My new blog is a comic diary of my Catholic convert life: comic as in always illustrated if not always LOL or ROTFLOL. Once upon a time, about 18 years worth of time, [...]]]> Please welcome back Owen Swain is a returning Catholic Dad.  He has a new blog, Drawn to Catholicism.  Here is what Owen writes:

My new blog is a comic diary of my Catholic convert life: comic as in always illustrated if not always LOL or ROTFLOL. Once upon a time, about 18 years worth of time, I was a Protestant minister but now, hey, I’m a part time parish catechist, an artist and, wait for it, a Catholic dad!

Glad to have you back, Owen!

It is over 99% likely, based on that alone and my wife’s age, that #2 won’t.  (I think God wants me to trust Him 100%, not the numbers 99%.)  She’s in the middleish part of the “you ought to feel a kick” period (I [...]]]> …and it’s hard not to be worried, since #1 has Down syndrome.

It is over 99% likely, based on that alone and my wife’s age, that #2 won’t.  (I think God wants me to trust Him 100%, not the numbers 99%.)  She’s in the middleish part of the “you ought to feel a kick” period (I think), and hasn’t yet.  Pray for us.

They:  “Those golden things the Pope has, the great works of art in the Vatican . . . they could be sold, and the money given to the poor.”

Me (and others):  “Um…that’s what Judas said, about pouring perfume on Jesus’s head.”

They:  “Yeah, but [...]]]> A few weeks ago I had a discussion at church that surprised me.

They:  “Those golden things the Pope has, the great works of art in the Vatican . . . they could be sold, and the money given to the poor.”

Me (and others):  “Um…that’s what Judas said, about pouring perfume on Jesus’s head.”

They:  “Yeah, but that was Jesus.”

Me:  “Aren’t those art works also meant for the glory of God?”

They:  “Are they?”

Well, I hope so.

There’s something called dominion theology.  I don’t know much about it, or even what it is exactly, but it does have a bit about the end of the world coming not when things go to hell and Jesus intervenes, but when things get better due to the church’s actions.  I think part of the “better” is making the world beautiful by building cathedrals (and, to be sure, by building hospitals and loving our neighbors).  I don’t know if any of this is true, but I do like the perspective that we ought to be making the world a better place.

I started to wonder if “They” were right here, for different reasons.  Today I went to St. Patrick’s Cathedral in Manhattan.  It’s magnificent.  Maybe it’s too magnificent.  I went in, and it was a beehive of tourists taking photos, and those velvety cords to keep you from going where you shouldn’t, and staffers there to search your bags in case you’re a terrorist and keep you from wandering down the center aisle during the service snapping your flash.

My church back home is the sort that doesn’t even have a nave; it has a “worship space.”  Its construction, like that of your house, is flimsy.  Nobody’s going to come interrupt our services to take pictures of our statues.  Unless we buy some.  Maybe St. Pat’s should sell the cathedral to the highest bidder and rent a basement somewhere that’s so ugly nobody would want to look at it.

But when mass started, I found the buzzing beehive wasn’t a problem.  I could hear (once the priest found his mic).  There were people snapping photos along the wall, but the only real distraction I had was the usual, my thoughts, the monkey-mind that won’t shut up.

And afterwards, I went to that wall where the tourists were, and had my own look.  There was St. Jude, reminding me that God loves those that mourn; and St. Brigit, reminding me that we need to love them too.

So the art still had its uses.  I think we can hold off on the auction.

In the revised edition, it was amended to: “Mostly harmless”.

Much the same could be said of [...]]]> In the original version of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (or rather, in the original version of “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy) the entry for Earth consisted of one word: “Harmless”.

In the revised edition, it was amended to: “Mostly harmless”.

Much the same could be said of the evolution of my attitude toward Halloween.

When I was a lad, I can’t recall having any awareness that Halloween was about anything other than innocent fun.

Then, at some point in childhood, I remember hearing some news report around Halloween time about Devil’s Night in Detroit. That’s not good, I thought.

And now, for the past several years, I’ve grown increasingly aware of the impossible-to-miss anti-Halloween sentiment among many Christians, both Catholic and Protestant.

This astounds me.

To be sure, the rampant commercialization of Halloween is not exactly a crowning cultural achievement, and there are ample examples of costumes that one would be hard pressed to argue are not imprudent to wear (for one of various reasons).

But to go argue that any sort of observance of Halloween per se is wrong is not a little ridiculous, especially considering that Halloween is, yea, a Christian holiday — and, even more specifically, a Catholic holiday.

I’d be hard pressed to come up with any clearer thoughts on the day than those Sean Dailey articules here:

Anyway, today is Halloween, a most glorious holiday. A good Catholic holiday, for this is the day that we honor the age-old truth that the devil, like all who are besotted with pride, cannot stand being mocked. So we mock him, with silly costumes and mischievous pranks and door-to-door begging, and have a wild old time doing so. Tomorrow we go to Mass to honor the saints in the Church Triumphant and ask their intercession for us in the Church Militant; and we will spend the rest of November offering up suffrages for the poor souls in Purgatory — the Church Suffering. But tonight, we celebrate our mortality … while not forgetting that even in death we retain hope in the Resurrection.

Today I also came across an eminently sensible article by Helen Hull Hitchcock that is well worth a read. Therein, she offers some historical background about Halloween customs and traditions, and thoughtfully addresses some of the common prudential concerns many Christian parents have regarding Halloween.

Perhaps needless to say, our kids will be going trick-or-treating tomorrow night, because, as Hitchcock rightly points out, it’s simply “fun”.

And I should also point out that they are also participating this year in what is commonly offered by many Catholic parents as an “alternative” to Halloween: to wit, a Saints Party.

(I’m planning to post pictures of them in both sets of costumes next week on my blog, Lunch Break.)

Call it the perfect storm of parenting. Who doesn’t want to believe that there is a magical, wondrous, no-parental-guidance-required product that will turn their kids into Mensa members? The combination of our lack of [...]]]> How could anyone have ever known that there’s a connection between early exposure to TV and later problems with attention span?

Call it the perfect storm of parenting. Who doesn’t want to believe that there is a magical, wondrous, no-parental-guidance-required product that will turn their kids into Mensa members? The combination of our lack of time, our paranoia over our kids performance, and our faith in technology primed this generation of parents to accept the clever advertising around “Baby Einstein” as truth…

I’ve never seen any of the Baby Einstein DVDs, and as far as I know, our kids haven’t, either.

We did buy one of the Holy Baby DVDs a few years ago when our two oldest girls (now ages 5 and 6) were younger, but they only watched them a few times—largely, as I recall, because they weren’t much interested in it.

Just as well.

I’d be curious to hear from other Catholic Dads: How much, if any, time do you allow your little ones to watch videos of this ilk?

[Cross-posted at Lunch Break]

This disturbing story of Sr. Donna Quinn, O.P., highlights for me one small insight of a book I read this week. Catholic Matters by Fr. Richard John Neuhaus (a favorite of mine) notes the discord and confusion that plagues our modern age. This confusion reaches even to Dominican sisters [...]]]> . . . but can you be a religious sister?

This disturbing story of Sr. Donna Quinn, O.P., highlights for me one small insight of a book I read this week. Catholic Matters by Fr. Richard John Neuhaus (a favorite of mine) notes the discord and confusion that plagues our modern age. This confusion reaches even to Dominican sisters apparently.

People like Sr. Quinn have, Neuhaus says, bought into this idea:

Morality has become almost totally a matter of feelings and preferences. You have yours and I have mine. If I say that something is “wrong,” I am expressing no more than my personal preference. “I am not comfortable with that.” “I feel that is not right.” “I would prefer you not do that.” In short, the making of arguments is replaced by the expression of emotions.

And Sr. Quinn’s whole “ministry” seems to be based on emotions. As her superior said, Sister sees her role as

accompanying women who are verbally abused by protestors.  Her stance is that if the protestors were not abusive, she would not be there.

Whatever her reason for doing what she is doing, she will answer at some point for her actions. But perhaps things aren’t so bad. Perhaps Sister is just on the fringe. As the article notes,

In a 2002 address to the Women’s Studies in Religion Program at Harvard Divinity School, Sr. Quinn described how she came to view the teachings of her Church as “immoral”: “I used to say: ‘This is my Church, and I will work to change it, because I love it,’” she said.  “Then later I said, ‘This church is immoral, and if I am to identify with it I’d better work to change it.’  More recently, I am saying, ‘All organized religions are immoral in their gender discriminations.’”

As a former member of this illustrious religious order, I’m saddened today that nothing is done to reprimand Sr. Quinn and maintain the Dominican tradition of preaching the Truth. Please pray for Sr. Quinn and the many souls she escorts each day.