I dreamt you were going out with Juliette Lewis. Who's Juliette Lewis?As it happens, I didn't know who she was either.
Friday, 19 December 2008
Thursday, 18 December 2008
I've lost faith in train station information screens
I was somewhat worried about the flooding last Saturday, because I was travelling by rail, after a worrying wait at Bristol, I eventually got to Bath, only an hour later than expected.
However getting back home was quite an ordeal, I had been directed to change at Westbury, but for some reason my train (20:30 to Exeter) wasn't listed on the departure screen, although trains before and after were listed. I asked the customer service guy, and he told me to just catch the next train to Exeter. I went to the correct platform, checked the platform's information screen and got on the train. Despite these precautions I ended up travelling towards London and only discovered I was going the wrong way when I was nearly at Reading. I asked the guard what to do, I was directed to the Station Supervisor's Office at Reading (which wasn't labelled as such, took ages to find it) to find out how to get home. Because it was getting quite late, the only train heading in the right direction was a train to Bristol, so I took that train (23:00) and arrived in Bristol at 00:30. There were no further trains leaving Bristol that night, and I assumed no buses either, so I went to the nearest hotel to get a room for the night.
I woke up fairly late (for me at least) had breakfast and explained the situation to the woman at the ticket office, and so didn't have to buy another ticket to get home, however I must have just missed a train to Exeter, because I had to wait another hour before the train arrived. I took a taxi home from the station and got home about noon.
On a more postive note, the Christmas meals with both my Asperger support group and the Devon Wildlife Trust (who I've been doing volunteer work for) were both very enjoyable.
However getting back home was quite an ordeal, I had been directed to change at Westbury, but for some reason my train (20:30 to Exeter) wasn't listed on the departure screen, although trains before and after were listed. I asked the customer service guy, and he told me to just catch the next train to Exeter. I went to the correct platform, checked the platform's information screen and got on the train. Despite these precautions I ended up travelling towards London and only discovered I was going the wrong way when I was nearly at Reading. I asked the guard what to do, I was directed to the Station Supervisor's Office at Reading (which wasn't labelled as such, took ages to find it) to find out how to get home. Because it was getting quite late, the only train heading in the right direction was a train to Bristol, so I took that train (23:00) and arrived in Bristol at 00:30. There were no further trains leaving Bristol that night, and I assumed no buses either, so I went to the nearest hotel to get a room for the night.
I woke up fairly late (for me at least) had breakfast and explained the situation to the woman at the ticket office, and so didn't have to buy another ticket to get home, however I must have just missed a train to Exeter, because I had to wait another hour before the train arrived. I took a taxi home from the station and got home about noon.
On a more postive note, the Christmas meals with both my Asperger support group and the Devon Wildlife Trust (who I've been doing volunteer work for) were both very enjoyable.
Padre nostro, che sei nei cieli, #3
Should be able to finish off the first line with this one:
sei
'sei' is a part of the verb 'essere', which looks like this in conjugation:
The rather odd configuration of line 3 is because Italian has a polite form of address, for people you don't know, the elderly, your boss etc. Basically, to be polite you use the third person, which takes a little getting used to. Here 'lui' means 'he', 'lei' means 'her' and 'Lei' is the polite form for 'you'. In fact, 'lei' without a capital letter can mean the polite form too, as if it wasn't already confusing enough. Incidentally, Mussolini apparently wanted people to stop using the word 'Lei' in this way, because he thought it sounded effeminate, which didn't tie in too well with the whole fascist ethos.
You can see that for 'I am' and 'they are' the same word, 'sono', is used. You probably think that's fine because you've got the words 'io' and 'loro' to distinguish between them, but in fact the words in brackets (subject pronouns if you're interested) aren't used the same way as in English - they're mostly not used. You do use them for emphasis, for example, but you don't actually come across them too often. So with 'sono' you have to work the meaning out from the context.
Ok, so we've got the word 'sei' and you can see that it means 'you are', which could potentially make you scratch your head, seeing as that means that so far we have something like "Our Father, who you are [in heaven]" and that is a funny sort of a translation. It might comfort you to know that it actually corresponds quite well with the more traditional version of the Lord's Prayer, "Our Father, who art in heaven", 'thou art' being the old familiar form, which you can see used sometimes in insults*. The more modern translation "Our Father in heaven", I imagine, is a workaround for the fact that "who are in heaven" sounds pretty odd, even though it makes sense linguistically speaking because it's the Father who's addressed. Incidentally, I hope you noticed that we don't use the polite form for God, who's our Father (or Dad, or Abba). We also don't use it for Mary, our mother, or the saints, our brothers.
nei
Ok, this is getting a little long, but I don't want to do another instalment on the first line, so here goes:
a - to
da - from
in - in
On the left, all the Italian prepositions in the Padre Nostro, on the right a simple translation. No need to explain what a preposition actually is I think. I should point out though that the translations are a gross over-simplification because prepositions are one of the most bewilderingly unpredictable parts of most languages. You have only to think of the phrase "What's on telly?" to grasp this.
Not done though. Have a look at this:
You can see what's going on - if, in Italian, you have an 'in', next to an 'i', you get 'nei', so 'nei cieli' means "in the heavens". It's not really that difficult once you get used to it, although if you saw the list of how all the articles combine with all the relevant prepositions, you might panic.
Lest I forget, I should point out that Italians use the definite article in different places to us, though I don't think it's worth going into detail. Also, as in the Greek original, in Italian, the word for 'sky' and 'heaven' is the same.
* "Thou whoreson zed! thou unnecessary letter!" - King Lear, "Come and get one in the yarbles, If you have any yarbles, You eunuch jelly thou." - A Clockwork Orange
sei
'sei' is a part of the verb 'essere', which looks like this in conjugation:
| essere | (to) be, being |
| (io) sono | I am |
| (tu) sei | you are |
| (lui/lei/Lei) è | he/she/it is (+ you are) |
| (noi) siamo | we are |
| (voi) siete | you are (plural) |
| (loro) sono | they are |
The rather odd configuration of line 3 is because Italian has a polite form of address, for people you don't know, the elderly, your boss etc. Basically, to be polite you use the third person, which takes a little getting used to. Here 'lui' means 'he', 'lei' means 'her' and 'Lei' is the polite form for 'you'. In fact, 'lei' without a capital letter can mean the polite form too, as if it wasn't already confusing enough. Incidentally, Mussolini apparently wanted people to stop using the word 'Lei' in this way, because he thought it sounded effeminate, which didn't tie in too well with the whole fascist ethos.
You can see that for 'I am' and 'they are' the same word, 'sono', is used. You probably think that's fine because you've got the words 'io' and 'loro' to distinguish between them, but in fact the words in brackets (subject pronouns if you're interested) aren't used the same way as in English - they're mostly not used. You do use them for emphasis, for example, but you don't actually come across them too often. So with 'sono' you have to work the meaning out from the context.
Ok, so we've got the word 'sei' and you can see that it means 'you are', which could potentially make you scratch your head, seeing as that means that so far we have something like "Our Father, who you are [in heaven]" and that is a funny sort of a translation. It might comfort you to know that it actually corresponds quite well with the more traditional version of the Lord's Prayer, "Our Father, who art in heaven", 'thou art' being the old familiar form, which you can see used sometimes in insults*. The more modern translation "Our Father in heaven", I imagine, is a workaround for the fact that "who are in heaven" sounds pretty odd, even though it makes sense linguistically speaking because it's the Father who's addressed. Incidentally, I hope you noticed that we don't use the polite form for God, who's our Father (or Dad, or Abba). We also don't use it for Mary, our mother, or the saints, our brothers.
nei
Ok, this is getting a little long, but I don't want to do another instalment on the first line, so here goes:
a - to
da - from
in - in
On the left, all the Italian prepositions in the Padre Nostro, on the right a simple translation. No need to explain what a preposition actually is I think. I should point out though that the translations are a gross over-simplification because prepositions are one of the most bewilderingly unpredictable parts of most languages. You have only to think of the phrase "What's on telly?" to grasp this.
Not done though. Have a look at this:
| + il | + i | + la | + le | |
| a | al | ai | alla | alle |
| da | dal | dai | dalla | dalle |
| in | nel | nei | nella | nelle |
You can see what's going on - if, in Italian, you have an 'in', next to an 'i', you get 'nei', so 'nei cieli' means "in the heavens". It's not really that difficult once you get used to it, although if you saw the list of how all the articles combine with all the relevant prepositions, you might panic.
Lest I forget, I should point out that Italians use the definite article in different places to us, though I don't think it's worth going into detail. Also, as in the Greek original, in Italian, the word for 'sky' and 'heaven' is the same.
* "Thou whoreson zed! thou unnecessary letter!" - King Lear, "Come and get one in the yarbles, If you have any yarbles, You eunuch jelly thou." - A Clockwork Orange
Monday, 15 December 2008
Padre nostro, che sei nei cieli, #2
nostro
Have a look at this:
You should recognise the nouns and articles from last time. What we have here is the form in which you'd usually find 'you' and 'our' added in. They're the only two possessive forms in the Padre Nostro - no 'my', 'his', 'her', 'its' or 'their' to worry about.
You can see that the forms "agree" with the nouns, that is the forms vary from masculine to feminine, and singular to plural, but it's not really so hard for the main part. On the other hand, this can get confusing for English speakers. Take the following, for example:
1. il suo nome
2. la sua volontà
1 can mean "his name" as well as "her name", depending on the context. 2 can mean "his will" and "her will", depending on the context. What it is tempting to do is think that 'suo' means 'his', and 'sua' means 'her', but both can mean either. It's the noun that it agrees with, not the person.
Again, 'volontà' hasn't changed in the plural, but from 'le tue' you can see it's feminine plural.
You probably noticed though, that the Padre Nostro doesn't start "Il nostro Padre", as you might expect from the table above. I don't suppose you'll lose any sleep over it, but I'll try and explain anyway. Relations are a special case; generally speaking you ditch the article (mamma mia!), except when it's in the plural (i nostri padri). I don't have a particular explanation for why 'nostro' is after 'Padre' here, but I don't intend to worry too much about it. Most adjectives, in fact, come after the noun in Italian, but let's burn that bridge when we come to it.
che
'che' basically means 'that' or 'which'. However, it also means 'who' as it does here. There is an Italian word for 'who', but it's out of place here, because this 'who' elaborates on who the Father is. In Italian therefore 'che.'
Have a look at this:
| your | il tuo regno | i tuoi regni | la tua volontà | le tue volontà |
| our | il nostro pane | i nostri pani | la nostra terra | le nostre terre |
You should recognise the nouns and articles from last time. What we have here is the form in which you'd usually find 'you' and 'our' added in. They're the only two possessive forms in the Padre Nostro - no 'my', 'his', 'her', 'its' or 'their' to worry about.
You can see that the forms "agree" with the nouns, that is the forms vary from masculine to feminine, and singular to plural, but it's not really so hard for the main part. On the other hand, this can get confusing for English speakers. Take the following, for example:
1. il suo nome
2. la sua volontà
1 can mean "his name" as well as "her name", depending on the context. 2 can mean "his will" and "her will", depending on the context. What it is tempting to do is think that 'suo' means 'his', and 'sua' means 'her', but both can mean either. It's the noun that it agrees with, not the person.
Again, 'volontà' hasn't changed in the plural, but from 'le tue' you can see it's feminine plural.
You probably noticed though, that the Padre Nostro doesn't start "Il nostro Padre", as you might expect from the table above. I don't suppose you'll lose any sleep over it, but I'll try and explain anyway. Relations are a special case; generally speaking you ditch the article (mamma mia!), except when it's in the plural (i nostri padri). I don't have a particular explanation for why 'nostro' is after 'Padre' here, but I don't intend to worry too much about it. Most adjectives, in fact, come after the noun in Italian, but let's burn that bridge when we come to it.
che
'che' basically means 'that' or 'which'. However, it also means 'who' as it does here. There is an Italian word for 'who', but it's out of place here, because this 'who' elaborates on who the Father is. In Italian therefore 'che.'
Saturday, 13 December 2008
Padre nostro, che sei nei cieli,
Hi.
I read somewhere that a good way to learn a language is to teach it. So I thought I'd walk you through the Lord's Prayer, for the sake of doing something a bit different.
Instead of a guide on pronunciation, have an mp3.
Padre
If I err not, these are all the masculine nouns in the Padre Nostro:
Ok. Because of the Norman conquest, there're quite a few that you could probably guess the meaning of without me telling you. They come in two main flavours (there are more, but not in the Lord's Prayer), masculine nouns that end with 'o' and masculine nouns that end in 'e'.
To get the plural of both of them you change it into an 'i'.
All these masculine nouns start with a consonant and therefore the definite article ('the') is 'il' in the singular and 'i' in the plural ('il' and 'i' aren't in fact the only definite articles for masculine nouns that start with a consonant, but we don't need to worry about that here).
These are all the feminine nouns:
Again, none of them start with a vowel, which simplifies things. 'terra', which handily ends in an 'a' is easy to spot as a feminine noun, whereas you can see from 'tentazione' that there are feminine nouns that end in 'e' as well as masculine ones. When you learn nouns that end in 'e', you also have to learn whether they're masculine or feminine. What is worth remembering though, is that nouns that end in '-zione', which correpsonds to '-tion' in English, are usually feminine.
The feminine nouns that end in 'a' change to 'e' in the plural, but the nouns that end in 'e' in the singular form become 'i' again. 'volontà' is a bit of a funny one. The nouns that end in 'à' (the accent means that the stress falls on that syllable) don't change their form in the plural.
The definite article for all of these feminine nouns, because they don't start with a vowel again, is 'la' in the singular and 'le' in the plural.
I should think that's probably enough to start with.
I read somewhere that a good way to learn a language is to teach it. So I thought I'd walk you through the Lord's Prayer, for the sake of doing something a bit different.
Instead of a guide on pronunciation, have an mp3.
Padre
If I err not, these are all the masculine nouns in the Padre Nostro:
| singular | plural | English | |
| il padre | i padri | the father(s) | |
| il cielo | i cieli | the heavens(s) | celestial |
| il nome | i nomi | the name(s) | nominate |
| il regno | i regni | the kingdom(s) | reign |
| il pane | i pani | the bread(s) | |
| il debito | i debiti | the debt(s) | debit |
| il debitore | i debitori | the debtor(s) | |
| il male | i mali | the evil(s) | malicious |
Ok. Because of the Norman conquest, there're quite a few that you could probably guess the meaning of without me telling you. They come in two main flavours (there are more, but not in the Lord's Prayer), masculine nouns that end with 'o' and masculine nouns that end in 'e'.
To get the plural of both of them you change it into an 'i'.
All these masculine nouns start with a consonant and therefore the definite article ('the') is 'il' in the singular and 'i' in the plural ('il' and 'i' aren't in fact the only definite articles for masculine nouns that start with a consonant, but we don't need to worry about that here).
These are all the feminine nouns:
| singular | plural | English | |
| la tentazione | le tentazioni | the temptation(s) | |
| la volontà | le volontà | the will(s) | voluntary |
| la terra | le terre | the earth(s) | terrestrial |
Again, none of them start with a vowel, which simplifies things. 'terra', which handily ends in an 'a' is easy to spot as a feminine noun, whereas you can see from 'tentazione' that there are feminine nouns that end in 'e' as well as masculine ones. When you learn nouns that end in 'e', you also have to learn whether they're masculine or feminine. What is worth remembering though, is that nouns that end in '-zione', which correpsonds to '-tion' in English, are usually feminine.
The feminine nouns that end in 'a' change to 'e' in the plural, but the nouns that end in 'e' in the singular form become 'i' again. 'volontà' is a bit of a funny one. The nouns that end in 'à' (the accent means that the stress falls on that syllable) don't change their form in the plural.
The definite article for all of these feminine nouns, because they don't start with a vowel again, is 'la' in the singular and 'le' in the plural.
I should think that's probably enough to start with.
Wednesday, 10 December 2008
Nativity Scene
Nativity Scene
It's how we put our nativity scene together here, because I like the Italian way of doing it. Very hands on. It'd be a good thing for churches to do I think.
(I'm hoping by posting it I'll get James and Ella to do a really cool one and then I'll get to see it. Shh!)
Thursday, 4 December 2008
Married Priests Again
Okay. Let's try this again.
I said that the married priest seemed to think that those who don't want to abandon the discipline of celibacy for priests think that "familial love [is] incompatible with the vocation of a priest". I (reduntantly) pointed out that obviously the Vatican doesn't think so, or he wouldn't be in circulation.
Trouble is, I think that even if he was talking about incompatability (he may have actually used those words, but I'm not sure) it certainly can't have been what he meant. I imagine (it was a while ago now) that he was thinking more in terms of conflict, or tension. The interviewer asked a question which was something to do with whether married priests were considered second-class priests.
So, like I said last time, first thing I'd look at would be St. Paul:
I said that the married priest seemed to think that those who don't want to abandon the discipline of celibacy for priests think that "familial love [is] incompatible with the vocation of a priest". I (reduntantly) pointed out that obviously the Vatican doesn't think so, or he wouldn't be in circulation.
Trouble is, I think that even if he was talking about incompatability (he may have actually used those words, but I'm not sure) it certainly can't have been what he meant. I imagine (it was a while ago now) that he was thinking more in terms of conflict, or tension. The interviewer asked a question which was something to do with whether married priests were considered second-class priests.
So, like I said last time, first thing I'd look at would be St. Paul:
I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs—how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord. - 1 Cor 7:32-35I think in fact that this priest has probably over-spiritualised the issue. He was saying that his love for his wife and for his children does not restrict his capacity to love and serve God as a priest, and this is of course true. The way I see it. however, is that it's hardly even a theological question (except in the sense that reality is a matter of theological interest): it's a practical question. Everybody knows that both being a husband and being a father entail everyday duties, concerns and responsibilities that someone who is not a husband, and not a father, does not have. We don't criticise fathers for spending time with their wives and children - we expect it, and so we expect it of married priests too. A priest accepts the task of being a spiritual father to every person in his parish as God is the Father of all mankind. By having a wife and children, I think the parity of the relationship is somewhat obscured. I don't think that married priests are second-class priests, only that for them a particular tension exists that doesn't exist for celibate priests.
Friday, 28 November 2008
A relatively diverting Friday
Hello,
My wife is making focaccia in the kitchen. I, on the other hand, am blogging because we actually did a bit of stuff today.
We had a couple of things to do when we set out this morning. One was to go to Globo and spend £20 that we earned by spending about £100 (there doesn't seem to be a euro button on this Italian laptop, consequently I am pretending that the one means the other!). The other was to go and register me at the Italian equivalent of the Jobcentre.
I had my own personal mission as well, which was to buy a 3.5mm male-to-male audio cable, and we found one for a couple of quid (in addition to using pound signs for euros, I decided early on that I didn't want to lose the word "quid", so I'm using that for euros too) so I'm happy now. You may think that having an audio cable is a pretty lame thing to be pleased about, even for a man, but it means that I can connect my Minidisc player to my laptop, which means that I should finally be able to convert my music, that I made throughout my adolescence, into MP3s, as well as the cover versions that I romantically recorded for Monica, which means she has a little reason to be pleased too. I rather like listening back to my music, so it'll be nice to have it in a more well-supported format. If anyone's at all interested in having a copy, do let me know and I'll try and think of a sensible way to distribute it.
Other good news is that Monica found some jeans and a bobble hat in Globo! I know, I know - too excitment for one blog post, right? Seriously though, Monica has a hard time finding jeans she likes, because skinny jeans are in now, so it's pretty hard trying to find anything else. When we went to Globo last time we were looking for jeans for her and came back with nothing, so it is a result. The bobble hat is just nice, and it keeps my wife's head warm, which is something I approve of.
When we went to register at the jobcentre, we were perplexed to find that I didn't have my passport (I could use my driving license to register though) which was quite troubling. I kept my cool, but Monica was understandably a bit agitated. She phoned home and got her Mum to go on a passport search, which was fruitless, or rather, passportless I suppose. But a lady from the Jobcentre called while we were in the office saying that she'd found my passport, which she was only able to do because I had just given the jobcentre my phone number! Rather handy that.
Today the Blessed Sacrament has been exposed in the little chapel in S. Tommaso Apostolo, so Monica and I went to spend some time with Him, and apparently there's going to be confession later too, so I'll hopefully be able to make the most of that.
Monica wanted to try out using Skype to phone England, so we've bought some Skype credit and will give it a go. At the moment we get calls to England free, but only because Monica's parents pay (and were paying while Monica was in England) a fixed amount per month. If we use Skype instead, we can decrease their phone bill without them worrying that I'm never going to speak to my parents.
If you look here you'll see the comments section of one of James' blog entries where someone fairly randomly asked James and Ella if they did translations, because they had an old framed picture or Pius X with something written on it that they didn't understand. I'm not quite sure what James would have said to that, but I had a look, and instead of it being the impenetrable Latin that I was expecting, it was Italian! And I could translate it all without recourse to a dictionary! So I was quite pleased with myself. Which was nice.
It was quite a pleasant Friday, and it's not even finished yet.
My wife is making focaccia in the kitchen. I, on the other hand, am blogging because we actually did a bit of stuff today.
We had a couple of things to do when we set out this morning. One was to go to Globo and spend £20 that we earned by spending about £100 (there doesn't seem to be a euro button on this Italian laptop, consequently I am pretending that the one means the other!). The other was to go and register me at the Italian equivalent of the Jobcentre.
I had my own personal mission as well, which was to buy a 3.5mm male-to-male audio cable, and we found one for a couple of quid (in addition to using pound signs for euros, I decided early on that I didn't want to lose the word "quid", so I'm using that for euros too) so I'm happy now. You may think that having an audio cable is a pretty lame thing to be pleased about, even for a man, but it means that I can connect my Minidisc player to my laptop, which means that I should finally be able to convert my music, that I made throughout my adolescence, into MP3s, as well as the cover versions that I romantically recorded for Monica, which means she has a little reason to be pleased too. I rather like listening back to my music, so it'll be nice to have it in a more well-supported format. If anyone's at all interested in having a copy, do let me know and I'll try and think of a sensible way to distribute it.
Other good news is that Monica found some jeans and a bobble hat in Globo! I know, I know - too excitment for one blog post, right? Seriously though, Monica has a hard time finding jeans she likes, because skinny jeans are in now, so it's pretty hard trying to find anything else. When we went to Globo last time we were looking for jeans for her and came back with nothing, so it is a result. The bobble hat is just nice, and it keeps my wife's head warm, which is something I approve of.
When we went to register at the jobcentre, we were perplexed to find that I didn't have my passport (I could use my driving license to register though) which was quite troubling. I kept my cool, but Monica was understandably a bit agitated. She phoned home and got her Mum to go on a passport search, which was fruitless, or rather, passportless I suppose. But a lady from the Jobcentre called while we were in the office saying that she'd found my passport, which she was only able to do because I had just given the jobcentre my phone number! Rather handy that.
Today the Blessed Sacrament has been exposed in the little chapel in S. Tommaso Apostolo, so Monica and I went to spend some time with Him, and apparently there's going to be confession later too, so I'll hopefully be able to make the most of that.
Monica wanted to try out using Skype to phone England, so we've bought some Skype credit and will give it a go. At the moment we get calls to England free, but only because Monica's parents pay (and were paying while Monica was in England) a fixed amount per month. If we use Skype instead, we can decrease their phone bill without them worrying that I'm never going to speak to my parents.
If you look here you'll see the comments section of one of James' blog entries where someone fairly randomly asked James and Ella if they did translations, because they had an old framed picture or Pius X with something written on it that they didn't understand. I'm not quite sure what James would have said to that, but I had a look, and instead of it being the impenetrable Latin that I was expecting, it was Italian! And I could translate it all without recourse to a dictionary! So I was quite pleased with myself. Which was nice.
It was quite a pleasant Friday, and it's not even finished yet.
Monday, 24 November 2008
Married Priests
The subject's come up a couple of times for me recently. The other day Lorenzo was talking about it (I'm not sure why it came up) and said, if I understood correctly, that Jesus never said that priests had to be celibate, that it was a decision of the Church.
Then, getting my weekly fix of religious news from Sunday, I heard an interview with a couple of priests both of whom had a fairly positive attitude towards the idea (one a married ex-Anglican), though they didn't claim that it would solve the priest shortage and on the whole seemed quite moderate and sensible. The ex-Anglican one said that it was a distortion to claim that familial love was incompatible with the vocation to priesthood.
So I just thought I'd give my thoughts on those two things. I suppose everyone already knows that a celibate priesthood is not an unalterable teaching, but a matter of discipline? If you don't you do now.
With regard to Jesus' lack of definitive teaching on the matter, the first thing to note is that St. Paul does clearly have an opinion on the matter. And though he is certainly not Jesus, it doesn't do to ignore the Apostle to the gentiles.
And then there's the precedent set by the first priests of all, the Apostles.
N.B. Having just written the following, I already want to change it, because I didn't say what I orginally intended to say, and I think I've probably mis-represented the priest in fact. So, if you could just bear that in mind in the meantime. I may update it later.
With regard to the priest who thought that it was a mistake to think that familial love was incompatible with the vocation of a priest, the simplest thing I think is just to say with St. Paul what he says above. But though I don't think that we should remove the celibacy requirement, I personally don't think for a moment that marriage is incompatiable with the priesthood. The priest, as I say, seemed like a nice guy, and it makes a nice change to hear someone express their opinion without resorting to polemics, but I do think it was a bit of a straw-man argument. If the Church really thought that marriage was incompatible with priesthood he wouldn't be a priest. I suppose there might be some schismatic types who would claim that he isn't really a priest, but I don't see how an orthodox Catholic who isn't sold on the whole married priests deal could think what he thinks they think - if you follow me. (that doesn't mean that I don't think he's an orthodox Catholic b.t.w.)
And that's what I think about that.
Then, getting my weekly fix of religious news from Sunday, I heard an interview with a couple of priests both of whom had a fairly positive attitude towards the idea (one a married ex-Anglican), though they didn't claim that it would solve the priest shortage and on the whole seemed quite moderate and sensible. The ex-Anglican one said that it was a distortion to claim that familial love was incompatible with the vocation to priesthood.
So I just thought I'd give my thoughts on those two things. I suppose everyone already knows that a celibate priesthood is not an unalterable teaching, but a matter of discipline? If you don't you do now.
With regard to Jesus' lack of definitive teaching on the matter, the first thing to note is that St. Paul does clearly have an opinion on the matter. And though he is certainly not Jesus, it doesn't do to ignore the Apostle to the gentiles.
I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs—how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord. - 1 Cor 7:32-35There are some very obvious things to say about this verse being less than dogmatic, so please don't.
And then there's the precedent set by the first priests of all, the Apostles.
Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. [...] And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me." - Luke 22
Peter answered him, "We have left everything to follow you! - Mt 19:27Also, Jesus does have an explicit teaching which may be interpreted in different ways, but which is far from irrelevant.
The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry."
Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it." - Mt 19:10-12
N.B. Having just written the following, I already want to change it, because I didn't say what I orginally intended to say, and I think I've probably mis-represented the priest in fact. So, if you could just bear that in mind in the meantime. I may update it later.
And that's what I think about that.
Tuesday, 18 November 2008
Progress
Just reading in the Italian papers about the UK government's plans to sterilise teenagers. Obviously, being a Catholic who listens to what the Church says, I'm predictably not going to be in favour. But let's leave that aside for the moment.
The last time that politicians were talking about mass sterilisations as the solution, I seem to recall that we ended up with Nazism. Obviously, nothing bad could come of this, because they were evil pricks, whereas we mean well.
Also, why are these sorts of measures always meant to occur without parental consent? Very kind of the state to relieve us of the burden of making decisions about the lives of our children. Nothing remotely totalitarian about that.
Back to the Catholic stuff:
James started a sort of campaign to promote Humanae Vitae, the 1968 encyclical which re-stated the Church's historic teaching on contraception (it might seem like a good idea, but it's actually a shit idea) contrary to the prevailing mood, and this is a good excuse to quote from it:
The last time that politicians were talking about mass sterilisations as the solution, I seem to recall that we ended up with Nazism. Obviously, nothing bad could come of this, because they were evil pricks, whereas we mean well.
Also, why are these sorts of measures always meant to occur without parental consent? Very kind of the state to relieve us of the burden of making decisions about the lives of our children. Nothing remotely totalitarian about that.
Back to the Catholic stuff:
James started a sort of campaign to promote Humanae Vitae, the 1968 encyclical which re-stated the Church's historic teaching on contraception (it might seem like a good idea, but it's actually a shit idea) contrary to the prevailing mood, and this is a good excuse to quote from it:
Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.Of course, the Church being old-fashioned and wrong, none of those things happened after '68. Tush.
Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.
Tuesday, 11 November 2008
Harry Potter
Here's a thing worth mentioning: some time ago, I finished reading Harry Potter e il Calice di Fuoco. I'm now reading Harry Potter e l'Ordine della Fenice.
That's not bad is it?
That's not bad is it?
Saturday, 8 November 2008
Wedding Photos
He does some wicked photos does John, and he's just finished doing our wedding photos it would appear.
We get a CD in a little while, and the world at large gets these.
Anyone who's my friend on facebook will have seen quite a few of these before, albeit at the wrong angle and without that professional touch, but there's quite a few unique ones.
Go John, I say.
Also, for what it's worth, the wedding photos of our friends Ben and Hannah are up there too...
We get a CD in a little while, and the world at large gets these.
Anyone who's my friend on facebook will have seen quite a few of these before, albeit at the wrong angle and without that professional touch, but there's quite a few unique ones.
Go John, I say.
Also, for what it's worth, the wedding photos of our friends Ben and Hannah are up there too...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)