Mothers and Motherhood

I'm not good at keeping track of holidays, much less blogging about them, but since I know it is Mother's Day and can't pretend that I don't...here is a post about being a mother.

...I know nothing about being a mother.  That noun is as foreign to my vocabulary as...well...the word I don't know that should be inserted [here].  I am not a mom, and won't be for a very long time, if ever.  But the idea of motherhood and being a mom has been on my mind quite a bit over the years.  It is a topic that surfaces frequently when one is discerning the religious life.

"Oh, I love kids and want to be a mom; I could never be a nun," people would say when they discovered I was discerning a life of celibacy.  This was rather unsettling for me.  It implied that I do not love kids and, needless to say, I do.  I used to be absolutely certain that I was going to get married, live in a plantation home, and have twelve children.  Yet, even more so, comments like these showed a very skewed understanding of what it means to be a Sister and--by extension--what it means to be a mother.  

"Mother" is a noun, denoting a woman who has had the exquisite gift of cooperating in God's creative act.  It is one of the only privileges that the angels do not possess.  She carries within herself another human individual, and this unique and special little person has been specifically entrusted to her care by God.  She is given the great responsibility--and joy--of loving and caring for this child.

How could one not desire such a beautiful thing?  I know that many young women, thinking that they might have a religious vocation, struggle to give up the desire of being "mother".  I will be very honest: I never had this problem, and it makes me very sad when young women think they must give up the desire for motherhood to be a Sister or a nun.  They do not, nor should they.

See, while the above definition is not untrue, it is not wholly complete.  "Mother" is not merely a noun.  It is a verb.  It is not just having responsibility for another human individual--it is carrying that responsibility out.  It is caring for another person even when caring for them involves an extreme and unthinkable amount of self-sacrifice.  It is loving them unconditionally, even when one is not feeling very 'loving'.  It is loving them with Christ's Love; the noun side without the verb side is a shadow of what a mother is, of what she is supposed to be.

I realized this at a very young age.  I knew that it was possible to be a mother (noun)  without mothering (verb), largely due to my discovery of partial birth abortion at age nine.  And, having friends and family who were adopted and wanting to adopt myself, I knew that mothering was possible without being a mother.  Of the two, I deemed the verb the most important, and I realized I would never have to give it up.

"Love one another as I have loved you." We are called to love all children--all people--with the self-sacrificing love of a mother.  We are all called to mother.  The verb is the most important part, and we are called to fulfill it, not only with "our" children, but with *every* Child of God.  I never struggled with the "I'll-never-be-a-mother" aspect of the religious life, because I am perfectly capable of mothering no matter what my state.  Mothering is the most important, beautiful, and obligatory aspect of motherhood, and it was one I did not have to give up even were I to become a Sister.

Today, I would like to thank everyone who has ever fulfilled the most important aspect of motherhood: mothering. I would like to thank the mothers who loved their children enough to go through with their pregnancy, and who cared for them enough to put them up for adoption, or who cared for them enough to struggle through sacrifice and keep them.  I would like to thank the mothers--especially mine--who sacrificed years caring for and loving their children.  I would like to thank the godmothers, friends, and sisters who loved with a mother's charitable Love.  Most of all, I would like to thank the Sisters and nuns who devote their entire lives to mothering poor lost sinners in this valley of tears. Here's to you all, you who understand most what the word "mother" means.  May Mary--the perfect mother in both senses--forever guide and pray for you, and may God bless you on this special day!

Of Canyons and People

(Warning: unedited, coffee- and sleep- deprived post.  Read at your own risk.)

Recently, I found myself here^, gazing upon one of the seven wonders of the world: the Grand Canyon.  As I sat with my godchild, our legs dangling off the edge of a cliff, I looked out upon the gargantuan crater to the semi-circled mountains beyond.  The land of my birth not being condusive to far-sight (too many trees upon too-flat ground), I had never seen so far in my life.  I could see for miles, until distance overcame the clear air and the background faded into a smoky haze of grey.  Beneath our feet, between us and the Canyon floor, were large, flat, plain-like rocks that would have made a perfect stage for a rock concert.  The acoustics would have been grand.

In the distance I saw the river, the white water of the rapids noticeable even from my height:

But the water which I knew must have been swirling in a volitile rage miles away looked as still as this picture; for all its motion, it never moved.  In fact, the Canyon as a whole was as silent and motionless as these photographs (though much more impressive, of course).  I asked a fussy godchild what she thought lived down in the Canyon.

"Mountains," was the sniffled answer.

"True!  But what else?"

"More mountains...and rocks..."

Indeed.  All there was were rocks, rocks, and more rocks.  The monotnoy of the place was smothering, even as the size and open spaces were liberating.  I could not help but think that I was looking upon a thing that had been there eons before I knew existence, and would be there long after I am gone.  I was looking upon a thing that never changed, or knew things that changed, or cared. So...

I sat and held my godchild in my arms and thanked God that humans are fleeting.  Every one of the tourists (many from foreign countries, speaking in a babble of languages I did not understand) had come to see a marvel that for years has stolen the breath of the world.  And yet each of them, with their miniscule lives, were ineffably more precious.  Unlike the semi-circular plateaus, they were unrepeatable.  Unlike the Canyon, they would only be here once and for a very short time.  The Canyon was a marvel.  It was beautiful.  It was awe-inspiring.  It made me think of eternity.  But, mostly, it made me think of how much more of a marvel are the people around me--so small in comparison, but far more alive, far more unique, far more wondrous.  The Canyon would be there to inspire and impact millions for generations to come.  But that person I see on the street?  My elderly grandfather?  That child in the store?  They won't be.  I went to the Canyon seeking wonder, as do most.  I left thinking that it had been around me all the time, I was just never good at noticing it.

Finding Jesus in Journey

My youth director’s favorite example of finding God in the media was the song “Open Arms” by Journey.  He was listening to the song in his car one day, when the following interpretation for it simply hit him…very hard, apparently, for he always cried when speaking of it afterward. 

Listen to it first before hearing the Christian interpretation of it.

Here is the song: Open ArmsLyrics

Lying beside you, here in the dark

Feeling your heart beat with mine

Softly you whisper, you're so sincere

 How could our love be so blind

 We sailed on together

 We drifted apart

 And here you are, by my side

 

 

 My youth director saw the words of this stanza being sung from his own perspective, the perspective of a sinner who “drifted apart” from Christ, only to find that there Christ was by his side—He had never left.  Lying in bed at night while you pray, thinking of all those times that you abandoned God in favor of sin...haven't you ever wondered how He could forgive so unfaithful a lover?  How "blind" is His Love, in that respect! 

[Chorus]

 So now I come to you with open arms

Nothing to hide, believe what I say

 So here I am, with open arms

 Hoping you'll see what your love means to me

 Open arms

The chorus is Jesus speaking, and His arms are not only open in welcome; they are open on the Cross, open in the truest Love, just hoping that we will realize how much He Loves us.  Just hoping that we will choose to Love Him with heart, mind, and soul, that we will choose to be happy with Him in heaven forever.

 Living without you, living alone

This empty house seems so cold

 Wanting to hold you

 Wanting you near

 How much I wanted you home

My youth director sees this stanza through his own view again.  Isn’t the house--our very lives--cold and empty without Christ in them?  “Our hearts are restless until they rest in Thee, O God.”  Sometimes, we search for God without our even knowing it.  That is how my youth director saw these lyrics.  Personally, when I first read the lyrics, I thought of these words through Christ’s eyes.  The house is the Tabernacle.  Jesus, in a vision, once said to St. Josepha that the hearts which receive Him in the Eucharist are sometimes colder than the stones beneath His feet were, that night in prison before He was crucified. Today, in the Tabernacle, Christ Himself—Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity—waits for us to receive Him in Communion.  He dwells in the Tabernacles throughout the world, the Divine Prisoner.  In human terms, how cold and lonely that little house must be!  Jesus wants to embrace everyone who has ever lived and who ever will…but how few come to Him with open and loving hearts in Holy Communion!  When I think of all the chances I have missed to sit with the Divine Prisoner in Adoration, I think of these lines in this song.

Now that you've come back

 Turned night into day

 I need you to stay

“Our hearts are restless until they rest in Thee, O God.” And once they rest in You, once they have felt your grace and Love, they can never truly go back.  There is no experience so terrible, no circumstance so sorrowful, that can ever fully erase God from our memory.  Finding Jesus truly does “turn night into day”.  This song is not a Christian song; it’s a love song.  But when we listen to it through the lens of our Love for Jesus…what a perfect Love song it is!  Have you ever found Jesus like this, unexpected and unlooked for in a secular song?

Grace Before Reading...and Watching...and Listening

Being Catholic is not about going to church on Sunday.  It is not about knowing the Catechism.  It is not about how much money you give, people you help, or incense you burn.  Do not misunderstand me; these things are very important, and necessary.  But if you think that that is what being a Catholic is all about, you are gravely mistaken.  Being Catholic is about living Catholic.  Your Faith is not something you do; it is something you ARE.  You do not have Catholic; you ARE Catholic. 

Therefore, Catholicism is not something just for Sundays, any more than my being Tally is just for Sundays.  Catholicism is not something that I have, do, or experience only at this time, or in this place.  It is an inseparable part of me, and is always there.  Every single part of my life, every breath I take and moment I live, should be colored by my Faith.  One should see and do everything in light of Christ and the Church He founded. 

One of the most important places to begin coloring our thoughts with Christ is the media, because our entire world today is media.  The vast majority of what we learn is brought to us by television, music, the internet, and books.  That in itself is not a bad thing.  The media in all its various forms is a useful tool.  However, like all tools, it needs to be used properly; when it isn’t, it can harm us.  So, the media should have the same focus and end that everything else in our lives has: to bring us closer to Christ.  Our media should be as Catholic as we are. 

I can practically hear what you are thinking right now...

“You mean you want us to condemn ourselves to cheesy saint movies and repetitive Christian songs?”

"No more Hunger Games?!?"

"Your blog sucks and I am not listening to you."

No, no; I can assure you, that idea is as nightmarish to me as it is to you.  I merely mean to say that if we see everything through our Faith and truly live Catholicism, we are going to critically analyze what we see, hear, and read in light of our Faith.  We are going to try to find Jesus in what we listen to and view.  Just as a lukewarm Catholic only sees Jesus in Church, it is a less-than-ideal Catholic that only sees Him in the Bible.  If you live Catholic you will be able to find Him in just about anything.  If it isn’t Catholic, you will be able to make it Catholic.

My old youth director used to give his students a challenge: pick a song that is not Christian, was not meant to be Christian, and find within it a Christian message.  By the time we were done with the challenge, even Rod Steward, Roxette, Taylor Swift, and an awful lot of rap had Jesus in it.  There were very few songs that we were not able to find Christ in.

So, I would like to give you the same challenge that my old youth director gave to me.  I challenge you to find Jesus in an unexpected place; a song, a book, a movie.  Do you see just a story, a pastime; do you just hear a beat?  Or do you find Christ in it?  And, are there any ways in which what you hear/see/read contradicts your Faith?  Does it teach a value that goes against Church teaching?  Does it promote anything—explicitly or implicitly—that drags you—however minutely—away from Christ?  Or does it encourage you in holiness, bring you closer to Him?

Rev. John Simmons (1910) wrote a short essay entitles “Grace Before Reading” that spoke of the necessity of reading critically in light of Faith.  Today, we are exposed to more influences than just books.  Media in all its forms plays a big part in our lives.  So does our Catholic Faith.  How are you going to make those two fit? 

….I plan to begin a little series about how I have found Christian/Catholic messages in secular art and media (because, you know, all my plans for this blog totally work out, lol).  If you would like to share how you have seen Christ in the media, feel free to drop me an email, or comment.  I'd be happy to have you write a guest post!

Saint Gianna Molla

Today, April 28th, is the feast day of my patron saint, Gianna Beretta Molla. 
I chose her as my Confirmation saint because, at the time of my Confirmation, I was very heavily and actively involved in Pro-Life work (I still am involved, though my ministry has taken the form of prayer more than anything else, lately).  And who is a better example for a Pro-Lifer than Gianna Molla?

I am sure most of you already know the main focus of her story; how she was a doctor, wife, and mother who was diagnosed whith a uterine tumor when she was pregnant with her fourth child.  How she refused proper treatment because she refused to harm her baby.  How she died when that baby was only one week old...

Therefore, I am going to speak of something less often mentioned about Gianna: her interaction, as a doctor, with patients who had had or who intended to have, an abortion. 

Gianna's stance on abortion was very firm.  She viewed all human life as ineffably precious, and illustrated her views where words could not express them by being unfailingly charitable, caring and loving to everyone, and by never failing to do what it took to save her patients.  Her sacrifice is a testament to her reverence of life.  Gianna was well aware of the fact that abortion involves the ending of a new yet equally important human life, and so her views on the subject are rather obvious.  She was greatly grieved when one of her patients considered abortion, and would talk to them about their decision, discussing with them the value of life and encouraging them to rethink their options.  Nevertheless, no woman ever met any sort of condemnation or intolerance from her.  She was motherly toward them, and treated them with the utmost compassion no matter her strict stance. 

"Once, a young woman asked Gianna to come to her home because of some "mysterious" hemorrhaging, which was actually the result of an attempted abortion.  Gianna treated her compassionately, but firmly, urging her to seriously consider what she had done.  ...On another occasion, Gianna treated a young woman who had had an abortion.  With particular kindness, Gianna offered the young woman some words on the sacredness of human life, which the patient listened to attentively.  Gianan gently encouraged the woman to face the seriousness of her act and to realize that what she had done was not only an act of offense against her child, but also against God.  Gianna invited her patient to be reconciled with the Lord, and she encouraged her to embrace God's infinite mercy." [A Woman's Life, by Guiliana Pelucchi, p. 59-60]

I hear often from Pro-"Choicers" that those who are against abortion are also against women.  That they just wish to make women's lives more difficult, that they only hurt women by making them feel guilty.  That they don't care for women, even hate and kill them, etc. etc.  Gianna is proof that that is not what being Pro-Life is about.  Being Pro-Life is being Pro-LIFE.  She talked of God's mercy as much as she did the wrongness of abortion and the value of human life.  She supported women during and after their pregnancy, caring for them and their children often without accepting payment.  Gianna cared no less for the lives of the mothers in her care than for the lives of their children; of that her actions left no room for doubt.   Everyone who knew her liked her, and cries for her Cause arose soon after her untimely death.  Her example is a brilliant one, one which I strive always to follow.  Gianna was Pro-Life.  For that cause she gave her entire life and even her death.  Even those who had had an abortion acknowledged and appreciated her.  What better saint could I have chosen for this day and age?

Saint Gianna, pray for us!

The Flesh is of No Avail

John 6:63 reads, “It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh is useless.” (NRSV)

How can the bread actually be Jesus’ flesh if the flesh is useless? It is a question I have heard many times from people trying to disprove the Catholic Church’s teaching on the Eucharist. However, it has one very obvious fault: it is a comparison of verse 63 to verses 55-56. Let us, then, compare these two verses.

John 6:55-56 “For MY flesh is true food and MY blood is true drink. Those who eat MY flesh and drink MY blood abide in me…”

John 6:63: “…THE flesh is useless.”

In the former verse, Jesus is referring to His own flesh; in the latter, the flesh in general (in other words, your flesh and my flesh). Verse 63 cannot render null the literal interpretation of verse 55, because Jesus is speaking of two totally different fleshes in each one. With this understanding, let us now read verse 63 in context. Crack open your Bible and read John 6:60-65.

In this passage, we see the disciples tell Jesus, “This is a hard teaching to accept! How can we believe it?” To this statement, Jesus responds, “What?! Am I not credible yet? If you saw me ascending into heaven where I came from, then would you believe me?” Jesus goes on to give the listening disciples the same lecture He will give to Thomas in John 20:29. “You want to believe your eyes, your own flesh. But the flesh is useless! You must believe in your spirit, in your heart. Blessed are those who have not seen, yet still believe. This knowledge is given them in their hearts, told them by the Father. For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted by the Father.”

John 6:63 is not meant to render null and void verse 55. It is, in fact, a very clear rebuke to those who do not believe that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist. At this point, I would like to point out another fact worthy of note, and that is that John 6 is not simply a command to eat Jesus’ flesh and drink Jesus’ blood in a very literal sense. It is also a claim to divinity.

“Jesus would not drink blood, or command others to! The Jews were forbidden from drinking blood!” is typically the objection that comes next from my Protestant/Evangelical friends. And yes, it is true that the Jews were forbidden from drinking blood. But, why was it forbidden?

The Jews were forbidden from drinking blood because they, along with the pagans, believed that if one drinks blood they consume and assume the life of the one whose blood they drink. Assuming the life of a mere animal or human is then indeed repulsive. Who wants or needs the life of another mortal? Ah, but the blood and life one who is divine and immortal. That would grant eternal life. Doesn’t this sound familiar? John 6:51, 53 “…whoever eats of this bread will live forever. …unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood you have no life within you.”

Jesus is telling the disciples that if they drink His blood, they will have His eternal life. He is claiming to be divine, and they know it. That is why he points to the Ascension as the miracle they would need to witness to believe. They would need to see Him returning from whence He came to believe that He actually came from heaven.

So, no, John 6:63 is far from a disproval of the literal Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. As we have seen in this blog post and the last, the entire passage only makes the utmost sense in light of the doctrine of Transubstantiation. So, my friends, “do you also wish to go away?” Or do you believe?

How Did His Disciples Take It?

John Chapter Six is known as the “Bread of Life Discourse.” It caused a lot of commotion at the time Jesus gave it, and is still causing a bunch of ruckus today. Protestants and Catholics seem to always be at war with one another over it, the former claiming that Jesus meant His words figuratively, and the latter claiming that He meant them literally. The question to ask is, “How did Jesus’ disciples take it?”

There is no hesitation over this one. The people listening to Jesus when He gave the Bread of Life Discourse took him very literally. “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” they ask confusedly. Jesus responds to their confusion by repeating the same words over, in verse 54: “Amen, I say to you, except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood you shall not have life within you.” Jesus did not explain that He was speaking figuratively, as He did when saying we must be born again of the Spirit. In John 6, He does not change His teaching or expound upon it. Why? Because there was nothing to explain; everyone had understood him correctly. They must actually eat Jesus! “This is a hard teaching to accept,” they say. “Does this scandalize you?” Our Lord replies. “What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?” In other words, they would need a sign to believe His words. They would have to behold a visible manifestation of His power before they would give His words credence. Knowing this, Jesus rebukes them. He tells them that the evidence of their flesh is to no avail, and that they must simply believe. They receive the same message as Doubting Thomas is to receive later. Yet, they still do not accept Christ’s words. “Because of this, many of His disciples turned back and no longer went about with Him.” They took Him literally and could not handle the implications, so they left.

Was this all a misunderstanding? It could not have been, because Jesus does not call them back. Everywhere else in the Bible, when someone misunderstood Him, Jesus explained. Yet here He does not explain. Instead, He lets them walk as He turns to His Apostles and asks them if they, too, are going to abandon Him. To which Peter responds, “Oh, no, Lord; we know you’re only speaking figuratively…”

Oh, wait.