The Rational Mind

Love these guys.
Yes, all three of them, Mr D. too. We're, um... kinda commanded to.
So God bless Richard Dawkins.
(While I'm at it, "and God bless Mrs. Mantel, and everyone who ever lived named 'Cromwell,' and that idiot in the Cadillac who tailgated me when I was already over the speed-limit and that florist that cut me off at the light.")
But Conall and Donall rule! COME HOME, GUYS!!!!!!!

"Mawwiage.... mawwiage!" and "Showing Your Work"

 

Over at the Nominally Catholic Rundown a writer manages to gratuitously, (yeah, I split that... sue me,)  impugn the motives of priests who hold different ecclesiological viewpoints than herself, ("careerist minions," as if such people exist only in more conservative swaths of the Church,)
to imply that only the low-born are guilty of inebriated spousal abuse, ("disastrously married to Joe Six-Pack, who comes home drunk every night and beats her,")
to cast aspersions upon anyone who has respect for the Law and doctrine,
("the clerics who work for Müller [emphasis added] look for ... mistakes. There's got to be a law in there somewhere, and if not, we'll write a decree or something,")
and finally to remind us that we have not always been allowed a glimpse of the inside of the sausage factory, ("Francis has opened the living room doors, and now we are talking about that fat elephant that bedevils so many lives.")
Now, in general I'm a big fan of acknowledging the housebound elephants, with doing which, we would be giving each other the, "Ooooh, was that YOU??!???" look whilst holding our noses.

But in the case of Church teachings, which are, I will repeat, A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH, not mere protocols and procedures?
I have a friend whose conversational idiosyncrasies leave the rest of our circle.... let's just say confused as to what was really meant, or decided upon in any discussion.
"What time do you want to leave?" someone will ask.
Answers she, well, lets see. Three o'clock. Full stop.
"Okay."
But after a beat she will continue, Yes, three is when I have to be at such and such, so we'd have to leave here by two to be finished at thus and so in time....
By this point, others will begin to understand that there has not actually been what you could rightly call an "answer", she is, as they used to say in math class, "showing her work."
.... Now if we stop at thus and so on the way, we'll need an extra 15 minutes...
.... But I can take care of that later in the week...
.... Last time it didn't take as long, so it will probably only take three quarters of an hour to get there....
.... But school is out...
(Does that mean more or less time is required?)
.... So we'll need time to park.....
.....But not as much as we would have....
.... So let's leave only a little earlier. Full stop.
WHAT TIME DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE???!?@?#????
Oh, you know what, it's faster with a parking pass.
WHAT TIME DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE???!?@?#????
Anyone have one?
WHAT TIME DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE???!?@?#????
Well what I said.
WHAT TIME DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE???!?@?#????
It is perfectly possible for three different people to have been left with three different impressions of what she has actually decided regarding when we will leave.

The Church, as a whole, the Faithful?
We are the circle of friends.
The Synod?
That's my idiosyncratic friend.

I know the Nominally Catholic Rundown has already mocked the notion of confusion having been sown by the way in which the hierarchy under Francis is approaching things, but I think that was only because David Gibson wanted to mock Cardinal Burke.

I think the Church is plenty confused by the Synod Fathers insisting on showing their work, scribbling all over the damned page, crossing out, whiting out, erasing, and filling the page with so many nermals and symbols that we are at a loss to know what was actually done, what was actually decided. (And dishonest  reporting has not lessened the confusion. I'm talking to you, Nominally Catholic Rundown .)
Holy Father, most of us just want to know,
WHAT TIME DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE???!?@?#????

Or if you prefer the Nominally Catholic Rundown's analogy, please, Holy Father, keep the door to the living room shut until you've cleaned up the elephant dung.

"Ladies and Gentlemen, It's Like I Have a Twin!"

... to quote David Letterman.

Rebecca Hamilton is apologizing to everyone whose stories of Wackadoodle Masses she had doubted.

I've bored people to tears with my mea culpas in that regard.
I had it so good in my home parish, and a local monastery, and finally college years spent in a large city where the general impersonality of most liturgies served to protect them from the peculiarities of even Paulist perpetrators.
Idiosyncrasies are often obscured by the complexities urban life, the sensory overload one experiences in a giant metropolis.

Anyway, I. Also. Had. No. Idea.

But unlike Mrs. Hamilton, boor that I am, I never left my apology at that.
No, I had to say things like, I'm so sorry I just thought all you trads were crazy! or, "Wow, until recently I assumed y'all were making a big honkin' fuss over NOTHING!

Strange.
No one ever seems grateful when you tell him that your opinion of him has improved, that you no longer labor under the misapprehension that he and all those like him are either mentally ill or professional victims.

Go figure.

By the way, there have been a couple of those videos circulating in the Catholic blogosphere lately, one of a couple tangoing about the sanctuary, another of a man in monk's robes twirling around the altar.
I always think when I first see references o links to such that they are either faked, Episcopalian, or a remnant of an older, goofier decade in Catholicism.
But these latest have been real, and not all that old.

Those who have conniptions at the Reform of the Reform movement usually react to complaints about this sort of thing in one of two ways -- first, the complainers are lying.
But if faced with incontrovertible evidence, they suggest that the complainers were looking to complain and to that end went out searching for gotcha moments and should have stayed the hell home in their own parish.

To my chagrin, I sometimes fear myself more invested in weekday Mass than in the Sunday liturgy, since liturgists and musicians usually save their best efforts at crazy for the weekends.

But not always, she realized, after leaving when several couples began waltzing in the aisles.

Catechesis and Liturgy - a "Virtuous Circle"

When it comes to truly important aspects of our lives, matters of life and death, I think it is often impossible to define what is cause and what is effect. Participating in the Eucharistic Sacrifice, for instance, (and this is TRULY a matter of life and death, our eternal life, our salvation from deat!,) so we are often reminded, is the "source and summit" of our Christianity.
Orthopraxis both creates/nurtures, and proceeds from/is the apex of, our Faith.
So it is only natural that catechesis and the liturgy are locked in the relationship they enjoy, each both creating and resulting from the other, part of a virtuous circle, if you will.
Anyway, can't attend the conference in question, but who WOULDN'T want to be at these sessions? (Maybe some will be made available on line? transcripts? links to article's parallelling the presentations, Drs., Frs., et al? we shall see...)
I heart the Liturgical Institute.

Speakers and Topics

"A Catechetical Response to an Escalating Crisis: Sacramental Practice in the Twenty-First Century," Dr. James Pauley, Franciscan University of Steubenville
 
"Recovering the Meaning of the Liturgical Act and the Significance of Active Participation," Fr. Douglas Martis, The Liturgical Institute
 
"From the Sign to the Mystery: Foundations for a Liturgical Catechesis,"
Dr. Petroc Willey, Franciscan University of Steubenville

"Liturgical Catechesis: Practical Considerations"
Dr. James Pauley, Franciscan University of Steubenville

“The Liturgical Encounter and the Child: Insights from Catechesis of the Good Shepherd,” Mary Mirrione, National Director for the National Association of the Catechesis of the Good Shepherd

“Liturgy's Vital Role in Discipleship Ministry with Teenagers,” Jim Beckman, The Augustine Institute, Denver

“The RCIA Process: The Church's Measure for Liturgical Catechesis,” William Keimig, St. Mary’s of Piscataway, Clinton, Maryland

Speaking of words, and media and my computer's reaction to Patheos....

About the last named I spoke too soon. It's teaching my computer a tarantella or fandango or something.
About the second, CNN was the source cited by Fr Longenecker.
And about the first --

When does a news source, in describing a law, decide to use the phrase, "what it describes as"?

Would you describe those as words as "neutral"?

A writer has all kinds of nearly legitimate ways to slant what purports to be straight news rather than editorial.
Some, like "allegedly" may simply be for self-protection - or they may be expressly to cast doubt on what they have never the less chosen to report.

Headlines that are questions, are an oldie but goodie.

Deciding which of two sides gets the last word is one of the most effective yet unimpeachable, after all, someone has to get the last word, right?

Oh, well...
I suppose "what the law describes as" isn't as bad as, say.... "what the law laughably refers to as."

Yeah. CNN isn't taking sides here.

"Atrocious"?

Speaking of Fr Longenecker,

Kansas Governor and Catholic convert, Sam Brownback signs a law banning “dismemberment abortion.”....

Planned Parenthood Advocates of Kansas and Mid-Missouri sharply criticized the move, which it described as the latest in a series of “extreme political measures aimed at denying women access to health care and at undermining their decision-making ability.”

“Kansas is now not only the sole state with this atrocious law; it also now has more restrictions on abortion than any state in the U.S.,” the advocacy group said in a Facebook post.

As my friend Inigo would say, I don' thin' that word means hwhat you thin' it means...

The good Father continues,

The reason this law is such a great step forward is not only that it bans dismemberment abortion, but it throws the reality of abortion right up front into the spotlight.

To be against this law is to be in favor of cutting unborn babies up in little pieces while still alive in their own mother’s womb.

To be against this law is to be in favor of sticking sharp knives into the womb, cutting off  arms and lets and then sucking the parts out of the mother’s body.

To be against this law is to be in favor of putting another tool into the womb to find the baby’s head then crush it in a kind of nutcracker.

This law states quite clearly what late term abortions are all about.

Patheos

Hey, all of a sudden, Patheos isn't provoking St Vitus Dance in my hp!
Thank you! (I'm assuming since it stopped in mid-session, and I haven't done any updates lately, it is they who deserve the credit.)
I am especially glad to be able to read Fr Longenecker.

Well, you see, there are many different genres...

... of literature represented in the Bible Rolling Stone. Some of it is historical, you know, facts, but some is poetry, and some is editorial and some is correspondance, and some is collections of parables... you know, where a greater truth than that of the mere facts is what matters.

"Fact-checking.... what is 'fact-checking'?"

"More and more reporters now work outside of big, confident institutions. The details of what it means to check facts or seek comment aren’t always obvious to them.” -- Steve Coll

No!
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.

The speaker, by the way is the dean of the school of journalism at a university which trains and gives degrees to "reporters."
And the reporter of the story -- which I fear has set back the cause of women and victims and decency in this county by decades, decades -- is not a kid, forty-ish.

Does the Arcus Foundation's Grant of $120,000 to the Religion Newswriters Foundation Matter?

This article in the National Catholic Register certainly presumes that it does.
Arcus, which describes itself as,

dedicated to the idea that people can live in harmony with one another and the natural world. We believe respect for diversity among peoples and in nature is essential to a positive future for our planet and all its inhabitants, 

awards grants as a means of

Investing in the emerging leaders and activists who will guide the LGBT movement over the next generation. ....Organizations that received funding include several that work across sectors, bringing the LGBT-rights movement together with racial-justice, immigrant -rights, and reproductive-rights struggles.

These organzation, Arcus claims, will,

support Arcus’ goal of increasing the capacity and influence of pro-LGBT religious leaders and advocates around the globe.

Among which organizations, it numbers the Religious Newswriters' Foundation, in hopes it will

[Foster] a culture of LGBT understanding through the media...[by] produc[ing] feature stories and blog posts about religion and LGBT communities of color.

RNF is the "educational and charitable arm" of the Religion Newswriters Association, a non-profit professional association which tries to promote better reporting on religion in media and to help journalists who cover religion, (who, it must be granted, are often terribly ignorant of their subject,) do so

with balance, accuracy and insight. 

The Religion News Service, a non-profit affiliate of the RNA, is probably it's most public face, for the very reason that many media organizations have no one on staff with much understanding of religion -- the RNS is there with stories and headlines ready for the printing, presumably demonstrating this "balance and accuracy" oh, and "insight."
Now the Foundation, (the "educaitonal and charitable" person of this trinity,) has policies and ethics and by-laws. It won't take money from just anyone.

All gifts are accepted on a case-by-case basis. RNF reserves the right to decline or return any donation which, in the opinion of the board or the board's designees, may conflict with these principles or otherwise damage the integrity of the organization. Gifts from explicitly religious institutions such as denominations or judicatures shall not be accepted.

One would, no, I would presume this is intended to preserve not only an objectivity regarding its work, but also the appearance of objectivity.
Any lack of same would be most evident in that public face of the trinity, RNS, I should think.
Is it evident?  How do you see it?

RNF shall strive for an array of individual donors, so as not to be, or appear to be, overly dependent on donations from any particular sector, ideological perspective or type of individuals beyond the journalism community.
RNF's board, volunteer leadership, and staff are to remain in control of all programming, including agenda, speakers and topics, and no outside funding sources may be represented [emphasis supplied] as sponsors or co-sponsors of RNF events, without prior approval of RNF's executive director. 

This phrasing seem to me to acknowledge that perception juuuuuust might be reality, so there are times it is more important to them that knowledge of their funding sources clear advocating for something or other not get out, than that they not partner with advocacy groups.
That may or may not be a fair construction on my part.
Both RNA and RNF have by-laws concerning conflict of interest, but they seem concerned with monetary, (or easily converted to monetary,) gain, not advocacy; advocacy, say, that might influence the objectivity of opinions that might be dishonestly presented as as facts, or, say, encourage lying in an effort to besmirch the reputation of an advocate for a position other than that of the "journalist."

It is not for me to say, (oh my, I'm turning into Francis Urquart!) that cash, say in amounts like $120,000, from an advocacy group to the parent organization of a "news source" striving to "inform and illuminate" would be likely to influence that source's objectivity, or give the appearance of a lack thereof.

It is not for me to say that any of this matters.

But the Arcus Foundation, which, to remind you, gives grant for the express purpose of,

"investing in the emerging leaders and activists who will guide the LGBT movement" 

sure seems to think it's worth trying....

"Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes."

(Or, as Himself and I like to quote, in our shared shtick, "I am large. I contain pie.")

I well recognize the paradox inherent in my admiration of both the Noble Richard II and the Saintly Thomas More, one of the chief fabricators of the myth of Tudor Benevolence and Yorkist Villainy.

                    

"Jackal Hall"

I admit that I was not disposed to like Wolf Hall.

Seriously, making Cromwell the hero and More a villain?

(Though I suppose if you want to paint St Thomas More as an evil, humorless zealot, Anton Lesser's casting is a stroke of genius - the tight-rope he walked on Endeavour, between prissy, hateful bureaucrat and prissy sympathetic colleague was masterfully done.)

I have read only a little of Mantel's wok, and while I can admire her prose, I despise her for her undisguised and uninformed contempt for me.
(Yes, for me, for me personally and for you too, if you call yourself Catholic.)
And I am disposed, (I, as much as she, am the product of my prejudices,) to agree with most of what Simon Schama has to say:

It grates a bit to accept that millions now think of Thomas Cromwell as a much-maligned, misunderstood pragmatist from the school of hard knocks who got precious little thanks for doing Henry VIII’s dirty work. When I was doing research for A History of Britain, the documents shouted to high heaven that Thomas Cromwell was, in fact, a detestably self-serving, bullying monster who perfected state terror in England, cooked the evidence, and extracted confessions by torture. He also unleashed small-minded bureaucratic “visitors” to humiliate, evict and dispossess thousands of monks and nuns.

An aside, I recently read something, (which I will not bother to find and link because it is wrong, and I don't want to give them another click,) discussing the economics of Henry's reign which described the "windfall," of the proceeds from the dissolution sacking of the monasteries.
Windfalls are the fruit that providence allows you without the work of picking.
If you hack down the tree and strip it bear, the booty is not windfall. Words, people! they MEAN things!
And a further aside, I was also doing some reading on "poor laws," not of that era, but in the process came across quite a bit of scholarship concerning the increased suffering of the poor as a direct result of Henry's and Cromwell's destruction of the greatest charitable network their nation would ever have.
Those "fat, prosperous" monks were not swanning about bedecked in jewels and staging cupcake wars, they were creating and running the hospitals, soup kitchens, homeless shelters and schools of their time.
Anyway, back to Wolf Hall.

But Himself is addicted in equal measure to television and history, so he was looking forward to it very much, and I realized that I should at least give it a look, and try to be objective.

After I got over seeing the Pope playing Wolsey, I was most struck by the seeming contradiction between Cromwell's contempt for Catholicism and the hierarchical Church and his dogged loyalty in the face of some danger to that most political of prelates.
Is it principle? or misjudged, and rather fawning careerism and gratitude toward the mighty who looked upon his lowliness...
And the touching domestic scenes highlighting Cromwell's love for and very progressive attitude toward even his female children really resonated with me.
In fact, they seemed instantly familiar.
Well, there's a reason,

Curiously enough, the man who had really good relations with his children in a totally modern fashion, including giving his daughters the same elaborate education as men; Greek, Latin, mathematics and so on, is the villain as he is presented on Wolf Hall. Thomas More really did have these affectionate relations with his children. In other words, as I understand it, [the Mantel book] is based on a deliberate perversion of fact.

As a loyal supporter of Good King Richard, (III,) I am wary of clever fiction that deceives centuries of people that villains are heroic and good men villainous - hopefully, Mantel's fables will not prove so powerful nor so lasting.
But the tv show?
When all is said and done?
Well, it's gorgeously somber, lots of clever dialogue, remarkably effective score, good casting so far, and Mark Rylance, of whom I have been able to see far too little, is never, and has never been anything short of brilliant, (I couldn't afford Twelfth Night when I was near it, or it me, but some day I'll find a complete recording.) I marvel at his minimalism on screen, wonder how everything he does can be so perfectly calibrated for the camera and how it can work on stage.)

But when all is said and done?
Well, for an entertainment, it commits an even greater sin than lying -

It's a bore!!!!!

" 'Being on the Radio' Rather Than 'Performing on TV' "

This is a reminder of which I was very much in need.
From Zenit:
Singing the texts, at least on solemn occasions, reminds us that this is no ordinary text but God's word to us. It also fixes the attention very much on the word itself.
In 2005 a reader offered the following valuable suggestion based on experience, which I think is worthwhile repeating:

"When teaching lectors and seminarians, I have found it useful to tell them to think of themselves as 'being on the radio' rather than 'performing on TV.' This causes them to think how best to use their voice to proclaim the word of the Lord, undistracted by 'looking at the congregation, facial movements, gestures, etc. This approach allows the reader to take account of the listeners, making as clear as possible the sense of the text in front of them -- when God is speaking via their mouth. It also allows them to realize that the 'spoken word' they speak is God's word alive and so the most important thing. It also avoids the temptation to 'dramatize the text.'"

Himself and I have schtick, (shtick? shtik?) imitation an uber-dramatic lay reader at a parish in, (where else?) a theatrical community, Danversesque enough on the actual reading, hysterically so on "The word........ of....... the Lord," dropping her sepulchral voice at least an octave for the final two word.

And in my former parish I thought there were some usually superb readers who occasional crossed the line into dramatics.

And I've recently noticed that it is something against which I have to guard.
I receive a lot, a LOOOOOOOOOOOOT of compliments on my proclamation, not because I am particularly good but because many of the readers at my current parish are particularly bad.
Besides handling proclamation duties for Communion services in nursing homes, I read from time to time in the parish church itself, and specially in season, our congregation's collective age is really up there.
We have people who place there own devices on the ambo to transmit sound directly to them,  (if  only I had known of such devices when Mom was alive and deprived of really enjoying Church/opera broadcasts/tennis on TV, I'm assuming these same devices can somehow work with television,) and we have far more parishioners who could really use such technology

Besides volume -- I hold still, and insisted when choosing children and teens to chant or lead songs, (I couldn't do anything about those already in the cantor corps when I arrived, or the readers,) that if ones projection is insufficient when un-mic'ed one should not yet be allowed to read or sing with a mic' -- the most important aspects on which to focus are enunciation of consonants, particularly final, (thank you!) and punctuation or prehaps more accurately implied punctuation, (thank you!,) as it indicates phrasing.

Oh, and yeah, look up all those Old Testament names before hand, if necessary. Remarkable numbers of lay readers don't seem to have checked out "their" readings before arriving at church.

And if you're a woman, pitch your voice as low as you comfortably and naturally can. (As we age,hearing loss at hgihger frequencies tends to occur more rapidly than at lower, making men generally easier to hear for an aging population.)

But all of that is martha-ing.
First and last, as a reader or lector, remember that you are praying, not acting.

Get your mary on.

The people I actually know and in many cases see several times a week at Mass nod slightly....

... and murmer, "the peace of Christ be with you....."
The people who don't yet know the "new" words to the Mass, and have no compunction about taking over the "reserved for handicapped seating" seating, seem to want to prove they belong there with bear hugs.
I'm just saying.
(I understand that as that most pathetic of all creatures, the loud-mouthed introvert, this is mostly on me.)
 

While there is little less conversation here, in honor of Him Who is the life of the dead

 Something strange is happening  – there is a great silence on earth today, a great silence and stillness. The whole earth keeps silence because the King is asleep. The earth trembled and is still because God has fallen asleep in the flesh and he has raised up all who have slept ever since the world began. God has died in the flesh and hell trembles with fear.

  He has gone to search for our first parent, as for a lost sheep. Greatly desiring to visit those who live in darkness and in the shadow of death, he has gone to free from sorrow the captives Adam and Eve, he who is both God and the son of Eve. The Lord approached them bearing the cross, the weapon that had won him the victory. At the sight of him Adam, the first man he had created, struck his breast in terror and cried out to everyone: “My Lord be with you all.” Christ answered him: “And with your spirit.” He took him by the hand and raised him up, saying: “Awake, O sleeper, and rise from the dead, and Christ will give you light.”

  I am your God, who for your sake have become your son. Out of love for you and for your descendants I now by my own authority command all who are held in bondage to come forth, all who are in darkness to be enlightened, all who are sleeping to arise. I order you, O sleeper, to awake. I did not create you to be held a prisoner in hell. Rise from the dead, for I am the life of the dead. 

Alas, my Holy Saturday is very noisy indeed.
But it is better to have family than not to have family.
It is better to engage that to be isolated.
It is better to remember than to be alone.
It is better to have too much to do than nothing.

Also in honor of Him who is the life of the dead, I am still going to hold off commenting on a certain interview with a certain atheist in which a certain bishop seems to deny the existence of Hell - not the usual oh, sure there's a hell, but nobody's in it line, but a newish heresy-adjacent theology.
Well, I suppose that it is fitting that Satan be lonely.

Convo in Limbo on Holy Saturday

I read this poem by a religious sister or nun, (not certain which?), a Sister Mary Ada, every year.
I have heard it called "wet", "sentimental"... but it never fails to move me.
I've probably posted it before.
We often think of eternity, and of eternal life "stretching out," into the "future," "ahead" of what we perceive now - but it is important to remember that God's grasp of eternity is not so limited.
Think of all that, of all who seem to have gone "before."
Because... eternity.
(Since my own Father died long, long ago, and one brother predeceased my Mother, in the past few years the ending has struck me a bit too forcefully, but it will get better.)

The ancient greyness shifted
Suddenly and thinned
Like mist upon the moors
Before a wind.
An old, old prophet lifted
A shining face and said :
“He will be coming soon.
The Son of God is dead;
He died this afternoon.”

A murmurous excitement stirred
All souls.
They wondered if they dreamed ---
Save one old man who seemed
Not even to have heard.

And Moses standing,
Hushed them all to ask
If any had a welcome song prepared.
If not, would David take the task?
And if they cared
Could not the three young children sing
The Benedicite, the canticle of praise
They made when God kept them from perishing
In the fiery blaze?

A breath of spring surprised them,
Stilling Moses’ words.
No one could speak, remembering
The first fresh flowers,
The little singing birds.
Still others thought of fields new ploughed
Or apple trees
All blossom - boughed.
Or some, the way a dried bed fills
With water
Laughing down green hills.
The fisherfolk dreamed of the foam
On bright blue seas.
The one old man who had not stirred
Remembered home.

And there He was
Splendid as the morning sun and fair
As only God is fair.
And they, confused with joy,
Knelt to adore
Seeing that he wore
Five crimson stars
He never had before.

No canticle at all was sung.
None toned a psalm, or raised a greeting song.
A silent man alone
Of all that throng
Found tongue ----
Not any other.
Close to His heart
When the embrace was done,
Old Joseph said,
“How is Your Mother,
How is Your Mother, Son?”

                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me! I led you out of Egypt, from slavery to freedom, but you led your Savior to the cross.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me!
       Holy is God!
    Holy and strong!
    Holy immortal One, have mercy on us!
For forty years I led you safely through the desert. I fed you with manna from heaven,
and brought you to a land of plenty; but you led your Savior to the cross.
       Holy is God!
    Holy and strong!
    Holy immortal One, have mercy on us!
What more could I have done for you. I planted you as my fairest vine, but you yielded only bitterness:
when I was thirsty you gave me vinegar to drink, and you pierced your Savior with a lance.
       Holy is God!
    Holy and strong!
    Holy immortal One, have mercy on us!
For your sake I scourged your captors and their firstborn sons, but you brought your scourges down on me.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me!
 I led you from slavery to freedom and drowned your captors in the sea, but you handed me over to your high priests.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me!
 I opened the sea before you, but you opened my side with a spear.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me!
I led you on your way in a pillar of cloud, but you led me to Pilate's court.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me! 
I bore you up with manna in the desert, but you struck me down and scourged me.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me!
I gave you saving water from the rock, but you gave me gall and vinegar to drink.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me!
For you I struck down the kings of Canaan. but you struck my head with a reed.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me!
I gave you a royal scepter, but you gave me a crown of thorns.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me!
I raised you to the height of majesty, but you have raised me high on a cross.
                   My people, what have I done to you  How have I offended you? Answer me! 

 

Divine Liturgy

Holy Thursday in an eastern Rite - what could be better, what could be holier?

"Holy Thursday"

Is this a holy thing to see
In a rich and fruitful land,
Babes reduced to misery,
Fed with cold and usurous hand?

Is that trembling cry a song?
Can it be a song of joy?
And so many children poor?
It is a land of poverty!

And their sun does never shine,
And their fields are bleak and bare,
And their ways are filled with thorns:
It is eternal winter there.

For where'er the sun does shine,
And where'er the rain does fall,
Babes should never hunger there,
Nor poverty the mind appall.

 Not the Holy Thursday Blake had in mind, I believe, but today's a good time nonetheless to be reminded of the second most important direction in which a Christian' duty lies.

“If I have spoken wrongly, bear witness to the wrong; but if I have spoken rightly, why do you...?"

I wish someone, anyone, would show me in the actual words of the hand book  for Catholic school teachers in the San Fran Archdiocese, where the "hate," "judging," words  contrary to "love, acceptance, respect and dignity, " things in opposition to what "Jesus said," "harm," failure to "welcome," are.

Pope Visits With Prison Inmates

In 2011.

An Italian man ... asked if the Holy Father’s gesture would also be recognised by political leaders in its simplicity, so that dignity be restored to all, including detainees. The Pope replied that while his visit is of a personal nature aimed at showing the men and women of Rebibbia his genuine concern for them, it is also a public gesture to draw attention to the problems and difficulties of Italian prisons.

You must remember, it was in the news at the time.
Oh, that one....

And this one, as a matter of fact.

And this one:

Now here's an odd thing - Popes? they all have different personalities, different styles, different strengths... but these all believe the same Truths, and preach the same Gospel.

What does change is the World, and the way it receives them, and the way tries to bend or distort  their message to suit itself.
But the prince of the World will, ultimately, lose.

And I, when I am lifted up 

from the earth, 

will draw all men 

to myself.