Category: Uncategorized

READ SACRAMENTUM CARITATIS.

Catholic News Service reports.

Catholic News Agency reports.

CWNews reports. (Warning! Subscriber access requirement!)

Diogenes reports on reports.

SDG here, making a rare foray from guest-blogging limbo to highlight a film you MUST SEE if you live anywhere near anywhere that it’s going to be playing.

My REVIEW of INTO GREAT SILENCE

My INTERVIEW with filmmaker Philip Gröning

WHERE AND WHEN to see it (if you’re lucky)

Regular readers of Jimmy’s blog know that I have virtually never used my sporadic guest blogging simply to recommend a film. I have Decent Films for that.

Into Great Silence is a rare exception that rule — and many others.

I’ve been grateful for any number of cinematic experiences in my life, and found many movies to be inspiring, challenging, thought-provoking, what have you. I can’t fully articulate how Into Great Silence affected me, except to say that it was a transforming experience, in that I find very, very few films to be. I walked the dozen or so blocks from the screening room to my parking garage in another world — not just imaginatively immersed in the world of the film, but enveloped in a silence in my own heart.

Fittingly, its opening comes a week after Ash Wednesday. It makes for ideal Lenten viewing; I’ll probably add the DVD to my annual Lenten practice. (Don’t miss it in theaters just because the DVD is coming! My interview piece talks about why.)

Improbably, the film has been a hit in post-Christian, aggressively secular Europe, where it has played to packed theaters in a number of countries. Go figure. The US is supposed to be more religious than Europe; how will it play here?

REVIEW | INTERVIEW | WHERE AND WHEN

Joe Carter of Evangelical Outpost writes:

I don’t like to pitch stories to bloggers, but this is an issue that I think deserves our attention. My sources say that the funding of this program–which funds HIV testing for infants to prevent HIV related infections–was blocked by low-level staffers from the CDC. Why? Who knows? But all too often this is "how things get done" in D.C. Some unelected staffer sneaks in wording that circumvents the will of both the American people and our representatives.

Joe links to a story HERE, which states:

Every year thousands of babies, predominately from poor African-American families, are born at risk of developing HIV. Many of these children develop HIV related infections that could have easily been prevented by prenatal testing and treatment. States that have implemented HIV testing for infants have seen their infections rates drop dramatically. Such success even inspired Congress to pass the Ryan White Early Diagnosis Grant Program. The program authorized $30 million in funding to states with infant HIV testing in order to ensure that these vulnerable children are protected.

The program was created just two months ago yet someone has already included language in the appropriations bill to prohibit funding for the “Baby Aids” program. Section 20613(b) of H.J.Res. 20 states:

(b) None of the funds appropriated by this division may be used to: (1) implement section 2625 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff-33; relating to the Ryan White early diagnosis grant program)…

This provision does not save any money but simply prohibits funds to help identify these toddlers. In fact, the funding was already included in President Bush’s FY08 budget request. So why would anyone insert this language into the bill?

Earlier this week, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) attempted to add an amendment to restore the funding. Unfortunately, Democratic Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) never allowed the amendment to be included before the bill reached the Senate floor for a vote.

One would think that protecting sick babies is an issue that both Democrats and Republicans would fully endorse. So who inserted this language? And why wasn’t Sen. Coburn’s amendment added? Every American who cares about children should be asking that question – and demanding that Congress give us an answer.

SDG here, inspired by Jimmy’s fascinating post about purple in Advent to offer a few brief thoughts about Advent, including some 30-year-old observations about Christmas commercialism from Pre-16, and a plug for The Nativity Story — as well as (ahem) my coverage of it at Decent Films.

Every year at this time, of course, countless Christian families struggle with the annual pre-Christmas hype, which now seems to begin shortly after Halloween, and is in full swing by Thanksgiving. The notion of Advent as a distinct season of preparation, of recapitulating Israel’s long anticipation of her Messiah, seems lost amid a hectic welter of consumerism and commercialism.

As a result, lots of people are "Christmased out" long before the 25th. Forget about the Octave of Christmas — let alone the traditional 12 days — let’s just bring on New Year’s and get the whole "holiday season" over and done with for another year.

Of course there’s also the annual anti-commercialism backlash (for all the good it does), and the "Keep Christ is Christmas" campaign. At the same time, it may be worth noting that the evils of Christmas consumerism may have been slightly exaggerated.

For a couple of years now, a 1977 essay by then-Cardinal Ratzinger on Christmas commercialism has been getting some attention, probably because of his ascension to the Chair of Peter. Last year it was cited here, then this year it cropped up in the paper I write for, the National Catholic Register ("Have a B16 Christmas"). The official Yankee cap tip, though, goes to Wheat and Weeds for printing the following excerpt in full:

Nowadays a theologian or preacher is all but expected to heap more or less sarcastic criticism on our popular way of celebrating Christmas and, thus, to contrast impressively the sentimentality of our celebration with the reality of the first Christmas. Christmas, we are told, has been commercialized irredeemably and has degenerated into a senseless marketing frenzy; its religiosity has become tacky.

Of course, such criticism is largely justified, even though it might too readily forget that, behind the facade of business and sentimentality, the yearning for something purer and greater is not entirely extinguished; indeed, that the sentimental framework often provides the protecting shield behind which hides a noble and genuine sentiment that is simply reluctant to expose itself to the gaze of the other.

The hectic commercialism is repugnant to us, and rightly so: for it is indeed utterly out of place as a commemoration of the hushed mystery of Bethlehem, of the mystery of the God who for us made himself a beggar (2 Corinthians 8:9). And yet, underneath it all, does it not originate in the notion of giving and thus the inner urgency of love, with its compulsion to share, to give of oneself to the other? And does not the notion of giving transport us directly into the core of the mystery that is Christmas?

In the offertory prayer of the Christmas Vigil liturgy, we ask God for the grace to receive with joy his everlasting gifts that come to us in the celebration of Christ’s birth. Thus the concept of gift-giving is squarely anchored in this liturgy of the Church and, at the same time, we are made aware of the primal mode of all giving at Christmas: that God, on this holy night, desired to make himself into a gift to mankind, that he turned himself over to us.

The one genuine Christmas gift to mankind, to history, to each one of us, is none other than Jesus Christ himself. Even those who do not believe him to be God incarnate will have to admit that he has enriched and gifted the inner existence of generations upon generations.

So there you have it. Maybe you don’t have to feel guilty every time you set your foot in a mall or order another package from Amazon.com. OTOH, there are probably better things you can be doing as well, so…

With five kids, Suzanne and I are always looking for ways to make Advent more special and, well, more Adventy. I’m definitely looking forward to checking out the book Jimmy mentioned, The Catholic Home, to see how we might expand or enhance our family practices.

FWIW, here are a few quick notes about Advent in our house. If you have any suggestions you’d like to share, by all means note ’em in the combox!

As part of our effort to minimize the pre-Christmas hype and accent the distinctive nature of Advent, we wait until the third week of Advent — the week of the pink candle on the Advent wreath, the week of special joy at reaching the halfway mark — to trim the tree and hang lights on the house. (Actually, depending on the weather, we might hang lights earlier, but we don’t light them until the third week.)

We do an annual Jesse tree with OT and NT readings for every day of Advent. (Not the one in this example, but it gives you the idea.)

While it doesn’t directly relate to the meaning of the season, of course as Christmas approaches we watch It’s a Wonderful Life. Last year we watched The March of the Wooden Soldiers, and probably will again. Perhaps this year we’ll watch some version of A Christmas Carol too (I like ’em all).

And, starting this year, I believe we’ll have a new Advent tradition: watching THE NATIVITY STORY (opening in theaters today), the first major Hollywood movie that focuses on the real real meaning of Christmas since, well, practically ever. Hopefully we’ll catch in in theaters this weekend; next year we’ll watch it on DVD.

GET THE STORY.

Read more. Read even more.

SDG again with more Halloween pumpkin guest-blogging — this time real photos of an actual pumpkin that I (SDG, not Jimmy) decorated at a company picnic this year.

It’s not exactly a jack-o-lantern, because it’s not carved and therefore you couldn’t put a candle in it. So I called it "Jack-o-Maul" (as opposed to "Maul-o-lantern" or "Darth-o-lantern").

Some specifications:

• Horns/Nose: carved carrots (affixed with toothpicks)
• Face paint: Sharpies (black & red)
• Teeth/Whites of eyes: Wite-out
• Eyes: Grape halves, straight pins
• Arms: Mr. Potato Head
• Lightsaber: Tinker Toys

GET A CLOSER LOOK.

SDG here with some Halloween jack-o-lantern art guest-blogging.

Every year at Halloween I (SDG, not Jimmy) carve a jack-o-lantern. Sometimes it’s funny, sometimes it’s scary, sometimes it’s just… strange.

We take pictures every year, but when I went to look for the pictures for what I consider my most interesting jack-o-lantern to date, I was disappointed to find that they seem to be missing.

However, all is not lost. Inspired by Jimmy’s earlier post about virtual jack-o-lantern carving, I’ve done a quick virtual mockup of my best memory of what the jack-o-lantern looked like.

Again, this is not a photo, just a down-and-dirty Photoshop mockup, but I did really carve this design (more or less; I’m sure it’s not exactly the same), about seven or eight years ago.

I called it "The Hierarchy of Hell," because the inspiration was C. S. Lewis’s imaginative depiction of hell in The Screwtape Letters as a society in which everyone seeks to devour everyone else.

"The Hierarchy of Hell" depicts four concentric heads, each devouring and/or being devoured by others.

After carving "The Hierarchy of Hell," I discovered that my jack-o-lantern had an unexpected but eerily fitting "performance art" aspect: As the pumpkin began to shrivel and decompose, the #2 head slowly began to withdraw into the maw of the largest head, while the mouth of the largest head slowly began to "close" on the other heads!

By the time I finally went to throw the thing away, it had collapsed into a mouldering heap — and when I went to pick it up, it fell apart completely — and there on the ground where the base of the pumpkin had been was the clearly recognizable ruins of the three inner faces, long since fallen back against the floor of the pumpkin, grimacing up at me.

I have to tell you, I felt I had come a lot closer to portraying the reality of hell than I ever meant to!

P.S. I’ll follow up this post with another with some real photos of a pumpkin I decorated (as opposed to carved) at a company picnic this year.

SDG here with a personalized follow-up to JIMMY’S "WHAT’S THIS?" POST, which highlighted the Photoshop "cloning" technique on display HERE. (Tip of the Yankee cap to the reader who also pointed out THIS SIMILAR SITE.)

Being somewhat proficient (though hardly an expert) at this kind of Photoshopping, I was inspired to take a shot at creating a similar hybrid myself.

Incidentally, since I’m not aware of anyone having undertaken to name this particular breed of hybrid before now, I hereby dub my creature a "hipponetta." (No, it’s not part hippopotamus; "hippo" is Greek for "horse" — "hippopotamus" means "river horse" — and "netta" is Greek for "duck." The same use of "hippo" is found in "hippogriff," a mythical cross between a horse and the similarly mythical griffin.)

Anyway, while I’m pleased with the results, I’m aware that my image is far from a perfect illusion. The main problem is that the "found" images I started with — taken from MorgueFile.com, an excellent website for royalty-free images — weren’t perfect matches to begin with, and couldn’t entirely be reconciled. My hybrid image is really an impossible mishmash of two different perspectives as well as different animal parts, and it only works to the extent that you don’t notice or don’t pay attention.

What I’m most pleased with is the way I was able to apply the texture of the duck’s chest and neck feathers to the shape, features and highlighting of the horse’s chest and neck. I’d never tried anything like that before, and I think it came out pretty well.

All in all, it was a lot of fun, and in a way even the imperfections make it more so, at least to me.

GET A BETTER LOOK AT THE HIPPONETTA.

REVISIT THOSE OTHER TWO SITES.

Is it "too soon"?

I don’t think so.

FWIW, here’s my take.

And here’s David Beamer’s take (father of United 93 passenger Todd Beamer).

Also, some some discussion — and interview excerpts with the director — from Rush Limbaugh.

No. Not really.

The truth is: Thomas Howard is my hero, in more ways than one.

First, as an explainer of Catholic sensibilities to the Evangelical Protestant mindset in which I was raised, he is without peer. Just as to deconstruct non-Catholic misunderstandings on justification, the papacy, the canon of scripture, and practically anything else you can think of, go to Jimmy Akin every time (Jimmy is my hero too), likewise to awaken appreciation in the most trenchant Fundamentalist heart of ritual and ceremony, of worship in liturgy and sacrament, of sacred art and architecture, of the whole sacramental and incarnational worldview, Tom Howard is your man.

As a young Evangelical yearning for something more, I discovered Howard’s Evangelical Is Not Enough at just the right moment in my life. It was like water in the desert to me. Chance or the Dance? also is wonderful, though I got even more out of Hallowed Be This House (which I see is now published under the title Splendor in the Ordinary: Your Home as a Holy Place).

Secondly, Howard is a magnificent writer, a stylist of extraordinary grace, wit, and power. He makes wonderful use of words like "precincts" and "hugger-mugger" and "surfeit," and puts sentences and paragraphs together with such elegance and music that form and function become one, and you start to absorb something of what he is trying to tell you just from the sound of the words. He is almost more a poet than an essayist; he writes with the moving energy and joy of a man who loves deeply what he is writing about, who feels it down to the marrow in his bones.

Robert Bolt said that in A Man for All Seasons that he strove to create "a bold and beautiful verbal architecture." Howard’s writing is like that, and reading it, one feels, rather than thinks: If verbal architecture can be like this, with nothing dry or functional or utilitarian about it, why not church architecture also?

Anyway, recently at Arts & Faith, a discussion board I visit more or less regularly, there was some discussion around the disconnect between, on the one hand, Catholic and Orthodox veneration of relics and icons, and Protestant discomfort with such practices on the other.

This subject triggered my Thomas Howard Response Mechanism, which sets me off and running quoting Evangelical Is Not Enough, Hallowed Be This House and whatever else comes to hand (in a pinch I’ve even been known to reach for Once Upon a Time, God…).

So, I began working on a contribution to the thread, but what with one thing leading to another, as I secretly knew from the beginning it would, I got completely carried away and ended up writing a sprawling essay touching on some of the general themes regarding which Howard had been among my earliest and most influential guides.

And, as is often the case when one tries to do the same sort of thing that one’s hero does, I did what little I could to honor Howard’s style as well as his ideas.

Of course I could never really even approximately "channel" Howard, or hope to match either the talent or the style of his inimitable prose. The man is a true original. (The first few grafs of my piece in particular are too jargony and abstract, though I think it gets better after that, about the time I get to Genesis 1.) But I think anyone familiar with Howard may notice that I am at least trying to walk in Howard’s footsteps, even if I don’t quite have his stride.

Read SDG’s "Reflections on a sacramental/incarnational worldview" at Arts & Faith

Terry Mattingly has the story.

The Vatican is known its complex rituals, rich in ancient symbols and mysterious details. Take, for example, the funeral of Pope John Paul II, as described by the International Herald Tribune.

“The 84-year-old John Paul was laid out in Clementine Hall, dressed in white and red vestments, his head covered with a white bishop’s miter and propped up on three dark gold pillows,” wrote Ian Fisher of the New York Times. “Tucked under his left arm was the silver staff, called the crow’s ear, that he had carried in public.”

Get the joke?

You see, that ornate silver shepherd’s crook is actually called a crosier (or “crozier”), not a “crow’s ear.”

Get the story.