I am going to try out a new and hopefully fun feature for our growing group…instead of “7 Quick Takes Friday” or “3.5 Even Quicker Tuesday Takes” or “5 Wednesday Fake Takes” (I just made that one up actually) I thought of something that I have not seen thus far in the Catholic blogosphere, and which might have a slight twist of originality–but it will need your participation in order to be successful. And mostly just to have some Sunday fun.
I am going to attempt to post 3-5 songs every Sunday that are not particularly “religious” in nature, and then ask you to listen to them with new ears–in other words try to find something, even just one line or phrase, that speaks to you about our respective walks with our Lord Jesus Christ, and then share that message with the rest of us.
There will be no songs posted with strongly suggestive themes or language which you cannot use in front of your children for the most part, but some of them may come to the edge of those things, and if so I will tell you ahead of time, so you can be forewarned. The point here is to find out what the secular world is actually saying to us, and how we can respond. However it is difficult to do so if we cannot dare look at the world as it is. So some of these tunes may have a frankness to them, and if you are not sure in your hearts about listening to any, then please do not do so.
You are welcome to add songs as well, as long as they fit the same criteria above, but the one rule is you must relate it to the Faith somehow, and share in a sentence or two what the hidden spiritual theme might be, at least in your eyes.
Please don’t be too legalistic about it either, and know that there are no “right or wrong” answers here. I think this could be lots of fun, and I hope it catches on! Some weeks we may even have a particular theme to look for, such as songs that relate to a certain Bible verse or concept, or ones that mention a particular fruit of the Spirit, such as love or joy. This week the songs are just generally interesting though, and ones which reflect well the culture we live in–both the good and bad.
OKAY what religious message could I EVER get from this one??? Well simple– ”And the eagle flies with the dove…” Have you never met someone you KNEW you would have nothing whatsoever in common with, not only romantically but just in general, and they think opposite of you on every single issue from religion to politics, but somehow you just find that you connect? And you, and I, are called to love them–just as they are. As Christians this should be happening more and more, not less and less, to us.You should truly ”love the one you’re with.” Possibly not in the way that they are suggesting here, but with the love of our Lord. RIght? See, hidden spirituality!!!
Okay now another:
Well here was a song that had a few controversies in its time…there are all kinds of rumors that Anton Lavey of the Church of Satan is featured on the cover of this album. It by the way is not him in any case. But the haunting melody and the words, and even that controversy itself, tell me one thing. We must walk with discernment. One line of the song is “this could be heaven, this could be hell.” Is that not true of life in Christ? Without the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the Church, how do we ever know, as Pilate once asked, “what is truth?” We can easily be led astray by the enemy, but we do not have to be.
The well-known Snopes website clears up the “Hotel California” confusion here in case you still have any doubts. The song was in reality about the musicians themselves (the Eagles) seemingly ”having it all” during their heights of fame and fortune but still being trapped within themselves. Perhaps in reality that is a form of satanism…but the song is a warning against it, not a promotion of it.
Last one for today: WARNING HERE–this one contains 3-4 very quick but sexual images, yet the song is not really complete without them so I have included it “as is…” so watch this one only if you can honestly handle that please. I have purposefully linked it without showing an image to prevent any “occasions of sin” here:
The theme from one of the best series ever on television–HBO’s “True Blood.” While the show is not likely for your children, the video itself presents sexuality and spirituality juxtaposed one to another in a very “in your face” sort of way. The song “Bad Things” is written and sung by one Jace Everett, a studied Christian who nearly became a Pentecostal minister but instead went into music. I include it along with the video, as it shows the constant battle of love and lust, good and evil, sin and redemption, and ”True Blood” does the same thing in nearly every episode. It is not just about vampires and hobgoblins.
So that is it for today, folks. Let me know what you think–and please post your own too!
Now that Easter and Divine Mercy Sunday have passed, we fly towards the 3rd pinnacle Feast of the Catholic Faith–Pentecost Sunday, where the power and gifts of the Holy Spirit became manifest and the Church was literally born according to Acts 2. Due to my background with the charismatic renewal, both positively and negatively, I have spent much time searching my own heart in order to know where I stand as a now-and-forever Catholic Christian on the topic of spiritual gifts. The following article and the links attached should give a broad view of this, and I pray they will help those of you who may have some of the same questions I have had since returning to the Church. May we all experience, as Blessed John XXIII prayed, a “new Pentecost.” And may it be a fully authentic one.
Icon of the Pentecost (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
A few years back I wrote an article called “Towards a Sacramental Charismatic Theology.” I would in fact suggest reading that article first, in order to get my initial take on the topic, and as it is a sort of “part one” to this current post. The link for that article is as follows:
What I hope to do today is expand upon that topic, and to share my own insights since then which have pushed me further from “charismatic” and closer, hopefully, to the Sacramental. I would be clear at this point that I am against none of the genuine moves of the Holy Spirit which can and still do occur, both personally and in corporate worship. And many of those moves involve authentic charismatic gifts. What concerned me then and even more so now is the general attitude of those within what is called the “charismatic movement,” both Catholic and otherwise. I believe that we have begun to undermine the entire Church by not having clearer teaching on the topic, however. I do not expect to remedy that today in one blog, but as someone who has participated since 1970, when this movement was but a raw fledgling of experimentation after Vatican II, and who ended up outside of the Church precisely as a result of it for the next 35 years, sharing then in 6 different Protestant faith communities during that time (not counting 2 or 3 nondenominational ones), and my share too of New Age and other more tangible spiritualities due to a hunger that was never quite met in that entire time, I think I have developed at least a sense of what is missing when we reduce that which is “charismatic” to a movement.
For that reason I no longer identify myself as a “charismatic Christian” these days. On the other hand I belong to the largest and most truly charismatic Church within all of Christianity. I believe in the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit as well as the 9 charisma listed in 1 Corinthians 12. I believe fully in apostolic authority and private revelations from the Lord Jesus Christ to chosen believers. On rare occasions I have even had a few moments where I felt that He has spoken to me quite directly in situations where guidance or help was so sorely needed.
Man I sound like a regular Joyce Meyers here, don’t I? So how is it I have come to distance myself from a movement which obviously has done such good and highly influenced the Church overall in the last 50 to 100 years?
One thing I mentioned in some detail in the first article was the way most such meetings are conducted, whether Catholic or Protestant. Here I wish to expand on that thought and share why I believe that to be sometimes detrimental to the greater move of the Spirit within the Church. I was always troubled by the lack of consistency on following the clear Scriptural guidelines on the charismatic gifts, specifically as delineated in 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14. I think they are some of the most misused passages in the movement in fact, and I want to spend some time dissecting them. Not all will agree with my thoughts here, but I believe, as with all Sacred Scripture, it needs to be read in its own light, as well as within the light of other Scripture passages and the ongoing Sacred Tradition of the Church, and not with the insatiable desire to “get the gifts” at all costs.
So here goes, and I would only implore you to read what I share with an open mind and heart, and not with a stubborn desire to stay within a “feel good” Christianity that bears less fruit and, in the long run, feels “less good” than simple tried-and-true Catholic Christianity.
I would first of all start with the Catechism of the Catholic Church(CCC), and the definition of what is commonly called the “baptism of the Holy Spirit” among Pentecostals and charismatics. In articles 1285-1289 of the CCC we read the following:
1285 Baptism, the Eucharist, and the sacrament of Confirmation together constitute the “sacraments of Christian initiation,” whose unity must be safeguarded. It must be explained to the faithful that the reception of the sacrament of Confirmation is necessary for the completion of baptismal grace.89 For “by the sacrament of Confirmation, [the baptized] are more perfectly bound to the Church and are enriched with a special strength of the Holy Spirit. Hence they are, as true witnesses of Christ, more strictly obliged to spread and defend the faith by word and deed.”90
I. CONFIRMATION IN THE ECONOMY OF SALVATION
1286 In the Old Testament the prophets announced that the Spirit of the Lord would rest on the hoped-for Messiah for his saving mission.91 The descent of the Holy Spirit on Jesus at his baptism by John was the sign that this was he who was to come, the Messiah, the Son of God.92 He was conceived of the Holy Spirit; his whole life and his whole mission are carried out in total communion with the Holy Spirit whom the Father gives him “without measure.”93
1287 This fullness of the Spirit was not to remain uniquely the Messiah’s, but was to be communicated to the whole messianic people.94 On several occasions Christ promised this outpouring of the Spirit,95 a promise which he fulfilled first on Easter Sunday and then more strikingly at Pentecost.96 Filled with the Holy Spirit the apostles began to proclaim “the mighty works of God,” and Peter declared this outpouring of the Spirit to be the sign of the messianic age.97 Those who believed in the apostolic preaching and were baptized received the gift of the Holy Spirit in their turn.98
1288 “From that time on the apostles, in fulfillment of Christ’s will, imparted to the newly baptized by the laying on of hands the gift of the Spirit that completes the grace of Baptism. For this reason in the Letter to the Hebrews the doctrine concerning Baptism and the laying on of hands is listed among the first elements of Christian instruction. The imposition of hands is rightly recognized by the Catholic tradition as the origin of the sacrament of Confirmation, which in a certain way perpetuates the grace of Pentecost in the Church.”99
1289 Very early, the better to signify the gift of the Holy Spirit, an anointing with perfumed oil (chrism) was added to the laying on of hands. This anointing highlights the name “Christian,” which means “anointed” and derives from that of Christ himself whom God “anointed with the Holy Spirit.”100 This rite of anointing has continued ever since, in both East and West. For this reason the Eastern Churches call this sacrament Chrismation, anointing with chrism, or myron which means “chrism.” In the West, the term Confirmation suggests that this sacrament both confirms and strengthens baptismal grace.
There is some significant stuff here for those who seem compelled to seek a separate “baptism in the Holy Spirit” after being initiated both into Christ through baptism and then Confirmation. The most substantial point is this, also alluded to in my other article—we do not need a separate “baptism in the Spirit” once we are validly confirmed. We do at times need to awaken the gifts given to us within these Sacraments, but that can be done in a wide variety of ways. We also need to separate the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, with us at baptism to some extent but specifically embossed upon our hearts and souls at the moment of Confirmation—these are listed in the prophet Isaiah’s writings, and are the means by which Jesus performed His earthly ministry, as well with which we are to perform ours. In Isaiah 11:2 we find these listed—
1 There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots. 2 And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord.[1]3 And his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord.[2]
Listed more concisely (Wisdom, Understanding, Counsel, Fortitude, Knowledge, Piety, and Fear of the Lord ) and per Church Tradition, we receive the fullness of these seven gifts during our own personal “Pentecost” of Confirmation, at the time when the bishop (or the priest administering the Sacrament under his authority) lays hands upon us and anoints us with chrism oil. We are also told that this is a one-time event which cannot be repeated, as it places an indelible or permanent mark upon our soul, as does baptism and Holy Orders. Only these three Sacraments do this. I wonder then how we can go to lay persons later on and then ask them to lay hands upon us all over again so we can finally get the “good stuff” (i.e. speaking in tongues generally), and if this is not an actual insult to the original gift at times?
There are as mentioned 9 charismatic gifts, and neither here nor anywhere else in the text of Sacred Scripture can we find indication that we are each to have the “gift of tongues” or any of the rest for that matter. In 1 Corinthians 12: 4-11 it demarcates these and clearly not all persons had the same gifts:
4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit;5 and there are varieties of service,but the same Lord;6 and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8 To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.[3]
One of the most serious misconceptions here is that we “all” should be speaking in tongues in the first place! This idea comes from one isolated verse in 1 Corinthians 14 where St Paul tells us:
5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified.[4]
“I want you all speak in tongues…” that certainly sounds crystal clear and not to be missed (even though somehow the Church Universal inexplicably did so for 1900 years!). Unless of course you go back and read the rest of the chapter of course, first and foremost being 1 Corinthians 14:1 (which is in reality a summary of all three chapters together):
1 Make love your aim, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy.[5]
What was St Paul actually saying here? Read in its fullness, and continuing on with the chapter, it could easily be inferred that St Paul, rather than encouraging “everyone” to speak in tongues, was rather suggesting strongly to the Corinthian diocese that they were totally missing the boat by having such an obsession. And we have this same obsession today. You cannot attend a charismatic meeting without tongues being present, and it is very nearly an absolute expectation that, if you unfortunately somehow have missed out on this gift up until now, you will not need to “leave for home without it!” In other words get in the prayer line and do it now, do what is told you and tongues will then be yours. Period.
Another discrepancy I believe exists has to do with the uses of the gift of tongues. One school of thought is that it is primarily a “prayer language,” and I believe this can be a valid usage of the gift (1 Corinthians 14: 14-16). However, if used in this way, there is a very specific stipulation that has been ignored by virtually every Pentecostal or charismatic prayer group in the world, or so it would seem at least, and that is the following: do not, without an interpreter present, do this during public gatherings of believers!!! That would include the Holy Mass first and foremost, but also during gatherings of believers where worship often includes what could be thought of as (or sound like) the “buzzing of bees” to the outsider. This misuse, more than any other thing, is what gives charismatic meetings a bad name, and somewhat ironically St Paul apparently knew of this problem even during New Testament times. But they ignored him then, and we ignore him now.
When I first attended a Catholic charismatic meeting in the 1970s, a supposedly amazing new phenomenon was taking place called “singing in the Spirit.” What happens is that one person starts singing in tongues, no interpretation, and almost instantly or on cue the entire group is going at it within a millisecond or two. I question this practice. It is something that has been peculiar to Catholics more so than others in the renewal movement and I believe there is an obvious reason for this which I totally missed for many years because I was unaware of some of our own great Catholic Tradition. Catholics, from the least to the greatest, are used to singing at least some form of Gregorian chant if even on a small level—and even if it is simply the melodic version of the “Pater Noster (Our Father)” as sung at most Sunday Masses in our day. It is built into our Catholic DNA as it were. The “singing in the Spirit” mentioned above is amazingly similar to this. Protestants who do not know this type of singing do not tend to use it during even the most Pentecostal moments or at the height of their worship services. But Catholics do. Far from being “proof” that the Holy Spirit has sovereignly taken over the group like the cloud hovering over the Israelites of old, I believe rather it is chiefly a cultural peculiarity. If you were to go to the Middle East for example you might hear some Semitic sounds while “singing in the Spirit,” and in the Deep South of the United States some heavy-duty country-sounding “hooting and hollering” as well as the accompanying running up and down the aisles might take place instead. Yet each claim theirs to be the “real” manifestation of the Spirit. I will just say buyer beware. It is not wrong to sing in tongues—privately and at home. But I would challenge anyone to show me where it happened in the New Testament or in the early Church as a group. I have not found it. I do not think you will either.
Lastly I have seen Catholic charismatic renewal groups and literature take the two short passages of the CCC which even mention charismatic manifestations (specifically 696 and 2003), quoted in full below,
696 Fire. While water signifies birth and the fruitfulness of life given in the Holy Spirit, fire symbolizes the transforming energy of the Holy Spirit’s actions. The prayer of the prophet Elijah, who “arose like fire” and whose “word burned like a torch,” brought down fire from heaven on the sacrifice on Mount Carmel. This event was a “figure” of the fire of the Holy Spirit, who transforms what he touches. John the Baptist, who goes “before [the Lord] in the spirit and power of Elijah,” proclaims Christ as the one who “will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.” Jesus will say of the Spirit: “I came to cast fire upon the earth; and would that it were already kindled!” In the form of tongues “as of fire,” the Holy Spirit rests on the disciples on the morning of Pentecost and fills them with himself The spiritual tradition has retained this symbolism of fire as one of the most expressive images of the Holy Spirit’s actions. “Do not quench the Spirit.”
2003 Grace is first and foremost the gift of the Spirit who justifies and sanctifies us. But grace also includes the gifts that the Spirit grants us to associate us with his work, to enable us to collaborate in the salvation of others and in the growth of the Body of Christ, the Church. There are sacramental graces, gifts proper to the different sacraments. There are furthermore special graces, also called charisms after the Greek term used by St. Paul and meaning “favor,” “gratuitous gift,” “benefit.” Whatever their character – sometimes it is extraordinary, such as the gift of miracles or of tongues – charisms are oriented toward sanctifying grace and are intended for the common good of the Church. They are at the service of charity which builds up the Church.
and calmly turn them on their head in order to claim (somewhat dubiously in my opinion) everything from insisting that Blessed John Paul II had this gift to the stranger-than-truth claim that every single charismatic gift is for all of us, and just a matter of “stirring it up” from within. Accordingly to that view, it has been mysteriously lying dormant since the moment of our Confirmation, and we just need to grab hold of it. Somehow the Church apparently lost this entire concept, even though she managed to keep the Sacraments intact and administered correctly for over 2000 years, and it is thus up to the charismatic renewal to come to the rescue and bring it back! Stirring up the gifts within us in nothing new—St Paul again told St Timothy to do so in 1 Timothy 4: 13-15:
13 Till I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching. 14 Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophetic utterance when the council of elders laid their hands upon you. 15 Practice these duties, devote yourself to them, so that all may see your progress. [6]
But was he saying “Timmy—can I call you Timmy my son—could you PLEASE get cracking on that tongue-talking business or you will lose the Holy Spirit one of these days when you least expect it?” Was he saying that? I do not think so. Again context is everything, and I would point you above to the passage where Paul tells our beloved St Timothy to “stir (to in other words not neglect) the gifts.” Do you see tongues even on the list here? It would appear that St Timothy, a bit more timid than his modern namesake Tim Tebow, was not taking the time or energy to use the gifts given to him at his ordination into the priesthood. And that was what St Paul was commanding and exhorting him to do here.
I could go on and on, but much has already been written by others such as the great Tim Staples—yes another Tim (a former Southern style rooting-tooting Assemblies of God/Pentecostal minister, as I in fact was) and other Catholic apologists to verify what I share here. Time does not permit sharing verse by verse, but I would encourage you first and foremost to get out your good Catholic Bibles, blow off the dust, and read 1 Corinthians 12-14. Slowly. Like me you may be surprised what is and is not there.
Here are some of the thoughts of a great man and my brother in the Church, Tim Staples: It is worth a watch.
No, I do not fully identify as a “charismatic Christian” anymore. I do not need to. I am part of the “one, true, holy, Apostolic” (and may I dare to add one phrase to the Creed, especially since John Piper and Wayne Grudem have no problems messing with it from time to time!), and yes, “charismatic Church.” We are all charismatic as Catholic Christians. But let us do it God’s way. We surely should stir up our gifts and ask for more. But with that asking comes the responsibility of using them properly as well. Yours may indeed be tongues, mine perhaps prophecy (which incidentally was not necessarily foretelling the future but “forth-telling” and expounding on the already revealed Word of God more often than not). Prophecy incidentally is as such a gift that I am convinced is often used by priests who mysteriously bring those wonderful homilies where one sits and says “how did he know about my need to hear that word today.” Perhaps your gifts lie in those moments during silent Eucharistic Adoration where you kneel before Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament full of confusion and eventually leave the Chapel or altar suddenly very clear on some personal issue you have been struggling with—all of these are valid gifts of the Holy Spirit who lives within you and each of these are ways they may be developed or revealed. I would as well not neglect to mention how often meditating on the Mysteries of the Rosary or simple but prayerful Scripture meditation are major ways in which God speaks deeply to our hearts, often in very unexpected ways. The Holy Spirit is flowing within us every moment if we allow Him to do so.
Being a faithful Catholic Christian, if we are true to our Faith, should and does cause us to stir up whatever gifts we may have. So yes that command is to us as well. But to assume it must be “tongues” is a fallacy. And the charismatic movement is, in fact, made up of the entire body of Christ (again 1 Corinthians 12; 12-31 brings this out beautifully—look it up). The Catholic walk in Christ indeed has it all.
As a “last of the last words,” at least for this post, I would refer you as well to a great and in-depth post by a friend of mine, Jared Dale Combista, from his great blog Verum Nocet: He is a young man from the Philippines who has done a great deal of study on the topic and his information well worth considering. Here is his link:
ALL SCRIPTURE REFERENCES: Catholic Biblical Association (Great Britain). (1997). The Holy Bible : Revised Standard Version, Catholic edition, translated from the original tongues, being the version set forth A.D. 1611, Old and New Testament revised A.D. 1881-1885 and A.D. 1901 (Apocrypha revised A.D. 1894), compared with the most ancient authorities and revised A.D. 1952 (Apocrypha revised A.D. 1957) New York: National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA.
First and foremost this is far from a theological treatise on suffering or death. Neither is it a judgment on what the condition the eternal soul of Whitney Houston was in this last Saturday, February 11, 2012 when she was found near death in a pool of her own bathwater.
And to those of you who would say such inane statements such as “it was just her time to go” I simply would say one word–nonsense. Extreme nonsense. God did not “take her from us.” She departed this earth because of horrible complications from a seemingly wasted life. And lest you think I am being harsh, I surely am not. It could have easily been me. Or you. I will share more about that later on.
However the manner in which she left this world does not mean we cannot or should not attempt to make some sense, both comforting and perhaps to some extent disturbing as well, in her very tragic demise. I think that there are lessons for each one of us to discover if we choose to. And I hope we do so with some searing and ferocious honesty.
The most eerily powerful lesson I can think of here is in the form of a question—“what does Hollywood and fame do to people in general and particularly to Christians who become superstars and their testimonies?” I would not be the one to rant and rave about the evils of Tinsel town, nor do I think all Christians must avoid its glitter at any cost. I do wonder, however, if we ever stop and think what it may be doing to our young sisters and brothers in Christ who, often pushed forward by parents who name Christ as their own, into “making a name for themselves.”
Whitney Houston started out as a Gospel singer. Few from this generation may even remember this. But her mother, Cissy Houston, who sang a combination of Gospel and secular, was well-known long before Whitney was. Whitney was 15 when she first released a secular hit song, singing backup for Chaka Khan on the original version of “I’m Every Woman.” Without blame, I do have to wonder why a parent who knows something of the savage music industry would intentionally expose her daughter to that environment, and she did so regularly, taking her to night clubs as a young girl and even having her sing on stage with her. That in fact was how she was eventually discovered.
The last thing I would do is to pick on the grieving older Ms. Houston now or later. In fact a link sharing her perspective is listed at the bottom of this post. But it has to have at least crossed her mind that her daughter might be alive today were it not for the surreal success she had at such a young age. It would to me as a parent.
There is a long list of such juvenile-aged “Christian celebrities” who could be named here, and in each and every case whose parents might have at least monitored or slowed down the process but instead allowed a recording agent to begin controlling their child or children’s upbringing. And it seldom ends well. Britney Spears and Jessica Simpson were both touted as “virgins to marriage” and have both gone on to lead very rough lives indeed. The Jonas Brothers singing group is probably one of the prime examples of a strongly evangelical Christian idyllic family where each of the boys even publicly wore chastity rings and often spoke glowingly of their faith in Christ. Now Nick, the youngest, has publicly stated he “would not mind at all” doing nude scenes on Broadway if the opportunity presented itself, and Joe, on his first solo music video, in it lays shirtless in a bed while a young woman in panties straddles him. It might be noted that the Jonas’s father is a former Assemblies of God minister and that the boys were home-schooled. Nick nevertheless did his first Broadway performance (presumably with clothes on!) at age 7. It somehow strikes me as a form of schizophrenia on the part of parents who are aiming on one hand to protect their children from the “evils of the world” by homeschooling them, and then still allowing the youngest a taste of Broadway and beyond at such a tender age. Jon and Kate Gosselin, whose TLC (The Learning Channel) television series about their strongly Christian family (also Assemblies of God) while raising 8 children, were in fact divorced during production of the show. And, for a Roman Catholic example, Charlotte Church is, well, not too “churchy” these days, having had a child while unmarried and living with her baby’s father, as well as openly calling Pope Benedict XVI a “Nazi.” She once had sung for Blessed John Paul II at age 12.
My point is absolutely not to condemn or judge any one of these individuals or their culpability before God. But the danger of obtaining huge amounts of money and extreme constant boosts to one’s ego while lavishly partaking of this world and its goods eventually takes its toll. And in the cases I mentioned, families have been destroyed, as well as reputations. And I have pointed out only a very few of the many such stories.
But then again it is not my fault, is it? I think perhaps some part of it is actually. When I support Miley Cyrus concerts or CDs after her own “Christian father” Billy Ray Cyrus allows her to pose topless at age 16, and then blames it on photographer Annie Leibovitz, who is undoubtedly provocative and pushy but who also does not have final control over his minor child during any given photo shoot, is it any wonder why Miley might now be breaking away from the “straight and narrow?” And she too indeed is doing so at age 19.
Oh and did I make Britney go wild? No. But perhaps I eagerly read about it through my National Enquirer subscription and in some cases otherwise added to her publicity stunts by my enjoyment of the many entertainment gossip mongers. Do I own the albums or support the television programs which added to the fall of so many of these very precious young people who were never taught to properly handle fame? Maybe not individually so, but do I relish in a Jerry Springer type societal mentality which takes glee in the serious problems of our Hollywood counterparts?
We all do bear some responsibility here. That is my point. We relish the bad in others, and pray little if at all for them. Then we criticize and belittle them when they slip, instead of giving our hand to them whether personally or in prayer.
I will share a deeply delicate and rather private situation that bore much of this out to me rather chillingly a number of years ago. I also wish to divulge this with much care, as I would not wish to glorify the many mistakes or sins in my own life. When I was very much active in the LGBT lifestyle and community, I met someone one evening during one of my many visits to the local LGBT single’s bar, aptly named the “Gay Nineties.” He invited me to his beautiful condo in south Minneapolis, and I willingly decided to accompany him to his home that evening and night. Without much detail I will say only that this was a fairly common occurrence for me during those early years after my own Christian marriage had ended or more accurately failed due to my own weaknesses (1993 to be exact).
What I remember most about this young man, Carl was his name, was that, beneath the pleasant exterior and enjoyable conversation, a certain deep sadness was almost built into his eyes somehow. He seemingly had everything; a great job, a gorgeous home decorated with expensive original art, and he was “easy on the eyes,” as they say. In short he was a handsome and still youthful man in his 30s. We talked again a time or two later on, but nothing further ever occurred between us after that initial night. A year later, through some totally unrelated circumstances, I found out that he was near death due to HIV (AIDS). When I had met him twelve short months before, he must have known then of his status, but had not told me about it. In his defense we were relatively “safe” in our activities, but we all know that no “protection” (President Obama please take note here as you seek to enable even more sexual recklessness in our society!) is perfect. Just a couple of weeks later Carl died, and I was left wondering anxiously if I had a deadly virus in my body. Thanks only to God, and certainly in spite of my stupidity and lust, after being tested and re-tested, I turned out to be HIV negative. But to think that a young and vibrant man who I knew, was attracted to, and frankly had felt a bit rejected by in the end, had most likely known when he met me that there was no actual chance of anything permanent between us ever, was basically staggering to me. I believe he may well have been attempting in his own way to be merciful to me by not allowing me to get too close to him, and for that I will be ever thankful. But he was simply gone now, and it gave me pause in every way.
And Carl’s premature passing away may be the very reason I am here writing this today, because I did at least slow down and took drastically more care and caution after that event. So his death indeed, at least indirectly, has had some meaning to every person reading these words. I only wish I had known about his situation—maybe I could have comforted his sadness and at least given him some hope if I had. I certainly would have at least tried to had I known.
How does all of this relate to Whitney Houston? Quite simply that none of us are invincible. None of us are guaranteed the rest of today, much less tomorrow. And some, such as Whitney and Carl, will die before their time due to errors or sins within their own lives and bodies, or at least the consequences of those errors. Others of us, no less innocent, will be somehow spared and given an opportunity to do penance for both ourselves and those who have gone on before us. And before I condemn Cissy Houston, the Jonas parents, or the Gosselins for that matter, I need to stop and realize that all of them—every one of them in fact— almost surely wanted in their hearts what they thought was best for their children, and might well have made different decisions if given the chance once more.
Lent is around the corner. It may be the last Lent I or you ever see on this earth. Will we waste it by attempting to live in the fast lane but hoping our brakes hold out when we hit the speed bumps? Or will we rather allow Whitney’s and Carl’s lives, and so many others who are in reality just like all of us, whose past, whatever it was, caught up with them, to have real and lasting meaning?
I read just yesterday that Whitney’s last public performance was Thursday of last week, and she sang the children’s song “Jesus Loves Me.” So perhaps in her last days Whitney had come full circle to her Gospel music roots after all. Rest in peace, and may a merciful God hold you tight, Whitney and Carl. Your lives—and deaths—were not in vain.
Almost as a kiss from God Himself, as I was uploading this link to YouTube, I had the Rosary website up at the same time, and as these words “I’m Every Woman” shot from my computer speakers, the words “Our Father who art in heaven” and “Hail Mary full of grace” poured out from those same speakers. Whitney truly rest in peace, and in the arms of our Heavenly Father and Blessed Mother–the true “Every Woman.” God bless to all.
Shortly after President Obama was elected, Beyoncé was asked to sing this famous song at one of his excessively many Inaugural Balls. Etta later made some disparaging remarks, and many people “wondered why.” Bitter old woman, they thought. Obviously I do not know the full circumstances behind this macabre choice, but I will forever find it a sad irony that this African-American pioneerblues singer, who had popularized this song in 1961 (the year of Obama’s birth incidentally), was passed over for an honor that was so obviously hers and hers alone. In Etta’s own words:
Somehow our “ever inclusive” President had someone I personally consider to be less than full of integrity, who had portrayed Ms. James in the movieCadillac Records, sing it to him on his special day for the first dance as President. In my view, that would be like having an Elvis impersonator performing at your wedding reception when the real Elvis Presley was still alive and had offered to share his legendary talent and status for you, now wouldn’t it?
This year, on January 20, the 3rd anniversary of this sad event, Etta James passed away from terminal leukemia, just 5 days before her 74th birthday. She died watching from afar the first African-American President who had so rudely ignored her. And, while she apologized for her remarks, to my knowledge he never apologized for his choice. No doubt she, like so many, had dreamed of seeing ”at last” a minority President, and knowing her own song was performed in front him by a “younger and prettier” version of herself had to hurt deeply. And if you doubt Etta could still have pulled it off with style and grace, check out this clip from Dancing With The Stars later that same spring. She was a class-act legend then and now.
We can commit adultery in all kinds of ways, and I think a great. great wrong was done to this amazing and fine woman whose voice did not waver even in later years. It sadly says a lot about our values when Beyoncé is chosen over Etta to do Etta’s own song, and further done so at a party Etta literally helped to create by her pioneering spirit in the days before racial integration even seemed likely, much less a black President in her lifetime. I will always hurt for her over it. And for the record I would have made a few “disparaging remarks” myself. RIP Etta James.
As I sat in Holy Mass this morning, on the Feast of St Cecilia, virgin and martyr who is patroness of musicians, I also prayed for the repose of President John F Kennedy. He was shot—and killed—48 years ago this date in 1963. He also, during a campaign tour before becoming President, took in Mass at the Cathedral of St Paul where I attend. Strange to think of him sitting somewhere In those same pews where I today worshipped, praying in front of that same amazing life-sized Crucifix, and receiving the Eucharistic body, blood, soul and Divinity of our Lord from the same Tabernacle I this day prayed in front of. May his soul rest in peace. And may we never, ever forget how short life actually is.
The amazing use of religious imagery (such as St. Sebastian for one) and words in this song always boggles my mind, and yet it was not in any way written about the Faith as Michael Stipe, although raised as an evangelical Christian himself, is closer to agnostic in his own journey at this time. In fact he states it is not a religious song at all in any sense.
Somehow though this song seems to me like a cry for help, whether consciously or unconsciously…and to more than one of us it has at times expressed our doubts, fears, frustration and even anger towards the religious “system” that all too often has beaten us up instead of giving our lives the meaning it was meant to. And it is okay to be angry. But letting that anger push us TOWARDS God instead of away from Him–that is the real secret of healing. And that can only come through the very system we run from at times, the Church and the Sacraments. It is a paradox. Great music.
