the promise of glory!
the lure of eternity!
the meaning of purpose!
it swells the little man, until he bursts at his seams.
it consumes the proud man, finishing his existence.
it worries the humble man, upsetting his balance.
glory is only one vanity away from pride.
and i call that danger!
glory is only fitting for the prideless.
to godly beings who have no need for pride.
glory is only a vague shadow in the world of man.
for our language only does it injustice.
but what is glory?
it is that which accrues to the person one serves.
therefore, a master of many may seem glorious;
but only the Master of all truly deserves glory.
it is that which accrues to the person who has achieved perfection.
therefore, many men are subjects of poems and epics,
but only the Son of Man is the Good News.
it is that which accrues to the person radiating inspiration.
therefore, great men crowd the books of history;
but only the Holy Spirit fills Creation.
o humankind!
you who are confounded with limitation!
you who seek revelation with imperfect vigour!
you who are attracted to the masquerading glories of vanity!
will you see yourself with brutal honesty?
will you look upon your utter nakedness?
will you yield to the One who is Glory?
o sons of man!
look no longer in the clouds of confusion
look no longer in the crowds of endless chatter
look no further than your own hearts
and you will find that glory is to be given
to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit -
as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be -
and then you may finally have a foretaste
of the real glory in heaven.
Showing posts with label faith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label faith. Show all posts
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
the paradox of man
No man appears in safety before the public eye unless he first relishes obscurity. No man is safe in speaking unless he loves to be silent. No man rules safely unless he is willing to be ruled. No man commands safely unless he has learned well how to obey. No man rejoices safely unless he has within him the testimony of a good conscience.there is just so much wisdom bursting forth of this little book...
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Avoiding Idle Talk
*from CCEL; The Imitation of Christ
Shun the gossip of men as much as possible, for discussion of worldly affairs, even though sincere, is a great distraction inasmuch as we are quickly ensnared and captivated by vanity.
Many a time I wish that I had held my peace and had not associated with men. Why, indeed, do we converse and gossip among ourselves when we so seldom part without a troubled conscience? We do so because we seek comfort from one another’s conversation and wish to ease the mind wearied by diverse thoughts. Hence, we talk and think quite fondly of things we like very much or of things we dislike intensely. But, sad to say, we often talk vainly and to no purpose; for this external pleasure effectively bars inward and divine consolation.
Therefore we must watch and pray lest time pass idly.
When the right and opportune moment comes for speaking, say something that will edify.
Bad habits and indifference to spiritual progress do much to remove the guard from the tongue. Devout conversation on spiritual matters, on the contrary, is a great aid to spiritual progress, especially when persons of the same mind and spirit associate together in God.
Monday, January 07, 2008
Ch 2: Having a Humble Opinion of Self
... taken from the Christian Classic: Imitation of Christ (Thomas a Kempis)...
EVERY man naturally desires knowledge; but what good is knowledge without fear of God? Indeed a humble rustic who serves God is better than a proud intellectual who neglects his soul to study the course of the stars. He who knows himself well becomes mean in his own eyes and is not happy when praised by men.
If I knew all things in the world and had not charity, what would it profit me before God Who will judge me by my deeds?
Shun too great a desire for knowledge, for in it there is much fretting and delusion. Intellectuals like to appear learned and to be called wise. Yet there are many things the knowledge of which does little or no good to the soul, and he who concerns himself about other things than those which lead to salvation is very unwise.
Many words do not satisfy the soul; but a good life eases the mind and a clean conscience inspires great trust in God.
The more you know and the better you understand, the more severely will you be judged, unless your life is also the more holy. Do not be proud, therefore, because of your learning or skill. Rather, fear because of the talent given you. If you think you know many things and understand them well enough, realize at the same time that there is much you do not know. Hence, do not affect wisdom, but admit your ignorance. Why prefer yourself to anyone else when many are more learned, more cultured than you?
If you wish to learn and appreciate something worth while, then love to be unknown and considered as nothing. Truly to know and despise self is the best and most perfect counsel. To think of oneself as nothing, and always to think well and highly of others is the best and most perfect wisdom. Wherefore, if you see another sin openly or commit a serious crime, do not consider yourself better, for you do not know how long you can remain in good estate. All men are frail, but you must admit that none is more frail than yourself.
EVERY man naturally desires knowledge; but what good is knowledge without fear of God? Indeed a humble rustic who serves God is better than a proud intellectual who neglects his soul to study the course of the stars. He who knows himself well becomes mean in his own eyes and is not happy when praised by men.
If I knew all things in the world and had not charity, what would it profit me before God Who will judge me by my deeds?
Shun too great a desire for knowledge, for in it there is much fretting and delusion. Intellectuals like to appear learned and to be called wise. Yet there are many things the knowledge of which does little or no good to the soul, and he who concerns himself about other things than those which lead to salvation is very unwise.
Many words do not satisfy the soul; but a good life eases the mind and a clean conscience inspires great trust in God.
The more you know and the better you understand, the more severely will you be judged, unless your life is also the more holy. Do not be proud, therefore, because of your learning or skill. Rather, fear because of the talent given you. If you think you know many things and understand them well enough, realize at the same time that there is much you do not know. Hence, do not affect wisdom, but admit your ignorance. Why prefer yourself to anyone else when many are more learned, more cultured than you?
If you wish to learn and appreciate something worth while, then love to be unknown and considered as nothing. Truly to know and despise self is the best and most perfect counsel. To think of oneself as nothing, and always to think well and highly of others is the best and most perfect wisdom. Wherefore, if you see another sin openly or commit a serious crime, do not consider yourself better, for you do not know how long you can remain in good estate. All men are frail, but you must admit that none is more frail than yourself.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
"Everything" video on GodTube
Thursday, October 11, 2007
gerg, the gay supporter
i just signed a petition to the prime minister supporting the repeal of the infamous statute 377A. did i turn gay? whoa... of course not! in fact, sad to say, i still consider myself to be somewhat of a homophobe... i'm cautious around gays, inclined side with homophobic language, and highly uncomfortable with discussing gay sexuality (talking about lesbians is fine tho).
of course, the main issue here is:
how can i support the repeal of an anti-homosexual act law as a Catholic?
that's the point worth discussing in this post. i shall start by mentioning what i consider the proper stand a Catholic should take on the issue of homosexuality:
how does repealing 377A support that stand in any way?
here, i shall simply paste the comments i added to my petition... do read on:
an additional point to note is this: our more fundamentalist Christian brothers may be far more intolerant and oppressive in their gay ministries, employing peer pressure and guilt rather than Christ's way of gentle compassion - inviting conversion as a response to love. the result is their disillusionment with the church and often outright rejection of Christ himself. if us Catholics remain entrenched in our "comfort zones", Christ's ministry suffers! (this is not meant to diss Protestant efforts to reach out to gays: at least they try.)
the way to approach gays, for us as Catholics, must be the same approach we endorse with all other sinners (genocidal murderers, incestuous paedophiles, corrupt politicians, money-worshipping idolators; your brothers and sisters): the way Christ moved the world by becoming the Lamb led to the slaughter. we must put our lives on the line to listen to our brothers and be a channel of God's grace for them instead of merely relying on punitive laws. that is why i signed the petition - as a commitment to loving my gay brothers.
i shall end off sharing this hymn - note the irony!
of course, the main issue here is:
how can i support the repeal of an anti-homosexual act law as a Catholic?
that's the point worth discussing in this post. i shall start by mentioning what i consider the proper stand a Catholic should take on the issue of homosexuality:
- identifying oneself as gay; i.e. that a male is sexually attracted to other males, is not in itself sinful - just as a sex maniac is not sinning until he acts. this does not exclude lustful thoughts, of course! thus, a gay man who lusts after a man is as sinful as a heterosexual man lusting after a woman.
- the act of anal penetration (or to use an archaic term, sodomy) is, however, condemned by the Catholic church as a "transgression of nature". God Himself is demonstrated as offended by such acts (the word 'sodomy' stems from Sodom and Gomorrah, cities said to commit such acts in mass orgies), thus it is a safe bet for Catholics to steer clear of such sex acts (even if it is heterosexual). here, i would like to compare the much more 'acceptable' act of masturbation: the two are probably equally detestable in God's eyes.
- "Love thy neighbour as thyself." (Leviticus 19:18, Matthew 5:43. 19:19. 22:39, Mark 12:31, Luke 10:27, Romans 13:9, Galatians 5:14, 1John 4:7. 11, James 2:8) is the one law which sums up one's faithfulness to God. John the Evangelist says it the best: "Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." these words of God clearly tell us how we ought poise ourselves for our homosexual brethren - the same way we treat any other sinner, with love and acceptance.
how does repealing 377A support that stand in any way?
here, i shall simply paste the comments i added to my petition... do read on:
I am a practicing Catholic and I continue to believe that homosexual acts are against the natural order and offends God. However, God did give us the freedom to make our own choices, whether to commit sins or not. Among the many sinful choices which the Law punishes, I would consider 377A to be excessive - the Law does not punish people who masturbate, does it?further to those comments, i believe that leaning on the power of a secular court to deal with homosexual acts usually only leads to either, i) over-punishment, ostracism and stigmatisation, or ii) apathy due to non-prosecution. the latter is what seems the trend today - and while it makes a mockery of the legal system, it also insulates Catholics: non-visible homosexuality = no need to care about them or talk to them. for us practicing Catholics, s377A only either torments our lost brothers, or keeps us in an impenetrable "comfort zone" of ignorance and inaction.
Decriminalisation, however liberal it may seem, however it may imply homosexuality as acceptable, remains the only fair way forward, as particularly poignantly laid out in Para 5. I do not think conservatives wanting to keep an old law simply because it seems "too progressive" can be considered reasonable; neither can Catholics be considered good Catholics if they choose to support such an oppressive law as their preferred method of serving our homosexual brothers.
an additional point to note is this: our more fundamentalist Christian brothers may be far more intolerant and oppressive in their gay ministries, employing peer pressure and guilt rather than Christ's way of gentle compassion - inviting conversion as a response to love. the result is their disillusionment with the church and often outright rejection of Christ himself. if us Catholics remain entrenched in our "comfort zones", Christ's ministry suffers! (this is not meant to diss Protestant efforts to reach out to gays: at least they try.)
the way to approach gays, for us as Catholics, must be the same approach we endorse with all other sinners (genocidal murderers, incestuous paedophiles, corrupt politicians, money-worshipping idolators; your brothers and sisters): the way Christ moved the world by becoming the Lamb led to the slaughter. we must put our lives on the line to listen to our brothers and be a channel of God's grace for them instead of merely relying on punitive laws. that is why i signed the petition - as a commitment to loving my gay brothers.
i shall end off sharing this hymn - note the irony!
God Is Love
Love it was that made us and it was love that saved us.
Love was God's plan. When he made man; God's divine nature is love.
Born of God's love we must love Him, that's why He made us to love Him;
But only when we love all men can we partake of God's love.
But only when we love all men can we partake of God's love.
Love is a wonderful thing, joy in our hearts it will bring.
Where there's true love there is God and where there's God there is love.
Christ said: "Love must be the sign by which men will know you from Mine.
A new commandment I give: each other love as I did."
Love it was that made us and it was love that saved us.
Love was God's plan. When he made man; God's divine nature is love.
Born of God's love we must love Him, that's why He made us to love Him;
But only when we love all men can we partake of God's love.
But only when we love all men can we partake of God's love.
Love is a wonderful thing, joy in our hearts it will bring.
Where there's true love there is God and where there's God there is love.
Christ said: "Love must be the sign by which men will know you from Mine.
A new commandment I give: each other love as I did."
Friday, July 13, 2007
an amorous affirmation
g: Lord?
G: yes, son?
g: my God, do you love me?
G: of course, My dear - without a doubt.
g: as in like, really really?
G: yes, My precious - really really.
g: forever and ever?
G: until the end of time.
g: um... Father?
G: I'm still listening.
g: Dad... I love you too.
G: I know! even before I made you. I knew.
G: yes, son?
g: my God, do you love me?
G: of course, My dear - without a doubt.
g: as in like, really really?
G: yes, My precious - really really.
g: forever and ever?
G: until the end of time.
g: um... Father?
G: I'm still listening.
g: Dad... I love you too.
G: I know! even before I made you. I knew.
Saturday, May 19, 2007
ascension @ novena
didn't really like the priest's sermon... too accusatory. may leave bitter taste in many mouths. however, his words do make sweet meditative fodder. this hymn, however, i had to take home:
Chords for "O God, You Search Me"
Psalm 139, tune by Bernadette Farrell
Duration: [X] = [Y] [Y] = [Z] [Z] [Z] [Z]
O [D] God, You [G/D] search [D] me [A/D] and [D] You [A] know [D] me. [D/C#]
[G/B] All my [Dadd9/F#] thoughts lie [G] open [Bm] to Your [Asus4] gaze. [A]
When I [Bm] walk [Bm/A] or lie [G] down You [A/G] are be-[F#m]fore [Bm] me: [Bm/A]
[G7M] E-ver the [Em7] ma-[D/F#]ker and [G] keeper [A] of my [Dsus4] days. [D]
You know my resting and my rising.
You discern my purpose from afar,
And with love everlasting You besiege me:
In ev'ry moment of life or death, You are.
Before a word is on my tongue, Lord,
You have known its meaning through and through,
You are with me beyond my understanding:
God of my present, my past and future, too.
Although Your Spirit is upon me,
Still I search for shelter from Your light.
There is nowhere on earth I can escape You:
Even the darkness is radiant in Your sight.
For You created me and shaped me,
Gave me life within my mother's womb.
For the wonder of who I am I praise You:
Safe in Your hands, all creation is made new.
had a really hard time finding the chords to this fantastic song... thanks to grace (law grad, yr of 2006) who transcribed this to me from scores... hopefully it's true to original! your creator knows you thru and thru... so there's no shame, only love.
Chords for "O God, You Search Me"
Psalm 139, tune by Bernadette Farrell
Duration: [X] = [Y] [Y] = [Z] [Z] [Z] [Z]
O [D] God, You [G/D] search [D] me [A/D] and [D] You [A] know [D] me. [D/C#]
[G/B] All my [Dadd9/F#] thoughts lie [G] open [Bm] to Your [Asus4] gaze. [A]
When I [Bm] walk [Bm/A] or lie [G] down You [A/G] are be-[F#m]fore [Bm] me: [Bm/A]
[G7M] E-ver the [Em7] ma-[D/F#]ker and [G] keeper [A] of my [Dsus4] days. [D]
You know my resting and my rising.
You discern my purpose from afar,
And with love everlasting You besiege me:
In ev'ry moment of life or death, You are.
Before a word is on my tongue, Lord,
You have known its meaning through and through,
You are with me beyond my understanding:
God of my present, my past and future, too.
Although Your Spirit is upon me,
Still I search for shelter from Your light.
There is nowhere on earth I can escape You:
Even the darkness is radiant in Your sight.
For You created me and shaped me,
Gave me life within my mother's womb.
For the wonder of who I am I praise You:
Safe in Your hands, all creation is made new.
had a really hard time finding the chords to this fantastic song... thanks to grace (law grad, yr of 2006) who transcribed this to me from scores... hopefully it's true to original! your creator knows you thru and thru... so there's no shame, only love.
Saturday, May 05, 2007
this changed my life today!
well, it's a pretty simple webpage, the content would go down for almost anyone. and the message rocked my world. haha. watch the video!
http://www.hollywoodblasphemy.com/
luckily spiderman doesn't swear! =)
http://www.hollywoodblasphemy.com/
luckily spiderman doesn't swear! =)
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
the essence of doubt
doubts are everywhere. everyone doubts someone or something once in a while. now, that is a scary prospect! let me tell you why...
the person who doubts begins a journey, an exploration of unknown terrain. it's a good choice, really, seeing as how such journeys could bring the intrepid doubter across mountains and valleys into the promised land of Wisdom.
unfortunately, most of us have misconstrued the whole concept of doubt: we very often take it as an end in itself. this is where the scariness spooks. if the bulk of people travelling that journey of doubt believe the first step to be the end point, a sufficient reason to conclude that belief is unnecessary, then nobody would ever reach the promised land of Wisdom!
let me throw in a soci example. we pompous armchair critics like to deconstruct stuff and throw it in people's faces, like when we talk about religion, we say religion has a function in society. religion helps "maintain social cohesion and solidarity" through encouraging its adherents to attend rituals and ceremonies which evoke strong sentiments. sometimes, this encouragement can seem almost coercive due to people not wanting to be seen as un-religious or disobedient. these communal activities supposedly provide a sort of "social glue" where people then firmly subscribe to the ideals of that religion. the theory then goes on to assert that these "ideals of religion" are really what a particular society (sub- or unconsciously) considers to be the most important values. thus religion, while trying to assert the existence of God, is really trying to socialise individuals into good slaves of Society, which then assumes some dimension of godhood. now that the function of religion is somewhat deconstructed, i can imagine that many adherents would gasp with mouths widely agape, exclaiming, "the danged proselyters have screwed me over!" well, that's an example of taking the first step as the endpoint.
why? because the process (deconstruction, in the above case) is incomplete! take those claims above and line them up like this:
1. some of the impetus to participate in religious activities is actually based on guilt
2. rituals and activities merely serve to socialise individuals
3. religion's ideals are merely subservient to Society's ideals
4. Society is God
well, for point 1., even if the guilt stems from merely not wanting to be in the crowd, it's still not necessarily tantamount being "screwed over", unless you want to believe that. simply because, if everyone else is doing a certain thing, there ought to be some reason they're doing it, right? and if the acclaimed reason is one that sounds correct (worshipping God), then why not? the guilt can be seen as coercive, if you go on claiming that the "encouragement" is really a fear of judgement and ostracism. nothing illogical or problematic there, except that it's really quite difficult to prove that the individual is completely non-complicit in forming that judgement and/or ostracism. i.e., if you do something wrong, you can't simply expect the community to be saintly and instantly forgive you; there will always be those less saintly who will judge and ostracise. but you did something wrong first. and besides, this informal system of tit-for-tat is in itself proper, no?
for point 2., let's call it a tautology. if a social activity doesn't have any impact on the individual at all, then what the heck is for anyway? rituals and ceremonies help an individual understand their religion better (which incidentally is a function of rituals and ceremonies in the context of religion); does that mean religion is trying to psycho you? you make your own choices still, yes? granted, being in an environment of religiosity tends to shift people towards being religious - does that mean they are not able to exercise free choice any longer? and even if it does slightly feel like a restricted freedom, is not the end result of a congruous, positive religious community a good result? AND worth that restricted freedom? Singaporeans should know what i'm talking about =)
point 3. is really a coup for religion! if religions contain the most treasured ideals of a society, is that not in itself justified? only the best ideals should be worshipped, yea? as for their ideals being subservient to society's, it seems to imply that society is somehow "evil" or "unworthy". but really, religion serves society, just as politicians are supposed to serve their citizens (ouch). so if it seems as if some religious ideals are merely subservient, it may be because that certain religions do not want to wage holy war against society's infidels (no offense intended), but would rather try to dialogue. leaving the theory in typical socified airy-fairy style could distort a clearer understanding of intermingling social factors.
is society God? many times it seems so, truly. why follow norms? am i following social norms to please the society-God? it seems so effusive, isn't it? but we are over-generalising. norms are not evil laws to mandate your behaviour. no, society isn't out to control you simply for the sake of lording it over you. norms are constructed over time, through many intricate processes. individuals need to agree that murder is illegal and it's multitudinous varieties sorted out in different cases before it becomes binding statutes. biting fingers is seen as disgusting only after everyone agrees to it - and even then, you are still free to indulge in it if you can stand the constant nagging and ill-hygiene. exam grades are merely the simplest and most cost-effective way to stratify students by their performance - you are not being forced to mug. and of course, these 3 examples have a further option: if you feel these norms to be somewhat outdated or misconstrued, you are welcome to do your part in reviewing them. it takes a lot of effort to struggle against norms that seem unfair to the individual, which is why the abolition of slavery and the declaration of human rights are pretty recent history. if society is God, well, we could, with sufficient grit, move the hand of this God and write our own history or change people's lives permanently. the individual controls society, even though society has a lot of ability to influence the individual, simply because it's the individual that makes choices.
that's what i call taking more than one step in the journey. okay, it's a pretty long-drawn example, but basically the journey from doubt to Wisdom is a looonger one. i'm probably only making the second or third step myself...
the essence of doubt is not an end in itself - it requires tenacity and a desire for truth to complement it in order to achieve Wisdom.
*thanks to Joel Stanislaus for inspiring this.
the person who doubts begins a journey, an exploration of unknown terrain. it's a good choice, really, seeing as how such journeys could bring the intrepid doubter across mountains and valleys into the promised land of Wisdom.
unfortunately, most of us have misconstrued the whole concept of doubt: we very often take it as an end in itself. this is where the scariness spooks. if the bulk of people travelling that journey of doubt believe the first step to be the end point, a sufficient reason to conclude that belief is unnecessary, then nobody would ever reach the promised land of Wisdom!
let me throw in a soci example. we pompous armchair critics like to deconstruct stuff and throw it in people's faces, like when we talk about religion, we say religion has a function in society. religion helps "maintain social cohesion and solidarity" through encouraging its adherents to attend rituals and ceremonies which evoke strong sentiments. sometimes, this encouragement can seem almost coercive due to people not wanting to be seen as un-religious or disobedient. these communal activities supposedly provide a sort of "social glue" where people then firmly subscribe to the ideals of that religion. the theory then goes on to assert that these "ideals of religion" are really what a particular society (sub- or unconsciously) considers to be the most important values. thus religion, while trying to assert the existence of God, is really trying to socialise individuals into good slaves of Society, which then assumes some dimension of godhood. now that the function of religion is somewhat deconstructed, i can imagine that many adherents would gasp with mouths widely agape, exclaiming, "the danged proselyters have screwed me over!" well, that's an example of taking the first step as the endpoint.
why? because the process (deconstruction, in the above case) is incomplete! take those claims above and line them up like this:
1. some of the impetus to participate in religious activities is actually based on guilt
2. rituals and activities merely serve to socialise individuals
3. religion's ideals are merely subservient to Society's ideals
4. Society is God
well, for point 1., even if the guilt stems from merely not wanting to be in the crowd, it's still not necessarily tantamount being "screwed over", unless you want to believe that. simply because, if everyone else is doing a certain thing, there ought to be some reason they're doing it, right? and if the acclaimed reason is one that sounds correct (worshipping God), then why not? the guilt can be seen as coercive, if you go on claiming that the "encouragement" is really a fear of judgement and ostracism. nothing illogical or problematic there, except that it's really quite difficult to prove that the individual is completely non-complicit in forming that judgement and/or ostracism. i.e., if you do something wrong, you can't simply expect the community to be saintly and instantly forgive you; there will always be those less saintly who will judge and ostracise. but you did something wrong first. and besides, this informal system of tit-for-tat is in itself proper, no?
for point 2., let's call it a tautology. if a social activity doesn't have any impact on the individual at all, then what the heck is for anyway? rituals and ceremonies help an individual understand their religion better (which incidentally is a function of rituals and ceremonies in the context of religion); does that mean religion is trying to psycho you? you make your own choices still, yes? granted, being in an environment of religiosity tends to shift people towards being religious - does that mean they are not able to exercise free choice any longer? and even if it does slightly feel like a restricted freedom, is not the end result of a congruous, positive religious community a good result? AND worth that restricted freedom? Singaporeans should know what i'm talking about =)
point 3. is really a coup for religion! if religions contain the most treasured ideals of a society, is that not in itself justified? only the best ideals should be worshipped, yea? as for their ideals being subservient to society's, it seems to imply that society is somehow "evil" or "unworthy". but really, religion serves society, just as politicians are supposed to serve their citizens (ouch). so if it seems as if some religious ideals are merely subservient, it may be because that certain religions do not want to wage holy war against society's infidels (no offense intended), but would rather try to dialogue. leaving the theory in typical socified airy-fairy style could distort a clearer understanding of intermingling social factors.
is society God? many times it seems so, truly. why follow norms? am i following social norms to please the society-God? it seems so effusive, isn't it? but we are over-generalising. norms are not evil laws to mandate your behaviour. no, society isn't out to control you simply for the sake of lording it over you. norms are constructed over time, through many intricate processes. individuals need to agree that murder is illegal and it's multitudinous varieties sorted out in different cases before it becomes binding statutes. biting fingers is seen as disgusting only after everyone agrees to it - and even then, you are still free to indulge in it if you can stand the constant nagging and ill-hygiene. exam grades are merely the simplest and most cost-effective way to stratify students by their performance - you are not being forced to mug. and of course, these 3 examples have a further option: if you feel these norms to be somewhat outdated or misconstrued, you are welcome to do your part in reviewing them. it takes a lot of effort to struggle against norms that seem unfair to the individual, which is why the abolition of slavery and the declaration of human rights are pretty recent history. if society is God, well, we could, with sufficient grit, move the hand of this God and write our own history or change people's lives permanently. the individual controls society, even though society has a lot of ability to influence the individual, simply because it's the individual that makes choices.
that's what i call taking more than one step in the journey. okay, it's a pretty long-drawn example, but basically the journey from doubt to Wisdom is a looonger one. i'm probably only making the second or third step myself...
the essence of doubt is not an end in itself - it requires tenacity and a desire for truth to complement it in order to achieve Wisdom.
*thanks to Joel Stanislaus for inspiring this.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
"enlightened" praying
just an observation i've been making for a while now.
we often pray in such a manner:
"Lord, send forth Your Holy Spirit!"
"Come, grace us with Your holy presence!"
"Be with us!"
... insinuating that either a) the Lord isn't with us, b) some sort of invocation is necessary, or c) that these words help remind us we are in His presence. the former two are actually quite absent-minded, to say the least, for Christ himself did say that He will always be with us, both at the Last Supper, before His Ascension, and physically manifest by the descent of the Holy Spirit. indeed, much of the spiritual theology discussed in the many letters after the gospels assures us of His continued spiritual presence with us.
maybe it really isn't that huge a consequence, but c) is, to me, a significant point in seeking personal holiness. the human condition is such that remaining crisply aware of our Christian-ness at all times is always a challenge - and central to this challenge is remembering God's presence in our lives. prayers with these so-called 'invocations', if rationalised to be words that remind ourselves of His nearness, do become erstwhile prayers.
the (lengthily protracted) distinction is that we need not ask/plead God to be with us as if He might not be so; but rather, such stylised pleas are really more like laments of our own human weakness in being unable to be mindful of His presence at all times. in a sense, praying for God's presence (as if He wasn't present before) is unnecessary, and may even reflect a little poorly on a Christian's faith; but praying that His presence may be made more palpable, or that we may be more sensitive/worthy of His presence - that is an earnest Christian prayer.
another "problem" with some prayers are the almost senselessly self-centred petitions. these are multitudinous and may be more common than realised: for example, praying for grades, health, that a loved one may recover, weather, traffic, being on time, etc. all these little things which bother us in life, but we know God is Lord over - why not ask Him for a little supernatural assistance?
well, firstly, such an attitude attempts to place God "in our service". even petitions generally supposed to be good such as praying for peace, happiness, good fortune, etc, could have a deeper selfish perspective wherein we are really hoping that God would simply make things better for us. the importance of acknowledging this negative attitude lies in the fact that investing our faith in God's "dependability" on resolving such matters could have the reverse effect: how many Christians have turned away after seeing God fail to answer their pleas? this method of praying also tends to obscure the individual's personal role in such matters - praying for peace could dilute your own role in working towards it. if you feel called to petition for some general goodness, never forget to pray that God may reveal His plan for you in that mission. chances are, noticing a certain petition could predispose you to being a key figure in bringing that petition to fruition!
secondly, we could look at the proto-prayer: the Lord's prayer. while Jesus spends the first 3 lines glorifying the Father's name (to remind us who's serving who, nonetheless!) He simply uses "give us today our daily bread" to summarise all our various particular petitions. the only 2 specifically-mentioned petitions then follow: "forgive us our sins", and "deliver us from evil". at the end (yes, we often forget these last 2 lines), Jesus goes full circle and praises the Lord again: "for the kingdom, the power, and the glory are Yours, now and forever", which doubtlessly also reminds the person who prays to be humble before the Lord and accept that "not my will but Yours be done".
so Christ's example, thru this extrapolation, indicates the right focus for our prayers: to pray for the Father's mercy and deliverance. as His children, we definitely ought to share with Him our daily problems as well, talking thru with Him matters which matter to us and bring us anxiety. however, this discussion, if it degenerates into a "child asking for prize" session, would greatly lose the dimension of two-way communication. when petitioning for something close to your hearts, do not fail to listen for His reply! prayer would be so much more enjoyable if it wasn't merely mouthing wishes into the air, you know. being open to His will and seeking clarity and discernment are much more fruitful and mature forms of prayer, don't you think?
besides, if He looks after the sparrows and the flowers, He is definitely looking after those needs of yours too. if it does not seem like He is, fear not! you don't have to suspect that God is abandoning you... but do listen and discern if this gift of pain is to toughen you up or to bring you in line with a greater plan of His. and be resilient: prayers for discernment often take much more time if you're not used to it.
know that the Lord is with you at all times, and He hears what you ask. now, all you need to do is listen and seek His will.
we often pray in such a manner:
"Lord, send forth Your Holy Spirit!"
"Come, grace us with Your holy presence!"
"Be with us!"
... insinuating that either a) the Lord isn't with us, b) some sort of invocation is necessary, or c) that these words help remind us we are in His presence. the former two are actually quite absent-minded, to say the least, for Christ himself did say that He will always be with us, both at the Last Supper, before His Ascension, and physically manifest by the descent of the Holy Spirit. indeed, much of the spiritual theology discussed in the many letters after the gospels assures us of His continued spiritual presence with us.
maybe it really isn't that huge a consequence, but c) is, to me, a significant point in seeking personal holiness. the human condition is such that remaining crisply aware of our Christian-ness at all times is always a challenge - and central to this challenge is remembering God's presence in our lives. prayers with these so-called 'invocations', if rationalised to be words that remind ourselves of His nearness, do become erstwhile prayers.
the (lengthily protracted) distinction is that we need not ask/plead God to be with us as if He might not be so; but rather, such stylised pleas are really more like laments of our own human weakness in being unable to be mindful of His presence at all times. in a sense, praying for God's presence (as if He wasn't present before) is unnecessary, and may even reflect a little poorly on a Christian's faith; but praying that His presence may be made more palpable, or that we may be more sensitive/worthy of His presence - that is an earnest Christian prayer.
another "problem" with some prayers are the almost senselessly self-centred petitions. these are multitudinous and may be more common than realised: for example, praying for grades, health, that a loved one may recover, weather, traffic, being on time, etc. all these little things which bother us in life, but we know God is Lord over - why not ask Him for a little supernatural assistance?
well, firstly, such an attitude attempts to place God "in our service". even petitions generally supposed to be good such as praying for peace, happiness, good fortune, etc, could have a deeper selfish perspective wherein we are really hoping that God would simply make things better for us. the importance of acknowledging this negative attitude lies in the fact that investing our faith in God's "dependability" on resolving such matters could have the reverse effect: how many Christians have turned away after seeing God fail to answer their pleas? this method of praying also tends to obscure the individual's personal role in such matters - praying for peace could dilute your own role in working towards it. if you feel called to petition for some general goodness, never forget to pray that God may reveal His plan for you in that mission. chances are, noticing a certain petition could predispose you to being a key figure in bringing that petition to fruition!
secondly, we could look at the proto-prayer: the Lord's prayer. while Jesus spends the first 3 lines glorifying the Father's name (to remind us who's serving who, nonetheless!) He simply uses "give us today our daily bread" to summarise all our various particular petitions. the only 2 specifically-mentioned petitions then follow: "forgive us our sins", and "deliver us from evil". at the end (yes, we often forget these last 2 lines), Jesus goes full circle and praises the Lord again: "for the kingdom, the power, and the glory are Yours, now and forever", which doubtlessly also reminds the person who prays to be humble before the Lord and accept that "not my will but Yours be done".
so Christ's example, thru this extrapolation, indicates the right focus for our prayers: to pray for the Father's mercy and deliverance. as His children, we definitely ought to share with Him our daily problems as well, talking thru with Him matters which matter to us and bring us anxiety. however, this discussion, if it degenerates into a "child asking for prize" session, would greatly lose the dimension of two-way communication. when petitioning for something close to your hearts, do not fail to listen for His reply! prayer would be so much more enjoyable if it wasn't merely mouthing wishes into the air, you know. being open to His will and seeking clarity and discernment are much more fruitful and mature forms of prayer, don't you think?
besides, if He looks after the sparrows and the flowers, He is definitely looking after those needs of yours too. if it does not seem like He is, fear not! you don't have to suspect that God is abandoning you... but do listen and discern if this gift of pain is to toughen you up or to bring you in line with a greater plan of His. and be resilient: prayers for discernment often take much more time if you're not used to it.
know that the Lord is with you at all times, and He hears what you ask. now, all you need to do is listen and seek His will.
Friday, May 26, 2006
sunday best
just as you realise how late you are, an obstacle looms before you... what to wear for mass? shirt? jeans? yellow? green? don't worry, i'm only going to miss the entrance hymn, let's get this outfit perfected first. slippers? accessories? bag? perfume? and by the time you feel confident enough to walk big strides out of home and into church, the priest had just finished with "my dear friends, the good news of the lord." while you're still trying to murmur "praise you lord jesus christ" in mock response to an unheard gospel, the priest has already continued:
"i am very disappointed with the way some of us are dressed today. slippers? spaghetti straps? might i remind you that this is the house of god? when you go to an important function, do you choose your most comfortable clothes? no! you make sure that you are at your most presentable. and yet we gather here for worship in singlets! berms! miniskirts! the weather is no excuse... that's one of the reasons why we have air-conditioning! back in the old days people wore suits even in summer and those churches didn't even have fans! yada yada..."
luckily you've worn your sunday best and were not among those accused in this week's sermon. you heave a sigh of relief, but out of the corner of your eye, you catch a glimpse of someone whom the sermon is targeted at. he's an old man, probably over 70, his wrinkly limbs poking out of an almost tattered singlet and what looks like unwashed boxers. he slumps over his spot on the pews, with a 50cm radius of empty seats around him in the packed church. a voice begins to say "aiyo, why can't he dress up when he visits jesus? if it was some other priest, he might kena thrown out already lor." so unglam, right?
didn't that all sound somewhat wrong? punctuality issues aside, why does nobody ask this question: what is the sunday best? to me, it's straightforward. it's nothing to do with what you wear on the outside, but how you dress up spiritually. Matthew 5:23-4 goes "if you are bringing your offering to the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar, go and be reconciled with your brother first, and then come back and present your offering." if you need to mend a broken relationship, repay a certain spiritual debt, or even just say some words of encouragement to someone you know needs it, then do so before going to mass and you'll be dressed in your sunday best. regardless of what you have on your back.
it goes some way beyond this too. Matthew 7:3 asks "Why do you observe the splinter in your brother's eye and never notice the great log in your own?" "Do not judge, and you will not be judged; because the judgments you give are the judgments you will get, and the standard you use will be the standard used for you." i always harbour some resentment for priests who preach with so much fire that every line becomes a pronouncement of judgment. is that really how we behave as christians? jesus forgave mary magdalene, whom the pharisees wanted to stone. Matthew 23:4 records jesus' sharp tone against them "They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on people's shoulders, but will they lift a finger to move them? Not they!" are we in danger of becoming pharasaical?
and then it reaches out. Matthew 25:40 "In truth I tell you, in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it to me." Matthew 19:24 "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for someone rich to enter the kingdom of Heaven." Matthew 19:30 "Many who are first will be last, and the last, first." so when you see one of christ's brothers needing help, do not waste time judging the hypocrites forming the 50cm perimeter around him - go straight up to him and offer him your best. yes, stepping out of the comfort zone isn't easy, but that is how christ's mission for us looks like. start by just saying hi, getting to know the person at least, and then build up from there!
... so now mass has ended and everyone is squeezing their way out, some trying hard not to blurt vulgarities while exiting the carpark, others simply waiting to call the next person to honk "unchristian". the heaviest irony is that the so-called christian community is really little more than a farcical bunch of middle-class snobs trying to fulfil their sunday obligations and book a place in heaven. are you going to leave your christian mission behind in the pews? or will you heed the lord's calling and tend to his sheep?
i'll end off with Matthew 6:28-34:
"And why worry about clothing? Think of the flowers growing in the fields; they never have to work or spin; yet I assure you that not even Solomon in all his royal robes was clothed like one of these. Now if that is how God clothes the wild flowers growing in the field which are there today and thrown into the furnace tomorrow, will he not much more look after you, you who have so little faith? So do not worry; do not say, "What are we to eat? What are we to drink? What are we to wear?" It is the gentiles who set their hearts on all these things. Your heavenly Father knows you need them all. Set your hearts on his kingdom first, and on God's saving justice, and all these other things will be given you as well. So do not worry about tomorrow: tomorrow will take care of itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own."
"i am very disappointed with the way some of us are dressed today. slippers? spaghetti straps? might i remind you that this is the house of god? when you go to an important function, do you choose your most comfortable clothes? no! you make sure that you are at your most presentable. and yet we gather here for worship in singlets! berms! miniskirts! the weather is no excuse... that's one of the reasons why we have air-conditioning! back in the old days people wore suits even in summer and those churches didn't even have fans! yada yada..."
luckily you've worn your sunday best and were not among those accused in this week's sermon. you heave a sigh of relief, but out of the corner of your eye, you catch a glimpse of someone whom the sermon is targeted at. he's an old man, probably over 70, his wrinkly limbs poking out of an almost tattered singlet and what looks like unwashed boxers. he slumps over his spot on the pews, with a 50cm radius of empty seats around him in the packed church. a voice begins to say "aiyo, why can't he dress up when he visits jesus? if it was some other priest, he might kena thrown out already lor." so unglam, right?
didn't that all sound somewhat wrong? punctuality issues aside, why does nobody ask this question: what is the sunday best? to me, it's straightforward. it's nothing to do with what you wear on the outside, but how you dress up spiritually. Matthew 5:23-4 goes "if you are bringing your offering to the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar, go and be reconciled with your brother first, and then come back and present your offering." if you need to mend a broken relationship, repay a certain spiritual debt, or even just say some words of encouragement to someone you know needs it, then do so before going to mass and you'll be dressed in your sunday best. regardless of what you have on your back.
it goes some way beyond this too. Matthew 7:3 asks "Why do you observe the splinter in your brother's eye and never notice the great log in your own?" "Do not judge, and you will not be judged; because the judgments you give are the judgments you will get, and the standard you use will be the standard used for you." i always harbour some resentment for priests who preach with so much fire that every line becomes a pronouncement of judgment. is that really how we behave as christians? jesus forgave mary magdalene, whom the pharisees wanted to stone. Matthew 23:4 records jesus' sharp tone against them "They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on people's shoulders, but will they lift a finger to move them? Not they!" are we in danger of becoming pharasaical?
and then it reaches out. Matthew 25:40 "In truth I tell you, in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it to me." Matthew 19:24 "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for someone rich to enter the kingdom of Heaven." Matthew 19:30 "Many who are first will be last, and the last, first." so when you see one of christ's brothers needing help, do not waste time judging the hypocrites forming the 50cm perimeter around him - go straight up to him and offer him your best. yes, stepping out of the comfort zone isn't easy, but that is how christ's mission for us looks like. start by just saying hi, getting to know the person at least, and then build up from there!
... so now mass has ended and everyone is squeezing their way out, some trying hard not to blurt vulgarities while exiting the carpark, others simply waiting to call the next person to honk "unchristian". the heaviest irony is that the so-called christian community is really little more than a farcical bunch of middle-class snobs trying to fulfil their sunday obligations and book a place in heaven. are you going to leave your christian mission behind in the pews? or will you heed the lord's calling and tend to his sheep?
i'll end off with Matthew 6:28-34:
"And why worry about clothing? Think of the flowers growing in the fields; they never have to work or spin; yet I assure you that not even Solomon in all his royal robes was clothed like one of these. Now if that is how God clothes the wild flowers growing in the field which are there today and thrown into the furnace tomorrow, will he not much more look after you, you who have so little faith? So do not worry; do not say, "What are we to eat? What are we to drink? What are we to wear?" It is the gentiles who set their hearts on all these things. Your heavenly Father knows you need them all. Set your hearts on his kingdom first, and on God's saving justice, and all these other things will be given you as well. So do not worry about tomorrow: tomorrow will take care of itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own."
Saturday, February 25, 2006
embracing the lighter side of things
today i went for countless countess runs, found some good stuff, and lost them all while trying to arrange them and got connection interrupted. diablo2 is good clean fun eh? thanks mark, for reintroducing me to my favourite weakness.
well, i'm beginning to find that temper is not exactly something that really dominates you. usually, the lag would've pissed the shit out of me and set off an incoherent chain of vulgar unpleasantries. yet i managed to consciously laugh it off! a small victory in the long march towards sainthood.
and now it's time to plagiarise oxygen again~ this time it's hsingdee's delightful providence: the litany of humility.
O Jesus, meek and humble of heart, Hear me.
From the desire of being esteemed, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being loved, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being extolled, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being honored, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being praised, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being preferred to others, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being consulted, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being approved, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being humiliated, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being despised, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of suffering rebukes, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being calumniated, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being forgotten, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being ridiculed, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being wronged, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being suspected, Deliver me, O Jesus.
That others may be loved more than I,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be esteemed more than I,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That, in the opinion of the world, others may increase and I may decrease,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be chosen and I set aside,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be praised and I go unnoticed,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be preferred to me in everything,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may become holier than I, provided that I may become as holy as I should,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
Caritas
"Charity is patient, is kind; charity does not envy, is not pretentious, is not puffed up, is not ambitious, is not self-seeking, is not provoked; thinks no evil, does not rejoice over wickedness, but rejoices with the truth, bears with all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
(1 Cor. 13:4-7)
To have Charity is to love God above all things for Himself and be ready to renounce all created things rather than offend Him by serious sin.
( Matt. 22:36-40)
by Merry Cardinal del Val, secretary of state to Pope Saint Pius X from the prayer book for Jesuits, 1963
(plucked from Eternal World Television Network)
have fun praying it everyday!
well, i'm beginning to find that temper is not exactly something that really dominates you. usually, the lag would've pissed the shit out of me and set off an incoherent chain of vulgar unpleasantries. yet i managed to consciously laugh it off! a small victory in the long march towards sainthood.
and now it's time to plagiarise oxygen again~ this time it's hsingdee's delightful providence: the litany of humility.
O Jesus, meek and humble of heart, Hear me.
From the desire of being esteemed, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being loved, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being extolled, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being honored, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being praised, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being preferred to others, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being consulted, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being approved, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being humiliated, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being despised, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of suffering rebukes, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being calumniated, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being forgotten, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being ridiculed, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being wronged, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being suspected, Deliver me, O Jesus.
That others may be loved more than I,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be esteemed more than I,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That, in the opinion of the world, others may increase and I may decrease,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be chosen and I set aside,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be praised and I go unnoticed,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be preferred to me in everything,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may become holier than I, provided that I may become as holy as I should,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
Caritas
"Charity is patient, is kind; charity does not envy, is not pretentious, is not puffed up, is not ambitious, is not self-seeking, is not provoked; thinks no evil, does not rejoice over wickedness, but rejoices with the truth, bears with all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
(1 Cor. 13:4-7)
To have Charity is to love God above all things for Himself and be ready to renounce all created things rather than offend Him by serious sin.
( Matt. 22:36-40)
by Merry Cardinal del Val, secretary of state to Pope Saint Pius X from the prayer book for Jesuits, 1963
(plucked from Eternal World Television Network)
have fun praying it everyday!
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
the anthropomorphic reality
Genesis 1:27 states:
וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת-הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ, בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ: זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה, בָּרָא אֹתָם.
"God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."
and thus began the indiscriminate personification of objectivity to suit the human experience. if we were created in god's image, does it follow that he is "like unto us"? take for example, dolls which we humans create in our image: are they "like unto us"? indeed they may resemble us in the attributes which we willingly ascribe to them for the sole purpose of humanising these creations. and thus we have an infinitely differentiated realm for creativity and diversity when creating dolls. but is it fair to parallel this creation process with gen1:27? is it true that god has willingly ascribed various godly attributes unto us such that we resemble him? the problem here is that we, as the created, cannot tell with certainty, just as dolls probably have no idea how alike they are to their creators. yet our creator has given us the ability to think, to feel, and to reason, which to our best efforts have not been replicated genuinely in our creations thus far. thus, i contend that a proper parallel cannot be drawn as yet between human-doll creationism and god-human creationism. an extrapolation made from an incomplete presumption cannot stand as truth.
unfortunately, much of this prudence is lost in human history. we have attributed human characteristics to almost anything we come across. indeed, such is our limitation that our minds can only be creative insofar as that creativity lies within the finite realms of human experience - i.e. we simply can't imagine a god that is far from human likeness. and so our explanations for occurences in reality are constricted, tied to the leash of human-ness which we can't seem to escape. we are self-made prisoners of our language, mental schemata, cultural influence, and individual personalities. anthropomorhism is very much the de facto modus operandi of humanity, much like how materialism forms the superstructure of capitalist society.
yet these "human characteristics" are themselves crudely defined. philosophers have ruminated for centuries and are still unable to decide what makes us human. we can only grope around with a vague understanding of these ideals, consciously and subconsciously reinforcing each others' beliefs that to be "humane" is to be benevolent, welcoming, disciplined, etc - the proverbial "all things good". yet truthfully, the assertion that humanity tends towards goodness is deeply unorganised and lacking in parsimony or falsifiability, and so are any other exotic contentions for a generalised etiology of human characteristics. can there ever be a scientific evaluation of this human-ness?
and therefore i propose a new objectivity - one that brings an intention to reject anthropomorphic interpretations of reality. for reality and existence is not a human creation, and indeed until we can call our understanding of such phenomena "sufficient", we ought only tread with prudence when creating theoretical frameworks to "make sense of things". the scientific method stands as a rudimentary form of anti-anthropomorphic objectivity, yet i must admonish that careless treatment can still allow anthropomorphic elements to seep through - whether it is forming a hypothesis, designing an experiment, or interpreting data.
but some doubts linger. is it possible to maintain such a level of objectivity when it seems to take superhuman consciousness in every step of deliberation? could such an attempt be considered an exercise in "dehumanising" the inquirer? ultimately, would the removal of our anthropomorphic veil truly and uncompromisingly allow us to see reality with more clarity?
if we can't settle some of the questions raised here, we may permanently be unable to escape from the anthropomorphic prison that we have constructed for ourselves. but why would anyone want to escape it?
for a more contemporary discussion of anthropomorphism (free from gerg-thropomorphic contamination), simply wikipedia for it.
וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת-הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ, בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ: זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה, בָּרָא אֹתָם.
"God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."
and thus began the indiscriminate personification of objectivity to suit the human experience. if we were created in god's image, does it follow that he is "like unto us"? take for example, dolls which we humans create in our image: are they "like unto us"? indeed they may resemble us in the attributes which we willingly ascribe to them for the sole purpose of humanising these creations. and thus we have an infinitely differentiated realm for creativity and diversity when creating dolls. but is it fair to parallel this creation process with gen1:27? is it true that god has willingly ascribed various godly attributes unto us such that we resemble him? the problem here is that we, as the created, cannot tell with certainty, just as dolls probably have no idea how alike they are to their creators. yet our creator has given us the ability to think, to feel, and to reason, which to our best efforts have not been replicated genuinely in our creations thus far. thus, i contend that a proper parallel cannot be drawn as yet between human-doll creationism and god-human creationism. an extrapolation made from an incomplete presumption cannot stand as truth.
unfortunately, much of this prudence is lost in human history. we have attributed human characteristics to almost anything we come across. indeed, such is our limitation that our minds can only be creative insofar as that creativity lies within the finite realms of human experience - i.e. we simply can't imagine a god that is far from human likeness. and so our explanations for occurences in reality are constricted, tied to the leash of human-ness which we can't seem to escape. we are self-made prisoners of our language, mental schemata, cultural influence, and individual personalities. anthropomorhism is very much the de facto modus operandi of humanity, much like how materialism forms the superstructure of capitalist society.
yet these "human characteristics" are themselves crudely defined. philosophers have ruminated for centuries and are still unable to decide what makes us human. we can only grope around with a vague understanding of these ideals, consciously and subconsciously reinforcing each others' beliefs that to be "humane" is to be benevolent, welcoming, disciplined, etc - the proverbial "all things good". yet truthfully, the assertion that humanity tends towards goodness is deeply unorganised and lacking in parsimony or falsifiability, and so are any other exotic contentions for a generalised etiology of human characteristics. can there ever be a scientific evaluation of this human-ness?
and therefore i propose a new objectivity - one that brings an intention to reject anthropomorphic interpretations of reality. for reality and existence is not a human creation, and indeed until we can call our understanding of such phenomena "sufficient", we ought only tread with prudence when creating theoretical frameworks to "make sense of things". the scientific method stands as a rudimentary form of anti-anthropomorphic objectivity, yet i must admonish that careless treatment can still allow anthropomorphic elements to seep through - whether it is forming a hypothesis, designing an experiment, or interpreting data.
but some doubts linger. is it possible to maintain such a level of objectivity when it seems to take superhuman consciousness in every step of deliberation? could such an attempt be considered an exercise in "dehumanising" the inquirer? ultimately, would the removal of our anthropomorphic veil truly and uncompromisingly allow us to see reality with more clarity?
if we can't settle some of the questions raised here, we may permanently be unable to escape from the anthropomorphic prison that we have constructed for ourselves. but why would anyone want to escape it?
for a more contemporary discussion of anthropomorphism (free from gerg-thropomorphic contamination), simply wikipedia for it.
Thursday, January 05, 2006
sloth
yes... i've been too lazy to finish up my assignments (the arts t-shirt design, the grand candle meeting email & ppt slides, mm poster, caw poster, caroling write-up, etc?) but well, i figured i could at least share this passage... very nice reflective new yearsy one from 4th Jan's liturgy.
1 John 3:11-21
This is the message
as you have heard it from the beginning:
that we are to love one another;
not to be like Cain, who belong to the Evil One
and cut his brother's throat;
cut his brother's throat simply for this reason,
that his own lie was evil and his brother lived a good life.
You must not be surprised, brothers, when the world hates you;
we have passed out of death and into life.
and of this we can be sure
because we love our brothers.
If you refuse to love, you must remain dead;
to hate your brother is to be a murderer,
and murderers, as you know, do not have eternal life in them.
This has taught us to love -
that he gave up his life of us:
and we, too, ought to give up our lives for our brothers.
If a man who was rich enough in this world's goods
saw that one of his brothers was in need,
but closed his heart to him,
how could the love of God be living in him?
My children,
our love is not to be just words or mere talk,
but something real and active;
only by this can we be certain
that we are children of the truth
and be able to quieten our conscience in his presence,
whatever accusations it may raise against us,
because God is greater than our conscience and he knows everything.
My dear people,
if we cannot be condemned by our own conscience,
we need not be afraid in God's presence.
(plagiarised from oxygen, so minor typos may abound... i believe they use New Jerusalem Bible.)
1 John 3:11-21
This is the message
as you have heard it from the beginning:
that we are to love one another;
not to be like Cain, who belong to the Evil One
and cut his brother's throat;
cut his brother's throat simply for this reason,
that his own lie was evil and his brother lived a good life.
You must not be surprised, brothers, when the world hates you;
we have passed out of death and into life.
and of this we can be sure
because we love our brothers.
If you refuse to love, you must remain dead;
to hate your brother is to be a murderer,
and murderers, as you know, do not have eternal life in them.
This has taught us to love -
that he gave up his life of us:
and we, too, ought to give up our lives for our brothers.
If a man who was rich enough in this world's goods
saw that one of his brothers was in need,
but closed his heart to him,
how could the love of God be living in him?
My children,
our love is not to be just words or mere talk,
but something real and active;
only by this can we be certain
that we are children of the truth
and be able to quieten our conscience in his presence,
whatever accusations it may raise against us,
because God is greater than our conscience and he knows everything.
My dear people,
if we cannot be condemned by our own conscience,
we need not be afraid in God's presence.
(plagiarised from oxygen, so minor typos may abound... i believe they use New Jerusalem Bible.)
Friday, December 30, 2005
almost blasphemous...
yet an utterly lovely analogy filled with amazing anthropic sweetness. yes i'm using those goddamned vague terms, but they still mean something nonetheless! and so we move on to yet another plagiarised oxygen~
"intellectual property is only intellectual when shared."
22 Dec
MUD REFLECTING GOD
"What dirty, dreadful, disgusting stuff!" exclaimed a man referring to the mud along the streets of London.
"Hold on, my friend," said Ruskin, "not so dreadful after all. what are the elements of this mud? First, there is sand; but when its particles are crystallized according to the law of Nature, what is nicer than clean white sand? And when that which enters into it is arranged according to the still higher law, we have matchless opal."
"What else have we in this mud? Clay. And the materials of clay, when the particles are arranged according to their higher laws, make the brilliant sapphire."
"What other ingredients enter into the London mud? Soot. And soot in its crystallized perfection, forms the diamond."
"There is but one other - water. And water, when distilled according to the higher law of its nature, forms the dewdrop resting in exquisite perfection in the heart of the rose."
"So, in the muddy, lost soul of man is hidden thr image of his Creator; and God will do His best to find His opals, sapphires, His Diamonds, and His dewdrops."
- E. L. Moon (1000 Stories You Can Use, Volume Two by Frank Mihalic, SVD)
Do you know what makes up your make up?
"intellectual property is only intellectual when shared."
22 Dec
MUD REFLECTING GOD
"What dirty, dreadful, disgusting stuff!" exclaimed a man referring to the mud along the streets of London.
"Hold on, my friend," said Ruskin, "not so dreadful after all. what are the elements of this mud? First, there is sand; but when its particles are crystallized according to the law of Nature, what is nicer than clean white sand? And when that which enters into it is arranged according to the still higher law, we have matchless opal."
"What else have we in this mud? Clay. And the materials of clay, when the particles are arranged according to their higher laws, make the brilliant sapphire."
"What other ingredients enter into the London mud? Soot. And soot in its crystallized perfection, forms the diamond."
"There is but one other - water. And water, when distilled according to the higher law of its nature, forms the dewdrop resting in exquisite perfection in the heart of the rose."
"So, in the muddy, lost soul of man is hidden thr image of his Creator; and God will do His best to find His opals, sapphires, His Diamonds, and His dewdrops."
- E. L. Moon (1000 Stories You Can Use, Volume Two by Frank Mihalic, SVD)
Do you know what makes up your make up?
Thursday, December 29, 2005
oxygenated
sighs... have been slacking off lately with my zeal to read oxygen... i had almost 40 unread oxygens in my mailbox last time i checked! but herein comes a new challenge... to read thru old oxygens. and tho old they may be, each fresh insight still hits me like a lemon. like this one:
11 Dec - Third Sunday of Advent
HOME AND HEAVEN
A little boy always wanted to visit the place where heaven and earth meet. He could see it quite plainly from his mother's cottage and he thought the place where heaven came down to earth must be very beautiful.
With his eyes fixed on the horizon, the "meeting place of heaven and earth" be began one day, to walk. He walked on and on until he became very tired. he found himself in a valley where the horizon lay hidden from view: A cottage was near, and a woman was standing in the door. He told her of his quest, and she pointed out a house not so very far away.
"There it is," she said, "only hurry; it will soon be dark." He hurried on and was soon climbing the hill that led to his own home. And there in the doorway was his mother waving him a greeting.
"My own home," he thought to himself, "the place where heaven and earth meet."
- Drinkwater (1000 Stories You Can Use, Volume Two by Frank Mihalic, SVD)
Do you recognise your own home as the place where heaven and earth meet?
11 Dec - Third Sunday of Advent
HOME AND HEAVEN
A little boy always wanted to visit the place where heaven and earth meet. He could see it quite plainly from his mother's cottage and he thought the place where heaven came down to earth must be very beautiful.
With his eyes fixed on the horizon, the "meeting place of heaven and earth" be began one day, to walk. He walked on and on until he became very tired. he found himself in a valley where the horizon lay hidden from view: A cottage was near, and a woman was standing in the door. He told her of his quest, and she pointed out a house not so very far away.
"There it is," she said, "only hurry; it will soon be dark." He hurried on and was soon climbing the hill that led to his own home. And there in the doorway was his mother waving him a greeting.
"My own home," he thought to himself, "the place where heaven and earth meet."
- Drinkwater (1000 Stories You Can Use, Volume Two by Frank Mihalic, SVD)
Do you recognise your own home as the place where heaven and earth meet?
Thursday, December 22, 2005
wake me up when december ends
cheesy? no, really... december has been tough. i truly wish i could sleep thru the rest of it... but i can't, and i won't. i don't know whether to call it my stubborn streak, that adamant pride reluctant to groan in defeat as the gruelling schedule keeps up, or just simply denial.
what am i working my ass off for?
the retreat refreshed all the doubts that haunted me for the past few months. i had counted on the retreat being a refreshing experience alright, but not in this sense! here's a list of questions i thought i'd need to answer before being capable of contributing as a proper catholic:
it torments me to be unable to accept simple theories which may be flawed due to philosophical nitpicking; yet neither am i able to accept them without claiming a thorough understanding of all the vague terminology they tend to use. but the problem remains that i am not able to thoroughly study all these alleged logical inconsistencies nor investigate the controversies surrounding my faith.
so how? i still gotta go caroling, still gotta go mass, still gotta do what i've been doing. gotta? i don't know... now i don't feel like doing anything... until i understand what feeling means... i might never really feel like doing anything anymore.
this december might just never end... or i could re-read Psalm 119.
what am i working my ass off for?
the retreat refreshed all the doubts that haunted me for the past few months. i had counted on the retreat being a refreshing experience alright, but not in this sense! here's a list of questions i thought i'd need to answer before being capable of contributing as a proper catholic:
The Tract of Doubtsi don't know why i ask so many questions... is it some queer form of ego-trip? trying to act cheem? trying to go where no man should? challenging the powers that be? where does this perverted lust for tearing concepts apart come from?? why should i cave in to its demands??
Who is God? Jesus? Love? Reason? Society?
What is Humanity? Experience? Emotion?
Submission - what does it take?
Ego-centrism? Pride? Who else is involved?
Leap of Faith - why leap? What do we abandon?
The question of intent... for what purpose?
Why ask? Why question? What does the doubter gain?
Pursuit of Truth? What is Truth? Is there Truth?
Knowledge vs Wisdom: is it wise to know?
Desire... Thirst... Hunger... Craving...
Human paradigms? To be abandoned?
Defiance, Arrogance; where's the line?
Scepticism, Incredulity; what's the aim?
The Search for Answers: Magisterium?
Where doubts remain unaddressed, what do i believe?
Expectation, Satisfaction; primality of self?
Deconstruction: an end unto itself?
Objectivity/Subjectivity, why one or the other?
Priority? Focus? What deserves my attention?
Choose: is there Choice?
it torments me to be unable to accept simple theories which may be flawed due to philosophical nitpicking; yet neither am i able to accept them without claiming a thorough understanding of all the vague terminology they tend to use. but the problem remains that i am not able to thoroughly study all these alleged logical inconsistencies nor investigate the controversies surrounding my faith.
so how? i still gotta go caroling, still gotta go mass, still gotta do what i've been doing. gotta? i don't know... now i don't feel like doing anything... until i understand what feeling means... i might never really feel like doing anything anymore.
this december might just never end... or i could re-read Psalm 119.
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
the front pew
i'm a roman catholic. 'roman' largely due to religiously inconsequential historical factors, i.e. stuff that's good to know trivia with little effect on one's relationship with god. or is it?
mass... the thing we attend as part of our weekly routine. for some it's spiritually recharging, for others a source of divine inspiration. yet others may consider it the highest form of worship. but i suggest that a vast majority never think that far.
what makes a sacrament? as i watch a few hundreed glass-eyed parishioners file forward for their dose of communion, it makes me wonder. what do they think? why do they say 'amen' to the 'body of christ'? why do they bring their kids up for 'blessing'? why do some make the sign of the cross? is a sacrament little more than a personal interpretation of some symbolism-laden rituals? what are the consequences for us as persons? if there's such a thing, our 'spirituality'? our 'relationship with god'? these imprecise and hardly quantifiable concepts which seem so central to my very existence continue to torment me. am i being taken for a grand ride? could life really be meaningless, just as it currently feels?
and yet, setting all these abhorrent doubts and perturbing consternation aside, mass at nativity failed to recharge, inspire, or constitute some form of worship for me. while my faith simmers in denouement, the church and the religion persistently demands rote effort of me.
i sit in the front pew, but i truly am far from being inside the church.
mass... the thing we attend as part of our weekly routine. for some it's spiritually recharging, for others a source of divine inspiration. yet others may consider it the highest form of worship. but i suggest that a vast majority never think that far.
what makes a sacrament? as i watch a few hundreed glass-eyed parishioners file forward for their dose of communion, it makes me wonder. what do they think? why do they say 'amen' to the 'body of christ'? why do they bring their kids up for 'blessing'? why do some make the sign of the cross? is a sacrament little more than a personal interpretation of some symbolism-laden rituals? what are the consequences for us as persons? if there's such a thing, our 'spirituality'? our 'relationship with god'? these imprecise and hardly quantifiable concepts which seem so central to my very existence continue to torment me. am i being taken for a grand ride? could life really be meaningless, just as it currently feels?
and yet, setting all these abhorrent doubts and perturbing consternation aside, mass at nativity failed to recharge, inspire, or constitute some form of worship for me. while my faith simmers in denouement, the church and the religion persistently demands rote effort of me.
i sit in the front pew, but i truly am far from being inside the church.
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
breathe oxygen
wahaha i'm back to ripping off of Oxygen again! if you feel like you need a little spiritual food in your mailbox everyday, don't hesitate to burn 5 calories and clicking this link. trust me la, you won't regret one. this one i copied wholesale from the email i receive daily, sometimes a few hours late, but hey they've got their own lives too yea! as a team they're still really good la. so please enjoy... and give thanks to god for the gift of their ministry.
26 Oct
DEATH AS A LAW OF LIFE
Around us everyday we see many examples of death bringing forth life. A kernel of corn is buried and it grows into a tall cornstalk. The ice cube dissolves and it cools the water. A match burns itself out to light a fire. Water gets itself dirty to clean you. A battery goes dead giving you music and light. Wood burns itself out to cook your food. A tree dies to give you sago. Animals and plants die to give you your food.
By dying, all these things rise to a higher life. This is what Christian mortification is all about.
- Frank Mihalic (1000 Stories You Can Use, Volume Two by Frank Mihalic, SVD)
Will you die to yourself so that others may live?
_____________________
Romans 8:26-30
The Spirit comes to help us in our weakness. For when we cannot choose words in order to pray properly, the Spirit himself expresses our plea in a way that could never be put into words, and God who knows everything in our hearts knows perfectly well what he means, and that the pleas of the saints expressed by the Spirit are according to the mind of God.
We know that by turning everything to their good God co-operates with all those who love him, with all those that he has called according to his purpose. They are the ones he chose specially long ago and intended to become true images of his Son, so that his Son might be the eldest of many brothers. He called those he intended for this for those he called he justified, and with those he justified he shared his glory.
____________________
Luke 13:22-30
Through towns and villages Jesus went teaching, making his way to Jerusalem. Someone said to him, "Sir, will there be only a few saved?" He said to them, "Try your best to enter by the narrow door, because, I tell you, many will try to enter and will not succeed.
"Once the master of the house has got up and locked the door, you may find yourself knocking on the door, saying, 'Lord, open to us' but he will answer, 'I do not know where you come from.' Then you will find yourself saying, 'We once ate and drank in your company; you taught in our streets' but he will reply, 'I do not know where you come from. Away from me, all you wicked men!'
"Then there will be weeping and grinding of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves turned outside. And men from east and west, from north and south, will come to take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God.
"Yes, there are those now last who will be first, and those now first who will be last."
____________________
More than ten years ago, when I first experienced the gift of tongues, someone told me that the gift of tongues is the only gift of the Holy Spirit which can be used for ourselves, and he used the first part of today's first reading to prove it to me. That was probably the first in many times I've heard that proof being used for the gift of tongues.
What can I say about the gift of tongues, except that it takes tremendous faith to believe that what one is babbling is actually words from the heart to God and that he understands our babble. Someone once scolded me for using the word 'babble', but really, to anyone listening to someone speak in tongues, can they honestly say that it isn't babble to them?
I have encountered maybe a handful of people who truly have the gift of tongues and use it wisely for the good of others. But for every one of these there are hundreds more who believe that they have the gift of tongues and use it for themselves. However, I am no expert on the gifts, so I cannot judge who does and who doesn't really have the gift. Best for me just to avoid it altogether.
Last night, I was thinking of something just before going to sleep. I was thinking about the glory. To be more precise, I was in the loo last night, looking at an ad which spoke of the glory of Rome. It was the ad for a documentary on TV. It showed a woman standing in an ancient Roman city where its roads were running with blood. Is that glory, I asked myself?
Yes. Glory is always accompanied by bloodshed. The glory of Rome was when the Romans shed the blood of those that opposed them, letting it run through the streets of their cities. However, the glory of the Lord was when the Lord shed his own blood for those who opposed him. That's the difference between the glory of the Lord and the glory of men.
So in the first reading, we read that God's Son shared his glory with those he justified, which means to say, those who are with him must also share in his glory by shedding their own blood for those who oppose the Son.
Are we willing to do such a thing? Are we willing to shed our own blood, to sacrifice ourselves so that others may live? Especially if these others are the ones that oppose us?
For those who are not willing, the Lord does not recognise. "Lord, Lord," they say to him, "we went to church every week to share in the meal with you", but he will reply, "Did you share in my glory? Did you give of yourself so that others may live?"
For those that the Son shares his glory with, he justifies them by the gifts he empowers each. These gifts are meant to be used for the good of others, not merely for ourselves. The narrow door is where many will try to enter by, but not succeed, for the only way to enter it is by bringing others to the door at our own expense.
To love others as He has loved us. And He literally loved us to death.
______________________
Prayer: We pray for those who oppose us, that the Lord may be merciful and forgiving to them.
Give Thanks to the Lord for: Sharing his glory with us.
Upcoming Readings:
27 Oct, Thu - Romans 8:31-39; Luke 13:31-35; green
28 Oct, Fri - Ephesians 2:19-22; Luke 6:12-19; Sts. Simon and Jude, apostles; red
29 Oct, Sat - Romans 11:1-2, 11-12, 25-29; Luke 14:1, 7-11; green
------------------------
Disclaimer: The reflections expressed in this e-mail are the writer's own. They may not necessarily reflect the teachings of the Catholic Church. Nonetheless we should all be able to learn something from it.
26 Oct
DEATH AS A LAW OF LIFE
Around us everyday we see many examples of death bringing forth life. A kernel of corn is buried and it grows into a tall cornstalk. The ice cube dissolves and it cools the water. A match burns itself out to light a fire. Water gets itself dirty to clean you. A battery goes dead giving you music and light. Wood burns itself out to cook your food. A tree dies to give you sago. Animals and plants die to give you your food.
By dying, all these things rise to a higher life. This is what Christian mortification is all about.
- Frank Mihalic (1000 Stories You Can Use, Volume Two by Frank Mihalic, SVD)
Will you die to yourself so that others may live?
_____________________
Romans 8:26-30
The Spirit comes to help us in our weakness. For when we cannot choose words in order to pray properly, the Spirit himself expresses our plea in a way that could never be put into words, and God who knows everything in our hearts knows perfectly well what he means, and that the pleas of the saints expressed by the Spirit are according to the mind of God.
We know that by turning everything to their good God co-operates with all those who love him, with all those that he has called according to his purpose. They are the ones he chose specially long ago and intended to become true images of his Son, so that his Son might be the eldest of many brothers. He called those he intended for this for those he called he justified, and with those he justified he shared his glory.
____________________
Luke 13:22-30
Through towns and villages Jesus went teaching, making his way to Jerusalem. Someone said to him, "Sir, will there be only a few saved?" He said to them, "Try your best to enter by the narrow door, because, I tell you, many will try to enter and will not succeed.
"Once the master of the house has got up and locked the door, you may find yourself knocking on the door, saying, 'Lord, open to us' but he will answer, 'I do not know where you come from.' Then you will find yourself saying, 'We once ate and drank in your company; you taught in our streets' but he will reply, 'I do not know where you come from. Away from me, all you wicked men!'
"Then there will be weeping and grinding of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves turned outside. And men from east and west, from north and south, will come to take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God.
"Yes, there are those now last who will be first, and those now first who will be last."
____________________
More than ten years ago, when I first experienced the gift of tongues, someone told me that the gift of tongues is the only gift of the Holy Spirit which can be used for ourselves, and he used the first part of today's first reading to prove it to me. That was probably the first in many times I've heard that proof being used for the gift of tongues.
What can I say about the gift of tongues, except that it takes tremendous faith to believe that what one is babbling is actually words from the heart to God and that he understands our babble. Someone once scolded me for using the word 'babble', but really, to anyone listening to someone speak in tongues, can they honestly say that it isn't babble to them?
I have encountered maybe a handful of people who truly have the gift of tongues and use it wisely for the good of others. But for every one of these there are hundreds more who believe that they have the gift of tongues and use it for themselves. However, I am no expert on the gifts, so I cannot judge who does and who doesn't really have the gift. Best for me just to avoid it altogether.
Last night, I was thinking of something just before going to sleep. I was thinking about the glory. To be more precise, I was in the loo last night, looking at an ad which spoke of the glory of Rome. It was the ad for a documentary on TV. It showed a woman standing in an ancient Roman city where its roads were running with blood. Is that glory, I asked myself?
Yes. Glory is always accompanied by bloodshed. The glory of Rome was when the Romans shed the blood of those that opposed them, letting it run through the streets of their cities. However, the glory of the Lord was when the Lord shed his own blood for those who opposed him. That's the difference between the glory of the Lord and the glory of men.
So in the first reading, we read that God's Son shared his glory with those he justified, which means to say, those who are with him must also share in his glory by shedding their own blood for those who oppose the Son.
Are we willing to do such a thing? Are we willing to shed our own blood, to sacrifice ourselves so that others may live? Especially if these others are the ones that oppose us?
For those who are not willing, the Lord does not recognise. "Lord, Lord," they say to him, "we went to church every week to share in the meal with you", but he will reply, "Did you share in my glory? Did you give of yourself so that others may live?"
For those that the Son shares his glory with, he justifies them by the gifts he empowers each. These gifts are meant to be used for the good of others, not merely for ourselves. The narrow door is where many will try to enter by, but not succeed, for the only way to enter it is by bringing others to the door at our own expense.
To love others as He has loved us. And He literally loved us to death.
______________________
Prayer: We pray for those who oppose us, that the Lord may be merciful and forgiving to them.
Give Thanks to the Lord for: Sharing his glory with us.
Upcoming Readings:
27 Oct, Thu - Romans 8:31-39; Luke 13:31-35; green
28 Oct, Fri - Ephesians 2:19-22; Luke 6:12-19; Sts. Simon and Jude, apostles; red
29 Oct, Sat - Romans 11:1-2, 11-12, 25-29; Luke 14:1, 7-11; green
------------------------
Disclaimer: The reflections expressed in this e-mail are the writer's own. They may not necessarily reflect the teachings of the Catholic Church. Nonetheless we should all be able to learn something from it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
