Corruption linked to Borneo deforestation

Li' cousin chanting

Last Sunday, I brought my 10 year old cousin to the Old Latin Mass. And was I suprised at how fast she picked up at chanting the Gregorian Chants. I thought that was really lovely.

Seeing how easy it was for my little cousin to accept and chant regardless that she has never heard them before, made me think of why Jesus said, 'Let the little children alone, and do not stop them from coming to me; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of Heaven belongs.' Matthew 19:14.

On the contrary, unfortunately, many grown-ups shun at the sound of Gregorian chants and are not able to accept that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy. (Sacramentum Caritatis §4)

I think it the same goes with accepting Latin as the official language of the church. Because it is such a 'foreign' language therefore many write it off as 'irrelevant' to modern times.

Anyway, here's a video of  a solemn pontifical Tridentine Mass that was celebrated in St. Peter's Basilica a few days ago - a prove that this traditional Masses are being celebrated within the Vatican walls:

You can't always get what you want

You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes you might find
You get what you need.

- song by Rolling Stone 

Doing what you love means dealing with things you don't.
- House S7 Episode 19, The Last Temptation

The Claude Newman story

The following story of Claude Newman took place in Mississippi in 1944. The account was told by Father O'Leary, a priest from Mississippi, who was directly involved with the events. He has left for posterity an audio recording it.  This is the story transcribed here.

Claude Newman was a negro man who worked the fields for a landowner. He had married when he was 17 years old to a woman of the same age. One day, two years later, he was out plowing the fields. Another worker ran to tell Claude that his wife was screaming from the house.

Immediately Claude ran into his house and found a man attacking his wife. Claude saw red, grabbed an axe and split the man's head open. When they rolled the man over, they discovered that it was the favorite employee of the landowner for whom Claude worked. Claude was arrested. He was later sentenced for murder and condemned to die in the electric chair.

While he was in jail awaiting execution, he shared a cell-block of some sort with four other prisoners. One night, the five men were sitting around talking and they ran out of conversation. Claude noticed a medal on a string around another prisoner's neck. He asked what it was, and the Catholic boy told him that it was a medal. Claude said, "What is a medal?" The Catholic boy could not explain what a medal was or what its purpose was. At that point, and in anger, the Catholic boy snatched the medal from his own neck and threw it on the floor at Claude's feet with a curse and a cuss, telling him to take the thing.

Claude picked up the medal, and with permission from the prison attendants, placed it on a string around his own neck. To him it was simply a trinket, but he wanted to wear it.

During the night, sleeping on top of his cot, he was awakened with a touch on his wrist. And there stood, as Claude told the priest later, the most beautiful woman that God ever created. At first he was very frightened. The Lady calmed down Claude, and then said to him, "If you would like Me to be your Mother, and you would like to be My child, send for a priest of the Catholic Church." With that She disappeared.

Claude immediately became terrified, and started to scream, "a ghost, a ghost", and fled to the cell of one of the other prisoners. He then started screaming that he wanted a Catholic priest.

Father O'Leary , the priest who tells the story, was called first thing the next morning. He arrived and found Claude who told him of what had happened the night before. Then Claude, along with the other four men in his cell-block, asked for religious instruction, for catechism.

Royal wedding: What's with the hats?

The royal wedding was certainly a splendid and most envied one. I simply loved Kate's wedding gown, love the long sleeved lace and its simplicity.

It was also undeniably a fashion parade when the women guests arrived with their stylish attire and perhaps most captivating to the audience were their hats!

Well, aside the fashion statement each lady was trying to portray, did you know that there are reasons for their head coverings in church? This includes why the bride wears a veil too.

Meanwhile, if you can recall, both princes (and all the other men in uniforms) removed their caps upon entering the abbey and put them on again as they exit the church.

So, men remove their head coverings while women wear head coverings in the church. All these gestures mean something and are symbolical. Let's check out the biblical reasons to these:

1. Scripture

1 Corinthians 14:37

Anyone who claims to be a prophet, or to have any spiritual powers must recognize that what I am writing to you is a commandment from the Lord. 

St. Paul tells us in his first letter to the Corinthians (11: 1-16) that women must cover their heads because it is a Sacred Tradition commanded by our Lord Himself and entrusted to St. Paul.
 
2. Divine Hierarchy 

 1 Corinthians 11:3

But I should like you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

There is a hierachy established by God, in both the natural and religious spheres where the female is subjected to the male. In a marriage, God has given the husband authority over his wife as mentioned by St. Paul to the Ephesians:

Ephesians 5:22-24
Wives should be subject to their husbands as to the Lord, since, as Christ is head of the Church and saves the whole body, so is a husband the head of his wife; and as the Church is subject to Christ, so should wives be to their husbands, in everything.

Nevertheless, we should be clear that this subjection does not degrade women in any way because in God’s kingdom everyone is subjected to a higher authority.

1 Corinthians 11:12

...and though woman came from man, so does every man come from a woman, and everything comes from God.

3. Symbol of Christ's Incarnation

One should know that in the Old Covenant, both Jewish men and women used to cover their heads when they were worshiping. However, later the Jewish Christians changed this custom as they did with many other Jewish customs. The practice of veiling is to be a symbol of Christ's incarnation (God the Son in human flesh). As mentioned in 1 Corinthians 14, these customs were not man-made, rather inspired by the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 11:4-5

For any man to pray or to prophesy with his head covered shows disrespect for his head. And for a woman to pray or prophesy with her head uncovered shows disrespect for her head...

I shall quote Catholic Knight here:
Again, this goes straight back to the incarnation. All of this is a symbol of what we Catholic Christians believe about Christ, his incarnation, and the Eucharist. Paul tells us that if a man covers his head during mass, he dishonors his spiritual "head" which is Christ. In other words, a man who covers his head during mass dishonors Christ, because his action of veiling himself sends the physical statement that Christ was not incarnate as a man. The woman, on the other hand, representing the Church, ought to cover her head because if she believes that Christ is truly incarnate, she should veil herself as a sign that the Church has been made holy by Christ as his spouse. In doing so she honors Christ as a symbol of his sanctification on the Church. She also honors her husband with a physical sign that he represents Christ, because Christ came in the form of a man. The chapel veil is a sign of holiness because Christ has made his Church holy, and women represent the Church as the "bride" of Christ. It is a sign that the Church is covered and under Christ's protection. This is the symbolism of the Church's relationship to Christ. It is not so much a statement of a particular woman's holiness, but rather the Church's holiness.


4. Angels

1 Corinthians 11:10

...and this is why it is right for a woman to wear on her head a sign of the authority over her, because of the angels.

St. Paul explains that the angels, who are well aware with the customs of the church and what they mean, are offended when we ignore or don't follow the liturgical customs of the Church. We know that the angels are present and participate together with us each time we celebrate Holy Mass as explained in the Holy Scripture by St. John:

Revelation 8:3

And another angel came and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense that he might offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which is before the throne.

As a conclusion, we know that the symbolism of the veil takes that which is invisible, the order established by God, and makes it visible.

Hit and run

I would like to ask for your prayers for my friend's mom who was involved in a hit and run accident on Wednesday.

As another vehicle knocked them from behind, she fell off the motorcycle and hit the left side of her head on the road (her helmet was detached from her head already then). Her father who suffered injuries on his leg tried to get help from the passerbys but none stop until an Indian taxi driver (God bless his soul!) offered his help. Isn't it sad how the Malaysian attitude has become?

Right now she is still in a coma. On Thursday the doctor performed a surgery to stablilize the compression in her brain. Her pupil which was not dilating before this started to dilate after the surgery - that itself was a miracle, because the doctor said that the chances were really small.

Yesterday another surgery was done, this time with unhappier news. The doctor mentioned that her brain is still bleeding.

We went to visit her in the hospital yesterday where she was placed in the ICU. My friend and her sister talked to her, and we could see tears from both her eyes and at a point, there was even slight movement of her lips. Before we left the ward, both of them sang her the bedtime song she taught to her grandchild when he was a baby. Sigh...During our 2nd visit with another friend, we prayed for her and chanted the Kyrie, Pater Noster and Regina Coeli.

Please continue to pray for a miracle and strength for the entire family.

Papal infallibility

I think God has a way to get me to learn about Him and His Church. A tough way, unfortunately. But with my take-it-easy nature, I think He knows that that's the only way to push me. Have slacked at blogging since after Holy week - since I'm back on Facebook and watching House :)

Today we debated about sacred music and then I brought up how the Popes are infallible in his teachings. I have learnt about that recently but he challenged me the meaning and the degree of the Popes teachings being incapable of making mistakes.

So here's what I've found out and would like to share to you - an excerpt from Wikipedia:

Papal infallibility is the dogma in Roman Catholic theology that, by action of the Holy Spirit, the Pope is preserved from even the possibility of error when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the universal Church a dogmatic teaching on faith as being contained in divine revelation, or at least being intimately connected to divine revelation. It is also taught that the Holy Spirit works in the body of the Church, as sensus fidelium, to ensure that dogmatic teachings proclaimed to be infallible will be received by all Catholics. This dogma, however, does not state either that the Pope cannot sin in his own personal life or that he is necessarily free of error, even when speaking in his official capacity, outside the specific contexts in which the dogma applies.

Pope Leo XIII as successor of apostol Peter and bishop of Rome
has infallibility; so he guides the ship of God's Church
through dangerous sea. This painting is published in 1903.

Many people do confuse these 2 words :

1. infallible - incapable of making mistakes

2. impeccable - not liable to sin

Here is another excerpt from Catholic Answers that explains this difference:

Given these common misapprehensions regarding the basic tenets of papal infallibility, it is necessary to explain exactly what infallibility is not. Infallibility is not the absence of sin. Nor is it a charism that belongs only to the pope. Indeed, infallibility also belongs to the body of bishops as a whole, when, in doctrinal unity with the pope, they solemnly teach a doctrine as true. We have this from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church:

Luke 10:16

He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, 

and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.

Matthew 16:18  

So I now say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my community. And the gates of the underworld can never overpower it. 

Vatican II’s Explanation

Infallibility belongs in a special way to the pope as head of the bishops (Matt. 16:17–19; John 21:15–17). As Vatican II remarked, it is a charism the pope "enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter." 

The infallibility of the pope is not a doctrine that suddenly appeared in Church teaching; rather, it is a doctrine which was implicit in the early Church. It is only our understanding of infallibility which has developed and been more clearly understood over time. In fact, the doctrine of infallibility is implicit in these Petrine texts:

 John 21:15–17

When they had eaten, Jesus said to Simon Peter, 'Simon son of John, do you love me more than these others do?' He answered, 'Yes, Lord, you know I love you.' Jesus said to him, 'Feed my lambs.'

A second time he said to him, 'Simon son of John, do you love me?' He replied, 'Yes, Lord, you know I love you.' Jesus said to him, 'Look after my sheep.'

Luke 22:32

But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail, and once you have recovered, you in your turn must strengthen your brothers.'

Matthew 16:18  

So I now say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my community. And the gates of the underworld can never overpower it.

Based on Christ’s Mandate

Christ instructed the Church to preach everything he taught (Matt. 28:19–20) and promised the protection of the Holy Spirit to "guide you into all the truth" (John 16:13). That mandate and that promise guarantee the Church will never fall away from his teachings (Matt. 16:18, 1 Tim. 3:15), even if individual Catholics might.

As Christians began to more clearly understand the teaching authority of the Church and of the primacy of the pope, they developed a clearer understanding of the pope’s infallibility. This development of the faithful’s understanding has its clear beginnings in the early Church. 

Peter Not Infallible?

As a biblical example of papal fallibility, Fundamentalists like to point to Peter’s conduct at Antioch, where he refused to eat with Gentile Christians in order not to offend certain Jews from Palestine (Gal. 2:11–16). For this Paul rebuked him. Did this demonstrate papal infallibility was non-existent? Not at all. Peter’s actions had to do with matters of discipline, not with issues of faith or morals.

Furthermore, the problem was Peter’s actions, not his teaching. Paul acknowledged that Peter very well knew the correct teaching (Gal. 2:12–13). The problem was that he wasn’t living up to his own teaching. Thus, in this instance, Peter was not doing any teaching; much less was he solemnly defining a matter of faith or morals.

Fundamentalists must also acknowledge that Peter did have some kind of infallibility—they cannot deny that he wrote two infallible epistles of the New Testament while under protection against writing error. So, if his behavior at Antioch was not incompatible with this kind of infallibility, neither is bad behavior contrary to papal infallibility in general. 

Read more here...