What do you get when you cross a Jehovah's Witness and a Lutheran?
- Someone who comes to your door and doesn't say anything.
Showing posts with label Religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Religion. Show all posts
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Ruht wohl
Remember when ... St. Norbert & UWGB performed the St. John Passion, J. S. Bach?
I have to say that it was on of those first choral works for me that really helped grow as a singer. The second last Chorus, Ruht wohl, No. 67, is perhaps one of my favorite pieces ever. It means, Rest well. It's a lullaby to Jesus as he is laid in his tomb. It has long sweeping lines and the melody is haunting. It's in c minor and Bach does something truly astounding musically with the violin melody in measures 8 - 11 (this theme repeats often throughout). The melody is haunting because Bach goes from the tonic to the V and then rips open the iv chord (iv with a lowered 6th), like one of the wounds of Christ, and then slowly back down using vii and vii diminished.
The point of this whole complicated musical explanation is that from a theoretical standpoint it takes hours to truly understand how Bach put together what is really something quite whimsical. My question is whether or not Bach was truly conscious of how he put together this melody, or whether or not it was just such a talent and strength of his that it just sort of happened naturally and logically as he moved along on the keyboard.
Even if from a theoretical standpoint, Bach consciously understood the nuts and bolts behind his melody, then it is an even greater testimony to his strengths, both as a person and a musician. Bach created a melody that sticks with me because he realized that you can't lay Christ to rest with just anything, it has to sound like the heavens from which it came.
I have to say that it was on of those first choral works for me that really helped grow as a singer. The second last Chorus, Ruht wohl, No. 67, is perhaps one of my favorite pieces ever. It means, Rest well. It's a lullaby to Jesus as he is laid in his tomb. It has long sweeping lines and the melody is haunting. It's in c minor and Bach does something truly astounding musically with the violin melody in measures 8 - 11 (this theme repeats often throughout). The melody is haunting because Bach goes from the tonic to the V and then rips open the iv chord (iv with a lowered 6th), like one of the wounds of Christ, and then slowly back down using vii and vii diminished.
The point of this whole complicated musical explanation is that from a theoretical standpoint it takes hours to truly understand how Bach put together what is really something quite whimsical. My question is whether or not Bach was truly conscious of how he put together this melody, or whether or not it was just such a talent and strength of his that it just sort of happened naturally and logically as he moved along on the keyboard.
Even if from a theoretical standpoint, Bach consciously understood the nuts and bolts behind his melody, then it is an even greater testimony to his strengths, both as a person and a musician. Bach created a melody that sticks with me because he realized that you can't lay Christ to rest with just anything, it has to sound like the heavens from which it came.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
I Confess, Your Attitude Sucks.
This blog entry is in response to an article publised in Time Magazine, July 30th, 2007, Pg 60. It is also available at, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1645160,00.html
The article disscussing one Catholic's opinion with respect to the lifting of restrictions on Mass in Latin by the Pope.
The following is what I sent to the editor.
Dear Editor,
I would find an article discussing the merits of English over Latin in Mass much more interesting if the premise was not, "I don't like what I hear in English." Reading this article, I see it for what it is. Here is a person unhappy with the Catholic Church's teachings and would like nothing more than to escape back into a time when those in the pew had no clue.
The allure of Mass is not in the language that it is spoken, but of the celebration itself. It says very little about the Christian faith to attend worship out of "habit and guilt." Worshiping together as a community, as a body of believers with a common voice, celebrating the Eucharist together, is much more powerful than the "allure" of a dead language.
The most important point is that you'll never understand your faith if you just ride along through mass and not make any attempt to understand what is being said and what is going on. The lack of understanding is still what is inherently wrong with the Catholic Church today and it is a direct result of having the Mass in Latin for so many centuries. The fact that Cullen can understand what is going on in English and disagree with it should be celebrated, not condemned. The common language of the people should remain because it is their faith that makes the Church more of a community than an institution.
The article disscussing one Catholic's opinion with respect to the lifting of restrictions on Mass in Latin by the Pope.
The following is what I sent to the editor.
Dear Editor,
I would find an article discussing the merits of English over Latin in Mass much more interesting if the premise was not, "I don't like what I hear in English." Reading this article, I see it for what it is. Here is a person unhappy with the Catholic Church's teachings and would like nothing more than to escape back into a time when those in the pew had no clue.
The allure of Mass is not in the language that it is spoken, but of the celebration itself. It says very little about the Christian faith to attend worship out of "habit and guilt." Worshiping together as a community, as a body of believers with a common voice, celebrating the Eucharist together, is much more powerful than the "allure" of a dead language.
The most important point is that you'll never understand your faith if you just ride along through mass and not make any attempt to understand what is being said and what is going on. The lack of understanding is still what is inherently wrong with the Catholic Church today and it is a direct result of having the Mass in Latin for so many centuries. The fact that Cullen can understand what is going on in English and disagree with it should be celebrated, not condemned. The common language of the people should remain because it is their faith that makes the Church more of a community than an institution.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Amnesty and Immigration: Why common sense should lead the way.
As a Christian, I am the first person to want to help someone in need. I fully embrace charity and sacrifice as part of my mission of embracing Christ in others. My first inclination with the immigration debate that is going on was to say that it was not charitable or hospitable to deny people entry and a good life in our country, especially because our country really has no national ethnicity. This is not to say we do not have original ethnic groups, American Indians, but this is different because our society, culture, and government are not original to these groups. However, as I began to think about the issue of immigration and the other issues surrounding it, namely amnesty for illegal aliens, I felt that my charity was misplaced.
For a variety of socio-economic reasons we have illegal aliens in our country in probably almost every larger community in our country. Laborers are hired from Mexico to fill many jobs in farming, construction, landscaping, housekeeping, and other jobs in related fields. These people are often prospected by American employers looking for cheep labor. A portion of illegal aliens in our country make the entry into the country by themselves. None of this is unfamiliar to us, but these are the facts.
When you consider that most illegal aliens are regular people who come to our country to work and make a life for themselves, you feel a sense charity to help them because Americans want everyone who works to succeed. This is one of our few common values, a strong work ethic. Nearly everyone in our country is here in our country today because of this value. However, speaking of values, there are other values that Americans also embrace, values that define freedom, justice, fairness, and individualism. Justice or fairness is really the value that freedom rests upon. Equal opportunity gives the individual the power to accomplish what he or she wants. However, in order to provide equal opportunity fairly or equally, we have to have laws and due process.
Legal immigration is not an easy process, and in fact, it costs a lot of money. This would be the barrier to immigrating to our country, aside from the bureaucracy of legal entry. However, thousands of people legally immigrate to our country every year. They go through the process of legal immigration because they respect our country and our laws. Respect for our laws should be the first consideration by prospective immigrants and other parties of interest when seeking entry to the U. S. I was quite perplexed by the fact that many employers in various professions break the law to bring aliens into our country. The fact of the matter is that when employers do hire illegal aliens for jobs they pay these people much less than a U. S. citizen would make doing the very same job. This has the effect of “cheapening” our labor and actually making the job market and the economy worse. This hurts U. S. employers who are playing by the rules. The other side of the cost issue is that by immigrating illegally many folks have no choice but to use our public services, such as schools, medical care, and a variety of public assistance programs. This unexpected use on our system is an unexpected strain on these vital services, services we pay for.
I began this article saying that our charity as Christians is misplaced when we want to provide amnesty to illegal aliens. This is because we have other options to prevent people from entering our country illegally in the first place. We have the ability to make legal immigration easier, but still economically and socially responsible. We can provide a grant or scholarship to qualified individuals to enter our country to assist those with low income. We can also be more charitable to those groups of people in other countries who are coming to our country to find work. We have the ability to responsibly channel resources and education so that people, who might otherwise look to migrant work, are able to work in their own communities. We must consider that there are also adverse effects on these communities in other countries for allowing one of their most valuable assets, their people, an easy opportunity to leave.
The other pressing concern that should concern everyone in our country is that if it is so easy for an estimated 12 million illegal alien to enter our country, it is extremely easy for other groups, such as terrorists, to enter our communities as well. In our post 9/11 age, security of our country has a new priority and it means that we have to screen those entering and leaving our country much closer. This is simply a fact of life and cannot be avoided. We have a duty to follow the laws that we have set to ensure the safety of all Americans.
The challenge that we face is what to do with the illegal aliens that we already have in our country? While deportation seems logical, we must consider at what cost, how fair, and how practical it would be to begin deportations of the illegal immigrant populations. The first actions that should be taken nationwide are stiff penalties and accountability for U. S. employers. We have to make it a grave harm to their business to hire an illegal alien such that they will put in place effective programs to screen their workers and take responsibility for an issue that they helped create. Every business is replaceable by one that will comply with the law. It is much better for the consumer to pay higher prices for work performed by legal labor than pay an increased tax rate to fix illegal labor problems. Employers who use have utilized illegal labor should have to pay a penalty for engaging in illegal behavior.
To use some common sense, it does not seem practical to deport millions of people. However, to be fair, there should be a system to register these people, provide them with education on what procedures need to be followed to stay in the country, and assess what penalty they should pay to be able to stay. These folks are here illegally and there should be a punishment that fits the crime. I think it should be considered that illegal aliens who are naturalized into the country should pay a higher income tax rate for a specified period of time. I also think there should be an additional one time fine. They should also be listed on a public watch list for national security purposes as they were not legally screened for entry into the country. These folks should also be required at their cost to pay for any compliance to national heath standards that are necessary, i.e. vaccinations. There should be a deadline that these folks have to meet to get all of these things done. If these folks decide they do not want to pay a higher tax rate, a one time fine, and compliance with any other applicable laws on their own, they should be granted without penalty a grace period in which they would be able to return to their country. This proposed solution is both fair to the immigrants who are here illegally, U. S. citizens, and those who have immigrated legally.
By giving illegal aliens an option to make good with the law we are giving them opportunity. This opportunity is much better than simply granting them amnesty. The other side of this situation is that if they are in violation of immigration law they can be deported. The laws are in place for many good and valid reasons including national security, economic, public health, and equal opportunity. By granting amnesty to any illegal alien we cheapen the work that legal immigrants put into becoming citizens of our country. I believe in fairness and equal opportunity, but equal opportunity has to go both ways.
For a variety of socio-economic reasons we have illegal aliens in our country in probably almost every larger community in our country. Laborers are hired from Mexico to fill many jobs in farming, construction, landscaping, housekeeping, and other jobs in related fields. These people are often prospected by American employers looking for cheep labor. A portion of illegal aliens in our country make the entry into the country by themselves. None of this is unfamiliar to us, but these are the facts.
When you consider that most illegal aliens are regular people who come to our country to work and make a life for themselves, you feel a sense charity to help them because Americans want everyone who works to succeed. This is one of our few common values, a strong work ethic. Nearly everyone in our country is here in our country today because of this value. However, speaking of values, there are other values that Americans also embrace, values that define freedom, justice, fairness, and individualism. Justice or fairness is really the value that freedom rests upon. Equal opportunity gives the individual the power to accomplish what he or she wants. However, in order to provide equal opportunity fairly or equally, we have to have laws and due process.
Legal immigration is not an easy process, and in fact, it costs a lot of money. This would be the barrier to immigrating to our country, aside from the bureaucracy of legal entry. However, thousands of people legally immigrate to our country every year. They go through the process of legal immigration because they respect our country and our laws. Respect for our laws should be the first consideration by prospective immigrants and other parties of interest when seeking entry to the U. S. I was quite perplexed by the fact that many employers in various professions break the law to bring aliens into our country. The fact of the matter is that when employers do hire illegal aliens for jobs they pay these people much less than a U. S. citizen would make doing the very same job. This has the effect of “cheapening” our labor and actually making the job market and the economy worse. This hurts U. S. employers who are playing by the rules. The other side of the cost issue is that by immigrating illegally many folks have no choice but to use our public services, such as schools, medical care, and a variety of public assistance programs. This unexpected use on our system is an unexpected strain on these vital services, services we pay for.
I began this article saying that our charity as Christians is misplaced when we want to provide amnesty to illegal aliens. This is because we have other options to prevent people from entering our country illegally in the first place. We have the ability to make legal immigration easier, but still economically and socially responsible. We can provide a grant or scholarship to qualified individuals to enter our country to assist those with low income. We can also be more charitable to those groups of people in other countries who are coming to our country to find work. We have the ability to responsibly channel resources and education so that people, who might otherwise look to migrant work, are able to work in their own communities. We must consider that there are also adverse effects on these communities in other countries for allowing one of their most valuable assets, their people, an easy opportunity to leave.
The other pressing concern that should concern everyone in our country is that if it is so easy for an estimated 12 million illegal alien to enter our country, it is extremely easy for other groups, such as terrorists, to enter our communities as well. In our post 9/11 age, security of our country has a new priority and it means that we have to screen those entering and leaving our country much closer. This is simply a fact of life and cannot be avoided. We have a duty to follow the laws that we have set to ensure the safety of all Americans.
The challenge that we face is what to do with the illegal aliens that we already have in our country? While deportation seems logical, we must consider at what cost, how fair, and how practical it would be to begin deportations of the illegal immigrant populations. The first actions that should be taken nationwide are stiff penalties and accountability for U. S. employers. We have to make it a grave harm to their business to hire an illegal alien such that they will put in place effective programs to screen their workers and take responsibility for an issue that they helped create. Every business is replaceable by one that will comply with the law. It is much better for the consumer to pay higher prices for work performed by legal labor than pay an increased tax rate to fix illegal labor problems. Employers who use have utilized illegal labor should have to pay a penalty for engaging in illegal behavior.
To use some common sense, it does not seem practical to deport millions of people. However, to be fair, there should be a system to register these people, provide them with education on what procedures need to be followed to stay in the country, and assess what penalty they should pay to be able to stay. These folks are here illegally and there should be a punishment that fits the crime. I think it should be considered that illegal aliens who are naturalized into the country should pay a higher income tax rate for a specified period of time. I also think there should be an additional one time fine. They should also be listed on a public watch list for national security purposes as they were not legally screened for entry into the country. These folks should also be required at their cost to pay for any compliance to national heath standards that are necessary, i.e. vaccinations. There should be a deadline that these folks have to meet to get all of these things done. If these folks decide they do not want to pay a higher tax rate, a one time fine, and compliance with any other applicable laws on their own, they should be granted without penalty a grace period in which they would be able to return to their country. This proposed solution is both fair to the immigrants who are here illegally, U. S. citizens, and those who have immigrated legally.
By giving illegal aliens an option to make good with the law we are giving them opportunity. This opportunity is much better than simply granting them amnesty. The other side of this situation is that if they are in violation of immigration law they can be deported. The laws are in place for many good and valid reasons including national security, economic, public health, and equal opportunity. By granting amnesty to any illegal alien we cheapen the work that legal immigrants put into becoming citizens of our country. I believe in fairness and equal opportunity, but equal opportunity has to go both ways.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Quiet Past the 8th Floor
When Jim died he was taken up to heaven and greeted at the gates by an Angel. The angel told Jim that since he was a Lutheran he would be on the 10Th floor. Jim was surprised but was glad that he would get to see all his fellow Lutherans. The Angel led Jim into the Great Elevator of Heaven. As they ascended, the Angel pointed out that the Baptists were on floor one, Methodists on floor 2, Episcopalians on floor 3, etc. When there were nearing the 8th floor the Angel became very excited and said, "Shhhhh" "You must be very, very quiet and not say anything when we go past the 8th floor." Jim asked why they had to be so quiet. The Angel replied, "Well Jim you have to be quiet when passing the 8th floor because that's where the Catholics are, and they don't think anyone else is up here."
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Don't Kick Out The Liberals, Join the Roman Catholics
Once again in our times we have disturbing news. Today ripping through the other headlines is the disturbing news that the Anglican Communion is giving the "liberal" branch of the U. S. Episcopal Church an ultimatum. This week at their conference the Anglican Communion rebuked the Episcopal Church in the U.S. over the blessing of gay partners and ordaining gay clergy, such as Bishop Gene Robinson. They said stop, or face a reduced role in the church.
Before I go all blogger crazy on these people's asses, let me give you some personal back ground information. I am a gay man who attends mass weekly in the Episcopal Church. I have not been formally "received" into the church, however, I consider myself an Episcopalian. What does it mean to me to be an Episcopalian? I was raised a Roman Catholic and even attended a "minor" seminary in high school. I know a lot about the Catholic Church, their politics, and their belief structure. The Anglican Church is what I consider in many cases to be "Catholic without the Pope." The Roman and Episcopal liturgies are strikingly similar, they both have the same sets of clergy, and the belief structure is in the important areas totally compatible. So why might you ask are they two different churches? Gays, Women's role, Authority and Primacy Issues, Power, Money, Mary's role, Birth Control, Sex, etc. These are the issues that set any church apart from the Roman Catholics. Why would any church want to take a step in the direction of excluding a group of people from their church? Today's questions is: Why gay people?
My question to all of these "religious" people is, why do you have to pick on the gays? Why can't you bless us, accept us, pray with us, love us, and ordain us? Why do you have to make it "us" versus them? It even begs the question why gay people even want to be a part of your church when your leaders and members continually blast us and separate us and make us feel unwelcome? Come down off your high and mighty pulpit, swallow your pride, and get to know a gay person. The reason why they won't do that is because, when they do, they will find two people who love each other for no other reason than because they just do. Then they will have to confront their bigotry, hatred, and injustice. The so called "conservatives" just won't do that.
Homosexuality cannot be entirely explained and doesn't get a good wrap in the Bible because the Bible was written by heterosexual males over 2000 years ago, when reproducing was essential to a races survival. With all the people that the Bible supposedly excludes from any position of status like women, people of other religions and races, gay people, sinners of every other variety, etc, one has to wonder why anyone believes any of it at all? So the Anglican Communion would rather say, stop embracing gay people or we'll cut you out. Well cut me out then, I'll just continue to worship God and continue to pray that one day the "conservatives" will come to an understanding of the pain and injustice they have inflicted on gay people.
What I will do is speak out against these people. I will not tolerate their ultimatum. I will not worship in a church that censures an arm of it for welcoming all people, blessing them, and including them. I will not worship in a church that will not stand up for me as a gay person. I stand for inclusion and the truth. The truth is I'm a gay Christian. I have every right to worship and be recognized for who I am. My partner and I also have the right to be recognized as married because we are. We love each other, care for each other, and provide for each other in whatever circumstance we happen to be in. That is the meaning of commitment. Obviously the Episcopal church has a few things to learn about commitment to its gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.
So again I ask, what does it mean to be an Episcopalian in 2007? Why did I leave the Catholic Church? Why have I put forth so much effort? People are going to leave this church over this. People are going to fall away from Christ and his message of peace and love. One way or another, what ever the outcome, the Episcopal church is setting a date with empty pews and dwindling attendance, just like their Roman Catholic brothers and sisters. So you have to ask, what's the difference anymore?
LastManOut
Relevant News Links
Many Episcopalians Wary, Some Defiant After Ultimatum by Anglicans
Same-sex edict worries Bay Area Episcopalians
Before I go all blogger crazy on these people's asses, let me give you some personal back ground information. I am a gay man who attends mass weekly in the Episcopal Church. I have not been formally "received" into the church, however, I consider myself an Episcopalian. What does it mean to me to be an Episcopalian? I was raised a Roman Catholic and even attended a "minor" seminary in high school. I know a lot about the Catholic Church, their politics, and their belief structure. The Anglican Church is what I consider in many cases to be "Catholic without the Pope." The Roman and Episcopal liturgies are strikingly similar, they both have the same sets of clergy, and the belief structure is in the important areas totally compatible. So why might you ask are they two different churches? Gays, Women's role, Authority and Primacy Issues, Power, Money, Mary's role, Birth Control, Sex, etc. These are the issues that set any church apart from the Roman Catholics. Why would any church want to take a step in the direction of excluding a group of people from their church? Today's questions is: Why gay people?
My question to all of these "religious" people is, why do you have to pick on the gays? Why can't you bless us, accept us, pray with us, love us, and ordain us? Why do you have to make it "us" versus them? It even begs the question why gay people even want to be a part of your church when your leaders and members continually blast us and separate us and make us feel unwelcome? Come down off your high and mighty pulpit, swallow your pride, and get to know a gay person. The reason why they won't do that is because, when they do, they will find two people who love each other for no other reason than because they just do. Then they will have to confront their bigotry, hatred, and injustice. The so called "conservatives" just won't do that.
Homosexuality cannot be entirely explained and doesn't get a good wrap in the Bible because the Bible was written by heterosexual males over 2000 years ago, when reproducing was essential to a races survival. With all the people that the Bible supposedly excludes from any position of status like women, people of other religions and races, gay people, sinners of every other variety, etc, one has to wonder why anyone believes any of it at all? So the Anglican Communion would rather say, stop embracing gay people or we'll cut you out. Well cut me out then, I'll just continue to worship God and continue to pray that one day the "conservatives" will come to an understanding of the pain and injustice they have inflicted on gay people.
What I will do is speak out against these people. I will not tolerate their ultimatum. I will not worship in a church that censures an arm of it for welcoming all people, blessing them, and including them. I will not worship in a church that will not stand up for me as a gay person. I stand for inclusion and the truth. The truth is I'm a gay Christian. I have every right to worship and be recognized for who I am. My partner and I also have the right to be recognized as married because we are. We love each other, care for each other, and provide for each other in whatever circumstance we happen to be in. That is the meaning of commitment. Obviously the Episcopal church has a few things to learn about commitment to its gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.
So again I ask, what does it mean to be an Episcopalian in 2007? Why did I leave the Catholic Church? Why have I put forth so much effort? People are going to leave this church over this. People are going to fall away from Christ and his message of peace and love. One way or another, what ever the outcome, the Episcopal church is setting a date with empty pews and dwindling attendance, just like their Roman Catholic brothers and sisters. So you have to ask, what's the difference anymore?
LastManOut
Relevant News Links
Many Episcopalians Wary, Some Defiant After Ultimatum by Anglicans
Same-sex edict worries Bay Area Episcopalians
Saturday, February 10, 2007
My Joy
I have been writing a mass setting and my original inspiration for doing so was to write music for liturgy that is joyful. For me personally, the meaning of an expression of joy is critical because I want joy with sincerity. The first hurdle I faced was finding a musical pallet that had depth, but not darkness. It was also a great consideration to make sure the music was joyful versus happy. Happiness alone is a shallow representation of joy in Heaven, or the Love of God. This is aptly illustrated by the definitions of joy as found in the Merriam Webster Dictionary, “1a: the emotion evoked by well-being, success, or good fortune or by the prospect of possessing what one desires: DELIGHT b: the expression or exhibition of such emotion: GAIETY. 2: a state of happiness or felicity: BLISS. 3: a source or cause of delight.”
The first definition connotes a secular happiness resulting from personal success, luck, and often material pleasures. None of these things are expressly bad, yet they are not necessarily “joy in heaven.” Definition number three is much closer to what I want my music to accomplish, “a source or cause of delight.” Something that has the ability to cause or be the source of joy is much more powerful than that which we commonly know, for my music, such a thing is the delight of God’s love and the source of goodness in our lives as Christians. This source of joy is what needs to be communicated in the music that is written, so that, the person singing or listening to it feels this source of Joy and is uplifted in the expression of joy during the worship service.
The goal for this musical composition is to great a “Total Worship Experience.” I am about mid-way through the project. My concept is to write really more than just the individual mass parts but accompany them with additional music for opening, closing, and communion. I was inspired to take on this project because it was always a terrible disappointment to me as a musician to find the same lifeless music played week after week for service. Our lives as a matter of principle should be led with joy, led with recognition of the love that we share with Christ. Our music should reflect that as well. I look forward to working on this project every moment that I get, my mass of Joy.
The first definition connotes a secular happiness resulting from personal success, luck, and often material pleasures. None of these things are expressly bad, yet they are not necessarily “joy in heaven.” Definition number three is much closer to what I want my music to accomplish, “a source or cause of delight.” Something that has the ability to cause or be the source of joy is much more powerful than that which we commonly know, for my music, such a thing is the delight of God’s love and the source of goodness in our lives as Christians. This source of joy is what needs to be communicated in the music that is written, so that, the person singing or listening to it feels this source of Joy and is uplifted in the expression of joy during the worship service.
The goal for this musical composition is to great a “Total Worship Experience.” I am about mid-way through the project. My concept is to write really more than just the individual mass parts but accompany them with additional music for opening, closing, and communion. I was inspired to take on this project because it was always a terrible disappointment to me as a musician to find the same lifeless music played week after week for service. Our lives as a matter of principle should be led with joy, led with recognition of the love that we share with Christ. Our music should reflect that as well. I look forward to working on this project every moment that I get, my mass of Joy.
Friday, December 01, 2006
World Aids Day
Today Dec. 1st is marked as world Aids day. Most people are aware of the major issues that the Hiv/Aids presents. In rememberance of all the victims of this disease and their family and friends please join me in raising a prayer to these brave people.
Behind every statistic there is face. The estimated 39 million people affected world wide are so many people's mothers, fathers, daughters, sons, and loved ones. Each of these people need our help to lift up their voice, to continue researching a cure, to listen to their needs, and to place Hiv/Aids at the forefront of international discussion. World Aids Day is a time for these needs.
Contribution to fighting Hiv/Aids is often very simple. While monetary donations make vital services such as medical assitance, hospice care, and on-going research possible, solidarity is equally important. You can show your support with a red rippon, volunteering, or sharing your story so that others may better understand.
In support and prayerful rememberance,
LastManOut
Behind every statistic there is face. The estimated 39 million people affected world wide are so many people's mothers, fathers, daughters, sons, and loved ones. Each of these people need our help to lift up their voice, to continue researching a cure, to listen to their needs, and to place Hiv/Aids at the forefront of international discussion. World Aids Day is a time for these needs.
Contribution to fighting Hiv/Aids is often very simple. While monetary donations make vital services such as medical assitance, hospice care, and on-going research possible, solidarity is equally important. You can show your support with a red rippon, volunteering, or sharing your story so that others may better understand.
In support and prayerful rememberance,
LastManOut
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Just wear it….
I at one time owned a bumper sticker that had a black background and a simple white image on it of an unrolled condom that stated, “Just wear it.” I have always been very impressed with that message because it stated very simply and plainly with out confusion exactly what this item is for. It has come to my surprise that there are those people who do not know that using a condom is controversial from a moral standpoint, or banned by the Catholic Church. In all of their sexual morays, the Catholic Church has forbid its followers to use …condoms. Why? It is believed that sexual promiscuity outside of marriage as well as sex for non-reproductive purposes is gravely sinful. That leaves sex for married people who are either trying or open to getting pregnant. That’s it. No sex for anyone else ever.
The Church’s current position on Condom’s excludes them from use by anyone. This black and white, all encompassing, policy could not possibly take into the many situations in which condom use is completely appropriate from a medical and social standpoint. When should you wear a condom? You should wear one whenever you have any doubt about a partner’s STD status, when you are in no place or situation in which you could care for a child, when you simply don’t want to get pregnant, and any other time that you are not trying to get pregnant. It’s really quite simple. The condom lets you enjoy sex and gives you piece of mind. The condom is not fail safe and relies on its user knowing how to wear it properly. When used effectively it can help prevent pregnancy and STD’s. Plus, the use of a condom keeps your partner from being filled with semen, which some people find unpleasant. Wear a condom. As Martha would say, “It’s a good thing.”
So sex for enjoyment purposes is very controversial for Roman Catholics. That is why the Pope has a problem with what gay people do in bed. We enjoy sex. I also resent the statements by the Catholic Church and its clergy that homosexuals are preoccupied with sex. I am not preoccupied with sex nor are most gay people. I am not a nymphomaniac (Nymphomania is technically defined as excessive sexual desire by a female, from nymphae, the inner lips of the vulva, but to be fair, guys are way more guilty than girls in this area.) The difference between the Pope and I is that I have actually have sex and also have a healthy attitude towards it. When you consider the health effects of simply having sex, one wonders why exactly it is not encouraged more. It is widely known that sex is a natural anti-depressant, adds years to your life, and just plain makes you feel better. It’s crazy to think that people should only use it for reproductive purposes. And if you’re going to play the game, very practically, you need the right equipment. The condom should be the first thing you consider.
This article was sparked by an article I recently read and is feature in a link below. The article addresses the topic that the Vatican has recently commissioned a study on condom use. What the study will find we will probably never know because the Church is refusing to release its contents. Why should we be concerned? Well one of the world’s major religious institutions is going to use a private document to possibly make decisions about how to tell people to have sex and they aren’t even going to open it up for discussion. It’s appalling. So, no matter what the Church spouts off on with regard to a piece of rubber, please just remember for your own good, just wear it.
Yours truly,
LastManOut
More information at:
http://news.yahoo.com/
The Church’s current position on Condom’s excludes them from use by anyone. This black and white, all encompassing, policy could not possibly take into the many situations in which condom use is completely appropriate from a medical and social standpoint. When should you wear a condom? You should wear one whenever you have any doubt about a partner’s STD status, when you are in no place or situation in which you could care for a child, when you simply don’t want to get pregnant, and any other time that you are not trying to get pregnant. It’s really quite simple. The condom lets you enjoy sex and gives you piece of mind. The condom is not fail safe and relies on its user knowing how to wear it properly. When used effectively it can help prevent pregnancy and STD’s. Plus, the use of a condom keeps your partner from being filled with semen, which some people find unpleasant. Wear a condom. As Martha would say, “It’s a good thing.”
So sex for enjoyment purposes is very controversial for Roman Catholics. That is why the Pope has a problem with what gay people do in bed. We enjoy sex. I also resent the statements by the Catholic Church and its clergy that homosexuals are preoccupied with sex. I am not preoccupied with sex nor are most gay people. I am not a nymphomaniac (Nymphomania is technically defined as excessive sexual desire by a female, from nymphae, the inner lips of the vulva, but to be fair, guys are way more guilty than girls in this area.) The difference between the Pope and I is that I have actually have sex and also have a healthy attitude towards it. When you consider the health effects of simply having sex, one wonders why exactly it is not encouraged more. It is widely known that sex is a natural anti-depressant, adds years to your life, and just plain makes you feel better. It’s crazy to think that people should only use it for reproductive purposes. And if you’re going to play the game, very practically, you need the right equipment. The condom should be the first thing you consider.
This article was sparked by an article I recently read and is feature in a link below. The article addresses the topic that the Vatican has recently commissioned a study on condom use. What the study will find we will probably never know because the Church is refusing to release its contents. Why should we be concerned? Well one of the world’s major religious institutions is going to use a private document to possibly make decisions about how to tell people to have sex and they aren’t even going to open it up for discussion. It’s appalling. So, no matter what the Church spouts off on with regard to a piece of rubber, please just remember for your own good, just wear it.
Yours truly,
LastManOut
More information at:
http://news.yahoo.com/
Friday, April 14, 2006
Miracles Do Happen
The last month has been a journey for the entire family. Jerad's mom Lori was struck with a staph infection mostly due from, what we can tell, a minor surgery that she had in December. About 4 weeks ago as she was returning from vacation she was hospitalized. Since then she has undergone open heart surgery to replace a valve that the bateria ate away, she had her spleen removed, they put in a direct feeding line, and a tracheotomy so she could breathe better.
When I visted Mama this past Tuesday the speech therapist was with her in her room. She had also been transferred to a regular room out of ICU. The doctors had told us that they were not sure if she would ever be able to talk. I was awestruck when Mama was saying "Yes" and "No" and names of family members. She was also putting together sentances. It was a miracle to hear her say anything after all those long weeks in the hospital where we were not even sure if she was going to make it through the weekend. Just two weeks ago she didn't seem to understand anything that was going on around her. And then yesterday, I went up to visit and she and I had a very wonderful afternoon. Yesterday I did Mama's nails up for her for Easter. When I was finished she said, "God Bless You." I've never felt so blessed in my life, not because I helped her, but because Mama simply being able to say that made my heart leap.
Yesterday was Maundy Thursday and after our parishes Passover meal and Mass Fr. Seth came up and visted Mama with us. She had said that she would very much like to pray with him. Last year on Easter was the first time that Mama had met Fr. Seth. During the sprinkling of Holy water a drop of it hit her nose and an immediate healing took place for Mama. Mama Lori had an infection on her face a few years ago and ever since she had severe pain on her nose, which were something like headaches. After the water hit her nose the pain was gone. She was finally able to tell Fr. Seth this story last night. She had written herself a note to call him about it a year ago!!! :) The most wonderful thing about her healing was that she got such a sense of peace at that moment. She had that peace again last night when we prayed. The lord has truly been with Mama through everything.
Whether Mama's healing was actually physical or spiritual last Easter, there is truly a sign of rebirth in our lives. Mama described to me yesterday that this Easter is for her a rebirth this year. Jesus's dying and rising had brought new life to us all. In baptism, Christians experience this powerful symbol as we are submersed in water three times. We are reborn when come out of the water. We are born to a life with Christ for others so that they may know the miracle of Easter too. We are all saved in the resurrection. And as we truly and profoundly aknowlege through Jesus's death and triumph, Our sins are surely forgiven. Halleluia!!
Happy Easter
When I visted Mama this past Tuesday the speech therapist was with her in her room. She had also been transferred to a regular room out of ICU. The doctors had told us that they were not sure if she would ever be able to talk. I was awestruck when Mama was saying "Yes" and "No" and names of family members. She was also putting together sentances. It was a miracle to hear her say anything after all those long weeks in the hospital where we were not even sure if she was going to make it through the weekend. Just two weeks ago she didn't seem to understand anything that was going on around her. And then yesterday, I went up to visit and she and I had a very wonderful afternoon. Yesterday I did Mama's nails up for her for Easter. When I was finished she said, "God Bless You." I've never felt so blessed in my life, not because I helped her, but because Mama simply being able to say that made my heart leap.
Yesterday was Maundy Thursday and after our parishes Passover meal and Mass Fr. Seth came up and visted Mama with us. She had said that she would very much like to pray with him. Last year on Easter was the first time that Mama had met Fr. Seth. During the sprinkling of Holy water a drop of it hit her nose and an immediate healing took place for Mama. Mama Lori had an infection on her face a few years ago and ever since she had severe pain on her nose, which were something like headaches. After the water hit her nose the pain was gone. She was finally able to tell Fr. Seth this story last night. She had written herself a note to call him about it a year ago!!! :) The most wonderful thing about her healing was that she got such a sense of peace at that moment. She had that peace again last night when we prayed. The lord has truly been with Mama through everything.
Whether Mama's healing was actually physical or spiritual last Easter, there is truly a sign of rebirth in our lives. Mama described to me yesterday that this Easter is for her a rebirth this year. Jesus's dying and rising had brought new life to us all. In baptism, Christians experience this powerful symbol as we are submersed in water three times. We are reborn when come out of the water. We are born to a life with Christ for others so that they may know the miracle of Easter too. We are all saved in the resurrection. And as we truly and profoundly aknowlege through Jesus's death and triumph, Our sins are surely forgiven. Halleluia!!
Happy Easter
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Forgiveness
Have you ever had one of those moments where you were completely reminded of something at random that happened in the past?
Recently, I was blindsided by a past memory in high school. Frankly, I was just minding my own business helping a customer at work and the past decided to pick on me. There was nothing about that moment at all that should have triggered that memory. And, as small a moment as it was, it echoes through the halls of my history as a staunch reminder of how I deal with certain situations in my life.
Sophomore year of high school was the beginning of my academic career at St. Lawrence Seminary. My high school, small Catholic, all boys, boarding school, among other things, was a place in which to deepen ones spiritual connection with God and explore your own vocational calling. Discernment is to say the least a messy process. No one in my opinion just "knows" that you are going to be a priest, and if you were so firmly convinced of that, St. Lawrence made sure you knew there are options.
However, there are some things at my high school which are not optional. There is no option for example for girls to attend St. Lawrence. As a gay man, I could care less one way or another on that issue, unlike many of my more enlightened, seemingly feminist, classmates. (I am being sarcastic.) There is a host of rules that one must abide by and keeping all of the little ones strait is task enough because not all of them apply at all times. Which brings me to my point of contention: at St. Lawrence you are forbidden to wear any sort of hat indoors. Though, it is highly encouraged that you wear one outdoors in the winter. The latter needs little enforcement inMt. Calvary , WI
One blustery day my sophomore year of high school I was preparing to go outside and I put my stocking cap on in the lounge before I went out the first set of double doors to go outside. Fr Randy, our dorm prefect, was nearby and starkly reminded me that there are no hats in doors. I protested some and explained that I was very nearly out the door. After a bit of disapproval for his impudence, I was obliged to remove my cap. As I descended the stairs to the outer door I put my cap on but a few feet from the door. Fr Randy had in fact followed me to make sure that I didn't put it on. He then made me remove my stocking cap again but a few feet from the door, which I was clearly exiting.
Why am I concerned about this moment?
Fr. Randy was not motivated to truly improve student behavior, but rather to nit pick in the most annoying fashion. His motivation was to have some sport at my expense. I know this man took particular joy in lording this over me. I have never forgiven him for this. The only thing that I wanted out of this entire situation was to have my head warm before it met ice cold air. I think it particularly pernicious of Fr. Randy to insist upon otherwise.
This is a fine example of the extremes that the faculty at my high school regularly went to at length.
I cannot image any parent of any of the guys at my high school being worried over whether one of them momentarily had a stocking cap on before they went outside. It was a completely ridiculous humiliation that Fr. Randy decided to thrust upon me. I have never forgiven him for this. I will never be able to understand how someone can be that petty and insistent. This small rather stupid little moment in my past is important because it shows directly how personal liberty is chipped off at one piece at a time, bit by bit, so that you are left with nothing more than a mere pebble of liberty.
The point of this article is not to address the merits of hat wearing or liberty, but to confront the particular guilt I have for holding this angst against Fr. Randy all these years. We should forgive people; at least, that is the predominant opinion. This little story was an opportunity in my past to say to him, "Fr. Randy technically you are right I have violated the rules and I am sorry." Instead, I have projected very much hostility onto this man over something that, forgetting whatever motivations he had, I could have very gracefully obliged. This however, is not like me at all. I would rather fight, argue my point, and win. Had Fr. Randy and I been in a different place at a different time, I would have mopped the floor with him on this intrusion of personal liberty. However, the faculty at my high school had really dirty little tricks at their disposal and something like the hat rule was not a matter in which one cares to be victim to detention, community service, and a host of other lost privileges.
I can tell you I persist in my un-forgiveness for this reason. Fr. Randy has never apologized and I suspect never will. You cannot forgive those who will not be forgiven. You are thus obliged to maintain your position and let it rub you for whatever it is worth that you may not be victim to such an occurrence again.
Recently, I was blindsided by a past memory in high school. Frankly, I was just minding my own business helping a customer at work and the past decided to pick on me. There was nothing about that moment at all that should have triggered that memory. And, as small a moment as it was, it echoes through the halls of my history as a staunch reminder of how I deal with certain situations in my life.
Sophomore year of high school was the beginning of my academic career at St. Lawrence Seminary. My high school, small Catholic, all boys, boarding school, among other things, was a place in which to deepen ones spiritual connection with God and explore your own vocational calling. Discernment is to say the least a messy process. No one in my opinion just "knows" that you are going to be a priest, and if you were so firmly convinced of that, St. Lawrence made sure you knew there are options.
However, there are some things at my high school which are not optional. There is no option for example for girls to attend St. Lawrence. As a gay man, I could care less one way or another on that issue, unlike many of my more enlightened, seemingly feminist, classmates. (I am being sarcastic.) There is a host of rules that one must abide by and keeping all of the little ones strait is task enough because not all of them apply at all times. Which brings me to my point of contention: at St. Lawrence you are forbidden to wear any sort of hat indoors. Though, it is highly encouraged that you wear one outdoors in the winter. The latter needs little enforcement in
One blustery day my sophomore year of high school I was preparing to go outside and I put my stocking cap on in the lounge before I went out the first set of double doors to go outside. Fr Randy, our dorm prefect, was nearby and starkly reminded me that there are no hats in doors. I protested some and explained that I was very nearly out the door. After a bit of disapproval for his impudence, I was obliged to remove my cap. As I descended the stairs to the outer door I put my cap on but a few feet from the door. Fr Randy had in fact followed me to make sure that I didn't put it on. He then made me remove my stocking cap again but a few feet from the door, which I was clearly exiting.
Why am I concerned about this moment?
Fr. Randy was not motivated to truly improve student behavior, but rather to nit pick in the most annoying fashion. His motivation was to have some sport at my expense. I know this man took particular joy in lording this over me. I have never forgiven him for this. The only thing that I wanted out of this entire situation was to have my head warm before it met ice cold air. I think it particularly pernicious of Fr. Randy to insist upon otherwise.
This is a fine example of the extremes that the faculty at my high school regularly went to at length.
I cannot image any parent of any of the guys at my high school being worried over whether one of them momentarily had a stocking cap on before they went outside. It was a completely ridiculous humiliation that Fr. Randy decided to thrust upon me. I have never forgiven him for this. I will never be able to understand how someone can be that petty and insistent. This small rather stupid little moment in my past is important because it shows directly how personal liberty is chipped off at one piece at a time, bit by bit, so that you are left with nothing more than a mere pebble of liberty.
The point of this article is not to address the merits of hat wearing or liberty, but to confront the particular guilt I have for holding this angst against Fr. Randy all these years. We should forgive people; at least, that is the predominant opinion. This little story was an opportunity in my past to say to him, "Fr. Randy technically you are right I have violated the rules and I am sorry." Instead, I have projected very much hostility onto this man over something that, forgetting whatever motivations he had, I could have very gracefully obliged. This however, is not like me at all. I would rather fight, argue my point, and win. Had Fr. Randy and I been in a different place at a different time, I would have mopped the floor with him on this intrusion of personal liberty. However, the faculty at my high school had really dirty little tricks at their disposal and something like the hat rule was not a matter in which one cares to be victim to detention, community service, and a host of other lost privileges.
I can tell you I persist in my un-forgiveness for this reason. Fr. Randy has never apologized and I suspect never will. You cannot forgive those who will not be forgiven. You are thus obliged to maintain your position and let it rub you for whatever it is worth that you may not be victim to such an occurrence again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)