Journeys of a Catholic Poster Girl

Surrender is hard.

OK , we knew that. If anything about Christianity was easy, then a lot more people would be good Christians–myself included.

Today at Mass we heard the end of John Chapter 6, which we’ve been reading all month, also known as the “Bread of Life” discourse, where Jesus gives us great Eucharistic theology–”My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink”.

John tells us that many of the disciples stopped following Jesus after this–the saying was “too hard”. But when Jesus spoke to the twelve–”Do you also wish to go away?” Peter said, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of everlasting life.”

Peter is an interesting apostle. He can be brilliant–here, and when he says that Jesus is “The Christ, the son of God”, in Matthew, –and he can also be breathtakingly stupid–telling Jesus not to go to Jerusalem, “thinking as men think”–or just way out of it–wanting to build the booths for Moses, Jesus and Elijah on Tabor.

But the thing I like about Peter is that he falls, and then gets back up and does it all again. He denies Jesus three times, but then goes on to be Pope, and to be crucified. Peter is entirely, wonderfully human.

When I think about surrender, I think about what Peter said in today’s gospel. Where else can we go? If you are Christian, you believe that Jesus is “The way, the truth, and the life.” That’s it. No other way. Only Jesus can take us to the Father. So we follow him, because he has the words that Peter was talking about–the ones of life.

But to really follow him, we have to give everything, and follow him. Sell it all, leave family and friends, and, most importantly, leave behind self.

But we like ourselves, don’t we? For the most part, anyway. There are things I don’t like about myself, but for the most part, I like how God made me. And if God made me this way, then why do I have to give it up, to follow him?

Again, we get Peter and Jesus:

[Jesus] said to [Peter] the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, “Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” (Jesus) said to him, “Feed my sheep.  Amen, amen, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to dress yourself and go where you wanted; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.” (Jn. 21:17-18, NAB)

Where you do not want to go.

That’s the thing. It’s not that we mind “dying” to self, if that means giving up those irritating habits, and becoming a “nicer” Person, someone who “does what Jesus would do.”

But dying to self means just that–dying to it. In Peter’s case, he would be led to a cross, just like Jesus.

And I think we know what surrender means. And we don’t want to go.

It’s hard to surrender. I haven’t done it. I might think I’ve done it, but then someone reminds me that everything comes in God’s time, and God is in control, and then I sit there going, “yup. I’m dumb.”

He knows everything. And I know just about nothing. But I always think I know better. Just like Peter.

From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer greatly from the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed and on the third day be raised.

Then Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, “God forbid, Lord! No such thing shall ever happen to you.”

He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.”

Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me.

For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

What profit would there be for one to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? Or what can one give in exchange for his life?

For the Son of Man will come with his angels in his Father’s glory, and then he will repay everyone according to his conduct.

A thought from Samuel Adams:

A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy…While the people are virtuous, they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first internal or external invader…If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security.

Today’s mind-blowing Biblical Studies idea: 

“Reading the Scriptures is like going to Communion.” –Dr. Miletic. 

We were talking about the Catechism and doing what we would call in the English Department a “Close reading”, where we read the text and then dig around in it for its meaning. The text at hand was paragraph 103, which says that we (The Church) venerates Scripture as it does Christ’s body. 

Dr. Miletic then asked us for the connection between the two. We hemmed and hawed. 

“What do you do when you go to communion?”
Receive Jesus–body, soul, divinity.

“Yes. And that is also what you do when you read Scripture. Reading Scripture is like going to Communion.” 

I was blown away. Really. I had never thought of this that way. “The scriptures are sacramental,” he continued. “That’s why only an ordained minister can read the Gospel.”  

Wow. The same thing happens we when we read scripture as happens when we receive Communion! And I have a Bible around all the time!

I will be reading more of my Bible, that’s for sure.

“God has brought you here to stretch you.” –Dr. Miletic

So today at around 5:00 I went back to school. 

A big box, delivered via UPS, was waiting for me in my apartment office. Inside was one spiral bound course text and two binders–one for Principles of Biblical Study I and one for Sacraments. I opened the box rather ceremoniously, with scissors, as opposed to my usual grab and tear open method. 

I read the course materials, the Distance Learning Guidelines and ‘how to submit assignments.” Biblical studies has no exams, just papers, which increase in the difficulty (the first was really just a worksheet!), culminating in a 10 page exegesis paper, which is basically a close reading of a Biblical text. Sacraments, on the other hand, has no papers, just a midterm and a final. I had to order the documents of Vatican II, which I should get on Saturday, so I decided to start Biblical Studies (211/511) today. 

I found a blue legal pad left over from my days at Cap, grabbed a mechanical pencil, and put the CD into my DVD player. Perched on my rocking chair I selected the first lecture. 

It was great. I felt like I was right in the classroom with them, on the first day of some balmy August. The professor, Dr. Miletic, is 1) VERY easy to understand , 2) wickedly intelligent and 3) very funny. My hand was flying over the notepad as I took notes. It was incredibly exciting, invigorating, astounding. 

He talked about the usual things–class expectations, the syllabus, the texts for the class. Then, since the class focuses on the Old Testament (OT), he talked about how it came into being–first in Hebrew, then translated into Greek by Alexander the Great around 330 AD. He discussed how the OT and the NT are intertwined, how you cannot really know one without the other. We even talked about the hypostatic union! (which is the idea that Jesus is both God and Man–he is an invisible, eternal person who also took on a finite human nature).  He was great. All the ideas flowed seamlessly into another. And then the class was over.

The assignments were: start the worksheet (asssingment 1–I actually finished it, go me!) Read 40 paragraphs of the CCC on Sacred Scripture (101-141), and then read Dr. Miletic’s handout on what we just read in the CCC (very helpful). Then, start reading Genesis. 

OK so I got through the first three things. CCC, handout, worksheet. Done. Filed the worksheet to be mailed in when it was due. 

Then I picked up my Bible. For my MA I’m using the Ignatius version since I love the RSV translation. I thought, well, I’ll just read until I get bored. Genesis is 50 chapters and I have weeks to read it. (We have a long time with Genesis. Then we’re reading like a book of the Bible every two days.) 

I picked up the pencil and notepad again and began to read. I read the whole thing, noting typology (where Jesus is prefigured in the NT), the covenant, and made a rough timeline–who was born when, who married who, when Joseph was sold into slavery in Egypt. Which of Jacob’s wives had which of his 13 kids. 

When I was finished I wanted to go on to Exodus–much like I wanted to go on to the next lecture. But I didn’t. I typed up my notes (might come in handy later) and checked off the assignments. 

Tomorrow I’ve got my first Sacraments lecture. There’s no actual assigned reading, so I’m not quite sure how this will work, but whatever. We’ll find out. 

On the tentative schedule I made, I will be done with both these classes in mid-September. I have six months from the date the courses are mailed to finish, so my completion date was early-to-mid November. I LOVE being ahead! Basically I set it up like so: MWF–Sacraments; T Th–Biblical Studies. Now if Sacraments ends up being longer than 50 minutes, I’ll switch, but I think this will work well. Biblical Studies has a ton of reading with it, so I’ll probably need more time to get that all done as I get to things like “Numbers/Deuteronomy in two days”.

A handicapped child, even if it is only one among a thousand healthy ones, has its own life to live, as a unique being, alongside that of its parents and its brothers and sisters. Why does God “allow this”? Let us beware of “glib” answers. Where the question “Why?” is concerned, only the response of solidarity can convince anyone. I, too, might have been this handicapped child. It has the same human existence and the same dignity as I do. It is a living challenge to me: Be the kind of person to me that you would wish for if you were in my place. How much love has come into the world by this painful means!

–Chirstoph Cardinal Schonborn, Chance or Purpose?: Creation, Evolution, and a Rational Faith (102-103)

From Sunday’s New York Times magazine is this article about a Pentecostal preacher who is also running the Democratic National Convention: (emphses mine)

F.I.A. has also financed the faith outreach of state parties, sometimes in striking ways. In Alabama, the pro-life party chairman was given F.I.A. money to publish a “Faith and Values Voters Guide” in local newspapers just before Election Day in 2006. The 12-page insert provided the religious narratives of statewide Democratic candidates — “I was richly blessed in my life with parents who raised me in a Christian home. . . .” — and concluded with a Democratic “covenant for the future.” The covenant pledged to “require public schools to offer Bible literacy as part of their curriculum” and made at least two vows that run counter to positions of the national party: to “pass a constitutional amendment confirming that all life is a gift from God and should be protected; and that life begins at conception” and to “defeat any efforts to redefine marriage or provide the benefits of marriage to a same-sex union.”

Daughtry sounded surprised when I read her these vows. Though she is a biblical literalist who sees no problem with teaching creation theory side by side with evolution — “For me, the Bible is history” — she, following the teaching of her father’s church, is also pro-choice. “God allows us to choose in the biggest matter,” she said, “whether to accept Him in our lives. How then can we take away choice on other profound issues? We don’t believe the government should interfere.” Hearing Alabama’s covenant, she said right away that F.I.A. has not vetted everything the state parties have done with its money. Then she leaned heavily on the poles of the big tent: “The wonderful thing about the Democratic Party is that we have room for all kinds of opinions.”

Does anyone else see the massive,inherent contradiction here?
“[s]he is a biblical literalist……[who] is also pro-choice.”

Um, isn’t one of the commandments, “Thou Shalt Not Kill”?
I fail to understand how people can put the well being of animals and plants above the well-being of a baby. It just fails me.

As Jesus passed by he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “Neither he not his parents sinned; it is so that the works of God might be made visible through him.

Today’s Gospel is my favorite Gospel passage, since it reflects so neatly upon my own experience. Many people today share the same feelings as the disciples–if you have an illness, or are experiencing difficulties and trials, you must have “done something” to deserve them. Because God is a good and just God, so why would anyone endure trials or sufferings if they didn’t deserve them?

A corollary is also seen–people who are “oppressed and afflicted” (Isaiah 52) wonder what they have to done to offend God. “Why me, God?” can be a frequent cry (see the Book of Job). And here, Jesus provides the answer: “so that the works of God might be made visible through him.”

In Catholicism, Suffering is not Suffering for its own sake. As John Paul The Great wrote in his encyclical Salvifici Doloris (On the Meaning of Suffering) in 1984:

The Redeemer suffered in place of man and for man. Every man has his own share in the Redemption. Each one is also called to share in that suffering through which all human suffering has also been redeemed. In bringing about the Redemption through suffering, Christ has also raised human suffering to the level of the Redemption. Thus each man, in his suffering, can also become a sharer in the redemptive suffering of Christ.

In the Way of the Cross message of 2005, John Paul invokes Paul:

The adoration of the Cross directs us to a commitment that we cannot shirk: the mission that St. Paul expressed in these words: In my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the Church. (Colossians 1:24).

So here we have some of the basis of the Church’s doctrine of “Redemptive Suffering.” It is not a waste to suffer. God sees and sympathizes with us. All of us suffer to different degrees–spiritually, physically, mentally, etc. But this doesn’t mean that God doesn’t love us. Mother Teresa once said that in suffering, Jesus is bringing you close enough to Him so that He can embrace you, He can kiss you. Suffering brings you closer to God.

Sure, there are ways we’d like to get closer without actually suffering. I don’t know anyone who wakes up and says, “Yes! Today’s another chance to suffer! Woohoo!” But God does not abandon us. Even when we think he has–as Jesus did, on the cross, “My God, My God, why have you abandoned me?”–he has not. Through His Passion and Death, Jesus has been through everything a human being can endure. He knows what we are feeling.

Our suffering can bring others to him. When I was in the ICU in 2001, friends that hadn’t been to church in years went and prayed. The same thing happened during my transplant. I’m not aware of any Great Conversions from these experiences, but my circumstances brought other people before God, and made them aware of Him and His dominion over us. My talking and normal activities hadn’t done that–it took something very, very dramatic to get these kids into a church. Maybe they haven’t been since; I don’t know. But I know they were there at least once, asking God for a favor. Sometimes the “God as ATM” theory is the first way you get people to go to church–ask God for something and see what happens.

God’s work can be made manifest through you–but you have to consent to it.

…from the third.
I’m talking about St. Augustine and his Confessions.
Most people that are into classical/theological lit have heard of it. A few of us have read it in its entirety. I tried once, and failed miserably. I just didn’t get it. What was everyone raving about?
Now I know. It’s been two years since I last tried to read it, and now, armed with a new translation, I have discovered the incredible wisdom and richness of Augustinian prose.
Augustine is far from a ivory-tower saint. This is a guy who dabbled with women (having a child with one of them), calling himself a “slave of lust”, while being engaged to a girl (and I do mean girl; he had to wait until she was 12 to marry her. He was over 20 by this time.). He stole, caroused, got drunk, and pursued many other activities familiar to twenty-first century frat boys. His mother, St. Monica, certainly earned her “St.” with him as a son. He left Hippo to go to Rome and Milan, teaching rhetoric to support his high living lifestyle.
Yet, somehow, God found him (in no small matter due to his mother’s unceasing prayers), he became a Christian, and, eventually, Bishop of Hippo (in North Africa).

I haven’t finished this re-through yet, but I am enthralled. This should be required reading. (Nerdy book note: PLEASE get the translation I linked to above, if you’re going to read this. It is readable, elegant and VASTLY superior to the other one I tried, which I believe was published by Signet.)

Late have I loved you, beauty so old and so new; late have I loved you. And see, you were within and I was in the external world and sought you there, and in my unlovely state I plunged into those lovely created things which you made. You were with me, and I was not with you. The lovely things kept me far from you, though if they did not have their existence in you, they had no existence at all. You called out and shattered my deafness. You were radiant and resplendent, you put flight to by blindness. You were fragrant, and I drew in my breath and now pant after you. I tasted you, and I feel but hunger and thirst for you. You touched me, and I am set on fire to attain the peace which is yours. (Book X, 38)

A bumper sticker seen on I-70 E, heading home today:

“God is not a Republican….or a Democrat”

(I’m going to leave out he part where the “or a Democrat” was in really small letters at the bottom.)

OK, fine, I doubt that Jesus would endorse all the current policies of the GOP. But both JPII and B XVI have said that capitalism offers man the most freedom to be what he truly was meant to be. I don’t need to tell you how JPII felt about Communism, do I? Or B XVI on Marxism?

But I find it very, very difficult to believe that the Dems can, in any honest way, claim God’s on their side. * They are pro-abortion. They kill babies. End of story. Even if you’re a pro-life Dem, you are voting for people who vote to kill babies.
Say what you want about the GOP, but we don’t do that.**

*Although Ohio’s Democrat, Methodist-minister Governor said that “I don’t read about anything that Jesus said about abortion specifically.” (Me thinks the pastor needs to brush up on his 10 commandments.)

**Yes, there are pro-abortion Repubs. The thing is, they tend not to get too far nationally. And more locally–well that’s anyone’s guess. But pro-life is the party platform.

“Through Heaven’s Eyes”–Stephen Schwartz, The Prince of Egypt

A single thread in a tapestry
Though its color brightly shines,
Can never see its purpose
In the pattern of the grand design.

And the stone that sits on the very top
Of the mountain’s mighty face
Doesn’t think it’s more important
Than the stones that form the base

So how can you see what your life is worth, or where your value lies?
You can never see through the eyes of man…
You must look at your life
Look at your life through Heaven’s eyes.

A lake of gold in a desert sand
Is less than a cool, fresh spring.
And to one lost sheep, a shepherd boy
Is greater than the richest king.

If a man lose everything he owns,
Has he truly lost his worth?
Or is it the beginning
Of a new and brighter birth?

So how can you measure the worth of a man
In wealth, or strength or size?
In how much he gained, or how much he gave?
The answer will come
The answer will come to him who tries
To look at his life through Heaven’s eyes…

And that’s why we share all we have with you,
Though there’s little to be found.
When all you’ve got is nothing, there’s a lot to go around.

No life can escape being blown about
By the winds of change or chance
And though you’ll never know all the steps
You must learn to join the dance.
You must learn to join the dance…
So how do you judge what a man is worth
By what he builds or buys?
You can never see with your eyes on earth
Look through Heaven’s eyes!
Look at your life
Look at your life
Look at your life through Heaven’s eyes!