Psychoactive or performance-enhancing medicines? We’re getting better at them than you might think.
I’m still waiting for an over-the-counter learning aid, though. Man, I’d love to be able to go to the pharmacy and pick up a safe, effective, no-prescription thingie to help me better learn Aramaic . . . or canon law . . . or calculus . . . or linguistic theory . . . or history . . . or . . .
STARTING CAPTIONS:
Catholic writer Danielle Bean composed a mother’s version of St. Francis of Assisi’s Prayer for Peace during the eye of a storm of childhood stomach-flu:
A MOTHER’S PRAYER OF ST. FRANCIS
(STOMACH FLU VERSION)Lord,
Make me an instrument of Your healing love;
Where there is vomit let me bring Lysol;
Where there are boogers, Kleenex;
Where there is fever, Tylenol;
Where there is boredom, library books;
Where there are chills, warm blankets;
And where there is whininess, Scooby Doo.O Divine Master,
Grant that I may not so much seek
To be well-rested as to provide clean sheets,
To be appreciated as to disinfect the house,
To be showered as to give warm baths,
For it is in scrubbing out the bathroom that we are cleansed,
It is in sharing laps that we find comfort,
And it is after resting that we will return
To a normal life.
(Nod to the Curt Jester for the link.)
EXCERPTS:
1. He takes truth seriously. Born in Bavaria in 1927, on the eve of the Nazi seizure of power in Germany, young Joseph Ratzinger saw firsthand the brutality and terror of the Nazi way of life. Behind totalitarian violence was utter contempt for the truth claims of the historic Christian faith. As a schoolboy, Ratzinger once witnessed his Nazi teacher replace the cross in the center of his village with a Maypole, a neo-pagan symbol of Teutonic native religion.
Despite the defeat of Hitler and Stalin, the de-Christianization of Europe and, to a lesser extent, of North America continues to pose a great challenge to the church today. This is why Cardinal Ratzinger spoke, on the eve of his papal election, of the "dictatorship of relativism."
On his episcopal coat of arms are the Latin words "cooperatores veritatis," a phrase taken from 3 John 1:8, "That we may be fellow workers for the truth." The Christian faith stands or falls with the imperious claim that the almighty Creator of all that is has acted in space and time to reveal himself in nature and history and to redeem the world through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is a statement about the way things are, not merely about what is "true for me."
(CHT to the reader who e-mailed!)
A reader writes:
I hope you will answer my question concerning the uses of Holy Water. I to like have and use holy water at home. So when I travel I like to pick up holy water from different churches. Its a nice way to visit other churches, the priest, parisherners and to collect holy water.
Recently I was in my home town. There is more than one chuch in this particular city. I went to one particular church there and I was
very much disappointed in the way I was treated because I wanted holy water. Never in all the years I have been catholic, and I am cradle born have I been so disppointed by the way I was treated by the church secretary and even the deacon himself because I wanted holy water. I was told that they had found that people were using holy water for sacriliege purposes. Upon hearing that I didn’t know whether to cry or laugh. I could understand a secretary being ignorant to the use of Holy Water but I can’t understand the ignorance of a church deacon. They even had the nerve to ask me if that was my intended purpose.My question is, Can holy water be use sacrilegiously? My mind, heart and soul says "No Way!"
Well eventually I did get my holy water but not after I had recieved the third degree. I finally had to ask, Are you going to deny me taking holy water from this church? I had to ask three times. Each time they said no but they were not too happy because I wanted holy water. I don’t understand. I was really confounded by their behavior.
You certain encountered a very unusual circumstance and it’s understandable that you’d feel confused and disappointed.
It is at least possible for a person to use holy water–or any sacramental–for a sacreligious purpose. For example, an evil cult might take some and (God forbid) use it mockingly in ceremonies worshipping the devil or something.
Hypothetically, the local parish may hae turned up such a group–or perhaps just a couple of rebellious teenagers–using it for a genuinely sacreligious purpose.
I also wonder if there might have been a communications problem here. It also is possible for people to use holy water superstitiously–as if God were definitely going to use it to accomplish certain miracles or as if it had magical powers or needed to be used in all kinds of circumstances where it doesn’t. It is much easier for me to imagine people using holy water supertitiously than sacreligiously.
If the parish staff–including the deacon–were not used to having folks show up and ask for holy water and someone showed up and asked for a significant quantity, they may have wondred–out of a misplaced and possibly puritanical sense of zeal–wondered whether it would be used superstitiously, even if not sacreligiously. The deacon might have then misspoke and said "sacreligious" when he meant "superstitious."
I don’t know that this is the explanation. It’s just conjecture. But it’s something that might lead to the kind of unfortunate experience you had.
A reader writes:
I went to confession today, and when the priest said the words of absolution
he left out the usual "from your sins." So it was, instead, "I absolved you
in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." I take it this is
valid. I’m just looking for confirmation on this.
You are correct that this would be valid (unless the priest intended to absolve you of something other than your sins–e.g., ecclesiastical censures–though that’s not in view in this case).
Isn’t the required form
simply "I absolve thee" according to Trent? Thanks for your help.
Trent references the words of absolution in passing but doens’t quote them completely. It says "I absolve thee, etc." In making these references, Trent is not attempting to specify the minimal form necessary for absolution. It is simply stressing that the absolution takes effect when the minister says the words that constitute its form. Part of the formula is provided simply to indicate when this occurs.
There is no single set of words that are necessary for validity in the case of this sacrament. Various formluas of absolution are used in different rites of the Church, though "I absolve you" is the one used in the Latin rite. It is valid as long as the priest intends to do what the Church does, even if he omits the object of absolution. His intent to do what the Church does–since the Church absolves sins in this sacrament–is sufficient.
20
Ignatius Insight has another in its series of weekly articles on Catholic bloggers. This time they print responses to the question of what value there is in Catholic blogs.
Technically, the question they posed (though they don’t print it in the article) was "What can a Catholic blog do that others can’t?"
Your humble blogger has the lead answer this week.
What I’ll be interested to see is if they print the opening of my answer to next week’s question ("What criticisms of blogs are most valid?"). It was distinctly off-the-wall.
HIGHLIGHTS:
HIGHLIGHTS: