From Auspicato Concessum by Pope Leo XIII (about St. Francis):
Now the perfection of Christian virtue lies in that disposition of soul which dares all that is arduous or difficult; its symbol is the Cross, which those who would follow Jesus Christ must carry on their shoulder. The effects of this disposition are a heart detached from mortal things, complete self-control, and a gentle and resigned endurance of adversity. In fine, the love of God and of one’s neighbor is the mistress and sovereign of all other virtues: such is its power that it wipes away all the hardships that accompany the fulfillment of duty, and renders the hardest labors not only bearable, but agreeable.
Filed under: prayer
“If you hear the voice of the Lord today, do not harden your hearts!”
Audio Te, Audio Te
My eyes are sewn shut, my ears plugged up, my hands tied, my mind fogged; but the voice of God pierces heart, not ear and eye. His gravity woos us imperceptibly toward him, pulling us off our feet. However much I try to love and fail, Mercy, whose name is also Love, is sufficient. Not that I might mock God, but that I might trust him to be merciful in an infinite and pure manner. Though I slip in my feeble efforts at holiness and love, scraping my red rough knees now covered with mud and blood, “all the fitness He requires is to feel [my] need for Him.”
May I bear witness to your love, God. May I be an shining example of your kindness and mercy, that as your servant Francis once said, you may make your glory known in me, as you could find no more pitiful a sinner than me!
Filed under: Uncategorized
Peter Kreeft has blown my mind and, subsequently, my plans of writing about Protestantism. I’ll have to pick my thoughts up off the floor after listening to (and taking pages of notes on) this. Way to go Pete!

The Best Catholic is a Good Protestant?!?
A few thoughts on the matter:
Here’s an excellent entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia*:
All writers on the spiritual life uniformly recommend, nay, command under penalty of total failure, the practice of silence. And yet, despite this there is perhaps no rule for spiritual advancement more inveighed against, by those who have not even mastered its rudiments, than that of silence. Even under the old Dispensation its value was known, taught, and practised. Holy Scripture warns us of the perils of the tongue, as “Death and life are in the power of the tongue” (Proverbs 18:21). Nor is this advice less insisted on in the New Testament; witness: “If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man” (St. James 3:2 sq.). The same doctrine is inculcated in innumerable other places of the inspired writings. The pagans themselves understood the dangers arising from unguarded speech. Pythagoras imposed a strict rule of silence on his disciples; the vestal virgins also were bound to severe silence for long years. Many similar examples could be quoted.
Silence may be viewed from a threefold standpoint:
- As an aid to the practice of good, for we keep silence with man, in order the better to speak with God, because an unguarded tongue dissipates the soul, rendering the mind almost, if not quite, incapable of prayer. The mere abstaining from speech, without this purpose, would be that “idle silence” which St. Ambrose so strongly condemns.
- As a preventative of evil. Senica, quoted by Thomas à Kempis complains that “As often as I have been amongst men, I have returned less a man” (Imitation, Book I, c. 20).
- The practice of silence involves much self-denial and restraint, and is therefore a wholesome penance, and as such is needed by all.
From the foregoing it will be readily understood why all founders of religious orders and congregations, even those devoted to the service of the poor, the infirm, the ignorant, and other external works, have insisted on this, more or less severely according to the nature of their occupations, as one of the essential rules of their institutes. It was St. Benedict who first laid down the clearest and most strict laws regarding the observance of silence. In all monasteries, of every order, there are special places, called the “Regular Places” (church, refectory, dormitory etc.) and particular times, especially the night hours, termed the “Great Silence”, wherein speaking is more strictly prohibited. Outside these places and times there are usually accorded “recreations” during which conversation is permitted, governed by rules of charity and moderation, though useless and idle words are universally forbidden in all times and places. Of course in active orders the members speak according to the needs of their various duties. It was perhaps the Cistercian Order alone that admitted no relaxation from the strict rule of silence, which severity is still maintained amongst the Reformed Cistercians (Trappists) though all other contemplative Orders (Carthusians, Carmelites, Camaldolese etc.) are much more strict on this point than those engaged in active works. In order to avoid the necessity of speaking, many orders (Cistercians, Dominicans, Discalced Carmelites etc.) have a certain number of signs, by means of which the religious may have a limited communication with each other for the necessities that are unavoidable.
And in the Rule of St. Benedict, Sixth chapter:
Therefore, because of the importance of silence, let permission to speak be seldom given to perfect disciples even for good and holy and edifying discourse, for it is written: “In much talk thou shalt not escape sin” (Prov 10:19). And elsewhere: “Death and life are in the power of the tongue” (Prov 18:21). For it belongeth to the master to speak and to teach; it becometh the disciple to be silent and to listen. If, therefore, anything must be asked of the Superior, let it be asked with all humility and respectful submission. But coarse jests, and idle words or speech provoking laughter, we condemn everywhere to eternal exclusion; and for such speech we do not permit the disciple to open his lips.

—
*Obrecht, Edmond. “Silence.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 13. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912. 19 Aug. 2008 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13790a.htm>.
Filed under: The Faith | Tags: catholic, faith, Guatemala, protestant, st. benedict, st. francis, thomas merton
Recently I have been reflecting on the nature of the Protestant church, and to be honest, the thing still perplexes me. Pierre Bayle is quoted as saying: “I am a good Protestant, and in the full sense of the term, for from the bottom of my soul, I protest against everything that is said, and everything that is done.” This, more than anything else, confers to me the essence of Protestantism. But before I speak about the Protestant church, let me describe my spiritual history, as it unequivocably colors my views.
I was born into a non-denominational, read: full Gospel, church. Victory Worship Center was a break-away sect of a larger baptist church, Faith Temple; the break-away being a result of pastoral division, i.e. board vs. pastor. My father attended Faith Temple under the auspices of the factioning pastor, and subsequently was one of the founding members of Victory Worship Center. My dad worked the soundboard. My mom led the worship and balanced the books. You get the idea here.
I grew up intensely involved in my faith, and consequently, deeply devoted to my church. I made my way through the different age-related ministries: day-care, pre-school, ACTS club (children’s church), Nite Vision Cafe (youth group, now “The LP”), finally graduating from all the extra-curricular ministries into the adult church. I was part of the Nite Vision Band for over a year; I occasionally DJ’d for the Sunday morning junior services; I attended weekly bible-studies; I worked as a landscaper for the church one summer. Again, you get the idea: I was involved.
However, throughout high school, I began my spiritual journey. Having ingested large amounts of C.S. Lewis early in my high school career, and after being inundated with Existentialist mumbo-jumbo in my English courses, I was positively lost. The old non-denom’ explanations weren’t sufficient. Victory, then, was teaching what I percieved as a watered down Gospel, full of flash, affluence, and rhetoric, while lacking real substance (to the credit of Victory, there was a wave of the “Prosperity Gospel” heresy present in the church which, to some extent, has subsided). I was a malcontent, angry with what I saw the church preaching. Yet, I was hopelessly bound up by ecclesial and familial ties to the church with which I no longer felt an affinity.
I then began to turn from the protestant realm to more exotic sources (exotic being quite ironic, as it turns out, for what I turned to was not exotic, but authentic). I delved into the monastic teacher, St. Benedict of Nursia, and his simple, unassuming rule about how to be a poor, obedient, stable little Christian. I was bewildered and challenged by the great Seraphic Father himself, St. Francis, who taught me to love “Lady Poverty” and revel in the beauty of Creation. I sat at the feet of the profound, contemplative mystic, the trappist monk named Thomas Merton. If you’re an astute reader, you’ve probably noticed one common trend: these men are catholics. St. Benedict and St. Francis founded monastic and gyrovagic orders; Br. Thomas Merton was, in many ways, a strict orthodox priest.
It was, of course, no accident that I was not even in my native land when this transformation was in full-swing. Quite appropriately, I was in a country in which everyone spoke another language and lived another culture; I was in an arid, lush, magnificent and dangerous place, which to this day, has continued to woo me to return. I was in Guatemala. Guatemala provided me the isolation I needed to discern. Far away from parents and friends, I could truly be alone, even when surrounded by people. While the family I was with was of the most gentle and charitable disposition, I prefered solitude. I sat with Merton, Benedict, and Francis. They talked and I listened. In fact, they nearly talked me into become a monk (something I would struggle with for quite a while).
Upon return, though, little had changed spiritually. I began to date, Kelli (who, as it turns out, I am now engaged to). Kelli and I went weekly to her non-denominational church, Christian Life Fellowship. Nearly her entire family was non-denominational and attended Christian Life, and so this was a perfect and comparable church to plug into. Nevertheless, the seeds which had been laid by the great fathers of the faith lay silent and still in the cold soil of my soul. Still, I ran into the same road-blocks as before with Victory. What was being taught by the fathers, to me, wasn’t lining up with the weekly teaching. I was intensely discontent, perhaps even unfulfilled, and after months of gentle proding (if there is such a thing) from my good friend, Brian Visaggio of Saint Superman, I decided that I would move to a liturgical church*. The first try, of course, was the Catholic Church.
I had little experience with the actual church outside of the literature I’d read, save one profound experience. Sarah Miller (who would ultimately accompany me to my first mass) invited me to the Holy Saturday Mass at her home church in Sulphur. The sights and sounds were enough to bewilder even the staunchest protestant, weaned on an austere liturgy. The smell, the burning incese, made a footprint of sanctity in my mind; the sounds both terrified and threw me into a state of reverance; the quite procession of genuflection, kneeling silently and piously before a rugged, splintered cross encapsulated the entire Christian life. I came home in a daze, and after expressing my delight and amazement at the liturgy, was quickly instructed (by way of question), “you aren’t going to be catholic, are you?”
I called Sarah Miller (present then, throughout RCIA, and finally at my confirmation). Sure, she said, she would be glad to accompany me to a mass. I went. I can say nothing of the homily, the music, the sights and sounds, the smells, the congregation. Nothing of this day has weathered the barrage of time except the immense peace, the serenity, the calm I felt. It was the feeling of walking into the home you grew up in; a place where you were not questioned, not an outcast, not a stranger; no, in that church, I sat with God. Rather than moving in me, he stilled all things which moved. This, for me, was the sign. I was to become Catholic. I was to embark on a mystagogia, a journey, which would alienate me from many, bind me to some, and leave me feeling as though I had only seen the shadow of God on the cave-wall for 19 years; now I stood in the sun.
The rest, as they say, is history [this is admittedly a very incomplete history, lacking my affair with Buddhism, my struggles over monasticism, the pains of joining the Church, all the wonders and blessings of being Catholic, and so on -- but again, another day].I must admit that this foree into my history today was unplanned and unexpected. I had planned to expound upon the perplexities of my protestant bretheren! And yet, that can be another day. In fact, the Bayle quote is perhaps more appropriate for me than for many of my protestant brothers and sisters. My protest was not against the ancient and eternal truths; no, it was against the protest. I realize, now, that Jeremiah was as prophetic in Ancient Israel as He is now:
Thus says the LORD: Stand beside the earliest roads, ask the pathways of old Which is the way to good, and walk it; thus you will find rest for your souls (6:16, NAB).
I rebelled against the rebellion, and Jeremiah was right: I found rest.
*Brian, to his credit, has never been a “conversion monger,” and I am eternally indebted to his patient with me in this matter — in fact, to all of you who helped me along this path, I am indebted to you (especially Kelli, who has been so understanding); thank you. I know God because of you all.
Filed under: The Faith | Tags: a little leaven, eucharist, liturgy, mass, st. benedict
From time to time, I come across a video, or a blog, or some sort of media, which purports to be Christian. I say “purports” because the piece in question usually bears no semblance of holiness, sanctity, reverence, or any number of characteristics of Christian worship. Having been raised without the mass, without the Real Body and Blood of Christ, I can recall always feeling uncomfortable with the flippant nature of some events or activities which passed for liturgy or worship. The following are a couple examples of what I’m talking about:
http://www.alittleleaven.com/2008/08/are-you-smarter.html
St. Benedict wrote, in the 20th chapter of his Rule: When we wish to suggest our wants to persons of high station, we do not presume to do so except with humility and reverence. How much the more, then, are complete humility and pure devotion necessary in supplication of the Lord who is God of the universe!
Today as I watched these videos — both drenched in irreverence and disorder — I became intensely thankful for the mass and the Eucharist, for the Mass itself casts out all disorder, while the Eucharist dispels all irreverence. St. Benedict’s words ring true to the modern Christian’s ears. What place is there for disorder when there is spiritual work to be done? Who could be irreverent who believed that Christ, in His Body and Blood, was truly present? There is no time to flail about like a man possessed; we have more important work today. We have to spend the time in adoration, thanksgiving, supplication, and intercession: we have no time for liturgical shenigans.
The mass, which is not present in a large number of Christian churches, is the bedrock of order. Instead of Bacchean clamor, we move along slowly, meditatively, prayerfully, as a small ship down a great river. We move towards God, not with shouting, flailing, and disrupting, but quietly with clasped hands and lowered heads.
Thank God for the mass and for the Eucharist.
Filed under: Uncategorized
There are three thing which I miss studying:
1. Descriptive Grammar
2. St. Benedict and his Rule
3. Peace and Conflict
Filed under: Uncategorized
I very much need to read this now. Maybe it will benefit you as well.
————
Friends,
We are not our money. If we give our money, we do not necessarily give ourselves. Until we are physically present, until we can touch, smell, taste, and see those we aim to help — we haven’t given ourselves. To give our money, that “thorn which chokes the good seed of the word,” is to only give a portion of our time and means — it is not giving of our person. We must give our whole selves. As St. Benedict eloquently stated: the whole Christ is seeking the whole person. Now, giving our money is important. But what good is a single note, when God requires a symphony? What good is a portion of our hearts, when God requires it all? What good is one page, when God desires the whole book?
Recall when Christ said, “come and see”? Well, go. Go smell poverty. Go see sickness. Go taste the bitter wine of loneliness. I promise, we don’t have to go far. I’d imagine, it’s all down at your local church, or nursing home, or homeless shelter, or even in the wealthiest neighborhood. Leave your job where it is. Leave your family. Leave your comforts. Leave your own life, if only for a little while. Trust me, I’m on the journey with you. I’m taking one tiny, seemingly insignificant but immensely consequential step at a time. We’ll walk together singing “Hallelujah! We are on our way to God.” We’ll walk and laugh, brighten spirits, comfort those who despair, feed bodies and souls, minister to hearts and minds. We will see Christ in his “distressing disguise,” and journey to God together.
With love,
Ryan “Andrew” Carruth
Maybe we could call it Vulnerability.
Maybe we could call it Love.
I like Simplicity, though.