Decisions, decisions . . .

I received a Comment - which I have not approved (but not yet deleted) - about a Chaplet of prayers, giving a link to a website. When one follows the link, it takes one to a site which purports to have what appear to be 'revelations' from our Blessed Lady to a lady living in (as far as I can tell) the USA.

Now : as Followers and regular readers will know, I'm still quite new to this - and the site in question gives no indication of any Ecclesiastical authority, which I would have assumed was important to validate such 'revelations'.

Should I publish this Comment, with its link, or simply delete it ?

Thought for Today

‘The time for contrition is the whole of the present state of life. For as long as one is a wayfarer, one detests the obstacles which retard or hinder one from reaching the end of the way.’
S. Thomas Aquinas

Causes not Symptoms

Earlier in Lent I was discussing the suggestion that one should be more concerned to ‘pick up’ things in Lent than to ‘give up’ things : and the ‘Thought for Today’, coupled with a comment made about it (for which H/T to Miss Ellen E), raised a further idea in my mind on that topic.

In the ‘Thought for Today’ the Curé d’Ars was suggesting that a good way to break bad habits was to do things which are the opposites of one’s besetting sins : and although this may be easier said than done, it is at least reasonably easy to understand as a concept – I mean, if one is overmuch given to eating Chocolate, for instance, then clearly giving it up for Lent is an obvious step on the road to mastering one’s cravings, and thus to controlling the greed which leads to overindulgence.

Similarly, one may decide to make regular use during Lent of some devotion which opposes some theological vice to which one knows one is prone : I know someone, for instance, who is saying Cardinal Merry del Val’s ‘Litany of Humility’ every day of Lent this year.

So far, the sainted Curé’s advice is perfectly straightforward, and easy to understand – and, indeed, to follow at least in theory.

What occurred to me, though, was that for some of us our besetting problems may not best be approached in this way. Your besetting sin, for example, may in fact be something over which you have little direct control, simply because it is more the symptom of a problem than a problem itself. For example : your over-indulgence in chocolate may just be greed – in which case ‘giving up’ chocolate is what you need to do - give it up; no more, and no less.

If, though, it’s not ultimately greed that causes you to overdo the chocolate but – say – that you are subconsciously using it as ‘comfort food’ to help you cope with some long-standing emotional trauma, then recognising this, and actively working during Lent to try and address the cause of your chocoholism – ‘picking up’, in other words, the need to remove the source of the problem, and actively addressing that – will actually do you far more good, especially in the long term, than simply ‘treating the symptoms’.

Now : you may be feeling that this is a bit like saying ‘during Lent I will lose two stone in weight’, and I accept that using Lent in that way is ultimately not what it’s about.

Where what you’re trying to do here, though, is to reduce or eliminate problems which lead one to bad habits, whether they are vicious of themselves, or merely bad for one – and I think most moral theologians would agree that almost anything which is physically or mentally bad for one is, ultimately, at least likely to be responsible, sooner or later, for sin.

Thus, using Lent as a time not only to try to treat the bad habits – the symptoms – but also to identify, and try and resolve, the causes of those bad habits, actually is something else worthwhile which we can ‘pick up’ as a part of our Lenten discipline.

Thought for Today - Lent III

‘The way to destroy bad habits is by watchfulness, and by doing often those things which are the opposites to one’s besetting sins.’
S. Jean-Marie Vianney, Curé d’Ars

Thought for Today

‘We do not become perfect by the multiplication of exercises, penances, and austerities, but rather by the purity of love with which we do them.’
S. Francis de Sales

At Cæsarea in Palestine . . .

‘ . . . S. Adrian, Martyr, who in the persecution of the Emperor Diocletian was first cast to a lion for the faith of Christ at the command of the governor Firmilian; and afterwards, his throat being cut by a sword, received the crown of martyrdom.’

So runs one entry in the Martyrology for today, 5th March : and I thought that S. Adrian was worth remembering for a moment.

The Martyrology doesn’t actually tell us why S. Adrian was martyred; but given that it was during the Diocletian persecution, one can guess that it was ‘ex odio fidei’. – ‘out of hatred for the Faith’.

Look what he had to endure, though : he was thrown to the lions, and afterwards had his throat cut. One may speculate why the lions didn’t kill him themselves; but during the persecution of Diocletian they were probably suffering from overwork and chronic obesity, so perhaps the need for a final coup de grace is not altogether surprising.

The critical point, though, is that he was willing to go through all that . . . and why ? Because he was a Catholic Christian, who felt that the truth of the Faith was worth standing up for . . . even if that meant standing up to a lion, or an executioner with a sword.

Are we really fit descendants of our predecessors in the Faith ?

No-one is talking about martyrdom – except perhaps by pinpricks; and yet how many of us, certainly in the Western World, are really standing up for the Faith.

The Government’s obsessions are irritating us; but why ? After all, we could eliminate the problem.

How ? Well, to give just one example, how about taking our Catholic Schools out of the ‘state system’, and running them privately – in which case the legislation wouldn’t affect us in the same way. Of course it would cost money; and it would undoubtedly mean that we all had to dig deeper into our pockets to support our Schools once they lost Government funding . . . but then they’d be Catholic Schools, teaching the Catholic Faith.

The problem is, I suspect, that most people don’t want to do that. Why not ? No, not a conviction that our schools are best controlled by the Government : just the pain of the financial cost of ‘going it alone’ without taxpayer’s money.

But is it really too painful ? I wonder if it’s more painful than being thrown to the lions, and then having your throat cut ?

I’m sure that if the Government made Catholicism illegal, and punishable by death, tomorrow, we’d have a fine new crop of English Martyrs. The problem is that this type of martyrdom, where the threshold is constantly being pushed away, just a millimetre or so at a time, isn’t quite so dramatic : you’re never actually being asked to ‘die for the faith’, just asked ‘not to rock the boat’ by accepting something that isn’t really too dreadful . . . is it ?

So by the time you get to the end, you’ve given way on everything else, and it hardly seems worth dying for that last little bit . . . but I wonder how comfortable it will feel on Judgement Day ?

Please : let us tell the Government – and all the political parties – NOW that they will get no support from Catholics unless they state clearly and unequivocally that they pledge an absolute commitment to Life; and (at least) to respect for the Church’s rights to teach its own Faith in its own schools . . .

. . . or should we just find – or found – a political party which supports Christian values, is pro-Life, and will fight against the modern ‘culture of death’ ?

Thought for Today

‘Men are generally the carpenters of their own crosses.’
S. Philip Neri