible part of life). However, we can take a sneak peek at discovering that our animals actually do have souls instead of being shocked when we see them in heaven by doing a bit of dedicated research, such as reading the Bible, studying the life of St. Francis of Assisi, and using our intuition at putting this jigsaw puzzle together.
Fr. Jack Wintz, O.F.M. has written a wonderful book specifically on this topic, called "Will I See My Dog in Heaven?". In the book, Fr. Wintz cites several reasons and "proofs" that God desires the whole family of creation to be included in his plan of salvation. One of them revolves around St. Francis' beloved poem called Canticle of the Creatures, in which Francis invites "Brother Sun" and "Sister Moon," "Brother Wind" and "Sister Water," "Brother Fire" and "Sister Mother Earth" to join him in praising God for all the beautiful creatures God has made. If animals were of no significance in the overall picture, then St. Francis would most certainly not have devoted so much time to them. Additionally, if you read the story of Noah's Ark in the biblical book of Genesis, God instructs Noah to take pairs of every living creature with him on the Ark. Let's emphasize "every", not just the ones that would benefit Man. You also see that God makes a solemn covenant not only with Noah but with all the animals and other creatures stating that "Never again shall all bodily creatures be destroyed by the waters of a flood" Gn 9:11. Why would God include other living things in his covenant if they really didn't matter? To the contrary, they apparently do matter, and it goes to show that God's perspective on salvation is vastly broader than our own.
Some people may also say that heaven is unlike anything we know here on earth, that our pets do not have souls, and that our awareness in heaven transcends even the most affectionate, loving degree that any human can have while here on earth. In other words, once in heaven, we aren't even aware that we had a loving pet because we are in a higher state of conscious love. Although it may seem empirically logical, I would strongly disagree with this because it basically nullifies any affectionate worth that we displayed while on earth. That is to say, your deep down love for your pet would be left out of your heavenly recollection. This does not seem to make sense simply because humanity's highest claim to its self worth, what sets it apart from other life forms, is its ability to love and reason. Therefore, it stands to reason that this highest merit must bear some presence in heaven, not merely be only a pre-requisite.
Surely such profound love for our pets will find a place with them in heaven. To the extent that our affections and good deeds for them transcend the notion of being reunited, I simply disagree. What then is human love, but a pre-requisite to some abstract form of heavenly love where we have forgotten this human-pet relationship? I think not. Our lives now, in all of their goodness and love, are directly reflective of heaven to come. I disagree with those who say that the entire scope of our affections for a pet is merely only a positive "checkmark in the box". For a human to expend their greatest effort at caring and loving a pet is the maximum they know. Why then should they be robbed of the fruits of their love by not seeing their pets in heaven? For what is heaven, but the fulfillment of the maximum efforts at humanly love? Therefore, by exhibiting these heavenly traits while on earth, we are actually directly promoting the heavenly state, not something transcending them. Heaven is real, it is among us every day in our everyday actions. This is no prerequisite rehearsal.
For argument's sake, let's assume animals do not have souls and when they die, that's it, they die. Now, think of the most loving, affectionate, caring individual towards an animal that you can imagine. Let's say this person goes through life perfectly, avoids sin, and is the classic "ideal" candidate for heaven. The person dies and is now in the heavenly realm. According to some apparently astute religious beliefs, including some mainstream Christian denominations, this person would be in a heavenly state which transcended any love they had for their pet. Sound logical? Yes, but there's a problem. These same faith beliefs fall short of saying that this person will see their pet in heaven. Here's the problem. Now, if you're this person and you are in a heavenly state of pure bliss, do you have the ability to recall that you loved your pet while on earth? If the answer is yes, then wouldn't you be somewhat sad that your pet is not allowed in heaven? I would be. Is there sadness in heaven? No. Therefore that scenario would not make sense. On the flip side, while in heaven let's say you don't have the ability to recall your affections for your pet, that it has been erased somehow in your heavenly mind, that you are somehow above and beyond that memory. If this is the case, it doesn't put too much clout on the earthly love you had for your pet, merely categorizing it as a pre-requisite which isn't retained in heaven. So much earthly affection, care, and love; merely an un-retained pre-requisite? That would be ridiculous thinking and certainly does not make sense either. As you can see, and I invite you to brainstorm this issue yourself, it makes perfect sense and follows logical reason that we in fact will see our beloved animals in heaven.
One may ask, "Well, if I had such a deeply affectionate relationship with my pet, in short, I loved my dog, and that represented goodness and happiness to me, then why can't I have my Lamborghini in heaven too?" Good question! Who decides to what degree a "loved" other-than-human thing goes to heaven? Arguably, one can say indeed other things are in heaven. Christ himself promised his apostles: "I tell you, I will not drink this fruit of the vine from now until the day when I drink it new with you in my Father's reign" Mt 26:29. Clearly he is referring to wine. Therefore we must conclude that wine is present in heaven, yes? If wine is, how about cheese, and doughnuts, and my comfortable pair of dungarees, and how about that guy's Lamborghini? One could actually make a plausible argument for such items. However, opening up a discussion on these as well as our pets is precisely how we then come to understand why heaven (as well as purgatory and hell) is an eternal repository of souls surrounded by an environment which is exponentially full of good things (or bad things if in hell).
Out of all of my dearest uncles, my uncle Ben was my favorite. His love for painting was very apparent, as I often recall the discussions we used to have at our family's annual Christmas gathering. I have dabbled in this form of artistic expression too, so his brush stroke tips were always welcomed. He has been deceased now for many years, but I have always pondered the question: "I wonder if my uncle Ben is painting?" And the answer always comes back as "Of course he is. This is something that he loved doing dearly, how could he not be painting?!" So spend some time, think, and pose the question to yourself. You'll then discover why some things, including your pets, will never really die.
Incarnation and Reincarnation
Perhaps the most mysterious of all spiritual concepts is the notion that one's soul has somehow already existed in a past life, and will continue its rebirth in another bodily host until it achieves perfection. When most people hear the word "reincarnation", they immediately conjure up ideas of someone's soul going into another person. In a nutshell, that simple-minded explanation, less all the intellectualization, is actually right on key. However, the concept of reincarnation may only be partly true. Keep in mind that the teachings on reincarnation have existed for thousands of years, deeply ensconced in Far Eastern religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism. Arguably it would be difficult to entirely rule out the purported truths these teachings hold. However, as in most religions, no faith belief is 100% correct. Religion, it may be said, is one of Man's best attempts at understanding his own existence, which logically will never be completely understood until we co-exist purely with the Creator. Therefore it would be incorrect to state that any one faith has a monopoly on the Truth, including those believing in reincarnation. Why then, do millions of seemingly rational people believe in some degree of "reincarnation"? Or, perhaps many think they believe in reincarnation, but in actuality what they are referring to is called Incarnation.
To understand the difference, we must first begin by categorizing a couple of terms for clarity. For our discussion, let us refer to the "soul" in the traditional sense, that part of us that continues to exist after we die and ultimately goes to heaven or hell. The "spirit", on the other hand, will be taken to mean the essence of God, the Oneness of divine Creator and creation where there is no individuality of the parts, but rather all are One. In reincarnation, a soul travels from individual to individual upon each one's bodily death until it achieves a state of perfection equal to that of the Creator, thereby attaining oneness with the spirit. It may take several lifetimes to achieve this, being continually reborn into several bodies, with some believing that even animals and plants serve as host recipients. The concept is profound, as it focuses on its goal of complete unity with the creator. But there is a problem.
The unfortunate problem with reincarnation is that, although its goal is a noble one, it places very little emphasis on the individual other than to teach that each host of the traveling soul must have good karma in order to foster the soul's destiny. The entire focus is placed on the achievement of the soul's destiny, which is nice, but what about all the host's and their own destinies? For example, person A dies, the soul reincarnates into person B, then C, then D, all the while dependent on each person to help it become one with the spirit. As you can see, the goal is to get this soul to the creator. This seems to place little clout on the individual, other than the fact that they are merely assistants in the process. The situation thus becomes apparent because these "assistants" may tend to consider themselves less individually responsible, and more abstractly responsible being part of a chain of hosts. What this does is downgrade the significance of an individual's own free will and destiny, and make it appear as part of a collective process. This is the hidden, indirect tragedy with belief in reincarnation. Of course, reincarnation belief does not entirely divert from the individual hosts, as they are gaining unison with the soul on its way to the spirit, ensuring they too will be reunited, all as one. But given the human element and thinking capacity, it seems rather an injustice to de-emphasize individuality of one's own soul. Enter Incarnation...
Most people are probably likening their reincarnation beliefs to a concept known as Incarnation. Slightly different than reincarnation, incarnation means the personification or embodiment of a deceased soul (or spirit) in another person. There is an extremely important distinction we should make regarding a soul embodiment and a spirit embodiment. This is perhaps where most people find confusion and either are for or against the concept. For a soul to incarnate, this would parallel reincarnation as discussed above. The reborn soul continues its mission in the body of a live person. Some would argue that is unfortunate, as its reward has not come for it still occupies an earthly body. On the other hand, for the spirit to incarnate means that the spirit, as we've defined as being the essence of God, in a deceased person manifests itself in the life of a living person. There is no coincidental effect as you might guess. For example, your mother was a church-going person who regularly prayed the rosary, while you had no interest. After she died, you find yourself doing what she did. For what is the spirit but the continual presence of God among us, from our creation through our death and beyond. This is the belief of AndrewOstrowski.com, that upon death, every living creature's soul enters its realm of heaven, hell, or purgatory, simultaneously as its spirit may or may not also manifest in the earthly body of another. Keep in mind the distinction between soul and spirit. The soul being uniquely individualistic, the spirit being universally part of the One. I have always thought the original film Star Wars, as futuristic as it was, hit the nail on the head regarding the spirit of Oneness. The "Force" as it was referred to, was a direct connotation to the Spirit. Just as the Jedi knight possessed the spirit and was able to attain unity with the One, upon death, the knight's soul entered heaven. A good example of this is seen in the film after a repentant Anakin Skywalker abandons the "dark side" and embraces the Force just before he dies, a glimpse of him is seen in the heavenly state because of this repentance. The soul then is directly influenced by the spirit, and for humans, has a choice to make either to accept the spirit or reject the spirit. Most people fall somewhere in between, accepting and rejecting simultaneously through the course of their earthly life, thus life becoming a continual tug of war between the forces of good and the forces of evil vying to win over souls, who all have entirely free will to choose. For just as the Garden of Eden represented Heaven on Earth, it was Man's free will to choose disobedience, resulting in the lifelong struggle to regain that heavenly state through the emergence of the spirit incarnate in various prophets and ultimately culminating in Jesus, whose only reason for coming was precisely because Man choose his destiny poorly. For if Adam and Eve did not choose sin, we would today be living in an earthly heavenly realm with no reason for a Messiah to come. This is clear proof that each individual has to choose the destiny of their own soul. Heaven will not be handed to us as a gift. We must choose. The spirit is with us as guide, but it is ultimately up to us to choose the path and destiny of our soul.
While the Catholic Church tends to oppose reincarnation entirely, it is true to point out that some aspects of the teaching do merit validity. Such a fact is seen in scientific research which you are invited to analyze for yourself. Incarnation, on the other hand, may prove more favorable. As a personal example, the bodily deaths of my two cats, who were brothers, ignited me to approach this topic in earnest. Bodily, I point out, because something else happened... Soon after the death of the first, his brother began to act exactly as he did, jumping and affixing onto my upper leg which he had never ever done before. Calling out to my deceased cat individually as I sentimentally did (and still do!) soon found his brother responding in precisely the same manner, with all the specific mannerisms that the deceased had. Recently, the brother passed away and I have taken in two kittens born on my back porch. Incredibly, one of the kittens soon began to act precisely as my recently deceased cat did, exhibiting the identical mannerisms and even running to me when the deceased's name was called from afar. As any long-time animal owner knows, you become fine-tuned to readily spot and know behavior in your loved pet. I will also point out that these behaviors were entirely unique, not the usual, common behaviors that all felines exhibit. And I am also rather objectively scientific as you can see from this website's content, exposing issues for meticulous consideration. So, in the same way I propose, have these deceased animals been reincarnated? I think not. Rather, I believe the spirit in them, not the soul, has possibly incarnated. For nothing is impossible in the realm of the creator, rather, all that is good continues forever. Remember that Christ in the spirit actually existed before being born in the flesh as referenced in Jn 17:5. Certainly proof of Incarnation. Edgar Cayce points out that Christ's incarnate spirit may have been manifested in the prophets and wise thinkers of old, certainly valid if you keep in mind that the spirit is the essence of God.
The answer to the mystery of incarnation and reincarnation remains most intriguing. But as we've pointed out, no faith belief is entirely accurate. What we see instead are percentages of probabilities amidst the partly cloudy, partly sunny view. What is your opinion?
To understand the difference, we must first begin by categorizing a couple of terms for clarity. For our discussion, let us refer to the "soul" in the traditional sense, that part of us that continues to exist after we die and ultimately goes to heaven or hell. The "spirit", on the other hand, will be taken to mean the essence of God, the Oneness of divine Creator and creation where there is no individuality of the parts, but rather all are One. In reincarnation, a soul travels from individual to individual upon each one's bodily death until it achieves a state of perfection equal to that of the Creator, thereby attaining oneness with the spirit. It may take several lifetimes to achieve this, being continually reborn into several bodies, with some believing that even animals and plants serve as host recipients. The concept is profound, as it focuses on its goal of complete unity with the creator. But there is a problem.
The unfortunate problem with reincarnation is that, although its goal is a noble one, it places very little emphasis on the individual other than to teach that each host of the traveling soul must have good karma in order to foster the soul's destiny. The entire focus is placed on the achievement of the soul's destiny, which is nice, but what about all the host's and their own destinies? For example, person A dies, the soul reincarnates into person B, then C, then D, all the while dependent on each person to help it become one with the spirit. As you can see, the goal is to get this soul to the creator. This seems to place little clout on the individual, other than the fact that they are merely assistants in the process. The situation thus becomes apparent because these "assistants" may tend to consider themselves less individually responsible, and more abstractly responsible being part of a chain of hosts. What this does is downgrade the significance of an individual's own free will and destiny, and make it appear as part of a collective process. This is the hidden, indirect tragedy with belief in reincarnation. Of course, reincarnation belief does not entirely divert from the individual hosts, as they are gaining unison with the soul on its way to the spirit, ensuring they too will be reunited, all as one. But given the human element and thinking capacity, it seems rather an injustice to de-emphasize individuality of one's own soul. Enter Incarnation...
Most people are probably likening their reincarnation beliefs to a concept known as Incarnation. Slightly different than reincarnation, incarnation means the personification or embodiment of a deceased soul (or spirit) in another person. There is an extremely important distinction we should make regarding a soul embodiment and a spirit embodiment. This is perhaps where most people find confusion and either are for or against the concept. For a soul to incarnate, this would parallel reincarnation as discussed above. The reborn soul continues its mission in the body of a live person. Some would argue that is unfortunate, as its reward has not come for it still occupies an earthly body. On the other hand, for the spirit to incarnate means that the spirit, as we've defined as being the essence of God, in a deceased person manifests itself in the life of a living person. There is no coincidental effect as you might guess. For example, your mother was a church-going person who regularly prayed the rosary, while you had no interest. After she died, you find yourself doing what she did. For what is the spirit but the continual presence of God among us, from our creation through our death and beyond. This is the belief of AndrewOstrowski.com, that upon death, every living creature's soul enters its realm of heaven, hell, or purgatory, simultaneously as its spirit may or may not also manifest in the earthly body of another. Keep in mind the distinction between soul and spirit. The soul being uniquely individualistic, the spirit being universally part of the One. I have always thought the original film Star Wars, as futuristic as it was, hit the nail on the head regarding the spirit of Oneness. The "Force" as it was referred to, was a direct connotation to the Spirit. Just as the Jedi knight possessed the spirit and was able to attain unity with the One, upon death, the knight's soul entered heaven. A good example of this is seen in the film after a repentant Anakin Skywalker abandons the "dark side" and embraces the Force just before he dies, a glimpse of him is seen in the heavenly state because of this repentance. The soul then is directly influenced by the spirit, and for humans, has a choice to make either to accept the spirit or reject the spirit. Most people fall somewhere in between, accepting and rejecting simultaneously through the course of their earthly life, thus life becoming a continual tug of war between the forces of good and the forces of evil vying to win over souls, who all have entirely free will to choose. For just as the Garden of Eden represented Heaven on Earth, it was Man's free will to choose disobedience, resulting in the lifelong struggle to regain that heavenly state through the emergence of the spirit incarnate in various prophets and ultimately culminating in Jesus, whose only reason for coming was precisely because Man choose his destiny poorly. For if Adam and Eve did not choose sin, we would today be living in an earthly heavenly realm with no reason for a Messiah to come. This is clear proof that each individual has to choose the destiny of their own soul. Heaven will not be handed to us as a gift. We must choose. The spirit is with us as guide, but it is ultimately up to us to choose the path and destiny of our soul.
While the Catholic Church tends to oppose reincarnation entirely, it is true to point out that some aspects of the teaching do merit validity. Such a fact is seen in scientific research which you are invited to analyze for yourself. Incarnation, on the other hand, may prove more favorable. As a personal example, the bodily deaths of my two cats, who were brothers, ignited me to approach this topic in earnest. Bodily, I point out, because something else happened... Soon after the death of the first, his brother began to act exactly as he did, jumping and affixing onto my upper leg which he had never ever done before. Calling out to my deceased cat individually as I sentimentally did (and still do!) soon found his brother responding in precisely the same manner, with all the specific mannerisms that the deceased had. Recently, the brother passed away and I have taken in two kittens born on my back porch. Incredibly, one of the kittens soon began to act precisely as my recently deceased cat did, exhibiting the identical mannerisms and even running to me when the deceased's name was called from afar. As any long-time animal owner knows, you become fine-tuned to readily spot and know behavior in your loved pet. I will also point out that these behaviors were entirely unique, not the usual, common behaviors that all felines exhibit. And I am also rather objectively scientific as you can see from this website's content, exposing issues for meticulous consideration. So, in the same way I propose, have these deceased animals been reincarnated? I think not. Rather, I believe the spirit in them, not the soul, has possibly incarnated. For nothing is impossible in the realm of the creator, rather, all that is good continues forever. Remember that Christ in the spirit actually existed before being born in the flesh as referenced in Jn 17:5. Certainly proof of Incarnation. Edgar Cayce points out that Christ's incarnate spirit may have been manifested in the prophets and wise thinkers of old, certainly valid if you keep in mind that the spirit is the essence of God.
The answer to the mystery of incarnation and reincarnation remains most intriguing. But as we've pointed out, no faith belief is entirely accurate. What we see instead are percentages of probabilities amidst the partly cloudy, partly sunny view. What is your opinion?
Totus Tuus Opus Dei asks us to think about the meaning of life. One need not necessarily be a religious or spiritual person. For even the atheist is actually one who thinks about life and firmly takes a stance. For those that scoff and do not consider one iota of what their lives are ultimately about, be it a continuation after death or ceasing with the stopping of a heartbeat, their lives essentially exist in vain. How do they then differ from the mosquito on the wall, or the ant on the ground? They arise, eat, work, play and occupy an entirely secular mindset day after day.
I tell you, even the atheist and animal will find themselves in the heavenly realm before these people do. Rather, approach the mystery of life and death with an inquisitive mind...