february 2012 download

8/2/2019 February 2012 Download

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/february-2012-download 1/16

In this issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .February 2012

All hell let loose

World War II was not a straghtfoward death grapple between good and evil ......................................................... 3

The Prime Minister’s speec h

400th anniversary of the publication of the King James Bible ................................................................. . 4

Zeal for God’s House

An architect’s reflection on sacred space................................................................................................. 9

More time on line = less happiness for girls

Being hooked on facebook won’t help their social welfare ................................................................. 13

An ordinary path to holiness

Dora del Hoyo’s love of service...............................................................................................................13

Movie inspires a forg iveness movement

“There be dragons” impacts on personal life...........................................................................................15



DOWNLOAD app ea rs mo nthly and is d istributed free o f cha rge by St

Ma ry’s Informa tion Service, an initiative o f St Ma ry Sta r of the Sea , West

Melbourne.

The aim of DOWNLOAD is to alert readers to interesting, informative

or insp iring a rtic les from a va riet y of sources. Hopefu lly this c an a ssist in the

formation of a Christian outlook based on sound judgements on

c onte mp orary issues. The c onte nt of a rtic les refe rred to o r reprod uc ed do

not nec essarily reflec t in all respec ts the views of the Ed itorial Co mm ittee.

The Edito rial Com mittee: Frans Zylstra , Darren M ason, Fr. Ma x Pola k

E-mail address: [email protected]

St Mary’ s Info rma tio n Servic e, 33 Howard Street, WEST MELBOURNE VIC

3003.

Donations to help cover the expenses of producing and distributing

DOWNLOAD are welc om e. Cheq ues ma de out to ‘St Ma ry Star of the

Sea ’ m ay b e sent to the a bove add ress C/ - The Sec retary. Please spec ify

tha t your co ntribution is to DOWNLOAD. Alternatively, you m ay ma ke

a d onation with a c redit ca rd.

Visa Mastercard

Expiry Da te : . . . . / . . . . Signa ture: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mr/Mrs/ Ms/ Rev: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ad dress: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pho ne : . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-mail: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Want to rec eive DOWNLOAD by e-m ail? Just say so!

[email protected]

2



All Hell Let Loose World War II was not a straightforward death grapple between good and evil, says an

eminent m ilitary historian.

The eminent military historian Sir Max Hastings

has already produced several weighty volumes onthe Second World War, notably Armageddon,

Nemesis and Finest Years: Churchill as Warlord

1940-45. This work, subtitled “The World at War1939-1945”, completes the record. Hastingshimself describes it as a book “chiefly abouthuman experience” in which he tries to show thewhole picture, relying as much on civilian reports,letters, memoirs and diaries as on militarysources. Warfare, if not a commendable activityfor mankind, is a very ancient one and although itroutinely shows the darker side of human nature,it clearly fascinates the author; he has set himself to answer the question, what happens when“almost everything which civilised people takefor granted in time of peace [is] swept aside,above all the expectation of being protected from

violence.”

The figures themselves almost overwhelm the reader: 60 million people died between1939-45, both combatants and civilians, often in horrifying circumstances. Russia’ssacrifice of lives was immeasurably greater than all the other countries: 65 percent of

the total. Hastings shifts his analysis from country to country as one by one they aredragged into the war, either by enemy invasion or in coming to the assistance of allies. Along the way he dispels certain myths that have hovered around the actualhistorical events; for example, that the German army in Eastern Europe was somehowuntainted by the work of the SS death units which followed them. Hastings observesthat from 1939, during the Polish campaign, “the officer corps of the Wehrmachtalready displayed the moral bankruptcy that would characterise its conduct until1945.”

He also shows the bungling and incompetence that are a characteristic of war andwhich often caused most casualties, commenting that in England “before peace came,accidents in the blackout killed more people than did the Luftwaffe.” The magnificentChurchillian rhetoric which Hastings rightly extols in his study of the wartime primeminister could not hide the fact that the British armed forces demonstrated continual“failures of will, leadership, equipment, tactics and training.” Where there was a willto win, as the author points out, it could not compete with the Russian or Germanbrutal acceptance of the inevitability of huge numbers of casualties. The Alliedsoldiers on the battlefield behaved like “reasonable men”; their opponents simplywanted to win, at whatever cost and showed “what unreasonable men could do”.There was a limit to what the Allied commanders could demand of their men; underdemocratic systems there would be a demand for enquiries and investigations, actionsdenied to the populations under Communism or Fascism. Unlike Japan, “the concept

of self-immolation was beyond the bounds of Western democratic culture” and itwould have been “unthinkable” that the British would have eaten each other, ashappened in Leningrad, rather than surrender London or Birmingham.

3



Interestingly, given the intellectual eminence of Germany, the author suggests thatBritain’s claim to genuine success lay in the superiority of its application of scienceand technology. The best civilian brains were mobilised in the war effort; the work of the boffins at Bletchley Park and the cracking of the German Enigma code were moreeffective in defeating the enemy than the campaigns in the field. Germany’s invasionof Russia – Operation Barbarossa – is rightly given much space in the book. AsHastings comments, Hitler’s march into the Soviet Union on 22 June 1941 was the

defining event of the War. Hitler had underestimated Russia’s military and industrialcapabilities; and as with Napoleon, the sheer size of the country, coupled with theseverity of its winters were critical in Russia’s eventual victory. Tellingly, on 28November 1941, the German armaments chief, Fritz Todt, told Hitler, “This war canno longer be won by military means.” He favoured a political solution. Hitlerdismissed the idea and in the four years that followed millions more were to diewantonly and needlessly. The siege of Leningrad and the Battle of Stalingrad arevividly evoked in all their horror.

Yet as the author grimly reminds us, two million Russians also starved to death interritories controlled by their own governments; Stalin was as cynical about humanlife as was Hitler. His war aims, to grab as much territory in Eastern Europe as hecould get away with, were equally selfish and at odds with human liberty. By the endof the war England and America were in no position to protest as the Iron Curtaincame down. Hastings states, “The price of having joined with Stalin to destroy Hitlerwas high indeed.” He is dismissive of the German defence, “We did not know” whenmass atrocities came to light after the War, concluding that it was “impossible” formost German civilians credibly to deny knowledge of the concentration camps or of the slave labour system. Again, referring to the Holocaust, he judges that it was“easy”, in one of the most highly educated societies in Europe, to find people willingto murder “those whom their rulers defined as state enemies, without employingduress.” His sober conclusion is that WWII was not, as is sometimes thought, a

straightforward fight between good and evil. Yet the Allied victory did save the world“from a much worse fate than would have followed the triumph of Germany andJapan.” For those interested in the history of the last War this book provides anexcellent summary and overview; detailed, impartial and reflective and includingmany poignant and eloquent testimonies by ordinary people on both sides, caught upin a seemingly endless nightmare not of their own making. Hastings builds theclearest case possible that war is to be avoided at (almost) all costs.

Francis Phillips writes from Buckinghamshire, in the UK. www.mercatornet.com

The Prime Minister’s speech The following is the prepared text of a speech by British Prime Minister David Cameron,recently delivered at Christ Church, Oxford, for the 400th anniversary of the publication of

the King James Version of the Bible. In it, Mr Cameron says the UK is Christian country and

that when Christians are confident of their own identity it provides greater space for other

religious faiths too. The King James Bible still forms the basis for modern English

translations of the Bible, such as the New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition.

It’s great to be here and to have this opportunity to come together today to mark the end of this very special 400th anniversary year for the King James Bible. I know there are some whowill question why I am giving this speech. And if they happen to know that I’m setting outmy views today in a former home of the current Archbishop of Canterbury and in front of many great theologians and church leaders they really will think I have entered the lions’ den.But I am proud to stand here and celebrate the achievements of the King James Bible. Not as

some great Christian on a mission to convert the world. But because, as PrimeMinister, it is right to recognise the impact of a translation that is, I believe, one of thiscountry’s greatest achievements.

4

http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/king-james-bible/

http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/king-james-bible/



The Bible is a book that has not just shaped ourcountry, but shaped the world. And, with three Biblessold or given away every second, a book that is not justimportant in understanding our past, but which willcontinue to have a profound impact in shaping ourcollective future. In making this speech I claim noreligious authority whatsoever. I am a committed – butI have to say vaguely practising – Church of England

Christian, who will stand up for the values andprinciples of my faith but who is full of doubts and, likemany, constantly grappling with the difficult questionswhen it comes to some of the big theological issues.But what I do believe is this. The King James Bible isas relevant today as at any point in its 400 year history.And none of us should be frightened of recognisingthis. Why? Put simply, three reasons. First, the KingJames Bible has bequeathed a body of language that

permeates every aspect of our culture and heritage from everyday phrases to our greatestworks of literature, music and art. We live and breathe the language of the King James Bible,sometimes without even realising it. And it is right that we should acknowledge this –particularly in this anniversary year. Second, just as our language and culture is steeped in theBible, so too is our politics. From human rights and equality to our constitutional monarchyand parliamentary democracy, from the role of the church in the first forms of welfareprovision, to the many modern day faith-led social action projects the Bible has been a spur toaction for people of faith throughout history, and it remains so today. Third, we are aChristian country. And we should not be afraid to say so. Let me be clear: I am not in anyway saying that to have another faith – or no faith – is somehow wrong. I know and fullyrespect that many people in this country do not have a religion. And I am also incrediblyproud that Britain is home to many different faith communities, who do so much to make ourcountry stronger. But what I am saying is that the Bible has helped to give Britain a set of values and morals which make Britain what it is today. Values and morals we should actively

stand up and defend. The alternative of moral neutrality should not be an option. You can’tfight something with nothing. Because if we don’t stand for something, we can’t stand againstanything.

Let me take each of these points in turn.

First, language and culture.

Powerful language is incredibly evocative. It crystallises profound, sometimes complex,thoughts and suggests a depth of meaning far beyond the words on the page giving ussomething to share, to cherish, to celebrate. Part of the glue that can help to bind us together.Along with Shakespeare, the King James Bible is a high point of the English language,creating arresting phrases that move, challenge and inspire. One of my favourites is the line“For now we see through a glass, darkly.” It is a brilliant summation of the profound sense

that there is more to life, that we are imperfect, that we get things wrong, that we should striveto see beyond our own perspective. The key word is darkly – profoundly loaded, with manyshades of meaning. I feel the power is lost in some more literal translations. The NewInternational Version says: “Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror” The Good NewsBible: “What we see now is like a dim image in a mirror”. They feel not just a bit less specialbut dry and cold, and don’t quite have the same magic and meaning. Like Shakespeare, theKing James translation dates from a period when the written word was intended to be readaloud. And this helps to give it a poetic power and sheer resonance that in my view is notmatched by any subsequent translation. It has also contributed immensely to the spread of spoken English around the world. Indeed, the language of the King James Bible is very muchalive today. I’ve already mentioned the lions’ den. Just think about some of the other thingswe all say. Phrases like: strength to strength, how the mighty are fallen, the skin of my teeth,

the salt of the earth, nothing new under the sun. According to one recent study there are 257of these phrases and idioms that come from the Bible. These phrases are all around us fromcourt cases to TV sitcoms and from recipe books to pop music lyrics.

5



projects in England’s poorest communities including the Near Neighbours Programme whichEric Pickles helped to launch last month. And St Ethelburga’s Centre for Reconciliation andPeace in London’s Bishopsgate a building once destroyed by an IRA bomb but now a centrewhere people divided by conflict, culture or religion can meet and listen to each other’sperspective.

In total, there are almost 30 thousand faith based charities in this country not to mention thethousands of peoplewho step forward asindividuals, asfamilies, ascommunities, asorganisations andyes, as churches anddo extraordinarythings to help builda bigger, richer,stronger, moreprosperous andmore generous

society. And when itcomes to the greathumanitarian crises– like the famine inHorn of Africa –

again you can count on faith-based organisations like Christian Aid, Tearfund, CAFOD,Jewish Care, Islamic Relief, and Muslim Aid to be at the forefront of the action to save lives.So it’s right to recognise the huge contribution our faith communities make to our politics andto recognise the role of the Bible in inspiring many of their works. People often say thatpoliticians shouldn’t “do God.” If by that they mean we shouldn’t try to claim a direct

line to God for one particular political party they could not be more right. But weshouldn’t let our caution about that stand in the way of recognising both what our faith

communities bring to our country and also just how incredibly important faith is to so manypeople in Britain. The Economist may have published the obituary of God in their Millenniumissue. But in the past century, the proportion of people in the world who adhere to the fourbiggest religions has actually increased from around two-thirds to nearly three quarters and isforecast to continue rising. For example, it is now thought there are at least 65 millionprotestants in China and 12 million Catholics – more Christians than there are members of thecommunist party. Official numbers indicate China has about 20 million Muslims – almost asmany as in Saudi Arabia – and nearly twice as many as in the whole of the EU. And by 2050,some people think China could well be both the world’s biggest Christian nation and itsbiggest Muslim one too. Here in Britain we only have to look at the reaction to the Pope’svisit last year, this year’s Royal Wedding or of course the festival of Christmas next week, tosee that Christianity is alive and well in our country. The key point is this. Societies do not

necessarily become more secular with modernity but rather more plural, with a wider range of beliefs and commitments.

Ancient copies of the King James Bible are brought into the Oxfordgathering at which Mr Cameron s oke.

And that brings me to my third point.

The Bible has helped to shape the values which define our country. Indeed, as MargaretThatcher once said, “we are a nation whose ideals are founded on the Bible.” Responsibility,hard work, charity, compassion, humility, self-sacrifice, love pride in working for thecommon good and honouring the social obligations we have to one another, to our familiesand our communities these are the values we treasure. Yes, they are Christian values. And weshould not be afraid to acknowledge that. But they are also values that speak to us all – topeople of every faith and none. And I believe we should all stand up and defend them. Thosewho oppose this usually make the case for secular neutrality. They argue that by saying we

are a Christian country and standing up for Christian values we are somehow doing downother faiths. And that the only way not to offend people is not to pass judgement on theirbehaviour. I think these arguments are profoundly wrong. And being clear on this is

7



absolutely fundamental to who we are as a people what we stand for and the kind of societywe want to build. First, those who say being a Christian country is doing down other faithssimply don’t understand that it is easier for people to believe and practise other faiths whenBritain has confidence in its Christian identity. Many people tell me it is much easier to beJewish or Muslim here in Britain than it is in a secular country like France. Why? Because thetolerance that Christianity demands of our society provides greater space for other religiousfaiths too. And because many of the values of a Christian country are shared by people of allfaiths and indeed by people of no faith at all. Second, those who advocate secular neutrality in

order to avoid passing judgement on the behaviour of others fail to grasp the consequences of that neutrality or the role that faith can play in helping people to have a moral code. Let’s beclear. Faith is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for morality. There are Christianswho don’t live by a moral code. And there are atheists and agnostics who do. But for peoplewho do have a faith, their faith can be a helpful prod in the right direction. And whetherinspired by faith or not – that direction, that moral code, matters. Whether you look at theriots last summer, the financial crash and the expenses scandal, or the on-going terrorist threatfrom Islamist extremists around the world, one thing is clear: moral neutrality or passivetolerance just isn’t going to cut it anymore. Shying away from speaking the truth aboutbehaviour, about morality has actually helped to cause some of the social problems that lie atthe heart of the lawlessness we saw with the riots.

The absence of any real accountability, or moral code allowed some bankers and politicians tobehave with scant regard for the rest of society. And when it comes to fighting violentextremism, the almost fearful passive tolerance of religious extremism that has allowedsegregated communities to behave in ways that run completely counter to our values has notcontained that extremism but allowed it to grow and prosper in the process blackening thegood name of the great religions that these extremists abuse for their own purposes. Putsimply, for too long we have been unwilling to distinguish right from wrong. “Live and letlive” has too often become “do what you please”. Bad choices have too often been defendedas just different lifestyles. To be confident in saying something is wrong is not a sign of weakness, it’s a strength. But we can’t fight something with nothing. As I’ve said, if we don’tstand for something, we can’t stand against anything. One of the biggest lessons of the riotslast Summer is that we’ve got stand up for our values if we are to confront the slow-motion

moral collapse that has taken place in parts of our country these past few generations.The same is true of religious extremism. As President Obama wrote in the Audacity of Hope:“…in reaction to religious overreach we equate tolerance with secularism, and forfeit themoral language that would help infuse our politics with larger meaning.”

Frankly, we need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and a much more active,muscular liberalism. A passively tolerant society says to its citizens, as long as you obey thelaw we will just leave you alone. It stands neutral between different values. But I believe agenuinely liberal country does much more; it believes in certain values and actively promotesthem. We need to stand up for these values. To have the confidence to say to people – this iswhat defines us as a society and that to belong here is to believe in these things. I believe thechurch – and indeed all our religious leaders and their communities in Britain – have a vital

role to play in helping to achieve this. I have never really understood the argument somepeople make about the church not getting involved in politics. To me, Christianity, faith,religion, the Church and the Bible are all inherently involved in politics because so manypolitical questions are moral questions. So I don’t think we should be shy or frightened of this. I certainly don’t object to the Archbishop of Canterbury expressing his views on politics.Religion has a moral basis and if he doesn’t agree with something he’s right to say so. But

just as it is legitimate for religious leaders to make political comments, he shouldn’t besurprised when I respond. Also it’s legitimate for political leaders to say something aboutreligious institutions as they see them affecting our society, not least in the vital areas of equality and tolerance. I believe the Church of England has a unique opportunity to helpshape the future of our communities. But to do so it must keep on the agenda that speaks tothe whole country. The future of our country is at a pivotal moment. The values we draw from

the Bible go to the heart of what it means to belong in this country and you, as the Church of England, can help ensure that it stays that way.

www.mercatornet.com

8

http://www.mercatornet.com/

http://www.mercatornet.com/



Zeal for God’s House: An architect’s reflections on Sacred Space By Henry Harding Menzies Homelitic and Pastoral Review www.hprweb.com

The sun was setting over the vast Valley of Mexico as I climbed up to the flat roof of abuilding at the Montefalco Conference Center to do a painting. The shades of brilliant scarletfrom the sunset to the west threw the distant mountain range into waves of blue. I was

anxious to get set-up fast in order tocapture this strange beauty before itvanished. I wanted, especially, tocapture at sunset the snow-cappedMt. Popocatepetl, (elevation: 17,887ft.). Unfortunately, it was enshroudedin clouds. I fumbled to geteverything ready. The eerie silencewas broken only by the faint distantsounds of a mariachi band. A breeze

came up. The sky darkened. Ithought I had missed my chance.Then, all of a sudden, I looked upand saw, high above the hills to thenorth, the majestic snow-covered

peak of Mt. Popocatepetl, emerging slowly from behind the lavender clouds, completelydwarfing the western mountains. Brilliantly illuminated in pale pink, the peak appeared likesome ancient god towering above the lesser mountains in its distant majesty. No wonder thepagans worshipped this mountain! Its very silence seemed to say that it had been there,hidden all the time, towering above our little, mundane world—watching, waiting, andsuddenly deigning to show itself in its own good time to those whom it chose. It wasawesome. I threw my brushes down in dismay. My poor abilities could never, even for a

second, capture that silent, terrible splendor.Is it any wonder that the natives worshipped this mountain? They may have been ignorant of Christianity, but they respected what they could see of the Creator in his works. At least, theyhad a “sense of the sacred,” something which seems to be lost today in many Catholicchurches. Normally, we go to church to worship him, to participate in the liturgy. We go therenot only for Holy Mass, but to confess our sins in the Sacrament of Reconciliation, to bebaptized, to get married, and for our funeral Masses. These are the most private, personal actsa person can perform throughout his life. But even when there’s no liturgy going on, we gothere to pray before his living Presence in the tabernacle. And, yet, today when you walk intomany Catholic churches, they look like huge, cold auditoriums, warehouses, shopping mallsor circus fun houses. Some are just confusing in their “modern” contortions. Where is thesacrifice? There is no apparent indication of sacrifice but only comfort and provision forevery human convenience. And worship? There is no sign of reverence in that bland,antiseptic atmosphere. And God’s Presence? Just try to find the tabernacle. It is usuallyhidden out of sight behind a column, and given little more importance than a plaster statue. Itis difficult to find anything of awe and reverence that would give any indication that Godhimself is truly present. Certainly, something vital has been lost in Catholic churcharchitecture today, so much so that many of the faithful wonder, “What happened to theglory?” Hand-in-hand with the loss of the sacred is the loss of the sense of beauty. So manynew and renovated churches are just plain ugly and barren. Some border on the grotesque. Itis not a question of style. What has been lost is not a classical or gothic architectural style,but a total vision of the church edifice as a sacred space infused with beauty.

Sacred Space

But before considering “sacred space,” perhaps we Americans don’t appreciate any specialplace, much less “sacred” places. Possibly, we live in such an immensely large country withso much space that we have lost the sense of the uniqueness of any one place. Historically, we

9

http://www.hprweb.com/





have always been moving westward. On the other hand, we all reverence the sites of CivilWar battlefields. We sense the special significance of Plymouth Rock, or of IndependenceHall, or “Ground Zero.” We like to return to the places of our childhood. So, perhaps, the lossof unique space is not really totally lost but hidden somewhere, deep down inside all of us.However, there are indications that this loss of the sense of special places can be moreharmful than we think.

Edward T. Oakes inan essay, The

Apologetics of

Beauty, recalled themassacre at

Littleton’sColumbine HighSchool on April 20,1999. After theevent, one native of Littleton wrote anessay describing howthe town had

changed from thequiet village of hischildhood, into justpart of the suburbansprawl of Denver. I

grew up, however humbly, in a town with a character and sense of place, and I had thosethings, too. What sense of place can there be in the Littletons of America now, in these mall-lands: where each Gap and McDonalds is like the next, where the differences between thingsare neither prized nor scorned, but are simply wiped from existence? Growing up in ananonymous landscape, how can anyone escape his own encroaching sense of anonymity? Inthis world, meaning evaporates. In a world of monotonous getting and spending, the need toshake things up, to make a mark, any mark, may overpower everything else, including sense.

The trench coat Mafia’s particular brand of evil may have stemmed from a terrible absence, aloss of perspective, that might be one of the unforeseen consequences of the loss of place.Long before Christianity arrived, mankind had reverenced certain places in nature as sacred.Mt. Fuji in Japan is sacred to the Shintoists, who must make a pilgrimage to its peak at leastoncebefore they die. There are groves sacred to the early Druids, as can be seen atStonehenge. There are people in the Far East who make a festival of going to some vantagepoint to simply watch the sunset! Even people who have no religion occasionally have a“spiritual” experience when they walk through California’s redwoods, or peer into the GrandCanyon at sunset. St. Paul chastises those who ignore the Creator in his creation: “The wrathof God is revealed from heaven against the irreligious and perverse spirit of men, who, in thisperversity of theirs, hinder the truth. In fact, whatever can be known about God is clear tothem; he himself made it so. Since the creation of the world, invisible realities, God’s eternal

power and divinity, have become visible, recognized through the things he has made.Therefore, these men are inexcusable” (Rom 1:18-20).

St Mary Star of the Sea Church Melbourne

The sense of the sacred lies precisely in the fact that it is not something ordinary, but has todo with the extraordinary. Nor is it necessarily very pleasant, either. To us mortals, there canbe something terrible and fearful about divinity. In almost every encounter mortal men havehad with God in the Old Testament, there was both a radiant splendor but also terror,precisely because it was the “Other.” After Moses received the Ten Commandments, he hadto cover his face since the brilliance of experiencing God emanated from him, and was tooterrifying for the people to experience. Each time Christ appeared after the resurrection, theinitial reaction was fear. Otherwise, why did he say to them: “Be not afraid?” Peter was soovercome while witnessing the glory of the Lord at the Transfiguration that, in his

bewilderment, he impulsively blurted out something as irrelevant as building three tents there!In other words, he panicked. Perhaps, one unknown poet summed it up best: Let the

Archangel in terrifying grandeur step but a pace hitherward from behind the stars. Our own

heart in violent beat would destroy us.

10



But how is he there, more than anywhere else, since we know that he is everywhere, and thatwithout him, all places would simply cease to exist? What makes any place sacred is thatGod is present there in some special way, the opposite of Gertrude Stein’s famous quip aboutOakland, “There’s no ‘there’ there.” Certainly, the Jewish people always considered theTemple the most sacred space of all places. When God spoke to Moses in the burning bush,he told Moses: “Remove the sandals from your feet, for the place where you stand is holyground”(Ex 3:5). Obviously, God himself is very much concerned about sacred space, as A.Frossard has written: The Lord gave Moses very detailed instructions concerning the dignity

to be accorded divine worship. He laid down specifications for the construction of thetabernacle, the Ark of the Covenant, and the altar. He gave Moses guidelines for sacredutensils and priestly vestments. God wanted to give his people a profound respect for thesacred. Jesus Christ underlined this teaching with a new spirit. His zeal for the house of Godis fundamental to the Good News. In St. John’s Gospel (2:15-17.), we read: “He made a [kindof] whip of cords and drove sheep and oxen alike out of the temple area, and knocked overthe money-changers’ tables, spilling their coins. He told those who were selling doves: ‘Getthem out of here! Stop turning my Father’s house into a marketplace!’ His disciples recalledthe words of Scripture: ‘Zeal for your house consumes me.’”

Architecture

Therefore, it is apparent both

from the Old and NewTestaments that the Creator of allhas never been indifferent to theplaces of worship that hischildren have built for his glory.Although it is he who sanctifiesplaces, he has given his childrenthe freedom and the creativeability to give them form. So, itis in the art of architecture thatwe must search for the answer tothe question, “What is sacred

space?” Architecture isfundamentally “the art of space.”Etienne Gilson has written:“What distinguishes architecturefrom painting and sculpture is itsspatial quality. In this, and onlyin this, no other artist canemulate the architect.”Therefore, we can say thatarchitecture is not the art of a“something,” like sculpture orpainting, but it is the art of “nothing.” That is, it is the space

surrounding the “somethings.”Except in unusual circumstances,architecture provides the setting,

the backdrop, and the atmosphere for our lives. But it is never the main event, except inmonuments, world fairs, and Disney World, which must shout to be noticed. There is a kindof humility in architecture which does not call attention to itself. It must be discoveredpersonally. I quote Etienne Gilson again: “Architecture, being an art of space, attracts all theother arts of space, which obtrude to adorn it, but also to disfigure it, or, in any case, live off itparasitically.” Or, as Lao Tse put it much earlier: We put thirty spokes together and call it awheel, but it is on the space where there is nothing that the utility of the wheel depends. We

turn clay to make a vessel, but it is on the space where there is nothing that the utility of thevessel depends. We pierce doors and windows to make a house, and it is on these spaceswhere there is nothing that the utility of the house depends. Therefore, just as we takeadvantage of what is, we should recognize the utility of what is not.

Sagrada Familia in Barcelona – Gaudi’s masterwork

11



And in more modern terms:

Space constantly encompasses our being. Through the volume of space, we move, see formsand objects, hear sounds, feel breezes, smell the fragrance of a flower garden in bloom. Yet, itis inherently formless. Its visual form, quality of light, dimensions and scale, depend totallyon its boundaries as defined by elements of form. As space begins to be captured, enclosed,molded, and organized by the elements of form, architecture comes into being. (D.K. Ching,form space and order)

Architecture is also mute. Others make words to describe it, to study it. Words are evenneeded to build it. But once built, it simply is. Gilson states: “Architecture does not speak. ITIS. It is developed in a great silence, but man, being a talker, strains his ingenuity to make itspeak.” This silence is most apparent when architecture is used to serve the Church. It shouldbe silent. It is not supposed to call attention to itself because it is not at the heart of worship.The liturgy is the heart of worship. Architecture plays only an auxiliary role. It is the setting.It provides the space for the sacred actions of the liturgy, and, in so doing, becomes “sacred.”Although its role is auxiliary, it is extremely important because it has the ability to help ordetract, to contribute or mitigate against the liturgy itself. Pope Benedict XVI has written that:“Here it is fitting to remember that the purpose of sacred architecture is to offer the church afitting space for the celebration of the mysteries of faith, especially the Eucharist”(Sacramentum Caritatis). Certainly, it cannot play its part properly unless it somehow shares

in the great religious mysteries it expresses and serves. There is nothing more sacred than theliturgy of the Holy Mass and the Real Presence of Our Lord in the tabernacle. Furthermore, itis challenged to somehow incarnate God’s glory with a glimpse of heaven. Man “strains hisingenuity” to incarnate that vision in a human way. This striving is always intrinsic to thenature of the architectural design process. Architects are always striving toincarnate somekind of vision: whether it’s Mrs. Jones’s vision of her new kitchen, or amayor’s vision of the new city hall. It encompasses the real tension that is found in anycreative effort. In sacred space, it happens to be God’s vision; or put the other way around, itis the believers’ vision of God in his effort “to capture the Unseen in the materiality of theSeen,”…silently.

Sense of Beauty

But along with the loss of the sense of the uniqueness of any space—much less, sacredspace—we have lost the sense of beauty; and that might be the connection. As the Austrianpoet, Rainier Maria Rilke, stated: “For the beautiful is nothing but the first degree of theterrible.” Beauty is a powerful thing. It must be the primary goal of sacred architecture. PopeBenedict XVI suggests that: “Beauty, then, is an attribute of God himself and his revelation.The profound connection between beauty and liturgy should make us attentive to every work of art placed at the service of the celebration” (Sacramentum Caritatis). Many will agree, butmaintain that beauty is only a marginal, relative thing, or merely a matter of “taste” orornament, or private opinion. However, the Holy Father disagrees: “Beauty, then, is not meredecoration, but rather an essential element of the liturgical action, since it is an attribute of God himself and his revelation.” There have always been changing “fashions” in beautythroughout history, but God has instilled in all human beings, in all times, a sense of thebeautiful. Hans Urs von Balthasar wrote: “Beauty is the neglected sister of Truth andGoodness, the three transcendental properties of Being. Without her, we lose them, too. Butno longer loved and fostered by religion, beauty is lifted from its face as a mask, and itsabsence exposes features on that face which threaten to become incomprehensible to man.”To fail to produce beauty in sacred art is to rob God of His glory. The building structure maybe in place, the creature comforts may be in abundance—including air conditioning, paddedpews, the latest technology may be there, together with plenty of parking spaces—but God’sglory is not. Finally, this loss of the sense of the sacred place and beauty could be caused bythe sad fact that many Catholics have lost faith in God’s real presence in the Eucharist. PopeBenedict XVI had quite a bit to say about the Eucharist in his apostolicexhortation, Sacramentum Caritatis(Feb 22, 2007): It’s within this great sacrament that the

sacred and beauty come together.Certainly, an important element of sacred art is churcharchitecture, which should highlight the unity of the furnishings of the sanctuary, such as: thealtar, the crucifix, the tabernacle, the ambo and the celebrant’s chair. Here, it is important to

12



remember that the purpose of sacred architecture is to offer the Church a fitting space for thecelebration of the mysteries of faith, especially the Eucharist.

More time online = less happiness among girls By Carolyn Moynihan Family Edge (Blog for mercatornet.com)

Girls who spend a lot of time using multimediaseem are less happy andsocially comfortable thanpeers who spend less timeon screens, a study fromStanford Universitysuggests. Researcherscame to that conclusion after analysing an online

survey taken by 3,400 8- to12-year-olds. The survey was offered through Discovery Girls magazine, whichmarkets itself to that age -group (if indeed it is an age “group”, since there is, or oughtto be, a big difference between 8 and 12-year-olds). The more time they spent inonline communication and video use, the less happy they seemed to be. There areproblems with the survey: the girls self-report the time they spend on media, and theymay not be a representative sample. There’s also the causality caveat: it could be thatgirls already less well-adjusted avoid face-to-face relations and have more recourse tothe screen. With those reservations parents may still feel affirmed in their instinct tolimit media time for both daughters and sons.

There is a hint that girls, in particular, need face time rather than Facebook time:The reason, say the researchers, is that on a basic, even primitive level, girls need to

experience the full pantheon of communication that comes from face-to-face contact,

such as learning to read body language, and subtle facial and verbal cues. “Humans

are built to notice these cues — the quavering in your voice, perspiration, body

posture, raise of an eyebrow, a faint smile or frown,” said Clifford Nass, a Stanford

professor of communication who led the study. Social media, he added, leaves the

conversation two-dimensional. “If I’m not with you face to face, I don’t get these

things. Or, if I’m face to face with you and I’m also texting, I’m not going to notice

them.”

I recall that girls use social media much more than boys because they are moreinclined to confide in their friends anyway. However, they are not likely to benefitfrom texting and online networking that is displacing real friendship

An ordinary path to holiness February 14, 1928 is the date that the women’s section of Opus Dei was founded, when St

Josemaria was moved by a clear light while celebrating Mass in a small private chapel in

Madrid. The women of Opus Dei are representative of virtually all strata of society,

occupational roles, as well as many distinct cultures and personal and family circumstances.

Most are married and dedicated to their families, carrying out an apostolate of friendship

with those life brings them in contact with. Some dedicate themselves entirely to the corporate

activities of “the Work.” This is the case of the numerary assistant members. Dora del Hoyowas the first woman to join Opus Dei as a numerary assistant, shortly after meeting the

Founder, in 1946. She was 29 years of age. She died on January 10, 2004 on the eve of her

90th birthday. Her fame of sanctity has led the Prelate to seek formal testimonies of her life

13

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/25/does-technology-affect-happiness/?src=rechp

http://www.mercatornet.com/family_edge/view/generation_text_always_talking_but_whats_the_goal

http://www.mercatornet.com/family_edge/view/generation_text_always_talking_but_whats_the_goal

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/25/does-technology-affect-happiness/?src=rechp



with a mind to a possible process of canonization. Here we publish an interview with her first

biographer, Fr Javier Medina. www.opusdei.org

Why did you decide to

write about Dora del

Hoyo? Did you know

her personally?

I didn’t have the goodfortune of meetingDora. I have gotten toknow her through thewritten accounts of herlife from severalwomen who lived with

her during her years in Rome. Reading those accounts, I discovered a rich and attractivepersonality, and felt prompted to make her life known to others. So I started writing this book.

Dora appears on the left in this photo

What was Dora’s connection to the Founder of Opus Dei? Dora was the first numeraryassistant in Opus Dei. St. Josemaría found in this spiritual daughter of his a faithful anddedicated woman with great human gifts, who always knew how to say yes to God. That’swhy she holds special importance for Opus Dei.

The book refers to domestic work as a real profession. How does that apply to Dora?

In regard to work, the term “profession” designates occupations that require a high level of specific capabilities; and a “professional” is a person whose actions reflect a high degree of competence. All the testimonies about her life concur in affirming that Dora carried out herdomestic work with the competence of a first-class professional. She mastered every aspect of that work and exercised it at the highest level.

Is this type of professional work still relevant today?

One often hears the complaint today that the world is becomingever more de-humanized. At the same time, we would all liketo see more agreement, more solidarity, more understandingamong people. How can we achieve this? Certainly there is nosingle remedy. But in my opinion, if we want social relations toimprove, we have to begin with the most basic unit—thefamily.

Young people—and in fact everyone—need the warmth of ahome. And if they fail to find it, it becomes very difficult tolearn how to relate to others in a truly human way.

From that perspective, it is evident that homemakers like Doraplay a very important role in the well-being of society. Those

who govern need to be convinced of this reality and give astrong impetus to the work of those who exercise this profession—as a fundamentalinvestment in society’s future.

What is especially notable about Dora’s personality?

If I were to mention just one characteristic, without a doubt it would be her love for God andneighbor. She was a woman with a great heart.

Some testimonies cited in the book recall Dora as a heroic woman in the midst of a very

ordinary life. What sort of heroism was it?

Christian heroism does not mean doing what is “the most difficult” or “the greatest.” It takesplace in ordinary life, the consequence of a love shown continually in apparently small

details. That’s how Dora lived: taking care of others, out of love.

(The biography, "Una luz encendida,"is available from Palabra publishers inMadrid.Hopefully an English translation will appear soon.).

14



Movie Inspires a Forgiveness Movement Interview of Joaquin Navarro Vals by Jesús Colina www.Zenit.org

Without intending to do so, the movie "There Be Dragons," …has set off a "movement of many people who feel moved to forgive," says Joaquín Navarro-Valls.

Navarro-Valls, known as the long-time Vatican spokesman from 1984-2006, told ZENIT that

the producers of the movie, which is set during the Spanish Civil War, "are daily receivingmessages of thanks (some are on the Internet) from people who see the movie and decide toreturn home after years of separation, from spouses who are reconciled, from parents andchildren who have come to accept one another again, from others who return to God after along time of being distanced from him."

"There Be Dragons" is an historical drama, directed by Roland Joffé (“The Mission,” “TheKilling Fields,” “City of Joy”), that evokes the youthful years of St. Josemaría Escrivá (1902-1975), Opus Dei's founder (played by Charlie Cox), and his attitude to the Spanish Civil War.

Robert (played by Dougray Scott) is a journalist who, on investigating the figure of thefounder of "the Work" to write an extensive report, discovers that his father, Manolo (playedby Wes Bentley), with whom he has had no relationship for the past eight years, was a friend

of Escrivá during his childhood. From that moment, the plot leads the journalist and with himthe public, to discover unimaginable surprises that would change his life forever. On the eveof the U.S. premiere, ZENIT spoke with Navarro-Valls, who is investor in the movie, on hispersonal relationship with St. Josemaría Escrivá and why he became involved with "There BeDragons."

ZENIT: You lived for more than 20 years with thenow Blessed John Paul II as his spokesperson anda close collaborator. You also lived for five yearswith St. Josemaría Escrivá, who is one of thecharacters in this movie. What common elementsdo you see between these two holy persons?

Navarro-Valls: From the human andpsychological point of view, I would say that theyshared a great sense of humor, which bothmaintained up to the moment of their deaths.Another characteristic was their capacity to takethe initiative. They were able to foresee the needsof others and the needs of their time and did notsimply react to the problems or challenges thatarose in each moment.

On the spiritual plane, they both had a strongawareness of being in the hands of God and of fulfilling his will. St. Josemaría referred to

himself as a "madman" for the love of God.Blessed John Paul II would lose track of timewhen he was praying before a tabernacle.

At the same time, however, Josemaría Escrivá and Karol Wojtyla were men of flesh andbones and very much men of their time. When we have known a saint, when our own life hascrossed paths with theirs, I think that we have to modify the idea of holiness that appears inbaroque art, which centers above all on the extraordinary moments. Such an idea lacksrealism, consistency and proportion.

These two saints show us that holiness is joined to the material world and to everything that ishuman. I saw how they would make their own the joys and sufferings of the people aroundthem, laughing and empathizing with them. It seems to me that a saint is always a realist, with

the realism that allows one to see things with the eyes of God.Josemaría Escrivá and Karol Wojtyla make us see that in our concrete and human world thereis "a divine something" that is there waiting for anyone who knows how to find it, that every

15

http://www.zenit.org/





16

activity and every moment has its divine transcendence. I would also say that in these men wecan find some shared theological views, such as an interest for what is known as the"theology of the laity."

From the time he founded Opus Dei in 1928, Josemaría Escriva’s contribution to this hasbeen immense. And I think that John Paul II, by going ahead with St. Josemaría’scanonization, also wanted to proclaim, in a most solemn way, this ideal of sanctity in ordinarylife.

ZENIT: Why did you decide to become personally involved in "There be Dragons?"Navarro-Valls: As you yourself mentioned, in my life I have lived with two saints. In acertain way, I feel in my conscience that I have a responsibility to transmit this uniqueexperience, and I thought that the theater might be a suitable means.

In 2005, I collaborated with an Italian-American co-production about Karol Wojtyla, whichthe producer Lux Vide led from Italy. A little later, when Roland Joffé and the producers of "There be Dragons" spoke to me about the project, I found it attractive, and I decided toinvest in this movie.

I found Joffé's approach interesting. He constructs a story with parallel lives (as in "TheMission" and "The Killing Fields") in which Josemaría Escrivá is one of the centralcharacters. The film does not present a saint’s life, but the complicated lives of several people

deeply touched by a holy priest. The plot turns on the meaning of forgiveness, which haseternal significance in human history.

ZENIT: And what do you think of the results?

Navarro-Valls: I think what we have here is a film full of humanity and dramatic strength thatdraws in the viewer. You can see this in the box-office results in Spain, where it has been inthe theaters for seven weeks now. Roland Joffé has returned to his best moments and hasmade a movie that is both moving and entertaining.

I think that it is a great story of passion that finds its resolution in the theme of forgiveness.The nucleus of the movie is the narration of an ambiguous character, Manolo Torres (WesBentley), who, at the end of his life, resolves the problems he has with his son. It is a veryemotional moment in the film but, above all, it is the film’s moment of truth.

Without planning to do so, Roland Joffé has started a movement of many people who feelmoved to forgive. The producers are daily receiving messages of thanks (some are on theInternet) from people who see the movie and decide to return home after years of separation,from spouses who are reconciled, from parents and children who have come to accept oneanother again, from others who return to God after a long time of being distanced from him.As an investor, these reactions have been wonderfully gratifying and represent an incalculablevalue, far superior to any financial return on the investment.

ZENIT: Some have seen "There Be Dragons" as a response to “The Da Vinci Code."

Navarro-Valls: The film’s director and producers have said on numerous occasions that theydo not see the film as a response to anyone, among other reasons, because they consider theirmovie to be at a higher level, both artistically as well as from the point of view of pureentertainment. The movie contains a great deal of visual and musical beauty, and there aremany passions and emotions that will leave hardly anyone indifferent.

Nevertheless, while they do not consider themselves to be answering anyone, I think that"There Be Dragons" is in fact a powerful answer to "The Da Vinci Code," because itexpresses in a film the truth about questions related to the Christian message and the Churchthat were falsified in Dan Brown's story.

I would be delighted if many of the fans of "The Da Vinci Code" saw and enjoyed "There BeDragons." They would discover a more complete and more real picture of the supernaturalthemes of God's grace and holiness, which are the things to which every human being aspires.

I am convinced that Mr. Brown himself would appreciate this story, if he were to see it .

The film “There Be Dragons” is being shown at the Kino Theatre, 45 Collins St, Melbourne on Friday,February 17, at 7pm. Tickets on line www.therebedragons,com. Price $20

http://www.therebedragons%2Ccom/

http://www.therebedragons%2Ccom/

february 2012 download

Documents