Not Like Magua

For what ails ya

I heard this story at Mass this week:

The serpent said to the woman, "Did God say, 'You shall not eat of any tree of the garden'?" 2 And the woman said, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden..." 4* But the serpent said to the woman, "God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." 6 So..the woman...took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate...The LORD God said, "Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?" 12 The man said, "The woman...gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate." 13* Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this that you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent beguiled me, and I ate." (That's 10 eats.)

A Whole Lotta Eating going on. And I was thinking how Adam & Eve weren't forbidden from looking at something, or holding something, or wearing something, or using something; but eating something. Which makes sense because what you eat becomes part of you, whether it's nutritious or poisonous. And sin is as much a part of me as say, the DNA I also inherited from my parents.

But here's another Whole Lotta Eating episode:

"Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever... The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" 53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; 54 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56* He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. 58* This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever." (That's also 10 eats. More than coincidence?)

Another nice OT-NT couplet. Humans freely ingest the poison of sin; but they can also freely ingest the antidote. This is a concept the kids will grasp immediately. But John 6 doesn't show how. The how comes at the Last Supper. This year we've already covered Genesis and John 6.  So during tomorrow night's Last Supper class, I'll start with a quick backtrack to the eating in Genesis. Then when we get to "this is my body, this is my blood" we'll recall John 6 and eating the fruit, the kids will figure out how they combine to say something significant about Mass. Then in our Mass classes at the end of April, I expect I will be able to ask, "What does eating the fruit in Genesis have to do with Communion," and hear back something like, "Adam and Eve ate the bad food but now we eat the good food." In 6th grade that's an A.

Next year this idea will run from the first class to the last class: Genesis/ Passover/ John 6/ Last Supper/ Mass.

Audio based on the above content here.

Enchanted Sirach

This post links to RAnn's Sunday Snippets

Viva la Caccia

My wife personifies the Ideal Wife in Proverbs 31, which is not the subject of this post. This post is about our courtship some 26 years ago. Briefly, this was our courtship:

Some enchanted evening

When you find your true love,

When you feel her call you

Across a crowded room,

Then fly to her side,

And make her your own

Or all through your life you

May dream all alone.

Once you have found her,

Never let her go.

Once you have found her,

Never let her go.

That's right, a couple of verses from South Pacific's Some Enchanted Evening. I first heard Ezio Pinza sing it when I was a kid, and it has defined romance for me ever since.

So tonight I was browsing the Bible before Mass started. Let's try...Sirach. I get to Chapter 6:

"My son, from your youth up choose instruction, and until you are old you will keep finding wisdom. Come to her like one who plows and sows, and wait for her good harvest... Come to her with all your soul, and keep her ways with all your might." It's about Wisdom, but it made me think about my wife. And "Make her thy whole heart’s quest, follow, as best thou canst, the path she makes known to thee," which reminded me of our courtship, and Some Enchanted Evening. Then "search, and thou wilt find her, hold fast, and never let her go."

If Oscar Hammerstein wasn't riffing on Sirach when he wrote that lyric then this is a bigger vale of tears than I thought.


P.S. Sirach is a deuterocanonical book. I do wonder how Hammerstein might have encountered it.

Cri de Coeur 2

This post links to RAnn's Sunday Snippets

Sunflowers maybe

In the past week I engaged in some online discussion about the Church and the Laity. At one blog I was asked to answer the following question: "If you were able to make a request of your pastor regarding what you would like to see happening at Church, what would you ask for?"

I responded:

"The Institutional Church might enable the laity to use its structure to do things that the Institutional Church doesn't initiate, or direct, or manage, or oversee. Take my Diocese of Charleston SC. About 200k Catholics. Let's assume at a 1% rate, there are 2,000 Intentional Disciples in the state. I know maybe 100 of them. Suppose there were a clearinghouse for all self-identified IDs? It'd be useful for the motivated layman to know who all the others are, and coordinate, and support each other in ways we can only guess at. There are great things only the laity can do. But until we know who is ready to act we can only act individually, and in isolation. We can coalesce imperfectly around existing structures such as prolife and RE, but I believe we'll thrive if the Church simply calls the scattered mustard seeds to know each other at the diocesan level on down. And leaves the rest to Holy Spirit.

Speaking on the lay side, the fact that I'm socially connected to like-minded, New E Catholics in my parish/ deanery/ diocese/ Anglosphere is a huge encouragement in what I do as an individual. And it also means we give and receive lots of feedback, coordinate and put people in touch with each other, have lunch, etc. It may sound facile, but that sense of family matters a lot. And it all happens without being the clergy's problem."

Also in the last week I proposed to a pastor this approach to jumpstarting the New Evangelization in his parish. Something like it would be read from the pulpit and included in the weekly bulletin:

"Brothers & Sisters in Christ,

You are probably familiar with the term New Evangelization, which was first used by Pope JP2 more than 30 years ago. I’ve spoken about it both from the pulpit and in my other communications to the parish. Pope Francis regularly encourages all Catholics to help with "the church's primary mission of evangelization in the modern world." So evangelizing is something that the Church has been emphasizing for a long time, although I expect we can all agree that there’s not yet much evangelizing going on.

So what can we do? I hesitate to create a new parish-wide initiative or program, because I don’t think that's what we need. Instead I’d like all of you to reflect for the next month on whether you as an individual Catholic are called by Jesus to participate in building up the Church, whether by evangelizing or something else. You may feel a bit isolated or frustrated that God wants you to do something, but you may not know what it is. Or maybe you do know, and don’t see a way to make it happen. Maybe some of you already evangelize in your daily lives, and no-one else in the parish knows. Whoever you are, I know you’re out there, because the God gave each of us something to do, and the Holy Spirit gave us the gifts to do it. But I don’t know who you all are, and you may not know each other, either. So here’s what I propose:

On xx/xx/xx at xx p.m the parish will host a one hour social with light hors d’oeuvres. If the Holy Spirit moves you to come, come. If the Spirit doesn’t move you, but you’re curious, you come too. If this isn't your regular parish, come anyway. There won’t be a program for the evening beyond me saying a few words of greeting. Most of the time would be spent meeting each other, and finding out how we all help, or would like to help, make the Church all Jesus wants her to be.

As I said, there’s no plan, no program, and no obligation; just conversation and nibbles. It’s ok to just show up, but it’d help to figure food and drinks if you email xxxx if you do plan to come. See the bulletin for the email address.

It's a great time to be Catholic."

Here's my point: there are too many lay Catholics with too many unique gifts waiting to be used in ways that only the Holy Spirit may be aware of, for the Church to motivate and direct them all from the top down. So the alternative is to let the purposeful faithful find their own ways forward. That's how things have developed in my part of Upstate S.C.: a self-maintained, growing informal network of Intentional Disciples. But it took 15 years to develop all by itself. What I'd like to see is that same lay network extended throughout the diocese in much less time. How? By having the Diocese use its statewide structure and authority to generate an ekklesia, a calling-out of the motivated faithful from random obscurity into the light, so they can all see each other, both physically and via the net. The shepherd would still care for the flock, and watch for wayward sheep; but wouldn't organize, direct, or program this informal association. That'd be left to the people and the Holy Spirit.

Like Mao said, "Let Flowers of Many Kinds Blossom."

Book Review 7: Not the Fist, the Fingers

This post links to Convert Journal

I was given a review copy of Catholic Laity in the Mission of the Church: Living Out Your Lay Vocation by Russell Shaw. I looked at the cover: a blob of faceless people dressed the same, doing no-skill-no-brains heavy lifting, participating serf-like in yet another Hidebound Church Ritual. As my mother-in-law says: Oh Dear. I anticipated the usual disembodied dull platitudes and tiresome restatements of the obvious. Fortunately I read the book anyway, and was pleasantly surprised. I thought it was the opposite of the cover. It's about each lay person as a uniquely-gifted individual, not all of us en masse. 

The book kicks off with a history of the laity, the clergy, and their relationship, from Acts of the Apostles to the end of the 19th century. Huh- I didn't even know the laity had a history. Turns out we do, and it bears directly on what our roles may be today. Moving on to the 20th century, you'll be familiar with Catholic Action, the Catholic Worker movement, and Opus Dei. They're included not so much to explain what they are, but to show how they fit into a 2000-year-old stream of non-clergy doing their own thing. I like that.

Vatican 2 is treated at length, both in its specific attention to encouraging the laity to Get Out There Without Waitin' for Faddah an' Sistah t'Tell Ya What t'Do; and the difference between what V2 asked the laity to do, and what the laity's actually done so far. Apparently lay Catholics are still too much beholden to the clergy, which I understand completely, having been born in 1957. It wasn't that the Church didn't say, "Y'all lay folks got your own charisms, go use 'em." She did. But the people were thinking in terms of doing stuff within the established system, and following the initiatives of that system; and Mama Church didn't argue. Even today the typical Catholic has yet to jump on the chance to figure out his or her unique gifts, and then act on them without necessarily seeking the Church's approval, guidance, or control. But that was still V2's message.

So what's the problem? We could rattle off a few, but I would not have included clericalism among them. You know, what Pope Francis talks about every Tuesday. Shaw writes: "Clericalism....assumes that clerics not only are, but are meant to be the active, dominant elite in the Church, and lay people the passive, subservient mass." Careful attention is given to clericalism; how it curbs the laity's initiative and sense of responsibility; and how to minimize its effects. (Shaw wrote this book in 2005. Francis must have read it.)

That's the first half of the book, thematically if not physically. The second half discusses how the laity can get on with it:

1. Taking the idea of lay vocation seriously. That is, every lay person is called by God to Do Something, no less than Faddah or Sistah. God called you. Yes, you. Get on with it.

2. Figuring out your vocation and the charisms you received at Confirmation. So you can get on with it.

3. Taking responsibility for the Church.

4. Evangelizing the World wherever you find yourself. Get on with it. You could die tomorrow. OK, that's me talking, not the book, but a sense of urgency is a good thing.

If you're already on the New Evangelization Express, doing the Intentional Disciple Thing, you probably don't need to read this book. But you'll profit from its broad and deep scope if you do read it. If you're on the fence, or behind the fence, then yes, you need to read this book.

Get fired up about Jesus and His Church.

Elisha and Elijah

 The Few. The Proud. The Catechists.

Look Inside

I browsed a couple of catechist-related books yesterday. Not reading the books, but reading through the Look Inside bits on Amazon. Fr. Philip N. Powell mentions them at his blog.

The first one is The Pedagogy of God: Its Centrality in Catechesis and Catechist Formation. My Look Inside rating: No Sale. I'm the wrong audience for this prose.

Whoops- I should define my rating system. It's a lot like Sun Bear's rating system. Who? Sun Bear, "who was born Vincent LaDuke, was a writer and actor who is probably best known for founding the Bear Tribe in the 1970's in Washington." A New Age personage. I don't know much about the guy, but I have been fond of a Sun Bear aphorism for about 35 years. Here it is:

“If your religion doesn’t grow corn, I don’t want to hear about it.”

Speaking as a catechist, I love it. Modified to fit my situation, it's “If your catechetical book/ article/ post/ workshop/ lecture won’t improve my catechesis, I don’t want to hear about it.” I don't mean something mightn't be useful to someone else, but if it doesn't look like it'll help me in my classroom, I got other things to do. Like what things? Like read the second book:

Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Craft of Catechesis. My Look Inside rating: Buy. As I said, I only read the excerpts, but that's one way I decide to spend money on books. Or not. I don't care for this book's writing style either. But it appeals to me based on the 12 Keys of Catechesis listed at the book's end; and how I do or don't reference them in my 6th-grade class:

1. HOLISTIC: the Faith Professed, the Faith Celebrated, the Faith Lived and the Faith Prayed.

I'm good on the first 3. We don't pray a lot in my class. An opening prayer and a closing prayer. For all I know that's typical in all catechism classes. Maybe we do pray a lot. Classwise, I'm more focused the other three. I want to know more.

2. GRACEFUL: We maintain the primacy of grace. 

This, I don't know...."maintain the primacy of grace"? This sort of statement bugs me. What does that mean in the classroom? Why not: maintain the primacy of love? Why not: maintain the primacy of faith? Or: maintain the primacy of Christ? Dunno. I think it means we hope for mercy instead of justice. We cover that explicitly in class. But I'm intrigued. If I buy the book, I expect to have it explained.

3. ORGANIC: We practice an organic reading and teaching of the Faith.

I already apply the term 'organic' to my catechesis. Curious if the authors and I mean the same thing.

4. PERSONAL: Doctrine and its transmission is essentially personal.

Yes to this. I believe personal witness is the sine qua non of catechesis. I look forward to reading more.

5. TRUE: We proclaim the mysteries of the Faith as true...

Yes...seems awfully obvious though.

6. ATTRACTIVE: We highlight the innately attractive nature of the Faith...

Yes. I do this explicitly and continually. I want to read the book to see what specific examples the authors will provide.

7. PURPOSEFUL: We immerse doctrine within the dynamic of God's plan...

Yes. Intrinsic to class. The book may show ways of being purposeful that I don't know about.

8. FAITHFUL: We use the Catechism, drawing on the language of Scripture and Tradition.

Yes. I'm on this 100%, and curious as to the book's take on this all-important synergy.

9. EVANGELIZING: (go Look Inside)

I'm not moved at all by the book's phrasing here, but an explicit goal of my catechesis is to evangelize and catechize at the same time, all the time. Tell me more.

10. SCRIPTURAL: We let our catechesis be soaked in the Scriptures...

Yes. 100% on this, and want to read more.

11. LITURGICAL: (go Look Inside)

Not fond of the phrasing. Still, understanding the Mass is a big deal in class, so I want to read more.

12. PRAYERFUL: We make our catechesis a school of prayer...

Sounds vague and fluffy. I say it should be a school of faith. I'll want some elaboration.

Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius

This post links to RAnn's Sunday Snippets

hinge

Each year in Wednesday Night Sunday School we spend a few minutes on the fun parts of Isaiah 22.  I play the role of King Hezekiah and two volunteers play Shebna and Eliakim. When we get to Matthew 16 a couple of months later, we recall Isaiah 22. Then when we discuss the Mass in April, the kids learn that Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius were some of the popes that succeeded Peter. But I have never connected those guys to either Isaiah 22 or Matthew 16. I want all learning to be integrated with other learning, and this was a weak point in that respect. But this year is different, and better.

This year we did our Eliakim skit as usual in November. Then last Wednesday I treated Matt 16 like so:

I got two volunteers to come up and be Shebna and Eliakim. We did a quick refresher on Is 22. The kids remember only Eliakim's name, but that's ok. I care about the story and why it matters. They remember it just fine. We quickly re-enact it. Corrupt Shebna sits down. Now we cover Matt 16. I read bits from the chapter, and the kids figure out I'm now Jesus and the other actor is now Peter. We act out the keys again, and draw parallels between the two Kings and their Prime Ministers. The rest of the class play the 11 other apostles. They figure out the significance of Jesus borrowing from Isaiah.

Then I get five more boys to come up and stand in a row next to Peter. I stand behind them with my invisible keys. Peter dies and falls to the floor. The kids tell me to pass the keys to the next boy, he'll be the next pope. As each pope dies and falls to the floor, the King of Heaven gives the keys to the next boy. At the end they're all dead. I get them all to stand back up.

"Y'all tell me who these people are. Umm...they're the first popes! Yes! Some of them. Who's the first one? Peter! Yes, that was easy. Who's next? No guesses, that's OK, he's Linus. Linus, your name is...Linus! Yes, ya too smart, Linus! And these other popes are Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, and Cornelius. Do those names sound familiar to anyone? Yes! Where do you know Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, and Cornelius from? Umm....I don't remember. That's OK, we'll find out in April."

"Who's the pope now? Francis! Yes. He's the 266th pope. Who was before him? B...Benedict! Yes, good. Is Benedict dead? No, I think he just stopped being pope. Yes. That's very unusual, for a pope to retire. Trick question: in the Isaiah story, who picked Eliakim, the new prime minister? The King! Yes, Heze...Hezekiah! Yes. And who picked Peter? Jesus! Yes. Who is...the King! Yes. Did Benedict pick Francis to succeed him? No the other people did. Who exactly? Bishops? Well, sort of. They all wear red...like a bird...that is red...cardinals! Yes, a small group of bishops called cardinals. The bird is named after the men. Cardinal means hinge in Latin. Y'all remember we talked about hinges in December. For example, doors hang on, depend on, hinges. So to say something is cardinal, like a cardinal rule, means it's important like a hinge because other things depend on it, hang on it. But the cardinals don't just pick who they like for pope...remind me who picked the first pope. Jesus. Yes, so who still picks them? Umm...Jesus? Yes, good job! The King still has the power to pick his key-man. But Jesus put the cardinals in charge of making his pick. That's why the cardinals all pray for the Holy Spirit to guide them in making the right choice."

It only takes a few minutes to knit this together. And it prepares the children to jump all over Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, and Cornelius when those names pop up in our Mass classes in April.