Find What You're Looking For:
Navigation
The Categories
- Art (3)
- Cartoons (3)
- John Wauck (3)
- Life of Jesus Christ (4)
- Mortification (7)
- On Opus Dei (13)
- Recommended Posts (17)
- The Church (5)
- The Da Vinci Code (122)
- What others said (4)
The Archives
- January 2010
- November 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- April 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- September 2007
- June 2007
Posts By Date
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Jan | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
Registered Users
Subscribe
Pia de Solenni is a theologian in Washington DC, whose prize-winning doctoral dissertation in Rome dealt with gender issues in St. Thomas Aquinas. Slightly different versions of this article appeared in Hearst papers, a Canadian syndicate, and Catholic Exchange.
For those familiar with the history and tradition of the Catholic Church, The Da Vinci Code might provide more cause for laughter (at the absurd) than suspense. Author Dan Brown sounds as if he’s accusing the Catholic Church (and perhaps all Christian Churches) of not recognizing women, particularly in their role as mothers.
It used to be that the Catholic Church was faulted for talking too much about women as mothers and their life producing capabilities. Brown now suggests the contrary.
Had he done a serious historical analysis, Brown would have found just how groundbreaking the Catholic Church has been in its regard for women. In Catholic parlance, the Church is the bride of Christ, by no means a demeaning role. The Church eschewed mere cultural traditions and focused on the essential nature of women, starting with the fact that women are of equal dignity with men.
Women and men were subject to the same initiation rite, baptism, in order to become Christians. In a move that completely broke from ancient Roman law and tradition, Christianity understood that women were the bearers of rights (or decision making abilities) apart from their husbands and fathers. A long list of women martyrs, extolled by the Church for making their own decisions, witnesses this fact.
The Catholic Church, Brown’s subjugator of women, was also the first organized body to promote the education of women and to acknowledge that the decision of a woman not to marry was in fact a valid choice. Prior to this, women’s education was not endorsed or promoted by any government, religion, or large scale institution. Certainly, there were educated women; but they were educated because of private – not public – efforts. Similarly, most cultures had no place for an adult woman who chose not to marry. Even the so-called vestal virgins of the pagan religions were given recognition for their sexual relations with men of generally higher status, like a priest.
Records of 13th century French Catholic communities have detailed the activity of women in local government and businesses as well as their ownership of these businesses and other properties. Some twentieth century suffragette issues, like decision making and inheritance, had no relevance in a state like California which was based on Spanish law which in turn was based on Church law, reflecting each woman as a distinct human individual completely equal to man.
It has also been speculated that in the United States the women with the largest roles of public leadership and power in the early twentieth century were Catholic women religious. They not only headed religious communities, but schools, hospitals, and various other institutions. As religious vocations became victim to secularism, it would take the feminist upheaval of the late 1960’s and 70’s before women would assume such leadership positions again. Today, at the beginning of the 21st century, we still remark on the achievement of a woman who heads a university or other large institution even though her religious counterpart of a century ago already had such “power.”
These are but a few historical examples which do not even begin to explore the theological principles. But in line with Brown’s combined historical “fact” and art history approach, the art of the Catholic Church tells a different story than Brown’s. This tradition has always represented woman as a subject which stands in stark contradiction to some more recent artistic endeavors that represent woman as an object, someone who is not a person in her own right.
For two millennia, Catholic art has celebrated the womanliness of Mary the Mother of Jesus. In fact, during the Protestant Reformation, the artistic depiction of such buxom womanliness was generally considered indecent and a bit excessive by the reformers.
Catholic cathedrals and churches have not shied from display prominent statues of strong women. In Sicily, for example, the entrance to Palermo’s twelfth century cathedral is “guarded,” if you will, by four women saints memorialized in large statues, two on each side of the entrance gate. There are no men represented with them.
More recently, John Paul II continually referred to the irreplaceable ability of women to bring forth new life – again, a tradition long held by the Catholic Church he headed.
During the UN conference on women in Beijing, 1995, while abortion advocates dominated the meetings in an attempt to shape the outcome documents, John Paul II dryly noted that the draft document gave very little attention to the intellectual abilities of women. Had Brown done his research, he would have learned that it was others who wanted to suppress the “sacred” life giving powers of women with abortion and widespread contraception. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, thought it was more in line with the dignity of women to make sure that they know how to read and are educated.
This same Catholic Church that Brown attacks is the voice that has asserted that women have a role in every aspect of society. Interestingly, Brown‚Äôs own novel seems to indicate that women should have only supporting roles. His hero, Robert Langdon is a man. His tragic hero, Jacques Sauni?®re is a man. In his entire book, there are only three significant women: Sophie Neveu, granddaughter of Sauni?®re; Sister Sandrine, a mere watchdog for Sauni?®re and his male buddies; and Marie Sauni?®re, wife of Sauni?®re. Brown makes it clear that Sophie could never have deciphered the answer on her own. She needed Langdon. Marie was in Sauni?®re‚Äôs inner circle; but Brown does not give her a critical role except perhaps for her participation in a semi-public sex ritual. (Most women wouldn‚Äôt consider it liberating to have sex while others looked on.) Brown‚Äôs female characters recall the tradition of ancient Roman law whereby women were known only in relation to men ‚Äì their fathers, husbands, and masters.
Even Brown’s thesis that Mary Magdalene was a sort of ancient feminist hero, married to Jesus and mother of his offspring, ignores the substantial Catholic tradition that celebrates Magdalene’s intelligence, her ability to love, and her role as the “apostle to the apostles” when she brings them the news of Jesus’ resurrection. Her role is independent of the men in her life. This history, by the way, is confirmed by Church art.
At the conclusion of Brown’s tale, after their initial harrowing few days together, Langdon invites Sophie to join him for a getaway in Florence where he’ll be participating in a conference. He explains, “We’d be living in luxury. They’re giving me a room at the Brunelleschi.” Of course, he loves for her mind…
Perhaps one of the few truths in Brown’s entire novel is that some men will say anything to get a woman into bed, especially when he doesn’t have to give anything for the bed or the woman.
Pia de Solenni is a spokesperson for www.DaVinciOutreach.com. She is also a theologian whose work on women was recognized by John Paul II.
||
Print This Post
||
Email This Post
||
Other Recent Posts
dvc blog is back online!
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on January 26th.
Don’t Skip This Ad: A Brand New Book!
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on November 28th.
The Catholic Choice
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on November 2nd.
Just When You Thought It Was Safe
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on September 24th.
Juno/Juneau
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on September 2nd.
Read It and Weep… with Laughter
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on August 23rd.
The New Yorker: “Catholicism has everything else beat”
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on August 14th.
Don’t Give Up on Europe
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on July 11th.
B. in the U.S. A.: The Sheep Confirm the Shepherd’s Hope
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on April 27th.
Catholicism’s Cultural Glass: Half Empty or Half Full?
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on April 13th.
Thanks for posting this, Fr. Wauck.
Excellent article!!! Another unmentioned area where the Church dramatically improved the lot of women is marriage. In the Roman Empire, men could divorce and discard their wives at will. The Church’s insistence on the permanency and exclusivity of marriage provided a far greater level of stability and protection for women and their children than under the pagan system.
Could also mention that the early church had Deaconesses (Paul mentions one in Romans ch 16, and early cannon law mentions them too), which was a clerical order that instructed and baptized women. (It apparently faded to history when the Church ran out of new adult converts and after infants begain to be baptized.)
The practice of discarding female infants after a family alredy had one was also very common in pre-Christian Roman times. In ancient Rome the male to female ratio was something like 3:2…kind of reminds one of current day Communist China where unborn females are discarded at the nearest abortuarium after the ultrasound discovers the sex of the baby. In the Epistle of Mathetes in 130AD, it was written “They [Christians] marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring.” How odd of a woman-hating religion to put a stop to the slaughter of female infants…
And as to the value of women, writing around 193AD, Clement of Alexandria said: “…understanding that the virtue of man and woman is the same. For if the God of both is one, the master of both is also one; one church, one temperance, one modesty; their food is common, marriage an equal yoke; respiration, sight, hearing, knowledge, hope, obedience, love all alike. And those whose life is common, have common graces and a common salvation; common to them are love and training.” If that looks familiar, it may be from Galatians 3:28-29 (you know, one of Brown’s “altered gospels”): “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Amen Margaret.
“We’d be living in luxury. They’re giving me a room at the Brunelleschi.”
haha. Classic. (Classic b@s#@d that is, what !@#r would fall for that?)
Yeah, i’m kind of rude, sorry.
Hmm, tone it down there little buddy. BTW, Is that line supposed to be alluring? wow, haha, someone needs some major pickup line help.
“The Church‚Äôs insistence on the permanency and exclusivity of marriage provided a far greater level of stability and protection for women and their children than under the pagan system.”
Hear, hear!
Arnold, you’re too funny. Have pity on the man!
Awesome post! I find myself linking to you once again! (http://ramblinggopsoccermom.blogspot.com/2006/05/who-was-it-who-really-suppressed-women.html)
DON’T OVER THINK IT, BOYS….The Bible is very clear about the fact that Jesus had many STEP-BROTHERS AND STEP SISTERS. Mary Magdelin was JESUS STEP SISTER! I don’t know why human beings have to turn EVERYTHING into SEX, but this “race” of humans are REAL CROTH GRABBERS! Get a grip. Mary probably ended up a WIDOW, with some cash, and decided to finance her beloved brother’s mission AND go with him in case he got into trouble. Does ANYONE know WHO told Jesus’s mother what happend…or how he got arrested…or what the Romans were going to do to him…AND WHEN? Remember His mother WAS THERE…who told her to come? I BET you the word got to her though Mary Magdelin, the sister of Jesus.
Anyway this makes more sence than ANY of this Da Vinci stuff.
Thanks for posting, Fr. Wauck
Sometimes I just have to laugh at people who claim that the Church is a ‘womyn hater’. In the DVC movie there is a flashback scene which inferred that the inquisition was an attempt of the Church to suppress all women. The funny thing is that most of the scenes reminded me of the Salem witch trials– a Puritan affair. Ah, Hollywood. . . Sometimes the things that come out of it outdo even Jack Chick’s claims lol
“In the DVC movie there is a flashback scene which inferred that the inquisition was an attempt of the Church to suppress all women.”
Curioser and curioser. How quickly we forget history, right? (Speaking of, Paul Johnson’s “Modern Times” is pretty good. But that’s just an aside).
Sorry, above should’ve been “curiouser.” (yikes)
Thank you so much Pia for this post. And thanks for your talk in Toronto a few weeks ago and your wonderful talk on EWTN. We need beautiful, young and intelligent women like you to speak out, feminists in the true sense, to help this generation learn the truth.
When I read TDVC I thought that Dan Brown was just stupid and naive and was not doing anything on purpose in this book. But then this weekend one of our local leading radical feminists had an article in one of our Canasian newspapers singing Dan Brown’s praises.
I had never really thought that anyone educated would see anything of interest in Dan Brown’s book. When I read the book I really felt that Dan Brown was putting down women, as Sophie seemed quite silly for being so educated, and Dan Brown made Mary Magdalene of lower quality than she truly was. I felt Dan Brown treated considered woman second class.
So it was quite a surprise to see this radical feminist praising Dan Brown for reviving the theory of the sacred feminine.
Thank you Pia for setting the record straight.
In case anyone’s interested, this is a link to a talk Pia de Solenni gave last year at a “Women transforming Culture” conference in New York City.
http://www.murrayhillinstitute.org/Pages/Newsletter/june_2005/notion_of_beauty.html
“Curioser and curioser. How quickly we forget history, right? (Speaking of, Paul Johnson‚Äôs ‚ÄúModern Times‚Äù is pretty good. But that‚Äôs just an aside).”
Definitely. The whole of western civilization needs to be reminded that without the Church, it would have been wiped off from the face of the earth! We owe so much to the Church yet we reward her by removing every trace of Her presence from society. A lamentable departure, indeed.
What does ‘western civilization’ refer to? If it is things like rational thought, science and democracy, these are usually associated with classical Greece. Indeed, rational enquiry may have flourished there and then precisely because there was no record of revealed dogma such as the New Testament.
Sorry, I meant the Old Testament!
Faith and reason go together actually, the one strengthening the other. I don’t think they’re mutually exclusive. Perhaps I’m over-simplifying your statement though. Surely you don’t mean that religion is an impediment to the pursuit of knowledge I hope.
Hi Michelle
I was only trying to find out what tantumdicverbo meant.
Christian theology has availed itself of philosophical tools which had been around for centuries BC. If you think a ‘tongue in cheek’ belief in 12 gods on Olympus should be somehow credit for the development of such philosophical tools, it’s fine by me Рwith the emphasis on ‘tongue in cheek’.
His last name is Sacramentum
I getcha. And, of course, philosophical inquiry is as ancient as the hills as they say. Ordered clarity in thinking comes with time and we do owe the classical world a great debt. Sorry can’t post more at the moment, this is a good subject.
“Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth (…)”
(Fides et ratio, 1998)
ARN, you are too much.
Great name, tantum.
His brother’s name is Tantumergo. Parents were very unimaginative, I imagine…
Hello. I am a good friend of Dan Brown. I love to venture off in the web to see what people feel about Da Vinci code and other sources. Now because the movie is out in theatures, the book has risen a huge controversey in which Dan had never thought the book would hit the market and sell. It’s amazing how many articles we hear and we always want more. It’s great to see how effective the book has made.
Your articles you have put in are great. They show a deep concentration and value in the meaning and source of the writing Dan has explicited. I love how you take time and effort in this blog that you have created and search for meaning in the book.
I find a lot of people just like you that try to find meaning. You have to know that Da Vinci code is publically advertised as a FICTION novel. So some of the topics discussed in the book are negative, meaning fiction. Not real. They suit no purpose and drive no failure in the Catholic Church, to women, men, or any religious belief. I am not faulting you or judging you I just want you to remember that the book is fiction and not everything in it has a meaning or has a historical background.
Thank you again for writing your opinions on this matter. I’ll be reading more of what you got.
Mal
Dear Mal,
Perhaps you missed the point of the blog, but as Fr. Wauck put it, the DVC’s chiefly quite a laughing matter not to be taken too seriously (if at all). Take a look at the new post and you’ll get the picture. No offense to Dan Brown, God love ‘im, but there’s not much meat to the book or the film. It’s a nice little conspiracy theory (as you said, it’s in the fiction section even though he put some fiction under “Facts” but they may have been an editor’s mistake…although I doubt it), not much more.
It’s funny you write: “I just want you to remember that the book is fiction and not everything in it has a meaning or has a historical background.” Ha! Not like we didn’t know that already, but thanks for bringing the point home!
Almost nada is factual, of course… well, I guess he got the address of the NY headquarters correct.
Thanks and tell your friend Dan, “hello.” As Fr. Wauck mentioned earlier, he’s laughing all the way to the bank for the mass population’s incredible gullibility.
“I love how you take time and effort in this blog that you have created and search for meaning in the book.”
Sorry, don’t follow you. Where on this blog have we tried to “search for meaning” in the DVC of all places? I do hope you’re joking.
Hi Mal,
The main problem I have with the book is that intertwined with the fiction are real people and groups who are misrepresented. There are many people who believe much of what they read and so in this case especially they can come away with a very wrong understanding of some very fundamental truths. . . the truths about God Himself and His relationship with his creatures.
Hi Michelle, you‘re back with a vengeance I see! ‘Where on this blog have we tried to “search for meaning” in the DVC of all places?’ you ask. Do you mind my asking if you have any particular association with this blogg?
Brenda, hi. I think people want to make up their own minds. They flocked to see the movie, in spite of the reviews. Is this not positive?
Hi, Athena– Well, when I said “we”, I meant those of us blogging away here.
No association with this blog other than what you have. Ah, the blogosphere’s a rather large space.
You’re right, Athena, people just have to make up their own minds. Here’s the New Yorker’s Anthony Lane on the subject. So don’t take my word for it, by any means. Ciao!
(Link’s above in most recent post.)
“Should we mind that forty million readers‚Äîor, to use the technical term, ‚Äúlemmings‚Äù‚Äîhave followed one another over the cliff of this long and laughable text? I am aware of the argument that, if a tale has enough grip, one can for a while forget, if not forgive, the crumbling coarseness of the style; otherwise, why would I still read ‚ÄúThe Day of the Jackal‚Äù once a year? With ‚ÄúThe Da Vinci Code,‚Äù there can be no such excuse. Even as you clear away the rubble of the prose, what shows through is the folly of the central conceit, and, worse still, the pride that the author seems to take in his theological presumption. How timid‚Äîhow undefended in their powers of reason‚Äîmust people be in order to yield to such preening? Are they reading ‚ÄúThe Da Vinci Code‚Äù because everybody on the subway is doing the same, and, if so, why, when they reach their stop, do they not realize their mistake and leave it on the seat, to be gathered up by the next sucker? Despite repeated attempts, I have never managed to crawl past page 100.”
Thank you Michelle (x2).
Except Anthony Lane will never know if the good part starts on page 101!
Ha, ha, you’re right about that.
Glad you have a sense of humor.
Or an eye for detail! Is everyone out to see ‘the’ movie, I wonder. Has this blog run its course? What has it achieved?
Oh, I think it’s achieved quite a lot actually. For one thing, it provides a source from which to get more information about Opus Dei. Actually, if you take a look at the full Anthony Lane article, he says just that: “In fact, the sole beneficiaries of the entire fiasco will be members of Opus Dei.”
I’ve found different links here (on other posts elsewhere), such as http://www.opusdei.org, http://www.opusdeiblogs.org and someone else’s webpage but I can’t remember where I saw it. All in all, there actually many people who seem interested in learning more about the Church in general, so all for the good I must say.
This is described as a personal blog; there must be other sites with official info on Opus Dei, if this is what one is after. Why it would be beneficial to Opus Dei if the world at large finds out more about them I am not sure, but if this is the case they need not have waited until The Da Vinci Code appeared. I think you are right that people will want to find out more about the church, early church history in particular. It may be all for the good; it depends what would count as ‘good’ in this instance.
Yes, you’re right. Here, I mean “good” as in what is true. The truth will out as they say…and our mantra seems to be “seek the truth,” correct? Seeing the apparent cultural, historical and religous vaccuum permeating our society, there is a great need for accurate information to reach as many as possible. Of course, besides any ‘mass outreach’, the one on one is the most effective and most important.
Perhaps that’s the wrong expression, sorry–a vaccuum can’t ‘permeate.’ Anyway, the general idea is there’s an obvious void that needs to be filled.
“A long list of women martyrs”. Well, if you want to talk history… Catholic church certainly added to the list. Remember the “witches”?
Dear Mal, has Dan Brown shared any of his money with you? Oh, sorry (that´s a cheap one) couldn´t resist that
Thanks a lot for coming by and for your comments. Reading your post I had a mixture of feelings. One was peace towards you seeing as how you try to make a friendly post in spite of who “your friend” is. It makes me wonder if Dan Brown does not feel remorse in a way, as to the effect of his book. He may even be a victim of himself, seeing as he could not predict the reach of his imagination and his book. That is why his friends are now going all over the internet to see how much echo the book is receiving.
In any case Mal, when next you see Dan, do tell him he¬¥s succeeded in doing quite some damage, even though he wanted it to be fiction. Also tell him that it is “partly” his fault because he began his book with a “FACT” page, claiming that things exist and are true, which in actual fact are not.
The book is fiction, but it preys on facts, bandying about half-truths and untruths in a confusing mixture that leaves the ignorant befuddled. For those who already had things against the Catholic Church, your friend Dan provided them fodder for their flames.
Finally, tell Dan that we love him and wish him well and that whenever he finds himself alone, away from real and fake friends, and publishers and movie directors, let him do a soul searching and ask himself, “Was it worth it?”
“Also tell him that it is ‚Äúpartly‚Äù his fault because he began his book with a ‚ÄúFACT‚Äù page, claiming that things exist and are true, which in actual fact are not.”
I think you’re right, Magdalen. Weaving a story around facts is one thing (to an extent, that’s exactly what a historical novel is–take A Tale of Two Cities, for instance), but disguising fiction as fact? And presenting it as ‘impeccably researched’ (I kid you not, that’s what the NY Daily News actually commented; no comment there)… Well, as mentioned in the UK Telegraph review in another post (thanks, Barbara), “Though their argument might be that 50 million readers can’t have been wrong, I really, really doubt that all 50 million took the book this seriously. I certainly hope not.” I hope so, too.
Hallo Michelle! I finaly found you link!
I,m still on the other one too.I`m a glutton for punishment (poor LONELY ME.)I too have a link for you http://www.womanpriests.org (and a book ) No Women in Holy Orders?(The Ancient Women Deacons) by John Wijngaards Canterbury Press 2002.
sandra
Long lost Sandra?
Danke shein for the titles.
Let me ponder the woman priest information for a bit and I’ll give my thoughts on the subject. Is Mr. Wijngaards Anglican, by the way? (Just guessing from the Canterbury publisher).
Anyone else’s thoughts on the subject? Open forum, of course.
To All!
As I mentioned on Father Waucks Blog
Wolfgang von Goethe wrote in regard to “Index of forbidden Literature” Quote-”Having a book on the Index was the best publisity for the Author making sure the book would sell VERY well”
With the same sence of humor Cardinal Pietro Ciriaci in a speach held in latin during the second Vatican Council May 5th.i962 stated”there have been Pulishers who have stated that their books have been put on the “Index” knowing that this would mean that they would most definately be sought after.Just think how much profit they made!-without even giving the Holy Officium THEIR fare share-afterall the Officium did do them that Service” This statement “ofcourse” was made in JEST..
sandra
To all
We allkwow that the Vatican does not like to get into the Origin of Celibacy and try to block or go into Platitudes Do they think that we are not capable of looking up references–ie–That the Practice of Celibacy is an Ancirent Pagen practice ,and cultish Self Castration eas practiced by the Babylonians -Ph??nizer-and Orsis Worshipers Peter Browe “History Of Castration”1933Page 13The reason being that Sexual Abstainment was needed to be Spiritualy nearer to GOD-S Pope Pius XI even quoted Cicero in De legibus lib (2,C,8)in 1936″the Catholic Priesthood”In the Synode to Elvira (Spain) begining of the 4th.Cenuary proclaimed that “ALL BIschops and OTHER Clergy should distain from having Intercourse with their WIFES and not to procure any more children From henseforth,They need not however Divorce them but could “continue to keep them in their Household as MAIDS.And SERVANTS” “Also they should no longer enter into Marrage “That would mean that untill such time there was no CELIBACY!!!!
Father Wauck And Wm.Donnovan(Isee you grace this Blog with Your Knowlege)
How about a Response to my last comment (Wm.Donnovan I know you at least have a nummber of Passages from the Bible, or Quotes parat on the subject)Would be interessting!!!
Father Wauck and Wm Donnovan
Last comment is in regard to my longer Dialog on the Celibacy in the Catholic Church!!not nesacerily on the “Index” allthough that would interest me also!!
Hi Sandra
It seems that Fr Wauck has abandoned his flock РI mean blog! Рas has everyone else. Are people out buying The Da Vinci Code like mad? Compare Michelle’s references to articles in The New Yorker and The Daily Telegraph above Рthere are no dates but there is a 10,000,000 copy discrepancy. I recall an ancient ‘Not the Nine O’Clock News’ sketch on the BBC where, at a time when the Cult of Monty-Python Brian was the established religion, a clergyman of some denomination or other had been invited to a panel discussion to make the case for Jesus… I’m going back to Peter Singer. He’s still controversial, I think.
PS Will you switch the lights off or shall I?
You’re right, Athena, I wonder why the numbers dramatically changed when one crosses the Atlantic (!). Brings to mind what Fr. Wauck mentioned in his review (other post above) about the French policeman having time to join Opus Dei between the publication of the book and the release of the film. Of course, “all’s possible in cloud-cuckooland” (a la Dorothy Sayers: by the way, Sandra, have you read Sayers? Just FYI, she was one of the first women to receive an Oxford degree.)
I’m sure the blog’s being read even if there’s more reading than writing lately. Nice reminder there’s life outside the DVC (sorry, couldn’t help saying that).
Hi!Athena
I didn`t buy the da Vinci Code but have read it (its a BIT far fetched)I did buy the Holy Blood Holy Graal(shame on me) but it does make interessting reading,although INTERESSTING does not nessacarily mean TRUETHFULL
I am not so boniert as not to read books, other, than the ALLOWED by the`Holy Officium¬¥I dont have to agree with the contents,but to be able to correct one must read them first!only then can we make owr own decision to agree or not (I seem to be in a very distant time zone to you all.C.E.T).And by the way I am a CHRISTIAN and I`m not Knocking the Church but do reconise that we ALL (including Father Wauck-Wm Donnavan)need to Question the OPINIONS of others Not pass judgement on them,(the Authors) then as Christ said no man should judge others, this is to be left to the FATHER.I still have not found the Passage in the Bible where Jesus says that only the repentant who openly(Confesion before a Ordained Priest) Confesses sins and asks forgivenes of them will be forgiven by God.Jesus does say however that”No one comes to the Father other than through ME” I interperate that as meaning we should not pray for intervention through MAN made SAINTS. At another occasion Jesus forbade his Folowers to Kneel before him stating that such Honnor is reserved for the FATHER who is in Heaven,so if we should not Kneel before Christ
surely we should not do so before Images of (again) “MAN MADE SAINTS”.The early Christians did not give Reverance to a Cross but they did Kneel at the feet of the folowers of Christ listening to them preach (possibly because there was not enough chairs to go around)I suppose that comment was a bit “FRIVOL”sorry!
again “Nichts f?ºr Ungut” sandra
Wm.Donnovan said:-
Quoting Clement of Alexandria 193A.D “understanding that the virtue of man and woman is the same…..
“there is neither Jew or Greek,slave or free, male or female,for you are all one in Christ Jesus….”
Very comforting in 193A.D But lets move on (about 900hundred years)The Holy Augustinius,Hyronymous,Joseph of Aquin were all praised for their writings and guidance to the faithfull (and still are !)in which they take great pains to explain the DIFFERENCE between Man and Woman,ie`the female is composed of procentualy so much more FLUIDS??? than Males also that they are not known for their Reasoning,and are easily led astray so as to automaticaly dismiss them from any leading post in the catholic church¬¥ So much for EQUALITY in the Catholic Church`s Techings The Female is as you rightly say, thought of highly in the Church but for our WOMANLY ATTRIBUTES ie`supporting the MALE, Home building,Child bearing and education of the offspring.Not to mention Bed making Cooking Cleaning Pampering our Husbands and taking all the worry of his shoulders so that HIS mind be free to Tackle the moral and biblical Issues that we are denied.(due to the “FLUIDS”)
(still awaiting your responce) With Womanly Decorum Sandra.
OOPS I forgot to mention that before the 1500hudereds ONLY the Very Elite Woman was able to Read, and then advised by the MALE clergy to chose only Poetry and Domestic allied Literature (It was impossible to do oterwise , because all other books were writen in LATIN) as the female mind was not considered able to stay on any subject for very long also, too shallow to be able to grasp properly the content.Such things wre beter left to her supierior (Husband Father confessor)How about that for EUALITY!!I would be interessted to know when and how the Catholic Church Promoted the education of Women I mean EDUCATION Not just being alowed to read the Apropriate Books As far as I know the Vatican BURNED any Book which was not writen in Latin And ofcourse not APPROVED…
If no responce comes,it will please you to know that I give up,But it would (for my part )only prove MY piont god bless sandra
Dear Sandra, let me begin by asking you to forgive me for the silly comment I made earlier about you. I was not my best that day and just plain tired… I’m sorry
And yes, “God bless Sandra”, for many reasons, the least of which is not that she seeks the truth. Thanks too for your contributions to this blog.
Above you refer to the need to be able to read documents so as later to be able to comment on them. While that may have merit at first sight, you should also count on how curiosity (not every intellectual curiosity is healthy), lack of formation (including philosophical and theological preparation) can affect our understanding of the things we read. When we trust on the intepretation of the Church and its authorities to understand some documents, it is not because we would not dare give an opinion ourselves. Among other things, God gave the Church divine authority to teach and part of this exercise of magisterium is that he gives it grace to see beyong what our limited (and individual) human understanding can see. I must also add that in so submitting to that authority we find a humility that God also blesses with greater enlightening.
Jesus indeed did say that no one comes to the Father except through him, and that remains true. He himself also appointed twelve disciples whom he sent out to preach. After Jesus ascended to heaven (the feast we celebrate in many places today), many people learnt about Jesus (and came to him) through the preaching and testimony of the apostles, and they never met Jesus directly. What Jesus meant was that whatever pathway we take, He is the last end to that journey from man to God.
About Confession, Michelle pointed out elsewhere the reference in the Bible about “whosoever sins you forgive, they are forgiven”, etc. In looking at confirmation for teachings in the Bible, we should also realize, first that the language may have evolved, and secondly, not everything is in the Bible, which is why Catholics have the fortune to count on Scripture AND tradition: two legs that confirm one another.
Sandra: You argued
“So much for EQUALITY in the Catholic Church`s Techings The Female is as you rightly say, thought of highly in the Church but for our WOMANLY ATTRIBUTES ie`supporting the MALE, Home building,Child bearing and education of the offspring.Not to mention Bed making Cooking Cleaning Pampering our Husbands and taking all the worry of his shoulders so that HIS mind be free to Tackle the moral and biblical Issues that we are denied.”
I don’t have time to devote to theological arguments, or the writings of the church fathers, or the relationship of previous historical and political climates to the role of women as understood by the Church and by the secular world, but I do know my own life as a practicing Catholic woman.
I have been married to the same man for almost twenty years, and I am the stay at home mother of ten (count’em, ten!) lovely children, ranging from 18 to 2 years of age. Now, you must be thinking, “Poor, ignorant, oppressed soul. Poor unliberated drudge,” since you seem to think “childbearing and education of the offspring” are inferior occupations. Let me enlighten you as to my own choices and how the dynamics of my own home work.
Why am I a stay at home mom? My church has no set teaching on the matter. Following my Bachelor of Science in Psychology, I decided, even before I married, that this is how I would do things. My education gave me very compelling reasons for this choice. I informed my husband that this is what I would do– and he agreed because he saw it was important to me (marriage being a give-and-take between equals) even though he had no strong feelings one way or the other.
Why ten kids? Well, my husband and I noticed, through using Natural Family Planning (charting symptoms, temperatures, etc.–NOT the so called “rythm method”) that we developed a real respect and love for OUR fertility, a love for our capacity to cooperate with God in conceiving new life. So we chose to have these children, 10 persons whom you so coldly refer to as “offspring”.This is in no small way tied to my husband’s respect for me, and his refusal to use artificial contraception which places women at the service of men sexually– makes them 100% sexually available. His generosity in periodic abstinence, as well as in the abstinence required during some of my pregnancies which were medically complicated, has increased his capacity to be a generous husband and father. Which includes, side by side with me, “bedmaking, cooking, cleaning and pampering” each other, so that we can both “tackle the moral and biblical issues” that we need to, to make decisions and raise our children well. We have recourse to the sacraments of Confession and Holy Communion to help us grow in the grace we need to take this on. And our sons and daughters are being raised to both help out around the house and to work hard in school and educate themselves as well as they can. It is our hope and prayer that they will also continue to turn to Our Lord and to the Church for help in their own daily struggles.
Is this hard work? Of course. Have I sacrificed a great deal? Yes, but no more than my husband has.
And my “fluids” have nothing to do with any of this, since our understanding of female physiology and psychology has certainly improved since the 193 AD quote you provided above.
“In looking at confirmation for teachings in the Bible, we should also realize, first that the language may have evolved, and secondly, not everything is in the Bible, which is why Catholics have the fortune to count on Scripture AND tradition: two legs that confirm one another.”
This is a great conversation. I’ll interject a bit later if I may (sorry, charge it to the ‘time zone’ factor; I’m working right now).
Cheers to both (and to all, of course),
Michelle
Mom, thanks a great heap for this wonderful personal testimony! I’m proud of you, and you and your likes are the real models that we need. I will pray for you and your family.
Dear Winifred It goes without saying that ofcourse I forgive you nothing realy to forgive !!!
I do not doubt the Scripture nor do I think we should read EVERY BOOK or watch every Film but if we are open minded and respect others views on a important subject it can only be benefactual. Ofcourse we should not go off course in this venture,but in reading another`s view we also can in the end find confermation of our own and those of the Scriptures,dont you think..I only disagree with some one who repeatedly Quotes Bible Passages and does not reconise that the Bible was writen by MAN and that the Catholic Church HAS ITERPETATED passages wrongly in the past and probably will do so in the future.It is for that reason that Jesus said “continue to search for the true way”he did not say “stop now.”
Thank you for your kind words (God bless Sandra)It should have read God Bless. sandra I`m not so good at this typing and get carried away some times.As far as Confession is concerned,I know that we should fogive and can do so But this has nothing to do with the Act of Confession as defined by the Clergy.that if someone does not go to Confession they are dammed Nowhere in the Bible have I found that!! Once again God Bless..
Sandra
Hello, all–
This has nothing to do with the current conversation (if I may interject) but this is just in from the BBC. Actually, we have touched on the historical influence of the Church (some place on this ever-expanding blog) so it may fit in just the same.
Newsflash for the morning! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5014626.stm
Excerpt:
“With the possible exception of Malta, Poland is still the most overtly Catholic country in Europe. Two parties espousing traditional Catholic values share power in Poland and many Poles are regular church-goers.
That is partly because the Church was the only force which kept Polish national identity alive in the 19th Century, after foreign powers divided up the country and Poland ceased to exist, our correspondent says. The Church played a similar role under Soviet domination in the second half of the 20th Century.”
Thanks, Winnifred, for the prayers! You might not be so proud of me if you saw the state of my house right now. Tell you what– I’ll get off of this blog now (these things can be a little addictive) and go fold the laundry (my husband couldn’t find socks the other day– did he complain? No. He rooted through the laundry himself, without a word to me. He doesn’t necessarily consider these jobs my exclusive domain). And I’ll offer up the folding, in part, for your intentions, and Sandra’s, and for the intentions of all on this blog.
Thanks Mom (hmm sounds like saying “Mum”). All the same, thanks for offering your work partly for us and rest assured that we’ll repay.
Dear Mom
I`m afraid you take the coments I made too personaly It`s NOT about YOU But about the WOMAN in GENERAL.By the way you are not the only one who has born many OFFSPRING (whats wrong with that old yet very HOT word)As I have said YOU do not have to agree with ME but you could refrain from attacking me.I ALSO think you lucky in your happy Marrage and,happy for you that you are Proud of your CHILDREN (but is not PRIDE according to the teachings of the Church also a sin) Another thought.. Do you mean that if your Husband did not reject Contraseptives He would not Treat you with respect surely not? and how very GENEROUS of him to ACCEPT periodic Abstinence as you say also during “YOUR” pregances How Noble of HIM!!!Do tell us if Number 11 is on the way .Or is this Periodical abstinence a little longer?
“If you cant take the HEAT stay out of the Kitchen”
Still God Bless All Mothers (Me too) Sandra
´
Hi!Michelle and Winifred welcome back!!
horible thing this Time zone difference Its 16.45hrs. here and I must stop..
Got to go out with my Husband for a Meal He is so uncouth as to want to eat DAILY..Even on My day off.but is GEREROUS enough to take ME out so I don`t have the DRUGGERY of making it..Well enough of singing HIS praise..
If anyody is interessed I`ll be back later!!
sandra
To MOM Sorry but I just cant resist this !!
How we Wives must envy You with such a GEM for a husband He even looks for HIS own socks! “Without complaining”soon you`ll be telling us He even looks for YOUR`S.No! that would be asking too much.—-
Bye Bye…and I realy am soo sorry.and wont do it again (other than FORCED to)
sandra
I’m Back– he does look for mine! I wasn’t trying to make him out to be some sort of hero for that– I just mean to make the point that we both work together, and I figured there’d be some nasties out there who’d presume that, just because I referred to having to go see to the laundry, that he doesn’t lift a finger. Sorry you couldn’t resist the personal attack on my home life.
In an earlier post you referred to me attacking you personally– I didn’t. I simply argued with your remarks. I have made no speculations about your home life or marriage, no jokes or digs, like you have done with mine (asking me when number 11 was on the way, etc.). I’m done arguing with you. But I’ll still pray for you!
No I just cant leave it at that!!! dear MOM I DO NOT HAVE A BACHOLARS DEGREE IN PHSYCHOLOGY
But I dont think THAT is necesary,for all women to,expect and have, RESPECT from THEIR husbands. With or Without HIS GENROUS practice of Periodic Abstinence,or HIS Gracious aceptance of not using Contraception.The way you put it only those Husbands who, Do accept these things are protected from becoming sexual HOOLIGANS and are ofcourse LOVING and CARING fathers.doesn`t say much for the rest of the speicies. You don`t seem to aascribe very many noble attributes to them.POOR creatcures..Their Honor hangs, on a Condom ,Pill or Sexual Abstinance.. Not a very nice thought!!
now realy bye for now sandra
MOM Thanks for your Prayers we can all use them!!
I possiblly did (in your opinion )go a bit far.If so I apologise.I am not making fun at your Family But as you made the choise to put the details on the web you must not be anoyed if some one picks it up and comments on it. You did sound soo very smug and invited the comments And be fair yours to me were not sooo much less BITCHY..
no offence ment PERSONALY and I`ll pray for you too…. sandra
As I said, done with the argument.
MOM By the way I hope you don`t think me one of the “nasties”.
I kept to the Subject You Told the family HISTORY
why don`t we call a Truce on this one???
sandra
Question: Any body else feel they need an apology?
Didn`t mean to step on too many toes.
love and PEACE sandra
Ahem… Sandra dear Sandra, em, I don¬¥t know about an apology, but I do think you reacted too strongly to Mom. Besides you drew too many inferences from her post, to seem to refer to you personally (which I very much doubt). I know we¬¥re all different and have fuses of very different lengths, some requiring just a bit of flame to ignite… but hey, what¬¥s self-control about.
“Avoid Ab hominem attacks” is easy to say but in the heat of the moment … but I¬¥ll tell you a trick that works. When someone makes a post you feel incensed about, ignore it for a while. Log off, do something else and come back later. Perhaps one might then see it in gentler light.
Let´s cool it girls!
Ah, by the way Sandra, how was the meal with your husband? Hope all right. Take care.
“…artificial contraception which places women at the service of men sexually‚Äì makes them 100% sexually available.”
Does it? What about if you’re tired or sick? What about the interruptions and lack of privacy, vexing to both parties, that’s to be expected from a houseful of kids? You’re not available then. I’ve been there and I gave NFP a long trial due to my aversion to ABC. It didn’t work because our sexual lives were rendered half-dead with those other things. I couldn’t allow it to be finished off by NFP timing limitations. There was way too much sacrifice in our lives already and not enough pleasure, esp this one. Insisting on NFP is like saying we must destroy the village in order to save it.
And why do you talk of HIS sacrifice here? What about YOURS?
Hi Winifred!!
you are so right ! Just one last Comment on my Post to MOM I thought we were discusing The Reasons why or why not the Da Vinci Code should not be Read and or Seen by the Catholic Comunity.Mom was not replying to my comments but decided FREELY to give me a PERSONAL Family History.If One does such a thing then they should anticipate a reply,and must live with it.As you say I could have just over looked it but it WAS adressed to me,so I replied.I am sorry if this cuses Offence but its Comments such as hers (given in such a patronising way.”MY”opinion) which give fuel to many “WOMANS RIGHTS ” DEFENDERS.At no time did I refer to her as “Poor,ignorant,opressedsoul,poor unliberated drudge”WHOE WERE HER OWN WORDS HOPEFULLY NOT HER FEELINGS11:
well enough on that !! yes thank you meal was lovely we had to go out because we were planing on having a Barbeque but it rained all day and we had no alternative meal available (as we also had invited friends.) so not realy too bad I`ve not had to do the cleaning up afterwards!
Now back to subject–
In my opinion the Question is not whether we should boycot Dan Browns book,as he got all HIS FACTS from Sires Lincoln,Baigent,and Leigh (Holy Blood Holy Graal) It does bother me though that the Vatican is making an Issue of the D.V.Code when this is declared by him in “TRUTH”as fiction and letting The other three off the hook. have any thoughts on that?
Anomymous right now.
I share much of your feelings! but I think MOM has had enough BASHING from me (Not ment to offend though)
We have a saying in German “If you don`t want to get pregnant Eat an apple instead”Allright if you`re a vegitarian( now now that was definately “naughty”) Well if you are interessed in my thoughts on “The” subject The Boycot of the Da Vinci Code I`d like to hear from you…
kind regards— Sandra
Boycott?
Nah…
Giving the book or movie any attention probably played into Sony’s hands. All that earnestness and alarm anticipating a lion that turned out to be a pussycat.
Hello Sandra, regarding whether Dan Brown meant the book to be a work of fiction, you might want to take a look at this previous post on this blog http://davincicode-opusdei.com/?p=39. You¬¥ll see how Dan Brown initially began by insisting that all his data are “facts”. Later when he realized how much controversy his thesis was causing, began to shift gear, but never entirely. In fact, he keeps claiming (I have listened to him speak on radio and TV) that history supports his data and that they are based on history. Perhaps, he now feels safer sticking to that line on audio and TV, rather than put it down in books where he could be taken up.
Fr. Wauck– Why are you flagging my long posts?
Winifred I agree on that..
But the answer should be get to the roots ie´the beginings If Lincoln and associates did not write that book Dan Brown could not have had a PLOT would he? Get to the cause of the ILLNESS not remedy the symtoms.I still think if the catholic church did not cloth its self in secrecy and tell the truth about a lot of contraversial
subjects it would do its self a lot of justice, and in doing so, help the faithfull to keep faithfull.
There are a lot of Discrepance in the teachings and the doings of the Catholic Church..ie´Banks,Immobilia, Riches,Treasures,saying one thing practesing another..
Dear Anonymous my post also some times take quite long…but have not been altered …so dont worry
sandra
Winifred
Dan Brown is after all ONLY trying to sell his book and subcequent ones for as much as he can “The Mamon Money”
All is Fair in this Quest or so the saying goes!!just joking..sandra
In all fairness the things you criticize were just the expected way of doing things at the time and perhaps because the church had too much power in societies where most everyone’s catholic. Maybe things are different in Europe, in fact I kno they are, but in the US a lack of transparency isn’t tolerated. Witness the Scandal. Somehow I have a hard time believing this would ever happen in Spain or Italy. Not that there’s less child abuse there, just that people are less apt to complain.
Anonymous Right Now: I don’t talk about my sacrifices because my husband talks about them and loves me for them. I don’t really think of them as sacrifices– and I suspect he doesn’t think of his sacrifices as such either. He certainly doesn’t talk about them. But I acknowledge them and love him for them, so I chose to speak about them instead of what you might consider my own. Now you’ve politely asked me a personal question and I’ve answered it. I hope no one thinks it’s another invitation to insult my family.
Don’t you think that the less one focuses on one’s supposed sacrifices, the more time and energy there is to move forward in life? I speak only from my own experience. I’ve done both the focusing and the moving forward (even, in little ways, on the same day!) and I expect I will do both many times again, but I find the moving forward to be preferrable. My earlier post was meant to be an answer to a post that is all too typical– slamming grossly misunderstood Church teaching about women (which Ms. Di Solenni’s post helps to clear up) in a way that is really insulting to those of us who try to live our life according to it. I make no assumptions or judgements about any of the choices made by other women– I realize a lot goes into making each choice. I meant only to speak from my own experience in reference to comments already posted. I didn’t mean to sound smug, and only mentioned my educational background in reference to my education informing my decision to be a stay at home mom. I never said it made me an expert on anything else. I am, however, an expert on my family!
BTW– Fr. Wauck flagged my own earlier long posting as well– I wouldn’t take it personally.
To all (interessted)
Should we not put more thought into the Teachings or the lack of such by our Leaders ie¬¥Bishops,The Pope,and other clergy,instead of making ” A Lion out of a Pussycat ” as anonymous so rightly stated??
sandra–
HALLO!!!!
Who`s slamming now?!!!!
As I take from your post (MOM) you do not accept my appology So not being as GOODY GOODY as you I herewith withdraw it.
To anybody Interessted I do not Slamm the Catholic Church nor The many very great and honnerd Men AND Women who have proven in the past and present thier dedication to the faith and also shown great strenth and courage in doing so..If I had those feelings I would most certainly not be able to think of myself as a CHRISTIAN,which I do!!!Again, if one would read my posts I have at no point Insulted any bodys Family Or their way of life!! End of—-One more thought, to be able to Question is one of the Gifts from God bestowed on Mankind.And we should use it!!! Sandra
Mom–I’m sorry my comment may have come across as belligerent which was not meant to be the case.
As for not focusing on one’s sacrifice, there is a limit to how healthy that could be. Constantly ignoring ones’s own needs is corrosive and is counterproductive in the long run. There’s a reason that “recreation” is called that. It gives a person the breather she needs to go back and continue to work. I’ll admit that while I ususally sacrifice things important to me for stuff that to me may look like my children’s whims, I do’nt ALWAYS do it. It’s useful to carve out a little zone for yourself so others don’t take you for granted. This is the biggest reason I didn’t have more kids–I couldn’t afford to retain even that little bit for myself, the part that wants to savor life and enjoy it. I’m not criticizing your preferences-to each his own.
Sondra–It’s definitely insufficient instruction in the faith. I kinda took for granted w/o really thinking about it that all Catholics knew about as much as I did, but apparently Catholic schools 45 years ago were much more demanding and rigorous than the later ones and after school instruction. Otherwise all the excitement generated by TDVC would have been limited to non-catholics.
Dear anoymous I persoaly don`t think that we in Europe don`t complain so much but we may have a more open mind in these matters and are not as shocked at the obvious “All Mankind” have failings.It has been stated that a lot of the Problems in the Catholic Church are due to imposed celibacy.It IS possible,but not necesary true. A lot of my freinds think that many Americans suffer from False Morality, that also could be the case (please do not run to the conclusion that this would be my opinion)It does give room for thought though..
But before we judge (wich the scriptures forbids) we should search our own cocienceses! (hope that word is spellt right if not you will know what I mean.)I do not agree with `imposed´ celibacy as far as I know this was not a practice in the early Christian comunity`s..but correct me if I`m wrong (ofcourse with the apropriate Reference)sorry cant answer your remark any better.. sandra
Anonymous I too went to a Catholic Convant School (Started about 51years ago )I do know that we wre taught to belive what the Nuns and MOST importantly what the Priests taught us with NO questions asked!!!
Ofcourse we have moved on since then(Ihope)But the Authoreties must still be obayed See referance to D.V.Code Boycot.. sandra
Hey Winifred where have You gone ? Still speaking to me I hope?
Greetings to you also Michelle!!
And a long time since we heard fron Jeanne the real jeanne on this blog!
Funny your comment on “False Morality”. My Mom’s European and she says the same thing. (It was total culture shock when she came here. That and the absence of Social Democrats.)
As for clerical celibacy, I understand that several times during the Middle Ages celibacy became the rule and attempts were made to get the clergy to repudiate their wives becasue their children may insist on inheriting church property. Even if that failed, if the priest had a marriage in everyting but name, the kids would be considered illegitimate and couldn’t inherit. Not nice. Something like that.
Gotta go. My kid is champing on the bit to use our one computer. Talk about sacrifice.
Anonymous Great Sense of humor we Need more like it ( it is alowed afterall)
maye hear from you later .I`d like to hear what else your mom feels on the subject..
bye
Wow ladies! What has been going on since I left!
Mom, you are amazing. 10 kids! That is wonderful! And a stay at home mom! My hat goes off to you. And it is so wonderful to see a woman who praises her husband. We all need to learn from that. It is very important that we love our husbands, and no matter how poorly behaved they are we need to make them look like a hero to the kids. Fatherhood has taken such a bad wrap these days, that we need to build it up. How wonderfully you speak of your husband mom.
Sandra, what is the problem! All this yelling and screaming.(by using capital letters) This is not proper etiquette. It is difficult when you are writting and not having a 2 way conversation where you can see the other persons expression and voice tone, to always get the other persons meaning, but we should always be charitible. It would be great if you could go to a good priest and work out your misunderstandings. With the Catholic Church, when you do not understand something or accept it, it is your responsibilty to go back and find out where you went wrong. The confessional is a great place to get a good understanding on why contraception is wrong, as long as you choose a wise priest who is well educated in this area.
I suggest everyone send for the Christopher West CD’s found at http://www.sjw.ca/nws.php for a very cheap price to get a very good understanding of how marriage is suppose to be. It sounds like Mom already has given us a good example by using her own life to illustrate the beauty of chaste married love.
Anonymous Right Now: I didn’t think your post seemed belligerent. I recognize that having posted some personal history, I can expect personal questions.
Now– I was emphasizing the sacrifice part of life in my original post in order to underscore the point that my husband has matched me in the sacrifice dept. And just because I try not dwell on my own sacrifices doesn’t mean I don’t take care of myself or even rest, or that my husband and I never have any fun— parenting this many kids does not have to be drudgery, even though people seem to think it does. I, too, keep aside some “zones” for myself– some time for prayer, some time to read widely in areas that interest me, some time to keep up with friends, some time on a Friday night for my husband and I to leave the kitchen mess and kick back with a bowl of microwave popcorn, a bottle of wine and a good video. Church teaching on the role of women, and on human sexuality doesn’t mean I’m supposed to go around with a frown on my face and the air of a martyr. It has been and continues to be a joyful affirmation of my womanhood, and of the love I share with my husband. I just get frustrated when people continually argue that this teaching is unenlightened and thus imply that I’m unenlightened for living it.
DOn’t think we haven’t been there like you, feeling exhausted, perhaps a little discouraged at the work involved in raising a growing family. We just felt it would be worth it to see it through, and along the way decided we’d have a larger family than we originally intended because we kinda got used to having babies around (and now I’ve got 4 teenagers who can babysit and more time with my husband than I ever thought possible).And dinner in our house guarantees at least 6 belly-laughs per day! I know that this isn’t everyone’s decision, but just because it’s the one I made doesn’t mean I’m put upon and lacking any chance to rest or enjoy life!
la donna nella chiesa cattolica ha avuto un grandissimo ruolo. Si pensi a Caterina da Siena, un illitterata che viene proclamata dottore dell cHIESA; si pensi Madre Teresa di Calcutta. Cristo stesso eleva a dignita altisssima Maria.
I´ll attempt a translation of Innocenzo´s comment above:
“In the Catholic Church the woman has played a major role. It¬¥s enough to think of Catherine of Siena, an illiterate woman who was proclaimed a Doctor of the Church; or of Mother Teresa of Calcutta. Christ himself raised the Blessed Virgin to a very high dignity”.
Giusto Innocenzo?
Thanks, Diannewood for understanding what I was trying to do– show what a positive experience trying to live Humanae Vitae can be. And there are lots of parents like us, with families both large and small, who give us good example and are better at it than we are in the day-to-day management of things. It’s not the miserable existence some people seem to think, just because parenting and marriage are difficult tasks, whether you have one child or a dozen. Of course they’re hard work! But immeasurably worth it, even though society doesn’t value them like it should. Do you think this de-valuation is in part at the root of the large female readership of TDVC?
This is slightly off-topic but someone brought up the whole witches issue. Here’s someone’s take on that. http://www.jesusdecoded.com/truthbetold6.php
Diannewood said–
whats the probeem sandra—useing capitol letters and so on–
no problem only that my keyboard was playing up so had to go and buy a new one .By the way I am not the only one to uses capitol letters to emphasise a word or passage.but point taken.I also might mention that I do not write very well in English but try my best (as this is a English speaking Blog although some do try to get their point over in other languages) luckily I do understand Italian so did not need the very well ment translation. Thanks in the name of those who did..I will have to stop now got to get to grips with this new keyboard.
michelle… on witches I`ve got some good books on the subject too give you data later if interessted..
sandra
Diannewood said
“It would be good if you went to a good Priest….”
Thanks a lot for your kind advice,but in my (possibely wrong)opinion the best way for a christain to look, and,recive enlightment is to look for it in the Bible afterall that is where Gods Word is to be found.I do not have a “problem”with the “Scriptures”but do, with the “translations”of it¬¥s contents given by the Church(in general not only the Catholic) as it is,the church,does not allways go conform with the Teachings to be found therein.All my questions so far regarding references to 1.celebacy 2 contraception 3praying to,and asking for assistance from “so called” Saints (the Bible most definately,does not advise us but forbids us to pray or give such reverance to any person ,dead or alive.see Markus(7:6,7) Offenbarung(19:10)Galater(4:8-11)Epheser(5:10)Johannes(17:16)Petrus1(4:3)Johannes(4:23,24),and so on,and so on.Then as Jesus said “the dead see nothing hear nothing feel no pain or joy for they are dead”–”at the end of this time (Judgement Day)they will be called from thier “graves” “the just and the unjust to be judged according to thier deeds this will be done by the Father” My questions,were, directed to Fa. Wauck (a good Priest) on his Blog (she who laughs last) So far they have not been answerd,appart from advice to read a link(again composed by `mortals¬¥not a referance to a Bible text,wich a requested… I am sorry if this post is so long but after being lectured to on “etiquette”I felt I must redeem my self some what.As far as “Etiquette” is concerend it it quite legitim in German to use capitol letters in order to emphesise a point or just a word .Just thought you would like to know (wegen der ETHIK) (or ethic, ethical)as you please..God bless—– sandra
gerat link michelle-thanks
I have literature on the Witch-Hunt.
Geschichte Der Hexenprozesse Band 1-2 by Soldan-Heppe Verlag..Revised by Max Bauer.
In this book they, at the end of the second volume refer to an art of Witch-Hunt,still in existance today and give references to Catholic as well as Protestant teachings in the Clergy Semanary¬¥s(Schools for ongoing Priests of both confessions.)This I have not researched myself yet. No time,nor so much interest,as to take the timeto do so…But both Volumes are Interessting with Transcripts from the original Trials.A bit gruesome though .Not for the faint hearted. sandra
Sandra,
The Church uses scripture and tradition and the magisterium. It is a protestant view that we find all the answers in the bible.
Is there an Opus Dei centre in your area? It may help to go there and see if you can get in on a doctrine course, so that you can get a clearer understanding on all we believe. Go to http://www.opusdei.org to find out if there is one near you. The catechism can help also, or the new compendium of the catechism. These are the types of books we need to spend our time reading. Forget about the DaVinci Code.
Mom I think the reason women are reading the DaVinci Code is boredom. We all like a good story. The Harry Potter phenonomon proved that. I was fighting the book off my kids. With the DaVinci code, I also could not put it down, read it in 2 sittings even though I knew that it was a load of garbage. But it did not do anything for me, it did not stay with me and haunt me and make me think the way Anna Karenina is doing to me as I read it now.
We all need to pick up a good classic and get into it. They can help us come to terms with the truths in life and can help us have something to do with our mind, instead of worrying about things we have no control over.
We also need to be reading a good spiritual book, and the gospels each day. The spiritual readings help balance us, they help counteract the garbage that flies at us each day. And it doesn’t hurt to read a good conservative leaning newspaper each day so we have something intelligent to talk about with those we meet in our day. We live in the world so we need to keep up with what is happening and know how to put a Christian view on the news. We need to write letters to the editor to correct the mistakes we see in the newspapers pertaining to the Church so that we can make sure that only the truth is out there.
If we are doing all this we will not have time to waste on pop literature such as TDVC. We as women need to fill our minds with intelligent things so we do not come across as airheads.
Then on chat lines, or places like this, we we can help educate each other through intelligent conversations.
Diannewood– you like Anna Karenina? Must give it a try. Saw the movie long ago ( the old one, with Bette Davis). Right now I’m re-reading Brideshead Revisited, by Evelyn Waugh. One of my faves.
Hi Sandra
I had trouble with my internet connection and in the meantime … has this post caught fire! If there is no agreement among journalists as to the number of copies The Da Vinci Code has sold so far, what are the chances of achieving agreement on anything else, I wonder! I am not aware of a call for a boycott of The Da Vinci Code, book or film. This could be because of increasing tolerance, or because it was sensed that the call would be ignored anyway Рto the embarrassment of whoever made it.… If by ‘knocking the Church’ you mean attacking the Catholic Church, this is probably a favourite pastime of several other Christian churches, each of which makes the same claims to ‘exclusive authenticity’ and any of which should be glad to welcome new members. I think most have married clergy and some even have female priests. They are likely to be more relaxed about contraception though perhaps not so with abortion Рdespite the fact that St Thomas Aquinas might well have supported not only early abortion but even later abortion in the case of female embryos, which would seem to corroborate your thesis about women. By the way, would it matter to you if I said I thought you were right about women and Christianity or is it only our host’s views that matter to you Рand if the latter, why? (I really liked the joke about Cardinal Ciraci Рfact or fiction.)
Michelle, thanks for the link re Poland. I wonder why it is more likely that children who grow up in Poland – rather than Japan – turn out to be catholic. If it were down to cultural conditioning, early exposure at an age when people have a tendency to take things for granted, we might have a partial explanation for the appeal of The Da Vinci Code – childhood assumptions revisited.
dear dianne F.N.Jersey
Thanks for reading my post. I have been catholic for nearly 60years I do not know much about the Protesant Ideas on the bible ,Other than that which I get from reading about the reformation(Historicaly),It does not interest me greatly either.I might try the Opusdei conection as you suggest,might help but,if not I`m quite happy in my faith I reject that wich does not coincide with the bible and try to live according to what does.I can only hope that this would be suficiant.I aslo think that we (not only Women) should extend our horizon by reading ,but also share your views that We all need a bit of light heartedness now and then even if it does come from books such as The Da Vinci Code and its likes as long as we know what we should be looking for in such Literature..I have posted a comment on a Blog Fa.Wauck “who am I”its about The real Da Vinci ,it could interest you (and others) bye and “keep beliveing” sandra
Thanks Sandra,
Did you say you were Italian? I am Italian, but 2nd generation, I live in Canada, and I was born here. My grandfather came from Palermo Sicily and my grandmother is from Calabria. I went to Assis and Rome in 2002.
Hey Mom! I love Brideshead revisited. It is one of my favourites. I love the BBC production of it too. I get it out from our library every few years. George Weigle has a good essay on it in a book of his I just finnished reading “Letters to a young Catholic”. I am also trying to read all the books on Father John McCloskey’s list “A Catholic Lifetime Reading Plan” which you can find here: http://www.catholicity.com/mccloskey/articles/readingplan.html I am presently reading “Sadness of Christ” by St. Thomas More right now as my spiritual reading. It has to do with the time when Jesus was praying in the garden and the apostles kept falling asleep. It is very beautiful, very deep. Anyway I hope to read all 100 books before I go to Heaven.
Also Sandra,
In your points back at Fr.Wauck ‚Äúwho am I” you ask why it would be so bad if Jesus was married. It is important to remember if he was it would change our whole wonderful supernatural life in Christ. Nuns would loose there meaning for exhistance, as they are married to Christ, as are priests. And we can all be if we develop a spiritual life. It is important that we spend time each day with Jesus, and develop our friendship with him, so that it can get deeper and deeper. Then we will understand why Jesus could not have married Mary Magdelene, but in reality he is married to her, as we can all be. It is all too deep for the likes of Dan Brown. It is very difficult to explain to someone like Dan Brown who does not believe in the Divinity of Jesus Christ.
Also the Vatican has never said that we cannot read the book. A few Cardinals have given their opinion, but that is all. I think the real concern is not so much for Catholics who know their faith well, but for those who do not know their faith.
quite right concerning Dan Brown Dianne
I don`t think he realy cares much either way? As I said earlier His main concern is to sell books(and it worked).
Realy The Problem If there is one, does most certainly not lie with reading D.V.Code. but with the times (or rather the moral culture )in which we live.Sensationalisim and the total lack of Morals (and I don`t mean just the sex thing)is more to blame for the human race becoming Brutalizeid.We all say, we think War and Violence disgusting and that it should stop .But as soon as the News Chanel comes on we can`t get enough,
If there is an accident on the Autobahn (moterway)we stop to watch endangering ourselves and others.
Every Film that promisess lots of Violence, and or Sex, Coruption, are box office HITS.
Wives(mothers) say they must go to work because they need to earn the money to make ends meet( in some cases true)but mostly they spend more on fast food because they don`t have time to cook,also they need a second car to get to work,(more costs) then they have a bad concience towards th?©ir children for not having enough time for them so, they try to suppress it, by buying even more computer games.(Costs) I could go on for ever But at the end of the day (because SHE has to have a larger wardrobe.as she has to go to the office every day must look good)
the family ends up no better off Financialy but a lot poorer where the rest is concernd.
Please don`t get me wrong I do not plead for all mothers to stay at home but I do think that they should,weigh up the Good against the bad ,and not just go out to work because society says it is their Womanly Eaqual Right to do so..OOPS there I go rambling on I promise I will try to be a little less “long- breathed ” in future—-By the way my post on the other blog is awaiting Moderation as I supose this will
Much toooo long sorry again Sandra
dianne f.n.j.
Jesus Married—-
What I ment was, If by some streach of immagination Jesus was married, what could non christians find so terrible about it ,for them, to reproach the catholic religion.
The thing is they don`t believe in christ and his teachings when it suits,
but like to quote his word when that suits.
Many views, that the church had held for centuries,have later been (With better understanding)retracted and an appologie (when due ) given.I personaly don`t think it would end my believing the bible nor would it shake mytrust in Gods Word.Ofcourse there will be some who would be insecure,and some who will doubt but the truely
Faithfull can and should not.For It will all unravel in the end!!
Is it possible that we missinterpret some things? Yes! Are we falable?Yes! But,if we live according to The Lords Rules,by keeping the Commandments and showing in our daily lives that we do so.Then, surely we give witness to the teachings of Jesus.And lets not forgezt we “learn ba doing”…
Last Words for tonight! I`ll hang about for a while though.. it`s 03.37hrs. here good night
sandra
dear dianne
“fact or fiction”
thanks for the answer,and I do appreciate, any, comment or thoughts on the matter.
About Cadinal Ciraci I take it as being FACT as it is quoted in a very authenic book Peter Godman (quite independent) Title (in German) Die Geheime Iquisition.roughly translated The Secret Inquisition? the Quote is on Page 341 (Just if interessted)
Allthough not adressed to me,my Answer to Question “Why in Poland….” In Poland Under the Comunist Rule the Catholic Church was more oe less Forbiden,as we all know that is for many (see Reformation) all the more reason to embrace it, also,it makes things more interessting the more people are against something others will want to know why..An other reason could be that the Catholic Comunity were very tight knitt, mostly For obvious reasons kept to themselves!And, as we also know its easier to Preach to the already convinced.Hope I¬¥m not going too far here?Hope to hear from you again…
I have to work a litle on my Book keeping (the Fiscal one)As I said Earlier Mamon Money! Till later.
Sandra
i just seen the movie and all i think of is mary magdalene…i pity her..why? because in the movie, its shows that the disciple of god doesnt want people to know about jesus and magdalenes realtionship.what struck me most is when they showed or play magdalene was pregnant at the time that jesus will be crucified. it looks like the disciple of jesus were tring to hide the story about the realationship of jesus and magdalene.and why? because they want to preseve the divinity of jesus.but did they ever think of magdalenes situation?. moreover, what happen to sarah??? after seeing the movie, i have a lot of question running thru my mind…i only have knowledge about how mary gave birth to jesus and jesus being a man already.where is the story while he is in his teen age years? does anyone tell me the story pls…
Now i am really puzzled if its fiction or fact. fiction because i’ve read the book first before seeing the movie and mr.dan brown said its all fictional but then again factual beacause how can he created this kind of story if hes not sure on what he is trying to takle in cathiliscm. i feel betray by the catholic chruch ,thats what i also felt when i watched the movie because it shows that they are really hiding something..dont get me wrong i am a roman catholic. a heard a lot of news about priest who raped women and IF THERES A SMOKE,THERES A FIRE… ( this is my point of view) i rather pray straight to god than be a member of any religion. urghhhhhhh i am really confused so help me GOD!
Dear Sel,
I wish I could give you some answers right off but I’m on my way out the door. But here’s a point in the right direction–take some time and listen to this podcast by Fr. John Wauck. It’s in question/answer style and addresses MANY of the questions you’re concerned with…
Click here:http://davincicode-opusdei.com/?p=89 and follow the links.
It’ll take a bit of time to load (you can download it into your iPod if you wish). Give it a go, it’s an excellent interview. I hope this helps a bit!
Sorry, the link didn’t go through (see above)
http://davincicode-opusdei.com/?p=89
Please don’t feel sorry for Mary Magdalen, Sel. She’s a glorious saint in heaven, and she was the first recorded person to see Jesus after the Resurrection. It’s true that she wasn’t married to Jesus, but that’s nothing to complain about. Nobody was.
Like the novel, the movie is just make believe, and it exposes nothing but Dan Brown’s ignorance of history, art, and religion. If you want to feel sorry for someone, feel sorry for him. Really, there’s nothing to lose sleep over here.
Hi Sel
I wonder why watching The Da Vinci Code film has had such profound impact on you, when reading the book apparently had no effect. The screen shot of a fleeing pregnant Magdalene may be powerful and emotive but it’s no more than a screen shot and it’s no more than what’s described in the book.
What Jesus did in his teenage years I don’t think anyone can tell you as there seems to be no relevant evidence. Whether such evidence was simply lost or intentionally suppressed may be an interesting question but the fascinating one seems to be whether theologians would in principle agree to engage in some ‘thought experiments’ and try to specify precisely the historical evidence which, if it re- surfaced, would compel them to advise a change in the official dogmatic position.
Hi! Athena yes it would be interessitng to know what Jesus did in his Teens:
But it wasn`t probably very much different, from the other teens of the day, If it was we should surely be able to find it some where in the Scriptures.
I did,earlier in the Blog metion,that;-A reason why there is no mention of Jesus being married “could” be,because,it would not have been out of the ordinary, as it was the practice of Jewish young men to marry at least before their mid 20tys. And it was expected that their Fathers made the match for them.So some could say that,its more likely to have been mentioned if He WASN`T,because that would have been `stranger¬¥still.
These are only a few thought to discus not nessecarily my views…
maybe some one can pick up on it?
sandra
Just an after thought-
There is also no where in the bible where it is denied either!
sandra
Looking at the Gospel, there is only one incident described between his birth and when he began his ‘public life’: when he was about eleven/twelve and he went with his parents to Jerusalem. We all know the story of his being lost for several days but ‘found’ by Joseph and Mary teaching the elders in the Temple. The scriptures say he went home with them, “and grew in grace and wisdom.”
Then silence. Silence for almost twenty years. What happened in those 20 years of his life? I think we may safely assume he lived with his family, learned his father’s trade and took over the family business when Joseph died. A working man like everyone else, but a man who worked hard, treated his clients well, and had smile and a joke ready to brighten the day. Can you imagine him doing lousy work? I doubt it. And he had to support his mother and himself, so he probably was incredibly busy like the rest of us (don’t have to tell you that, Sandra! Hope the book-keeping is finished for a while!).
I don’t know if you remember the flashback scene in Mel Gibson’s “Passion of the Christ” when he’s working in the workshop and Mary calls him in for lunch. It’s such a great vignette, just about 2-3 minutes, but it shows the love between mother and son.
Anyway, there is so much to ponder here in these 20 years of ’silence.’ A scriptural silence perhaps, but a rich silence all the same.
Hi Sandra, Michelle et al
It is striking that nobody apparently bothered to chronicle the life of a person whose birth was recognized from the very beginning as being in fulfillment of ancient prophecies. Some may find it incredible that a child who was ‘teaching’ the elders at 11, simply went back to being a carpenter till he was thirty. (Sorry, I can’t tell a ‘rich silence’ from any other!) However, I was specifically referring to evidence that might lead to a revision of what is generally accepted: The contention that The Da Vinci Code is not it Рi.e. the hard evidence that suffices to prompt revision Рwould not be very interesting unless, in principle, there could be some evidence that would do the trick. If nothing would do, it is a truism that nothing does.
Michelle .
“said Silence silence..”
I agree with you whole heartedly!
About “Book keeping” Terrible!Terrible! I have to do a Bilanz for 2003,2004,and 2005 for the School Accounts the “Finanz Amt” want to make sure we didn`t make a profit..( not much chance of that) as we are a Privatly run Org. inside the School.. we look after the Children,for working Parents in the after noon. (also before they start School) As here there is no compulsary Afternoon School attendance..so not every small town has Facilities..But after working all night I finaly got through,ofcourse after checking again and again..Thanks for the interest.
sandra
Athena Hallo again!
I also must agree with you!
As Jesus did teach in the Temple, and, the Elders did “dispute” with him I suppose we must asume He had a great knowlege of the Scriptures Which again would mean that he studied them.
Again, that, implies he didn`t “JUST” help in zhe Family Business.Most young Men of his Day after, their studies of the Thora,went on to become Rabi`s (Teachers) and again,It was Compulsory for a “Rabi) to be Married.In the Bible it is mentioned that Jesus was caled on many occasions Rabi, Teacher.
I`ll let you take it from there.. Regards
sandra
Athena and Sandra,
“Some may find it incredible that a child who was ‚Äòteaching‚Äô the elders at 11, simply went back to being a carpenter till he was thirty. (Sorry, I can‚Äôt tell a ‚Äòrich silence‚Äô from any other!)”
Well, I hadn’t intended to launch into an exegesis here (neither room nor time) but I do agree with you that some may find it ‘incredible’ that such a child prodigy became a carpenter (or other similar trade). But as God can do whatever (and has done so) he wills, the incredible to our minds is nothing to him. If it’s incredible that he wished to share in his creatures’ experience of daily work and family life, it’s even more incredible for him to have come to earth in the first place. Do you follow me?
Anyway, what I had meant by a ‘rich silence’ is the fact that he allowed that silence. Bear in mind that the Gospels are the inspired Word of God, recorded by the authors through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. We have St. John’s word for it that there are a great number of other stories, parables, events, etc. which could have been recorded but were not (sorry, can’t find the citation, but the gist is that the whole world could not contain all the books that would need to be written if we wrote Christ’s entire life).
That he willed these particular events to be written down and not others does mean something, I dare say. Of course, if we don’t believe the Gospel is the inspired Word of God, well…then it’s all up for grabs, isn’t it?
Very good response Michelle!
If I make a statement it is not nessacerily reflecting my views.
But I think its best to invite disscusion,rather than to ignore a subject, that, some one is going to pick up anyway.
Shows we`re not afraid of it,don`t you agree?
Have to get my head clear for a while (Book keeping) so I`ll watch a bit of Television.Hope it works I will be back later, to see how things go .
by the way Fa.Wauck has a good new Post “Villian of the Da Vinci Code? worth visiting!!
sandra
“Shows we`re not afraid of it,don`t you agree?” You’re right there, Sandra. Good luck with the book-keeping!
Another Question.Did anyone read my Post about:-
“the Times and Or the Moral culture we live in…”
Well It`s partly because of that,that I, have to do all this Book keeping Most of the Children that we Look after in the School,are from quite “well off”families but,still,they are away from home (brought by `Parent¬¥)
at about 07.30AM before school starts(ca´08.30) go to school and come for dinner ca´12.30PM do their home work then stay untill they are picked up at 16.30PM a long day for 6-10year olds don`t you think?
Ofcourse we have to Charge for this sevice (as we do not get any money from the State) Those children whose Parent`s cant afford the Fee do get some help Financialy ofcourse. But as stated most are very well off pity they don`t want to do the “bringing up” thrmselves. As the Financial benefit can`t be so great,because we have to charge ‚Ǩ250.- a month per Child..+‚Ǩ4.50 per day for Lunch and other snacks..
This does support my earlier comment..
sandra
Athena
I don`t think we`ll get many answers here! Just Platitudes!
Sorry no offence ment Michelle!
I personaly,would like for somebody,to point to a bible text and explain,to me (and possably)others why the Points that Athena and I have arisen can`t be explained in clear text by a bible quote. This must surely be possible. Please do not tell me that this is a mater of “believing”.Bccause as I have allready stated,God him self said we should `examine¬¥the scripture to find it trust worthy.One of the most precious gifts from God to Mankind is the ability to”Reason”which makes us apart from Animals I personally think we should use this gift.
lots of kind regards and good night
(at last I´ve managed to complete my book keeping! Amen!!)
sandra
.
To Michelle, Sandra and Athena,
Just an observation:
The text of the Revised Standard Version (CE) Bible says: “they (Mary and Joseph) found him (Jesus) in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions; and all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers.” (Lk 2: 46-47)
It seems that Jesus was not teaching or arguing with the teachers in the temple. He was sitted among them and he was “listening‚Ķ and asking them questions” just like any kid of his age would do. This seems more of learning from the teachers rather than lecturing the teachers. Besides, the teachers seemed not to be amazed with any lesson Jesus taught but his sharp mind. (You are right, Sandra, Jesus studied the scriptures. This scene proves your statement.)
No wonder, as Athena observed, no one chronicled the early life of the young Christ because, at that age, he did nothing that drew any attention or suspicion from anybody; not even the most familiar with the Scriptures of that time had a hunch that the Christ was amidst them. (Even Satan was not sure if the baby born in Bethlehem was the messiah. Thus, he tempted Jesus in the dessert to get proof if he were the Son of God.)
John the evangelist noted also that Jesus only did his very first miracle during the wedding feast at Cana (Jn 2:11) This means, Jesus never did anything extraordinary before that episode in Galilee.
But when he went public, the evangelists recalled as much as they can, many of the things he did. And yet they only relayed to us as much as they wrote. Even John had to admit: “Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples which are not written in this book.” (Jn 20:30) If this is so, it might not be necessary for Catholics to revise anything in the creed.
I hope this help you discussion.
Thanks for the citation from St. John, Leon. That was the text I’d referred to but didn’t find.
No worries, Sandra–I just read your comments above (sorry, I’ve been out so haven’t followed discussion…)
No offense meant, none taken. I do hope I haven’t been tossing platitudes about though! Nothing worse than platitudes…except polemics and pat answers, n’est-ce pas?
Leon’s commentary is helpful, I think. Also, if anyone wants to take a look at the Jesus-marriage question a bit more, here are some other thoughts: http://www.dunreath.org.uk/html/09.html
I hope a link to more info won’t be considered a ‘platitude.’ Just kidding.
(Just for the record, by ‘polemics’, I don’t mean Polemics as in the field within Christian theology.)
Thanks michelle,for the link I`ll look at it later.
In luke 2 we also find “My child, why hast thou done so to us?Behold,thy fathrt and I seek thee sorrowing”
Ana he said unto them,”How is it that ye sought me?Knew ye not that I must needs be in my Father¬¥s house?”
And they understood not the the word which he spoke to them. And his mother stored up all these things in her heart. I asume that She at least knew of His difference!And his special state.
Leon
said “No need to revise the Creed…” bit Stark that remark after just stating that ” in the Revised Standard Version…..”
Sorry, just being, sooooo funny!No offence ment I just think we have to try to have light fun even (or,esspecialy)when conversing on the subject of Da Vinci Code!!!
just got in from school have to make the dinner be back later
bye for now Sandra..
Are you kidding???? the Church has been trying to wipe out women for 2000 years. the Spanish and German inquistion wiped out some say 500,000 women. Very few men were killed, burned or Tortured. the Maleius Malificorum that was written by the pope at the time, was a very real book. I have seen and read a copy. It told how to find a witch, torture HER and how to finally kill her, all in the name of GOD. You have got to be jokeing. This site is a bunch of hogwash.
“the Church has been trying to wipe out women for 2000 years.”
Well, we’re still here, Michael. Ironically, some women have been the staunch defenders of the Church. Curious, isn’t it?
Hate to say it, but the hogwash on this site is mostly confined to comment number 127.
Where to begin? The name of the book is Malleus Maleficarum. It was not written by the pope. It was never official Catholic teaching. It was, in fact, condemned by the Inquisition and placed on the famous “Index of Forbidden Books.”
While it is true that “some” – some nuts? – say the Spanish and German inquisitions wiped out 500,000 women, those people are not historians.
If you’re really interested in the facts, the following article is a good place to start. Note, for instance, that the Spanish Inquisition condemned a grand total of 59 witches to death.
Balanced History of the Inquisition Is Possible, Says Expert
Editor of the Minutes of International Symposium
VATICAN CITY, JUNE 16, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Researchers now have the necessary materials to write a history of the Inquisition without falling into negative prejudices or propagandist apologetics, says an expert historian.
Agostino Borromeo, the coordinator of the book “Minutes of the International Symposium ‘The Inquisition,’” gave that assessment Tuesday during a press conference to present the book.
In the volume, Borromeo gathers the addresses of a 1998 congress, which brought together renowned historians from around the world.
“Historians no longer use the topic of the Inquisition as an instrument to defend or attack the Church,” said Borromeo, a professor at Rome’s La Sapienza University. “The debate has moved to the historical level, with serious statistics.”
Borromeo said that the “black legend” begun in Protestant countries against the Inquisition was opposed by a propagandist Catholic apologetics that failed to obtain an objective view.
He said a “great step forward” was made, in part, with the opening of the secret archives of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the former Holy Office, ordered by John Paul II in 1998. Borromeo illustrated some of the data found in the “Minutes of the International Symposium ‘The Inquisition.’”
Referring to the best-known tribunal, the Inquisition in Spain, Borromeo explained that between 1540 and 1700 it held 44,674 trials.
The accused who were condemned to death comprised 1.8%, including 1.7% condemned in “contumacy,” that is, they could not be executed as their whereabouts were unknown. In their stead, dummies were burned or hanged.
In regard to the famous “witch hunts,” the historian said that the ecclesiastical tribunals were much more indulgent than the civil. In the 125,000 trials held in the Spanish Inquisition’s history, 59 “witches” were condemned to death. In Italy, there were 36, and in Portugal 4, he added.
“If we add up this data, we do not even reach 100 cases, as opposed to the 50,000 people condemned to the stake, the majority by civil courts, out of a total of some 100,000 trials held in the whole of Europe during the modern age,” Borromeo said.
Proportionally, the most numerous killings of witches took place in Switzerland (4,000 were burned out of a population of about 1 million); Poland-Lithuania (some 10,000 out of a population of 4.4 million); Germany (25,000 out of a population of 16 million); and Denmark-Norway (some 1,350 out of a population of 970,000).
Borromeo explained that the term “Inquisition” was applied to the group of ecclesiastical tribunals that by express papal delegation had jurisdiction to judge the crime of heresy.
The first Inquisitors were appointed by Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241) to combat heresies in specific areas.
“Gradually, with the passing of time, the papacy endowed this institution with its own organization, bureaucracy and norms, which gave a specific face to the Inquisition,” Borromeo said.
“Particularly active in the 13th and 14th centuries to combat the medieval heretical movements, especially the Cathars and Waldensians, the Inquisition would experience a decline in its activity in the 15th century,” he added.
“But it would experience a resumption of activity in the 16th and 17th centuries with the establishment of the new tribunals in the Iberian peninsula — whose action was directed primarily against pseudo-converts from Judaism and Islam and with the creation of the Roman Holy Office, first conceived as an instrument of struggle against the spread of Protestantism,” Borromeo said.
“The tribunals were eliminated between the second half of the 18th century and first decades of the 19th century,” he said. “The last tribunal to disappear was the Spanish one, abolished in 1834.”
John Paul II sent a message for the presentation of the “Minutes,” in which he underlined the need for the Church to ask for forgiveness for the sins committed by her children in the course of history.
At the same time, the Holy Father clarified that “before asking for forgiveness, it is necessary to know the facts exactly and to recognize the deficiencies in regard to evangelical exigencies in the cases where it is so.”
ZE04061604
“The text of the Revised Standard Version (CE) Bible says: ‚Äúthey (Mary and Joseph) found him (Jesus) in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions; and all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers.‚Äù (Lk 2: 46-47)
It seems that Jesus was not teaching or arguing with the teachers in the temple. He was sitted among them and he was ‚Äúlistening‚Ķ and asking them questions‚Äù just like any kid of his age would do. This seems more of learning from the teachers rather than lecturing the teachers. Besides, the teachers seemed not to be amazed with any lesson Jesus taught but his sharp mind. (You are right, Sandra, Jesus studied the scriptures. This scene proves your statement.)”
Leon,
It’s my understanding that, in the culture of the time, the teacher sat and asked questions/taught. The students stood.
First off, pardon the long text.
It seems better to have it whole rather than running about clicking on the links piece-meal fashion.
“And it came to pass, that, after three days, they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, hearing them, and asking them questions. 47 And all that heard him were astonished at his wisdom and his answers. 48 And seeing him, they wondered. (…) And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject to them. And his mother kept all these words in her heart. 52 And Jesus advanced in wisdom, and age, and grace with God and men.” (Lk 2:46-48, 51-52)
The following is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church concerning the ‘hidden life’ of Christ (CCC, 531-534)
The mysteries of Jesus’ hidden life
531 During the greater part of his life Jesus shared the condition of the vast majority of human beings: a daily life spent without evident greatness, a life of manual labor. His religious life was that of a Jew obedient to the law of God,221 a life in the community. From this whole period it is revealed to us that Jesus was “obedient” to his parents and that he “increased in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man.”222
532 Jesus’ obedience to his mother and legal father fulfills the fourth commandment perfectly and was the temporal image of his filial obedience to his Father in heaven. The everyday obedience of Jesus to Joseph and Mary both announced and anticipated the obedience of Holy Thursday: “Not my will. . .”223 The obedience of Christ in the daily routine of his hidden life was already inaugurating his work of restoring what the disobedience of Adam had destroyed.224
533 The hidden life at Nazareth allows everyone to enter into fellowship with Jesus by the most ordinary events of daily life:
The home of Nazareth is the school where we begin to understand the life of Jesus – the school of the Gospel. First, then, a lesson of silence. May esteem for silence, that admirable and indispensable condition of mind, revive in us. . . A lesson on family life. May Nazareth teach us what family life is, its communion of love, its austere and simple beauty, and its sacred and inviolable character. . . A lesson of work. Nazareth, home of the “Carpenter’s Son”, in you I would choose to understand and proclaim the severe and redeeming law of human work. . . To conclude, I want to greet all the workers of the world, holding up to them their great pattern their brother who is God.225
534 The finding of Jesus in the temple is the only event that breaks the silence of the Gospels about the hidden years of Jesus.226 Here Jesus lets us catch a glimpse of the mystery of his total consecration to a mission that flows from his divine sonship: “Did you not know that I must be about my Father’s work?”227 Mary and Joseph did not understand these words, but they accepted them in faith. Mary “kept all these things in her heart” during the years Jesus remained hidden in the silence of an ordinary life.
Father Wauck
said “…..only 59 witches were condemnd to death,,,,,,,(and later)…..”the accused who were condemnd to death comprised of 1.8% including 1.7% who could not be Exicuted because…..¬¥were so in `contumacy¬¥”use of dummies.
What a Pity for Jeanne d`Arc.(They knew where She was alright)The Carinals at her trial didn`t mind giving her over to the secular courts,knowing,full well That they would condem her ( eventualy burn her)as as Witch and heretic…But, alls forgiven as, she would be centuaries later redeamed and made a Saint..What bad luck to be 1.1% of 59.Also in the times of the Inquisition Heresy went practicaly allways hand in hand with witchkraft. “so if we don`t get you on one, we`ll get you on the other” How convenient!
regards sandra
Sorry to contradict “Mary did not know these things”
As the Angel Gabriele Visited Mary, before, Jesus`s birth and told her,she would bear The Son of God ( or Saviour )and his name should be Jesus.How then would she have forgoten this,most,happy Message?Esspecialy as she did bear a son (while still a Vergin)and did name him Jesus..
Awaiting your (surely)very interesting answer….
sandra
Sandra,
I’m not sure Joan of Arc is really representative. She was killed for political reasons (the English wanted her out of the way). The heresy charges were pretty much trumped up. I think once Rome got hold of the case, they reversed the verdict. Not in time to save her life, obviously, but it wasn’t “centuries later”.
Sandra,
Mary surely did know he was the Son of God. NO DOUBT about that. If there was one human person on earth who knew the secrets of the mystery, it is she.
I think the Catechism is referring instead to their reaction to Christ’s words “Did you not know that I must be about my Father‚Äôs work?‚Äù They did not understand what exactly that “work” would entail, or when he would begin or how it would play out. They knew the “what” and the “why”, but not the “how.” I hope this clears it up a bit.
Signing off for a while (my turn to do accounts! Sandra, you have my complete sympathy!)… Cheers
Sorry should hve read “…did not `understand¬¥ these words”
sandra
karen LH.
“not centuaries later” Ok! When was She canonised?
I did not say that she was “Represntative” And I do Know that it was political,but,The reason it was political is,because the Pope did not want King Charles to owe his crown (coronation-victory over the English armies)to some body who was thought a “witch-heretic” So you see I do do my homework…Joking!!
sandra..Please!! Michelle do not even mention that nasty word “Accounts” Ha Ha !
“The reason it was political is,because the Pope did not want King Charles to owe his crown (coronation-victory over the English armies)to some body who was thought a ‚Äúwitch-heretic‚Äù ”
Maybe I don’t know the history well enough, but I thought that her case was decided by the local bishop, who blocked her appeal to Rome?
Dear Karen LH
If you don`t know off hand I might assist. 1920. (no offence though)
sandra
Sandra,
She may have been canonized in 1920, but she was cleared shortly after her death. This from THE OXFORD DICTIONARY OF SAINTS:
“About twenty years later, Joan’s family asked for the case to be reopened: Callistus III appointed a commission which in 1456 quashed the verdict and declared her innocence. She was beatified by Pius X and canonized by Benedict XV in 1920.”
Dear Sandra, No judgements here but just a quick thought: It would always to possible to question everything the Church has done or does; it would always be possible to put to doubt everything we have been told or thought by teachers and any and every authority; but then where would we stop?
There is an argument that God has given us reason so that we back up our faith with the product of our intelligence, but there is a limit to the lee-way we should give to our capacity to “question”. What then is the meaning of faith?
My dear, take the advice of someone who wants to be a friend: take a moment to ask God for more faith. Adding “humility” won¬¥t be bad either.
Karen LH
Not in my books! The Bishops, Cardials and so on tried to make her retract the fact that she heard voices (angel Micheal)and that she was sent by God to assist The `Dauphin¬¥Charles against the English ..when she didn`t,they said that she was a unrepentant heretic…The duke of Bedford (I think?) bought her from the Duke of Burgandy for a large summ And insisted that the `Church¬¥put her on trial for those charges!!!Politics and the `church¬¥were synanome at that time ( also today in some respects)..
sandra
Dear KarenLH you are right!
But (here I go again lack of Humility) When Callistus Reversed conviction it was expiedient for him to do so As no` Most Holy ´ King could have been anointed with the help of a convicted Witch-heretic and still be recognised by the Holly Church
Winifred Thanks for the advice.I`ll try to follow it as far as the praying for Faith is concernd.
About “Questioning” i have a few quotations on the subject for you (and others) if interested I`ll have to look them up though( and translate from German into English…But,first I have to have Dinner,
so give me a bit…
sandra
“Not in my books! The Bishops, Cardials and so on tried to make her retract the fact that she heard voices (angel Micheal)and that she was sent by God to assist The `Dauphin¬¥Charles against the English ..when she didn`t,they said that she was a unrepentant heretic‚ĶThe duke of Bedford (I think?) bought her from the Duke of Burgandy for a large summ And insisted that the `Church¬¥put her on trial for those charges!!!”
OK. I thought I’d heard somewhere that she had tried to appeal to Rome and been prevented. If I have time I’ll try to hunt around this evening and figure out where I got the idea. For now, off to do some housecleaning (ugh!).
Winifred Regarding “Where do we stop…..limmit to the lee way…. How about “Beloved I beseetch thee, continue to search for the truth” That, I think, is a good enough answer! not mine by the way..
KarenLH.
I dont think that Rome had to wait 20years to get HOLD of the case,as it was “the talk of the town” at the time…And besides I`m sure that nobody would have dared to anounce that Jeanne d¬¥Arc was to be condemnd an Heretic in the name of the Roman Catholic Church,(with, all, the that time Catholic society looking on) without the Pope or at least somebody in Rome knowing about it.(as it did take quite a while to finaly convict her.) But enough on `just¬¥one mistaken `burning¬¥
sandra
Karen LH very recamendable of you (Housecleaning I mean) dito as far as Ugh! goes.
till later sandra
Re: housecleaning: It wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t so darn hot! I’m trying not to turn on the air conditioning until evening, but I’m going to break down right soon.
“It‚Äôs my understanding that, in the culture of the time, the teacher sat and asked questions/taught. The students stood.”
Karen LH,
Apparently, rabbis did not only teach sitting. It seems that disciples were also called “followers” because they did not only follow the mind of their teacher but literally followed their master who would also teach while walking. This practice can easily escape attention without a careful reading of scriptural texts. Just to cite a few: “A scribe came up to him, ‘Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go’.” (Mt 8:19); “But Jesus said to him, ‘Follow me and leave the dead bury the dead’.” (Mt 8:22); “Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple.” (Lk 14:27) A good reference on this is J. Mouroux’s “I believe. The personal structure of faith.”
Nevertheless, I’d like to point out why it makes more sense that Christ was not lecturing the temple teachers when he was there at age twelve.
Catholic faith sustains the Jesus Christ is perfect God and perfect man. The perfection of his humanity means that he reached maturity following the different stages of human life. Hence, we don’t find in the Gospels a baby Jesus that talked on the night he was born because babies have to develop first the right shape of the mouth and have to hear first before they begin saying a word. The following passage from St Luke tells about Jesus Christ: “Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man.”(Lk 2:52)
Now, if we would say that Christ was teaching at the age of 12 (moreover, to experts in the temple) that will mean his human skills to communicate must be as developed as that of a full-grown man. Moreover, his vocabulary must be enough to elaborate, let’s say, a parable to lecture the teachers. This seems not consistent with our faith in Jesus Christ.
Karen Lh
We should be so lucky!!! It`s been raining here (Germany) for at least a week and is just about 14degrees+
We need the Heating on!
sandra
LeonG.
So your Reciting the Scripture again. Very Good place to find answers!!
But I was under the immpresion that in the times in which Jesus lived, a younge man (at least in Palestina)
was much more educated in the scriptures(Thora) than the young men of today! (at that time a 12year old would be clased as a “young Man”) So not too far fetched,to think he, also would be (possibly even more so)
Just a thought!
sandra
” As the Angel Gabriele Visited Mary, before, Jesus`s birth and told her,she would bear The Son of God ( or Saviour )and his name should be Jesus.How then would she have forgoten this,most,happy Message?Esspecialy as she did bear a son (while still a Vergin)and did name him Jesus..”
It is worth remembering that Jesus knew in detail the whole course his earthly life take from his conception onwards because of his divine, infinite knowledge as God. (Catholic faith teaches that Christ has two intellegences: human and divine.) This is shown by what he says in reply to Mary. However, Mary realized that his reply contained a deeper meaning which she did not grasp. She grew to understand it as the life of Jesus unfolded. Mary’s knowledge that Jesus was the Christ and her reverence towards him led her not to ask any further questions but to reflect on Jesus’ words and behaviour in this instance, as she had done on other occasions. (Lk 2:19)
Jesus, perfect man, also had acquired knowledge just as all of us have. We come to know through our own effort, starting with sense knowledge. In fact, we don’t know anything that did not pass through our senses. When we say that Christ had this kind of knowledge, and that he thus gradually became more knowledgeable), it simply follows from accepting the incarnation of Christ as a real fact and the assertion that he has assumed a true human nature (and therefore, a nature with limitations).
Sandra,
No offense. But I don’t buy that.
I’ll come back much later because I also have to work like you ladies. I just snooped in. Great conversation!
Good night from me too, to all
sandra
I am surprised – interesting comments http://boymedexams.ifrance.com/
Like! Thank you!
http://danuegonax.com
Thanks much!
The Author, you – super hero!
http://srubibablo.com
Thanks much!