Did you miss Mother Angelica Live Classics this week? If you did, you missed a great episode, but thankfully EWTN shares it's programming on Youtube now.
I just love Mother Angelica. She's a wonderful teacher and inspiration to me.
God bless you Mother Angelica!!
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Friday, July 8, 2011
I trusted you Fr. Corapi...
I've avoided this topic long enough. My intention was not to shove it in a closet and pretend it wasn't happening, but rather to wait and see.
I didn't want to believe it and I didn't want to slander a priest whom I have loved, trusted and respected for so many years. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. I wanted to believe this was some horrible attack by the enemy to bring down a good priest and great defender of the Faith. I wanted to know that the trust I put into this priest was well placed. I wanted to believe that he was a victim because to believe he was guilty was just too devastating. It made me question my ability to discern the truth from lies. Who could I trust if someone I looked up to like Father Corapi was lying and leading a double life, preaching one thing and doing another? How could I fall for such deceit? Who should I trust if not a priest who preaches so well on the faith?
I'm a convert. I don't know that I would actually be Catholic today if not for Father Corapi's teaching on EWTN and Youtube. Eventually probably, but Father Corapi's teaching fast tracked me to becoming Catholic. I had so many questions about the Catholic faith and like many others before me, found them answered on EWTN (God bless you Mother Angelica). While Father Corapi certainly was not the only one teaching me the Catholic faith on EWTN, he was one of my favorites (as you may already know if you've read my conversion story on this blog).
Father Corapi not only taught the Catholic faith well, he defended it. He inspired others to defend it with knowledge. He inspired a love of the Catholic faith and a love for learning the Catholic faith. He was a great speaker. He was also a great deceiver.
As I said earlier, I didn't want to jump to any quick judgements when the "Corapi Controversy" first began hitting the media. I wanted to give it some time and see what actually came to light. Before the rumors began, I noticed a different looking Corapi. He had shaved his head, dyed his goatee and gotten an orange tan. I wondered what that was all about. It was strange to me and others I talked with. We couldn't figure out why he would do that to himself- we still can't figure that out. It's bizarre. Was Father Corapi having a mid-life crisis or something?
Like so many others, I was shocked and outraged on behalf of Father Corapi when he was suspended back in March. I was so full of absolute trust in this priest that I could not believe for a moment the rumors of him acting in anyway unprofessional as a priest. I thought "the enemy is attacking a great Catholic priest" and I stood by that belief for months.
Then the bizarre "Black Sheep Dog" story came out along with his statement that he was no longer going to be called "father", but simply "The Black Sheep Dog". Well, pardon my language here but "Just what the hell was that?" Now my shock was over-run with my anger. I shouted "Hypocrite" at his blog. He had preached and taught for YEARS about "offering it up" and "carry your cross" when we suffered, he NEVER preached about giving up and walking away! Who was THIS man and where was the Father Corapi I had come to know??
Ahh... and there lies the problem. I didn't know Father Corapi, I never had. The Father Corapi I thought I knew was a fraud. He was made up. The real Corapi was busy with prostitutes, sexting and living away from his order collecting millions from his media company. In other words he was the SAME John Corapi as he was BEFORE his conversion "back to the Church" (from his conversion story video). All the ways he described himself prior to becoming a priest are exactly what has come out now. He's the same old John Corapi he was in his youth, drinking, drugs, women, lying...boldly living in sin without thought for morality. There was no conversion. It was all a lie, a deceitful lie to sucker people in.
That is devastating to so many of us who trusted him, respected him, looked up to him and believed in him. And what of his poor mother? She must be even more devastated then the rest of us. He has spoken of his parents lovingly during his speeches, how proud they were when he "changed" his life and became a priest. What must she think of him now? I believe his father has already passed away- at least he was spared seeing his son fall so low.
This week's statement by SOLT's (the order Corapi belonged to) naming the allegations and 'proof' found are just too much to ignore any longer.
Source: http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=114254
You lied to us "Father" Corapi. It's not just that you did these things, it's that you continue to deny it and call yourself innocent when the proof has already been found. Admit it!! Stop telling everyone you are innocent and face up to what you've done. You need to confess, repent, do penance AND apologize to everyone. It's not that I thought the man sinless or that he could do no wrong, I'm not that naive. It's that I didn't think he would flat out lie to everyone or be the fraud he has been proven to be. To say I am disappointed doesn't begin to cover it.
Christ was betrayed by a kiss, those who believed in Father Corapi were betrayed by his lying lips. You continue to say you are innocent when the evidence is overwhelming against you. Judas gained 30 silver coins for betraying Christ, Corapi gained boats, ATV's, luxury vehicles and more for betraying those who believed in him and trusted him. Was it worth it John?
You've taught me your last lesson John Corapi... never completely trust anyone, even a priest. I'll pray for you, but I'll never trust you again.
I didn't want to believe it and I didn't want to slander a priest whom I have loved, trusted and respected for so many years. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. I wanted to believe this was some horrible attack by the enemy to bring down a good priest and great defender of the Faith. I wanted to know that the trust I put into this priest was well placed. I wanted to believe that he was a victim because to believe he was guilty was just too devastating. It made me question my ability to discern the truth from lies. Who could I trust if someone I looked up to like Father Corapi was lying and leading a double life, preaching one thing and doing another? How could I fall for such deceit? Who should I trust if not a priest who preaches so well on the faith?
I'm a convert. I don't know that I would actually be Catholic today if not for Father Corapi's teaching on EWTN and Youtube. Eventually probably, but Father Corapi's teaching fast tracked me to becoming Catholic. I had so many questions about the Catholic faith and like many others before me, found them answered on EWTN (God bless you Mother Angelica). While Father Corapi certainly was not the only one teaching me the Catholic faith on EWTN, he was one of my favorites (as you may already know if you've read my conversion story on this blog).
Father Corapi not only taught the Catholic faith well, he defended it. He inspired others to defend it with knowledge. He inspired a love of the Catholic faith and a love for learning the Catholic faith. He was a great speaker. He was also a great deceiver.
As I said earlier, I didn't want to jump to any quick judgements when the "Corapi Controversy" first began hitting the media. I wanted to give it some time and see what actually came to light. Before the rumors began, I noticed a different looking Corapi. He had shaved his head, dyed his goatee and gotten an orange tan. I wondered what that was all about. It was strange to me and others I talked with. We couldn't figure out why he would do that to himself- we still can't figure that out. It's bizarre. Was Father Corapi having a mid-life crisis or something?
Like so many others, I was shocked and outraged on behalf of Father Corapi when he was suspended back in March. I was so full of absolute trust in this priest that I could not believe for a moment the rumors of him acting in anyway unprofessional as a priest. I thought "the enemy is attacking a great Catholic priest" and I stood by that belief for months.
Then the bizarre "Black Sheep Dog" story came out along with his statement that he was no longer going to be called "father", but simply "The Black Sheep Dog". Well, pardon my language here but "Just what the hell was that?" Now my shock was over-run with my anger. I shouted "Hypocrite" at his blog. He had preached and taught for YEARS about "offering it up" and "carry your cross" when we suffered, he NEVER preached about giving up and walking away! Who was THIS man and where was the Father Corapi I had come to know??
Ahh... and there lies the problem. I didn't know Father Corapi, I never had. The Father Corapi I thought I knew was a fraud. He was made up. The real Corapi was busy with prostitutes, sexting and living away from his order collecting millions from his media company. In other words he was the SAME John Corapi as he was BEFORE his conversion "back to the Church" (from his conversion story video). All the ways he described himself prior to becoming a priest are exactly what has come out now. He's the same old John Corapi he was in his youth, drinking, drugs, women, lying...boldly living in sin without thought for morality. There was no conversion. It was all a lie, a deceitful lie to sucker people in.
That is devastating to so many of us who trusted him, respected him, looked up to him and believed in him. And what of his poor mother? She must be even more devastated then the rest of us. He has spoken of his parents lovingly during his speeches, how proud they were when he "changed" his life and became a priest. What must she think of him now? I believe his father has already passed away- at least he was spared seeing his son fall so low.
This week's statement by SOLT's (the order Corapi belonged to) naming the allegations and 'proof' found are just too much to ignore any longer.
Fr. Corapi's Order Finds Him Guilty
ROBSTOWN, TEXAS, July 5 (CNA/EWTN News) - Father John Corapi's religious order has found him guilty of substance abuse, sexual activity and violating his promise of poverty.
A July 5 press release from the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity (SOLT) said that while Fr. Corapi was involved in public ministry he had "sexual relations and years of cohabitation with a woman known to him, when the relationship began, as a prostitute."
The investigative team also found that he "repeatedly abused alcohol and drugs," "recently engaged in 'sexting' activity with one or more women in Montana," and holds legal title "to over $1 million in real estate, numerous luxury vehicles, motorcycles, an ATV, a boat dock, and several motor boats."
His religious order said it is concerned "Fr. Corapi is now misleading (many) individuals through his false statements and characterizations."
"It is for these Catholics that SOLT, by means of this announcement, seeks to set the record straight."
Source: http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=114254
You lied to us "Father" Corapi. It's not just that you did these things, it's that you continue to deny it and call yourself innocent when the proof has already been found. Admit it!! Stop telling everyone you are innocent and face up to what you've done. You need to confess, repent, do penance AND apologize to everyone. It's not that I thought the man sinless or that he could do no wrong, I'm not that naive. It's that I didn't think he would flat out lie to everyone or be the fraud he has been proven to be. To say I am disappointed doesn't begin to cover it.
Christ was betrayed by a kiss, those who believed in Father Corapi were betrayed by his lying lips. You continue to say you are innocent when the evidence is overwhelming against you. Judas gained 30 silver coins for betraying Christ, Corapi gained boats, ATV's, luxury vehicles and more for betraying those who believed in him and trusted him. Was it worth it John?
You've taught me your last lesson John Corapi... never completely trust anyone, even a priest. I'll pray for you, but I'll never trust you again.
Is.2:22 'Stop trusting in mere humans,
who have but a breath in their nostrils.
Why hold them in esteem?'
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
A "Living, Breathing Document?" Try Reading It!
by Contributor Tim Siggia
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government, lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." -- Patrick Henry
As we celebrate another Fourth of July, it seems only fitting that we pay at least a passing tribute to the most important of our founding documents, the Constitution of the United States. Some may argue that it was the Declaration of Independence that was officially proclaimed on July 4, 1776, and that the Constitution was not adopted until 11 years later, on Sept. 17, 1787, and they would be right. However, the 11-year hiatus between our nation having declared its independence from the British Crown and adopted the Constitution which would be the bulwark of its existence stands as proof that the Constitution was not drafted overnight, and neither was it lightly considered by those who put it together. It was written, and fully intended by those who wrote it, to stand for time.
What the liberals among us regard as axiomatic, unquestionable truth concerning the Constitution is recognized by conservatives as the Biggest Lie Ever Told. On the evening of June 30, 2011, Democrat strategist Chris Hahn, a former campaign worker for Sen. Chuck Shumer (D-N.Y.), repeated the lie once again: that our Constitution is "a living, breathing document that evolves over time." Oh really? To those who not only perpetuate this lie but believe it themselves, may I put forth a question: Have you ever tried reading that living, breathing document? Do you even know how many articles it contains, and how many amendments? (There are seven of the first, and 27 of the second.)
Let me suggest an analogy here, one to which any homeowner -- or, for that matter, any responsible tenant -- can readily relate: Consider the foundation upon which your home is built. Is it a "living, breathing" structure that evolves over time and shifts with the prevailing winds and sands? Of course it isn't! If it were, it would not support your home, and you know it! Well, the Constitution of the United States is the foundation of our representative republic, and the Founding Fathers intended for it to be just that: a firm, rock-solid foundation, not a "living, breathing" anything.
But what about the amendments to the Constitution, I can hear the liberals protesting now? Aren't they evidence of the Constitution being a "living, breathing" entity? Once again, I offer the analogy of a house's foundation. Even the firmest of structures will eventually show signs of decay, and so it is with our Constitution. But note here that as the Constitution itself was not lightly drafted, so the amendment process is not likely taken. In order for the Constitution to be amended, or to have an amendment repealed, the following process must be undertaken. The amendment must be proposed in Congress, and passed by a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate -- which means that unless one party totally dominates both houses of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans must be in fundamental agreement with it. Next it must be signed by the president. Even then the process is not over, for the measure must then be ratified by the individual states before it becomes part of our Constitution. It is a most cumbersome process, and intentionally made so by our Founding Fathers for the specific purpose of preventing our most important founding document from becoming the very thing liberals now claim it to be: a living, breathing document that shifts with the prevailing sands of time.
So why, in the face of all this, do liberals still adamantly aver our Constitution to be a "living, breathing document"? May I suggest a translation here from politico-speak to plain, simple English? What they are really saying here is that our Constitution says whatever they want it to say, and means whatever they want it to mean. Two glaring examples of this prevail to this day. The first example is the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision of 1973, in which a liberal-dominated Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that a woman has a "constitutional" right to have her unborn child aborted. Yet where in the Constitution is this matter addressed, or, for that matter, even suggested? I have read the Constitution -- more than once -- and I can unequivocally state for the record that it IS NOT THERE! Yet because five liberal Supreme Court justices agreed that it OUGHT to be there, even if it isn't, it was therefore made "constitutional" by judicial fiat. To this day, Democrats and other liberals still glowing cite "a woman's constitutional right to a safe, legal abortion," though their claim has absolutely no basis in fact.
The second is a deliberate misreading of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment which supposedly establishes the separation of Church and State. The Establishment Clause simply reads, "The Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion." What it means, and was fully intended to mean, is that there would be no establishment of any one religion to be the national religion in exclusion of all others. There is nothing here about any supposed separation of Church and State, though liberals continually read this into the Establishment Clause. What follows the Establishment Clause -- and about what we never hear a peep out of from liberals -- is the Exercise Clause, which states, "nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It is the Exercise Clause, in fact, that liberals have DELIBERATELY ignored, resulting in federal regulations prohibiting school prayer, praying in public places, and displays of the Ten Commandments and other things pertaining to religion.
So where does the phrase, "separation of Church and State," originally appear? Not in the Constitution, nor in any of our other founding documents, but rather, in a private letter from Thomas Jefferson to a group of Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut -- a private letter whose contents were never intended to become legislation.
For those who do not have pocket Constitutions (which are available upon request from the Heritage Foundation at www.heritage.org), the Constitution may be found online. May I suggest to my liberal friends, as well as anyone else who may be interested in going to the source for the truth, a reading of this wonderful document? May I especially suggest a perusal of Amendments 1-10, known to every school child as the Bill of Rights, to see what every one of these amendments has in common regarding the role of government in our lives, and then compare it to what we hear from the White House today? It all just might result in a most profound education.
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government, lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." -- Patrick Henry
As we celebrate another Fourth of July, it seems only fitting that we pay at least a passing tribute to the most important of our founding documents, the Constitution of the United States. Some may argue that it was the Declaration of Independence that was officially proclaimed on July 4, 1776, and that the Constitution was not adopted until 11 years later, on Sept. 17, 1787, and they would be right. However, the 11-year hiatus between our nation having declared its independence from the British Crown and adopted the Constitution which would be the bulwark of its existence stands as proof that the Constitution was not drafted overnight, and neither was it lightly considered by those who put it together. It was written, and fully intended by those who wrote it, to stand for time.
What the liberals among us regard as axiomatic, unquestionable truth concerning the Constitution is recognized by conservatives as the Biggest Lie Ever Told. On the evening of June 30, 2011, Democrat strategist Chris Hahn, a former campaign worker for Sen. Chuck Shumer (D-N.Y.), repeated the lie once again: that our Constitution is "a living, breathing document that evolves over time." Oh really? To those who not only perpetuate this lie but believe it themselves, may I put forth a question: Have you ever tried reading that living, breathing document? Do you even know how many articles it contains, and how many amendments? (There are seven of the first, and 27 of the second.)
Let me suggest an analogy here, one to which any homeowner -- or, for that matter, any responsible tenant -- can readily relate: Consider the foundation upon which your home is built. Is it a "living, breathing" structure that evolves over time and shifts with the prevailing winds and sands? Of course it isn't! If it were, it would not support your home, and you know it! Well, the Constitution of the United States is the foundation of our representative republic, and the Founding Fathers intended for it to be just that: a firm, rock-solid foundation, not a "living, breathing" anything.
But what about the amendments to the Constitution, I can hear the liberals protesting now? Aren't they evidence of the Constitution being a "living, breathing" entity? Once again, I offer the analogy of a house's foundation. Even the firmest of structures will eventually show signs of decay, and so it is with our Constitution. But note here that as the Constitution itself was not lightly drafted, so the amendment process is not likely taken. In order for the Constitution to be amended, or to have an amendment repealed, the following process must be undertaken. The amendment must be proposed in Congress, and passed by a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate -- which means that unless one party totally dominates both houses of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans must be in fundamental agreement with it. Next it must be signed by the president. Even then the process is not over, for the measure must then be ratified by the individual states before it becomes part of our Constitution. It is a most cumbersome process, and intentionally made so by our Founding Fathers for the specific purpose of preventing our most important founding document from becoming the very thing liberals now claim it to be: a living, breathing document that shifts with the prevailing sands of time.
So why, in the face of all this, do liberals still adamantly aver our Constitution to be a "living, breathing document"? May I suggest a translation here from politico-speak to plain, simple English? What they are really saying here is that our Constitution says whatever they want it to say, and means whatever they want it to mean. Two glaring examples of this prevail to this day. The first example is the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision of 1973, in which a liberal-dominated Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that a woman has a "constitutional" right to have her unborn child aborted. Yet where in the Constitution is this matter addressed, or, for that matter, even suggested? I have read the Constitution -- more than once -- and I can unequivocally state for the record that it IS NOT THERE! Yet because five liberal Supreme Court justices agreed that it OUGHT to be there, even if it isn't, it was therefore made "constitutional" by judicial fiat. To this day, Democrats and other liberals still glowing cite "a woman's constitutional right to a safe, legal abortion," though their claim has absolutely no basis in fact.
The second is a deliberate misreading of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment which supposedly establishes the separation of Church and State. The Establishment Clause simply reads, "The Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion." What it means, and was fully intended to mean, is that there would be no establishment of any one religion to be the national religion in exclusion of all others. There is nothing here about any supposed separation of Church and State, though liberals continually read this into the Establishment Clause. What follows the Establishment Clause -- and about what we never hear a peep out of from liberals -- is the Exercise Clause, which states, "nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It is the Exercise Clause, in fact, that liberals have DELIBERATELY ignored, resulting in federal regulations prohibiting school prayer, praying in public places, and displays of the Ten Commandments and other things pertaining to religion.
So where does the phrase, "separation of Church and State," originally appear? Not in the Constitution, nor in any of our other founding documents, but rather, in a private letter from Thomas Jefferson to a group of Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut -- a private letter whose contents were never intended to become legislation.
For those who do not have pocket Constitutions (which are available upon request from the Heritage Foundation at www.heritage.org), the Constitution may be found online. May I suggest to my liberal friends, as well as anyone else who may be interested in going to the source for the truth, a reading of this wonderful document? May I especially suggest a perusal of Amendments 1-10, known to every school child as the Bill of Rights, to see what every one of these amendments has in common regarding the role of government in our lives, and then compare it to what we hear from the White House today? It all just might result in a most profound education.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Saturday, June 25, 2011
Rant Warning
Warning: I AM going to rant.
First Rant: It's summer time and yes it's hot out. Everyone is trying to stay cool and enjoy the warm season while it lasts here in New England, I get that, really I do. What I don't get is going to church with your butt hanging out of your shorty shorts, or your cleavage spilling out of your spaghetti string tank tops. What ever happened to wearing your "Sunday best" for God? You get all dressed up for dates, weddings, parties but not for God and worshipping? What's wrong with you?
You're in CHURCH for goodness sake, COVER UP!! No one wants to worship while seeing your body parts dangling out of your clothes. If you want to dress like you're for sale please take it somewhere else because my children and I don't want to see it!
You're in CHURCH for goodness sake, COVER UP!! No one wants to worship while seeing your body parts dangling out of your clothes. If you want to dress like you're for sale please take it somewhere else because my children and I don't want to see it!Church is NOT for showing off your abs, new boob job or your perky butt. Church is for WORSHIP. Show some reverence and respect not only for God, but also for others seeking to worship in church and how about showing some self respect?? Dress appropriately for church. You are worshipping GOD, you are receiving your Savior in the Eucharist. This is HOLY, you need to dress appropriately.
I am not saying you need to go out and spend a lot of money on clothes just for church. They don't need to be expensive, they need to be MODEST. Have you ever looked at the amount of times modesty is brought up in the scriptures? Guess what?? Modesty doesn't go out of fashion with God, certainly not during mass. Besides being disrespectful in your revealing clothes, you look like a complete idiot.
Second Rant: This is to all the parishes out there who advertise in their bulletins and websites that they are an AC/climate controlled parish where parishioners can worship in a cool AC controlled environment during the hot summer months. If you advertise it then PLEASE DO IT!
I can't tell you how many times myself and others go to a church in the summer BECAUSE it offers a cool place to worship only to get there and find the doors open to the summer heat and people inside fanning themselves silly with their bulletins. Those same bulletins that advertise AC! What's up with that? If you can't afford to run the AC then STOP ADVERTISING YOU DO. It's false advertising and people are tired of it.
Final Rant: Shut up!! People need to SHUT UP in church. This has been a pet peeve of mine for YEARS- DECADES to be honest. But recently I had another
incident that really pushed my buttons and then soon after that I was talking with other Catholics and they all shared similar stories about their parishes. Lack of reverence.
A few weeks ago, I attended a Sunday morning mass (I usually go to Saturday evening). As soon as mass had ended, the priest barely making it to the narthex (entry area) to shake hands with parishioners as they leave; and parishioners exploded into talking about baseball scores, the weather, the price of gas and their cute new sandals while the "choir" (more like a band) belted out BLUES tunes with their electric guitar, drums and baby grand piano- I kid you not.
Unfortunately for all the folks who wanted to quietly pray after mass, we were instead bombarded with loud music and people nearly yelling over the music to talk about nonsense. I can't exactly say I was stunned as this wasn't the first time this has occurred, but none the less I was ticked off, disappointed and appalled at the lack of reverence shown by nearly every single person in this parish (and no I am not saying which one). The nave/sanctuary is NOT the place to be doing this. Can't you shut up for the 3 minutes it takes you to walk OUT of the nave and sanctuary areas?? Apparently not.
What is WRONG with everyone?? Do they not know what worship is about? What our parish churches are about? WHO is IN our parish churches?? If you're a Catholic and you don't know what mass is about you need to take the time and educate yourself. Either look it up, talk to your priest or you can email me I'd be happy to fill you in.
So my question is, are you all stupid or intentionally disrespectful?
Put some clothes on! Dress for GOD. Shut up and show some respect to God, your parish, other parishioners and yourself. If you don't know any better, consider yourself educated now.
And to the priests and deacons out there, how about some homilies on MODESTY and REVERENCE?? Your parishioners NEED to hear it.
I am not saying you need to go out and spend a lot of money on clothes just for church. They don't need to be expensive, they need to be MODEST. Have you ever looked at the amount of times modesty is brought up in the scriptures? Guess what?? Modesty doesn't go out of fashion with God, certainly not during mass. Besides being disrespectful in your revealing clothes, you look like a complete idiot.
Second Rant: This is to all the parishes out there who advertise in their bulletins and websites that they are an AC/climate controlled parish where parishioners can worship in a cool AC controlled environment during the hot summer months. If you advertise it then PLEASE DO IT!
I can't tell you how many times myself and others go to a church in the summer BECAUSE it offers a cool place to worship only to get there and find the doors open to the summer heat and people inside fanning themselves silly with their bulletins. Those same bulletins that advertise AC! What's up with that? If you can't afford to run the AC then STOP ADVERTISING YOU DO. It's false advertising and people are tired of it.
Final Rant: Shut up!! People need to SHUT UP in church. This has been a pet peeve of mine for YEARS- DECADES to be honest. But recently I had another
incident that really pushed my buttons and then soon after that I was talking with other Catholics and they all shared similar stories about their parishes. Lack of reverence. A few weeks ago, I attended a Sunday morning mass (I usually go to Saturday evening). As soon as mass had ended, the priest barely making it to the narthex (entry area) to shake hands with parishioners as they leave; and parishioners exploded into talking about baseball scores, the weather, the price of gas and their cute new sandals while the "choir" (more like a band) belted out BLUES tunes with their electric guitar, drums and baby grand piano- I kid you not.
Unfortunately for all the folks who wanted to quietly pray after mass, we were instead bombarded with loud music and people nearly yelling over the music to talk about nonsense. I can't exactly say I was stunned as this wasn't the first time this has occurred, but none the less I was ticked off, disappointed and appalled at the lack of reverence shown by nearly every single person in this parish (and no I am not saying which one). The nave/sanctuary is NOT the place to be doing this. Can't you shut up for the 3 minutes it takes you to walk OUT of the nave and sanctuary areas?? Apparently not.
What is WRONG with everyone?? Do they not know what worship is about? What our parish churches are about? WHO is IN our parish churches?? If you're a Catholic and you don't know what mass is about you need to take the time and educate yourself. Either look it up, talk to your priest or you can email me I'd be happy to fill you in.
So my question is, are you all stupid or intentionally disrespectful?
Put some clothes on! Dress for GOD. Shut up and show some respect to God, your parish, other parishioners and yourself. If you don't know any better, consider yourself educated now.
And to the priests and deacons out there, how about some homilies on MODESTY and REVERENCE?? Your parishioners NEED to hear it.
Saturday, June 4, 2011
STOP the "Bathroom Bill" NOW!
Have you been paying attention to the "Bathroom Bill"? Are you worried what this will mean for our state, our public schools and public areas? If not, you should be.
What you need to know about "The Bathroom Bill" (HB 6599).
If HB 6599 passes, the state as you know it will change immensely and not for the better.
Our public school children will be forced into confusing situations about themselves, their teachers and their classmates. If a young child proclaims themselves to be transgendered they will able to use school bathrooms of the opposite sex. If a transgendered boy wants to play on the girls track team he will be able to. If a transgendered girl wishes to play on the boys football teams she will be able to and by state law no one will able to stop it.
If your kindergartener's male teacher decides to dress in drag one day and wear high heels and a dress to class the school will have no power to reassign him and you as the parents will have no legal rights to protest your child being placed in this classroom. To oppose this will make you guilty of discrimination!
Your daughters will be sharing bathrooms with boys and your sons will be sharing bathrooms with girls. What of high school shower rooms? Will the transgender boy on the girls soccer team be allowed to shower in the girls team locker room? See section 25 of the current bill which does allow for shared bathroom facilities as well as shower areas.
Adult women and little girls will have their safety put in jeopardy each time they use a public restroom. Male predators will easily mask themselves in female garb and use public restrooms as hunting grounds to assault women and children at a higher rate than ever. These predators are opportunists and this law will give them more LEGAL opportunities to assault women and children.
This bill MUST be stopped for the protection of women and children!
For more details visit: The Family Institute of Connecticut
( http://www.votervoice.net/core.aspx?AID=274&Screen=alert&IssueId=25319&APP=GAC&SiteID=-1&VV_CULTURE=en-us )
Is this what we want for Connecticut??
I should hope not, but if we don't STOP HB 6599 this is what the future of Connecticut will be.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Knights of Columbus Museum
Today my family and I visited a few museums in New Haven, Ct for my daughters sixteenth birthday. Each year I ask my children to decide what they would like to do for their birthday, and this year my sixteen year old requested spending her day at a few museums. We first spent a few hours at the Peabody Museum in New Haven, then she requested we visit a 'new-to-us' musuem. The Knights of Columbus Museum on State Street is what she wanted to see next, so off we went. Admission is free and parking is free- you can't beat that!
Having never been to the KoC museum before we were not sure what to expect. We were delighted to find a special "Blessed: A Tribute to John Paul II" exhibit going on. The JPII exhibit took up nearly the entire second floor of the museum. There were assorted paintings, photos, clothing, furniture, vestments, art sculptures and more!
(above: this is the fountain near the underground parking area)(below: JPII Tribute Gallery)
(below: Rubble from the World Trade Center 911 attack)
(below: Saint Peter bronze statue)
Besides the wonderful JPII Tribute Gallery, the KoC museum is also currently featuring "Full of Grace: Crowned Madonnas from the Vatican Basilica" reprint paintings from all around the world. These were amazing. Unfortunately, photographing the artwork was forbidden so I can not share them here. This artwork is a collection of printed reproductions from the Vatican's own collection.
There is much to see at the Knights of Columbus Museum and I highly recommend it.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Thank you...to 'Nobody'!
Written by Contributor Doug
In the 1987 movie, “Suspect,” starring Cher and Dennis Quaid, Joe Mantegna plays an ambitious and zealous Washington D. C. prosecutor erroneously prosecuting a deaf/mute homeless man (played by Liam Neeson) in the alleged mugging and murder of a female file clerk. The prosecutor makes the case that in a city with so many very prominent people, a seemingly lowly file clerk with just a few bucks on her, and working late on a cold night and just trying to get back to her parked compact jalopy on a cold night to get home is in fact an important person, and as the prosecutor cites, “too important to forget.”
You don’t need to be in Washington D.C. to be surrounded by supposedly “prominent people.” They surround us in almost every community, and if not, then all over the TV, radio, Internet and in the press. They seem relatively inescapable, all these mammoths of importance, in whose shadow the rest of us meaningless schmucks seem to quietly evaporate. And as we know all too well, to put it mildly, some of these supposedly superior people aren’t quite at all what they’re cracked up to be in terms of character. But what really makes these coronated behemoths of prominence so prominent?
In the (1987) movie, “Wall Street,” a scrappy, blue collar machinist union steward, played by Martin Sheen, angrily admonishes his hoity, brash, up and coming stock broker son (played by real life son, Charlie Sheen), that he never judged a man by the size of his wallet. You could probably append to that moral, fame, as well.
I don’t like phony greeters and phony greetings. My voice mail welcomes me, as does my computer when I turn it on. It’s all fluff. I don’t like receiving a phony greeting from an inanimate object like it cares about me or even has the capacity to do so.
Likewise I bristle at being greeted by people whose job it is to greet me. I’m a big, strong fellow. I don’t need a doorman to open a door for me and feign my superiority. I resent being greeted by the person at Wal-Mart or the local DMV branch, who wishes me a good morning and might possibly even ask me how I’m doing today like he really cares. (Some day, I’ll stop and actually give him the whole laundry list as an answer!)
And forgive me, but greeters in church strike me as phony too. To call this stewardship is a stretch at best. If someone seeks stewardship, there are much more substantive things to do and that need being done. But I suppose it’s like chicken soup for a cold; it might not help, but it certainly can’t hurt either. I see no harm in it, but little to any real value either. If it is because it is your job (be it paid or unpaid), to robotically greet me as opposed to simply doing it because you truly wish to do so, then I’d much rather you save your breath and my time.
I guess I’m like my old man, a somewhat rugged, cantankerous and generally stoic, but also straight-shooting sort, who used to ridicule people for showing up and sending flowers at wakes and funerals. “Come see me and give me flowers when I’m alive, not dead!” the old man used to grumble. You would have had to know my father to appreciate the irony, as he was hardly the type of guy you would give flowers too anyway, but his point was characteristically sage, succinct, and crystal clear nonetheless.
My parish is one of those that has the cigar store Indians who redundantly offer the unsolicited good morning and open the door for people entering for Mass. But my parish also has a certain usher, also doing “stewardship” who takes the stewardship to higher plain beyond that which seems obligatory, minimal, and frankly, shallow, if not utterly plastic.
I don’t know her name. She is an elderly woman, who dresses both modestly and frugally. She has a consistently warm, gentle, and loving radiance about her. Clearly, you can see Jesus in her and in her gracious actions. When she passes the basket to each and every person who contributes, she quietly nods, smiles, and thanks them, as if they were donating to her. Sometimes, for younger folks and kids, she might also address them as “Dear,” “Sweetie,” “Honey,” etc. I don’t know this woman’s name. I know nothing about her, but her presence and actions both strike and inspire me every time I see her and I see her take her stewardship of ushering just one small, but very genuine step further. An I’m willing to bet that nobody ever asked her to do that. (With all due respect, and no offense intended, to all the very well-meaning "greeters" out there, see the difference?) Her simple, unsolicited and earnestly heartfelt gesture warms me every time she and I share that brief interaction, and I can’t help but think I am not the only so affected by her.
Something about this warm, sweet, loveable old soul reminds me of the parable of the poor widow who gave her last two coins to the temple, and Jesus remarked that while those richer and more ostentatious than her sanctimoniously gave the little extra of the vast surplus they could afford, the poor old widow humbly, quietly, instinctively and faithfully gave all she had left. Several biblical passages also tell us that the rich and famous here are exalted here, yet will be humbled come Judgment Day, and visa versa with the poor and humble.
Likewise, those who cling to save their life here will lose it, while those who look toward the next life will reap so much more. The Bible also teaches us that what some of us here on earth consider “wise” is actually folly in God’s eyes, and more often than not, even sinful. We are also called to be the “light” to illuminate the earth and “the salt” to season it. The Bible also teaches that we should not seek praise for doing what is right, for such is what is expected of us. The Beatitudes tell us that “The meek will inherit the earth.”
That little old lady in my church is a monumental pillar to absolute nothingness. She’s nobody important. In fact, she’s simply a nobody - here. It is said that angels often secretly walk among us and do good works. I can’t help but think that this humble little old lady is an angel, and the secret status of that angel is really no secret, at least for those willing to look instead of just see, and to listen instead of just hear, despite and beyond all the earthly noise, grandeur, shallow distractions and fleeting pleasures.
There is inherent beauty in these angels among us who the world arrogantly and foolishly deems “nobodies,” and our lives are better for their presence, and for their good works. And if you haven’t yet noticed, then start doing so today.
I believe it was St. Therese (“The Little Flower”) who, unable to do much of anything else, incessantly prayed for others while seriously ill and confined to bed. (As someone once taught me in my younger days, “When you don’t know what to do….DO SOMETHING!“) Indeed, when we are weak is when we are strong. And when we are “nobody” then we are truly “somebody,” especially in God’s eyes.
And to that angelic “nobody” in my parish, I simply say, “No, Ma’am….Thank YOU!”
“Humility is the mother of salvation.” (St. Bernard)
-by Doug-
Connecticut Catholic Corner Contributor
In the 1987 movie, “Suspect,” starring Cher and Dennis Quaid, Joe Mantegna plays an ambitious and zealous Washington D. C. prosecutor erroneously prosecuting a deaf/mute homeless man (played by Liam Neeson) in the alleged mugging and murder of a female file clerk. The prosecutor makes the case that in a city with so many very prominent people, a seemingly lowly file clerk with just a few bucks on her, and working late on a cold night and just trying to get back to her parked compact jalopy on a cold night to get home is in fact an important person, and as the prosecutor cites, “too important to forget.”
You don’t need to be in Washington D.C. to be surrounded by supposedly “prominent people.” They surround us in almost every community, and if not, then all over the TV, radio, Internet and in the press. They seem relatively inescapable, all these mammoths of importance, in whose shadow the rest of us meaningless schmucks seem to quietly evaporate. And as we know all too well, to put it mildly, some of these supposedly superior people aren’t quite at all what they’re cracked up to be in terms of character. But what really makes these coronated behemoths of prominence so prominent?
In the (1987) movie, “Wall Street,” a scrappy, blue collar machinist union steward, played by Martin Sheen, angrily admonishes his hoity, brash, up and coming stock broker son (played by real life son, Charlie Sheen), that he never judged a man by the size of his wallet. You could probably append to that moral, fame, as well.
I don’t like phony greeters and phony greetings. My voice mail welcomes me, as does my computer when I turn it on. It’s all fluff. I don’t like receiving a phony greeting from an inanimate object like it cares about me or even has the capacity to do so.
Likewise I bristle at being greeted by people whose job it is to greet me. I’m a big, strong fellow. I don’t need a doorman to open a door for me and feign my superiority. I resent being greeted by the person at Wal-Mart or the local DMV branch, who wishes me a good morning and might possibly even ask me how I’m doing today like he really cares. (Some day, I’ll stop and actually give him the whole laundry list as an answer!)
And forgive me, but greeters in church strike me as phony too. To call this stewardship is a stretch at best. If someone seeks stewardship, there are much more substantive things to do and that need being done. But I suppose it’s like chicken soup for a cold; it might not help, but it certainly can’t hurt either. I see no harm in it, but little to any real value either. If it is because it is your job (be it paid or unpaid), to robotically greet me as opposed to simply doing it because you truly wish to do so, then I’d much rather you save your breath and my time.
I guess I’m like my old man, a somewhat rugged, cantankerous and generally stoic, but also straight-shooting sort, who used to ridicule people for showing up and sending flowers at wakes and funerals. “Come see me and give me flowers when I’m alive, not dead!” the old man used to grumble. You would have had to know my father to appreciate the irony, as he was hardly the type of guy you would give flowers too anyway, but his point was characteristically sage, succinct, and crystal clear nonetheless.
My parish is one of those that has the cigar store Indians who redundantly offer the unsolicited good morning and open the door for people entering for Mass. But my parish also has a certain usher, also doing “stewardship” who takes the stewardship to higher plain beyond that which seems obligatory, minimal, and frankly, shallow, if not utterly plastic.
I don’t know her name. She is an elderly woman, who dresses both modestly and frugally. She has a consistently warm, gentle, and loving radiance about her. Clearly, you can see Jesus in her and in her gracious actions. When she passes the basket to each and every person who contributes, she quietly nods, smiles, and thanks them, as if they were donating to her. Sometimes, for younger folks and kids, she might also address them as “Dear,” “Sweetie,” “Honey,” etc. I don’t know this woman’s name. I know nothing about her, but her presence and actions both strike and inspire me every time I see her and I see her take her stewardship of ushering just one small, but very genuine step further. An I’m willing to bet that nobody ever asked her to do that. (With all due respect, and no offense intended, to all the very well-meaning "greeters" out there, see the difference?) Her simple, unsolicited and earnestly heartfelt gesture warms me every time she and I share that brief interaction, and I can’t help but think I am not the only so affected by her.
Something about this warm, sweet, loveable old soul reminds me of the parable of the poor widow who gave her last two coins to the temple, and Jesus remarked that while those richer and more ostentatious than her sanctimoniously gave the little extra of the vast surplus they could afford, the poor old widow humbly, quietly, instinctively and faithfully gave all she had left. Several biblical passages also tell us that the rich and famous here are exalted here, yet will be humbled come Judgment Day, and visa versa with the poor and humble.
Likewise, those who cling to save their life here will lose it, while those who look toward the next life will reap so much more. The Bible also teaches us that what some of us here on earth consider “wise” is actually folly in God’s eyes, and more often than not, even sinful. We are also called to be the “light” to illuminate the earth and “the salt” to season it. The Bible also teaches that we should not seek praise for doing what is right, for such is what is expected of us. The Beatitudes tell us that “The meek will inherit the earth.”
That little old lady in my church is a monumental pillar to absolute nothingness. She’s nobody important. In fact, she’s simply a nobody - here. It is said that angels often secretly walk among us and do good works. I can’t help but think that this humble little old lady is an angel, and the secret status of that angel is really no secret, at least for those willing to look instead of just see, and to listen instead of just hear, despite and beyond all the earthly noise, grandeur, shallow distractions and fleeting pleasures.
There is inherent beauty in these angels among us who the world arrogantly and foolishly deems “nobodies,” and our lives are better for their presence, and for their good works. And if you haven’t yet noticed, then start doing so today.
I believe it was St. Therese (“The Little Flower”) who, unable to do much of anything else, incessantly prayed for others while seriously ill and confined to bed. (As someone once taught me in my younger days, “When you don’t know what to do….DO SOMETHING!“) Indeed, when we are weak is when we are strong. And when we are “nobody” then we are truly “somebody,” especially in God’s eyes.
And to that angelic “nobody” in my parish, I simply say, “No, Ma’am….Thank YOU!”
“Humility is the mother of salvation.” (St. Bernard)
-by Doug-
Connecticut Catholic Corner Contributor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
