Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Bible Review-CSS Study Bible

Gail Buckley, Founder and Executive Director of Catholic Scripture Study International, the world’s fastest-growing Catholic Bible study program, sent me a copy of her CSS Study Bible to review and pass around to the girls in the St Gianna Vocation to Motherhood Group at my house on Tuesday mornings so they can check it out. Before I say anything else, let me just say that talking to Gail was an absolute pleasure... she has a tangible love for God's Word that shines through her personality, and as I was trying to book her to speak at my Catholic Women's group here in Fayetteville with very few resources, she was more than accomodating and helpful. I am truly encouraged by her attitude, her kindness, and her completely amazing work. She's an inspiration!
I have been anxiously awaiting the release of the COMPLETE Scott Hahn Study Bible, and getting discouraged with the wait. I looked around to see if there were any other attempts at creating an orthodox study bible for Roman Catholics that made understanding Scripture more accessible, and randomly found this little gem in my favorite Bible publishing house, no less..... St Benedict Press/Tan Books.
I was intregued! Though I hadn't heard much about it in Catholic Bible blogs (why not? Anybody know??), here was a bible that promised to combine my two favorite elements: Orthodox, Catholic Commentary from a reputable source and the Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition of the Bible. I was ecstatic to check it out, and I am still elated even though it's about two months later (the Bible arrived just before my vacation and I wasn't able to do the review while I was gone.)  Of course, I read it every day on my vacation, used it to back up a point I was making in a dialogue with a French priest we had over, and have since passed it around to the girls in my Bible Study, who all seemed excited to check it out themselves. So as promised, here is my review of the St Benedict Press / Catholic Scripture Study International Bible.

First, the Cover and Design: 
Photobucket

I absolutely LOVE the Look of this bible. It is an exact replica of the St Benedict Press LARGE Print RSV with a redesigned cover. I was sad to see my St Benedict cross go on the cover, but at the same time, I love the CSS Logo and there's just something so incredibly AWESOME about having a Bible that says "tradition/scripture/magisterium" right on the cover. It has the thick, heavy look of lots of protestant study Bibles out there which appeals to me (I dig the black leather look. Some do not. ) It also has three different colored ribbons, which make it marvelous to use because you definitely NEED about three ribbons to do any kind of "studying" in a Bible (ie, flipping between passages, etc.) The leather on the cover is thinner and less substantial than the leather on the plain edition of the RSV sold through Benedict Press, but it is certainly nice and will stand up to a lot of wear.

Photobucket

Another thing I like is the size. It's BIG, which I wanted, but not so big that you need two hands to read it all the time, which means I can still read it in bed. Like! I also think St Benedict Press does such an amazing job with the bookbinding and all that. It lays pretty flat and is super flexible, which I LOVE in a Bible (can't stand stiff Bibles, which is why I am sad about the Baronius Press Douay Rheims.) On the other hand, it's not so flexible that you worry it's going to fall apart within a week of heavy use. This is a "lifetime" Bible investment. Some of us will wear it out in a few years, but you know what I mean. It is very good quality. Don't mind the wavy bits in the pictures here, I forgot to take out all the "add in" sheets I carry around everywhere when I took the pictures, and the wavy pages are actually not part of this Bible. 

Next, the features: 
Photobucket

As I said before, this bible is an exact replica of the St Benedict Press Large Print RSV-CE, with the addition of a series of glossy inserts on various topics ranging from apologetics to lenten traditions. These inserts are very informative, orthodox, and helpful. I used to carry around a two page printout I call the Apologetics Cheat Sheet on which I had printed all the scripture references for the various Catholic doctrines we must always defend.... it's amazingly brilliant that this bible includes that (FOR ONCE  a Bible that is as thorough as it SHOULD be in my eyes!) and I can now stop carrying around my nasty old laminated sheet. Yay! 
I also used to carry around various sheets with reference to the Church's teachings on specific topics, and they are ALL present here in this Bible, which is wonderful and very freeing for me. For once I feel like the people who designed this Bible are people who have the same concerns that I do: understanding the Faith, defending the faith, and hearing from God for my personal life. In that order. And they aren't afraid to make some enemies.... (hooray!) the inserts contain topics that address hell, the myth of overpopulation and the culture of death, and the errors of protestant biblical interpretation.

Photobucket

The last several pages are actually an amazing reference tool similar to the concordances we are used to seeing in Protestant Bibles. They contain an alphabetical list of subjects and their corresponding locations in scripture. The topics are practical in nature and applicable in daily life. It is a GIFT to Catholics everywhere, especially Catholics who are poorly catechized or don't really KNOW their Bibles, to be able to have such an easy reference table without having to make it oneself. I love this feature.

Photobucket

And lastly, the page design itself: 
Photobucket
Large print, beautiful typeface, very readable. I admit, I really want to have the footnotes in the text, but they aren't-- they are in the back of each testament. And they are sparse. Which is fine, as long as they are in there, but since the notes are just the regular RSV notes with nothing added, which was kind of a bummer. I had hoped the guys at CSS would have included additional notes to help us add meaning to the text bit by bit. At the same time, I find that since the RSV doesn't have footnotes, I'm not tempted to READ them instead of the text, which means that A) I read more scripture and B) I'm not as influenced by the notes in my reading since they aren't in my face. So even though it's less esthetically pleasing -- to me-- to have JUST the text without any breaks for notes, it's actually more profitable for my bible reading time.
The pages are thin.... I include some of the pages on which I have made notes so you can see that pen bleeds through pretty good. I don't personally care about that but many of you bible snobs out there (tee hee) will likely have a fit if you buy a bible that has pages this thin. Personally, I actually LIKE that it shows through... helps me to feel like I'm accomplishing some work in my daily Bible study. :D

A few notes on the translation: 
Many people wonder why we might read an RSV instead of the NAB, which is the version of the Bible selected and promoted by the United States Catholic Bishops for American Catholics. That alone might make people shy away from the RSV-CE, but let me reassure you: the Vatican ONLY uses the RSV-CE when publishing scripture quotations in English.
The RSV-CE is NOT the 2nd Edition revision of the RSV-CE. Therefore the text retains SOME of the thees and thous without overdoing it and rendering it unreadable to the average modern reader. However, it also retains some of it's eceumenical nature which has been weeded out in the RSVCE SECOND Edition. 
I absolutely love the RSV, which I think is more readable than the Douay Rheims but far closer to the DR's "perfect" translation than the absolutely frustrating New American Bible, which contains notes using the historical-critical method that absolutely boggle the Orthodox Catholic mind.  (and not in a good way.) I also love that the RSV retains much of the original style we have come to love... in psalm 23, for example, we don't "dwell in the house of the Lord for years to come" as we did in the New American Bible. We dwell in the house of the Lord FOREVER. As it was written. (why the NAB does this is beyond me. I've lost enough sleep over it and am not even going to bother ranting... but do know that -- praise God-- the NAB seems to be doing a little better with the release of the NABRE (revised NAB) in which we, for example, now "dwell in the house of the Lord for endless days.")
Anyways, all this to say that like any translation, the RSV has it's bad points, but to me the good outweighs the bad... if only they would get some more thorough footnotes going it would be hands down the ideal Bible Version.

So that's it.... the CSS Study Bible is incredible, as perfect a Catholic Study Bible is going to get until we are able to have some textual notes that don't make us cringe and that actually contain the Old Testament, which is, you know, half the story. I am so thankful for CSS putting this Bible together and I will be passing it around to everyone I know and making it my every day Bible. Go ahead and pick yourself up a copy. You will be so glad! 

Those of you who are local will probably get to hear all about how it came to be this year when we finally get Gail to come out and speak. I know you're going to love it. 
If you have any questions about this Bible, please feel free to comment below. I don't make taking additional pictures and what not if you need them. Thanks!

ADDITION: In an email this morning, Gail pointed out a few things that I thought should be included. First, she explained that she thinks of this bible as a reference Bible and not a Study Bible, and upon reflection I can definitely see that calling it a reference Bible is the optimal explanation.... it contains all of the bits and pieces many of us carry around in our bibles, but doesn't contain all of the notes that would be required to dig into the actual text line by line.
She also mentioned the origin of the illustrations, which I forgot to mention. They are beautiful!! They came from a monk in Europe who loves to take pictures of stained glass windows. It is so refreshing to own a bible that doesn't have pictures of Jesus that look like they walked off the walls of some 1970s CCD class. These are pictures of stained glass windows that are uplifting, beautiful, and calming. Soul-stirring. and the rest of the design of the Bible (borders, etc) on the notes pages go along with the illustrations perfectly.
Enjoy this Bible..... from my discussions with her and just from having used the thing myself for a couple of months now, I can see what a beautiful labor of love it really is.

Wordless Wednesday--Hurricane Irene Sunsets

Pre-Irene

Post Irene


Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Story of a revert.

Found this video this morning through the CLAA forums.... this man's family is schooling their children using the CLAA and he was featured on EWTN recently.
I initally watched it out if interest based on my interactions with his wife on the forums, but really enjoyed hearing about his conversion experiences and loved the insights. Thought you might like it too.

Tasty Tuesdays- Pompe a L'huile (Bread from Provence)

La Pompe a L'huile is a specialty from my neck of the woods. Aside from making a great teatime treat, a perfect breakfast food or an easy desert when served with delicious jams or fruit.... it is a staple on the Provencal Christmas Table, and it would be unthinkable not to have one there. What is it? Think of it as a brioche-type bread... kinda like Challah. It's name means "pumped with oil" (oh yes, it's true!) because it's MADE with olive oil! Remember to tear the bread into pieces—tradition says that cutting it might sever your friendship with the people at the table.

So let's get started. :)



Ingredients:
1 cup warm water
2 packages of yeast
1/2 cup sugar
2/3 cup olive oil
1 egg, beaten
1 teaspoon salt
3 tablespoons orange flower water
3 1/2 to 4 cups all purpose flour

Dissolve the yeast in the warm water. Stir in the sugar, olive oil, egg, salt and orange flower water. Stir in 2 cups of the flour and mix well. Add the next 1 1/2 cups flour, 1/2 cup at a time to form a stiff dough.

Knead the dough for five to ten minutes until smooth, adding the final 1/2 cup flour as needed to keep it from sticking. Place the kneaded dough in a lightly oiled bowl and cover with a clean dish towel. Allow dough to rise until double in size - about two hours.

Punch dough down and spread in a large oval shape on a greased baking sheet. The dough should be about 1/2 inch thick all around. Using a knife, cut seven large slits in the dough and separate them into seven holes each several inches wide (without tearing through to the edges of the bread). Allow dough to rise another hour.

Bake in 375 degrees Fahrenheit oven for 15 to 20 minutes.

An alternative, easier recipe can be seen below:

Ingredients
3 3⁄4 cups flour
1⁄3 cup plus 1 tbsp. sugar
1 7-gram package active dry yeast
3⁄4 cup plus 1 tbsp. extra-virgin olive oil
2 tsp. salt

1. Make a poolish: Put 1 1⁄2 cups of the flour, sugar, yeast, and 1 cup warm water into a large bowl and stir well with a wooden spoon to combine. Let the mixture sit in a warm spot until bubbly, about 30 minutes.

2. Add remaining 2 1⁄4 cups flour, 3⁄4 cup of the oil, and salt to the poolish and stir until a dough forms. Turn the dough out onto a lightly floured surface and knead until smooth and elastic, 5–7 minutes. Grease a large clean bowl with the remaining 1 tbsp. oil, place dough in the bottom, and cover with a clean towel. Set the dough aside in a warm spot to let rise until doubled in bulk, 3–4 hours.

3. Preheat oven to 400°. Gently turn dough out onto a large sheet of parchment paper and gently stretch it with your fingers to form a 12" circle. Using a small, sharp knife, cut out five 2"-long slits, each about 1" wide, starting from the center of the bread and cutting toward the edge, so that the dough will resemble a sand dollar (discard dough scraps or bake them separately as a cook's-bonus nibble). Using your fingers, gently stretch the holes open a little wider so that they won't close up completely when bread is baked. Carefully transfer the dough—on the parchment paper—to a large baking sheet and bake until golden brown and puffed, about 15 minutes. Remove the bread from the oven and immediately brush the top and sides with 2 tbsp. hot water to soften the crust. Transfer the bread to a rack to let cool, or serve warm, if you like.

Monday, August 29, 2011

Mama Mondays- All I really need to know about parenting I learned from knitting


This is the work of Jamie Clegg, a fellow raveler and Christian parent, and a blogger over at:
www.thepreparedhomemaker.blogspot.com. She posted it the other day in a parenting group we are both part of and it really resonated with me. She gave me permission to publish it here, and I pray it will touch you too.

As of late I’ve been overwhelmed with the awesomeness of the task and responsibility of raising my children. For certain there are so many things that I need to do differently, experiment with what works best, or totally drop. As an only child there are no references from my childhood dealing with sibling issues, and particular character issues (as I was always on the receiving end and not the teaching). So my only references must come from resources around me, particularly books on Christian parenting. And in that area I feel as I am one who learns but never comes to knowledge. I feel like I am standing at a great chasm with a book that tells me that I can fill it up, if I use the right tools. But the book doesn’t list what tools those are.

But today as I was putting my girls down for a nap with my busywork knitting in front of me, it was like God sent me a note on my needles.

Busywork knitting is something to occupy my time, while I can still be productive without putting much thought into it. Its great for letting the wheels in my head spin around the issues I’m dealing with. For the last while its been a pattern for leprosy bandages. Essentially home made ace bandages with thin crochet cotton on tiny needles. Only twenty six stitches wide and knit every row. At aprox. 18 rows per inch, Ive managed almost 2 1/2 feet.

While knitting away and thinking about the task of child raising “How do I teach them what they need to know? How can I be that example?” , the verse “line upon line precept upon precept” popped up on my needles.

At first thought that verse is a pretty common “well duh” kind of verse that I’ve seen in Child rearing books often. But when put in context of my knitting it pretty much punched me in the face. ( I told God to be clear about the answer now didn’t I?)

I am the knitter- Gods chief means of building the character of this child. The needles are the tools God uses to shape us, the thread is His precepts and guidelines. Each stitch is each day. God is the pattern I’m following.

At first when the piece is begun it seems tedious, as there is not much to show, and so far to go before there is even a recognizable resemblance to the pattern. The stitches are small and each one dependent on the one behind and underneath it. And yet if there is any hope for reaching the conclusion there must be a start made. After that consistency is key. If I lay my work aside and forget about it nothing happens, it never grows into the pattern as planned. If I leave it on the needles too long, after continuing again, there will be evidence that the work had been stagnant and create a blemish on the fabric. If I am haphazard about what circumstances I leave my knitting sitting around, the influences around it may very well unravel my work (ever have children pull the needles out?), This can cause serious damage indeed, and happen frequently if you are not vigilant. If I am not careful to give an account of my work on a regular basis, attention to details slip and I am now knitting with one less stitch than I had been previously. Closer inspection reveals a dropped stitch, that depending on the strength of the surrounding circumstances, can cause a run, ripping through the foundations I have so carefully put on before.

What to do? Do I stop and give up? Do I get mad and throw the whole stupid business in the frog pond? Do I carefully frog back and begin with a new set of rows? Or do I employ and plead the tool of the crochet hook (God’s Holy Spirit) to fix each marred stitch? Ask a lace knitter with a run in a circle shawl 5 rows back which is easier!

And when I am finally done with the piece and I have built upon the foundations, and I am satisfied that it matches what the pattern intended, what then do I see? This bandage seems fit for the purpose which the pattern intended, but I notice that over the long time I’ve been knitting and building that the thread, which, when once on the ball was a beautiful and resilient white, is now less than glorious. Many outside influences have left their mark on this piece that must be addressed before it can be used to heal the wounds which the world makes. It must be washed and bleached and tried in order to be of any use. This process can make a knitter quite nervous. Will there be shrinkage? Will it unravel. Will the process reveal any hidden flaws from inattention? Will it be deemed worthy of using? One would see the importance of the duty and responsibility a parent takes on. May God help us as parents!

So much of this lesson sprang into my mind at a moments notice. So now I know. God has been faithful to show me. May I be faithful to follow The Pattern, and keep moving along, one stitch, one row, one inch at a time, till in the end God’s likeness is embedded in my child.

Copyright 2010 Jamie Clegg

Mama Mondays- Preparing the School Uniform

Part of our adventures into CLAA this past week have included time spent in the forum, in which I have learned so much of the practical, "how to" aspects of the structure of many amazing Catholic families whom I have secretly wanted to spy on but never had the opportunity to meet on their home turf.
Part of this is because I live in an area where there are very FEW large Catholic families, at least, large Catholic families who have well behaved, well educated children (they all seem to live in Dunn, where the Extraordinary Form is.... hmmmm. Well, I shouldn't be too harsh, there are a growing number of large families at my little Maronite Parish, too.)
Part of this is also that those large families that do make me suck in my breath and say "wow, you are awesome, how do you do that??" don't really have the same lifestyles as the majority of people and young families I see around Church. Whereas we have mommy groups and coffee dates and playdates and school til noon, these families I WANT to meet, who seem to be doing it right, are hardly ever "out," let alone "around."
We know they exist because we see their ten kids sitting quietly in a neat row at mass. But we never see them at the mommy/kid groups the Parish hosts or at women's events around town. I've asked moms like this to come speak at playgroups to encourage younger moms, especially because I'm encouraged by their clearly amazing parenting skills. And I laugh, bewildered, because.... they always say no.
I also find it amazing that many of my friends who don't have families that look like these families have many negative things to say about them. Here are some snippets of conversations I've had or overheard  people having about large, well behaved families we might see at mass.
"You know how they get those kids to behave like that? They go home and beat them."
"She can't really be that happy. She's probably medicated."
"If their kids are always like that, they must be stifling their personalities."
"Why don't they ever DO anything?? They are weird."
"There is NO WAY their kids are always that good."
Over time, I've come to learn through life experience and spending time with them at home that those families are often the happiest, the least violent, the most creative and expressive, and the most active. And yes, the kids are really almost always THAT good.

Once, my husband did some work on a house where the family had ten amazing kids. The whole time he worked, he couldn't get over how well the household operated. Mother was in the dinning room overseeing the schooling. The littles were playing nicely outside. The children took turns doing chores. The children didn't back talk, weren't rowdy, and were extremely nice. On the third day, they invited him in to eat lunch, and he accepted. Lunch was pleasant, delicious, simple, and fun. He discovered the family was Catholic, and that they went to the closest Parish near us where the Latin Mass is offered. He came home and told me I needed to meet this mother and learn from her.
A week or so later, we were meeting our priest out for dinner and drinks and their family walked in. I saw the mother and observed her with the kids... my husband was right. They were an amazing family. I stared in awe and amazement. And then dinner was over, and we went home. We haven't seen them since then.
I've considered dropping a note in her mailbox:
Hello! I noticed your family is incredible and I want to know the secret. No one out here seems to get it. Please help!
Of course, I never have. But I did pray, a lot. I wanted to know how she (they) did it. I wanted (and my husband wanted) a family that looked and behaved like that. Not just externally, but internally-- we wanted the benefits we saw in their personal holiness. So I prayed.
And God led me to something even better than this particular family, which God knows would have probably ended up disappointing me somehow. :D
Instead, He led me to the CLAA, which we enrolled in for the academics but which turns out to be a literal "how to" of what all these families I see and think... "WOW!" about are doing. And not because they are telling us what to do, but because the purpose of a classical education sort of encapsulates a certain idea: the pursuit of wisdom being tantamount to a "pure and perfect" education. The CLAA encourages you not just to talk about and think about holiness but to actually do those things which you talk about and  think about. It's not for the weak minded or faint of heart.

As a parent, I am not exempt from my children's call to holiness. I have to be the first one to make the sacrifices, to live right, to reach sainthood, if I expect them to follow. And that has been a revelation for us, because although we knew it on a practical level, we didn't realize how little we were actually doing it. In fact, in just two weeks of CLAA, we have realized that our lives were completely ordered around the wrong things and anchored in self-defeating ideas. Our actions didn't match our purpose, even though we thought we were so "different" from everybody else. Really, we were the same, just calling ourselves different.
What do I mean? I mean that instead of having a simple life anchored in prayer and work, we had a complicated life anchored in leisure. And it showed in our kids.

The first step in CLAA is not enrolling the kids and diving into the academics. The first step is to re-organize your family life so that you can handle the academics. Before enrolling, most families take a year or two just to teach their kids the basics of a simple, ordered life: family prayer times, chores, discipline, obedience, respect, sacrifice, etc. They learn to par down their meal plans so that they are healthy and sensible and not gluttonous. They learn to be a little self-sufficient and get their finances in order so they don't have to depend on anyone. They learn to be less social and more sacrificial. Then, once they have figured out the basics of the simple life, (which does NOT have to mean a farming life, of course-- just to be clear)  they can begin the academics. It's like enrolling in a saint factory (as if Marriage wasn't enough. :D) The hardest thing about it is just doing it..... because it's one thing to say "I start tomorrow!" But it's quite another to actually make the changes a good home education for your children requires. We already thought we were there. Now it is clear that we haven't even begun to scratch the surface. In fact, here I am writing a blog at 6 am instead of going for a morning run. You see what I mean? Guess I better write the rest in a few minutes, when I get back. :)

One of the first steps to a working schedule is to purge your home. Family watching too much TV? Throw the TV out. Spending too much time doing laundry? Get uniforms. This is something that my husband and I actually enjoy-- people are always amazed/annoyed at how easy it is for us to throw away/get rid of stuff that we have been given/had for years etc. We hate clutter, and when we live alone again, our house will be much easier for us to live in. (His dad is a packrat.) The reason CLAA families tend to do this step is twofold.
First, because "stuff" gets in the way of a holy life. It's a slap in the face of materialism to say: "I don't need or want that." It's also because CLAA families adhere to a rigid work schedule according to their family's needs. The best advice I have ever received thus far about time management has been this: "Make the family schedule. Get rid of EVERYTHING that gets in the way of the schedule."
Now, before you go thinking this means that at 7 AM you better be done cooking breakfast, or else, let me reassure you.... it's not so much the rigid time frame as it is the rigid structure of the schedule that matters: "Don't fool around," is the message. "Life is too short and we are supposed to be becoming saints. Is this activity/ conversation/ etc. wise? Is it helpful according to your goals?" It is serious. Too serious for many.

One of the first steps of purging is paring down the clothes. We have too many clothes. We stuff them in closets and forget about them. We vainly keep a million combinations of clothes around and for what? To leave off doing laundry for days on end?? To gripe at the mountain of laundry that ensues? Especially for large families, the clothing is usually the first thing to go.
One of the easiest ways to do this is to create family uniforms. Now I know what you're thinking... because I thought it too. UNIFORMS??
However, you have heard me say over and over again here that the best times of my life were the simplest-- in particular when I was in Basic Training in the US Army. And what did I have in the Army? A locker, containing three sets of work clothes, one set of dress clothes. A Bible. a pen. a journal. a flashlight. Some soap. a toothbrush. A hairbrush. The thing with the Army uniforms was that they were the best, most practical outfit for women and men to get pretty much ANYTHING done. There is nothing in the known universe you wouldn't be totally comfortable doing in BDUs. They are amazing. Once I was out of the army, I had so many clothing choices, and they were largely appealing and attractive, but none of them were as liberating as my old BDUs. We hardly wasted any time doing laundry, worrying about how we looked.... All we had time for was work, prayer, and a really rewarding rest period. (if we earned it.) Which is kinda the point of what we are trying to do here... only less.... military. or is it?
Sacrifice is the key to the Christian life.... and the Christian life is meaningless without it. We are weak, so we need discipline to help us do the impossible. I can tell you that nothing in the world is more rewarding than succeeding at a difficult task after enduring sleeplessness, hunger, and angry drill sergeants. The thrill of having overcome is like nothing else. The Christian life is good, but only if we endure to the end, and only if we allow ourselves to be disciplined into sacrifice. There is glory on the other side of pain.... we shouted it all day long during difficult field exercises: Pain is temporary, pride is forever. Pain is weakness leaving the body. Etc. etc. Kinda like my favorite quote from St Josemaria Escriva: "Blessed be pain. Loved be pain. Sanctified be pain. . . Glorified be pain!" (The Way, 208)

Sacrifice requires courage, and uniforms require courage, because we are essentially getting rid of everything that stands between us and God with regards to our lengthy list of excesses in the vanity department. (and no, that doesn't mean that a uniform should be UGLY. On the contrary.... we should never look frumpy or unattractive.) It doesn't mean that your uniform should be SIMILAR (like, the same thing every day. It can be one Monday outfit, one Tuesday outfit, one Wednesday outfit, etc.) What it does mean is that your clothes should be simplified. It shouldn't take half the day to determine what to wear to a certain event or on a certain occasion. Time wasted we will never get back. Simplify.

The considerations when making a uniform for yourself or for the kids are really simple:

1. What does modesty mean to your family?
2. What does your family do in a day?
3. How does your family manage laundry?

When it comes to uniforms, quality should always win over quantity (the French know this intrinsically, since they traditionally own very few items that are very good, high quality clothing. Americans, on the other hand, have closets overflowing with cheaply made clothes.) Colors choices should be harmonious so that you can mix and match if needed. And most people who have been doing this a while recommend about 10 pieces of clothing per person. (on average.)

So for example, in my house:

Modesty in dress means hiding those parts of our bodies which need not be revealed. At one time, it meant covering completely. But over time we came to see how this alienated us from the very world we lived in, and didn't fulfill our purpose of being "just like everyone else, only different." For us today, this means wearing decent clothes that don't give away our bodies. (General rules of thumb for us girls, for example, would be skirts past the knee and sleeves that reach the elbows as much as possible. Collars that aren't too low. Etc.)

In one day, we exercise, cook, clean, play, walk, garden, stand, sit, hostess, etc. So we need clothes that suit all of those purposes. (Good luck figuring it out, I STILL am.) An important consideration here is looking feminine-- it would be easy for me to order some BDU pants and tee shirts and be done, but is that really giving my husband the best of my womanhood? Not really, because he enjoys me looking girly.

My family does laundry as it comes in. We don't have a laundry day, we just do it as the hamper gets full.

I will post what our uniforms end up being later once we have figured it out, but for now suffice to say that I like the idea, that we are going to be implementing it, and that it isn't something that will happen all at once, but rather happen over time. I've been thinking about it for a few weeks now.

About two years ago, a friend approached me with the idea of having a "mommy uniform" to help keep me sane. I liked it, and over time, I implemented it to some degree. (I currently switch off wearing one of three long tiered skirts and a 3/4 sleeve tee from Old Navy during the week. On Tuesdays I usually wear jeans and a shirt because I have a bunch of mommies over and want to look less.... little house on the prairie. :D) It had never occurred to me to give the kids a uniform too, but now it makes so much sense! And something else I noticed.... here in North Carolina, even the PUBLIC SCHOOL children have uniforms!! Why wouldn't we?

For those of you who are interested, here is a link to the original article on the CLAA website that got me thinking. Do you have school uniforms? Mommy uniforms? Workout or Work uniforms? Tell me about them.

Saturday, August 27, 2011

Saints on Saturdays- Saints who were mothers

St Gianna, pray for us!
Here is a compiled list of saints who were mothers. Take some time to look them up one day or over several days, and learn from them what they knew to get themselves and their families into heaven.

Blessed Angela of Foligno
Blessed Anna Rosa Gattorno
Blessed Anne Marie Taigi
Blessed Antonia of Florence
Blessed Dorothy of Montau
Blessed Émilie d'Oultremont d'Hoogvorst
Blessed Eurosia Fabris
Blessed Helen of Poland
Blessed Ivetta of Huy
Blessed Margaret Pole
Blessed Marie of the Incarnation Guyart
Blessed Marie-Azélie Guérin Martin
Blessed Michelina of Pesaro
Blessed Santucci Terrebotti
Blessed Victoria Strata
Blessed Virgin Mary
Eve the Matriarch
Rachel the Matriarch
Ruth the Matriarch
Saint Adela of Pfalzel
Saint Adeltrude of Aurillac
Saint Aelia Flaccilla
Saint Agia
Saint Amalburga
Saint Amunia
Saint Anne
Saint Bathilde
Saint Begga of Ardenne
Saint Bridget of Sweden
Saint Candida of Bañoles
Saint Candida of Naples
Saint Candida of Rome
Saint Candida the Younger
Saint Cecilia Yu Sosa
Saint Clotilde
Saint Crispina
Saint Darerca
Saint Dionysia the Martyr
Saint Ebbe of Minster-in-Thanet
Saint Elizabeth
Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton
Saint Elizabeth of Hungary
Saint Elizabeth of Portugal
Saint Ermenilda of Ely
Saint Felicity of Rome
Saint Frances of Rome
Saint Gianna Beretta Molla
Saint Gladys
Saint Gorgonia
Saint Gwen
Saint Hedwig of Andechs
Saint Helena
Saint Hereswitha
Saint Hilaria the Martyr
Saint Hildegund
Saint Humility
Saint Ida of Boulogne
Saint Ida of Herzfeld
Saint Ida of Nivelles
Saint Jacoba
Saint Jeanne de Chantal
Saint Jeanne de Lestonnac
Saint Judith of Prussia
Saint Ludmila
Saint Macrina the Elder
Saint Margaret Clitherow
Saint Margaret of Cortona
Saint Margaret of Scotland
Saint Monica
Saint Natalia
Saint Non
Saint Nonna
Saint Olga of Kiev
Saint Osith
Saint Patientia of Loret
Saint Patricia of Nicomedia
Saint Paula of Rome
Saint Perpetua
Saint Plautilla of Rome
Saint Priscilla of Rome
Saint Publia
Saint Richrudis of Marchiennes
Saint Rita of Cascia
Saint Sadalberga
Saint Saxburgh of Ely
Saint Sigrada
Saint Silvia of Rome
Saint Sophia
Saint Theopistes of Rome
Saint Valeria of Milan
Saint Waltrude
Saint Wastrada
Saint Wilfrida
Saint Zedislava Berka
Saint Zoe of Pamphylia
Sarah the Matriarch
Venerable Margaret Bosco

Friday, August 26, 2011

Freaky Fridays-- the prophetic pulse and the core of contemplation

Well, it's 06:48 here and we are waiting on a hurricane, the first of the season, called Irene, to get here by the end of the day.
In the seven or so years I've lived here we have had a hurricane or an almost-hurricane a year, and only once has the weather been bad enough to make me think: oh em gee, the world is falling apart. For me, the tornadoes this past year were FAR more terrifying than any hurricane experience we've ever had. However, since in the last six or so  months we've had before-our-eyes devastation due to tornadoes, a nuclear fallout problem due to a tsunami and subsequent breakdown of a nuclear power plant, the hottest summer I can remember, an EARTHQUAKE (thought I left those behind in California??) and now this, so I'm a little bit.... edgy. Maybe as a child I was less aware of the gravity of all the weather scenarios I endured. We thought earthquakes, even big ones, were like roller coasters, and the great El Niño had us paddling down the streets on our surfboards for fun. Now that I'm a grown- up (?) though, it's a little bit different.
There are a million and three zany prophecies out there warning of end times storm scenarios, beginnings of apocolypses, storms unleashing economic problems unleashing world instability, etc. Is there truth to them? Quite honestly, I neither know nor care anymore. I think it's absurd to sit on these prophecies or look at world events with a "the world is ending" mentality. After all, the world started ending for me the day I was born, and it could end today as I step outside and into the street, or truly at any given moment. St Joseph, keep me ready!
On the other hand, I think it's foolish to DIScredit the fact that things are changing around here. Something is up in the air, and I can see it/feel it everywhere. For me, it's a tingling, spaced out, airy feeling of simultaneous dread and displacement I get in the pit of my stomach and somewhere along the lines of my heart. Since I started really paying attention, I can think of a handful of times I have experienced that same "woah, this is serious" feeling. Once at a rave, in Los Angeles. Once while sitting in my driveway here in Fayetteville, NC looking up at the clouds in the sky. Once at a pro-life rally in Raleigh, NC when the spiritual opression was thick in the atmosphere as a "feminist pro-lifer" ranted about rape and destruction. Once on my front porch the day the tornadoes came. Once when I was sitting in church listening to some god-awful protestant song that had no place in mass whatsoever, and watching the people in the pews either clapping along or sleeping. Once in an airport, watching the planes take off. Once while I was praying for someone who needed deliverance from demonic oppression. Once when I was in a walmart during Valentines' day while the hurried, materialistic world swirled around me. It's a general feeling of unease and certainty that what I see in front of me is passing away... is dust.  A feeling that I'm standing in the middle of a wildly swirling mess and that I see it but I don't know how to escape it. Probably similar to the feeling a deer gets when caught in the headlights of a passing car: "Here it comes. This is it. Oh, Sh*t!"  Some people call that feeling "anxiety." Maybe even a "panic attack." I call it.... a spiritual wakeup call.
It's just obvious to me that while the wold has been ending since Jesus rose again, we are now at a "turning point" of sorts. It's in the air. I imagine the "air" felt charged like this around the time just before the crucifixion in Jerusalem... we get a picture of it when we watch Mel Gibson's movie The Passion-- a tangible feeling of "something" in the guts of the people. Just like it was in the air for my parents when they lived through the sixties. The times, they are a' changin.
Recently, I upset a Catholic friend by posting a prophetic word given by a protestant charismatic regarding the intensity of the coming storm and its relationship to the end times. To me, the core of all these prophetic messages is the same, and it is good: repent, turn to God, amend your lives. The Kingdom is nearer today than it was yesterday. Whether or not the prophecy is "accurate" doesn't really make a difference. We may feel personally implicated and then respond with personal decisions: like selling a stock, or not buying a house. We may feel disconnected and totally reject it. But at the end of the day, what all these "prophets" have to say, Catholic or not, has no relevance whatsoever because there are no secrets that need be revealed. We know the gospel message. We know what we must do. We must do it, and there are no shortcuts.
As people called to be Contemplatives (and I do believe we are ALL called to contemplation) in the world, we must realize the great wisdom of what Mary did: She took all these things and kept them in her heart. (Luke 2:19)
So take all these things, and keep them in your hearts. We don't need to pass judgment on every prophecy, every news story, every new ideology that emerges. We don't need to pass judgement on trends, what other people are doing, thinking, saying....we don't need to pass judgement on every new weather system and natural disaster and economic failure and war. We need to pray and work, taking all these things, and keeping them in our hearts.
People look to prophecies because they want to hear a magic word that gives them all they are searching for. They don't realize that Jesus does that from the altars of every Catholic Church in the world without saying a word. He is there: a silent witness that HE remains the same -- FAITHFUL-- though the world moves like mad. If you read prophetic words long enough, you begin to get a picture, and that picture becomes clearer and clearer as time goes by, like a camera lens focusing... and what you see is JESUS. Only Jesus.
In the midst of all the hurricane preparedness my friends up and down the coast are doing, my prayer is that we would keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, and -- as my friend Sandy so aptly put it last night as she was trying to determine whether to evacuate or not-- "drown out all other voices." Drown out the news, the world, the stores, the radio. Drown out your TV and the internet, your facebook and twitter feed. Drown out your parents, your friends, your boss.... and turn to Jesus, who commands the winds, and walked on water, who created the heavens and the earth. He is here, and He alone is sovereign over all the earth.

Say it with me: Jesus, I trust in You.

Thursday, August 25, 2011

Theology Thursdays- On Infant Baptism


"Let the children come to me
. . . for to such belongs the kingdom of God." (Luke 18:15-16)


One of the first theological conundrums we came across as we were slowly becoming Catholics was the idea of infant baptism. At the time, we had begun to understand the salvific necessity of baptism, thereby wanting it for our kids, but we saw baptism as the outward expression of an internal faith our children did not yet profess, and thus we sort of hesitated to allow what we saw as a "ceremony" that could potentially stall our children's spiritual progression. 

Of course, looking back, I can say that I was thinking like a true protestant and not like a Catholic at all. Had I been thinking like a Catholic, I would have been also thinking like an Israelite. You see, when we consider issues like this it becomes so totally clear (at least to me) that the Catholic faith is the continuation, in Christ, of the Jewish faith in every way that it is absolutely mind boggling to me now that more people don't make the connection. Are you ready? Here it is.

Why should we baptize our babies into the faith?

Because JEWS circumsized their babies into the faith.

What does circumcision have to do with baptism?

Baptism replaced circumcision.


Wait a minute.... huh??

Turning to Col. 2:11–12, we read:



11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh[a] was put off when you were circumcised by[b] Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.




Did you catch that? St Paul calls baptism a circumcision made without human hands here. Jewish children were circumsized in anticipation of the faith in which they were to profess, and so Catholic children are also baptized in anticipation of their coming Christian faith.

Further, because it is a sacrament, baptism brings certain graces which are simply not receivable in other circumstances.... such as the grace to erase original sin. Not convinced?


After Lydia was converted through Paul's preaching, "She was baptized, with her household" (Acts 16:15)
The Phillipian jailer who converted: "the same hour of the night . . . he was baptized, with all his family" (Acts 16:33)
And here Paul remembers: "I did baptize also the household of Stephanas" (1 Cor. 1:16)

Still need more? Below, find a more complete list compliled from John Salza over at  Scripture Catholic:

Gen. 17:12, Lev. 12:3 - these texts show the circumcision of eight-day old babies as the way of entering into the Old Covenant - Col 2:11-12 - however, baptism is the new "circumcision" for all people of the New Covenant. Therefore, baptism is for babies as well as adults. God did not make His new Covenant narrower than the old Covenant. To the contrary, He made it wider, for both Jews and Gentiles, infants and adults.

Job 14:1-4 - man that is born of woman is full of trouble and unclean. Baptism is required for all human beings because of our sinful human nature.

Psalm 51:5 - we are conceived in the iniquity of sin. This shows the necessity of baptism from conception.

Matt. 18:2-5 - Jesus says unless we become like children, we cannot enter into heaven. So why would children be excluded from baptism?

Matt 19:14 - Jesus clearly says the kingdom of heaven also belongs to children. There is no age limit on entering the kingdom, and no age limit for being eligible for baptism.

Mark 10:14 - Jesus says to let the children come to Him for the kingdom of God also belongs to them. Jesus says nothing about being too young to come into the kingdom of God.

Mark 16:16 - Jesus says to the crowd, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." But in reference to the same people, Jesus immediately follows with "He who does not believe will be condemned." This demonstrates that one can be baptized and still not be a believer. This disproves the Protestant argument that one must be a believer to be baptized. There is nothing in the Bible about a "believer's baptism."

Luke 18:15 – Jesus says, “Let the children come to me.” The people brought infants to Jesus that he might touch them. This demonstrates that the receipt of grace is not dependent upon the age of reason.

Acts 2:38 - Peter says to the multitude, "Repent and be baptized.." Protestants use this verse to prove one must be a believer (not an infant) to be baptized. But the Greek translation literally says, "If you repent, then each one who is a part of you and yours must each be baptized” (“Metanoesate kai bapistheto hekastos hymon.”) This, contrary to what Protestants argue, actually proves that babies are baptized based on their parents’ faith. This is confirmed in the next verse.

Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants.

Luke 1:59 - this proves that "teknon" includes infants. Here, John as a "teknon" (infant) was circumcised. See also Acts 21:21 which uses “teknon” for eight-day old babies. So baptism is for infants as well as adults.

Acts 10:47-48 - Peter baptized the entire house of Cornelius, which generally included infants and young children. There is not one word in Scripture about baptism being limited to adults.

Acts 16:15 - Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word "household" comes from the Greek word "oikos" which is a household that includes infants and children.

Acts 16:15 - further, Paul baptizes the household based on Lydia's faith, not the faith of the members of the household. This demonstrates that parents can present their children for baptism based on the parents' faith, not the children's faith.

Acts 16:30-33 - it was only the adults who were candidates for baptism that had to profess a belief in Jesus. This is consistent with the Church's practice of instructing catechumens before baptism. But this verse does not support a "believer's baptism" requirement for everyone. See Acts 16:15,33. The earlier one comes to baptism, the better. For those who come to baptism as adults, the Church has always required them to profess their belief in Christ. For babies who come to baptism, the Church has always required the parents to profess the belief in Christ on behalf of the baby. But there is nothing in the Scriptures about a requirement for ALL baptism candidates to profess their own belief in Christ (because the Church has baptized babies for 2,000 years).

Acts 16:33 - Paul baptized the jailer (an adult) and his entire household (which had to include children). Baptism is never limited to adults and those of the age of reason. See also Luke 19:9; John 4:53; Acts 11:14; 1 Cor. 1:16; and 1 Tim. 3:12; Gen. 31:41; 36:6; 41:51; Joshua 24:15; 2 Sam. 7:11, 1 Chron. 10:6 which shows “oikos” generally includes children.

Rom. 5:12 - sin came through Adam and death through sin. Babies' souls are affected by Adam's sin and need baptism just like adult souls.

Rom. 5:15 - the grace of Jesus Christ surpasses that of the Old Covenant. So children can also enter the new Covenant in baptism. From a Jewish perspective, it would have been unthinkable to exclude infants and children from God's Covenant kingdom.

1 Cor. 1:16 - Paul baptized the household ("oikos") of Stephanus. Baptism is not limited to adults.

Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:2 - Paul addresses the "saints" of the Church, and these include the children he addresses in Eph. 6:1 and Col. 3:20. Children become saints of the Church only through baptism.

Eph. 2:3 - we are all by nature children of wrath, in sin, like all mankind. Infants are no exception. See also Psalm 51:5 and Job 14:1-4 which teach us we are conceived in sin and born unclean.

2 Thess. 3:10 - if anyone does not work let him not eat. But this implies that those who are unable to work should still be able to eat. Babies should not starve because they are unable to work, and should also not be denied baptism because they are unable to make a declaration of faith.

Matt. 9:2; Mark 2:3-5 - the faith of those who brought in the paralytic cured the paralytic's sins. This is an example of the forgiveness of sins based on another's faith, just like infant baptism. The infant child is forgiven of sin based on the parents' faith.

Matt. 8:5-13 - the servant is healed based upon the centurion's faith. This is another example of healing based on another's faith. If Jesus can heal us based on someone else’s faith, then He can baptize us based on someone else’s faith as well.

Mark 9:22-25 - Jesus exercises the child's unclean spirit based on the father's faith. This healing is again based on another's faith.

1 Cor. 7:14 – Paul says that children are sanctified by God through the belief of only one of their parents.

Exodus 12:24-28 - the Passover was based on the parent's faith. If they did not kill and eat the lamb, their first-born child died.

Joshua 5:2-7 - God punished Israel because the people had not circumcised their children. This was based on the parent's faith. The parents play a critical role in their child's salvation.

STILL not convinced? What about some early church fathers?

Irenaeus

"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).



Hippolytus

"Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).



Origen

"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus8:3 [A.D. 248]).

"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).



Cyprian of Carthage

"As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).

"If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another" (ibid., 64:5).



Gregory of Nazianz

"Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!" (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7 [A.D. 388]).

"‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly [I respond], if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated" (ibid., 40:28).



John Chrysostom

"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).



Augustine

"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).



Council of Carthage V

"Item: It seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children] from the barbarians" (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]).



Council of Mileum II

"[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration" (Canon 3 [A.D. 416]).

Baptize your children. Give them the gift of faith.... and a running start on the spiritual journey!
My family with Fr. Michael Cassabon and the Godparents of our third daughter at her baptism.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Wordless wednesday-- Highlights from our trip home to France























































On How to Hear Women's Confessions (for priests)

Confessions of Women. 

A dangerous rock which the priest encounters in the stormy sea of the world is the hearing of women’s confessions. The knowledge of this fact and a sense of dread are his best safeguard. He must persevere in a state of indifference and insensibility towards female penitents; he must keep his heart hermetically sealed against human sentiments of affection and avoid every sign of familiarity, though cherishing a holy respect and reverence for the sex of our mothers. 

Woman needs the sacraments more frequently than man. Her good influence in the home-circle is of the highest value for the faith and morality of those who come in daily contact with her. Her presence should spread about her the perfume of Christian devotion and charity. It is the duty of a confessor to cultivate the virtues of humility and purity in the queenly heart of the Catholic woman and to fit her for the exalted position which Mary, the Mother of Jesus, won for her in the Church of her Son. 

Guard your eyes: Averte oculos tuos, ne videant canitatem. The eyes are the windows of the soul; close them to keep sensuality aloof. Do not look at a female penitent either before, during, or after confession. It would he injurious to you and others for several reasons. Non permittas illas ante confessionale accedere, ut tibi loquantur, et multo minus, ut manus deosculentur. In actu confessionis non ostendat, se eas agnoscere (St. Alph.). Guard your tongue; never use expressions of friendship and familiarity; put the fewest possible questions. 

With young women observe the advice of St. Augustine: Sermo brevis et rigidus cum his mulieribus habendus est; nec tamen quia sanctiores, ideo minus cavendae; quo enim sanctiores sunt, eo magis alliciant. St. Liguori says: Cum junioribus in confessionariosis potius rigidus quam suavis. Speak to a woman in the confessional as if you were addressing her spirit, separated from the body and standing before the judgment-seat of God. Be kind and respectful to old women, especially if they are afflicted with deafness or some infirmity peculiar to their age. Obsecra anus ut matres (1 Tim. v. 2). 

Do not permit them to tell more than their sins, and check garrulity. Piarum praecipue muliercularum garrulitatem graviter ac moderate coerceat (Conc. Balt. IT. 281). Be not deceived by tears: they may be sincere, but women’s tears are always cheap and handy. Frequently raise your heart to Mary Immaculate that it may not be moved by human sentiment. St. Alphonsus gives another important advice: Abstineant Confessarii a munusculis recipiendis, et praecipue ad illarum domus non accedant. 

Rev. William Stang, D.D., Pastoral Theology (Second, Revised and Enlarged Edition) (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1897), 178-180. 

NOTE
Born in Germany, William Stang (1854-1907) taught theology and was a parish priest before he came to the Diocese of Providence, Rhode Island. The book cited above was meant to be a practical guide for future priests. In 1904 he was named the first Bishop of Fall River, Massachusetts. He died following surgery in 1907. Bishop Stang High School was founded at North Dartmouth, Massachusetts, in 1959. The school is coeducational and sponsors weekly reconciliation services.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Tertullian (2nd Century) on Women's Apparel

Tertullian was a Catholic rhetorician of the 2nd century. He wrote the following treatise on women's apparel, which we ought to read and discuss. If you've never read Tertullian, you're probably going to be challenged by this...and either love him ot hate him. He's a Christian rhetorician, after all, not a politician.

Book I

Chapter 1. Introduction. Modesty in Apparel Becoming to Women, in Memory of the Introduction of Sin into the World Through a Woman

If there dwelt upon earth a faith as great as is the reward of faith which is expected in the heavens, no one of you at all, best beloved sisters, from the time that she had first “known the Lord,” and learned (the truth) concerning her own (that is, woman's) condition, would have desired too gladsome (not to say too ostentatious) a style of dress; so as not rather to go about in humble garb, and rather to affect meanness of appearance, walking about as Eve mourning and repentant, in order that by every garb of penitence she might the more fully expiate that which she derives from Eve,— the ignominy, I mean, of the first sin, and the odium (attaching to her as the cause) of human perdition. “In pains and in anxieties do you bear (children), woman; and toward your husband (is) your inclination, and he lords it over you.” And do you not know that you are (each) an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil's gateway: you are the unsealer of that (forbidden) tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God's image, man. On account of your desert— that is, death— even the Son of God had to die. And do you think about adorning yourself over and above your tunics of skins? Come, now; if from the beginning of the world the Milesians sheared sheep, and the Serians spun trees, and the Tyrians dyed, and the Phrygians embroidered with the needle, and the Babylonians with the loom, and pearls gleamed, and onyx-stones flashed; if gold itself also had already issued, with the cupidity (which accompanies it), from the ground; if the mirror, too, already had licence to lie so largely, Eve, expelled from paradise, (Eve) already dead, would also have coveted these things, I imagine! No more, then, ought she now to crave, or be acquainted with (if she desires to live again), what, when she was living, she had neither had nor known. Accordingly these things are all the baggage of woman in her condemned and dead state, instituted as if to swell the pomp of her funeral.

Chapter 2. The Origin of Female Ornamentation, Traced Back to the Angels Who Had Fallen.

For they, withal, who instituted them are assigned, under condemnation, to the penalty of death—those angels, to wit, who rushed from heaven on the daughters of men; so that this ignominy also attaches to woman. For when to an age much more ignorant (than ours) they had disclosed certain well-concealed material substances, and several not well-revealed scientific arts— if it is true that they had laid bare the operations of metallurgy, and had divulged the natural properties of herbs, and had promulgated the powers of enchantments, and had traced out every curious art, even to the interpretation of the stars— they conferred properly and as it were peculiarly upon women that instrumental mean of womanly ostentation, the radiances of jewels wherewith necklaces are variegated, and the circlets of gold wherewith the arms are compressed, and the medicaments of orchil with which wools are coloured, and that black powder itself wherewith the eyelids and eyelashes are made prominent. What is the quality of these things may be declared meantime, even at this point, from the quality and condition of their teachers: in that sinners could never have either shown or supplied anything conducive to integrity, unlawful lovers anything conducive to chastity, renegade spirits anything conducive to the fear of God. If (these things) are to be called teachings, ill masters must of necessity have taught ill; if as wages of lust, there is nothing base of which the wages are honourable. But why was it of so much importance to show these things as well as to confer them? Was it that women, without material causes of splendour, and without ingenious contrivances of grace, could not please men, who, while still unadorned, and uncouth and— so to say— crude and rude, had moved (the mind of) angels? Or was it that the lovers would appear sordid and— through gratuitous use— contumelious, if they had conferred no (compensating) gift on the women who had been enticed into connubial connection with them? But these questions admit of no calculation. Women who possessed angels (as husbands) could desire nothing more; they had, forsooth, made a grand match! Assuredly they who, of course, did sometimes think whence they had fallen, and, after the heated impulses of their lusts, looked up toward heaven, thus requited that very excellence of women, natural beauty, as (having proved) a cause of evil, in order that their good fortune might profit them nothing; but that, being turned from simplicity and sincerity, they, together with (the angels) themselves, might become offensive to God. Sure they were that all ostentation, and ambition, and love of pleasing by carnal means, was displeasing to God. And these are the angels whom we are destined to judge: these are the angels whom in baptism we renounce: these, of course, are the reasons why they have deserved to be judged by man. What business, then, have their things with their judges? What commerce have they who are to condemn with them who are to be condemned? The same, I take it, as Christ has with Belial. With what consistency do we mount that (future) judgment-seat to pronounce sentence against those whose gifts we (now) seek after? For you too, (women as you are,) have the self-same angelic nature promised as your reward, the self-same sex as men: the self-same advancement to the dignity of judging, does (the Lord) promise you. Unless, then, we begin even here to pre-judge, by pre-condemning their things, which we are hereafter to condemn in themselves, they will rather judge and condemn us.

Chapter 3. Concerning the Genuineness of “The Prophecy of Enoch.”

I am aware that the Scripture of Enoch, which has assigned this order (of action) to angels, is not received by some, because it is not admitted into the Jewish canon either. I suppose they did not think that, having been published before the deluge, it could have safely survived that world-wide calamity, the abolisher of all things. If that is the reason (for rejecting it), let them recall to their memory that Noah, the survivor of the deluge, was the great-grandson of Enoch himself; and he, of course, had heard and remembered, from domestic renown and hereditary tradition, concerning his own great-grandfather's “grace in the sight of God,” and concerning all his preachings; since Enoch had given no other charge to Methuselah than that he should hand on the knowledge of them to his posterity. Noah therefore, no doubt, might have succeeded in the trusteeship of (his) preaching; or, had the case been otherwise, he would not have been silent alike concerning the disposition (of things) made by God, his Preserver, and concerning the particular glory of his own house.

If (Noah) had not had this (conservative power) by so short a route, there would (still) be this (consideration) to warrant our assertion of (the genuineness of) this Scripture: he could equally have renewed it, under the Spirit's inspiration, after it had been destroyed by the violence of the deluge, as, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian storming of it, every document of the Jewish literature is generally agreed to have been restored through Ezra.

But since Enoch in the same Scripture has preached likewise concerning the Lord, nothing at all must be rejected by us which pertains to us; and we read that “every Scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired.” By the Jews it may now seem to have been rejected for that (very) reason, just like all the other (portions) nearly which tell of Christ. Nor, of course, is this fact wonderful, that they did not receive some Scriptures which spoke of Him whom even in person, speaking in their presence, they were not to receive. To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude.

Chapter 4. Waiving the Question of the Authors, Tertullian Proposes to Consider the Things on Their Own Merits

Grant now that no mark of pre-condemnation has been branded on womanly pomp by the (fact of the) fate of its authors; let nothing be imputed to those angels besides their repudiation of heaven and (their) carnal marriage: let us examine the qualities of the things themselves, in order that we may detect the purposes also for which they are eagerly desired.

Female habit carries with it a twofold idea— dress and ornament. By “dress” we mean what they call “womanly gracing;” by “ornament,” what it is suitable should be called “womanly disgracing.” The former is accounted (to consist) in gold, and silver, and gems, and garments; the latter in care of the hair, and of the skin, and of those parts of the body which attract the eye. Against the one we lay the charge of ambition, against the other of prostitution; so that even from this early stage (of our discussion) you may look forward and see what, out of (all) these, is suitable, handmaid of God, to your discipline, inasmuch as you are assessed on different principles (from other women)—those, namely, of humility and chastity.

Chapter 5. Gold and Silver Not Superior in Origin or in Utility to Other Metals

Gold and silver, the principal material causes of worldly splendour, must necessarily be identical (in nature) with that out of which they have their being: (they must be) earth, that is; (which earth itself is) plainly more glorious (than they), inasmuch as it is only after it has been tearfully wrought by penal labour in the deadly laboratories of accursed mines, and there left its name of “earth” in the fire behind it, that, as a fugitive from the mine, it passes from torments to ornaments, from punishments to embellishments, from ignominies to honours. But iron, and brass, and other the vilest material substances, enjoy a parity of condition (with silver and gold), both as to earthly origin and metallurgic operation; in order that, in the estimation of nature, the substance of gold and of silver may be judged not a whit more noble (than theirs). But if it is from the quality of utility that gold and silver derive their glory, why, iron and brass excel them; whose usefulness is so disposed (by the Creator), that they not only discharge functions of their own more numerous and more necessary to human affairs, but do also none the less serve the turn of gold and silver, by dint of their own powers, in the service of juster causes. For not only are rings made of iron, but the memory of antiquity still preserves (the fame of) certain vessels for eating and drinking made out of brass. Let the insane plenteousness of gold and silver look to it, if it serves to make utensils even for foul purposes. At all events, neither is the field tilled by means of gold, nor the ship fastened together by the strength of silver. No mattock plunges a golden edge into the ground; no nail drives a silver point into planks. I leave unnoticed the fact that the needs of our whole life are dependent upon iron and brass; whereas those rich materials themselves, requiring both to be dug up out of mines, and needing a forging process in every use (to which they are put), are helpless without the laborious vigour of iron and brass. Already, therefore, we must judge whence it is that so high dignity accrues to gold and silver, since they get precedence over material substances which are not only cousin-german to them in point of origin, but more powerful in point of usefulness.

Chapter 6. Of Precious Stones and Pearls

But, in the next place, what am I to interpret those jewels to be which vie with gold in haughtiness, except little pebbles and stones and paltry particles of the self-same earth; but yet not necessary either for laying down foundations, or rearing party-walls, or supporting pediments, or giving density to roofs? The only edifice which they know how to rear is this silly pride of women: because they require slow rubbing that they may shine, and artful underlaying that they may show to advantage, and careful piercing that they may hang; and (because they) render to gold a mutual assistance in meretricious allurement. But whatever it is that ambition fishes up from the British or the Indian sea, it is a kind of conch not more pleasing in savour than— I do not say the oyster and the sea-snail, but— even the giant muscle. For let me add that I know conchs (which are) sweet fruits of the sea. But if that (foreign) conch suffers from some internal pustule, that ought to be regarded rather as its defect than as its glory; and although it be called “pearl,” still something else must be understood than some hard, round excrescence of the fish. Some say, too, that gems are culled from the foreheads of dragons, just as in the brains of fishes there is a certain stony substance. This also was wanting to the Christian woman, that she may add a grace to herself from the serpent! Is it thus that she will set her heel on the devil's head, while she heaps ornaments (taken) from his head on her own neck, or on her very head?

Chapter 7. Rarity the Only Cause Which Makes Such Things Valuable

It is only from their rarity and outlandishness that all these things possess their grace; in short, within their own native limits they are not held of so high worth. Abundance is always contumelious toward itself. There are some barbarians with whom, because gold is indigenous and plentiful, it is customary to keep (the criminals) in their convict establishments chained with gold, and to lade the wicked with riches— the more guilty, the more wealthy. At last there has really been found a way to prevent even gold from being loved! We have also seen at Rome the nobility of gems blushing in the presence of our matrons at the contemptuous usage of the Parthians and Medes, and the rest of their own fellow-countrymen, only that (their gems) are not generally worn with a view to ostentation. Emeralds lurk in their belts; and the sword (that hangs) below their bosom alone is witness to the cylindrical stones that decorate its hilt; and the massive single pearls on their boots are fain to get lifted out of the mud! In short, they carry nothing so richly gemmed as that which ought not to be gemmed if it is (either) not conspicuous, or else is conspicuous only that it may be shown to be also neglected.

Chapter 8. The Same Rule Holds with Regard to Colours. God's Creatures Generally Not to Be Used, Except for the Purposes to Which He Has Appointed Them

Similarly, too, do even the servants of those barbarians cause the glory to fade from the colours of our garments (by wearing the like); nay, even their party-walls use slightingly, to supply the place of painting, the Tyrian and the violet-coloured and the grand royal hangings, which you laboriously undo and metamorphose. Purple with them is more paltry than red ochre; (and justly,) for what legitimate honour can garments derive from adulteration with illegitimate colours? That which He Himself has not produced is not pleasing to God, unless He was unable to order sheep to be born with purple and sky-blue fleeces! If He was able, then plainly He was unwilling: what God willed not, of course ought not to be fashioned. Those things, then, are not the best by nature which are not from God, the Author of nature. Thus they are understood to be from the devil, from the corrupter of nature: for there is no other whose they can be, if they are not God's; because what are not God's must necessarily be His rival's. But, beside the devil and his angels, other rival of God there is none. Again, if the material substances are of God, it does not immediately follow that such ways of enjoying them among men (are so too). It is matter for inquiry not only whence come conchs, but what sphere of embellishment is assigned them, and where it is that they exhibit their beauty. For all those profane pleasures of worldly shows— as we have already published a volume of their own about them — (ay, and) even idolatry itself, derive their material causes from the creatures of God. Yet a Christian ought not to attach himself to the frenzies of the racecourse, or the atrocities of the arena, or the turpitudes of the stage, simply because God has given to man the horse, and the panther, and the power of speech: just as a Christian cannot commit idolatry with impunity either, because the incense, and the wine, and the fire which feeds (thereon), and the animals which are made the victims, are God's workmanship; since even the material thing which is adored is God's (creature). Thus then, too, with regard to their active use, does the origin of the material substances, which descends from God, excuse (that use) as foreign to God, as guilty forsooth of worldly glory!

Chapter 9. God's Distribution Must Regulate Our Desires, Otherwise We Become the Prey of Ambition and Its Attendant Evils

For, as some particular things distributed by God over certain individual lands, and some one particular tract of sea, are mutually foreign one to the other, they are reciprocally either neglected or desired: (desired) among foreigners, as being rarities; neglected (rightly), if anywhere, among their own compatriots, because in them there is no such fervid longing for a glory which, among its own home-folk, is frigid. But, however, the rareness and outlandishness which arise out of that distribution of possessions which God has ordered as He willed, ever finding favour in the eyes of strangers, excites, from the simple fact of not having what God has made native to other places, the concupiscence of having it. Hence is educed another vice— that of immoderate having; because although, perhaps, having may be permissible, still a limit is bound (to be observed). This (second vice) will be ambition; and hence, too, its name is to be interpreted, in that from concupiscence ambient in the mind it is born, with a view to the desire of glory—a grand desire, forsooth, which (as we have said) is recommended neither by nature nor by truth, but by a vicious passion of the mind—(namely,) concupiscence. And there are other vices connected with ambition and glory. Thus they have withal enhanced the cost of things, in order that (thereby) they might add fuel to themselves also; for concupiscence becomes proportionably greater as it has set a higher value upon the thing which it has eagerly desired. From the smallest caskets is produced an ample patrimony. On a single thread is suspended a million of sesterces. One delicate neck carries about it forests and islands. The slender lobes of the ears exhaust a fortune; and the left hand, with its every finger, sports with a several money-bag. Such is the strength of ambition— (equal) to bearing on one small body, and that a woman's, the product of so copious wealth.

Book II

Chapter 1. Introduction. Modesty to Be Observed Not Only in Its Essence, But in Its Accessories

Handmaids of the living God, my fellow-servants and sisters, the right which I enjoy with you— I, the most meanest in that right of fellow-servantship and brotherhood— emboldens me to address to you a discourse, not, of course, of affection, but paving the way for affection in the cause of your salvation. That salvation— and not (the salvation) of women only, but likewise of men— consists in the exhibition principally of modesty. For since, by the introduction into an appropriation (in) us of the Holy Spirit, we are all “the temple of God,” Modesty is the sacristan and priestess of that temple, who is to suffer nothing unclean or profane to be introduced (into it), for fear that the God who inhabits it should be offended, and quite forsake the polluted abode. But on the present occasion we (are to speak) not about modesty, for the enjoining and exacting of which the divine precepts which press (upon us) on every side are sufficient; but about the matters which pertain to it, that is, the manner in which it behooves you to walk. For most women (which very thing I trust God may permit me, with a view, of course, to my own personal censure, to censure in all), either from simple ignorance or else from dissimulation, have the hardihood so to walk as if modesty consisted only in the (bare) integrity of the flesh, and in turning away from (actual) fornication; and there were no need for anything extrinsic to boot— in the matter (I mean) of the arrangement of dress and ornament, the studied graces of form and brilliance:— wearing in their gait the self-same appearance as the women of the nations, from whom the sense of true modesty is absent, because in those who know not God, the Guardian and Master of truth, there is nothing true. For if any modesty can be believed (to exist) in Gentiles, it is plain that it must be imperfect and undisciplined to such a degree that, although it be actively tenacious of itself in the mind up to a certain point, it yet allows itself to relax into licentious extravagances of attire; just in accordance with Gentile perversity, in craving after that of which it carefully shuns the effect. How many a one, in short, is there who does not earnestly desire even to look pleasing to strangers? Who does not on that very account take care to have herself painted out, and denies that she has (ever) been an object of (carnal) appetite? And yet, granting that even this is a practice familiar to Gentile modesty— (namely,) not actually to commit the sin, but still to be willing to do so; or even not to be willing, yet still not quite to refuse— what wonder? For all things which are not God's are perverse. Let those women therefore look to it, who, by not holding fast the whole good, easily mingle with evil even what they do hold fast. Necessary it is that you turn aside from them, as in all other things, so also in your gait; since you ought to be “perfect, as (is) your Father who is in the heavens.”

Chapter 2. Perfect Modesty Will Abstain from Whatever Tends to Sin, as Well as from Sin Itself. Difference Between Trust and Presumption. If Secure Ourselves, We Must Not Put Temptation in the Way of Others. We Must Love Our Neighbour as Ourself

You must know that in the eye of perfect, that is, Christian, modesty, (carnal) desire of one's self (on the part of others) is not only not to be desired, but even execrated, by you: first, because the study of making personal grace (which we know to be naturally the inviter of lust) a mean of pleasing does not spring from a sound conscience: why therefore excite toward yourself that evil (passion)? Why invite (that) to which you profess yourself a stranger? Secondly, because we ought not to open a way to temptations, which, by their instancy, sometimes achieve (a wickedness) which God expels from them who are His; (or,) at all events, put the spirit into a thorough tumult by (presenting) a stumbling-block (to it). We ought indeed to walk so holily, and with so entire substantiality of faith, as to be confident and secure in regard of our own conscience, desiring that that (gift) may abide in us to the end, yet not presuming (that it will). For he who presumes feels less apprehension; he who feels less apprehension takes less precaution; he who takes less precaution runs more risk. Fear is the foundation of salvation; presumption is an impediment to fear. More useful, then, is it to apprehend that we may possibly fail, than to presume that we cannot; for apprehending will lead us to fear, fearing to caution, and caution to salvation. On the other hand, if we presume, there will be neither fear nor caution to save us. He who acts securely, and not at the same time warily, possesses no safe and firm security; whereas he who is wary will be truly able to be secure. For His own servants, may the Lord by His mercy take care that to them it may be lawful even to presume on His goodness! But why are we a (source of) danger to our neighbour? Why do we import concupiscence into our neighbour? Which concupiscence, if God, in “amplifying the law,” do not dissociate in (the way of) penalty from the actual commission of fornication, I know not whether He allows impunity to him who has been the cause of perdition to some other. For that other, as soon as he has felt concupiscence after your beauty, and has mentally already committed (the deed) which his concupiscence pointed to, perishes; and you have been made the sword which destroys him: so that, albeit you be free from the (actual) crime, you are not free from the odium (attaching to it); as, when a robbery has been committed on some man's estate, the (actual) crime indeed will not be laid to the owner's charge, while yet the domain is branded with ignominy, (and) the owner himself aspersed with the infamy. Are we to paint ourselves out that our neighbours may perish? Where, then, is (the command), “You shall love your neighbour as yourself?” “Care not merely about your own (things), but (about your) neighbour's?” No enunciation of the Holy Spirit ought to be (confined) to the subject immediately in hand merely, and not applied and carried out with a view to every occasion to which its application is useful. Since, therefore, both our own interest and that of others is implicated in the studious pursuit of most perilous (outward) comeliness, it is time for you to know that not merely must the pageantry of fictitious and elaborate beauty be rejected by you; but that of even natural grace must be obliterated by concealment and negligence, as equally dangerous to the glances of (the beholder's) eyes. For, albeit comeliness is not to be censured, as being a bodily happiness, as being an additional outlay of the divine plastic art, as being a kind of goodly garment of the soul; yet it is to be feared, just on account of the injuriousness and violence of suitors: which (injuriousness and violence) even the father of the faith, Abraham, greatly feared in regard of his own wife's grace; and Isaac, by falsely representing Rebecca as his sister, purchased safety by insult!

Chapter 3. Grant that Beauty Be Not to Be Feared: Still It is to Be Shunned as Unnecessary and Vainglorious

Let it now be granted that excellence of form be not to be feared, as neither troublesome to its possessors, nor destructive to its desirers, nor perilous to its compartners; let it be thought (to be) not exposed to temptations, not surrounded by stumbling-blocks: it is enough that to angels of God it is not necessary. For, where modesty is, there beauty is idle; because properly the use and fruit of beauty is voluptuousness, unless any one thinks that there is some other harvest for bodily grace to reap. Are women who think that, in furnishing to their neighbour that which is demanded of beauty, they are furnishing it to themselves also, to augment that (beauty) when (naturally) given them, and to strive after it when not (thus) given? Some one will say, “Why, then, if voluptuousness be shut out and chastity let in, may (we) not enjoy the praise of beauty alone, and glory in a bodily good?” Let whoever finds pleasure in “glorying in the flesh” see to that. To us in the first place, there is no studious pursuit of “glory,” because “glory” is the essence of exaltation. Now exaltation is incongruous for professors of humility according to God's precepts. Secondly, if all “glory” is “vain” and insensate, how much more (glory) in the flesh, especially to us? For even if “glorying” is (allowable), we ought to wish our sphere of pleasing to lie in the graces of the Spirit, not in the flesh; because we are “suitors” of things spiritual. In those things wherein our sphere of labour lies, let our joy lie. From the sources whence we hope for salvation, let us cull our “glory.” Plainly, a Christian will “glory” even in the flesh; but (it will be) when it has endured laceration for Christ's sake, in order that the spirit may be crowned in it, not in order that it may draw the eyes and sighs of youths after it. Thus (a thing) which, from whatever point you look at it, is in your case superfluous, you may justly disdain if you have it not, and neglect if you have. Let a holy woman, if naturally beautiful, give none so great occasion (for carnal appetite). Certainly, if even she be so, she ought not to set off (her beauty), but even to obscure it.

Chapter 4. Concerning the Plea of “Pleasing the Husband.”

As if I were speaking to Gentiles, addressing you with a Gentile precept, and (one which is) common to all, (I would say,) “You are bound to please your husbands only.” But you will please them in proportion as you take no care to please others. Be without carefulness, blessed (sisters): no wife is “ugly” to her own husband. She “pleased” him enough when she was selected (by him as his wife); whether commended by form or by character. Let none of you think that, if she abstain from the care of her person, she will incur the hatred and aversion of husbands. Every husband is the exactor of chastity; but beauty, a believing (husband) does not require, because we are not captivated by the same graces which the Gentiles think (to be) graces: an unbelieving one, on the other hand, even regards with suspicion, just from that infamous opinion of us which the Gentiles have. For whom, then, is it that you cherish your beauty? If for a believer, he does not exact it: if for an unbeliever, he does not believe in it unless it be artless. Why are you eager to please either one who is suspicious, or else one who desires it not?

Chapter 5. Some Refinements in Dress and Personal Appearance Lawful, Some Unlawful. Pigments Come Under the Latter Head

These suggestions are not made to you, of course, to be developed into an entire crudity and wildness of appearance; nor are we seeking to persuade you of the good of squalor and slovenliness; but of the limit and norm and just measure of cultivation of the person. There must be no overstepping of that line to which simple and sufficient refinements limit their desires— that line which is pleasing to God. For they who rub their skin with medicaments, stain their cheeks with rouge, make their eyes prominent with antimony, sin against Him . To them, I suppose, the plastic skill of God is displeasing! In their own persons, I suppose, they convict, they censure, the Artificer of all things! For censure they do when they amend, when they add to, (His work;) taking these their additions, of course, from the adversary artificer. That adversary artificer is the devil. For who would show the way to change the body, but he who by wickedness transfigured man's spirit? He it is, undoubtedly, who adapted ingenious devices of this kind; that in your persons it may be apparent that you, in a certain sense, do violence to God. Whatever is born is the work of God. Whatever, then, is plastered on (that), is the devil's work. To superinduce on a divine work Satan's ingenuities, how criminal is it! Our servants borrow nothing from our personal enemies: soldiers eagerly desire nothing from the foes of their own general; for, to demand for (your own) use anything from the adversary of Him in whose hand you are, is a transgression. Shall a Christian be assisted in anything by that evil one? (If he do,) I know not whether this name (of “Christian”) will continue (to belong) to him; for he will be his in whose lore he eagerly desires to be instructed. But how alien from your schoolings and professions are (these things)! How unworthy the Christian name, to wear a fictitious face, (you,) on whom simplicity in every form is enjoined!— to lie in your appearance, (you,) to whom (lying) with the tongue is not lawful!— to seek after what is another's, (you,) to whom is delivered (the precept of) abstinence from what is another's!— to practise adultery in your mien, (you,) who make modesty your study! Think, blessed (sisters), how will you keep God's precepts if you shall not keep in your own persons His lineaments?

Chapter 6. Of Dyeing the Hair

I see some (women) turn (the colour of) their hair with saffron. They are ashamed even of their own nation, (ashamed) that their procreation did not assign them to Germany and to Gaul: thus, as it is, they transfer their hair (there)! Ill, ay, most ill, do they augur for themselves with their flame-coloured head, and think that graceful which (in fact) they are polluting! Nay, moreover, the force of the cosmetics burns ruin into the hair; and the constant application of even any undrugged moisture, lays up a store of harm for the head; while the sun's warmth, too, so desirable for imparting to the hair at once growth and dryness, is hurtful. What “grace” is compatible with “injury?” What “beauty” with “impurities?” Shall a Christian woman heap saffron on her head, as upon an altar? For, whatever is wont to be burned to the honour of the unclean spirit, that— unless it is applied for honest, and necessary, and salutary uses, for which God's creature was provided— may seem to be a sacrifice. But, however, God says, “Which of you can make a white hair black, or out of a black a white?” And so they refute the Lord! “Behold!” say they, “instead of white or black, we make it yellow—more winning in grace.” And yet such as repent of having lived to old age do attempt to change it even from white to black! O temerity! The age which is the object of our wishes and prayers blushes (for itself)! A theft is effected! Youth, wherein we have sinned, is sighed after! The opportunity of sobriety is spoiled! Far from Wisdom's daughters be folly so great! The more old age tries to conceal itself, the more will it be detected. Here is a veritable eternity, in the (perennial) youth of your head! Here we have an “incorruptibility” to “put on,” with a view to the new house of the Lord which the divine monarchy promises! Well do you speed toward the Lord; well do you hasten to be quit of this most iniquitous world, to whom it is unsightly to approach (your own) end!

Chapter 7. Of Elaborate Dressing of the Hair in Other Ways, and Its Bearing Upon Salvation

What service, again, does all the labour spent in arranging the hair render to salvation? Why is no rest allowed to your hair, which must now be bound, now loosed, now cultivated, now thinned out? Some are anxious to force their hair into curls, some to let it hang loose and flying; not with good simplicity: beside which, you affix I know not what enormities of subtle and textile perukes; now, after the manner of a helmet of undressed hide, as it were a sheath for the head and a covering for the crown; now, a mass (drawn) backward toward the neck. The wonder is, that there is no (open) contending against the Lord's prescripts! It has been pronounced that no one can add to his own stature. You, however, do add to your weight some kind of rolls, or shield-bosses, to be piled upon your necks! If you feel no shame at the enormity, feel some at the pollution; for fear you may be fitting on a holy and Christian head the slough of some one else's head, unclean perchance, guilty perchance and destined to hell. Nay, rather banish quite away from your “free” head all this slavery of ornamentation. In vain do you labour to seem adorned: in vain do you call in the aid of all the most skilful manufacturers of false hair. God bids you “be veiled.” I believe (He does so) for fear the heads of some should be seen! And oh that in “that day” of Christian exultation, I, most miserable (as I am), may elevate my head, even though below (the level of) your heels! I shall (then) see whether you will rise with (your) ceruse and rouge and saffron, and in all that parade of headgear: whether it will be women thus tricked out whom the angels carry up to meet Christ in the air! If these (decorations) are now good, and of God, they will then also present themselves to the rising bodies, and will recognise their several places. But nothing can rise except flesh and spirit sole and pure. Whatever, therefore, does not rise in (the form of) spirit and flesh is condemned, because it is not of God. From things which are condemned abstain, even at the present day. At the present day let God see you such as He will see you then.

Chapter 8. Men Not Excluded from These Remarks on Personal Adornment

Of course, now, I, a man, as being envious of women, am banishing them quite from their own (domains). Are there, in our case too, some things which, in respect of the sobriety we are to maintain on account of the fear due to God, are disallowed? If it is true, (as it is,) that in men, for the sake of women (just as in women for the sake of men), there is implanted, by a defect of nature, the will to please; and if this sex of ours acknowledges to itself deceptive trickeries of form peculiarly its own—(such as) to cut the beard too sharply; to pluck it out here and there; to shave round about (the mouth); to arrange the hair, and disguise its hoariness by dyes; to remove all the incipient down all over the body; to fix (each particular hair) in its place with (some) womanly pigment; to smooth all the rest of the body by the aid of some rough powder or other: then, further, to take every opportunity for consulting the mirror; to gaze anxiously into it:— while yet, when (once) the knowledge of God has put an end to all wish to please by means of voluptuous attraction, all these things are rejected as frivolous, as hostile to modesty. For where God is, there modesty is; there is sobriety her assistant and ally. How, then, shall we practise modesty without her instrumental mean, that is, without sobriety? How, moreover, shall we bring sobriety to bear on the discharge of (the functions of) modesty, unless seriousness in appearance and in countenance, and in the general aspect of the entire man, mark our carriage?

Chapter 9. Excess in Dress, as Well as in Personal Culture, to Be Shunned. Arguments Drawn from I Cor. VII.

Wherefore, with regard to clothing also, and all the remaining lumber of your self-elaboration, the like pruning off and retrenchment of too redundant splendour must be the object of your care. For what boots it to exhibit in your face temperance and unaffectedness, and a simplicity altogether worthy of the divine discipline, but to invest all the other parts of the body with the luxurious absurdities of pomps and delicacies? How intimate is the connection which these pomps have with the business of voluptuousness, and how they interfere with modesty, is easily discernible from the fact that it is by the allied aid of dress that they prostitute the grace of personal comeliness: so plain is it that if (the pomps) be wanting, they render (that grace) bootless and thankless, as if it were disarmed and wrecked. On the other hand, if natural beauty fails, the supporting aid of outward embellishment supplies a grace, as it were, from its own inherent power. Those times of life, in fact, which are at last blest with quiet and withdrawn into the harbour of modesty, the splendour and dignity of dress lure away (from that rest and that harbour), and disquiet seriousness by seductions of appetite, which compensate for the chill of age by the provocative charms of apparel. First, then, blessed (sisters), (take heed) that you admit not to your use meretricious and prostitutionary garbs and garments: and, in the next place, if there are any of you whom the exigencies of riches, or birth, or past dignities, compel to appear in public so gorgeously arrayed as not to appear to have attained wisdom, take heed to temper an evil of this kind; lest, under the pretext of necessity, you give the rein without stint to the indulgence of licence. For how will you be able to fulfil (the requirements of) humility, which our (school) profess, if you do not keep within bounds the enjoyment of your riches and elegancies, which tend so much to “glory?” Now it has ever been the wont of glory to exalt, not to humble. “Why, shall we not use what is our own?” Who prohibits your using it? Yet (it must be) in accordance with the apostle, who warns us “to use this world as if we abuse it not; for the fashion of this world is passing away.” And “they who buy are so to act as if they possessed not.” Why so? Because he had laid down the premiss, saying, “The time is wound up.” If, then he shows plainly that even wives themselves are so to be had as if they be not had, on account of the straits of the times, what would be his sentiments about these vain appliances of theirs? Why, are there not many, withal, who so do, and seal themselves up to eunuchhood for the sake of the kingdom of God, spontaneously relinquishing a pleasure so honourable, and (as we know) permitted? Are there not some who prohibit to themselves (the use of) the very “creature of God,” abstaining from wine and animal food, the enjoyments of which border upon no peril or solicitude; but they sacrifice to God the humility of their soul even in the chastened use of food? Sufficiently, therefore, have you, too, used your riches and your delicacies; sufficiently have you cut down the fruits of your dowries, before (receiving) the knowledge of saving disciplines. We are they “upon whom the ends of the ages have met, having ended their course.” We have been predestined by God, before the world was, (to arise) in the extreme end of the times. And so we are trained by God for the purpose of chastising, and (so to say) emasculating, the world. We are the circumcision — spiritual and carnal— of all things; for both in the spirit and in the flesh we circumcise worldly principles.

Chapter 10. Tertullian Refers Again to the Question of the Origin of All These Ornaments and Embellishments.

It was God, no doubt, who showed the way to dye wools with the juices of herbs and the humours of conchs! It had escaped Him, when He was bidding the universe to come into being, to issue a command for (the production of) purple and scarlet sheep! It was God, too, who devised by careful thought the manufactures of those very garments which, light and thin (in themselves), were to be heavy in price alone; God who produced such grand implements of gold for confining or parting the hair; God who introduced (the fashion of) finely-cut wounds for the ears, and set so high a value upon the tormenting of His own work and the tortures of innocent infancy, learning to suffer with its earliest breath, in order that from those scars of the body— born for the steel!— should hang I know not what (precious) grains, which, as we may plainly see, the Parthians insert, in place of studs, upon their very shoes! And yet even the gold itself, the “glory” of which carries you away, serves a certain race (so Gentile literature tells us) for chains! So true is it that it is not intrinsic worth, but rarity, which constitutes the goodness (of these things): the excessive labour, moreover, of working them with arts introduced by the means of the sinful angels, who were the revealers withal of the material substances themselves, joined with their rarity, excited their costliness, and hence a lust on the part of women to possess (that) costliness. But, if the self-same angels who disclosed both the material substances of this kind and their charms— of gold, I mean, and lustrous stones— and taught men how to work them, and by and by instructed them, among their other (instructions), in (the virtues of) eyelid-powder and the dyeings of fleeces, have been condemned by God, as Enoch tells us, how shall we please God while we joy in the things of those (angels) who, on these accounts, have provoked the anger and the vengeance of God?

Now, granting that God did foresee these things; that God permitted them; that Esaias finds fault with no garment of purple, represses no coil, reprobates no crescent-shaped neck ornaments; still let us not, as the Gentiles do, flatter ourselves with thinking that God is merely a Creator, not likewise a Downlooker on His own creatures. For how far more usefully and cautiously shall we act, if we hazard the presumption that all these things were indeed provided at the beginning and placed in the world by God, in order that there should now be means of putting to the proof the discipline of His servants, in order that the licence of using should be the means whereby the experimental trials of continence should be conducted? Do not wise heads of families purposely offer and permit some things to their servants in order to try whether and how they will use the things thus permitted; whether (they will do so) with honesty, or with moderation? But how far more praiseworthy (the servant) who abstains entirely; who has a wholesome fear even of his lord's indulgence! Thus, therefore, the apostle too: “All things,” says he, “are lawful, but not all are expedient.” How much more easily will he fear what is unlawful who has a reverent dread of what is lawful?

Chapter 11. Christian Women, Further, Have Not the Same Causes for Appearing in Public, and Hence for Dressing in Fine Array as Gentiles. On the Contrary, Their Appearance Should Always Distinguish Them from Such

Moreover, what causes have you for appearing in public in excessive grandeur, removed as you are from the occasions which call for such exhibitions? For you neither make the circuit of the temples, nor demand (to be present at) public shows, nor have any acquaintance with the holy days of the Gentiles. Now it is for the sake of all these public gatherings, and of much seeing and being seen, that all pomps (of dress) are exhibited before the public eye; either for the purpose of transacting the trade of voluptuousness, or else of inflating “glory.” You, however, have no cause of appearing in public, except such as is serious. Either some brother who is sick is visited, or else the sacrifice is offered, or else the word of God is dispensed. Whichever of these you like to name is a business of sobriety and sanctity, requiring no extraordinary attire, with (studious) arrangement and (wanton) negligence. And if the requirements of Gentile friendships and of kindly offices call you, why not go forth clad in your own armour; (and) all the more, in that (you have to go) to such as are strangers to the faith? So that between the handmaids of God and of the devil there may be a difference; so that you may be an example to them, and they may be edified in you; so that (as the apostle says) “God may be magnified in your body.” But magnified He is in the body through modesty: of course, too, through attire suitable to modesty. Well, but it is urged by some, “Let not the Name be blasphemed in us, if we make any derogatory change from our old style and dress.” Let us, then, not abolish our old vices! let us maintain the same character, if we must maintain the same appearance (as before); and then truly the nations will not blaspheme! A grand blasphemy is that by which it is said, “Ever since she became a Christian, she walks in poorer garb!” Will you fear to appear poorer, from the time that you have been made more wealthy; and fouler, from the time when you have been made more clean? Is it according to the decree of Gentiles, or according to the decree of God, that it becomes Christians to walk?

Chapter 12. Such Outward Adornments Meretricious, and Therefore Unsuitable to Modest Women

Let us only wish that we may be no cause for just blasphemy! But how much more provocative of blasphemy is it that you, who are called modesty's priestesses, should appear in public decked and painted out after the manner of the immodest? Else, (if you so do,) what inferiority would the poor unhappy victims of the public lusts have (beneath you)? Whom, albeit some laws were (formerly) wont to restrain them from (the use of) matrimonial and matronly decorations, now, at all events, the daily increasing depravity of the age has raised so nearly to an equality with all the most honourable women, that the difficulty is to distinguish them. And yet, even the Scriptures suggest (to us the reflection), that meretricious attractivenesses of form are invariably conjoined with and appropriate to bodily prostitution. That powerful state which presides over the seven mountains and very many waters, has merited from the Lord the appellation of a prostitute. But what kind of garb is the instrumental mean of her comparison with that appellation? She sits, to be sure, “in purple, and scarlet, and gold, and precious stone.” How accursed are the things without (the aid of) which an accursed prostitute could not have been described! It was the fact that Thamar “had painted out and adorned herself” that led Judah to regard her as a harlot, and thus, because she was hidden beneath her “veil,”— the quality of her garb belying her as if she had been a harlot—he judged (her to be one), and addressed and bargained with (her as such). Whence we gather an additional confirmation of the lesson, that provision must be made in every way against all immodest associations and suspicions. For why is the integrity of a chaste mind defiled by its neighbour's suspicion? Why is a thing from which I am averse hoped for in me? Why does not my garb pre-announce my character, to prevent my spirit from being wounded by shamelessness through (the channel of) my ears? Grant that it be lawful to assume the appearance of a modest woman: to assume that of an immodest is, at all events, not lawful.

Chapter 13. It is Not Enough that God Know Us to Be Chaste: We Must Seem So Before Men. Especially in These Times of Persecution We Must Inure Our Bodies to the Hardships Which They May Not Improbably Be Called to Suffer

Perhaps some (woman) will say: “To me it is not necessary to be approved by men; for I do not require the testimony of men: God is the inspector of the heart.” (That) we all know; provided, however, we remember what the same (God) has said through the apostle: “Let your probity appear before men.” For what purpose, except that malice may have no access at all to you, or that you may be an example and testimony to the evil? Else, what is (that): “Let your works shine?” Why, moreover, does the Lord call us the light of the world; why has He compared us to a city built upon a mountain; if we do not shine in (the midst of) darkness, and stand eminent amid them who are sunk down? If you hide your lamp beneath a bushel, you must necessarily be left quite in darkness, and be run against by many. The things which make us luminaries of the world are these— our good works. What is good, moreover, provided it be true and full, loves not darkness: it joys in being seen, and exults over the very pointings which are made at it. To Christian modesty it is not enough to be so, but to seem so too. For so great ought its plenitude to be, that it may flow out from the mind to the garb, and burst out from the conscience to the outward appearance; so that even from the outside it may gaze, as it were, upon its own furniture, — (a furniture) such as to be suited to retain faith as its inmate perpetually. For such delicacies as tend by their softness and effeminacy to unman the manliness of faith are to be discarded. Otherwise, I know not whether the wrist that has been wont to be surrounded with the palmleaf-like bracelet will endure till it grow into the numb hardness of its own chain! I know not whether the leg that has rejoiced in the anklet will suffer itself to be squeezed into the gyve! I fear the neck, beset with pearl and emerald nooses, will give no room to the broadsword! Wherefore, blessed (sisters), let us meditate on hardships, and we shall not feel them; let us abandon luxuries, and we shall not regret them. Let us stand ready to endure every violence, having nothing which we may fear to leave behind. It is these things which are the bonds which retard our hope. Let us cast away earthly ornaments if we desire heavenly. Love not gold; in which (one substance) are branded all the sins of the people of Israel. You ought to hate what ruined your fathers; what was adored by them who were forsaking God. Even then (we find) gold is food for the fire. But Christians always, and now more than ever, pass their times not in gold but in iron: the stoles of martyrdom are (now) preparing: the angels who are to carry us are (now) being awaited! Do you go forth (to meet them) already arrayed in the cosmetics and ornaments of prophets and apostles; drawing your whiteness from simplicity, your ruddy hue from modesty; painting your eyes with bashfulness, and your mouth with silence; implanting in your ears the words of God; fitting on your necks the yoke of Christ. Submit your head to your husbands, and you will be enough adorned. Busy your hands with spinning; keep your feet at home; and you will “please” better than (by arraying yourselves) in gold. Clothe yourselves with the silk of uprightness, the fine linen of holiness, the purple of modesty. Thus painted, you will have God as your Lover!




another snag from the CLAA FORUMS, introduction by William Michael.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...