I am hot...

it just comes in flashes.

Maybe they’ve bought into the myth that Catholic isn’t Christian

Posted By on May 9, 2007

I’m up to my eyeballs with modern “Catholic” music. No, this isn’t going to be another bashing of all things modern or all things Haugen. (I actually enjoy much of the Mass of Creation, judge me as you might.) But recently, the difference between good church music and bad has been highlighted by the difference between what I’ve been hearing at the morning and evening Masses at my parish.

Now, I’ve hesitated about writing this in the past, because the morning choir director is a wonderful lady, and I’m very fond of her. The members of the choir are also people I admire, respect, and like. But I have gotten increasingly distressed by the song choices that have been thrust at the morning attendees.

The first problem is a relatively simple and not terribly surprising one: Oregon Catholic [sic] Press. They publish a music issue that drones at its best and offends at its worst. A year or two ago, Charming and Patient Husband and I determined that many of the songs featured in this esteemed booklet are composed by monkeys with a blank music composition sheet on the wall and a handful of darts. I am of the rather bizarre opinion that if you don’t have an idea or an inspiration for a song, it may be a sign that you should not write a song. Trying to force one by putting random notes on a sheet rarely results in beautiful music that honors God.

Recently, though, I’ve begun to wonder if honoring God is even the point of some of them. Now, to be sure, there are a few good and time-honored songs in the music issue. I can’t even evaluate accurately the percentage, though, because I only know what songs are chosen for us to sing on a given Sunday. Recently I noticed that more and more of them don’t bother mentioning God.

Let me reiterate: liturgical songs that make no mention, direct or indirect, of the Person for whom they are written. Not even words like “You” or “Him.” Not even “creation.”

What, some may ask, does a worship song that doesn’t worship sing about, then? Gather songs are the perfect example bar none. A number of them essentially say “We gather together because gathering is nice. We gather to gather. We gather so that we might be a gathering of people gathered! What a sacred space it is when we gather!”

These delightfully meaningless gathering songs are often followed by collection songs that say “We love the poor and the lame, so that social justice might be served.”

Then, by Eucharist we’re ready for the big guns. “Oh, we love so much! We have a table. We eat bread. We gather around the table to eat bread. Did I mention we serve wine? We serve it with bread!”

Then, finally, we exit to some song that might as well have been written by Kool and the Gang. “We celebrate! We have a good time! Let’s go out and care about the poor!”

Thankfully, we can still pray, hear the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, and receive Him in Holy Communion. OCP hasn’t taken that away.

I’m not naming names, and my intent isn’t to point fingers at individuals. We come to church to worship… all I’m asking is that choir directors remember that and make it our first priority in the music they select. If God isn’t mentioned, if the song is about us, not Him, I don’t care how good the arrangement is; it isn’t going to inspire, and it won’t give Him the honor due Him.

Please, please, let us sing His praises.

Let’s get a few things straight.

Posted By on May 9, 2007

HAVING large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags, says a report to be published today by a green think tank.

The paper by the Optimum Population Trust will say that if couples had two children instead of three they could cut their family’s carbon dioxide output by the equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York.

I’m mad. I’ll admit it, I’m not feeling any particular desire to respond to the Optimum Population Trust rationally. I kind of want to rant and suggest how they could reduce the population in their own homes — but I won’t. Instead, I’ll tell them a few things that I wish they would, themselves, be rational enough to consider.

John Guillebaud, co-chairman of OPT has this to say: “The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child.”

Let’s get the first thing straight. I help the future of this planet by having a large family. I make it a better world by increasing the ratio of good people to twits like Guillebaud. I raise them well, with values like “thou shalt not kill” and “love your neighbor as yourself.” I’m not perfect as a parent, and my children do not learn these lessons perfectly but there is no doubt in the mind of any person with values who knows them that every blessed one of them is, indeed, a blessing to and an improvement in the world. My children bless the world with their charitable acts, with their volunteering, with their willingness to grow, and with the love they spread in the world. It is indisputable that if any one of them did not exist, the world would be a less good place.

Let’s get a second thing straight. My children will pay Guillebaud’s social security one day, and mine too, unless the Guillebauds of the world have their way and decrease the population sufficiently to eliminate the possibility of receiving social security before I reach retirement age.

Let’s get a third thing straight. Those who seek to trample the religious liberties of people who disagree with their own religious perspectives are doing a grave wrong. The idea that animals are more important than humans, or that human existence is inherently bad is a mistaken religious ideal. the members of OPT certainly have a right to believe these errors, let’s be honest about what it is that they are proposing: an alternate set of religious values. They are seeking to sway those who hold to other religious views, such as Judeo-Christian values and secular humanism.

Every human being has worth, and if I ever meet a person who dares to tell me to my face that one of my children is a waste of oxygen and should not exist, they will have to invent a new language to hold all the vocabulary I’m likely to spout.

quick prayers

Posted By on April 30, 2007

Please pray for my little ones for the next hour. They got hold of some snail bait, and we’re not sure how much they ingested, if any. Poison control said if there is going to be a problem it will happen in the next hour.

Thanks.

Update: It’s been a little more than an hour since the incident, and the kids are showing no symptoms at all. God is great!

Note to Hypertot

Posted By on April 20, 2007

The car in the next door neighbor’s driveway is there because it belongs to him. I don’t care how much you like cars, please resist the temptation to open other people’s cars and play with their steering wheels.

Monkeytot

Posted By on April 20, 2007

(She’s Hypertot’s little sister, who just turned 1 this month.)

Monkeytot: yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Me: Oh yeah?
Monkeytot: Yeah!

Tomorrow is my Carmelite meeting. Yaaay, grownups!

Note to Hypertot

Posted By on April 19, 2007

I hope you understand now why putting Kix into your nostril is a bad idea. In case you were wondering, Cheerios would be just as uncomfortable. I wouldn’t recommend trying.

Also, please take my word for it: putting an onion peel up your nose really isn’t going to make it “feel better.” I promise.

How Many Angels Don’t Dance on the Head of a Pin?

Posted By on April 19, 2007

When we think of the infinite we think, of course, of God. But when we think of God, it can be easy to forget to think of half of the infinite. God is all-powerful; God is all-loving. Maybe God can make a rock so heavy He cannot lift it. (I like to think He can, and that He can also lift it.)

So God is the “Big Guy.” Infinitely big. No argument here. But what about infinitely small?

What set all these thoughts in motion was a little booklet called The Catholic Reader. It’s a slender, staplebound collection of about 20 pages with prayers, poems, thoughts, and devotions. Near the beginning is a page of one-line “Inspirational Thoughts & Devotions,” and among them I found this gem:

No problem is too small for the Lord.

Now, I’ve heard many times that no problem is too big for the Lord. I’ve even used that as an encouragement for people who worried that God could not forgive their sins: nothing we have done is too big for God to deal with, because nothing we can do can be bigger than God’s infiniteness.

But too small? That’s another matter.

How many times have we avoided a prayer for a need, because we thought God was busy with more important things? How many times have we avoided a problem instead of dealing with it because it was too big for us, but too small to bother the Lord with? How many times have we allowed ourselves to wallow in the thought that we are too small for God’s attention?

Our Lord is infinite. One of the joys of that is that there’s “enough of Him to go around.” The fact that He’s busy helping this world leader or that cancer victim doesn’t mean He is spread too thin to help with our smaller problems. When one of my kids is hurting or in serious need, I don’t stop loving the others. And God is a much better (and more infinite) parent than I am.

Take your little concerns to Him. And don’t forget to offer thanks and worship while you’re there.

Carmel Sundae — the Discussion Group

Posted By on April 3, 2007

Well, it’s official: either this blog is a hit, or I’ve let it get to my head. Either way, what it means is that now there’s a discussion group for readers and others. This is to allow for more extensive discussion than a comment field generally allows, and to encourage a feeling of community. Topics are not limited, though, except by decency and manners, so if you have other thoughts, questions, prayer requests, or anything else to share, feel free.

If you’re interested in discussing things with other members of the blogosphere, feel free to join! If you prefer to keep reading without joining the group, that’s okay too. Either way, you are appreciated!

Bombeck and Feminism

Posted By on April 3, 2007

I’m reading a biography of Erma Bombeck, which expresses Erma’s attitude about women’s rights like this:

“The problem with the women’s movement is that it’s been too elitist.” Erma meant that the leaders of the movement had usually been women who had never been housewives, had never had children, and, in some cases, had never been married.

This really points to what my problem has always been with the so-called women’s movement and feminism in general. While they claim to be fighting for the rights of all women, or even just their own rights, what they are really fighting for is the right to tell me what to do. They claim to be fighting for the right to be professionals, when many or most of them already are; then they go on to label any choice that differs with their own (such as the choice to stay home and raise children) as oppression or in some other way harmful.

Let me clarify here and now that if wanting women to receive equal pay for equal work is feminism, I’m a feminist. If contending that women deserve every bit as much respect as men deserve, I’m a feminist. If supporting women in the choice to work or not is feminism, sign me up!

If, on the other hand, feminism means pitting women against each other, I don’t much like it. If the working woman, in the name of feminism, has the option of degrading the housewife for making a different choice than she has made, I do not believe the feminist is truly advancing the cause of women at all. Rather, the woman who degrades traditional womanhood brings harm to all women. This is a brand of feminism I cannot endorse.

If all things female must be abrogated for the sake of women’s rights, then the fight itself merely reflects a belief of the movement itself that womanhood is despicable.

St. Grandma

Posted By on March 25, 2007

Please pray for the repose of my grandmother, Agnes, who passed away today.

My most recent memory of her was a couple of years ago, when she and I were both visiting my mom. She had seen my sister’s freestanding toilet paper holder, and was so delighted that she decided to forego using her four-footed cane. She’d discovered that a toilet paper roll fit on it, and she set it up in her bathroom. For the rest of the week, anyone who visited heard her telling with giggles about her new toilet paper holder.

A remarkable young artist named Akiane had a vision of heaven as a small child, and she said that there were colors we have never seen on earth. I can picture my grandmother giggling with delight as she sees for the first time in many years, and sees new colors and sights… and most of all, sees the Face of Jesus.