Astounding thoughts from the 1400s...

I have been reading Eamon Duffy's pseudo-classic The Stripping of the Altars, which discusses "Traditional Religion in England 1400-1580".  It is rife with some pretty amazing things concerning the Christian faith in England.  For one, Duffy paints a picture of a populace, rich and poor, gentry and serf, that is relatively well-educated theologically.  One thing is for sure, Catholicism in England's heartland was in no need of Reformation prior to Henry VIII's desire to legally have an heir with a woman not his wife.  That, however, is not the "astounding thoughts" I am referring to.

Astounding Thought Number 1: Catholics didn't actually believe they were saved by works in any way shape or form...

I will admit that I have long thought that the Church in the early 1500s had some definite need for change.  I used to say, and adamantly believe, that while the Church never taught salvation by works officially, that is what the people believed.  Boy was I wrong.  While the people may have striven to do good and avoid evil, and while the people may have correctly believed that works are a part of salvation (see James 2), to think that works=salvation is a huge myth...at least in England.  Consider the preamble of a will from the century before the Reformation: "Lord I put the deth of oure lord Ihesu Crist betwene me and myn evil dedes, betwene me and thi Iugement", or what of Sir Roger Townsend (a successful lawyer who died in 1492), who was "besechyng him for the merytes of his bitter and gloriouse passion to have mercy oon me and to take me into his mercy which is above all workes..."  Far from being rare among people's wills, this was the norm: to beseech God to consider the Cross of Christ when judging the person's works.  For many, according to Duffy, the Crucifix was a huge consolation at the deathbed, for it helped remind them of Christ's Sacrifice, and warded off those dangerous thoughts that they were too great a sinner to be saved.  This was far from being rare...this was the norm.  In fact, instruction books for the clergy emphasized this, and the primers that the people used for private devotion (written in English and Latin in many cases), emphasized it as well.  But what of the people who couldn't read, or couldn't afford a primer?  Where did they learn it?  From the Mass and the Liturgical Calendar, which focused on the Saving and Redeeming Sacrifice of Christ.

Astounding Thought Number 2: Parishes exhibited a sense of the Communion of Saints and Cloud of Witnesses through the charity of prayer for the dead...

People in the 1400s and 1500s were not all that different from people today: we all are afraid of being forgotten after we die.  Many today attempt to build their legacy, to create some kind of memorable thing for them when they die: a charitable organization, some indellible mark on history, some major social or economic work, perhaps a physical monument, whatever.  In Fifteen Century England, it was through requests for prayers for the deceased person's soul.  See, despite the fact that we want to believe that all Christians are going to heaven, we seriously can't say that for sure.  Jesus says in Matthew "Not everyone who says 'Lord! Lord!' will enter the Kingdom of Heaven."  People then really understood that, and so petitioned God that in His Mercy, He would substitute the death of His Son for the soul of the deceased.  In addition, Scripture says in Revelation that nothing impure will enter Heaven (and seriously, how can it?  I mean to enter into the Presence, the Pure and Perfect, stainless, sinless, Presence of the Almighty is too awesome to consider, and you want to say that somehow we can do so with the stain of sin on our souls?), and seeing as we die with sin on our souls, we must be purified of the sin after death.  The people would pray that the soul of the deceased would quickly be purged and enter into the Presence.

What does this have to do with the Communion of Saints and Cloud of Witnesses?  Well, it was common for each parish to keep a "bede-roll", which contained the names of each and every person who ever donated time, money, goods, or talents to the parish.  This bede-roll was read each and every Sunday and on Holy Days throughout the year.  Thus, each and every donor/volunteer was remembered each week and their souls were prayed for each week as well.  It was a principle way for the parish to remember its dead.  However, Duffy explains a different, more subtle, and perhaps latent purpose: "It was also designed to present for imitation a pattern of piety, and to instill in the hearers a sense of the parish and its worship, as a continuing reality."  In other words, such a practice encouraged othe parishioners not only to donate, but to participate in parish life.  Also, later he says, "Here the parish community has become something more than the total of its past and future members: it has been set in the full perspective of eternity."  How is this?  Well, the individual's salvation becomes intertwined with the salvation of all who came before, and will come after, as they all continue to pray for each other.  The hearers are drawn into eternity by constantly praying for those that came before and by knowing that those who come after will pray for them.  There is an otherworldly sense of community. 

So, why are these astounding thoughts?

1)  How many people do we know who truly and honestly have any concern for their souls when they die?  The idea that Christ's Sacrifice is the only thing that links us to God is not common for most people that we (actually I) meet.  This orientation has nothing to do with us, but rather with God, His Mercy, and His Son.   The thought is pretty astounding: no matter what, our sinful nature and our sinful deeds separate us from God.  The Mass makes it painfully obvious: the Sacrificed Victim is presented to the Father in our stead: instead of our sins, our faults, and our failings, all the Father sees is His Sacrificed Son.  Unfortunately, it appears that that blatant sign of the Mass was lost when, for no good reason, priests began to "turn their backs" on God.   Christ is offered to us, not for us.

2)  No matter where I've gone to church, Protestant or Catholic, there has been a lack of this sense of Communion of Saints.  It is not as if we are in this together.  As a Methodist, we had a church historian, an elderly woman who was a life-long member of the congregation.  I remember reading of the church's history, but aside from the buildings, there was no palpable connection, no real, lasting unity...they weren't part of our communion.  The same has been true in Catholic parishes I've been involved with.  How else can you describe the constant battle for parishes to raise the necessary funds to function, or to bring forth holy priests?  There is lacking a sense of an eternal community.  The current members are not beholden to those who went before, and have no concern for those who will come after.  Their individual salvations are not perceived as intertwined.

Now, I am not suggesting that we go back to those ancient practices of theological will-writing, or bede-rolls.  But it is worth noting that the attitudes they presented are positive and should be encouraged.

If there was any doubt...

Way back in 2006, Bob Casey, Jr. ran against incumbant Rick Santorum for Pennsylvania's Senate seat.  Santorum was an outspoken supporter of the War on Terror, as well as the Pro-Life cause.  The NYTimes even endorsed Santorum based on his record for helping the poor (over and above his pro-life stance and his support for the War on Terror) over Casey.  Casey ran as the "I'm not a Republican" candidate, although in almost every meaningful way, he and Santorum supposedly were identical.  Casey somewhat supported the War on Terror, and was the son of outspoken pro-life Democratic governor, Bob Casey, Sr.  To the average Joe, because Casey and Santorum were somewhat interchangeable, and the Republican party wasn't high on people's list, Casey seemed fine.  Of course, nationwide, Casey's election helped tip the balance of power to the Democratic Party in the Senate, but really, how are people going to anticipate that?

Many people were concerned that Casey would put aside his pro-life principles in favor of the party line.  On the big things, Casey appeared to support Life, but it was the little votes that show the true Casey.  For example, he voted along party lines when the Mexico City Policy vote came up.  Bishop Martino, then Bishop of Scranton, Casey's hometown, called him on it.  During the Obamacare debate, Casey sponsored an amendment that sounded good, but had no real meaning or point (it essentially was his way of sounding pro-life, but towing the party line).

When it became obvious that the Republican Party was going to attempt to defund Planned Parenthood, I wrote to Casey's office, urging him to support the legislation that would defund PP.  This is what he wrote back:

"Dear Mr. Aukema:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me about family planning. I appreciate hearing from you about this issue.

Access to family planning services is of paramount importance for women in America. As a public official, I have sought to support family planning as an essential means of preventing unintended pregnancies. Because reducing the number of unintended pregnancies reduces the number of abortions, I will continue to support programs that expand access to family planning services.

Increasing access to comprehensive health insurance is a critical first step to ensuring the health of more women and their families. As of 2008, 14 percent of women in the United States had no health insurance. On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed the landmark Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Act”) into law. The Act will make significant changes to health coverage for woman, expanding health insurance coverage to an estimated 12.3 million additional women, and guaranteeing greater access to recommended preventive health benefits.

The expansion of Medicaid family planning programs in the Act presents an opportunity to improve low income women’s access to contraceptive services. Following passage of the Act, states are now able to expand their state Medicaid family planning programs without first obtaining federal approval. The Act also makes important progress toward ending insurance companies’ discriminatory coverage policies, such as treating pregnancy as a pre-existing condition.

The Act also includes a new program, the Pregnancy Assistance Fund, based on legislation I introduced. The Pregnancy Assistance Fund will reduce the number of abortions by providing support for pregnant women, including funding for programs that help pregnant or parenting teens and young women stay in school; funding for colleges and universities to provide pregnancy and parenting resources for their students; and assistance to states to provide intervention services, accompaniment and supportive social services for pregnant victims of domestic violence, sexual violence or stalking. This amendment was included in the Act and received $250 million in appropriated funds. Pilot programs are currently being implemented in 17 different states to address the needs of these young women.

At my urging, the Act also extends and increases funding for adoption by $1.2 billion over two years, by extending and increasing the Adoption Tax Credit. The recently-enacted Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 extended the tax credit as it existed before the Act for another year, through 2012.

I have also consistently supported funding for the Title X national family planning program to provide contraceptive services and other health care to low income women. As a pro-life Senator, I believe family planning reduces the number of unintended pregnancies, and thereby reduces the number of abortions.

I voted against H.R. 1, the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, which would have eliminated funding for Title X and barred Planned Parenthood from receiving federal funds for non-abortion related health care. Providers are statutorily prohibited by the Hyde Amendment from using federal funds for abortion. Title X funding also supports well-woman and preventive health care like annual gynecological exams and gynecological cancer screenings.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.  Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.

If you have access to the Internet, I encourage you to visit my web site, http://casey.senate.gov/.  I invite you to use this online office as a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.

Sincerely,
Bob Casey
United States Senator"

It is obvious from this that Bishop Martino was right in calling Casey to account: he is not pro-life in any way, shape or form.  If you are from Pennsylvania, and pro-life, don't vote Casey in 2012.  He lied and babies died.

Family update!!!

Christina admited last night that me losing my job was a blessing, if for any other reason than it forced us to homeschool.  We were planning on sending Maura to school in Pre-K 4, although she'd be 5, because her birthday was after school started.  Likewise, we were going to send Nolan to Pre-K 3. 

In retrospect, that would have been horrible.  Although Maura likes to play, and would have had fun at school, when it came time to learn, she'd be bored out of her mind.  Currently, she is reading books, mostly on her own, at a second or third grade reading level.  This is what she loves to do.  She will read to Nolan sometimes as well.  She is in her first grade math program.  With math, she's not as motivated.  She is bored by the busy work, which is what it appears to her to be, and likes the learning sessions.  This is not to say she's not as bright, she'd just rather be reading.  She is really taking to her end-of-the-day journal, and this seems to help her synthesize some of what she learned or did that day.  Maura is very mature.  Its hard to believe she's only 5.  She looks and acts like a 7 year old (and reads like one too),

Nolan is a bundle of energy.  At home, he can mostly be bouncing around and yet learn.  I'm not so sure that would happen in a school.  Maura is on level 4 for reading, while Nolan is on level 2.  He enjoys reading, but enjoys being read to much more (he likes the attention).  In math, it is another story.  He is only a few lessons behind Maura.  According to Christina, he'll ask for help for the first problem on a page, and once he knows how to do that, will do the rest on his own.  His handwriting is a bit more advanced than a "normal" 4 year-old, and it is one of the only things that clues you that the kid is only 4 years old. He speaks at a level much higher than a 4 year old, and he remembers extremely well.  Besides his habit of saying wierd things ("Mommy, why are you a bat that was swallowed by your hand?"), it almost impossible to tell he's only 4.

Little Colleen isn't saying much, but she's a smart little bugger.  While Nolan had a vocabulary of like 20 words by 15 months, Colleen says "No, no, no!" and "How!" (from Peter Pan).  I think she's saying other things, but its hard to say.  However, she doesn't need to be verbal, because she's picking things up left and right.  She helps unload the dishwasher, and helps put toys away on her own.  She also is learning to join in with Maura and Nolan in their play (they might not understand it, but it is clear that she is attempting to join them).  Oh, and she loves all our pets: Maggie, our three gerbils, and our fish.  She's particularly fond of pulling Maggie's tail and staring at the gerbils.