Waxing Poetically: Addressing Culture with a Twist of Poetry

Today comes part two and three of this documentary on humor in the religious life and how being too serious can be destructive to one’s sense of humility.

Both videos upload by YouTube member LoyolaPress

Wax for God’s laughter!

Share this post with others:

Father James Martin talks about why to him humor is a necessity in a Church that is often deadly serious and how Jesus’ parables may have been considered funny in his day.

object width=”425″ height=”344″>
Uploaded by YouTube member LoyolaPress

Wax and laugh!

Share this post with others:

Note to Christians: Note that these views are exactly parallel to those of Christ in morality and while they differ in theology, it is also to be noted that these views were expressed said 500 years prior to Christ’s birth.

Timeless Quotes From the Buddha from Gerald Penilla on Vimeo.

Wax unto others.

Share this post with others:

Surreal, abstract and an interpreter of the soul, Alex Grey takes the viewer inside his process and discusses what part spirituality plays in his and others’artistic experience.

Uploaded by YouTube member MixaMina

Wax in paint.

Share this post with others:

Given the recent resurgence of the gay marriage debate in Vermont and in New York (my home state) I would like to repost a previous argument (with minor alterations) archived from December 15, 2008. As stated in earlier posts, I am a devoted Catholic Christian. My intention with this post was and continues to be a constitutional one, not a religious one.

Recently, the gentleman at the Plato’s Cave blog gave readers a look at the Newsweek op-ed on whether the Bible truly prohibited gay marriage. The piece by Lisa Miller cites pointedly the ambiguous relationship of David and Johnathan in 1 Samuel among other themes of marriage not just being that of a man and a woman such as rampantly common polygamy and Jesus’ noted total silence on homosexuality in all of the Gospel texts.

But upon having a lively and very intellectually sound talk with my new friend, I did a bit more research and found a more concerning issue: several bishops in the Roman Catholic Church (of which I am a member) had been actively pushing for congress to pass legislation to “protect” marriage as being between a man and woman.

“What are called ‘homosexual unions,’ because they do not express full human complementarity and because they are inherently nonprocreative, cannot be given the status of marriage.” - The Administrative Committee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops September 10, 2008

in the same conference, the bishops even cited a recent Vatican document that called legal recognition of same-sex unions “gravely unjust.”

When I first saw this choice of wording, I was perplexed. I thought it was strange that such gravity be placed on the adoption of homosexual unions. But after a vast examination, I now see that the Church simply wishes to honor the unique, complementarity relationship between male and female opposites in nature, whether it be in humans, animals, or vegetation and does not in my view, suggest homophobia in any way. Yet, I thought to myself, “That’s fine, but why is the Catholic Church imposing this view upon the secular and pluralistic state? Aren’t Church and State supposed to be separate?”

According to the United States’ First Amendment,”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The very first utterances of the document fully, clearly, concisely and objectively point to the separate and totally free exercise of the governed people and their chosen faith or lack thereof. In saying this, the document makes arguing a religiously-based belief as reason to deny others a right to an opposing belief or lifestyle a tricky and slippery slope by which many freedoms may be subject to change based on others’ disagreement with the free expression of those freedoms. For instance, If Catholic bishops simply choose to make their voices heard to persuade law makers to change their personal views of marriage to agree with the Church - that is the very point of even having any debate. However, if the bishops seek to force those views on non Catholics - that worries me greatly!

To be firmly clear, my lack of support of the bishops’ push for a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman is not to deny the bishops’ right to hold any faith beliefs they wish. Nor is it to deny of affirm validity of the Church’s beliefs. It is simply and only to say that if any religion-specific beliefs are allowed to dictate the policies of a pluralistic, democratic society, it is not only dangerous and injurious to the society as a whole, but it also poses a very troubling dilemma for religious freedom in general.

I love my personal faith very much and my belief in God is without question central to how I live my life. In the past several years, I have in fact grown to have a great and abundant love for my Catholic faith. But it is that same faith that teaches me to respect all people, to not abuse any form of life, and most of all to love those with whom I may have differences, be those, physical, cultural, philosophical or religious. My faith does not tolerate anything less than peace between all the human family. I fear that suggested laws based upon a specifically Catholic viewpoint means forcing my faith upon unwilling ears and eyes. It would be the same as if a Muslim were to force a ban on pork on nonbelievers or more extremely, to tell all citizens to be Muslims. The same can be said of any faith belief being thrust upon any unwilling people. I ask all religious people to ask themselves a few questions. Is faith by force faith at all? Do the majority of religions preach that any hope of betterment can happen by force?

Finally, it should be said that most religions (and I am fairly well versed in several) demand that believers be willing participants in the joy of choosing that belief and not robotic zombies without lively and passionate wills to serve their faith all the days of their lives. Both Christianity and Islam teach that pure-hearted people shall see God, not unwilling hypocrites. Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism teach that a willingness is needed to practice virtuous living. Demanding unwilling people submit to a particular belief by its nature destroys believers’ ability to joyfully choose to do so on their own. It is an argument of personal freedom. It is the only [argument] to live up to the words of Thomas Jefferson in 1776 that all Americans are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Otherwise all freedoms, I fear will be at a grave risk - including the freedoms enjoyed by the Catholic Church itself.

Wax thoughtfully, and willingly.

Note:Waxing Poetically returns to regular posts tomorrow.

Share this post with others:

“Parting your soup is not a miracle Bruce, it’s a magic trick. A single mom who’s working two jobs, and still finds time to take her son to soccer practice, that’s a miracle. A teenager who says “no” to drugs and “yes” to an education, that’s a miracle. People want me to do everything for them. What they don’t realize is they have the power. You want to see a miracle, son? Be the miracle.” - Morgan Freeman playing God in Bruce Almighty (2003)

Source: imDb

This idea seems a noble one - namely that people’s many daily wishes are not to be expected to have magical cures. Right now, the world in many ways is in peril. Many nations remain at war from Holy Land to Latina America to Asia’s Sri Lankan civil war. The world economy is in significant recession and recovery is slow; and the debate on how to deal with issues such as climate change and how to heal the wounds of abject poverty continues. So often, miracles are thought to be limited to parting the seas or stopping bullets as if God were a hokey comic book hero limited to his shiny spandex and cascading cape who unabashedly seeks to rid the world of all evils.

But the above statement lends itself to simple charity. You may be a teacher helping kids realize their unique talents or a doctor on the verge of an AIDS vaccine. You may be a parent helping his son with his math homework or a daycare worker watching someone’s children. You may be an orthopedic surgeon helping a badly-injured woman to walk again or a clergyman giving hopeful word to a suicidal soul a Still, you may simply be a friend to a lonely older man or finally helping yourself get off of drugs for the first time. Whatever it might be at all, the miracle is often within us!

Wax a miracle.

Share this post with others:

Today marks Easter Sunday - a day on which the Christian faith holds that Jesus rose from the dead to promise eternal life to his followers. But for others who believe in God, God is… well - God is..

Archived from March 13, 2009

The video below is a discourse about the reality of people’s beliefs, Sufi Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs and others. What is God? Who is God? What is his nature? What is his form? Is he everywhere? Is he nowhere? The Bible says his name is Yahweh meaning “I am.” Why do we feel we must know everything about our creator?
why not embrace the mystery of God?

Uploaded by YouTube member DrBillRamos

Wax in God.

Photo of the Day and Video of the Day return on Monday.

Share this post with others:

Today marks Both the Christian Good Friday celebration and the second day of the Jewish Passover. In honor of this occasion, this week’s Articles of Faith segment will acknowledge both faiths in song. Some of the following may be considered to be a bit on the liberal side of things, but it is in no way meant to diminish the sacredness of the season. Well wishes are extended to all who celebrate!

Matisyahu - “Jerusalem”

Uploaded by YouTube member fastmotionforme

The Divine Chaplet of Mercy in Song 2008 Version

Uploaded by YouTube member pcbuyer123

May all who celebrate have a happy, happy season!

Wax festively!

Share this post with others:

Whether you’re a believer or a skeptic, beware of con artists!

Uploaded by Youtube member EveryTribeOutreach

Wax for the truth,

Share this post with others:

I was recently invited to debate an Atheist group on Facebook. The message boards were brimming with theories on all sides from strict Biblical fundamentalism to curious belief and militant Atheists. The conversation was mostly cordial and mellow. Still there were a few Atheists claiming that believers were somehow stupid people who bowed to a magic invisable man in the sky with a long, white beard who spends his time sitting on a throne and waving his cosmic wand to and fro. However, my friends and peers who do have a conviction about the presence of God are much less storybookish and much more logical about the prospect and even a more-than-likely definition of the concept of God.

The following are my own conclusions:

1. Either life was created OR it always existed (as eternity itself or Creation).
Therefore, to the theologian, God is either the Creator or the collective conscience of all that IS… OR both of these.

2.Scientifically speaking, matter that exists cannot be destroyed (i.e, a cloud does not disappear… it becomes rain). Eternal life? The believer says, “YES!”

The Atheist says, “If God is the Creator, then who created Him?” But I say, “If there is no Creator, there is without a doubt Creation itself. If you believe such a particular creation has a first cause that means that by most every theological standards that you believe in God(s). If you however conceive no First Cause than you simply acknowledge What is,usually no ‘thing’ can exist without having been created (or technically changed from a previous form) unless the first thing were eternal - unless it were an eternal presence before all else from which all the subsequent things came and continue to derive….. If you believe the latter, you may likely confirm the former in that such a presence serves to create the probable Big Bang int he first premise.”

3. The First Cause just happened.

Suppose neither of the previous two scenarios were true and suppose life just happened. would not that first happening have direct influence on everything thereafter? Further, nothing could be subsequently created without that first catalyst seeing that matter is only known to derive or be reformed from other matter. So that happening must in some way be the catalyst for all that is to follow from itself. Does this description not define most if not all definitions of a prime mover and creative force? YES! Even if there were spontaneous creation of matter as quantum theory might reveal, science has proven beyond a doubt that spontaneous generation would be the exception to the rule and not the rule itself. It is a fact that the observable Universe functions by cause and effect/action-reaction principles. The word “God” now becomes only a name for the catalyst. So really rather than asking if God exists, one may be better off first defining God.

These are my arguments. Present yours without malice if you wish. I wish you well.

Wax with or without God.

Note: Photo of the Day an Video of the Day return tomorrow.

Share this post with others: