Watch and learn:
This is the guy who did this!
This book was the game changer.
As I post this 564 views.
Watch and learn:
This is the guy who did this!
This book was the game changer.
As I post this 564 views.
From a reader…
To gain an indulgence we are required to “pray for the Pope’s intention”. How are we to understand this – are we asking God to answer the specific prayer intentions of the Holy Father (crudely, asking God to do what the Pope wants)? Or are we praying that God will give inspire and guide the Pope, i.e . that his intentions may be according to God’s will? No doubt this is a bit of a dumb question but I’ve never seen this explained clearly.
Good question. I suspect some people may be a little confused about this.
When you are asked to “pray for the intentions of the Holy Father”, you are not being asked to pray for the Holy Father, though that is good and all Catholics really ought to. Rather, you are asked to pray for the intentions that the Holy Father designates that we pray for. For instance, this month, October 2014 we have these intentions.
Next month, it’ll be something else. There is usually a “general” intention and a “mission” intention.
If you don’t happen to know what the Pope’s designated intentions are, you can make a general intention to pray for what he wants. However, in this internet age, you can find quickly what the Pope wants. The intentions for the whole year are posted before each year begins. You might print them out and put them by your wall calendar, or write them on slips of paper for your prayer book or hand missal or your refrigerator. You could tack them up with a new Zed-Head magnet!
We are all in this together. It is good to have intentions designated by the Vicar of Christ, for us to coordinate our prayer for specific issues.
The day began with eggs Benedict.
By the way. Did you see how some loons are saying that some Cardinals tried to conspire with Benedict XVI to sway the proceedings of the Synod? Sheesh.
Next, from the Met. There is an exhibit of some Pre-Raphaelite stuff. Here is the Kelmscott printing of The Well at the World’s End, which I read when I was getting interested in the Inklings and their predecessors back when I was in “middle school” and high school.
The atrium area of the Frick.
I spent some time with Constable’s White Horse.
This is, by the way, an important painting.
Was there a good point in the sermon you heard for your Sunday Mass?
Another question: Was the Synod that just closed mentioned in the sermon? In what terms?
Was the Beatification of Paul VI mentioned?
The snippers and stitchers of the Consilium allowed this Sunday’s prayer to survive unscathed in the post-Conciliar editions of the Missale Romanum. The Collect still echoes the ancient sentiments of Holy Church wherever the Roman Rite’s Ordinary Use of Holy Mass is offered in Latin on the 32nd Sunday of Ordinary Time. We look forward to hearing its content echoed in English.
Omnipotens et misericors Deus,
universa nobis adversantia propitiatus exclude:
ut mente et corpora partier expediti,
quae tuae sunt, liberis mentibus exsequamur.
In your distinguished Lewis & Short Dictionary you will find that pariter is an adverb, “equally, in like manner” and “at the same time”, connecting mens and corpus (think of the adage mens sana in corpore sano… “a healthy mind in a healthy body”). Adversantia, neuter plural active participle, is from adversor “to stand opposite to one, to be against, i.e. to resist or oppose (in his opinions, feelings, intentions, etc.); while resistere and obsistere denote resistance through external action.” It is constructed with the dative, which explains the nobis. The distinction between “internal” and “external” is useful crowbar to pry open this Collect.
We encounter many difficulties and challenges in life. There is resistance and adversity. Indeed, there is an Adversary. We are opposed from without and from within. We must constantly cope with the unreconstructed effects of original sin together with the diabolical workings of the enemy of the soul, who stirs up passions, memories, and implants wicked thoughts and images. Very wisely Holy Church prayed at Compline every night (but now only on Tuesdays) the passage: “Be sober and vigilant: for your adversary (adversarius) the devil is going around like a roaring lion seeking whom he might devour: whom you must resist (resistite), strong in the faith. But you, O Lord, have mercy on us” (1 Peter 5: 8-9). God truly is a God of mercy, to protect us so from such a dire foe.
Excludo literally means, “to shut out, exclude; to cut off, remove, separate from any thing.” Therefore it also means, “to drive out, thrust out, hinder, prevent.” We are praying to God to keep away from us all things that actively hinder and oppose us and, if we stick closely to the distinction made between adversor, resisto, and obsisto, particularly interior dangers.
How will that come about? God must be appeased. He must be favorable towards us. In the Collect we find the word propitiatus, a perfect passive participle from propitio, “to render favorable, to appease, propitiate.” Propitiatus is “having been appeased.” Many forms of propitio appear in our liturgical prayers. Its use reflects our recognition that as a race and as individuals we have sinned in His sight and offended Him. Our offense required a Redeemer capable of appeasing the Father. We offend God as a society or as groups only on the basis of the personal sins of individuals. We must seek to make amends, but our efforts would be in vain without the merits of Christ’s sacrifice mediated through the Church.
The word expediti is from expedio, “to extricate, disengage, let loose, set free, liberate any thing entangled, involved.” When applied to persons, is means “to be without baggage”. Thus, the noun expeditus, i, m., is “a soldier lightly burdened, a swiftly marching soldier.” You might have heard of a “St. Expeditus” (feast day 19 April) a patron saint of procrastinators and computer programmers… for reasons which are perfectly clear. Expeditus is appropriately depicted as a Roman soldier holding aloft a Cross. Expediti refers, course, our freedom from the chains of sin which would have doomed us to eternal hell. Going on, exsequor is “to follow, go after, pursue” as well as “to follow up, prosecute, carry out; to perform, execute, accomplish, fulfill”. Finally, that quae tua sunt is literally “things which are yours”. There isn’t room here to get into why but it refers to God’s will which for us are God’s commands. Think of it this way, Jesus told His Mother and Joseph, “I must be about my Father’s business” (cf. Luke 2:49).
If you are going to Holy Mass in the Ordinary Form, in English, on the 32nd Sunday of Ordinary Time, you will hear the obsolete-duck version from the old incarnation of…
OBSOLETE ICEL (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
God of power and mercy,
protect us from all harm.
Give us freedom of spirit
and health in mind and body
to do your work on earth.
SLAVISHLY LITERAL TRANSLATION:
Almighty and merciful God,
having been appeased, keep away all things opposing us,
so that, having been unencumbered in mind and body equally,
we may with free minds accomplish the things which You command.
Notice that the old ICEL version does nothing with the concept of propitiation. The Latin makes a connection between the Father’s power, His mercy, and what was done according to His plan so that we could be saved. Also, whereas soon-to-be-abandoned ICEL version refers to “freedom”, the Latin does so but with a sense that we are impeded or encumbered, or could be. But I think the real objection to the old ICEL version must be how bland it is. It is entirely unremarkable.
For those of you who may need to preach, or who want to drill more deeply into what our Collect really says, notice that it is cited in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1742 in the section on “Human Freedom in the Economy of Salvation”, but with a different, more accurate translation:
“Almighty and merciful God, in your goodness take away from us all that is harmful, so that, made ready both in mind and body, we may freely accomplish your will.”
You could look up that section of the Catechism and study it, perhaps reflection during this election cycle about how human freedom doesn’t mean that we can do anything it pleases us to do, but rather that our actions must conform to our dignity as God’s living images, and that we must respect that image in others, at every stage of human life. God has a plan in the economy of salvation for every one of His images, from conception to death.
Our Collect’s military language reminds me of the three-fold understanding of the Church: Militant, Suffering, and Triumphant. We are lightly burdened foot soldiers (expediti) of the Church Militant on an urgent mission. Enemies are all around. Obstacles abound without and within (adversantia). Before going into battle soldiers shed their heaviest gear so they can move more freely. They take only what they need for clash about to begin and to fulfill commands (quae tua sunt). Their training was grueling, repetitious, often boring. Their bodies are now strengthened, hardened. They developed habits through the tedious drills so that when danger looms their minds are freed up (liberis mentibus). Though they may be afraid, they can act with confidence when their commanders act with sure and true competence.
This is the ideal for the soldier. It is the ideal for every Christian. Virtues are habits developed over time by repetition and discipline. Our Church’s pastors are our officers who must lead us through adversities towards our objective of heaven. We must diligently learn and review the content of our Faith, especially in the fundamentals, basic catechism. With discipline we must frequent the sacraments. We must train our children, din into them the catechism use of the sacraments. They must be given a rule of life which, after a measure of time, becomes so much a part of them that it is nearly automatic. We must foster it in ourselves as well. It will carry us through even the worst things we might have to face.
Years ago I had an experience which confirmed the value of old-fashioned methods of catechism: rote memorization and repetition aloud. I was called to a hospital to assist in a man’s difficult death. I gave him Last Rites and talked with the family as they struggled with the end of their loved-one’s life. An estranged daughter, beyond her middle years, which had clearly been pretty rough, was severely bitter. She cursed life, fate and God for the cruelty her father’s dying. She shouted at me, “Why did God make us if this is ALL THERE IS?” I responded asking, “You tell me. Why did God make you?” She became very still. Then she said, “God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next.” I continued, “What must we do to save our souls?” On cue she responded with something that she hadn’t probably thought of for decades: “To save our souls, we must worship God by faith, hope, and charity. We must believe in Him, hope in Him, and love Him with all our heart.” “Did your father do that?”, I asked. “Oh, yes”, she said, “…. oh yes.”
She had been taught well as a child. Without question there were times when she had to be forced to learn and to repeat over and over what seemed boring and pointless. She had been drilled at school, perhaps, by the Sisters, the sort in habits with rulers, whom we now see mocked in the media by ungrateful cads who benefited from their dedication. Her parents did their duty and gave her what she would one day need. By the grace of God the gift her dying father pressed on her years before was rediscovered – in the moment when the battle over her soul was joined.
Many today criticize the old method of education by memorization and repetition. They say that children just mouth things they do not understand. Children might not understand what they are learning at that moment, but one day they will. It will be ready for them. They will have it because it had been given them. Soldiers, sailors and Marines gripe about their training and entertain homicidal thoughts about their drill instructor. But when the time comes, they have the skills that will win battles and save lives. Not a few Marines return to their DI to shake his hand and thank him. We are pilgrim soldiers of the Church Militant. To reach our goal of heaven, we need training, sacrifice, and leadership.
Since the days of the pontificates of St. John Paul II and of Pope Benedict XVI, I believe we were, and still are, seeing a recovery of Catholic identity through a renewal of authentic worship in continuity with our tradition. There is a strong leadership among our bishops and priests, who are no longer permitting Holy Church to be shoved off the field of battle. They aren’t entirely willing to be pushed around, even by other leaders in the Church.
Do all you can to support our bishops and priests. Pray and fast for them. Support their needs and projects. Express that support to them. And in your march of life be prepared always to give reasons for the hope that is in you (cf. 1 Peter 3:15).
Just in case you were wondering what sort of people were on the other side of the issue, this is a Twitter exchange between the Jesuit James Martin and Massimo Faggioli, a liberal academic in St. Paul:
Card. Burke is compared to the late Archbp. Marcel Lefevbre. They invoke “schism”.
Will they next say that St. John Paul II was a Lefebvrite?
St. John Paul issued Familiaris consortio and the Catechism of the Catholic Church and everything that Card. Burke has said can be found in both.
For a liberal, Lefebvre is the equivalent of the bogeyman, Hannibal at the gates, the monster under the bed.
If “ideologue” is now liberal code for “faithful”, I suppose that “schismatic” is now their code for “believer in the Magisterium”.
I hope that these guys have a fainting couch.
The Collect for the 29th Ordinary Sunday is found the ancient Gelasian Sacramentary among the prayers for the 5th Sunday after Easter. Those of you who participate in celebrations of Holy Mass according to the 1962 Missale Romanum will hear this Collect on the Sunday after Ascension.
Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, fac nos tibi semper et devotam gerere voluntatem, et maiestati tuae sincero corde servire.
Almighty eternal God, cause us always both to bear towards You a devout faith, and to serve Your majesty with a sincere faith.
OBSOLETE ICEL (1973):
Almighty and ever-living God, our source of power and inspiration, give us strength and joy in serving you as followers of Christ.
CURRENT ICEL (2011):
Almighty ever-living God, grant that we may always conform our will to yours and serve your majesty in sincerity of heart.
The complex verb gero means basically “to bear, wear, carry, have”. In the supplement to the great Lewis & Short Latin Dictionary, Souter’s A Glossary of Later Latin, we find that after the 3rd century A.D. gero can be “to celebrate a festival”. This is confirmed in Blaise’s dictionary of liturgical Latin vocabulary; gero is “celebrate”. In a construction with a dative pronoun (such as tibi) and morem (from mos as in the infamous exclamation O tempora! O mores!) it can mean “perform someone’s will.” I think today’s tibi…gerere substitutes devotam voluntatem for morem. That servio (“serve”) is one of those verbs constructed with the dative case, as in “to be useful for, be of service to”.
In our Latin prayers maiestas is usually synonymous with gloria. Fathers of the Church St. Hilary of Poitiers (+368) and St. Ambrose of Milan (+397), and also early liturgical texts, use this concept of “glory” or “majesty” for more than simple fame or splendor of appearance. A liturgical Latin gloria can be the equivalent of biblical Greek doxa and Hebrew kabod. Doxa was translated into Latin also with the words like maiestas and claritas, which in some contexts become forms of address (“Your Majesty”). This “glory” or “majesty” is a divine characteristic. God will share His gloria with us in heaven. We will be transformed by it, made more radiant as the images of God we are meant to be. Our contact with God in the sacraments and liturgical worship advances the transformation which will continue in the Beatific Vision. “And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another (a claritate in claritatem); for this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit” (2 Cor 3:18).
When God wished to speak with Moses, His Presence would descend on the meeting tent as a cloud (Hebrew shekhinah) and fill the tent. Moses’ face would shine radiantly from his encounters with God and had to be covered with a veil (cf. Exodus 34). The shekhinah remains with us architecturally in our churches… in some places at least. Even more than the burning presence lamp, a baldachin or a veil covering the tabernacle is the sign of the Lord’s Presence.
When we enter the holy precincts of a church, our encounter with the Lord in mystery must continue the transformation which began with baptism. During the Year of Faith, which is fast coming to a close, commit to be well-prepared to meet the Lord in your parish church. Be properly disposed in body through your fast, in spirit through confession.
Today’s Collect always brings to my mind a fresco by Piero della Francesca (+1492) in little Monterchi near Arezzo. “La Madonna del Parto” shows Mary great with Child, a subject rare in Renaissance painting.
One meaning of the Latin verb gero is “to be pregnant” as in gerere partum. In the fresco, twin angels in Renaissance garb delicately lift tent-like draperies on each side to reveal Mary standing with eyes meditatively cast down, one hand placed on her hip for support, her other hand upon her unborn Child.
The fresco, this wonder depiction of life, was ironically painted originally for a cemetery chapel. The drapery and the angels invoke the image of a baldachin and the veil of a tabernacle. It calls to mind the tent in the wilderness where the Ark with the tablets and its golden angels were preserved, wherein Moses spoke to God so that his face reflected God’s majesty.
Mary, too, is Ark of the Real Presence, the Tabernacle in which Christ reposed. She, like the tent of the Ark, was overshadowed. Our Sunday Collect reminds us also to look to Mary, the Mother of God and Mother of the Church, our Mother. She is the perfect example of the service to others that flows from loving her Son, bearing the faith, serving God’s transforming glory.
Pope Francis addressed the Synod participants at the end of the Synod. I’ll out the blah blah:
(Vatican Radio) At the conclusion of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family, Pope Francis addressed the assembled Fathers, thanking them for their efforts and encouraging them to continue to journey.
Below, please find Vatican Radio’s provisional translation of Pope Francis’ address to the Synod Fathers:
I can happily say that – with a spirit of collegiality and of synodality [Q: How are they different?] – we have truly lived the experience of “Synod,” a path of solidarity, a “journey together.”
And it has been “a journey” – and like every journey there were moments of running fast, as if wanting to conquer time and reach the goal as soon as possible; other moments of fatigue, as if wanting to say “enough”; other moments of enthusiasm and ardour. There were moments of profound consolation listening to the testimony of true pastors, who wisely carry in their hearts the joys and the tears of their faithful people. Moments of consolation and grace and comfort hearing the testimonies of the families who have participated in the Synod and have shared with us the beauty and the joy of their married life. A journey where the stronger feel compelled to help the less strong, where the more experienced are led to serve others, even through confrontations. And since it is a journey of human beings, with the consolations there were also moments of desolation, of tensions and temptations, of which a few possibilities could be mentioned: [Not that we want to dwell on them...]
- One, a temptation to hostile inflexibility, that is, wanting to close oneself within the written word, (the letter) and not allowing oneself to be surprised by God, by the God of surprises, (the spirit); within the law, within the certitude of what we know and not of what we still need to learn and to achieve. From the time of Christ, it is the temptation of the zealous, of the scrupulous, of the solicitous and of the so-called – today – “traditionalists” and also of the intellectuals. ["traditionalist" "intellectualisti". Really?]
- The temptation to a destructive tendency to goodness [it. buonismo] [This also means a "going along to get along", not to make waves.], that in the name of a deceptive mercy binds the wounds without first curing them and treating them; that treats the symptoms and not the causes and the roots. It is the temptation of the “do-gooders,” of the fearful, and also of the so-called “progressives and liberals.” [Because liberals are "do-gooders" and the traditionalists ... aren't?]
- The temptation to transform stones into bread to break the long, heavy, and painful fast (cf. Lk 4:1-4); and also to transform the bread into a stone and cast it against the sinners, the weak, and the sick (cf Jn 8:7), that is, to transform it into unbearable burdens (Lk 11:46).
- The temptation to come down off the Cross, to please the people, and not stay there, in order to fulfil the will of the Father; to bow down to a worldly spirit instead of purifying it and bending it to the Spirit of God.
- The temptation to neglect the “depositum fidei” [the deposit of faith], not thinking of themselves as guardians but as owners or masters [of it]; [I am not sure I get that part. How can you both "neglect" the depositum fidei and then think you are its "owner".] or, on the other hand, the temptation to neglect reality, making use of meticulous language and a language of smoothing to say so many things and to say nothing! They call them “byzantinisms,” I think, these things… [? I didn't get that part, either. Who neglects reality?]
Dear brothers and sisters, the temptations must not frighten or disconcert us, or even discourage us, because no disciple is greater than his master; so if Jesus Himself was tempted – and even called Beelzebul (cf. Mt 12:24) – His disciples should not expect better treatment.
Personally I would be very worried and saddened if it were not for these temptations and these animated discussions; this movement of the spirits, as St Ignatius called it (Spiritual Exercises, 6), if all were in a state of agreement, or silent in a false and quietist peace. Instead, I have seen and I have heard – with joy and appreciation – speeches and interventions full of faith, of pastoral and doctrinal zeal, of wisdom, of frankness and of courage: and of parresia. And I have felt that what was set before our eyes was the good of the Church, of families, and the “supreme law,” the “good of souls” (cf. Can. 1752). And this always – we have said it here, in the Hall – without ever putting into question the fundamental truths of the Sacrament of marriage: the indissolubility, the unity, the faithfulness, the fruitfulness, that openness to life (cf. Cann. 1055, 1056; and Gaudium et spes, 48).
And this is the Church, the vineyard of the Lord, the fertile Mother and the caring Teacher, who is not afraid to roll up her sleeves to pour oil and wine on people’s wound; who doesn’t see humanity as a house of glass to judge or categorize people. This is the Church, One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and composed of sinners, needful of God’s mercy. This is the Church, the true bride of Christ, who seeks to be faithful to her spouse and to her doctrine. It is the Church that is not afraid to eat and drink with prostitutes and publicans. The Church that has the doors wide open to receive the needy, the penitent, and not only the just or those who believe they are perfect! The Church that is not ashamed of the fallen brother and pretends not to see him, but on the contrary feels involved and almost obliged to lift him up and to encourage him to take up the journey again and accompany him toward a definitive encounter with her Spouse, in the heavenly Jerusalem.
The is the Church, our Mother! And when the Church, in the variety of her charisms, expresses herself in communion, she cannot err: it is the beauty and the strength of the sensus fidei, of that supernatural sense of the faith which is bestowed by the Holy Spirit so that, together, we can all enter into the heart of the Gospel and learn to follow Jesus in our life. And this should never be seen as a source of confusion and discord.
Many commentators, or people who talk, have imagined that they see a disputatious Church where one part is against the other, doubting even the Holy Spirit, the true promoter and guarantor of the unity and harmony of the Church – the Holy Spirit who throughout history has always guided the barque, through her Ministers, even when the sea was rough and choppy, and the ministers unfaithful and sinners.
And, as I have dared to tell you , [as] I told you from the beginning of the Synod, it was necessary to live through all this with tranquillity, and with interior peace, so that the Synod would take place cum Petro and sub Petro (with Peter and under Peter), and the presence of the Pope is the guarantee of it all. [I don't think the mere presence of the Pope that guarantees anything. The Pope also has to act and speak. No?]
We will speak a little bit about the Pope, now, in relation to the Bishops [laughing]. So, the duty of the Pope is that of guaranteeing the unity of the Church; it is that of reminding the faithful of their duty to faithfully follow the Gospel of Christ; it is that of reminding the pastors that their first duty is to nourish the flock – to nourish the flock – that the Lord has entrusted to them, and to seek to welcome – with fatherly care and mercy, and without false fears – the lost sheep. I made a mistake here. I said welcome: [rather] to go out and find them. [Interesting!]
His duty is to remind everyone that authority in the Church is a service, as Pope Benedict XVI clearly explained, with words I cite verbatim: “The Church is called and commits herself to exercise this kind of authority which is service and exercises it not in her own name, but in the name of Jesus Christ… through the Pastors of the Church, in fact: it is he who guides, protects and corrects them, because he loves them deeply. [Because he loves them, he corrects them.] But the Lord Jesus, the supreme Shepherd of our souls, has willed that the Apostolic College, today the Bishops, in communion with the Successor of Peter… to participate in his mission of taking care of God’s People, of educating them in the faith and of guiding, inspiring and sustaining the Christian community, or, as the Council puts it, ‘to see to it… that each member of the faithful shall be led in the Holy Spirit to the full development of his own vocation in accordance with Gospel preaching, and to sincere and active charity’ and to exercise that liberty with which Christ has set us free (cf. Presbyterorum Ordinis, 6)… and it is through us,” Pope Benedict continues, “that the Lord reaches souls, instructs, guards and guides them. St Augustine, in his Commentary on the Gospel of St John, says: ‘let it therefore be a commitment of love to feed the flock of the Lord’ (cf. 123, 5); this is the supreme rule of conduct for the ministers of God, an unconditional love, like that of the Good Shepherd, full of joy, given to all, attentive to those close to us and solicitous for those who are distant (cf. St Augustine, Discourse [Sermon] 340, 1; Discourse 46, 15), gentle towards the weakest, the little ones, the simple, the sinners, to manifest the infinite mercy of God with the reassuring words of hope (cf. ibid., Epistle, 95, 1).”
So, the Church is Christ’s – she is His bride – and all the bishops, in communion with the Successor of Peter, have the task and the duty of guarding her and serving her, not as masters but as servants. The Pope, in this context, is not the supreme lord but rather the supreme servant – the “servant of the servants of God”; the guarantor of the obedience and the conformity of the Church to the will of God, to the Gospel of Christ, and to the Tradition of the Church, putting aside every personal whim, despite being – by the will of Christ Himself – the “supreme Pastor and Teacher of all the faithful” (Can. 749) and despite enjoying “supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church” (cf. Cann. 331-334).
Dear brothers and sisters, now we still have one year to mature, with true spiritual discernment, the proposed ideas and to find concrete solutions to so many difficulties and innumerable challenges that families must confront; to give answers to the many discouragements that surround and suffocate families.
One year to work on the “Synodal Relatio” which is the faithful and clear summary of everything that has been said and discussed in this hall and in the small groups. It is presented to the Episcopal Conferences as “lineamenta” [guidelines].
May the Lord accompany us, and guide us in this journey for the glory of His Name, with the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of Saint Joseph. And please, do not forget to pray for me! Thank you!
[The hymn Te Deum was sung, and Benediction given.]
Thank you, and rest well, eh?
I am at the glorious Pastrami Queen on Lexington.
Mushroom Barley soup
“Smile!” … yep… he was smiling.
We spent time in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, sort of my Mecca, to which I bow several times when I come to this city. There are exhibits of incredible tapestries right not by Pieter Coecke van Aelst. Wow. There is also a small exhibit of Pre-Raphaelite stuff, of which I can’t get enough. Fascinating movement and period.
Some of the cases in the lower hallways (straight on) have been switched around. Here is something I haven’t seen:
This is a late Roman or maybe Byzantine piece, 300-500. It’s a chariot mount. You see three figures, two orators and a grammarian. The scrolls and the raised hand, palm outward as a teaching gesture give them away. They also have writing tablets. My interest in ancient rhetoric caused my eye to zoom to this piece as we were charging by.
I find this little medallion, perhaps made in Alexandria but maybe found in Tivoli, made in the early 300′s, to be charming.
A mother, probably wealthy given the hairdo, with her son.
Did any of you listen to my LENTCAzTs last year?
Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet (+1704). This is a hard-paste biscuit porcelain piece from Sévres. The Met, btw, has a spiffy collection of soft-paste, also.
When I am at the Met, I can feel my brain reactivate.
Also, during a short break for a refreshing beverage in the cafe of the American Wing, we were approached by a fellow who writes for Crisis, Tom Piatak. Review his piece from last April about Divorce. HERE He makes great points drawn from Evelyn Waugh’s Brideshead Revisited.
At Hell’s Bible we find an editorial:
Pope Francis Walks the Talk
Vatican Signals on Gays and Remarriage Are a Hopeful Beginning
A half-century after the historic changes of the Second Vatican Council, Pope Francis is showing his intent to drive a comparably ambitious agenda for the Roman Catholic Church in the 21st century.
The current synod of bishops in Rome, called by Francis to encourage reform and modernization, [ahhh... that's why he called it!] set a ringing tone of compassion this week with an opening call for a more welcoming attitude toward gay people, unmarried couples, divorced Catholics who remarry, and children in these unions. [See my earlier post about what the MSM was going to do next. HERE Did I call it?]
The bishops’ report on their first week of private discussions did not immediately change church doctrine. [Not immediately... but there's hope! As long as Francis the Hopepful, the most wonderfullest Pope evhur, the first Pope ever to smile or kiss a baby can fend off those hate-filled, close-minded mouth-breathing conservatives!] But it signaled the pope’s determination to have the church look anew at the realities of the modern world, [How revolutionary. John Paul and Benedict never considered the modern world as it is. Nope. Never. What was that phrase, again? "Dictatorship of Relativism"?] including what the bishops [No! Archbp. Forte, not "the bishops"] were moved to call the “positive aspects of civil unions and cohabitation” — a formulation unthinkable in an era when the church denounced such Catholics as “living in sin.” [But doesn't now. So, you would think that now the NYT is a fan of the Church. Right?]
The synod’s summary language about gays and lesbians was even more remarkable.
Moderation is ON.