Jerusalem, Jerusalem

I just returned from a trip to the Holy Land. On hearing Pope Benedict XVI's homily of the Palm Sunday Mass I wanted to share what he said about his own trip last year to the places where Jesus walked.


"The pilgrimage to the earthly Jerusalem," he said, "can be something useful for us Christians. Faith in Jesus Christ is not the invention of a fairy tale. It is founded on something that actually happened. We can, so to speak, contemplate and touch this historical event.

"It is moving to find oneself in Nazareth in the place where the angel appeared to Mary and transmitted the task of becoming Mother of the Redeemer to her.

"It is moving to be in Bethlehem in the place where the Word, made flesh, came to live among us; to put one's foot upon the holy ground where God wanted to make himself man and child."

"Following the material paths of Jesus should help us to walk more joyously and with a new certainty along the interior paths that Jesus himself points out to us," he said.

The Holy Father added, "When we go to the Holy Land as pilgrims, we go there, however as messengers of peace too, with prayer for peace; with the firm invitation that everyone in that place (which bears the word "peace" in name), has everything possible so that it truly become a place of peace."

"Thus," he said, "this pilgrimage is at the same time an encouragement to Christians to remain in the country of their origin and to commit themselves in an intense way to peace."

So to summarize the Pope said:
1) It is a great privilege to see the places where Jesus lived and walked and this can help us to appreciate His teachings and the sacrifice of His life for our salvation.
2) A visit to these lands should help us to pray for peace in these sometimes troubled lands.
3) Our visit can give hope and encouragment to Christians who have not left because of danger but have stayed.
(Pope Benedict's homily taken from a post on Zenit News Service on Palm Sunday, 2010)

Help! Where has Grammar gone?

Often I hear people on television say things like:

I never seen it coming.

Please note that:
'saw' is the past tense of 'see'
For example: I see you in the picture.
Yesterday, I saw you at the Mall.

'I seen you.' is wrong, wrong, wrong.
We must say:
I have seen the movie, 'White Christmas six times.'
or She has seen the movie, 'White Christmas six times.'
You can say it quickly like:
I've seen the movie, 'White Christmas'. or
She's seen the movie, 'White Christmas.'
But you cannot say
I seen the movie, 'White Christmas'.
or She seen the movie, 'White Christmas'.
It is not correct English.
So in order to prevent early grey hair in English teachers or others who believe grammar is important, please try to use 'see' and 'seen' correctly.

Thank you.

Oh Canada or Not

Oh Canada, or Not.


I admit I was upset when I heard that a school principal in New Brunswick had “banned the singing of the national anthem” because of two families who did not want their children singing it. With other Canadians I wondered incredulously, “What kind of people do not want their children to sing the national anthem?” and “Why would a school principal cave in to two families who did not want it rather than consider the majority of people in his school?”

On February 9, 2009, Susan Ormiston interviewed the Principal, Eric Millet, on CBC’s The National. The Principal stated that he had never banned the singing of the National Anthem but rather than having it played over the school’s PA system everyday changed to singing the anthem only at assemblies. By the way, there is no law which says “Oh Canada ’ must be sung at schools.

After the media broadcast the story of a “principal who banned the singing of the national anthem because several families didn’t want their children to sing it”, Eric Millet received over 2,000 e-mails, largely hate mail including some death threats. I wonder what this says about our civilized society? Many people (check out The National’s website comments on the story) assumed, incorrectly, that the families who complained were immigrants. The Canadian parliament ordered the school to re-instate singing the anthem and Eric Millet’s career as a Principal has been ruined. In fact, he wonders if he can ever go back to teaching again. He has obviously been traumatized at the amount and intensity of hate that was directed towards him.

In the interview with Mr. Mallet, Susan Ormiston did not apologize on behalf of the CBC and other media who made the false claim in the first place. Wouldn’t you think news reporters would check with the principal to get his side before releasing the story?



In the end there are some important things we can all learn from this unfortunate incident:



1) Don’t believe everything you read in newspapers or hear on television even if it is the news. Take the media to task if you feel it has not acted in an ethical or truthful manner. And check with Snopes before forwarding "hate-type" items received via internet.

2) Don’t jump to conclusions. Letters to the CBC written by those whose children attend Bellisle School in Springfield , NB. clearly state that the two families who complained about the anthem were not immigrants but were Canadians several generations back. Do some research on “religions’ that don’t allow the singing of national anthems – there aren’t that many.

3) Don't generalize - there are good and bad people in every nationality, every group.



4) Don’t send hate mail to anyone. No one deserves it. If people are guilty of a crime – do what you can in order for justice to be done – but let the criminal justice system take care of the punishment. If you don’t think the criminal justice system is doing its job – write to the MPs involved and tell them so. Fight for justice for all – which means only the guilty are punished and the punishment is appropriate for the crime.



5) Remember what Flower said to Bambi, “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.”



6) And if you claim to be a Christian, remember Jesus’ words, “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.” (Actually a form of this is also taught by the other major world religions).

The Hills are Alive with the Sound of Mozart!


The hills around Salzburg are alive with the sound of music. It was, after all, the setting for the movie “The Sound of Music” and the real-life story of Maria von Trapp that it was based on. But Salzburg is first and foremost alive with the sound of the music of Mozart for the city is justly proud of its most famous son.
I traveled from Vienna by train which turned out to be a very comfortable ride on Austria’s efficient rail system. The time went by quickly as we passed villages that looked like scenes from fairy tales. Too soon the train pulled into Salzburg station. My compartment companion was on his way to spend a weekend in Salzburg with his girlfriend and said they would drive me to my accommodation.
After settling in my lodging next to St. Sebastian Church, I went out for a walk around Salzburg. Winding streets where no vehicles are allowed are lined with shops to entice the tourist: savvy fashions, hand made pottery, cafes and of course, restaurants.

There are many concerts where one can hear “a little night music” performed in Salzburg. Churches in Salzburg often pay tribute to Mozart by using his music in the Mass, which is, of course, for what many pieces were originally composed. The best part of these “performances” is that they are free!
Some of these performances include dinner such as does the one at St. Peter’s Stiftskeller, which claims to be Central Europe’s oldest restaurant. This restaurant, built in AD803, was documented during a visit by Charlemagne. I searched the winding streets to find the church and restaurant and, when I finally did find it, decided to have dinner there. The turkey schnitzel served with parslied potatoes and cranberry sauce accompanied by a glass of white wine was truly heavenly.

At its Mozart’s concert, later in the evening, the restaurant serves a menu that is made up of 18th century dishes; food that may have been served during Mozart’s time. Mozart’s Mass in C-minor was first performed at St. Peter’s Church in 1789 and the Mozart family did actually eat at the restaurant at least on one occasion (but more than likely more often). Nannerl, Mozart’s older sister, wrote in her diary, “Papa and Henry had lunch at St. Peter’s and made music.” Nannerl, whose real name was Anna Maria, was a talented musician in her own right and both she and her more famous brother, Wolfgang, were taken by their father to play at the courts of Europe. You can still see her grave behind St. Peter’s in the cemetery.

Mozart’s birthplace, a house on Getreidegasse 9, is now a museum where the violin he used as a child is on display along with other items. A later Mozart residence, Tanzmeisterhaus or The Dancing Master’s House is near Trinity Church on the Markartplatz. It is also open to the public with an entrance fee.
The next day I took a short city bus ride (# 6 bus to Plainbruke) followed by a pleasant twenty minute country walk to Maria Plain Basilica. On the way I passed typical Austrian farm houses, complete with the smell of manure, and looked back on fantastic views of the city of Salzburg. There were spring flowers blooming along the road and the air was crisp and cool. Maria Plain is a twin-towered, cream and turquoise basilica on the top of a hill overlooking Salzburg. At the altar is an icon of the Virgin Mary which in the 16th century miraculously escaped being destroyed in a fire. Mozart chose the peaceful sanctuary of this basilica to compose his Coronation Mass for the Blessed Virgin Mary. From the hill where Maria Plain is situated there is an unbeatable view of Salzburg lying in the valley below.
At the traditional nearby Gasthaus I had a light lunch of cold cuts, salad and scrumptious fresh bread before walking back (this time downhill) to Salzburg and the bus.
On the bus I noticed the stop, Mirabelplatz, and decided to get off to explore. In the gardens of the Mirabel Palace, amongst fountains and formally laid gardens, there is a moss-covered pavilion where Mozart composed one of his most popular pieces “The Magic Flute”. One of the fountains made an appearance in the movie, “The Sound of Music”, too, for that is where the family danced and sang “Do, Re, Mi.”
A tour offered by one company is a “Sound of Music” tour which takes you to places featured in the film including the convent where Maria was a novitiate nun before her marriage, the church where Maria and Baron von Trapp were married and the villa used as their home in the film. I didn’t take this tour but I did hear that it is very worthwhile.

Back in central Salzburg I relaxed with a melange (the Austrian version of cafe latte) and apfel strudel at the Stern Hotel Terrace and drank in the view as well. The Hohensalzburg Fortress, built in 1077, overlooking the Salzach River and the town below with its many church steeples is a memorable picture.

The narrow streets of Salzburg are filled with unconscious charm, no doubt one reason the old, baroque part of the city has been chosen as a UNESCO World Cultural Heritage Sight. There are outdoor restaurants, graceful arches with painted murals and the inevitable gift shops overflowing with Mozart chocolates, liqueurs and other souvenirs.

Even if you are not a fan of Mozart there is still lots to keep you occupied in Salzburg. Slosh down an Austrian beer with weiner schnitzel at one of the outdoor cafes. Get lost in the small winding streets shopping for china or drindls (traditional Austrian dresses). Spend a peaceful moment in one of the lovely old churches. Or climb up to the Fortress for another view of the town. One thing is for certain, you will never be bored in Salzburg.

Good Friday, 2008.
We are often led to believe that churches nowadays are empty. Oh, one may guess that the more lively, aggressive churches attract members but the Catholic churches plagued by scandals and an outdated papacy must have empty pews. Right?
Well the Catholic church I went to on Good Friday was packed to the rafters – no sitting room and people standing at the back. As there is nothing unusual about this parish, I have no reason to believe that any of the other parishes in the area were lacking worshippers either.
Why would people spend two hours in church on a spring day-off from work? Were there just old people there or those who had nothing better to do with their time? No. There were old people and young people, families with small babies, those with young children and those with teenagers. There were old and young and those in between. There were just as many men as women. There were those who were dressed in jeans and hoodies, and those that were dressed in “dressier” outfits. There were teachers, business men and women, truck drivers, students, stay-at-home moms, electricians and university professors. There were those who were born in Italy, Ireland, Germany, the Philippines and Korea and those who were born in Canada.
One might say that these are the Christmas/Easter crowd –those that go to Mass only at these times. But this was Good Friday not Easter Sunday. The ‘twice a year crowd’ would normally go on Easter Sunday.
In a former age (years ago when I was kid, for example) one could say people went to church because it was good for business, they had to keep up appearances or they wanted to look good. But today it is not particularly fashionable to go to church, it is not necessary and one doesn’t gain much socially from going. Furthermore, why go on Easter if you don’t go the rest of the year?
But there they were – people going up to venerate the cross, people kneeling and praying – traditions and prayers that have been used since the first centuries of Christianity. Not all of these people are stupid or deluded or out-of-date. Maybe, just maybe there is something to Christianity after all.
Whatever. I have come to the conclusion, though, that the people who spread the rumour that churches are empty are people that never really go themselves. Perhaps it is one of those “urban legends” one hears about!

Did the Catholic Church Suppress the Bible?

Recently I watched a program which discussed the belief in the Bible as the Word of God before and after the Reformation. There were the usual ‘experts’ who gave their comments but in this particular program I must say they seemed to represent only Protestant thought and one that was particularly negative concerning the Catholic Church at that. Although some of it was very interesting, I felt that it misrepresented what the Roman Catholic Church has historically taught and still teaches concerning the Bible.
The line went, “The Catholic Church tried to keep the Bible from the people. We see this because the Bible was only in Latin, people were not encouraged to study the Bible and it was not translated into the languages of the people until the Reformation.” Although this is a popular fable passed around it is certainly not the complete story.
It is true that the language used by the Catholic Church for Scriptures and as well, the Mass, was Latin and remained so until Vatican II in the 1960s. In fact Latin is still the official language of the Church and important documents are still written first in Latin, thus not favoring any other particular language in use today.
In the Europe of the Middle Ages this had some other advantages. It was not uncommon for scholars to study in a university far away from their own country. Scholars and other educated people all understood Latin so one could be an Englishman studying in a university in, say, Bologna and still be able to understand the Mass. The university lectures would also be in Latin making it easier to study wherever you wanted to. Latin was a universally understood language in the Europe of the Middle Ages even more so than English is in the world today.
Now, of course, there were those who did not read or understand Latin: the common, uneducated people, and one might suppose they were at a distinct disadvantage. However, except for Scripture readings, the Mass follows the same pattern every time it is celebrated (even today) and those who attended would be familiar with the language they heard each Sunday. Furthermore, the homilies (or sermons) were in the language of the people so the teaching of the Scripture was in a language they could understand. It is probably true that the average person knew more of the Bible in the Middle Ages than they do today. The sermon at Mass, the art in the stained glass and paintings, the morality plays presented in the market – all these things taught the “unlettered” men and women the gospels in spite of the fact that they did not know Latin.
In any case, it was probably not until the late Middle Ages that the uneducated English could read their own language. Chaucer, who was born in 1340 or 1344, was the first to write in the language of the common man in England. How many ordinary people could read English? Until the printing press was invented probably not many.
It does seem though that in England the Scriptures in the language of the people lagged behind compared to other European languages. Remember that England had had Norman kings who spoke French and that only French or an Anglo-Norman dialect was spoken at court from the tenth to about the fourteenth century. English peasants called the animals in the field, cows, pigs and sheep but at court where the meat was served at meals they were boeuf, porc and mouton (which later came into English as beef, pork and mutton).
So much for England. Were there Scriptures in the language of the people in other countries in Europe?
Bishop Ulfilas (318-388) devised an alphabet for the Goths and translated the Old and New Testaments into their language soon after.
Another of the earliest translations of Scriptures must have been in 411 into Armenian by Mesrob who also invented their alphabet.
In the ninth century St. Cyril and St. Methodus invented an alphabet (the Cyrillic alphabet still used in Eastern Europe) for the Slavs and translated a Bible into Bulgarian.
Parts of Psalms, Revelation and some of the Old Testament were translated into French as early as the seventh century. A complete version of the Bible was made in the thirteenth century.
In Italy a complete version of the Bible in vernacular Italian was available in 1472 and this manuscript is now in the National Library at Paris.
There were numerous versions of parts of the Bible in German as far back as the seventh and eighth centuries and there was a complete Bible in the fifteenth century before the invention of printing and well before Luther’s New Testament in 1522.
The first Bible in Dutch was printed at Delft in 1475.
The first complete Polish Bible was printed at Kracow in 1561.
There were even portions of Scripture translated into Arabic as early as the tenth century and an Arabic Bible was published at Rome in 1671.
So we see that there were Scriptures in languages other than Latin available well before the Reformation. The Reformation or the Protestant Movement in the 16th century had the advantage of a newly invented printing press. The inventor of moveable type was the German, Johan Gutenburg (1400?-1468?) who, by the way, was a Catholic.
Before the printing press, Catholic monks had been copying Scriptures by hand from the earliest manuscripts down through the centuries We must remember that if they had not preserved God’s word neither Catholics or Protestants would have the Scriptures today.
Not only is it said that the Catholic Church did not have Scriptures available in the common languages, the Church is also accused of keeping the Bible away from the people, even going so far as chaining Bibles in the Church! Remember that before printing had been invented the Bible was hand-copied and therefore copies were both rare and expensive. Chaining the Bible to the Church would keep it from being taken away and therefore making it more available to those who were able to read. One can compare this with telephone books that are chained up at public telephone booths today – not to keep people from using them but keeping them available for all.
Did the Church discourage people from reading the Scriptures and “Bible study”? The answer to this is “yes” and the feeling of the danger of Bible Study has continued to recent times. Even though one might see Bible studies taking place in Catholic parishes today there are good reasons to discourage personal “Bible study”. One only has to look at the results of ‘uncontrolled’ bible study – the thousands of new denominations and even cults that develop because someone interprets a Bible verse in his or her own way. The resulting deep divisions are often over minute differences of Biblical interpretations. One simple example is: Paul wrote that a woman should cover her head in church. Is this something which reflects the culture of the time or is it a commandment from God that should be followed today? Some Protestant churches insist on women wearing hats in church but most do not.
Reading the Bible within the context of the Church is however encouraged by the Catholic Church today. With the guidance of scholars of the Church we can understand Scripture by knowing what the writer meant and how it was understood in the culture of the listeners of the time and then move on to what it can mean for us. The Church has people who are experts in languages, culture and translation who can help us understand the Scriptures. Furthermore, in the Catholic church perhaps the major reason for reading Scripture is that it might be obeyed, not so much that we need to dissect it every which way in order to understand it. Is it really so difficult to understand what it means to “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” for example?

As to how the Catholic regards Scripture one only has to look at the following quotations to get an idea of this:
St. Jerome (340-420) said, “Not to know the Scriptures is not to know Christ.”

A document from the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) states, “Among other things that pertain to salvation of the Christian peoples, the food of the Word of God is above all necessary, because as the body is nourished by material food, so is the soul nourished by spiritual food, since, '...not by bread alone doth man live, but in every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God.'" (Matthew 4:4).

And finally, from the Catechism of the Catholic Church: “In Sacred Scripture, the church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, ‘but as what is really is, the word of God.” (103)
“And such is the force and power of the Word of God that it can serve the Church as her support and vigor and the children of the Church as strength for their faith, food for the soul, and a pure and lasting font of spiritual life. Hence, access to Sacred Scripture ought to be open wide to the Christian faithful.” (131)
It is sad to see ignorance that causes misunderstandings amongst Christians but sadder still to see ignorance perpetuated by television programs and books written by those who should have done their research beforehand.

A Journey Home

The man at the front of the classroom was telling the story of Moses and the Exodus from Egypt. When he explained about the blood which the Israelites put on the door posts of the houses and linked this blood of a lamb to the Blood of the Lamb, Jesus, a light snapped on in my head. I was twelve and had heard this story many times. I had heard it in Sunday School at the church where my Mom and I went and I had probably seen it portrayed by this time in the movie, The Ten Commandments. However, until now I had never heard of the link between Jesus’ crucifixion and the story of the Passover. I had always wondered why Jesus had died and had wondered with the crowd at the foot of the cross, “If you are God, why don’t you save yourself?” Now it made sense. It was all God’s plan for our salvation.
The Baptist minister who was speaking to our class was the husband of our teacher and he came to school every week to teach us about the Bible. This wasn’t part of the curriculum and eventually some of the parents complained (I’m glad to say my parents weren’t amongst those who did) and the classes were stopped. But not before I “had accepted Jesus as my Savior and committed my life to Him”.
After I was “saved” I worried about my parents not being Christians. My mother had been brought up a Catholic but had married my father, a non-Catholic. As they were married in a Protestant church my mother would not have been able to receive the Eucharist after her marriage. Some of the small towns where we lived during my childhood did not have a Catholic church in them anyway, after all this was the Bible-belt of Alberta, so my mother and I attended a United Church (a union of Methodists, Presbyterians and Congregationalists in Canada). My father, although he had been brought up in a devout (and strict) Lutheran family, did not go to church because he said he had seen too much hypocrisy in all churches. Probably an excuse, yes, but perhaps not without some truth. The fact that my mother prayed the Our Father, had taught me about Jesus, went to church, led a righteous life and was kind to everyone did not count much with me. Later I saw that her charity towards others and her faith was deeper than that of some Evangelicals who didn’t consider her a Christian.
When I was younger (about 7) I had had some amazing answers to prayer. We moved to new towns quite often and I hated starting a new school and being the 'new kid'. Before moving once, I prayed that there would be somebody in the new school who had read my favourite books, the Anne of Green Gables books. After we had moved and I asked someone if they had ever read these books, the answer was, "The teacher read them to the class." So everyone had read them! I made lots of friends there not just because of the books and some still are my best friends after over 60 years.
After I finished school I went away to train as a medical laboratory technologist in a city quite far from home. I went to Baptist churches or churches which were similar. I worked for a few years after graduating but I felt my lack of Bible knowledge made it difficult for me to 'witness' to others so I thought I should go to Bible School. I found one that I thought was not too narrow-minded or old-fashioned! I was a bit worried that it would be just like a prolonged Sunday School lesson. I found I actually enjoyed the studies and we studied subjects other than the Bible, such as theology, English literature and Christian education. My favourite instructor was a godly man, Mr. Simmonds, an Anglican, who challenged students from Evangelical churches to think more deeply about what they glibly said they believed.
During Bible school years I met people from one mission in particular which appealed to me. This was the Overseas Missionary Fellowship (OMF), formerly The China Inland Mission, which had been started by an Englishman, Hudson Taylor, in the 19th century. I had read his biography and some of his writings and had been impressed by the integrity of his life. The fact that OMF did medical work and not just evangelism, prayed about their needs instead of asking people for money and accepted Asian nationals from the countries where they worked, were things that attracted me to them. I actually didn’t want to be a missionary but OMF at that time needed a laboratory technologist for their hospital in South Thailand. I took this as a sign that God may be calling me to Thailand and applied but I hoped (and prayed) that I wouldn’t be accepted. At least I wouldn’t have to feel guilty if I applied but was turned down! “Unfortunately”, I was accepted and went to Thailand in 1969. Again God surprised me and I enjoyed my work and life in Thailand.
Leaving my parents was the hardest thing I have ever done and it didn’t get any easier over the next 14 years as I came home on furlough and went back to Thailand every four years. Since I was their only child I know now that it was very difficult for my parents to see me go, too. I would see tears in my father’s eyes but my mother always put on a brave front at the airport. We had always been a close family and I know seeing me board the plane was the hardest thing she had ever done, too.
One furlough when I came home from Thailand my parents had moved and I had to find a new home church. Evangelicals are sometimes not so tied to a denomination; they look for a church where they agree with the doctrine, where the pastor has good sermons or where there are friendly people. I was a bit disappointed when I went to some Evangelical churches and found the people more interested in being ultra-fashionable (although I like dressing fashionably, too) than in Christian missions and the music more for entertainment than worship. I had met some Anglicans I admired and whenever I went to an Anglican service I felt drawn to this type of liturgy. Moving to an Anglican church was a bigger step than going to another “free” church. Although there were members of OMF who were Anglican, North American evangelicals usually think of Anglicans as being “too liberal” (for example, not believing in the Virgin Birth). However, I knew there were many Anglicans who were evangelical or fundamental in their beliefs and I liked their openness more than the narrow attitude of some Evangelicals. Perhaps, I also wanted to shock those Evangelicals who thought of Anglicans as ‘too liberal”!
I found a lovely small Anglican church near my parent’s home. The people were interested in my missionary work and the Anglican priest was not liberal at all. People did not dress to show off their clothes or compete in fashion and everyone seemed to accept one another as they were. My mother followed me there as she had always done and she said she liked it because it was so much like the Catholic church she remembered as a child. I loved the prayers in the Prayer Book and felt liberated from a judgmental atmosphere.
During my last few years in Thailand I lived in the same house as a missionary who was involved in the charismatic movement. It was quite amazing that she received a Roman Catholic Charismatic magazine called “New Covenant”! I liked reading the articles. I believed that each denomination had some truths, even the Catholic Church, although I questioned their emphasis on Mary. But I thought, with others, that there were some Catholics who were real Christians especially those in the charismatic movement as they, at least, studied the Bible!
I resigned from OMF a few years after my father’s death in order to be with my mother but also I felt the need to move on. By then I had been in Thailand for fourteen years. Linguistics had fascinated me when I was studying Thai and so I decided to go to university and major in Linguistics. A nearby medical laboratory needed someone to work evenings and weekends so I was kept very busy.
Strange to say, although I enjoyed studying at university and did well, I also became very depressed in my fourth year. I suppose part of it was re- adjusting to my own culture again, too. For example, the fact that all murders and rapes were reported on television news made me afraid to go out! In fact I had come from a more dangerous place in South Thailand where the hospital had once been shot at and two missionary nurses had been kidnapped and killed.
But one of the biggest challenges was living in Western society as an unmarried woman. When I had been a missionary there had been many other single women missionaries but at home a single woman my age was as strange as someone with two heads. In fact someone at work said to me, “You’ve never been married? Never?” If I had been divorced or living with someone this would have been acceptable but somehow being "single" was inconceivable. Christians accepted you on the surface, after all most evangelical missionaries are single women, but the final goal and prayer of everyone was to be married and if you weren’t, what was wrong with you? Of course, I had always wanted to be married and have a family like most women but it had not seemed to work out that way. I wasn't interested in the men that were interested in me and vice versa. I can see now that not marrying some of these men was really a blessing in disguise. Mother’s Day was especially painful as roses were handed out at church– only to those who were mothers! This I found out later also caused pain for those who were married but were unable to have children. What a contrast it was years later at a Catholic Church where everyone who was “motherly”, and not just those who were actually mothers, were prayed for on Mother’s Day.
A recent failed ‘romantic interest’ in my life didn’t help either but the underlying problem was that it seemed God didn’t answer prayer after all. Even when I had obeyed him by becoming a missionary (or perhaps because I had) he hadn’t led me to a Prince Charming. I would hang on to the Bible verses that seemed to say ‘whatever you ask for, you shall receive”. Yes, there were conditions but wasn’t I fulfilling the conditions? I later realized that I thought of God as a Santa Claus who was supposed to give me whatever I asked for. There was no idea of sacrifice or suffering in my Christianity. Also, I didn’t realize that some of my married friends envied my independent life which had included travel and education and living in a foreign country. Moreover, the marriages of several of my friends and relatives had ended in divorce.
One day I saw a sign at university about the prayer to St. Jude – I copied it out and brought it home. Why I, as an evangelical Christian, would do this I don’t know. My mother said she knew the ‘Hail Mary’ prayer that it mentioned and could help me with that. I didn’t know what to pray for: a husband? to feel happy? or whatever was best for me? Actually, I never stopped believing in God – I just wondered why He hadn’t keep His promises about prayer.
When God answered the prayer of St. Jude for me it was not what I expected. For into my life came David; a handsome, popular, Italian guy who began the Master’s program in Linguistics that I also had just started. . He wore a crucifix and some other medals so I figured he was a Catholic but I could see that David was one of those Roman Catholics who seemed to be a “real” Christian.
He was popular with the other students but I kept to myself in those days and went home after classes instead of working in the Grad student’s office. David however seemed determined to get to know me and talked me into going to a Rosary Group he and a Malaysian student had started. There I met other Catholics who seemed to be “real” Christians, too. Some were from Kenya, one was from Hungary and others were from Singapore and Malaysia so I got a feeling of how universal the Church is. They were all younger than I was and I was not a Catholic but they accepted me as one of their group without any hesitation.
David and I would have long discussions about religion over cups of coffee – and he was able to answer all my questions about Mary and the Pope and the other usual things that bother Evangelicals. He also gave me books to read: Evangelical is Not Enough by Thomas Howard, Catholicism and Fundamentalism by Karl Keating and the tape by Scott Hahn telling about his conversion. As I read I could see I had a lot of misconceptions about what the Catholic Church believed. I came to see how wonderful the idea of authority was and how the Magesterium was a safeguard against endless multiplication of denominations and heresies. The authority of the Pope, guided by the Holy Spirit, seemed so sensible and biblical. I would pray the Rosary (an Evangelical praying the Rosary!) as I walked to university and give thanks to God for new friends and a new outlook. At my first Mass I was so surprised and pleased at the “sermon”. I thought it could have been preached in any Evangelical church.
Does God have a sense of humour? I believe He showed a sense of humour when He answered the prayer of St. Jude for me. For although He had sent me a friend in David, He had not sent me a husband. Not only was he much younger than I was but he also said that after Grad school he was planning to join a religious order! I learned that in the Church there were vocations of marriage, of religious life and of single life. And moreover it wasn’t primarily women that He called to a single life as it is in Evangelical circles. Actually, several members of the Rosary Group later entered religious life.
At one of our coffee discussions I said to David, “But Luther was right in being upset about the Church selling indulgences wasn’t he?” David lost his patience. “Lorraine, we’ve talked about this several times. Now you just have to make up your mind whether you’re going to join the Church or not.” (some people did sell indulgences in the 15th century and this was wrong. It was not the doctrine of indulgences that was wrong but the selling of them.)
He was right, of course. So I called and I left a message for the person in charge of RCIA at the University Community but he didn’t call back. When I finally did reach someone, he said they weren’t having RCIA that year and directed me to a nearby parish. RCIA is Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults and is a study group that one attends from roughly September to Easter before being confirmed as a Catholic. I called them but they held their meeting on Wednesdays and that was an evening I worked at the medical lab.
Finally I found one parish that held the class on a day I could attend. I kept thinking that if it were an Evangelical church things would have been made easier and someone would probably even have picked me up for the meetings. But I drove by myself one night a week, often on icy roads, for 8 months to attend the class. I remember thinking, “Boy, you really have to be determined to join the Catholic Church.”
I’m afraid my attitude was rather arrogant in the classes at first. After all I’d been to Bible School for three years, had been a missionary for fourteen years so I was sure I knew more than some of the people who were teaching the class. I discovered that I underestimated what “ordinary” Catholics know. Although I did learn a lot about the Catholic Church from what I read outside the class, these people did know the Gospel and the Bible. Besides, they were often more charitable than I was. I still admire those “cradle Catholics” and their authentic faith.
We were always told that by coming to the classes we should not feel pressured into joining the Church if we didn’t feel ready or didn’t ever want to join. I never doubted that I wanted to become a Catholic but I wanted to make sure that it was not just because of any influence David may have had on me. I came to see that even when I was angry at him over something (and at this time it was quite often) I still felt compelled to become a Catholic. I came to realize it wasn’t his influence that made me want to become a Catholic but something else or rather Someone else who was drawing me to His Church.
The parish chose a sponsor for me, Gloria, a faithful volunteer in many areas of church work. She had trained as a nurse at a hospital in another province where I had also been (although not at the same time) yet no one at the church knew that I had ever worked at that hospital!
I was received into full communion in the Catholic Church at the Easter Vigil, 1990 with the members of the Rosary Group from university filling two pews. After the Vigil, the Rosary Group had a reception for me with all my new friends. And a very international group it was! They presented me with a gold Crucifix on a chain which I still wear.
My mother attended Mass at the University with me and she really respected the new priest, Father Louis. Eventually she said she would like to come back to the Church because she missed the Eucharist and she surprised me by saying, “No matter where I went to church, I have always felt Catholic”. Father Louis had several talks with her and she went to confession. And then this rather shy woman in her seventies read the Nicene Creed at a Mass for university students and was accepted back into the Church of her childhood. When she died seven years later, her funeral was in the parish where I had attended RCIA classes.
For several years I helped in the RCIA classes in the University community and then later in another parish.
David was ordained as a Catholic priest in the Dominican Order and teaches philosophy and Latin.
Three years after my mother died, I went back to Thailand, this time to teach English in Catholic schools. Although a couple of Evangelical friends cooled in their relationship with me, most of them (including some OMF missionaries) have remained good friends and put up with my Catholic quirks.
My ‘crossing the Tiber’ was the best thing that could have happened to me. I still can’t help crying sometimes at Mass – the beauty and truth of it is overwhelming. My conversion is an on-going thing, of course. I still have some un-Catholic attitudes and a lot to learn but gradually I am becoming more accepting of other people and I am learning more about what faith in Jesus means. In particular I am learning to appreciate the tremendous gift of the Eucharist.