VIRTUE'S NATURAL BENEFITS

Here’s the evidence that virtue can benefit your mental and physical health,in the form of six science-backed benefits of practicing a virtuous life:

1.  Better sleep habits

If you find yourself tossing and turning at night and discover that counting sheep doesn’t seem to solve the problem, living a virtuous and purpose-driven life may be the perfect, drug-free solution for your insomnia. A recent study found that participants who had a purpose for their life experienced fewer sleep disorders and problems and also experienced better quality of rest. The people who participated in the sleep study found that their higher sense of purpose prevented stress and anxiety from plaguing their bedtime habits. Although the study was conducted with senior citizens, the researchers theorize that helping people live a purpose-driven life can reduce the amount of sleep disorders the general population also experiences.

2. Increased general happiness

Previous studies have shown that when you spend money on others, you’re happier than when you spent the same amount of money on yourself. In fact, brain scans reveal that small acts of generosity and virtue cause the brain to produce a”warm glow” as a response to boosted happiness levels. But if your budget is tight, don’t worry. Even small, random acts of virtue and kindness allow your brain to experience that warm glow.

Read more: This blind man has the secret to happiness, and it’s inspiring everyone who reads it

Back in 2004, another study asked participants to perform five random acts of kindness every week for six weeks. At the end, those who had performed little random acts of kindness reported feeling more happy than the participants in the study who hadn’t done any acts of kindness.

3. A boost in positive emotions

Living a life of gratitude can lead to increased levels of positive emotions. When people participate in activities like thanking others, reflecting on their blessings throughout the day, and writing thank you notes, they experience an increase in their experience of positive emotions.

Not only does gratitude boost your happiness levels, but it also raises your happiness set-point (the “default” level of happiness you feel independent of circumstances), according to psychologist Robert A. Emmons. Other positive emotions that are increased by living virtuously include joy, optimism, pleasure and enthusiasm. Virtue also suppresses feelings of depression, envy and resentment.

4. A lowered rate of depression

Giving your time, talent, and treasures can lower your chances of depression. The more you volunteer your time, the happier your life will be, according to research conducted at Harvard. Their research revealed that there was “a strong relationship between volunteering and health: those who volunteer have lower mortality rates, greater functional ability, and lower rates of depression later in life than those who do not volunteer.” By giving your time to others and striving for a virtuous life, you’ll be better equipped to ward off feelings of loneliness and depression.

Read more: The rosary is a weapon against depression and hopelessness.

5. “Helper’s high”

Thanks to endorphins that flood into your brain when you’re practicing good deeds, you’ll experience a natural “helper’s high” when you live virtuously. In fact, some research shows that those who help may actually gain more in terms of mental health than those on the receiving end of their kindness and generosity. Helping others also leaves you with a greater appreciation for what you’ve been blessed with, as well as a sanctification that comes from giving of yourself. Focusing on the needs of others also helps put your own personal struggles into perspective.

6. Increased self-esteem

Living generously can give you a sense of purpose. For instance, volunteering allows you to help out in your own community and make a difference in the lives of your neighbors and friends. It also gives you an empowering opportunity to spend time making an impact in people’s lives. By taking the focus away from yourself, and spending time building up social interaction within your community, you also are able to foster a greater sense of belonging.

Volunteering your time can also give you a new set of skills and experiences. It leaves you with a sense of achievement. By growing out of your comfort zone and giving of yourself to those around you, you cultivate opportunities to face your fears and contribute to society.

CONTEMPORARY TYRANNY AND CATHOLIC SOCIAL DOCTRINE

Contemporary Tyranny and Catholic Social Doctrine

The usual view among Catholics is that public authority should look after all aspects of the common good. As a result, the social encyclicals have proposed a variety of responsibilities for government. The variety has grown with the range of problems under consideration, from the condition of industrial workers in Rerum Novarum to the comprehensive good of all humanity and even the natural world in more recent encyclicals.

The popes have therefore presented classical liberalism and libertarianism as positions to avoid. They have, of course, also rejected socialism. People, families, and associations need to lead their own lives, make their own decisions, and own the consequences. Otherwise they will be deprived of the agency necessary for human dignity. Saint John Paul II noted that rejection of such considerations by Communist governments led to passivity, alienation, inhumanity, and gross inefficiency, and eventually to collapse of the system.

The popes have been less inclined to discuss limitations on public authority based on the corruptions to which political power may lead. John Paul’s comments on democracy and the division of powers in Centesimus Annus showed his awareness of the problem, as did some of Benedict’s comments in Caritas in Veritate, but such concerns have been a minor feature of the social encyclicals. Concern with extremes of economic power, along with the position of the Church hierarchy as a government, seem to have inclined the popes to think of government as a neutral arbiter that stands above the clash of interests that pervades everyday social and economic life.

That tendency has perhaps been strengthened by memories of Catholic monarchy, by hopes for a better world after the sacrifices of two world wars, and by the post-Vatican II sympathy for secular aspirations and movements that led many to idealize what a universalized secular authority could achieve. It may also reflect the status of Catholic social doctrine as part of moral theology, which leads it to speak more of what should happen than what actually happens.

Idealization of worldwide secular movements and authorities seems to have reached its peak in Populorum Progressio, in which Blessed Paul VI asserted that “[development] agreements would be free of all suspicion [of self-interest] if they were integrated into an overall policy of worldwide collaboration,” and contended that

some would regard these hopes [regarding world government] as vain flights of fancy. It may be that these people are not realistic enough, and that they have not noticed that the world is moving rapidly in a certain direction. Men are growing more anxious to establish closer ties of brotherhood … they are slowly making their way to the Creator, even without adverting to it.

But political power is often more corrupting than economic power. Nor are the corruptions likely to be remedied by making power global, thereby emancipating it from answerability to anyone but those who are globally strongest.

The corruptions come from every direction: ordinary people find ways to game the system for various benefits; pressure groups use government programs as a vehicle for rent seeking; the well-connected profit through cronyism and special deals; and private powers and their public counterparts otherwise find ways to work together for mutual benefit that take little account of the public interest.

Beyond such economic corruptions, there are ideological temptations. Those with power habitually exaggerate their wisdom and virtue and the importance of what they do, so that the greater their power the more likely they are to feel themselves called upon to remake the world in the image of their own perhaps radically defective ideal. Our present global elites, for example, lead extraordinarily privileged lives, and they base the legitimacy of their position on claims of economic efficiency and neutral expertise. So why wouldn’t they try to put their legitimacy beyond question by claiming that such qualifications are the key to all good things, and attempt to establish a global technocracy that overrides all other sources of authority, including local community, cultural tradition, natural law, and the Church?

The most basic point leading the popes to reject both socialism and classical liberalism is the need for societies to be oriented toward something beyond economic concerns, and ultimately toward God. Pope Benedict noted that denial of objective values can lead even democracies into a new form of tyranny notwithstanding forms of popular election, separation of powers, and legal recognition of human rights.

Such concerns are becoming ever more pressing. Even so, recent popes haven’t said much about their practical implications. Suppose, for example, that the “true world political authority” Benedict called for in Caritas in Veritate became a possibility, but there was no prospect whatever it would “observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, … seek to establish the common good, [or] make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth” in the sense he required. What then? He didn’t say.

The Catechism sheds some light on the matter when it tells us that

Regimes whose nature is contrary to the natural law, to the public order, and to the fundamental rights of persons cannot achieve the common good of the nations on which they have been imposed… Authority is exercised legitimately only when it seeks the common good of the group concerned.

Current Western governments and international organizations, as a matter of the defining principles they believe give them moral authority, reject natural law and public order based on anything other than technology and human will. They also reject rights as basic as religious freedom, the right to life, and the right of a man and a woman to form a family as a publicly-recognized institution with a natural function and the rights corresponding to that function, such as the right to educate their children in accordance with normal standards of right living.

The ability of such governments and organizations to achieve the common good and exercise legitimate authority is consequently limited. Their faith in their own righteousness is not. They are therefore unlikely to be suitable partners for the Church in advancing her social goals.

Churchmen have sometimes been caught flatfooted dealing with totalitarian movements, and the current situation of growing soft totalitarianism is too recent and too disturbing for its implications for Catholic social action to have been adequately understood and articulated. For that reason it is not surprising if some churchmen fumble things.

Many have therefore fallen into serious errors, some of which are strikingly illustrated by the recent article by Antonio Spadaro, S.J., and Marcelo Figueroa in La Civiltà Cattolica. From that and the subsequent America interview with Fr. Spadaro it is clear that for the authors any religiously motivated political opposition to secular progressivism—for example, support for abortion restrictions, denial of recognition to same-sex “marriage,” and conscientious objector rights for culture war losers—is an attempt to impose “religious morals” that falls outside legitimate political discourse. Cooperation among Christians in support of such projects is therefore an “ecumenism of conflict” or even an “ecumenism of hate” that should be resolutely opposed.

That view, of course, rejects not only traditional doctrine on the relation between Church and society but the applicability of natural law to secular states. It reduces the social activity of the Church to that of a secular progressive NGO. Some such result seems inevitable when the post-Vatican II anthropocentric turn and the will to cooperate with secular movements and authorities become absolute.

That must change, and Catholics must regain their critical sense of what secular movements and authorities really are. The obvious remedy—which is necessary in any case, for reasons apart from politics—is a restored emphasis within the Church on natural law and on the transcendent dimension of the Faith. Only those dimensions can give us a correct perspective on worldly affairs, and make possible effective efforts for true justice. Divorced from them the social doctrine of the Church is no longer itself.

PURGATORY

Why I am thanking God for Purgatory

Imagining what purgatory will be like shows us our hope for justice. And forces us to acknowledge our faults.

“Our souls demand Purgatory, don’t they? Would it not break the heart if God said to us, ‘It is true, my son, that your breath smells and your rags drip with mud and slime, but we are charitable here and no one will upbraid you with these things, nor draw away from you. Enter into the joy’? Should we not reply, ‘With submission, sir, and if there is no objection, I’d rather be cleaned first.’ ‘It may hurt, you know’ – ‘Even so, sir.’ “
—C.S. Lewis, Letters to Malcom: Chiefly on Prayer, pp 108-109

An unexpected benefit of my conversion to the Catholic faith was the realization that I didn’t have to go to Hell, even though I was not worthy to enter Heaven. I had known before catechesis that Confession was supposed to wipe away one’s sins, but I didn’t think that 65 years of wrong-doing could actually be erased.

As I learned more about Catholic teaching, I found out that Purgatory was prefigured in the Old Testament: 2 Maccabees 12:44-45, Malachi 3:3, Isaiah 4:4, Micah 7:9, Psalm 66:12. I also learned that despite medieval descriptions, Purgatory was not a less painful version of Hell, where we were punished for our sins, but a regime in which we would be cleansed and made suitable to enter heaven. As the Catechism has it:

“All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.”
—CCC 1030

So, what will my Purgatory be like? Rather than taking an exhaustive list of my sins, venial and mortal, and giving a purgative cure for each (this isn’t a confessional), let me examine just one: impatience/ irritation. Now, what should Purgatory accomplish with me on that front? Rather than a behavioral remedy, such as administering an electric shock so we avoid committing the sin, it should change our soul, so in our innermost being we abhor the sin and refrain from it.

Here’s how that change in soul might be accomplished for this specific example — at least in my imaginings. I’ve often dealt with online or telephone help desks—problems with a computer, credit or cell phone charges, etc. Quite often the people who man these help desks are contract workers in other countries—their command of English is adequate, but their accents make them hard to understand (for this old guy with hearing problems). So I blow up, I get nasty, I don’t call them names, but I do everything I can to make them feel little and inadequate.

What better way of making me understand how bad my behavior is than to put myself in their place, to be the recipient of insult, snide remarks about competence, an angry voice? I will be the help desk person, and those seeking help will be speaking Latin (which I know a little of), or German (ditto), or French (also).

Of course, this is just me recognizing a fault and imagining what I might find a suitable purgation, but God’s ways are not ours, nor our thoughts his (so don’t take this scenario to the bank or use it for your RCIA homework). But yes, a chastisement should be our due, and if it is one that makes us experience the effect of our sins, so that we truly repent and abhor them, I will feel it a just punishment.

It may take a while, though, as in my case, there are many such faults.

MARKS OF A PROPHET

THE MARKS OF A PROPHET

There are at least ten distinguishing marks of the prophetic office; these characteristics in the lives and ministries of believers identify them as prophets. These traits should be evident in varying degrees in the life of anyone with a prophetic gifting who is attempting to grow and develop in that gifting. They are most fully developed in those who have been raised into the prophetic office. Whenever we see any of these qualities displayed in someone’s life, we should encourage that person to grow and develop their gift.

1.     Preaching that exhorts and strengthens the disciples. The prophet’s message always builds up the lives of disciples; it never tears down. A disciple is a student; someone who is learning, maturing, and growing up in the Christian faith. These are the ones who are encouraged and strengthened by the prophet’s message. Those believers who have refused to mature, on the other hand, may find the prophet’s message to be harsh and painful. It always hurts to be outside of the will of God. A prophet’s word always builds up those who are striving to grow in Christ.

2.     Character that is true, honest, faithful, and holy. A prophet points to and reminds us of our destiny in Christ. Therefore, his life should display the character of Christ. While this is true of all believers, it is particularly critical for those in the prophetic office. The Old Testament prophets were held to a very high standard, not only by the people but by God. Moses was a prophet (see Deut. 34:10); yet one lapse on his part in representing God before the people resulted in God denying him the opportunity to enter the Promised Land (see Deut. 32:48-52). Character matters.

3.     A message that appeals not to the flesh but to the spirit. Growing disciples want messages that challenge and stretch their spirits. Babes in the faith who have no interest in growth usually don’t like prophetic preaching because it brings them under conviction. They are more interested in gratifying the flesh. The message of a true prophet always speaks to the spirit directly and without compromise.

4.     Prediction and fulfillment of prophecy. In other words, a prophet speaks something concerning the future, and God fulfills that prophecy. It could be a prophecy spoken into the life of an individual or an entire congregation. Whatever form it takes, such a prophecy will be specific in nature with clearly measurable fulfillment. Once the event comes to pass we know that God has raised that prophet into office.

5.     Spiritual discernment in the lives of others. This one sometimes makes people nervous, particularly those who know that their lives are not what they should be in the Lord. A prophet has the ability in the Spirit to discern spiritual reality in the lives of others, good or bad, and speak concerning that reality. This prospect creates anxiety in some people who fear that the prophet will uncover all the mess they have allowed into their lives. Have no fear. A mature prophet will never publicly uncover mess because God does not embarrass people. The prophet may address the problem privately with the person, if the Lord leads that way. However, he is more likely to exhort the person to follow God’s will and obey what God has told him to do.

6.     Declaration of divine judgments when needed. This is another one that makes people nervous. Sometimes a situation is so bad or has gone on so long that the word of the Lord through the prophet is one of judgment. Prolonged rebellion or disobedience to God, or refusal to heed prophetic warnings or respond to calls for repentance, will ultimately bring about God’s judgment. No one likes these kind of pronouncements, least of all the prophet, but sometimes they are necessary.

7.     Willingness to suffer for speaking the truth without saving self. A mature prophet has long since committed his or her life totally into God’s keeping and has recognized that suffering is an “occupational hazard.” Speaking the truth for God is more important than personal comfort. Sometimes suffering comes as a result of declaring divine judgment. Jeremiah spoke the truth about God’s coming judgment on the southern kingdom of Judah and was convicted of treason and imprisoned in a dry cistern. A true prophet is not afraid to suffer for the truth.

8.     A message in harmony with the Word of God and the known will of God. A prophet’s message will never, repeat never, contradict the Word of God. The Spirit and the Word always agree. Since a prophet is a “pneumatic” (Spirit-person), his word will also be in agreement with the Word of God. A message that goes against God’s Word is a sure indicator of a false prophet.

9.     Employment of symbolic actions. Prophets preach with pictures. Jesus used this method all the time in His teaching, painting pictures in people’s minds through the stories and parables He told. Prophets use pictures because that’s the way God reveals His will and His Word to them. A prophet sees how things are done in the natural and applies it to the spiritual.

10.      Ability and authority to judge the manifestations of prophetic gifts. A prophet serving in a recognized and acknowledged prophetic office has the ability and authority to identify and judge the presence, display, and use of prophetic gifts in others. In other words, a prophet has the ability to recognize and identify other prophets (both true and false).

FULTON SHEEN AND PEACE

FULTON SHEEN AND PEACE

Monday, January 14, 2013

PEACE FROM JESUS

John 14:27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid. (NIV)

---

You can read the verses around this Bible passage from the Internet Bible: - in English, and many other languages

---

Bishop Fulton Sheen: "Where are your gods?'

Fulton Sheen saw the wars that took place over the course of his life as the result of a multitude of sins. Indeed, violation of the moral law in and of itself incurs grave consequences - it is sin that brings suffering. In response to those who point the finger at God, making him responsible for evil, he wrote, "The only time some men ever think of God is when they want to find someone to blame for their own sins. Without ever saying so, they assume that man is responsible  for everything good and beautiful in the world, but God is responsible of all its wickedness and its wars. They ignore the fact that God is like a playwright who wrote a beautiful drama, gave it to men to act with all the directions for acting, and they made a botch of it." Confronted with unbelievers who ask, when everything is going wrong, "Where is God?" he replied, "Where are your gods now? Where is your god Progress in the face of two world wars within 21 years? Where is your god Science, now that it consecrates its energies to destruction? Where is your god Evolution now that the world is turned backward into one vast slaughterhouse?"

Parting words have a special significance. Before Jesus left the upper room, anticipating His arrest and crucifixion, He left a promise of peace. Although the few days would be unbelievably turbulent, He wanted their hearts to be at rest and contented. The world, flesh and devil would tempt them to be afraid but He wanted them to know that every circumstance was in God’s control.

The peace which Jesus gave His disciples was not based on an absence of conflict or uncertainty; there would be much of both in the future. But neither was His peace passive: the disciples had to choose to manage their hearts by trusting that the Lord would have authority over everything that opposed them. Peace would come as they trusted the Lord; it would be the result of their relationship with Him. They would be sure that their sins had no power to accuse them, and that their Saviour was also their protector. So they need not fear God’s anger, the devil’s taunts, the world’s hatred or their own weakness.

Anxiety can be a habit, founded on yesterday’s bad experiences. Jesus commands us to manage our hearts according to His promises. We must teach our hearts, from the Scripture and with prayer, that ‘we can do everything through Christ who gives us strength’ (Philippians 4:13) and ‘I will trust and not be afraid’ (Isaiah 12:2). In other words, we have the responsibility to actively believe His promises and refuse to believe lies. This is not just self-discipline. As we trust God’s promises in the Bible and depend on Him, so His peace grows inside our hearts – it is a fruit of the Holy Spirit’s work in our lives, and real evidence that we do belong to Jesus. And as you learn to live in relationship with Him, your friends and colleagues will notice too! They will appreciate you not being stressed out, and may want to find out why you have changed.

Prayer: God of peace. Thank You that You do not expect me to live in fear, and that Jesus has promised that I shall have peace. I am sorry that I have tried my own routes to peace which have failed or left me exhausted. Please help me to work actively with You to manage my heart, believing Your promises and rejecting all that is a lie. In Jesus’ Name. Amen.

THE HUMAN THÉRÈSE

THE HUMAN THÉRÈSE

            Popularly known as the Little Flower, she was born Thérèse Martin in Alencon, France, the youngest of five sisters who became nuns. She entered the Carmelite monastery at Lisieux at the age of 15 and took the name of Thérèse of the Child Jesus and the Holy Face. Told to write the story of her life, she composed an autobiography she said reflected not on what had occurred but on grace at work in the events. She declared she had suffered much, but even in the excruciating darkness of mystic purification she continued to rejoice in the outpouring of divine love for her. Thérèse makes her story a canticle of gratitude to Jesus Christ, whom she sees present with her in every experience. Her teaching shows how the most ordinary existence contains potential for extra-ordinary holiness. Thérèse invites others to follow her “little way” of spiritual childhood, which she describes as an attitude of unlimited hope in God’s merciful love. Her moral option fills the book of the “anawim Yahweh” whose relationship with God is instinct with a placid but bold confidence that owes everything to the divine Giver. It was early on that Thérèse placed all her trust in God. “...but in my case, had not my heart been lifted up to God from its first awakening, had the world smiled at me from the cradle, there is no knowing what I might have become.” And in her last poem she wrote: “O thou who cams’t to smile on me, in the morning of my life, Come, Mother, once again and smile - for lo ! ‘tis eventide.”

NATURAL CHARM               Even though her heart was given to God, it did not lose its natural charm thereby. A paragraph from her diary: “I chose as friends two little girls of my age. But shallow are the hearts of creatures. It happened that for some reason that one of them had to remain at home for several months. While she was away I thought of her very often, and on her return showed great pleasure at seeing her again. All I met with, however, was a glance of indifference  -  my friendship was not appreciated. I felt this very keenly, and I no longer sought an affection  which had proved so inconsistent. Nevertheless, I still love my little friend and I pray for her; God has given me a faithful heart, and when once I love, I love forever. But perfect love can only exist upon earth in the midst of sacrifice. A heart given to God loses none of its natural affection; on the contrary, that affection grows stronger by becoming purer and more spiritual.”

NATURAL SENSITIVITY                  To prove once again that he could make use of people with the frailties that human nature is heir to, God chose Thérèse who herself admitted, “My heart is naturally sensitive and it is precisely because of its capacity for pain that I wish to offer to our Lord every kind of suffering it can bear.” She may well have taken umbrage at Pope Pius X’s description of her as “the greatest saint of modern times”, since she knew well how painful and at times stubborn a process was sainthood. Her mother described the little Thérèse as a “little imp of mischief...One doesn’t know how she will turn out...she is so thoughtless...she has a stubborn streak that is almost invincible.” Capable of violent outbursts of temper, sensitive, touchy, moody,  a victim of  scrupulosity, she would weep at the slightest affront, and then weep again for having wept ! At the impressionable age of four she had to endure her mother’s death. Childhood’s gay abandon dissolved into withdrawal and introspection, leaving her more timid, scrupulous and sensitive than ever. What Thérèse later called her “conversion”, happened on Christmas Eve, “the night of illumination”, when “our Lord turned my darkness into a flood of light.” In a divine instant her identity received the impress of maturity. By this time Thérèse was 13; yet even at 20 (and at Carmel) she had not lost her sparkle. “She is filled with tricks...a mystic...a comedienne...she can make you shed tears of devotion, and she can just as easily make you split your sides with laughter”, observed her prioress.

FRAILTY and HIDDENNESS                       Sincere awareness of her weakness and an ardent desire to love and be loved were the dual motors of her psycho-spiritual progress.  “I am resigned to see myself always far from perfect, even glad of it.” Natural possessiveness was matched by the reflex to be possessed. “I have flames within me”, she says, “I want to be set on fire with love.” And with the seal of finality her choice fell on someone frail and sensitive, with a great longing to be accepted and loved: Jesus. If flesh is synonymous with frailty, then for Thérèse the Word became weakness, whose persistent refrain she echoed and re-echoed. Like Wordworth’s  “violet by a mossy stone, half-hidden from the eye”, she chose Shakespeare’s “blessedness of being little”, believing her true humanity lay in hiddenness, and it pleased God to keep her inconspicuous even in her own community. How successful she was in this can be gauged from a remark of a community member just a few weeks before Thérèse’s death. “She’s a sweet little Sister, but what will we be able to say about her after her death ? She didn’t do anything.”  Little did that community member realise that within that fragile human frame vibrated a dynamic of articulate mysticism that still electrifies the human spirit and that would merit her the splendid title of “Doctor of the Church”.  Reading her diaries alone will persuade anyone that she had synthesised a deeply biblical way of living the faith in the full acceptance of human frailty.

                        The exterior life of Jesus and Mary at Nazareth was so run of the mill that the neighbours were scandalised when Jesus announced  his divine mission to them. The supernatural instinct which drew Thérèse of Lisieux to Nazareth was an authentic one. Here she discovered that she could live the reality of things, could be completely possessed by God, without its showing externally. The life of Jesus and Mary is the living illustration and affirmation of the highest mystical life, with complete detachment from outward appearances, i.e. from all mystical phenomena. The essence of the mystical life is constituted uniquely by God’s possession of the soul, independently of all sensible phenomena which are at best only secondary components. This simplification is a kind of cleansing which leaves the mystical life purer and loftier. God can produce the most profound supernatural changes without any external signs marking his action, for the senses (and the psychological consciousness which registers these things) are very far from the depths where supernatural marvels are effected. They may, however, be perceived in the works of charity and justice.

THE “LITTLE WAY”              There is no such thing as “adult baptism;” all baptisms are children’s baptisms, whatever the age of the recipient, for “unless you become like little children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven”, said Jesus. There is a quality in man that specifies his nature as no other quality does, and that is his capacity to achieve his humanity by surrendering himself unreservedly to God. Jesus realised it on the cross: “Father, into your hands...” Young as she was, Thérèse attained maturity by way of littleness. She had only to be herself  -  weak, fragile, and a little child, to let herself be carried. “I can see that it is enough to recognise one’s littleness”, she said, “and give oneself wholly like a child into the arms of the good God.”

THE TEST                                                     Her “little way”, however, was not without its agonising over “faults” and frets about displeasing God and trying to earn his love. This performance-related meandering lasted three years and a half, when finally a retreat director “launched me full sail upon the waves of confidence and love.” She made the voyage without the perks of miracles, visions or voices. All she had was the staid sacrament of the present moment. “I have frequently noticed that Jesus does not want me to lay up provisions. He nourishes me at each moment with a totally new food. I find it within me without knowing how it is there. I believe it is Jesus himself hidden in the depths of my poor little heart; he is giving me the grace of acting within me, making me think of all he desires me to do at the present moment.” Thérèse’s little way of trustful surrender would not pass muster without the grueling test that she depicted as the “thickest darkness” that enveloped her especially the last Easter of her life. Her lungs were already invaded by pulmonary tuberculosis. She had coughed up blood  -  the sign in nature of the divine summons, a “distant murmur”, she observed, “which announced the Bridegroom’s arrival.” What she went through from then on could just about be expressed in words carved out of the darkest caverns of her vocabulary. Encased in “heavy fog” that suddenly becomes “more dense”, which not the slightest sliver of heavenly light can pierce. The thickening opaqueness mocks her with the voices of a thousand sinners that death will expose her to ultimate futility  -  “the night of non-existence.”  “I do not want to write any more about it”, since “I fear I might blaspheme.” Her accumulated excellence was being drained into the “black hole” of her “little way.” Pointing to a row of chestnut trees, she said, “Look, do you see the black hole...where we can see nothing; it’s in a similar hole that I am as far as body and soul are concerned.....what darkness. But I am at peace.” Peace in darkness. Can the unaided human spirit attain to this bizarre synthesis ?  “If I had no faith”, Thérèse confessed, “ I would have inflicted death upon myself without a moment’s hesitation. Yet will I trust him.”

AND FINAL SURRENDER               Were faith not the pearl of great price, it could do without testing; and irritants and doubts would help ditch it on the roadside of life’s journey. Thérèse’s doubts were so grave as to make her say, “I don’t believe in eternal life. I think that after life there will be nothing more. Everything has vanished from me.” Yet she clung to the one thing that mattered. “All I have is love.” The last line she ever wrote was, “I go to him with confidence and love.” Suffering and  death revolted her, as they would any human being. Her Lord had recoiled from their prospect, too. But like her Lord she believed here was transforming power and movement  -  the strange, shattering and clarifying experience we call the Paschal mystery. Surrendered brokenness is goodly material for surpassing beauty. Her sister Celine sat by her bed and asked, “What are you doing ?”  “You should try to sleep.”  “I cannot”, replied Thérèse, “I’m praying.”  “What are you saying to Jesus?”  “Nothing  -  I just love him.”

THE AFTERNOON OF 30 SEPTEMBER 1897                 Thérèse had asked that she might die the death of the crucified Jesus. And it was granted her. On the afternoon of 30 September her temptations against faith were so violent that she was in total darkness. Hours before her death her forehead was crowned with beads of perspiration. She was agitated and begged those around to sprinkle her with holy water. Between gasps and close to despair she said, “How we ought to pray for the agonising !”  At this point, Mother Agnes, seeing her sister in this condition, was bewildered. She knew well that Thérèse was a saint, but this looked to her more like the death of a sinner. She rushed out to an older part of the monastery to a statue of the Sacred Heart, of which she was very fond, and pleaded, “Oh Sacred Heart of Jesus, do not let my sister die in despair.”  This revealing incident helps us understand better the transition from the agony to the ecstasy of the last moment.

                                                Thérèse had forewarned them: “Do not be surprised; I have asked to die the death of Jesus on the cross, when he said, ‘Father, why have you abandoned me ?’”  She entered the horrendous night of Jesus’ forsakenness, when all hell was let loose in the form of diabolical temptations. If St. John of the Cross said that the death of the just is an event of love that carries them away peacefully, it was not the death that Thérèse knew. But her torment only served to burn away the residual dross in the gold of her spirit. Her face suffused with love, with dying lips, Thérèse of Lisieux breathed her deathless whisper:

“My God, I love you.”

 

  

CATHOLIC-ORTHODOX SPLIT

                          CATHOLIC- ORTHODOX SPLIT

When, why and how did it happen? And when will it come to an end?

In 1054, Pope Leo IX of Rome and Patriarch Michael I Kiroularious of Constantinople excommunicated each other. This mutual act crowned a number of East-West disputes, resulting in an East-West schism in the Church. Western dioceses remaining in union with Rome came to be known as Roman Catholic, while Eastern dioceses remaining loyal to Constantinople claimed the banner of Orthodoxy. Nearly 1,000 years went by before a joint Catholic-Orthodox commission was created to study the causes of the division and work toward possible reunification.

While the official schism between East and West can be pinned to 1054, the split was actually a long time in the making. Over centuries, Eastern and Western Christendom developed different theological emphases and liturgical practices, as well as differing notions of Church governance.

One of the key issues that drove East and West apart was the primacy of the Bishop of Rome. Eastern Christians did not deny that the See of Rome held primacy over all other churches, even Constantinople, but they did dispute the juridical claims that bishops of Rome were increasingly making regarding this primacy. A particular flashpoint in the debate can be seen in what is known as the Filioque Controversy. Beginning in the 7th century, some Western Christians added the phrase “and the Son” (filioque) to the Nicene Creed’s teaching that the Holy Spirit proceeds “from the Father.” Although Eastern and Western Church Fathers affirmed that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, Eastern Christians objected to the pope’s adoption of the phrase “and the Son” into the Roman liturgy in the early 11th century. They argued that the pope alone has no authority to change what a church council—in this case, the Council of Nicaea—had decreed.

Other issues aggravating tensions between Eastern and Western Christians were different approaches to sacramental discipline and clerical celibacy.

Nevertheless, if Pope Francis could tell a Lutheran delegation last year that “what unites us is far greater than what divides us,” then we should apply his words particularly to members of the Orthodox Church. Orthodoxy retains a true apostolic succession among its bishops, and thus its bishops and priests celebrate the sacraments validly. Also together with Roman Catholics, Orthodox Christians revere the Blessed Mother, they foster devotion to the saints (especially the martyrs), and they fast and feast according to the seasons of the liturgical year.

With so much in common, and given Christ’s prayer and wish that his children “might all be one” (Jn 17:21), Catholic and Orthodox pastors today rightly dedicate themselves to constructive dialogue, with the aim of a return to unity.

The journey toward reunification began officially in 1964 when Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I of Constantinople met for the first time in Jerusalem. The following year they signed a joint declaration lifting the sentences of excommunication their predecessors had conferred on each other 900 years before. Since then popes and Eastern patriarchs have exchanged visits and signed declarations on a variety of occasions, most recently on September 1, the World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation, a day observed by both Rome and Constantinople.

It 1979 Pope John Paul II and Ecumenical Patriarch Demetrios I formally established the Joint Commission for Theological Dialogue. The commission includes representatives from the Greek Orthodox patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, as well as the Russian Orthodox Patriarchate of Moscow and the Orthodox patriarchates of Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Poland, Albania, Finland and Estonia. Since the commission’s creation, 14 meetings have been held, which have produced nine documents of ecumenical importance.

The most recent document was issued in 2016. It studies the roles played by bishops, and in particular by the Bishop of Rome, in the first millennium, before the schism occurred. By remembering the shared past of East and West, the commission hopes to create common understanding of today’s circumstances.

With the 2016 document, an important phase of the joint commission’s work ended. A planning committee met in Greece earlier this month, September 5-7, to develop possible agendas for future meetings.

Read more: Catholic-Orthodox Communion: The Goal of Francis and Bartholomew

In his address last year to Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople for the feast of St. Andrew, held as a patron by the Orthodox, Francis said noted that the journey will continue, sustained much more from heaven than by efforts on earth.

“In this journey towards the restoration of eucharistic communion between us, we are sustained by the intercession not only of our patron saints, but by the array of martyrs from every age,” he said, “who ‘despite the tragedy of our divisions… have preserved an attachment to Christ and to the Father so radical and absolute as to lead even to the shedding of blood’ (Saint Pope John Paul II, Ut unum sint, 83).”

WHAT IS CANON LAW?

It may seem like a bunch of rules, but it is geared towards helping others toward salvation.

For many people “law” tends to be a bad word when it comes to religion. To our modern ears it sounds oppressive and domineering, and makes the teenager inside of us instantly want to rebel. We might be tempted to say, “Is the Church trying to turn us into robots with all these man-made rules?”

Before we make any instant judgements, let’s take a look at what “canon law” refers to in the Catholic Church.

Father James Goodwin gives a perfect summary of what canon law is and why it is not something negative, but a basic part of any healthy organization.

“Put simply, canon law is how the Church organizes and governs herself. The word ‘canon’ basically means rule. There are about 1.3 billion Catholics in the world, and the Church administrates a large collection of institutions. Therefore, the Church needs an organizational structure to carry out its office of governance and its saving mission. Every society needs laws — and so does the Church. There is an old saying: ubi societas ibi lex (‘where there is a society there is law’). Imagine driving on the highway where there are no rules of the road? It would ultimately lead to disaster.”

It is not an easy task helping others toward salvation, and the those within the Church need boundaries and rules that govern exactly how their ministry should be enacted. This has been the case since the very beginning. In the Acts of the Apostles there were many disputes that had to be resolved and rules that would guide the Church in her apostolic ministry. The most basic example of this was the procedure the early Church developed when deciding who to replace Judas (see Acts 1:15-26).

Over the centuries many more laws were created through various councils, but it wasn’t until 1917 that there was a single collection. Up until 1917 there were many rules governing the Church, but no single place to examine them and make sure they were not conflicting with each other. This Code was revised in 1983 and continues to govern the Church to the present day.

It includes many different items, such as rules that govern the administration of the sacraments, the celebration of the liturgy, teaching the faith and appointment of clergy members. It is important to remember that these laws exist to serve the divine law, the 10 Commandments and the teachings of Christ. Canon law is not opposed to what God has given us, but is meant to help us in concrete situations to follow God’s law.

As an example of how canon law helps the Church to remain faithful to Christ, here are the some of the official duties of a parish priest.

Can. 528 §1. A pastor is obliged to make provision so that the word of God is proclaimed in its entirety to those living in the parish; for this reason, he is to take care that the lay members of the Christian faithful are instructed in the truths of the faith, especially by giving a homily on Sundays and holy days of obligation and by offering catechetical instruction. He is to foster works through which the spirit of the gospel is promoted, even in what pertains to social justice. He is to have particular care for the Catholic education of children and youth. He is to make every effort, even with the collaboration of the Christian faithful, so that the message of the gospel comes also to those who have ceased the practice of their religion or do not profess the true faith.

Can. 529 §1. In order to fulfill his office diligently, a pastor is to strive to know the faithful entrusted to his care.

Therefore he is to visit families, sharing especially in the cares, anxieties, and griefs of the faithful, strengthening them in the Lord, and prudently correcting them if they are failing in certain areas. With generous love he is to help the sick, particularly those close to death, by refreshing them solicitously with the sacraments and commending their souls to God; with particular diligence he is to seek out the poor, the afflicted, the lonely, those exiled from their country, and similarly those weighed down by special difficulties. He is to work so that spouses and parents are supported in fulfilling their proper duties and is to foster growth of Christian life in the family.

Does that sound like something “bad”? This section of canon law basically wants to make sure that pastors are doing what they are supposed to be doing. While some might argue that you should just tell priests to follow Christ’s Gospel and everything else will fall into place, canon law makes everything more concrete and gives examples that priests can live by.

Suffice to say canon law is not something to be avoided, but embraced and seen as an aid to ministry, guiding the Church in the important work of salvation.