Find What You're Looking For:
Navigation
The Categories
- Art (3)
- Cartoons (3)
- John Wauck (4)
- Life of Jesus Christ (4)
- Mortification (7)
- On Opus Dei (13)
- Recommended Posts (17)
- The Church (5)
- The Da Vinci Code (121)
- What others said (4)
The Archives
- March 2011
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Mar | ||||||
| 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 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
Registered Users
Subscribe
My own story seems to connect, perhaps collide, would be the better word, with The Da Vinci Code in several ways.
I am American priest of the Prelature of Opus Dei, living at the real headquarters of Opus Dei in Rome (the one that’s not in NY), which has been my home for the last ten years. I studied Renaissance history at the real Harvard University (the one without professors of symbology), and now I work as a professor at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, where I teach a course on literature and Christian faith.
If you wish to know yet more about me, please click on the link that says “about”
WAP ENABLED: The posts can also be viewed on WAP-enabled phones.
Simply point your WAP browser to http://davincicode-opusdei.com/wp-wap.php
[photo credit: Antonello Nusca]
||
Print This Post
||
Email This Post
||
Other Recent Posts
Fr. John Wauck Blogs again!
- Filed under John Wauck. Created on March 20th.
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.
amazing site, worth reading, no kidding
what do I respond to friends that ask me wether is it good to read the book and later, in May, to go see movie. I don’t want to appear that the church has brought back the index of prohibited books, because it isn’t true.
thanks,
Paul
This is an excellent initiative, why didn’t I think of that? In case you’re not aware, I was not able to access the site through Safari, the main Mac browser. I sent a bug report, and had to access through Explorer, which is a pain. See if you can tweak things so that Safari can access it. Do you want me to invite people to ask questions?
Hi, Paul. I would tell people that they needn’t bother reading the book. Read Dave Barry’s parody of it (I’ll be attaching a link), and that should be sufficient – better written and very, very funny. The novel is simply inane.
Thanks for the observation, Eric. The problem with accessing the site through Safari should be cleared up by now. Let me know if you’re still having trouble.
Mr. Brown summed up his general philosophy in a recent History Channel show titled Unlocking the da Vinci Code, stating that while at a class at Amherst College, he and his friends said,”Well, why not?” when a teacher said that someone had speculated that there could be female in the Last Supper.
“Well, why not?” didn’t go too far when the HC trekked around French villages in search of townspeople who might be familiar with any of Browns collection “well-known” and what are basically ancient urban legends about the secret bloodline that traveled through France. In fact, the HC couldn’t find any villagers anywhere who actually supported his views or even heard these tales, and only one woman who agreed to comment, simply scoffed, “sacrilege.” Apparently, Brown’s only supporters are thrill seeking book readers. It’s pretty bad when you can’t even fool American television. HC even believed that Johnson killed Kennedy!
Dear John: A mutual friend, Rob Miller, put me on to your site. Very helpful. Thanks. Best, David PS: Could this be one of those rare cases where the movie is better than the book–from worse to bad?
I hope, Scott, that the History Channel made it to the tomb of Mary Magdalen in southern France. The whole notion of searching, via mysterious codes, for a tomb that has been a popular Christian pilgrimage site for many many centuries is one of the novel’s many “strokes of genius.”
About the movie, my question is whether it will be flop along the lines of Bonfire of the Vanities, which seemed like a sure-fire hit and fooled everyone. The presence of Tom Hanks in both of these movies makes me wonder. Clearly, Dan Brown wrote the book with a movie in mind, but I think it’s pretty clear that he wasn’t thinking of one starring Hanks, who seems – to my mind – terribly miscast here, as he was in Bonfire.
It’s a shame they didn’t get Anthony Hopkins as Teabing.
The book presents a lot of problems for a director – above all the massive about of pedantic expository material, which doesn’t make much sense to begin with. I’m curious to see what gets cut.
No doubt the movie may be a new fantasy experience, Anon, and I was also thinking Bonfire, who knows, could end up being a big flop (except in Europe no doubt). Russell Crowe was on before Hanks, it was reported.
Anonymous wrote: I hope, Scott, that the History Channel made it to the tomb of Mary Magdalen in southern France. The whole notion of searching, via mysterious codes, for a tomb that has been a popular Christian pilgrimage site for many many centuries is one of the novel’s many “strokes of genius.”
I just wanted that repeated because I think it was a really cool comment. Ha!
It’s amazing how anyone can be a follower of Josemaria Escriva. He was a very sadistic, not to mention masochistic evil vile man. Why anyone would follow his bent ramblings is beyond belief. I guess you must be the same to follow someone. Even smart learned people can be so wrong!!
I wonder if Linda J has ever read anything written by St Josemaria Escriva. Yes even smart people can be so wrong – just look at Howard (director of the film). I used to love every film he directed, but, now, no more. I’m sorely disappointed with him.
But back to the ‘smart’ people who follow St Josemaria – could 86,000 be so wrong? Could John Paul II the great be so wrong? Could many bishops all over the world be so wrong?
Hi Fr.
I would think that Opus Dei should put a lot more effort into helping the families of members who have ‘vanished’ into the chiasm of Opus Dei rather than try to ‘cash’ in on a silly book written by a goose with a hidden agenda.
This problem of Mothers and Fathers seeing their children change from free loving young Catholics into not seeing their children as they turn into robots for Opus Dei is a massive problem for the Personal Prelature and not one to be laughed off or put to one side. The family is an integral part of Gods Plan and Opus Dei works against this with the way members are encouraged to put their ‘natural’ family to one side as they endeavor to be more spiritual as they separate themselves to become more and more like Opus Dei
Very sad.
It does happen and it is one of the many problems associated with the organization.
May St. Jose’ Maria Escriva Bless you.
Louis
Dear Fr. and Juliet esp.
“…even the elite will be fooled” Can’t get any more ‘elite’ than Opus Dei. The devil is a wry crafty fellow. The most precious ‘tool’ of Christianity is the ‘family’ . Opus Dei divides families. Yes, 86,000 could be wrong. Yes, John Paul 11 could be conned. So many were denied a voice against St. JoseMaria Escriva – all the relevant departments were stacked and where was the Devil’s Advocate??
All we can do now is to pray fervently to this saint for him to right the path of destruction left in his wake.
“Dear St. Josemaria Escriva, The church has found favor with you and elevated you to sainthood. You now know so well the sufferings of individuals and families involved in Opus Dei.. I therefore besech you that if it be God’s will to intercede for me and release my sister/brother…. …..from the bondage of Opus Dei and restore unity to his/her family. This I ask through the Holy Family of Nazareth, Amen.” One Our Father….,Hail Mary…,and Glory Be… for each person being prayed for.
This is an open blog, and I am going to leave these last few comments on it, partly because I think they speak for themselves, but I would prefer that future comments stick more closely to the topic of The Da Vinci Code and Opus Dei. I don’t want to have to remove comments. If you just want to talk about Opus Dei or Saint Josemaria, there are plenty of other sites for that sort of discussion.
Bottom line: it should be obvious that all Catholics must strive to love their families, and in this respect the members of Opus Dei, most of whom are married with children, are just like everyone else.
Glad to see you are setting the record straight, Fr. John. The email form is returning an error.
Fr. hasn’t put the record straight. The Testimonies from ex-Opus Dei members on the ODAN website put the record straight. They speak loudly and clearly for themselves.
Very generous of you though Father, for leaving these negative comments on.
God Bless
Dear Father, Can you mail me a list of evening/day of recolletions for women in the Chicago area? I used to live in the area when Fr. Ignatius heard my family’s confession at St. Theresa’s Parish in Palatine, Illinois.We used to go into Chicago(St. Mary of the Angel’s) after we moved to Michigan as our family pilgrimage for Mary but that has ended. I so miss the day of recollections of Opus Dei and would like a list of parishes in the Chicago area where my grown daughters might be able to attend. Thank you, Kathy Morkes
I caught a little clip of you on CBS news a few days ago. Loved the bit about learning more about the church from Monte Python than from Dan Brown. Also, thanks for informing us that Dave Barry has a parody of Da Vinci Code in the works. I can’t wait to see it. Dave Barry is hysterical. We need more Dave Barrys in the Work.
It’s amazing how a simple fiction story can create a whole scandal everywhere. I‚Äôm a 26yo guy from Guatemala (Central America), who lives in Guatemala. I most confess that got completely excited about the book. But then I started to get more curious about Opus-Dei and Catholic Religion itself. Was born and raised as a catholic. Anyhow, I kind of got lost somewhere. Now I‚Äôm heading back to all those believes that I was brought-up with… and it has been great. Still don’t know much about Opus-Dei, and probably I am not the sort of people who may become part of this special group (special in a nice-good way, please don‚Äôt take me wrong).
Any how, there’s this one special person in my life now, who has taught me some stuff about Opus-Dei.
Today was published in one of our local papers wrote by an AP journalist. It mentioned the efforts and a sort of public campaign Opus-Dei has started in its headquarters. I found it interesting and since it had also some websites addresses at the end, I decided to check them out. That’s how I ended up knowing about you and found your e-mail address and a message that states that private emails are possible.
There was also information that I found interesting on the press-note. It said that actually the same editorial hose which published Brown‚Äôs book is going to publish a collection of spiritual reflections called ‚ÄúEl Camino‚Äù (The Road I would say‚Ķ remember the news was in Spanish) by Josemar??a Escriv?° Balaguer. I just hope, the same way we got Brown‚Äôs book in Spanish, we can also get Escriv?°‚Äôs reflections. I may not become part of Opus-Dei, but still consider their activities and everything very interesting and helpful.
Hope you could understand my email. I know my English is not very good, but somehow I got the feeling of writing you some lines, after looking at the http://www.davincicode-opusdei.com site.
Hope I could get any response from you. Any recommendation on readings would be kindly appreciated.
Greetings from Guatemala… SALUDOS Y ABRAZOS.
Hector,
While you are looking for some more stuff on Opus Dei have a look at …www.odan.og . there you’ll find some pretty revealing testimonies and stories from some pretty honest folk aboout their experiences in Opus Dei. Their stories should be read and heeded by all caring and concerned Catholics the world over.
God Bless
P.S. The glaringly obvious fact that Dan Brown’s book is all fiction is in the Opus Dei character being an Albino. As if a member of Opus Dei could be an albino. Opus Dei would not allow anyone with a physical deformity to be in Opus Dei – just doesn’t look right!!
Shouldn’t that be “odan.org”… or is this a reference to the Biblical “Og”?
Thanks, Louise, for the illuminating comment, which I intend to leave up, even though I don’t really see what it has to do with a post entitled “Who am I?”
Speaking for myself, I’ve never thought of albinos as having a “deformity,” and as a matter of fact there ARE albino members of Opus Dei, so in the end this comment may shed more light on its author than on Opus Dei.
In any case, thanks again for the comment. Of course, if you’d like me to remove it, I’d be happy to do so.
Sorry for the omission of a letter Father. Yes the website to which I refer is http://www.odan.org
Speaking for myself, I think the documents and testimonies on ODAN’s website and my comment on a member of Opus Dei being an albino has as much do with a post entiltled “Who am I?” as the other comments on this page have.
It that surprises me that there are albino members of Opus Dei. I have always had the impression that in the pursuit of spiritual perfection, Opus Dei insisted on physical perfection too – well that has been my experience anyway.
I am sure you’d be happy to remove my post but of course, I am happy for you to leave it there.
God Bless.
‘It that surprises me’ sorry there I go again. should read ‘It surprises me’
I have met an albino who is a member of Opus Dei. A nicer person it would be hard to imagine.
Back on the subject of the Da Vinci Code, it’s basically a cartoon story, but pretentious and overblown. A documentary ‘The real Da Vinci Code’ on Channel 4 (I think) deflated it very effectively, with humour and mockery – a bit like the approach of this blog. The presenter was Tony Robinson.
Dear Fr John,
I belong to the Work and I wish to thank you for your contribution to the understanding of the Prelature. I have not read all the articles written YET, but with some time I will. However, it is a pity that I cannot express so well in English as I wish. Nevermind!
If you ever think I could be of any help, just let me know.
God bless us all
Maria
Why is there such a shock and horror to this book? I personally don’t get it. I mean after all if you read the book you understand. IT IS FICTIONAL. I’m in belief that people should be thankful for the book no matter how riddled with FICTION it is. Obviously it has done the Church more good then it has harm. 90% of the people that read the book know it is fiction and read it for the story. I know thast what I did. I mean look at the people that it has brought to the church. I for one have always found the church odd b ut that is me. There are alot of people who will be coming to the church and see something they like. This alone is worth it if you are really out to save people as most religious people are.
ciao John, we met the other night at the Harward’s gathering ( I was the one evangelical fellow that spoke to you at the end). Would like to grap a coffe sometime. please email. ciao
CC,
Your major point about the book is, as you say, IT IS FICTIONAL (caps yours). So… why couldn’t the author come up with a fictional, secretive society? Opus Dei is a real society in the real world, so don’t you think that the author might have wanted to pick on it a little? And if so, don’t the members of the real group, Opus Dei, have a right to respond?
I’m sure that he could have made up a fictional group if he tried really hard. The fictional group wouldn’t then show “shock and horror”, neither of which, by the way, are being displayed here.
in every novels , some things are true and other falses, so Iam believer , I conffirmed about some instruction of Rome about the Rest Day calls Lord Day, Bible confirmed The Sabbath, not the Sunday that all truly believers follow wrongly
Tks.
Dan
God blesss you
Who’s this guy?
To elaborate a little on the fact that it is a fictional work…in his introduction to the book, Brown claims to write a fictional book that incudes heavily researched facts about the Catholic Church and Opus Dei. Brown then proceeds to flood the pages with so much trivia, so closely intermingling fact and fiction that it is hard for those who are not theology majors or in contact with Opus Dei to distinguish the difference. Clarification is therefore necessary.
The confusion between fact and fiction in this book in my opinion is what has entrigued the public into reading an otherwise tedious and overdone cat and mouse chase.
Dan Brown; thank you for your book, is an interesting fiction novel. Thank you for convincing me more of the wonderful gift of my catholic faith. Thank you for increasing my love for the Opus Dei and for their members. I love you. Jose Antonio.
Yeah, that’s the way to go boy!
Thanks, Nokia.
I agree with you, Elena, about the fact-or-fiction factor in the novel’s appeal, and I think it also has to do with the specific things about which the question is being raised. After all, this isn’t any-old subject matter that’s at stake here, but rather Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church and Western civilization.
fascinating read! As is usually the case. The book may be good, but the real thing is much better! (much more accurate too!)
From the movie clips I’ve seen, the whole look of the film is so over the top I’m hoping it will someday end up on MYSTERY SCIENCE THEATER 2000! remember that anyone? Maybe the DVC will revive it!
Dear Padre John,
thank you very much for this very interesting and informative site. I must confess that I never read mr Brown’s books beyond page 50… I bought them while catching a train station and, by the time I reached my stop, the books had reached such a level of absurdity and lack of substance that…
In ogni caso, I am grateful for this site for many personal reasons… and also because it gave one of my students, I believe, much to think about. She came to me to tell about a post written in answer to a question of hers (on “whipping”, as far as I remember…) and that answer brought us to chat a bit about problems and issues and meanings that I seldom dare to discuss in the classroom. Of course, it may come to nothing… but, on the other hand, it may also be that something good can be gained by a very clever, sensitive (only sometimes sensible) student.
So, this post is just to thank you for your work, padre John.
I promise I’ll keep reading.
Oremus invicem,
Giuseppe
p.S. I also owe you an apology (excusatio non petita): when first seeing the site and the post I only read hurriedly and superficially and passed a very harsh (“duro”?) judgement on your person. I shouldn’t have, and I should have known better. But we live and learn, don’t we?
Do you write in Spanish also? I have some friends in Mexico who I would like to send some of your articles to. Thanks
Your website and your beliefs reek of insecurity. We would all benefit if members of Opus Dei and other dictatorial religions and organizations could take a deep breath and consider that their beliefs and traditions might not be the best for members or society as a whole.
The Da Vinci Code is merely a fictional book written to entice the popular audience (of which it has done very well.) Opus Dei’s concern about the books’ contents is strong evidence as to the weakness of this organization.
Sorry, Giuseppe, for this very tardy response to your comment. I just wanted to say how much I appreciated it. I thought that Francesca’s questions were excellent, and I regret that I still haven’t found time to provide a full response. As you may have seen, the conversation has picked up again under the latest post about “Provence in May.”
I think, Chela, that someone is doing a site similar to this in Spanish – in fact, translating some of the material from this site. I’ll try to find out more about that.
Thanks, Free Thinker, for the marvelous comment. Would you prefer that I held my views more securely, or do you simply want me to think the way you do?
I’ve been lurking on your site for a while and just wanted to say thanks. It takes much generousity to leave in posts with um, an opposite view, but as you say, they speak for themselves. Thanks again for your work.
Hi Fr. John!
I will be visiting Rome for four days at the end of May. I was hoping to stop by Santa Croce – maybe meet with the students again? We can talk about DVC from Hollywood’s persepctive…
Hope we can work it out. God bless -
Barbara
Hello Fr. John:
I went to BC high in Boston Mass and Stonehill College also in Mass. I have been well schooled in the history and teachings of the church.The Devinci code failed to sucker me.
It has been a great pleasure to read your comments on the Davinci code. I read the book and found it mildly entertaining and slightly annoying. On the upside maybe all the controversy will get people to do some reading and learn the truth. I find it sad that people would read a work of fiction and use the text to bash the Church.
To me it was a quick read, that did get me interested fast. However I feel that Spiderman comics were more enlightening than Mr Browns work.
I enjoy your comments and look forward to more.
JFC
I was thrilled to come across your website when I was searching for information on the Davinci Code. Although the novel is a work of fiction I think it is important to clarify the confusion that has sprung up, especially among people that have very little knowledge of christianity and those that read without keeping in mind the fictional nature of the work.I will refer all my friends to your website and share the enlightening information I get from it.Please keep it up!
John, I as happy to hear about this blog from a friend who was in a talk you gave during easter week. It is a great resourse for a clear analysis of the book and its impact – just what I was looking for.
Hi, I’m an Italian cooperator of Opus Dei since 1982.
I’ve not read the book and I probably will not read it.
I know the Opus Dei very well, it has marked all the most important periods and moments of my life, and I admit that is true the thing our Father said : “The Opus Dei is the better place to live and the better place to die”.
Next week I’ll be on the Como Lake, at Urio Castle, for my annual course of retreat and I’ll pray also for Dan Brown: there are better ways to gain money than writing errors and fairies.
I want to submit to readers the last favour which saint Josemaria did to me: I work as a business analyst in a merchant bank and since two years ago I had a boss who hated me owing to my Christian faith and to my being cooperator of Opus Dei. In December 2004 I prayed the imagine of our Father in order to obtain my boss went away, but to gain more money.
One week later, my boss told us about his dismission in a week or two.
Then came the new boss: a lovable person, who loves me a lot, and whose sons frequent a Faes School of Milan (a school directed by the alumns parents whose spiritual formation is directed by the Prelature of Opus Dei).
Now me and my new boss go together to the monthly spiritual retreat for professional organized by the Prelature in our town.
As you can see, Opus Dei is everything (good) but a secret association.
My best wishes
Andrea Godone
Grazie Andrea per questa testimonianza! Nothing like personal experiences to tell the story better
Thanks a lot, Nokia, I wish you an experience like mine
Yours truly
Andrea Godone
I suggest the readers to read a wonderful work about Opus Dei (it’s a hard reading: four volumes!!!)
IL FONDATORE DELL’OPUS DEI by Andr?®s Vazquez de Prada (Ed. Leonardo International)
Sorry, three volumes…
Right, no need to make it any harder!
I came to your site after a friend of mine emailed me the lick with the following attached “he’s opus dei and American!” I figured I’d lurk around until I found something I could comment on.
Thanks for leaviing the first few comments from dissenters up, it provides an idea of the mryiad opinions available. If they were to read my comment – I would tell them that they ought to go find some truly mangled religions and cults to ridicule off the face of the earth.
Thank you Fr. for this site. I’m probably among the few who have not read the book, have not seen television shows about, and do not plan on seeing the film. Your site is informative and entertaining at the same time.
Thanks & God Bless.
~ M.
Dear Fr. Wauck,
I am very interestin in the work who you are working in the defence of our faith and defending the name of the Prelature OPUS DEI. I am writing from Mount Angel Seminary, Oregon and my diocese is Boise, ID. I was born in Bogota Colombia and loking for sourses in spanish and english abour decode-davincicode. Today I have the oportunity to watch the movie cracking the davincicode form Family entertaimen is good. I looked to in http://www.acidigital from Paulo J. Gines a defence against davincicode and the attacks to opus dei. If you have more sourses in spanish about it let me know please.
aincerely
Deacon Jorge Ramirez
Very interesting site definentely informative i was wondering if i could use some of the pictures off of your site for mine i am diong a small thing about the davinci code and i can’t find any pictures let me know
Oops i meant to say doing not diong sorry
Sure, FBP. Feel free to use whatever you like from this website. Keep up the good work.
Deacon Ramirez, I don’t know much about the Spanish-language sources, but I’d start by checking out the opusdei.org site in Spanish. My understanding is that they have a lot of links.
CONGRATULATIONS!
Fr. Wauk:
I wonder whether anyone has noticed that Dan Brown’s key premise — that the chalice does not appear in the Last Supper — is actually false. The chalice appears in the left column, just over the head of an apostle. You can look up photos of the restored painting and see it clearly. This is not my idea. I read it in my research after reading the book.
This, to me, points out the numerous factual errors in the book.
I believe this book is dangerous because people think that it is an accurate description of Christian history. I have heard of cases of people leaving the church over it.
The Bible says, My people perish for lack of knowledge.
This is apparent in the DaVinci Code. Christians (esp. Christian leaders) must educate themselves about their faith and their history.
Dear Fr. Wauck,
I knew you to be very erudite and well read from your talks on literary themes on EWTN. The fact that you are a priest of the Work [a fact I have only found from the web] further confirms my first impressions. Well done on the website; it is quite informative, authoritative but not at all combative and in fact entertaining with its own twists. I have already recommended it to friends.
God Bless
Why can’t the church or even opus dei stop the movie or get the courts to get them to insert a disclaimer.
This is necessary since the author has said on several occasions that even though the work is fiction, that facts are true. This is as misleading as it is oxymoronic.
I hope I am right on this one.
Hello! The New York Times published today, May 11 the pictures of the Chuch of St. Pantaleon with and without the add for the DVD movie. I think you should encourage people in Rome to pay for a new add in the same church-cover spot advertizing: “Seek The Truth (or some other DVD line): http://www.opusdei.org.” It is sure to make a story in all mayor news papers.
Dear Father Wauck,
What troubles me most can be found in Chapter 7 of the DVC: “Suspiciously, Opus Dei’s elevation occurred the same year the wealthy sect allegedly had transferred almost one billion dollars into the Vatican’s Institute for Religious Works–commonly known as the Vatican Bank–…In a second maneuver that raised eyebrows, the Pope placed the founder of Opus Dei on the ‘fast track’ for sainthood…” What is more unsettling is the lack of indignation expressed by the Holy See and Opus Dei regarding this statement.
I am wise enough to know that the Catholic Church is neither infallible nor incorruptible. After all, sin is everywhere, and is found in intellectual dishonesty.
If sainthood can be “bought” then the “Apostle’s Creed” needs to be revised. The last sentence of the prayer would be more appropriate if it read like this: “I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints both holy and political, the forgiveness of sins, ours and the Catholic Church’s, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting. Amen.”
Opus Dei is an evil in the Church that will be exposed. Nothing evil will ever be allowed to remain in the Church. Trust in Christ.
Fr.
Thank you for an intelligent and rational discussion of this issue. It is great to see someone of your insight, sensitivity,and humor turn up the light. This issue is an opportunity for us all to think about our faith and what we believe and why we act the way we do. Thank you and all catholic educators who work to bring us all closer to God by using our intelect to enhance our faith.
Dear Fr. Wauck,
A little digression from the DVC topic but could you perhaps post a note on the Gnostic Gospels? Just saw the National Geographic coverage on the Gospel of Judas and though it’s rather laughable (especially the part when they showed Our Lord laughing *at* the 12 disciples), perhaps someone should set the fact straight, e.g. about how St Iraeneus ‘selected’ the gospels…
Sir…Father…If you have doubts or you just don’t like the story after reading or watching Da Vinci code you faith in God is not deep enought….You can’t hide the truth wchich is NOT KNOWN . Whole religion is based on BELIEVES only.I’m Christian but I didn’t choose that…my parents decided – it’s WRONG . How and why someone is deciding about such a important thing? I’m less and less in to religion. I see so many lies , so many unknowns , Church killed so many people durning few last centuries, Church was and is changing God will , Pedofiles in churches , Fathers making money on wrong and illegals things….Almost every war is because RELIGION. Good thing that people can choose…even when as a kid they where forced to believe in any kind of God. I understand that everyone can have faith in something – that’s fine with me, BUT DON’T DECIDE WHAT PEOPLE CAN WATCH AND HEAR. Vatican is wrong , hiding truth and its lies and making money and creating membersa on something what is not 100% sure but on other hand is trying to stop anything what is telling different story on the same subject saying it;s not truth???? Come on…make your mind people.
[...] Father John Wauck, an Opus Dei priest living in Rome, publishes a blog about the Da Vinci Code and Opus Dei. [...]
You presented a good explanation of Opus Dei’s mortifications. I think that is enough. As for other issues, it is true that it should be discussed in other venues. I just hope that you do listen to these issues— as I suppose you sense there’s something wrong with why some ex-members say these. You cannot just say , they say these because they are “bitter”. there must be something to it.
Be compassionate.
Good morning.
I watched your interview on CNN in my country Kenya yesterday morning. I think the answers you gave in response to the Da Vinci Code debacle were fresh and clear – I can’t think of any other words to describe what you said!
The way you also presented yourself in a happy and wholesome way did justice to the ministerial priesthood of the Catholic Church and hopefully this will attract more young men in this service of the Church.
Sincerely,
Symph
Cool website. Will come by. Say to the guys in Rome that the improvement of the website http://www.opusdei.org has been fantastic, specially the video stuff. It helps a lot. I specially like the Chinese guy from Hong Kong who cuts pieces of meat the whole bloody day.
Regards
Hallo to all!
Well after reading NEARLY all of the comments I must ask, is the Vatican only distresed at the Da Vinci Code because it Accuses Opus Dei of Murder, or does it objekt mostly to the Idea that not only men are allowed to be Priests,only virgins can be truely holy women and or that Jesus COULD, (ONLY, COULD) have enjoyed a relationship with a WOMAN other than his Mother?¬¥.Who by the way was at the time of his death by no means a VIRGIN having had a least 5 more Children.(Through “normal”chanels).The whole Question of beliveing or not can surely not be at the mercy of a Author of a Fictional Book (interessting or not).Why forbid a Film -Book or any such thing that incites people to try and find the TRUTH.Or is the Vatican REALY afraid of SOMETHING:
And to find out that Jesus was in the State of Holy Matrimony surely would not be sooo very bad as according to the Holy Church the sacrement of Matromony is sacred indeed.Hope this is not tooo blasphemus so as not to be printed.(I am from the bad Old Europe we had the bible long before America by the way.Only as referance to an earlier comment by another participant)I know this is a bit long but hope its not too borring!
PS.Please do not try to correct my English (in patroniesing way) as occoured once on this block its not very CHRISTIAN..I try my best!!
Response to Lisa from New Jersey May 6th.
I have a copy of The Last Supper By L.D.Vinci Printed in my Catholic Bible still cant find the chalice! but as L.D.Vinci was not present at the Last Supper ,he wouldn`t know where to place it !! But surly not above the head of an Apostle!!!
Thanks any way sandra.
Hi, Sandra:
Please visit this link to view a computer enhanced image of Da Vinci’s Last Supper, with grail image highlighted. You can’t miss it! (I hope.) Lisa
http://heavenguide.com/images/chalice/two_enhanced.jpg
Lisa-new jersey
thanks for the link I didn`t miss the Graal but, don`t know what it`s doing up there Do you?
And ofcourse such a precious chalice would not have been used by Jesus at the Last Supper,but thats beside the point.as Da Vinci was painting for the taste of the day he might have put in a rather more `appropriate´
one than that which was more likely used.
Any way this is a picture painted by a painter however talented he was not what one could call an authority on Religion as he dabbled in Alchamie and was quite a `Lad´so who cares realy if he did put in some of his own codes its the beauty of the `art work´ that we should accknowlege not his `a little´ croocked thoughts don`t you think? sandra
Dear Sandra:
I totally agree with you that Da Vinci is not a definitive source on the Christian faith. I also agree that it’s important to acknowledge the beauty of his artworks.
What’s my point? At the beginning of the book, Dan Brown claims that everything he writes about art and history is true.
Brown says: Mary Magdalene is the hidden “grail” in the painting.
I refute that. How? If you want to find a hidden grail in the painting, look on the left column. There’s your hidden grail, Dan.
I have no idea why Da Vinci would have painted that golden image on the column or what it is supposed to mean or even that it is a hidden “code.” Your guess is as good as mine. I’m no expert. I read this elsewhere on the web and just thought I would pass it on.
I also know nothing about his involvement in alchemy … But that’s an interesting point to raise. Hope I’ve explained!
Lisa in new jersey
You explained very well at least for me.. About Da Vinci, he was one of the greatest minds of his days but, just couldn`t keep it on any one subject for very long hense his many unfinished ventures, flying mashines, even submarins,he even visited morgues to use corpses to examine the bone and muscle structure.He spent a fortune trying to find the ledgenary Stone Of Wisdom to make gold.As an Artist he didn`t spend so much time Painting he only used this skill to finance his other ventures,in fact he did very few Painting.he was realy a weapons master for some of the Grands of his day Developing cannons and other Artillery.He could possibly have had a secret code `but not no more¬¥ thanks to Dan Brown!!!It is also worth looking up his Life story,as he, was sought after by the Inquisition at one time. Only his conections in high places(the Fam.Sforza from Mailand) saved him,an interessting Personage but most Profane he is also thought (strongly)to have been Homosexual,or at least He was “undecided” on the matter–I hope I`m not boreing you any way enough this is not REALY in line with the subject at hand sorry Sandra
Wait Wait abit it is acctualy inline with the subject.
Who in their right minds would expect a Person of Da Vinci`s caracter to have some secret Knowlege of the Bloodline of Jesus and who would have entrusted HIM with such knowlege “He would have sold it to the highest bider” as he was known for his want and love of Money.Quite a thought that, don`t you agree?
sandra
Regarding Da Vinci:–
I forgot to mention that he was also a very talented Achitect:In short As we would say today an allround Talent…never the less not some one you would want to entrust with a secret as brisant as the “Sang-ral” (Blood- royal) in the hope that he would gard it from the world!!!
sandra
Isn’t your brother in law the spy Hansen? wierd story eh
Dear James Bond
Sorry don`t get it!!
Brother in Law? Spy? Hansen? Very wierd!!!!
How about giving us a clue?
sandra
Sandra, “James Bond” is just telling us about Fr. Wauck’s brother-in-law. Old news, you know.
(And 007, what does that have to do with the blog?)
Hi!michelle missed you!
My last posts are awaiting moderation so I`ll just listen in for a while.
What is it about Fa.Waucks brother in law?
Just out of curiosity! is it a “have to know?)
sandra
That’s “Hanssen” and “weird”, but yes, the old news Michelle refers to is that the convicted spy Robert Hanssen is my brother-in-law. Not sure if that qualifies as “have to know” material; I suppose it is a point of curiosity, though. For the record, I have three other brothers-in-law, and three sisters-in-law… all fascinating folks.
Thanks Fa Wauck
I can`t Imagine That the Proverb “One bad Apple…) applies in this case!
As you, have proved, in your dedication to Your Faith ( if others share it or not)
Glad to hear from you again!!! It`s not realy a ( Must Know )as “Irren ist menschlich”Errorum Humanum..”
sandra
I just googled your name. Holy s–t. That was one very bad guy. And to cynically posture as a religious man using Opus Dei as a cover is the worst. I’m so sorry.
Hi! anonymous.
I suppose we all have one(black sheep I mean)
May be I could be classed as that too, by my Fam.Being Divorcd! But wont get into that tooooo painfull,I am married again (without the Church`s Blessing)and have been,for 27Years (with the same Man). We are both (hopefully) still very happy in our Uinion Only regret! could not have Children (but we have three from my privious marrage) all very good kids Married and very Happy..By the the only one who has to be sorry, is said Brother in Law! best regards…
sandra
Correction
Should have read “By the way only one who has be sorry…..”
My book keeping is doing my head in (but it has to be done).
sandra
Sandra, I tend to believe that there is only one white sheep in the human family … well, two if you count the Blessed Virgin Mary. Probably not many totally black sheep either. Most of us are spotted to one degree or another, each with our own peculiar markings. The important and wonderful thing is that Jesus Christ died for all the sheep: the black ones, the spotted ones, and even his immaculate Mother.
Do you know G.K. Chesterton’s remark about the Immaculate Conception (at least I think that’s what it’s about)? In a world of drunks, Mary was the only person to be born sober. Some Chesterton expert will correct me if I’m wrong.
Chesterton continued…Mary as the only ‘unfallen star’ and mirror of himself…
Or found his mirror there; the only glass
That would not break with that unbearable light
Till in a corner of the high dark house
God looked on God, as ghosts meet in the night.
Star of his morning; that unfallen star
In that strange starry overturn of space
When earth and sky changed places for an hour
And heaven looked upwards in a human face.
(The Queen of Seven Swords)
“Himself” above refers to God, of course, not GKC (!).
Hey peeps! On a different note… didn’t John feature in a recent documentary: The Grail Trail: In Pursuit of the Da Vinci Code? I liked his calm yet defiant approach in that, and can totally see where he’s coming from. I recently bought a book on Opus Dei, and I am trying to become more spiritual and incorporate some of their beliefs, thoughts and daily activities into my everyday life. I can’t remember the author’s name ATM, but I read 5 chapters in one go it was so good- fact as well. Well, to slightly twist the comment, the lady on the documentary also said he had a ‘hypnotic voice’ and looked ‘like Hugh Grant’ (or along those lines)! I can say I agree with her on that one- that cheeky smile does it for me! : ) I would recommend this website and I think Fr. John makes some very good points!
Big smile for the people and Fr.John Wauck.
Dear Father Wauck:
Why is it, that every priest has the same automated answer to the same questions asked by so many?
Was Jesus Christ married? Your answer was “Yes” to the church.
But that is not the question that has been asked.
Was Jesus Christ in fact, married to Mary Magdalen? She was infact his “companion/spouse.”
Did in fact, Mary Magdalen have Jesus Christ’s child?
If so, would it be possible that in today’s world, there is someone out there that is a Direct blood decent of Jesus Christ?
Why doesn’t the church want to answer these questions?
Not having asked every priest this question (I’m surprised that you have), I’m not sure that every priest answers it the same way, and if they did, I wouldn’t be so sure that their answer was “automated.” Perhaps they answer in the same way for the same reason that all sane people answer the question “Is the earth flat?” the same way: the answer is perfectly obvious.
If, in fact, the question is – as it clearly was not in the case above – “Did Jesus marry Mary Magdalen?”, well, then the answer is simply no, and the Church has certainly not avoided saying that. There isn’t the slightest shred of evidence to suggest that Jesus was married to anyone – much less Mary Magdalen. The reason the Church doesn’t spend a lot of time on questions that aren’t worth asking or answering is, well… self-explanatory.
if nothing else, it is good that dan brown wrote the da vinci code becasue:
(1) it causes people to think about the Catholic Church, good or bad, and
(2) it shows that the Roman Catholic Church, although bank-rolling Opus Dei, isn’t the craziest organization out there.
so, as a devout catholic, i would like to thank dan brown for his, albeit, misguided attempt at controversy. he was able to cause people to think, which is hard enough these days, aside from celebrities and sex. have we forgotten that our faith is based on beleif in GOD and JESUS, not in personal egoism and pride in self-mortification. Although the Da Vinci Code has obvious flaws and exaggerations, in relation to Opus Dei he was dead on. Faith is about glorifying and praising, not replicating Jesus’ pain and suffering. It teaches that Jesus perservered those inflications because he was the Son of God. What do you as members of Opus Dei say when you try to ‘out do’ those sufferings? I am almost done, because masochistic, depraved topics aren’t my favorite. I believe with or without faith, people fall into vices. Some drink, others smoke. But it is the truly preverted and sinful that follw cults that disguise themselves as ‘faith organizations’. With people like Opus Dei guising in religious ‘revivals’, it is truly a time to pray for the world.
God Bless and I hope you find true faith.
Goodness, someone actually believes the DVC’s portrayal of Opus Dei even after all the work on this blog and elsewhere?
“Faith is about glorifying and praising, not replicating Jesus‚Äô pain and suffering.” Perhaps we forget that every year we live Holy Thursday, Good Friday and Easter Sunday. We reach Easter via the Cross of Christ. We bless ourselves with the Sign of the Cross. The Mass is the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary. Everywhere in Catholic culture we remember the Cross. As has been said many times on this blog already: methinks thou dost protest too much. A Protestant friend once asked why we have crucifixes in Catholic Churches instead of bare crosses. This seems to be your question as well. Because, St. Paul unashamedly says, we preach Christ Crucified.
This is so basic to Catholicism., I’m a bit surprised we forget so quickly and easily.
Amusing, Krystie.
You say that “about Opus Dei, Dan Brown was dead on.” And yet, the main Opus Dei character is a monk (i.e., a walking impossibility) who practices corporal mortification in a way that would get him thrown out of Opus Dei in a second. Is this what you mean by dead-on accuracy? The head of Opus Dei in the novel is a president general living in New York, when the real head is a prelate living in Rome. Is this what you mean by dead-on accuracy. Brown speaks about someone called “the Teacher” and, with regard to corporal mortification, he speaks of “discipline belts” – things which, as far as I can tell, exist only in his imagination. Is this dead-on accuracy or near-total ignorance?
No, Dan Brown doesn’t have a clue about Opus Dei.
And by the way, for a “devout Catholic,” you seem remarkably confident in seeing pride, egoism, depravity, sinfulness, masochism and whatnot in the souls of Christians you do not know. You accuse members of Opus Dei of trying to outdo the sufferings of Jesus. Do you have some knowledge of their inner thoughts that makes you certain that members of Opus Dei are trying to do such a blasphemous thing?
Jesus said that his followers would fast, and fasting is a form of corporal mortification. When you fast on Good Friday are you trying to outdo the sufferings of Christ or are you demonstrating a solidarity with those sufferings?
John, why did you take down the posts? I realize you have a right to censorship BUT I brought up good historical and theological points. You could of engaged them. The spy thing is intriguing and lends credence even if not correct in the ultimate analysis about secrecy and conspiracy. You should be more open than to eliminate posts, and you should engage more directly and not through plithy responses.
Dear Apostle EF,
My apologies. A bit of confusion on this end.
Here are the texts of both those posts.
Best wishes and prayers.
1.
The Hannsen spy thing is a point about Wauk personally and Opus Dei that creates some smoke of secrecy and intrigue.
2.
The reason that the convicted spy being related to the priest and author/host of this website is interesting is that it goes to “proof” or at least a reason that Opus Dei is secretive. While it may not be proof nor a correct conclusion, it is interesting and may be “wierd”.
I am not sure if Hannsen was a member of Opus Dei. But apparently his brother in law on this website and his wife were/are. Freeh, the head of the FBI knew he was a spy and participated in an event the same day or close to when he was arrested.
The interesting part of Hannsen is the hypocricy, the contradiction, the veneer–the psychological aspect of believing in something and doing something else (for years) or to know something is not true and still do it.
This is the psychology behind the criticism of Opus Dei (that I do not believe is legitimate but sometimes understandable) Opus Dei/Communism/FBI/CIA/Spies–it is interesting at worst.
Wauk does not answer sufficiently even if correctly the question on the marriage of Jesus to Mary Magdalene. He may be correct that there is not a shred of evidence but to say the Church does not have to answer or can give short shrift to answer a question that supposedly does not need to be asked does not sunstantively nor adequately deal with a question that readers of this flawed book genuinely are asking.
There is a logic to believe that Jesus was married as Judaism generally although perhaps not universally does not have celibacy and even the “priestly” class (Levites) and even Nazarines had families, and many Rabbis have large families. Jesus was a Jew, not an Essene assumedly, there is not evidence of Kabbalah at the time (some Kabbalists were celibate)(No evidence of the Kabbalah until the Middle Ages although there is an argument that it has Babylonian concepts and influences) and the Gospel does not specifically state that Jesus was celibate or unmarried. To not state that Jesus was not celibate or unmarried could be interpreted as that he was married as being married with a family could or would be the assumption in that culture and religion at that time. Moroever, there is room to interpret the relationship with Mary Magdalene and Jesus as there are many traditions that are not explicitly in the New Testament and in fact much of Catholic teaching is based on non-explicit teaching and extrapolation (that may well be correct) and tradition.
There are Catholic and French traditions that Mary Magdalene came to the South of France that are not necessarily Gnostic. There are some interesting potential links between the Albigensians (that the Catholic Church probably was too violent against and may have done mass slaughter the other good points of St. Dominic and Innocent the III notwithstanding) such as that one of the great massacres (Toulouse?) supposedly 20,000 was at the Church of St. Mary Magdalene.
Similarly, the perpetual virginity of Mary or the pre-celibate nature of Joseph (the second which is not a dogma of the Catholic Church) is hard to understand when the explicit reading of the Gospel stories talk about Jesus having brothers. Now the Aramaic explanation (but the Gospels were written in Greek and the English translations even Catholic ones are consistent) is that brother=cousin HOWEVER, this is plausible but not the most logical nor reasonable. NOW, did Mary have other children? Isn’t this the logical and explicit reading of the Gospel? The Copts also believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary and the Bodily Assumption (although they are accused of being Monosphytes and do not accept the Council of Chalcedon but do accept the Council of Nicea) but in their and other Eastern Orthodox traditions Joseph had children from a previous wife and was a widower. The problem with the Eastern Christian Joseph Widower theory is that it means that there is still a bloodline related to Jesus. Supposedly the Pope (Urban II?) gave orders during the Crusades to kill the descendants of Jesus. (Cannot verify but was claimed on internet and Discovery channel–realize not best sources) However, that there were some people/tribes during the time of the Crusades in the Holy Land who claimed/were identified with the relatives of Jesus. This would go against the theory that the Bloodline was in France (also Clovis converted in the 5th Century and the history I have studied indicates a good Charlemange and Pepin and granpa Charles Martel and not the bad Carolingian line taking out the Merovingians)
There are other traditions that Joseph of Arimithea made it to England (than under Roman Rule?) and Glastonbury is where the grail was (this has been floating around for a while)
Certainly Mary Magdalene and Jesus were close, intimate at least in an emotional sense, something that is not allowed for reasons of prudence and purity primarily in Opus Dei. St. Escriva nor John Wauk (Rev) would not have a non family member female in the same way Jesus had Mary Magdalene as a follower/leader of early Christians. This does not mean they were married but the language of the Gospels and the extra or non canonical texts do provide some “shred” of evidence that Jesus and Mary Magdalene could of been married.
Certainly, it would or could of been odd (the Essenes notwithstanding and the Essenes were neo or quasi Gnostic it seems so it would be hard from an “Orthodox” Catholic view to argue that Jesus was an Essene only that celibacy was not completely impossible)that Jesus was not married. Marriage and a family would of been accepted and encouraged and the opposited looked upon oddly for a Jewish carpenter/rabbi in the 1st Century living in what is now Israel/Palestine.
Wauk should give more and better answers and not just say there is not a shred of evidence or the question should not be answered or textbook answers for a grade school CCD class.
My admittedly dismissive response was not a reply to a question about Jesus possibly being married, but rather a flat assertion that He married Mary Magdalen. Such a statement does not merit a serious response, so I stand by what I said.
As your post makes clear, there are serious and interesting questions that can be asked about the matter.
The “Da Vinci Code Catechism” was meant to imitate the tone and brevity of grade school CCD catechisms. What you say about it is true, but it doesn’t pretend to be a complete discussion of any of the issues. I hope that people found it thought-provoking and at least somewhat amusing.
Regarding your serious remarks about the “shred of evidence,” the point seems debatable, but I feel that I am on pretty strong ground.
The language of the Gospels does not provide any indication that Mary Magdalen was anything other than a deeply devoted disciple of Jesus, which is entirely consistent with what you say about an emotional bond (I assume that such a bond would have existed between Jesus and all his closer followers). She only speaks with Jesus once – and only in John’s Gospel. (In all other cases, she is simply one among several women following Jesus.) In that very brief exchange, she refers to Him as “Rabbi.” (He tells her not to touch Him.) The most that can be said is that Jesus addresses her by her first name, but, then again, that was her name, so why would He not? After all, He also addresses Martha, the sister of Lazarus, by her first name. Moreover, Jesus has much longer and more intimate conversations with Martha and her sister Mary, but no one is claiming that there are shreds of evidence suggesting they married Jesus. (For what it’s worth, Jesus also speaks much more to the Samaritan woman – also in John’s Gospel.)
I don’t consider the ambiguous language of a gnostic text written long after the fact to count as “evidence” of a marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalen. Even contemporary assertions are not necessarily taken as a evidence, and if a Catholic apologist were to write a narrative today about, say, Abraham Lincoln, in which he appeared as a convert to Roman Catholicism, that alone would certainly not constitute evidence that Lincoln died a Catholic.
It’s true, of course, that it would have been unusual for a young Jewish man not to marry, but Jesus was obviously the ultimate exception to the rule, and the fact that most men married is not “evidence” that this one did.
As I say, whether these things count as evidence is debatable, but, all in all, I’ll stick with what I said the first time.
AEF,
Regarding your comment above: “Certainly Mary Magdalene and Jesus were close, intimate at least in an emotional sense, something that is not allowed for reasons of prudence and purity primarily in Opus Dei. St. Escriva nor John Wauk (Rev) would not have a non family member female in the same way Jesus had Mary Magdalene as a follower/leader of early Christians. This does not mean they were married but the language of the Gospels and the extra or non canonical texts do provide some ‚Äúshred‚Äù of evidence that Jesus and Mary Magdalene could of been married.”
Would you elaborate on the “shred” of evidence you’re referring to here? I’m not clear on that so don’t follow you. Thanks.
Also, I beg to differ but reasons of “prudence and purity” you seem to be referring to should be familiar to most Christians regarding Christ’s sense of respect and delicacy when dealing with women. I doubt Opus Dei has the monopoly on that interpretation. When the apostles come upon Christ speaking with the woman alone at the well, they’re surprised (Jn 4:26-27). From the Gospels, Christ shows a well-bred refinement towards women that is an example to us all. Prudence and purity are virtues for any Christian in any age. Thank you for bringing it up as a reminder of how rare, but necessary these are today.
Cheers.
P.S. In many commentaries here, there are many topics brought out for discussion which is well and good. We’re learning. I think there’s one thing to bear in mind through all the polemics. We can’t reach up and bring Christ down to our human level, trying to make him ‘fit’ a human behaviour pattern or pigeon-hole him into a purely historical frame-work. He entered our history, being himself the center of history–the ‘why and wherefore’ of all historical events before and after. So it does seem a bit ludicrous to be searching for a merely ‘historical’ Jesus when he is, in a very real sense, ‘supra-historical.’ I hope this makes sense. It just seems that commentaries forget that Christ is much more than a historical figure.
Rev. John Wauk,
What about the Eastern Orthodox (I think Eastern Catholic and Oriental Christian (Coptic, Assyrian, Aremenian non Chalcedon)) tradition that Joseph was a widower with children from a previous marriage? I realize the traditional Catholic response to the explicit use of the English word brother is that it is NOT brother but actually cousin in Aramaic. My problem with this is twofold 1) the New Testament was written in Greek and 2) the Catholic apologists, as Jimmy Akins points out, do not know Aramaic.
The Perpetual Virginity of Mary seems to be a dogma of the Catholic Church, the physical Assumption is a dogma and a belief in Coptic (Monosphyte?) and Orthodox (not a dogma though but certainly a belief even an icon in the Kremlin) in the Assumption. One can believe in the Assumption but not the perpetual virginity.
Similiarly, even Muslims believe in the Bodily Virginity of Mary or the Virgin Birth, only secularists or Modernistic Catholics don’t. However, either it seems that Mary had children (which is biologically and theologically possible and humanly probable) or that Joseph had children before Mary from a first wife (which apparently was typical in 1st Century Palestine). Aramaic would of been the venacular language and even a well educated Opus Dei priest would probably only have studied Latin and Greek (probably not even Hebrew) and certainly not Aramaic.
SO….
1. Is the Eastern Christian tradition of Joseph as a widower with pre-Mary children brothers of Jesus valid?
2. Could Mary have had children? Does Jesus have brothers and sisters?
3. Is the perpetual virginity part of the deposit of faith? The Catholic Church has institutionalized controversial beliefs that are part of the Eastern Orthodox tradition in part and were debated in the Church such as a) the Immaculate Conception of Mary–rejected by some Eastern Christians and certainly Protestants but certainly an ex cathedra declared infallible dogma and b) the Assumption of Mary (sometimes after the Falling asleep or Dormition in the East) which also is an infallible ex cathedra declared dogma and also indicates an issue with the Physical Ressurrection (a Jewish belief also among some) BUT THE PERPETUAL VIRGINITY OF MARY (That Mary was always a Virgin, NOT the Virgin birth, that she and Joseph NEVER had relations and she had no children after Joseph) is NOT an infallible dogma declared ex cathedra by a/the Pope
ONLY the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception (remember that in some private revelations there was a denial of the Immaculate Conception and Thomas Aquinas did not believe in the Immaculate Conception arguing with other theologians)
SO CAN MARY HAVE HAD OR DID MARY (MARY MOTHER OF JESUS) OTHER CHILDREN?
Could this be a/the bloodline?
The divinity of Christ is a serious question with shreds of evidence on all sides that ostensibly should be analyzed. Thomas Jefferson wrote treatises about it and even his own Gospel. So educated, well accomplished men, who contributed to our society did not believe in the Divinity of Christ at different times of history.
Obviously Pontius Pilate and Caiphas did not believe in the divinity of Jesus and neither did some of his own disciples. (ALthough the Eastern Orthodox and Coptic Churches and perhaps others have a tradition that Pontius Pilate converted and became a Saint in the Antiochene Church, this is hinted at in the extra-biblical scenes in the Passion that the wife of Pilate had a devotion to Jesus and had interaction with he and his Mother, and she had some divine dreams or intuition as to the goodness and innocence of Jesus) So Pilate may have converted and became a saint. Caiphas did not believe in the divinity of Christ and thought as Jews do today that the incarnation a priori is impossible and that G-D cannot become man, did not become man, so Jesus cannot be G-D incarnate, and is not even the Hebrew Mosiach (Messiah)
The Divinity of Christ was a hotly debated topic in the Early Christian World, and is not clear from a mere explicit reading of the Gospel texts, in facct I never understood why Jesus referred to himself as SON OF MAN, or seemed to be humble to the extent that would not indicate that he was indeed God.
Arians, Gnostics (with a different perspective as some believe we all can become God in some Hindu like sense of oneness perhaps maybe I don’t get it) don’t believe in the Divinity of Christ
neither do Muslims
Just reading the Gospel again I don’t undertand why Jesus says to only pray to the Father or seems to have limitations as God or why he is called or calls himself the SON OF MAN, he does not say I am Hashem (the name literally, but the Essential Tetrgrammaton incarnate, I am ELOHOIM became man)
Other pagan/polytheistic Gods became incarnate in their theo-histories or mythology, KRISHNA for the Hindus, Zeus and the Greeks impregnating women to creat Hercules or to challenge humans on hospitality
Or myths of Sons of God, virgin births, half god/half man Gilgamesh, Eqyptian myths etc. even Alexander the Great Myths
The question is IS JESUS GOD? CAN GOD BECOME INCARNATE AS MAN? HOW DOES IT HAPPEN? HOW IS IT POSSIBLE?
DID JESUS CLAIM TO BE GOD?
Where are the claims of divinity when they are not explicit ONLY PRAY TO THE FATHER, I AM THE SON OF MAN,
calling out the psalm on the cross ADONAI (he was not referring to himself), and calling God ABBA (Daddy) is radical from the more formalized Jews and the blaspemy of even prounouncing Havayah BUT calling God father in a more intimate way, which he encourages us to do does not necessarily imply a more unique Father/Son relationship and Jesus clearly states that God is ALL of our fathers, to call him Abba (us), is Jesus giving us a path but he is not the ONLY son, at least not in the Gospel
What is the Son of Man? How can it be proven that Jesus was God incarnate? Doesn’t that go against all of Jewish theology?
That Jesus Christ is God is a central tenent of Christianity. Millions out there don’t believe it, of course, which differentiates the Christian from the non-Christian.
Long story short, if you don’t believe it, I think answers from this blog may help direct you but can’t give you that faith, AEF. All your questions above show you’re searching but faith is a gift that can’t be given via the internet. Just my thoughts.
Cheers,
Michelle
Perhaps I should have entitled this post “Who do people say that I am?” since we seem to have left the blogger’s identity (ie, mine) far far behind!
That’s true, it’s kind of funny no one’s picked up on that… ha, ha!
Dear Apostle EF,
You have asked main serious questions here – about which many serious books can be and have been written. I would take a look at the Catholic Catechism, because I think a lot of the answers are there.
One small point: it is quite striking that Jesus never places Himself among the apostles in referring to God as “our Father.” When He Himself speaks of God, He usually says “My Father”. The only time He says “our” Father is when He tells the apostles what THEY should say: When YOU pray, say “Our Father…” In fact, he tells the apostles that he is ascending to “My Father and your Father” – a very peculiar phrase that seems designed precisely to avoid the expression “our Father” in a sense that would imply that Jesus’s relationship with the Father is simply the same as the apostles’ relationship with the Father.
Fa Wauck
We know who “you”are.
But who hides behind AposleEF not E.T I hope?
ApostleEF.
You may like to visit the other parts of Blogg. (To be found bottom right)
I have in the past (here and other parts of Blogg)raised similar Questions and my posts may have been on “awaiting Moderation ,(a little anoying but thats life)BUT they have all been Posted (uncencord).
I am also not always of the same opinion as, Fa.Wauck and others about Celibacy,Virginity,and so on but I do belive in the Scriptures,Bible you can call it as you would.
I do Belive in God,Jesus,Mary his Mother and lots more….
Forgive me if I am wrong, but,I have the impression that you do not.
If this is true,then Whats it to you. If,if,if.Are you just interessted ? ok.fine but do not as have others before you,take it apon your self to judge the motives of “Others”
Then, by doing so you commit the same “Sin” you claim to see in `them¬¥.
Maybe see you on the other part of Blogg ie¬¥ “Lost in Translation”
With best regards
sandra
Apostle EF
I beg pardon should have read “…..uncensored”
This is for anyone interested in AEF’s questions. Just found a post called “Trinity Sunday: Recovering the experience of God” here: http://www.robertaconnor.blogspot.com/ Cheers, Michelle
Is this the Apostle EF from the movie the APOSTLE?
Apostle EF,
The Opus Dei Webpage http://www.opusdei.org has answerwed
20+ Questions on Jesus Christ whih is found at:
http://multimedia.opusdei.org/pdf/en/catechesis.pdf
The answers, originally prepared by a team of theologians and historians of the University of Navarre (Spain), have been translated into English by the Dunreath Study Centre, Glasgow, Scotland, and can also be found on their website, http://www.dunreath.org.uk
The Questions answered here are:
1. What do we really know about Jesus?
2. What does Mary’s virginity imply?
3. Did St. Joseph marry a second time?
4. Was Jesus single, married or widower?
5. Current situation of historical research of Jesus
6. What sort of historical credibility does the Bible have?
7. Who were the evangelists?
8. How were the first gospels written?
9. What are the canonical and the apocryphal gospels? How many are there?
10. What is the difference between the canonical gospels and the apocryphal gospels?
11. What do the apocryphal gospels say?
12. Who are the Gnostics?
13. What do Roman and Jewish sources tell us about Jesus?
14. What do the Qumran manuscripts tell us?
15. What is the Nag Hammadi library?
16. Who was Mary Magdalene?
17. What was the relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene?
18. What does the “Gospel according to Mary (Magdalene)” say?
19. What was the relationship between Peter and Mary Magdalene?
20. What went on at the Last Supper?
21. What does the gospel of Philip say?
22. Did Jesus really mean to found a Church?
23. What is the Holy Grail? How is it related to the Holy Chalice?
I think a legitimate question that Fr. Wak can answer is
1. If the Eastern Churches (Oriental or Orthodox) have a doctrine and/or tradition that Joseph was a widower with children from a pre-Marian relationship?
and
2. Is Mary a Virgin after the birth of Jesus? The earlier post aptly points out that the infallible dogmas are only with the Assumption and Immaculate Conception per se.
There is no evidence, beyond current fiction and some gnostic texts, that Mary Magdalen married Jesus or had children by him at all. However, there is evidence of a bloodline related to Jesus as in his brothers and sisters from Mary or half siblings through Joseph.
The links are good HOWEVER, it does not adequately explain that the Gospel says (in Luke) Brothers (and names the names) and SISTERS, and the Opus Dei site uses this as proof that he was not married. They say it is Hebrew for sibling, but sibling is not cousin moreover, as noted above the Gospels were written in Greek, and the spoken language was Aramaic. I have not heard a good reason nor explanation of how Jesus does not have brothers. The Opus Dei website, while otherwise excellent and informative in PDF format, also does not mention the Eastern Orthodox tradition of Joseph being married before Mary. Which apparently was common at that time. Women would die from childbirth or whatever and men would even take the sister as a wife.
Wauk, I am still waiting for a good explanation on the brother and sister thing.
Dear Nick
I am of the same opinion,(Jesus had Brothers) Not as sugested, “Brothers-Cousins”.
The Gospels were written about 20-30years after the Death of Jesus.
And in some cases well into the 60ties (and later.)
The language of the gospel writers,? as there are none (Original) being that they were writen,on Papyrus,or Parchment.(it is assumed in Paulus case would have been Greek or Roman Р`Latin´)
And Just because The Eastern Orthodox Church,has a “Tradition”does not make it the “Truth”(nor the “Untruth”)
If one cann`t find a specific Passage that states a Very Important “Fact” could this be simply because:-it “Simply” is not true,or at least not,deemed by the “Author” to be of substance.
After all they (Esspecialy Paulus),took great pains to rectify any “Missunderstanding”among the followers.so why not in this, as I mentioned “Very” important point.
`I´ can not give an other answer except:
What you can not Prove,you can not Claim, Maintain with impunity
sandra
PS.
Paulus does, however point out, in his “Leters” to the.Galathians.1:6-12.Futher-1:13-24.-2:11—-.Kephas.”Petrus”.1:19.is most important..To Timotheus.1.:3..and so on
sandra.
Just a question and a thought.
If Jesus had brothers, why weren’t they found among the apostles? James (the other one, not John’s brother) was identified as his cousin. But where are his “brothers” if they existed? The natural thing would be that they’d be with him, don’t you think? None weren’t mentioned at the Last Supper, in the Agony in the Garden, in the Way of the Cross, at Calvary. You’d think they’d be with him or at least braving it out with Mary. Instead, who is at the Cross? Mary, Mary Magdalene, John, some other holy women. I think the reason why ‘his brothers’, if any, weren’t with him at those moments is simply this: they didn’t exist.
Of course, this is from a purely human point of view (not theological at all).
P.S. Thanks for the references, Sandra. Also, look at 1 Timothy 3:14-16 (“the Church of the living God, the pillar and maintstay of the truth.”)
NYCMichelle
OK.
Who were present at Crucifiction?.Who was present at “Last Supper”?Very few of the Apostles(Crucifition) and,regarding “Last Supper” “Agony in The Garden” Mary His Mother (according to Bible)Was not.
Does That mean, She too, “…did not Exist” No surely not. As we know very many of the “Followers ” of Christ were in “Hidding” `Possibly¬¥ also his “Brothers” also??(Petrus certainly was)
Also some thoing to “ponder”on,donn`t you think? Also “…just a thought..”
see ya later.
sandra
PS.
The Verses from Timotheus, I have already read.
Thank you (as I am reading the life of Paulus) Timotheus was also his (modern word )`aeutante¬¥,also helped to write the “Leters” for Him.As he got older,and his eyesight was failing..
Thanks.
sandra
NYC Michelle
“..at the Cross…”
Some would be tempted to asume:- That as `only¬¥ Mary(His Mother),Mary Magdalen,Johannes,(some other Holy Women,not named) were at the Cross this could indicate the `Very promenent¬¥role Mary Magdalen played in His(Jesus) life… Not my Opinion!! But, still worth a thought.
sandra
Hello, Sandra!
Well, I don’t think the comparison works with Mary since we have many other references of her in the Gospel so there’s no doubt about her existence at all.
My point is that there isn’t a single other reference (that I can find) of Jesus having ‘brothers’ except that one line from Luke: “And it was told him: Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee” (Lk 8:20). And, as you can see, from the Douay-Rheims translation, it says ‘brethren’ which is pretty generic. Of course, I’m not a Scripture scholar so can’t pick up on the nuances of the original text. (Anyone willing to provide some light on that?).
It seems to me that if Jesus had ‘siblings’, they’d be more present than they are. One single line doesn’t really convince me. There are many references to Mary, Joseph, the Apostles, other disciples, Lazarus and his two sisters. Even if they were hiding later on, as you mentioned about Peter, we still know more about him than we do about the ‘brothers.’ Also, Fr. John mentions that St. John takes Mary into his home to take care of her after Jesus ascends into heaven. If Jesus had brothers, why wouldn’t they be the ones to take care of her? Anyway, too many things in the Gospel point to the absence of siblings, I think. Of course, we can agree to disagree on this one.
Oh, just read your reference to St. Mary Magdalene. I completely agree that she was one of his close followers! (I may be biased bc she’s one of my favorite saints and, as we were talking about confirmation names earlier, I chose hers
). Like his other close friends, Mary and Martha, the sisters of Lazarus. Thanks for bringing it up!
P.S. In case anyone wants an on-line Bible where you can ‘search’ terms, here’s one provided by Nokia earlier: http://www.drbo.org/
Ciao!
This business about the brothers is a bit of a non-issue.
The only real issue is whether Mary had other children. The Church teaches that she did not and that the people referred to as “brothers” in the new Testament are merely close relatives. Since even in English the word “brothers” has more than one meaning – brothers in arms, the brethren on the Supreme Court, “hey, bro” etc. etc. – the use of this word, especially in a cultural context in which the members of one’s extended family could quite easily be referred to as brothers, should not be terribly problematic. It tells us essentially nothing about the exact relationship of these people with Jesus Christ. (I’ve already mentioned elsewhere some scriptural reasons to maintain that Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus.)
In fact, if you compare the names in Mark 6 with those in Mark 15, it is perfectly clear that the so-called brothers (James and Joses) are not children of the Blessed Virgin Mary, but rather of another Mary.
If some Orthodox Christians have maintained that Joseph was a widower with children, I don’t think that presents great theological problems, but there is simply no reason to think such a thing – unless they are doing it simply to piously “explain away” the so-called “brothers”, which, I would insist, is not necessary.
If such step-brothers were to exist, they would have no biological relationship to Jesus.
As everyone here knows, I’ve contribute my share in the discussion of the brother-sister argument, the perpetual virginity doctrine and Jesus’ possible status as a widower prior to undertaking his mission, but it strikes me now that this is sooo irrelevant. Why is it so important? Would it change Jesus’ message if he had been married? I’m back to square one.
I’m rereading the book that I referred to in the “Other Gals” thread: “Alone of All Her Sex, The Myth and Cult of the Virgin Mary” by Marina Warner (1976). The part I’m reading now is all about the early battles on obscure points of theology e.g. Could Mary rightly be called the “Mother of God” since God is obviously preexisting? (yes).
More to the point, could Jesus be divine if he was born and conceived in the normal manner? (no). So the early Church sort of reverse engineered their way into the doctrine of the Virgin Birth and later perpetual virginity in order to back up the claim of Jesus’ divine status. According to the author this was importnat to the mentality of the time because it was necessary for Jesus’ mother not to be tainted by carnality-the notion of the Immaculate Conception got its start at this time but wasn’t made official until the 19th C-since this epitomized concupiscence if not evil. But if He’s divine, He could have done anything He wanted to. He didn’t have to consider the limitations of the clouded intellect of 4th C people, or our own for that matter, in His actions. So the conventional wisdom is that Jesus couldn’t have had a mother who wasn’t a virgin her whole life. Why not? He’s DIVINE. That trumps everything.
But my point is why are we moderns involving ourselves in some quaint mildly-interesting-from-a-historical-POV issue that obsessed our ancestors? We know that carnality’s not evil, and we just heard the Pope say so in an encyclical. Why not admit we really don’t know as much as we claim about Jesus’ life but that fact does nothing to change what we do know.
Fr. Wauck, my next project is “The Reed of God” as you suggest if the library has it.
By the way, at least one of the “other holy women” at the foot of the Cross is named: Mary of Cleophas (John 19:25), so – at least in this case – Mary Magdalen’s position is far from unique.
I should warn you ahead of time that “The Reed of God” is not a scholarly book. It’s devotional. It has the great advantage of being short too.
In a sense, I agree that we can sometimes become wrapped up in non-essential questions here. But, obviously, the divinity of Jesus is an essential one, and God’s marriage with a particular woman, while not perhaps changing His “message,” would raise huge theological issues.
I wouldn’t take Warner’s ideas as “gospel’… so to speak. The Virgin Birth is hardly a 4th-century concoction to boost the divinity of Jesus. It’s right there in Luke from the get go. And the perpetual virginity is, I would say, implicit, in Mary’s apparent choice of virginity PRIOR to the announcement of the angel (otherwise a betrothed woman’s puzzlement about a predicted pregnancy makes little sense).
Glad to see you wary of the idea that previous generations had a monopoly on “clouded intellects.” As I’ve said before, there was undoubtedly a Platonizing anti-corporeal strain in the culture at the time of the early Christians, but it was not the only one and some Christians fought it, and – viewing the situation very broadly – it was precisely Christianity that “upgraded” the body in Western thought. Our difficulty in perceiving the relevance of these doctrines may have something to do with the culture in which we find ourselves today.
Another thought precipitated by mindless housework: What’s the big deal about virginity anyway? Just because a person hasn’t experienced sexual intercourse doesn’t make him/her chaste. Think teenagers undergoing the onslaught of incoming hormones. Sure thay may be virgins but what about their thoughts?
So even there, those 4th C. folks didn’t get it right. They seemed to have had an overly literal and physical definition of virginity equating it more or less with chastity. Look at their weird obsession with the idea that Mary maintained her virginity even while giving birth. That’s a concept very much tied up with the idea of bodily intergrity and not chastity at the mental level.
Interesting our ancestor’s mindset; Any shift in some obscure point of doctrine was usually accompanied by massive loss of life. Either they just ddn’t get it, or it’s another example of Original Sin in action. Back to sucking dirt…
Quick question and I really have to get back to work–News to me that Mary intended to remain a virgin even though she was betrothed. Why would she even plan to marry if that was the case? Or was Joseph agreeable to this setup?
FA wauck
“…..many examples of meaning (Brothers)..Brethren in Arms…”
Yes, But even in English,one would not say:- “your Brethren are awaiting you, also your “Brother James” ?
may be wrong
but as NRN says enough has been said (writen) on this.
sandra
ARN
One of my preveous Questions (“…was Joseph agreeable to this setup..”
Thanks
sandra
Hello, Sandra
To bring things back into perspective
Why get married at all?(Mary Joseph)…
Remember the “socks” ha ha!
sandra
Hi! ARN
Go to “Lost in Translation”
You two are too much…back to the ‘socks episode.’
I found something interesting–just checking the blog for a second–here. http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=6956
It’s very short, but it may give more ideas.
Ciao!
Michelle
Just `One´more
Johannes.7:3-5.It is asumed by many Church historians that the “brothers” of Jesus were not in his “Faith”
The Greek word for “Cousin” at the time was, anepsi??s. “Brother” adelph??n. “Relation” (Family) syggen??n (Spoken) syngen??n.
In the Catholic Bible that I have (Westminster Text) the words are slighty changed,but in the Biblia Sacra 1956 they are given as near as posible in the original text..
The end..
NYC
Thanks..Ha!
I went to link,its a bit long, for me to do justice to,in short time .I will read later this evening.
(while the Mann of the house, “Sock wearer” waches Brazil in the football World Cup)
sandra
Well, I saw the secret password “socks” and thought it might be my cue!
Sandra(though I know you were kidding)– why get married? For the adventure! you still haven’t told me how your fair went.
I find myself wondering why the debate about Mary’s physical virginity? It’s just never one of the things I think about– it’s enough for me that there are sound theological reasons for it’s being so– it seems fitting, so I really don’t question it. Besides, as you rightly point out, ARN, chastity encompasses so much more. You talk about our teenagers, ARN, and I’m with you there– they need to understand this. If they think it’s only physical virginity, they’ll certainly end up in a muddle. It encompasses their thoughts, words, and other deeds besides just the purely genital. If we always put it positively, as in wanting always to respect the dignity of the other person, of remembering that they are a child of God, and of choosing to save that gift of themselves for marriage, then that’s half the battle– the other half is prayer.
But I digress–I never really thought about Mary’s perpetual physical virginity as a problem– it makes sense to me that God allowed her to remain completely physically intact with the birth of our Lord, and it makes sense that she wouldn’t suffer, either, since suffering in childbirth is the result of original sin. Goodness knows she suffered enough 33 years later, and co-redeemed us with that suffering. Her perpetual virginity, or arguments for and against it, just don’t pre-occupy me.
Why do you come back to this so much, ARN? (I don’t mean to be rude or challenging, I’m just genuinely curious)
NYCMichelle
I have just finished reading the link “Catholic Answers inc.”
While being very interessting,It is also a little `One sided´ The Questions seem `Hand picked´
Apart fom that,I have `follow up´ Questions,I donn`t think it would be fair to air them here.
Maybe there could be a “Blogg within The Blogg” for such `Disputes¬¥..
I suppose that would be asking too much though.
Again thaks very much for the Link
Its “Half time” Brazil Croatia.(1-0) for Brazil..
sandra
Dear Sandra,
I too am off to catch a bit of the second half of the soccer match before going to bed.
All the best. With prayers.
Hi! michelle M
You are right, the State of Mind of our Children and Youth.
That is what should be bothering us at the moment.(In these uncertain Times..)
Too many get “under the wheels”as we say here (kommen unter die R?§der).
Well the Fair went very well, thank you for asking,it was on for 4 days very! strenuous.But worth it in the end.
the Profit´s go towards buying (badly needed) new equipment for the Childrens playground.
We all were badly tired on Sunday evening, but also very pleased.
Thursday is a Holiday here and I have also the Friday off.Soooo a loooong weekend.
I must say I need it.
PS shall we call ourselves T.S.S.S (The Secret Sock Society) New Members Welcome!!
only Joking..(The name I mean)
Same to you Fa.Wauck.
I hope the Match gets better!!
Just in for a second. Glad you read the link, Sandra (yes, a bit ‘one-sided’ in the sense that it’s coming from a certain point of view, of course).
Cheers,
TSSS member #3
(I think you & Michelle M. are #1 & #2, right? Maybe it should be the “TOSS” (The Open-Secret-sock Society).
Well if you guys are going to start a secret society, I’ll have to go back to lurking. I refuse to belong to a secret society! They are so scary. I prefer to be transparent and have no secrets.
Alright, Dianne, we can dissolve TOSS as of now. I’m with you there, no secrets.
Thanks again for the Canadian mass schedules, I’ve already sent them to 2 friends of mine in Montreal.
“Her perpetual virginity, or arguments for and against it, just don‚Äôt pre-occupy me.
Why do you come back to this so much, ARN?”
Because I’m obsessed! Much like those weird 4thC folks.
Seriously, because of the shadow our religious heritage casts on us nowadays. The Church has a lot of ‘splainin’ to do to convince the world they’re not anti-sex, “the anti-corporeal strain” in the early culture that Fr. Wauck points out being exhibit A, and they have truly left all that behind.
Notice I’m not grappling with the intricacies of the doctrine of the Trinity, because it has roughly zero impact on our day-to-day lives. The other does, since it says something about a very important part of our day-to-day lives. But now since I’ve pretty much beaten this thing to death, I won’t bring it up again since it’s just plain silly to join our ancestors in their ignorant preoccupations. So you’re right, it will trouble me no longer as I will regard it as a meaningless vestige of our past.
But that would be TOSSS, you silly!
So NYC Michelle, I guess the offices of treasurer and secretary are up for grabs. Which do you want to be?
We still need a latin inscription for our emblem…oh wait… we don’t have an emblem either.
And not the embarassing one visited on the unwitting United Federation of Teachers whose latin slogan turned out to translate as “Those who can, do; those who can’t, teach; and those who can’t teach, teach Gym” (thanks to Woody Allen)
Interesting posts, Sandra, here and in “lost in translation”. I’m glad I didn’t scare somebody away.
Off with the soccer kid for a contact lense fitting. Til later!
Sorry, ARN, TOSS
Got cut off accidentally.
Meant to say sorry, ARN, but TOSS is dissolved to get rid of anything that smacks of ‘secrecy.’
Hope people have seen the St. Josemaria Mass schedules posted on the “Lost in Translation” thread. Helen also asked for prayers for a baby in Italy… you got ‘em, Helen! Thanks for the heads-up.
Ciao.
ARN,
I would argue that there is almost nothing of Catholic doctrine that doesn’t affect your everyday life. The doctrine of the Trinity has very much to do with why our union with Christ in his mystical body makes us truely, “divinely” lovable to God. This teaching leads to a great deal of hope, and points us in the clear direction of the source of our hope, (Jesus Christ) and why we can hope for so much.
Just a thought.
PTT
ARN– I think the trick is to read it as a positive, rather than a negative (the perpetual virginity thing, I mean)– you’re right, this may have been the problem with some early thinkers, though not with the big ones, and my mind does keep coming back to that wonderful, positive passage that Father left us on the other post, the one from the early Syrian monk on marriage (Our Lady and Ordinary Gals). Since this post is supposed to be “about” Father, I’ll take the opportunity to tell him that reading that passage has made it easier for me to “arise into the smiling day”.
Michelle M
Hi!
You are in many ways right as is ARN..
The thing is (and this is the last comment on the subject,”Perpetual Virgin”
If we are to belive the Scripture and ,or the Catholic Teachings.
They have to make up they`re minds about”It”
If, as Fa.Wauck states Tradstion is what the Teachings rely upon.I on the other hand was taught that the “Inspierd Scripture” is what the C.Curch is about,in the same breath told again that the Blessed Hieronymus,(took it upon himself)re,Translated the Scriptures into Latin in “His” words and his asumptions of what the (original)”writers” ment,and or were trying to tell us.
Not many years later, was not too sure on the “Issue” of Perpetual Virginity.(This is documented.At the Moment cann`t remember the Source)
One tends therefore to Queerie,A)what Is the “Message” B) Who do we Follow C)If the Bible is not the Inspierd Word of God..What is it..???
Then, the Question of Perpetual Virginity becomes, again, an “Issue”.If, someone got it wrong? Who?
Definately ….The End
By the way, NYCMichelle it is.. Beeeautifuly Suuuuuny here ,Garden ofcourse not liking it one bit!
bye for now
sandra
Correction:-”Tradstion”
Should have read “Tradition”
Ok.
I tend to agree with PTT about the Trinity and our daily lives. The identity of God really ought to be important for us, and if it’s not, then I think we have an opportunity to discover more about our identification with Christ (Gal. 2:20), the role of the Holy Spirit in sanctifying us, and our filiation with God the Father – huge areas for exploration, even if, as ARN says, they seem quite remote from the business of daily Christian living. They aren’t… or ought not to be.
If God is Love, it’s because there are three Persons in God.
About physical virginity, I’ll admit that this concern may seem reductively “biological”, and our reaction may well be “Who cares?” On the other hand, it can be viewed from the opposite direction too: we may be the ones who see biology as “merely biology”, as mere corporeality, as if it were detached from the truly personal – whereas a truly incarnational understanding of personhood would recognize the body – and, in this case, its integrity – as essential to human personhood. In other words, the concern of the 4th century may reflect a healthier view of the whole person than the rather gnostic one that prevails today. This is not to deny that there were, back then, gnostic strains of thought that would have viewed the body and its doings as essentially “icky.” I guess what I’m suggesting is that Christianity – then and now – has always had to fight for a proper understanding of its own doctrines, to prevent them from being hijecked and twisted by the surrounding culture. It happens all the time.
As PTT’s wife, I would like to agree with him and Father John concerning the Trinity, but as my daughter noted only this morning: Sometimes you “talk too big for me”. This is the way I see it:
If you try to get to know the Trinity as well as any human being can and as well as you in particular can , then you will have a much deeper understanding about the things that count the most. The more you “get” the Trinity, the more you understand the “goal”. The Trinity is IT, the beginning and the end.
Think about it, God is infinitely perfect; loveable and unselfish. The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit have a love thing going between the three of them that never stops. Between them there is always a total gift of self, nothing is ever held back. It just goes from each to the others and back agaiin and again and again. It is so big that it can’t remain with just them. They ( The Trinity) had to share all this perfect happiness – and so we are created to share in it.
If you like scripture, look at Genesis 1:26 & 27. God (The Trinity) created us in his image AND likeness. We have his image, we look like Him – God the Son. We have His likeness – we are like him – God the Trinity. Look at verse 27, he made us just like Him, The Father from whom the Son comes and the Holy Spirit who comes from both the Father and the Son and us likewise, The Male from whom the female comes and children who come from both. Doesn’t that just expand you mind?
If you believe this and “mull” on it, I think you’ll find ALL the answers you’re looking for. You will understand the true place of male and female and so will understand families (The Trinity on earth) You will understand Our Lady’s perpetual Virginity. Think about it, the Trinity cannot be broken and when God joins two people, male and female in true matrimony, that cannot be broken and they are asked to at least be open to life, even if unknowingly they are baren ( We are created in His likeness – The Trinity. How much sense would it make for Our Lady, Spouse of God to have another spouse? Saint Joseph was great Saint who did what God asked of him, but he was Our Lady’s husband in the same sense that he was Christ’s Father. God(The Trinity) was the true spouse and father.
And of course the complete gift of self – Christ, the baby – we know He did not have to expose Himself like that – think of how vuneral babies are and of course the Christ who did not even hold his earthly life back – death on the cross. If we are created truly in the image and likeness of God – the more we become like, indeed the more we BECOME HIM – the happier we are.
I challenge you – give it a try. Spend time each day with Christ still on earth ( the blessed sacrament) and try each day, with His help, to give more of yourself, to hold less and less back. You will see how much more peace you will have. Listen to the Holy Spirit – He’s very quite – get to know him, follow His indications, you’ll see how much better things work out.
Two more verses: Mark 8:34 -36 & Matthew 11: 29 – 30
I’m off to the Ballet School – its “Peek Week” – little daughter is dying for me to “Peek”. See you all later. I do have something to say about teachers (I said Coach) but I should have asked if you were ever taught something that you could not have learned without a teacher.
I’m reading over what you wrote, Brenda and it’ll take me a little time to absorb it. I was taught as a kid that the Trinity is 3 persons in one God and that it’s a mystery. Since it was a mystery, it seemed pointless for me to give the matter any further thought, which I haven’t until now.
ARN (and everyone else) If you’re interested eventually (though Brenda’s post above is very meaty) there is also something about Our Blessed mother posted on one of our canadian opus dei bloggers: http://www.davidmonique.blogspot.com/
oops– I meant “posted by” not “posted on”– didn’t mean to make it sound like she’s wearing it on a t-shirt!
For those who prefer French, the blog I mentioned above also has a French version (we’re officially bilingual here in Canada): http://www.moniquedavid.blogspot.com/
“Since it was a mystery, it seemed pointless for me to give the matter any further thought, which I haven‚Äôt until now.”
ARN, I guess Brenda’s point (correct me if I’m wrong, Brenda) was that the mystery of the Trinity still allows us enough ‘info’ to ponder and pray about, in an attempt to see how to ‘live out’ that love found in God. A bit like Bach perhaps, or whatever music you want: even if you don’t can’t read notes, you can still appreciate the music (the music would be a sort of ‘mystery’ to you in that sense). Now if you can read music or play an instrument, although you can’t compose music like Bach did, you can appreciate the point/counterpoint, the melodies weaving together, MUCH more than someone’s who can’t.
That is a really inane example (sorry, can’t think of a better image…), but in the same sense, the more we ponder the mystery, the more we can appreciate God’s goodness. For sure, we will never “understand” God but we can try to get to know him better, in our own humble way…
Ciao everyone–have a good weekend!
(Brenda, I stole the ‘music lessons’ analogy from you…thanks for your ‘visual’ way of explaining things. Cheers.)
That O.K. with me! I like music.
Father John,
I’ve read this blog with interest and I’d like to take us back to the theme… Who am I, which means to me, who am I as a practicing member of Opus De?. I am interested in Opus Dei and its members, like you, and want to be objective. Early in the blog we are directed to the ODAN site (http://www.odan.org/what_is_opus_dei.htm) to find out “the truth” about Opus Dei. That very slick site depicts Opus Dei in a way we’re used to hearing about Scientology: on the surface very warm and loving but underneath, full of deception, greed and manipulation. The site of course prints everything negative it can find on Opus Dei and is having a heyday with the Dan Brown book. One blog contributor, Louisa, said that the testimonies of ex and disaffected Opus Dei members “put the record straight”. Does it?
So can we get you to comment on why the hate and vitriolic distemper? The site says it was created in 1991 so it’s not just piling on in the current hysteria over Opus Dei fanned by Brown. The site says that these practice make Opus Dei offensive:
1. Corporal mortification (thinks it’s way too excessive and brutal)
2. Aggressive recruitment/undue pressure to join
3. Lack of informed consent and control environment
4. Alimentation from families
The last 3 sound very cultish indeed and with the accusation of the “index of forbidden books” make Opus Dei seem very much in the game of mind control over its young members.
What is your perspective? And I do realize that any person or group that is doing good is invariably going to have enemies.
Rich
oops… #4 Alienation from families
Good Morning Rich,
Please read #75, June 11 at 6:02 p.m. in Lost in Translation. Father Wauck will make an appearance here I’m sure when he can. In the meantime, I have a few things to say about your points. I’m off to Mass now. Catch you when I get back. Take a look at St. John: 15: 18-20
Dear Rich,
Maybe I should put up a post dealing directly with these issues, but very briefly…
The corporal mortification that members of Opus Dei are encouraged to practice consists, above all, in small acts of self-denial throughout the day. We’re talking about things that are left up to everyone’s spontaneous initiative: skipping dessert. getting out of bed on time, sitting up straight, not having that second glass of wine… “picking up one’s daily cross” in a thousand and one ways every single day, some deliberately chosen, some simply accepted on the fly. This is the characteristically “Opus Dei” approach to mortification.
Some members also use the now-famous cilice and discpline, but most do not. It is not something central to the vocation to Opus Dei, nor is it unique to members of Opus Dei. There are religious congregations in which all the members use these means of penance, but in Opus Dei it is more of the exception than the rule. Why Opus Dei has been singled out for attention on this point is a bit of a mystery (no one seems too concerned about Padre Pio or Mother Teresa doing the same things). In any case, while this sort of penance, as practiced in Opus Dei, is uncomfortable, it is utterly harmless. The gory stuff in the Da Vinci Code is not simply exaggerated; it is prohibited in Opus Dei.
I think it was quite telling that, in the Time magazine article on Opus Dei, a former member was asked about the cilice and discipline, and her response was “Oh, that was nothing.” She felt that the work schedule was far more difficult.
Regarding your other questions, you might want to look at the post on “The Cloistered Life of Numeraries” in which I tell my own story. You’ll notice that virtually all of my nieces and nephews went to schools run by members of Opus Dei (they had years of daily contact with the supposedly “aggressive recruiters” of Opus Dei), and out of 32 nieces and nephews only two joined Opus Dei – and only one of them while in that “Opus Dei environment”.
Keep in mind that the vast majority of members of Opus Dei are parents. To say that Opus Dei is interested in alienating people from their families simply makes no sense. Opus Dei exists, above all, in families: first my mother, then me, then my father…. where is the alienation here?
Obviously, people who join Opus Dei as celibate numeraries are, in any important sense, forming a family of their own – like people who grow up and get married. Do young people grow up, leave home and form families of their own? Of course they do. Does this change the amount of time they spend with their parents? Of course it does. But do the responsibilities one acquires through marriage alienate one from one’s family? Of course not. The people who complain about seeing less of the children after they join Opus Dei would probably have no complaints if that same child got married, or moved to work in another country or joined a cloistered convent or a missionary order – decisions which might well involve much greater separation.
Furthermore, it is quite common that parents discover their own vocation to Opus Dei through the vocations of their children. The common vocation becomes an additional bond between parents and children.
As has been mentioned elsewhere on the blog, a person must request, sometimes repeatedly to join Opus Dei. Frequently the first time someone asks they are told to think and pray about it some more. Before being admitted they are giving lengthy explanations of all the apsects of the vocation and encouraged to ask all the questions they want, to make sure they know exactly what they’re doing. They are asked explicitly whether they are doing this of their own free will. If someone joins Opus Dei without knowing what’s involved, that’s a sign that there was some mistake along the way, but this is in the interest neither of Opus Dei nor of the potential member, and everything possible is done to avoid it.
Rich– I suggest you also check out comment number 3 under the post “Canadian documaentary on Opus Dei”.
Hey Brenda,
Thanks for the insights in your June 11th post to “Lost in Translation” and the verses from John, which I sure enough figured to be what we all know is true: The good will always be hounded by evil.
Thanks, Father,
for taking the time to share your experience and your perceptions for all of us who are genuinely interested in finding out Who You Are, i.e., what Opus Dei is about. I did check out the blogs below, including “The Cloistered Life of Numeraries.” Hardly weird at all for those sincere in Christ. And I appreciate your attempt to understand why Opus Dei is sometimes maligned, as those who do try to live as disciples of Christ without fanfare are suspected of being perhaps orchestrated and manipulated subversives when that’s hardly the case
ODAN flaunts stories of those who tried Opus Dei and left disaffected. OK, it just wasn’t for them, and I sense a need to blame others for the failed experience. Also there may indeed be some Opus Dei groups that have in the past or do now go overboard in their recruiting and control. Those groups, if they exist today, perhaps need some better oversight from the bishop… because as described by ODAN, those groups are mean spirited and insecure in their faith and give all of Opus Dei a black eye. I sense that those Opus Dei groups, if they exist, are more the exception to the prelature than the rule..
So, as an outsider, if I have to choose, looking at the evidence and weighing in my own life experiences, at this point I choose Father John’s rendition of Who He Is as more typical of Opus Dei… people devoted to Christ living and working in the world and sharing common ideals and supporting each other in their life missions, understanding no one is perfect and everyone stumbles. ODAN appears to be upset because Opus Dei did not eliminate human frailty in its membership/governance and therefore feels compelled to tout that frailty, blind and unable to admit to the overwhelming good done by Opus Dei in the world.
Michelle,
Thanks! Yes I did take note of how Opus Dei can be twisted and attacked by those who misunderstand it or those who suspect maliciousness in anything that is mostly good!
And all of you thanks for sharing your perceptions. Dan Brown may have done a good thing, for I doubt that we would all be here discussing these things were it not for his attempt to change early Christian history and confuse modern Christians with his sensational novel. In the face of all that, all Christians should be attempting to seek and explain truth to weaker brothers and sisters sucked in by the deception couched in a murder mystery. These blogs work well on that behalf!
Rich
Rich,
Glad to hear from you, again. My husband has been working on an interesting point of view on this topic. Be sure to check back. I’ve been reading it, and helping to edit and I think it might be very helpful.
Dear Rich.
Maybe you would aslo like to read:-Paulus Letters to the Corinthians.(Answers to questions: maarriage and celibacy:-
It could possibly `answer¬¥your question:”Alienation from Families” 1.Corinthians 7:-12. (most important)7: 1.6-12,13. The act of celibacy is optional not compulsory!!
Regarding Scientology: the word in its self answers any queeries:- comes from `science-fiction´ used in the entertainment business (Films, books). The beleif in, ET´s and future,yet undisscoverd galaxis. `scientlogy´ where is the `logic´?? In no way to be compaired with Opus Dei.
good to have you on the `blogg
Any “group”, good or bad has their `enemies¬¥!!
Good to have you on the `blogg´
best regards
Another very important verse to rember is 1Corinthians 4:12,13
“and we toil, working with our own hands .We are reviled and we bless, we are persecuted and we endure,we are defamed and we answer softly;we have become as the refuse of the world, the offscouring of all men,even to this hour.
That says it all I think..
Well
Good night every body,it was along week end .I hope I can get some sleep!!
see you all tomorrow
God bless
sandra
Oh, Sandra– thanks for the quote from Corinthians!
Rich, thank you for your kind response to my post. Also, if you are interested, there are some testimonials from ex-members of Opus Dei on http://www.opusdeiblogs.org — quite eye-opening!
Thank you Sandra,
That quote is a blessing.
Good Night
Brenda,
Looking forward to the perspectives of your hubby. Will he be talking about why Opus Dei is twisted so to become a monster society in the minds of some?
Sandra,
Thanks for the scriptures. We sometimes forget about those!
I know now that it is silly to compare Opus Dei to Scientology or the Moonies, but, man, if ODAN were the only source for folks, that’s the type of freak show we would conclude it to be!
Michelle,
I appreciate the reference to the “Discovering New Voices” site. I don’t see any testimonials about people’s fortunes being confiscated or intimidating browbeatings or violation of rights or forced alienations. All them folks seem pretty confident and secure in their faith and their willingness to share that faith with love in their hearts and grateful to be part of a kindred group with the same compassionate mission. Yes, Michelle, quite eye opening after ODAN!! BTW, Brenda the supernumerary, that’s not our Brenda is it?
Brenda, is Rich right?
(Hope your anniversary was wonderful–and happy father’s day to PTT!)
Hello Fr. John, I feel an escpecially strong calling to Opus Dei, but I have yet to get information from them thru their website. I know they are very busy, but is there another outlet. I find myself searching for God in my daily life so much and defending Opus Dei despite the DaVinci Code movie.
Thank you for your time.
God Bless,
Dave Hagan
Louisville, KY
Good morning Dave,
I’m going to look up the number for an Opus Priest nearest to you. Be back as soom as I can. Have a great day!
Dave,
My husband is looking in to this for you. Sit tight. In the meantime, have you seen this site?
http://www.opusdeiblogs.org/
Rich– I never noticed there was a Brenda on there! We’ll have to ask her…. Brenda?
Moi? Do I sound like the kind of person who would “heave an orange” at her husband? Not Sure? Stay tuned to the Opus Dei Bogs. A clue pointing to the answer to your question might show up on the site later today! A hidden message lies secretely buried in an upcoming “Latest Additions” post.
WAit a minute, brenda… I’m recalling all your references to music……
Brenda, you are too much. This is great though… will remind everybody to keep an eye on http://www.opusdeiblogs.org for updates.
Also, in case y’all are interested, you can get a daily email message from the official Opus Dei webpage. Just click here, scroll down to “Receive messages by email” and type in your email address. Good stuff, that.
http://www.opusdei.us/sec.php?s=310
Ciao!
Ah Hah! Now we know Brenda’s been reading The Da Vinci Code (clues and hidden messages)!!!
PS you have a beautiful smile!!!
Brenda
Could “Hidden messages,clues,or even codes” possibily be Hidden,in MichelleM.¬¥s Basket of non-matching socks?
Come to think of it. MichelleM.thats why we have all those “ODDones”.
They´ve been `decoded´away!!But by whom??
Sandra– the basket of socks in my laundry room is nowhere NEAR being decoded (sigh….)
All right. I give up. Can someone explain what is it with the socks? Or must us newcomers follow the clues??
(Rich, you missed a rather essential post! Just kidding–somewhere in this ever-expanding blog there was a post about socks that had to do with …. I can’t recall what! Ladies, someone with a better memory than I can pick up from here. Unless, of course, this is going to be a DVC spin-off. The quest for the missing footwear-accessories.)
Brenda, can’t wait for your ‘Recent additions” at the http://www.opusdeiblogs.org site. Good things come to those who wait, I guess. Or, as one of my friend’s cell phone messages says: Hi, patience is a virtue. Don’t worry, I’ll get back to you. I promise!” Joking aside, thanks for the great testimonial on the other blog and fabulous photo.
Dear Fr. Wauck, I enjoyed reading your blogs on the Da Vinci Code, and I am glad that you have taken the time to refute Brown’s anti-gospel. It so happens that I have written at great length on the topic myself – it covers material that no one else has covered, and in a manner that is uniquely different. Can I send it to you as an e-mail attachment for your evaluation? Thanks, Francis
Dave,
If the email address you left when you posted works, you should be getting an email in the next day or so.
PTT
Oops, Rich, we weren’t meaning to be MYSTERIOUS! Check out the post “Our Lady and Ordinary Gals”. If you go to the June 5, 5:29 post you’ll see the beginnings of the sock joke– a few of us ordinary gals were joking about laundry, socks, etc. then started joking about secret sock codes to make fun of the Davinci Code! some others chimed in, even Fr. John put in his 2 cents. It still comes up from time to time…
But later on in the comments Father John posted a wonderful passage from a 5th century monk on Christian marriage— I highly recommend reading that post. It’ll knock your socks off!
Thanks, Michelle…. I see you started it!!! It’s neat to see everyone having fun, picking up the thread, throwing the socks around, no one darning anything and enjoying the camaraderie exploring Christianity together. A lot of good hearted kindred spirits here though not everyone thinks the same.
Thanks for including me. I’ll be out of town for a while but hope to be back on late next week!
In this months Catholic Digest there is an article titles “The Saint in my Sock Drawer”. It made me think of you gals.
Dear Francis,
By all means, send me your writing on the Da Vinci Code by email attachment. You can use this address:
info@davincicode-opusdei.com
Dear Fr. John,
I came across your interesting blog tonight and as I went through the comments I found out that there are those who treated the painting of Leonardo as ultimate representation of the last supper which it is not. They seem to forget that it was painted more than fifteen centuries after it supposedly happened. Leonardo was not present that evening meal nor was it written in the bible that The Christ was right there at the center between the apostles. It is a painting wherein the artist uses his imagination to give a good visual composition so as to satisfy the client who commisioned the painting, in this case, the church in Turin. Nobody will ever know how they sat in that upstairs room. But we know it happened because it was written about in the gospels. In truth, we don’t even know what all of them looked like. It is our faith in the gospels that makes the dicussion irrelevant. If we believe that is. And I hope that those who believe in The Christ will not raise questions about His Humanity and Divinity.It is either you believe or you don’t. If the members of Opus Dei are devout followers of its rule then so be it. One does not question. One just does.
You are a very patient man for allowing these comments and thank you for that.
By the way, in the Philippines, there’s also a member of the Opus Dei who’s an albino. One of the very intelligent person I know. There’s a website I’ve ran across, theworkofgod.org, which I would like to recommend to these writers. Thank you and God bless all of you.
Dear Betty Dy-Dela Fuente
You write.-”….The artist uses his imagination…..(further)to satisfy his client who commisioned the painting,in this case the Church in Turin..”
I am more or less your opinion on the other matters,but must disagree on those “….”.
As no Artist (not even a Leonardo Da Vinci) would be allowed to use his imagination ,but would be given exact instructions from his client.Further the Church in Turin was not “his cleint” Duke Ludovico Sforzs,of Milan commissioned him to paint The Last Supper while he (leonardo) was modelling a piece of worldly glory at the same time in the citadel of milan.(a coolossal equestrian statue of The Duke Ludovico.
The Fresco by Da Vinci was painted in the refectory of the now disused Dominican convent of Santa Maria della Grazie,Milan.
I hope you do not take this as criticism.It is not ment as such.The reason why I write this,is because some one will and maybe not quite with much `good¬¥intent.”Question”
Then as for myself,I do,as that, is also requested of us (search for the “Thruth”) in the Holy Scriptures.
with kind regards
sandra. from Germany.
Correction should have read:-
“Sforza” not Sforzs..and “colossal” not coolossal
sorry..
Dearest Sandra, I noticed my mistake in typing in Turin instead of Milan yesterday.It’s good you noticed. Sometimes the mind and the fingers do not coordinate. I just finished reading an item about The Shroud of Turin which was also debated on. That maybe was the reason why I typed in Turin instead of Milan. My posit is the same, for those who believe no explanation is needed. Nobody present at the supper was alive when the Lasr Supper was painted so we will never know who sat where. So when I said Leonardo used his imagination to pose his characters according to what was pleasing to the viewer and to himself, I’m saying that as an artist. He may have indeed added symbols only known to himself but he’s not here anymore to enlighten us and we can only guess. And no its not criticism to me. At least I know that you read my piece. Thanks.
Dear Betty D.D.F
I know what you mean “Mind runs away ahead of the Finger”(one in my case)
Did you know that Duke Forza wanted Leonardo to put his features on the face of Jesus,and those of his best enemy (Borgia) on that of Judas? (There is a slight resemblence..)
Da Vinci had to change the features on both at least 5 times.
nice to have you on board..visit the other posts ie¬¥”A Message from Malta” lots of nice interessting people
bye for now
sandra
Even better:-
“Lost in translation 3:The real secret of Opus Dei”
sandra
Dear Sandra,
There’s also a story about Leonardo using the same model for The Christ and Judas in the LAst Supper. The man posed as model for Jesus when he was young and then a long time after becoming a wordly character, he was asked to pose again. This time as the traitor, Judas, because his facial features have turned from being innocent to wordly.. This is of course written as stories for children to encourage them to be upright and holy. That was how they go about it was when I was young. Thanks for the tips.
Dear Fr. John:
Thanks for the great website. I’m trying to organize a conference for diocesan priests (I”m an associate of the sss+). We want to help priest develop the spirit of order, time-management … everything to do with human formation. We would like to invite Joaquin Navarro-Valls. Do you know how I can get in touch with him? We also need a bishop who could be a presenter on the topic. Do you have any leads? Anything you provide would be a great help.
Fr. Paul Nicholson
Listowel, Ontario,
Canada
Buon luogo, congratulazioni, il mio amico!
I believe and have proof that the lady in the painting called The Mona Lisa is MARY, found on painting discovered 2005, by Michael W. Domoretsky U.S.A.
I aslo believe the name of the person in the Last Supper to christ right is Mary , mother of Christ, my proof.
http://www.lionardofromvinci.com
More discoveries on da Vinci”s perpendicular reverse mirror image process. The Virgin and Child with St. Anne and the Infant St. John by mirroring the image on the right side of the drawing I have found the All Seeing Eye with Angel, the Chalice and the Masonic Symbol/compass and square , for the first time in 500 years a new discovered dimention within Leonardo da Vinci’s master mind. http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/gallery2.html
The discovery od the Chalice for the first time in 500 year, yes through the perpendicular reverse mirror image I have come to understant that the Mona Lisa painting is three paintings in one using this process the right and let side are also pictures,please take a look . http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/mirrorimage.html
http://www.lionardofromvinci.com
Dear Fr John
Thank you for all your info on Opus Dei, where you tell it like it is here on your blog. I am just back from my first visit to Rome and I spent a wonderful couple of hours by and around St Josemaria’s tomb, including the 8.30 mass in Latin. It really was a highlight of my trip. I asked the guy with ginger hair from Ohio to tell you a fan had come! Anyway that was me.
Best wishes and God bless.
Nina
Dear Fr. John:
I am a new convert to the RC Faith and receive spiritual formation from OD in San Francisco. It’s great to see you taking to the web! I pray for the Work every day — y’all have helped me become a faithful Catholic (the “norms”) and I in turn am helping others. Thanks so much!
NSF
I’m delighted to hear that you enjoyed your visit to St. Josemaria’s tomb, Nina. The “guy with ginger hair” did mention to me that a reader of the blog had stopped by that day. Sorry I wasn’t around at the time. Please pray for Opus Dei and the people who read this blog.
NSF, please keep those prayers coming. I’ll be praying that you help many people discover the faith, if they don’t already know it, or appreciate it and live it better, if they do.
Today, as the pope returns to Rome, is a great day to pray especially for the Holy Father and the Church in Latin America.
Hi Fr John,
I am Ciar?°n form Ireland, met you during the UNIV conference in a get together, which was great. Have you decided what you are going to do with the site now as the Da Vinci code is now almost forgotten about?
Slan (Irish for bye)
Ciar?°n
have you ever herd of the treasure trove list of tayopa .
a copy can be found in the Jim haydock book called the The lost jesuit gold of the sierra madre..
why is it of interest you ask .
2 silver chalices
12 solid gold cups
6 gold plates made from the jesus maria
12 solid gold cups
6 gold plates made from cristo
2 large commuion plates of gold
IMHO you are looking at the last super table setting , taken from the temple mount by the templars around 1307 …
note the wording …. jesus maria .. maria in latin is mary . jesus mary . not his mother …maria…
cristo in latin means christ …
6 plates from christ and 6 plates from jesus maria …jesus maria was at the last super ….!
note 2 silver cups
2 large communion plates
this is a setting for 12 people and 2 host…
May 1st of 2008, i will make the findings of my expedition 3 public ..IMHO i have found the treasure of the temple mount …do you want to be sure … go look at the peralta stones .. IMHO they were broken off tablets that were taken from the temple mount ,and used to make the peralta stones …. i beleive the templar were massacred by tribial indains of the area and the treasure is still there ….i do not value gold or silver …
but all the tablets from the temple mount well tell the true history and who is wrong and who is lieing …may god have mercy on their souls because i well not …
John ?
Hello, nice post. Bookmark it.
sorry , its your liver ,john … to bad , i wanted to get to know you , its Ok, i will see you again …
Hello, nice post. Bookmark it.
I saw you on the news today complaining about Hanks & Howard. I had to tell you about one of your own Catholic Churches doing something sleazy to make money. Father Richard McCabe former head of Emmaus Catholic Church in Lakeway , TX put up a 150 foot tall cell phone tower in the shape of a cross just to make money for his parish. Why? because he spent over $12,000,000 building a ego monument of a new church for himself and Bishop Gregory Aymand was fuming about the debt for this parish.
I used to be a reader at mass at Emmaus and since that tower went up several years ago my family and I quit the Catholic Church because it did a sleazy thing because it was desperate to make money.
So lets see if you have the courage to respond to me email. I recall that Jesus threw the money changers out of the temple, so why is this OK?
The most disturbing part of this is that the church is in Lakeway and my neighborhood is in The Village of The Hills. This vile priest put the cell phone tower on the last inches of land in Lakeway and the neighbors had no notice it was coming and came home one day to find this in their backyard.
Is this something your WWJD would approve of?
Do you feel proud about this?
BTW I went to Catholic elementary school, high school and college and this vile act by Emmaus Catholic Church made me so mad. I reported it to the Nuncio in Rome and he did nit give one hoot about me . That leads me to believe that Rome also supports doing whatever you can to gee t money for your parish.
I really want to see if you have what it takes to respond to me.
I am also forwarding this email to the national media.
I would like for you to respond to me so that i can email the photos of this vile act.
Did Jesus die on the cross so that a priest could whore himself for money??????
chris from texas,
it sounds like you are judging the entire Church by one man’s actions… Does it make you wonder if people ever judge your entire country, or your entire religion, based on your actions? That’s an awful lot of responsibility to put on one person, don’t you think? Kind of paves the way for prejudice.
I know that there are a lot of not so holy priests out there… yet, there are also a lot of very holy priests out there, as well.
The Catholic Church was instituted by Christ, and as such it has protections against certain things – but still, its members are human and as such, are subject to the fallen nature of humanity. We are sinners striving to become saints, not saints by association.
Of course Rome wouldn’t respond condemning or supporting the actions of one parish priest, do you think that all they have to do up there is respond to your – or my – letters? Their lack of response could simply mean that your letter wasn’t read by the right person – perhaps you ignored the normal format for protesting something within the Church, but is that their fault or yours? If you send a letter to the president of the United States, do you expect a personal response or assume that he disagrees with your letter? Rome is even busier than Washington, trust me.
Let’s pray for the full conversion of Dan Brown to Catholic faith. That is what all Catholics should do since he claims that he is a Christian.
I had done that all my wife from a strong protestant faith. I never forced her. She was converted last years to Catholic at her own request after 15 years of marriage.