Great Lent

Orthodox Christians called Lent, Great Lent. It is a great and very holy period of time in the calendar of the Church.

"Oremus pro invincem" ("Let us pray for one another") during this time of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving in preparation for the event of the Resurrection.

Here is a meditation from Luigi Giussani...

The Virgin felt that the creature she was carrying in her womb would have, one day, to die (every mother feels this, even as she tries not to think about it), but she did not feel that He would rise again. This is the event which is uniquely comparable to the mystery of the beginning. Just as the seed took shape within her womb, so, in the fullness of time, He would rise again; that Man would rise again. But she didn't know this. "Let it be done to me according to Your word, " on the Virgin's lips, is the same as, "Lord, Your will be done," on the lips of Christ. The correspondence between the Angelus and the Cross lies in the fact that both say, "Let it be done to me according to Your word." This is the gesture of obedience in its pure essentiality. Its pure essentiality makes you tear away from something that God asks-to then pass through a cross and a resurrection from which a limitless fecundity springs forth, a fecundity who boundary is the boundary of God's plan. Fecundity springs forth from virginity. Virginity can be conceived of only this way.

"Make my kids religious!"

"I want you to hang out with such-and-such so you can bring them back to the Church."

I don't remember who said this, but whoever did, was very wise: Nothing is less believable than an answer to a question that is not asked.

The point in life is not to be religious or to go to church. "Being" religious is the privileged struggle of freely being able to express one's love and gratitude. It is not an end in itself. The point of morality is not to be moral, but to be happy. We were made for happiness and freedom. One can only truly be happy if free to be good. Goodness is in accordance with human nature and frees us to be the persons we were meant to be.

It is also--as practicing the virtues are--an act of the will.

Falling in love (and loving as verb, not feeling) can not be forced. It goes against the nature of love and it goes against the Mystery who freely gives love and wants it to be freely reciprocated. (It takes two to tango...)

The essence of religiosity is love. Keeping that in mind, here are some tips from a single, non-married, non-parent:

1. Fathers are important. I have an aunt who asked me to make her kids religious and I flat-out told her the best thing she can do is to have her husband lead the family in prayer or do a short Bible-reading each week together, as a family, led by the father. This is especially true if you have sons. If the wife/mom is religious, it is more probable her daughter will be devout, but unless the father is, the sons most likely will not. Men learn from men. One of my good friend's family has family night every Thursday night. I like that idea.
2. We are fighting huge secular demons in America. Materialism is one of them. You can not serve both God and Mammon. Choose one or the other. Also, it is better to emphasize character and integrity over school and grades. I would rather my child be a decent human being than an honor student.
   
3. Start young. More than going to church, my parents taught me to love Jesus. Love comes first. Then obedience. You can't start with the "rules" as if that's the point. It's not the point. It's the expression. Making dinner for your husband is not the reason you married him. It's an expression of your love for him.
4. Be strategic. My parents did not teach us morals through "talks" or cheesy after-school specials. They had unspoken, high standards of my sister and I and we knew what was simply not an option. My mother especially taught us morals through the arts and films. Movies are very influential. Use them.
   
5. Growing up, I watched my grandmother read her Bible every morning. Very influential and a great visual memory. Try to have grandma around. :)
6. Go to Catholic conferences together. It is very powerful and moving. My family has grown so much because of these shared learning experiences.
   
7. Don't get strict on the stupid stuff. I drank alcohol well before 21. While my friends' parents were so strict on alcohol they were too busy to notice that daisy duke shorts are inappropriate apparel for a 7th grade girl or anyone for that matter.
   
8. I love Catholic "stuff," but don't overdo it. Icons are beautiful visual depictions of the gospel. In the middle of my living room there is a prominent picture of Jesus. It is a powerful visual reminder that He is present and is the center of our lives.
   
9. Create good memories and traditions. Good Friday at my house is hearing Fairuz (a Lebanese singer) sing Good Friday songs (in Arabic of course), smelling the incense burning, and reading the Bible. These images and senses stick well into adulthood.
10. Lastly, the best teachers are witnesses.
    

"Preach the gospel always, if necessary use words."

-St. Francis of Assisi

Five days until Lent 2009!

In Memory of Monsignor Giussani

In honor of the fourth anniversary of the death of my beloved Don Giussani, I want to share with you the homily given at his funeral mass by the then-Cardinal Ratzinger, currently Pope Benedict XVI.

Father Luigi Giussani died two months before John Paul the Great. The Holy Father was a friend of Father Giussani and gave legitimacy to his movement Communion and Liberation.

Thank you, Father Giussani for bringing me closer to Christ, for the spiritual family of the movement, and for (still) educating me on Christian maturity.

Milan Cathedral, February 24, 2005.
Funeral Mass for Fr Giussani

---

Homily of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Dear Brothers in the episcopate and in the priesthood, “the disciples rejoiced to see Jesus.” These words of the Gospel just read indicate the centre of the personality and of the life of our dear Fr Giussani.

Fr Giussani grew up in a home—as he himself said—poor as far as bread was concerned, but rich with music, and thus from the start he was touched, or better, wounded, by the desire for beauty. He was not satisfied with any beauty whatever, a banal beauty, he was looking rather for Beauty itself, infinite Beauty, and thus he found Christ, in Christ true beauty, the path of life, the true joy.

Already as a boy, along with other young men, he created a community called Studium Christi. Their program was to speak of nothing else but Christ, because everything else seemed to be a waste of time. Naturally, he was able to overcome the unilaterality, but he always kept the substance. Only Christ gives meaning to the whole of our life. Fr Giussani always kept the eyes of his life and of his heart fixed on Christ. In this way, he understood that Christianity is not an intellectual system, a packet of dogmas, a moralism, Christianity is rather an encounter, a love story; it is an event.

This love affair with Christ, this love story which is the whole of his life was however far from every superficial enthusiasm, from every vague romanticism. Really seeing Christ, he knew that to encounter Christ means to follow Christ. This encounter is a road, a journey, a journey that passes also—as we heard in the psalm—through the “valley of darkness.” In the Gospel, we heard of the last darkness of Christ’s suffering, of the apparent absence of God, when the world’s Sun was eclipsed. He knew that to follow is to pass through a “valley of darkness,” to take the way of the cross, and to live all the same in true joy.

Why is it so? The Lord himself translated this mystery of the cross, which is really the mystery of love, with a formula in which the whole reality of our life is explained. The Lord says, “Whoever seeks his life, will lose it and whoever loses his life, will find it.”
Fr Giussani really wanted not to have his life for himself, but he gave life, and exactly in this way found life not only for himself, but for many others. He practised what we heard in the Gospel: he did not want to be served but to served, he was a faithful servant of the Gospel, he gave out all the wealth of his heart, he gave out all the divine wealth of the Gospel, with which he was penetrated and, serving in this way, giving his life, this life of his gave rich fruit—as we see in this moment—he has become really father of many and, having led people not to himself, but to Christ, he really won hearts, he has helped to make the world better and to open the world’s doors for heaven.

This centrality of Christ in his life gave him also the gift of discernment, of deciphering correctly the signs of the times in a difficult time, full of temptations and of errors, as we know. Think of 1968 and the following years. A first group of his followers went to Brazil and found itself face to face with extreme poverty, with extreme misery. What can be done? How can we respond? And there was a great temptation to say, “for the moment we have to set Christ aside, set God aside, because there are more pressing needs, we have first to change the structure, the external things, first we must improve the earth, then we can find heaven again.” It was the great temptation of that moment to transform Christianity into a moralism and moralism into politics, to substitute believing with doing. Because what does faith imply? We can cay, “in this moment we have to do something.” And all the same, in this way, by substituting faith with moralism, believing with doing, we fall into particularisms, we lose most of all the criteria and the orientations, and in the end we don’t build, but divide.

Monsignor Giussani, with his fearless and unfailing faith, knew that, even in this situation, Christ, the encounter with Him, remains central, because whoever does not give God, gives too little, and whoever does not give God, whoever does not make people find God in the Fact of Christ, does not build, but destroys, because he gets human activity lost in ideological and false dogmatisms.

Fr Giussani kept the centrality of Christ and, exactly in this way, with social works, with necessary service, he helped mankind in this difficult world, where the responsibility of Christians for the poor in the world is enormous and urgent.

Whoever believes has also to pass through the “valley of darkness,” the dark valleys of discernment, as well as adversities, opposition and ideological hostilities that even took the form of threats to eliminate his people physically, so as to get rid of this other voice that is not content merely with doing things, but brings a greater message , and thus also a greater light.

In virtue of the faith, Monsignor Giussani passed fearlessly through these dark valleys and naturally, with the novelty he carried with him, found it difficult to find a niche inside the Church. Even though the Holy Spirit, according to the needs of the times, creates something new, which is really the return to the origins, it is difficult to see one’s way and to find peaceful harmony in the great communion of the Universal Church. Fr Giussani’s love for Christ was also love for the Church, and thus he always remained a faithful servant, faithful to the Holy Father and faithful to his Bishops.

With his foundations he also gave new interpretation to the mystery of the Church.

Communion and Liberation brings to mind immediately this discovery proper of the modern era, freedom. It also brings to mind St Ambrose’s phrase, “Ubi fides est libertas.” Cardinal Biffi drew our attention to the near coincidence of this phrase of St Ambrose with the foundation of Communion and Liberation. Focussing on freedom as a gift proper of faith, he also told us that freedom, in order to be true, human freedom, freedom in truth, needs communion. An isolated freedom, a freedom only for the “I,” would be a lie, and would destroy human communion. In order to be true, and therefore in order to be efficient, freedom needs communion, and not just any kind of communion, but ultimately communion with truth itself, with love itself, with Christ, with the Trinitarian God. Thus is built community that creates freedom and gives joy.

The other foundation, the Memores Domini, brings to mind again the second Gospel read today: the memory that the Lord gave us in the Holy Eucharist, memory that is not merely a remembrance of the past, but memory that creates present, memory in which He gives Himself into our hands and into our hearts, and thus makes us live.

Through valleys of darkness. In the last period of his life, Fr Giussani had to pass through the dark valley of sickness, of infirmity, of pain, of suffering, but here, too, his eyes were fixed on Jesus, and thus he remained true in all the suffering, seeing Jesus, he was able to rejoice; the joy of the Risen One was present, who even in the passion is the Risen One and gives us the true light and joy, and he knew that—as the psalm says—even passing though this valley, “I fear no evil because I know that You are with me, and I will dwell in the Father’s house.” This was his great strength, knowing that “You are with me.”

My dear faithful, dear young people above all, let us take this message to heart, let us not lose sight of Christ and let us not forget that without God nothing good can be built and that God remains enigmatic if he is not recognized in the face of Christ.

Now your dear friend Fr Giussani has reached the other world, and we are convinced that the door of the Father’s house has opened, we are convinced that now this word is fully realized: they rejoiced to see Jesus. He is rejoicing with a joy that no one can take from him. In this moment we wish to thank the Lord for the great gift of this priest, of this faithful servant of the Gospel, of this father. We entrust his soul to the goodness of his Lord and ours.

In this hour we wish to pray particularly, too, for the health of the Holy Father, taken once more into Hospital. May the Lord accompany him and give him strength and health. And let us pray that the Lord enlighten us, give us the faith that builds the world, the faith that makes us find the path of life, true joy.

Amen.

He's Just Not That Into You-the Movie

My sincere apologies for posting this and then taking it down without warning. And thank you to the four people who left comments. I invite you to re-post your comments if you are able.

My sister and I saw this movie on Sunday afternoon. The Rizkallah Sisters give it two thumbs up! Every woman will enjoy this film and so will every man who is secure enough in his manhood to admit that romantic movies are fun and that Sweet Home Alabama or 27 Dresses were especially enjoyable. (True stories but I won't name names!)

The film begins with a scene of a little girl who gets pushed on the playground by a little boy who happens to be her crush-item. She goes crying to her mother who proceeds to tell her that the reason he did that was because he likes her. The next shot is of the little girl with a sincerely confused look on her face.

The film responded to several of the issues we face in modernity.

1. Should women ask men out?
The film stresses the traditional idea that men should be pursuing women, not the other way around. Of course, in our day, women chase after men so much that men hardly ask women out anymore. Justin Long's character says, "Listen Gigi, if a guy wants to see you, believe me, he'll make it happen."

2. Are virtual realities such as text messaging, Facebook, online dating web sites legitimate means for meeting or communicating with your special interest?
I really appreciated how the film portrayed a negative view of technology in this case. Drew Barrymore's character had the insight that, "These days people don't meet organically anymore! You update your profile picture before you go get a haircut." I actually have a friend who got asked out to dinner through text messaging-seriously. Then two hours before the date, he canceled it. Via text message. I personally believe that the reason people (including myself) spend way too much time on Facebook and so forth is because we are really craving true, organic community but lacking it, we resort to technology to fill that need. Lorenzo Albacete says, "We need community in order to be truly human." At the end of the film, Barrymore deletes her MySpace account.

3. Relationship is an art, not a science. I can not explain, understand, or have knowledge about my significant other through the scientific method.
This is a typical assumption modernity embraces (due to bad philosophy stemming from Kant, previously Descartes...for more information, see my previous blogs): that any real knowledge is limited, narrowly to the scientific method. There is a scene in the film where a man gives his advice about dating women and then says, "It's not science but it's true," or something like that. Well, of course not!

4. Who really does the breaking up?
The film emphasized the idea that men are the real decision makers when it comes to making or breaking a relationship. While I have never been dumped (don't be jealous, I've still had my heart broken), I felt that I was always willing to work on things and it was essentially the man who threw in the towel. Women are extremely loyal and realistic about relationships. I tend to believe (because of my experience) that women are realists when it comes to love and that men are idealists. Always trying to match their idea of the perfect woman with a woman out there. I hate to break it to you men, but there are no barbie dolls and even if we look like one, believe me, we are just as quirky and weird as well, you are. :)

5. Vulnerability: A good or bad idea?
The main character, Gigi, is irresistibly endearing because of her vulnerability. She is unafraid to appear desperate because she is so honest about her need for a relationship. People who are vulnerable can be easily scoffed at but they only portray what most of us feel or want. Of course, one doesn't want to be too extreme and advertise in the personals section or anything but on the otherhand I find it so unattractive when I meet men who have to behave as though they are untouchable, super-extra ultra cool. Here in D.C., I meet a lot of people who have to make sure I know how smart they are. I admit, I am frustrated because I am a laid-back Californian with a Middle-Eastern temperment and personality. Even though it's risky (to live is to risk a poet said), I think being vulnerable is more humane. In one scene of the film, Gigi, crying says to Justin Long's character, "I may say and do a lot of stupid things but I'm closer to finding someone than you!" I agree with her but if I were the screenwriter I would have re-written the lines to say, "I may say and do a lot of stupid things...but at least I am alive!"

At the end of the day, we are all human. As my high school friend Jenny once told me, "we all pick our noses, Simone. If anyone denies it, they are lying."

This is a topic I would love to hear your ideas about....

The Father of Modern Philosophy

Do you ever wonder why the study of philosophy got a bad reputation? Or why it came to be viewed as something that has nothing to do with life?

Well, I blame the Father of Modern Philosophy and devout Catholic (darn it!) Rene Descartes. Descartes can be likened to the nice guy who had good intentions who really screwed things up. We can thank him for the bad philosophy that was to follow from David Hume, Immanuel Kant, etc.

Descartes was a brilliant mind and mathematician but he should have stayed in the mathematics department and left philosophy alone to Aristotle and St. Thomas who had it right in the first place. Unfortunately, Descartes was taught corrupted teachings of the Angelic Doctor through manuals instead of reading his works directly. (How does that make you feel about all the most likely corrupted textbooks we were taught from? We learn about people's thoughts by other people's thoughts about them...we need to return to a classical educational model...but that's another story for another blog..)

So here was where Descartes went right in philosophy: he sought to prove God's existence and the immortality of the soul. He is correct that God exists and that the soul is, indeed, immortal.

He wanted to do the Church a favor by proving these truths in an age of skepticism post-the division of Christendom in the 16th Century. However, he did not do the Church a favor in the end and actually did quite a bit of damage by embracing the skepticism in order to prove the skeptic wrong. He, in fact, made the skeptics more skeptical. He also contributed to the dualistic notion of the soul and body that many embrace today in attempting to define the human person. Some believe as Plato and Descartes did that we are essentially a soul. Plato believed that the body was even a kind of prison for the soul. However, the human person is uniquely body and soul and both as a composite are what comprise a human being.

So how did he open this can of worms? By attempting to rebuild the foundations of philosophy--a pretty big job for one person. Especially when you had the minds of Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas previously. But where Aristotle erred in scientific matters, Descartes erred in philosophical ones.

There is a point in reading this because you will learn how to approach knowledge and truth in your own life! I promise you philosophy done RIGHT is helpful!

Here's what happened: Descartes like math so much because the conclusions one gets in math are certain and self-evident: 2+2=4 You can't argue with that, right?

However, math is REALLY abstract, especially geometry. Descartes actually discovered algebraic geometry. (Thanks a lot, I hate high school because of you...just kidding...I did have fun poking my friend Jasmin's back in class.) Math does not deal with actual things, matter, etc. You can "do" math in a classroom, never using anything tangible, in your head, etc.

Descartes liked the certainty and decided to apply the mathematical model of abstraction to rebuild philosophy and to come to the knowledge of truth with that method. So instead of looking at the things of the world (how do I learn about an orange? Well, I find one and examine it!), he relies on his ideas. That is where he begins: in his mind.

He first begins by doubting everything, even his own existence. He comes to the conclusion that he does, in fact, exist because he is thinking and if you can think, you exist. This is where we get his famous, "Cogito ergo sum;" I think therefore I am.

Um, DUH. Aristotle said that it is foolish to seek a reason for what evidence shows to be fact.

He goes on to demonstrate the existence of God and says that he has this idea of a perfect, infinite being so therefore there must be a God. The error here is that just because I have an idea of God, does not make Him real. This was essentially the weak argument St. Anselm put forth positing that God is the "the being greater than which cannot be thought," allowing him to conclude that an existing "greatest" is greater than a non-existing "greatest," therefore God must exist. Well, I have an idea of a purple unicorn right now but that doesn't prove diddly-squat. (Sorry, Anselm.)

Descartes didn't really prove the existence of God. He goes on to "prove" the existence of the external world (which really should have been his starting, not ending point) by saying that if such a perfect being as God existed than he would not allow for this mass deception of my sense perception and therefore I and the world must exist.

This abstract method of Descartes is one of the idealist. The idealist claims to prove God's existence from his idea of God. This is contrasted with realism which seeks to look at what's in front of our faces and traces the effect back to the cause which is God. The idealist believes reality is in his ideas, the realist asks the question, "What is this in front of me? How did it get there?"

St. Augustine said, "I inquire in order to know something, not to think it."

Descartes method of knowledge, a method of doubt, is unreasonable and contrary to what is obviously in front of him: the world. He ends with the world, but in order to gain knowledge and discover truth, it is more convincing for the world to be the starting point.

The mistake Descartes made was that he chose the method and then tried to make the object conform to the method. Instead, one should look to the object to determine the method. What works for math ("mathematicism") will not work for all sciences. The human person is body and soul as a composite and so a completely abstract method will simply not work. Descartes denied sense skepticism which is self-refuting and contradictory because, as my professor puts it, "you only know sense error through sense truth, it can't be all error."

I agree with Aristotle it is foolish to prove what is evident and the existence of the world is clearly evident unless you are a madman where you have lost everything but your reason. (G.K. Chesterton)

Luigi Giussani says, "Realism requires a certain method for observing and coming to know an object, and this method must not be imagined, thought of or organized and created by the subject (ahem, Descartes!): it must be imposed by the object.

Why do I care? I care because by imposing the method he made our ideas superior to the object itself. Descartes made our ideas the object of knowledge instead of the means of knowing the actual object itself. Thought and reality are not identical. Reality should be the starting point. Thought is about reality, not reality itself.

I end thanking Father Giussani who really helped me understand all of this. Descartes just confused me. (He confused a lot of people and he is blamed for the increasing skepticism that modernity is, dualism, denial of the mind and athiesm.)

Giussani says in his book The Religious Sense, regarding our age of ideologies,

"Instead of learning from reality in all its aspects and building on it, man seeks to manipulate reality according to the coherent schemes fabricated by the intellect; 'thus the triumph of ideologies ratifies the defeat of civilization.'" (Alexis Carrel in his Reflections on Life)

Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul

Yesterday, January 25, the Church celebrated the conversion of St. Paul.

Yesterday, January 25, 2009, my friend Tara Hernandez entered the Poor Clares in Santa Barbara, California.

It is unlikely that for the reminder of my life I will see Tara more than once or twice. She will be cloistered and will be spending the majority of her day in prayer for the world. Her family will be able to visit her once a month (behind the cloister grill) until she takes her final vows where they will walk her down the aisle and then after her "wedding" to Christ (as we will be wedded to Christ in Heaven) she will only be able to see them four times a year (behind the cloister grill) for approximately an hour and half each visit.

Through the consecrated, virginal life she is choosing (love is choice or it is not love) to be a sign and witness to the reality of the life believers will enjoy in eternal life.

After the Great Persecution of Christians by Diocletian ended (305 A.D.), martyrdom by blood ceased in the Roman Empire with the Edict of Milan declaring the Christian Faith legal by the Emperors Constantine and Licinius. Christians were no longer shedding blood for Christ and through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit the "white" martyrdom began: the monastic movement. It started in Egypt, my mom and dad's mother country!

When we visited Egypt in the summer of 2007, we were able to visit some of these monasteries from the first recorded centuries in history. We met monks who were following in the legacy of their predecessors for 2,000 years.

The Christian Faith is either true or we are lunatics.

It must be very meaningful for my dear friend to enter the monastery on the Feast of St. Paul's conversion. She found her faith in her mid-twenties and now in her late twenties is participating in her ongoing conversion to Christ. We are saved, we are being saved, we will be saved.

Salvation is not a one-time event but an ongoing, dynamic process. Christ reminds us to always be vigilant through St. Paul's words,

"Do you not know that in a race all the runners compete, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. Well, I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air; but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified." (1 Corinthians 9: 24-27)

St. Paul, alive in Heaven, pray for us.

Tara, my friend alive on Earth, pray for us.

I will miss you.

The Latin Mass

Last Sunday, I experienced my first Latin Mass.

Surprisingly, I would not have thought to go unless my roommate was not such a huge fan of the Tridentine mass. She gets sparkles in her eyes when she talks about it. I was curious to see what the sparkles were all about. As it is, I feel spoiled at my current parish in Alexandria, Virginia Our Lady Queen of Apostles.

First, it's right across the street from where I live.
Second, the choir is great. (I sing in it, too.)
Third, the priests are orthodox.
Fourth, the homilies are *never* fluffy.
Five, we have Latin parts in the mass such as the Sanctus, Sanctus (The Holy, Holy...) and the Agnus Dei (Lamb of God...).

That's already a huge difference from (ahem) going to mass in Southern California. But I figure I should go, check it out, be in the know.

I've come to realize out here that choosing a mass can almost be just as complicated as ordering a drink from Starbucks: I'll have a tall soy one-pump sugar-free vanilla latte no whip extra hot.

There is Latin mass. There is high Latin mass and low Latin mass. There is solemn high Latin mass, too. Of course, there's the regular-old English mass. There is the English mass with traditional hymns and the mass with other "this should get me time out of purgatory"-type music. (Architecture, music, all of it--the 70s must go people!) I have gone to a charismatic (Praise and Worship-type) mass and it was a most amazing experience because it was still solemn (not banging on the guitar or drums) and done with respect and reverence. I have never seen a congregation so respectful and engaged in the mass until then. There is also the Norvus Ordo which is English mass with Latin parts. Interestingly enough, an Assemblies of God friend of mine preferred the Latin version.

The alter was beautiful. It had the Latin words Et Verbum Caro Factum Est engraved on it in large letters. It translates to "The Word was made flesh." I only knew that because one of my dearest friends just told me that in Bethlehem there is, I am assuming in the Church of the Nativity, engraved Et Verbum Caro Factum Est Hic, the added word "Hic" meaning "here, in this place." It is a powerful reminder to me that on the alter, during the liturgy of the Eucharist, the word does become flesh, that Jesus is really present. Further, the reminder that the Christian event is a fact and that it really did happen.

The Latin mass is an indisputably beautiful spectacle and this one had the best choir I have ever heard in my life. But while it was beautiful, it was hard for me. First, I don't know Latin (I'm enrolled in a class right now though, required for my degree) and following the mass was tough. Plus, as an American, I am used to things being quick, dumbed-down and the attention on me. This mass was two hours, the homily was long (but very good), and the priest had his back toward the congregation during the liturgy of the Eucharist, the second half of the mass. A lot of the women wore head veils, the concelebrating priests (one of them was Fr. Scalia--our Supreme Court Justice's son) wore their funny old-school hats (which I like because I like old-fashioned things and theatrical things as well, anything with character really...), we had to kneel at the communion rail and wait for communion, etc. etc. etc.

I left very appreciative of the beauty but assured that while I support Latin mass, it's not for me. It would be too hard to learn the Latin, it's too much work. The Latin mass is very eloquent and demands too much intellectual attention. I go to mass to worship God. Plus, people will judge me if I don't veil up.

And then...

I couldn't stop thinking about the mass. Seriously. I felt as though I received more graces from the mass than regular ones. I can't tell you if that's theologically-correct but that is my feeling on it. Even though it was paradoxically frustrating, it was light, too, in a sense. I had really gone to mass. I hadn't rushed. The mass was conducted at a proper pace. Nobody was rushing to leave the church afterward. Mass was a priority and...a pleasure.

I was reflecting on this paradoxical feeling and that is what inspired me to share the experience. I really feel drawn to return to Latin mass. Is mass supposed to conform to me? Or am I supposed to conform to it? Of course, the latter is true. Simone is not the center of the universe and neither are you. And since when do I cower from intellectual engagement? We are told to love God with our whole "heart, mind, and soul," if not at mass, then where?

I noticed the Latin mass more closely reflects the reality of our relationship with God. Not mine. Our. Even those people who do not worship or even acknowledge His existence. In the Latin mass, the priests are doing most of the work. At English mass, I get to do a lot. I get to do a lot of work in my life, too. I was a tad uneasy at the Latin mass because I was not doing much. But later, upon further reflection, I realized I kind of liked that. Sunday is not about doing, but being. Being still. Resting. In my life, I may think I do a lot and am in control. But that's not true. God is blessing me and in control and giving me more gifts than I can even imagine or thank Him for. I didn't even ask to be born, to be given life. It is a pure gift. Every second, every moment of the day. The things I "expect" out of life shouldn't be. Everything I am given, is a gift. I can't control it, take it, or possess it. I didn't plan to meet my friends, but God gave me such amazing people in my life. I am simply following and receiving. The priest does not have "his back to me," but is leading me to God. It is not about me, but about all of us facing our Lord together. We are not turned inward but outward toward the Infinite, the Mystery, who is proposing and calling out to us. This is especially evident during communion. I don't go up there and take communion. I have to kneel, be patient, and wait to receive the Eucharist. It is a gift and the form of the Latin mass, the structure, the beauty is so intentional as to make that relationship of God to Man, Giver to Receiver, very evident.

I'm not here to convert anyone to the Latin mass. I'm just happy when people go to mass. And I'm trying not to get too attached myself as who knows where I'll find a Tridentine mass in Southern California closer than a two-hour drive. But we'll see what happens. Beauty has spoken and it's hard not to follow what one finds attractive.