Reading Assignments for Flannery O’Connor Mini Course - Taught by Fr. Damian Ference
Some of these works can be found online. The books you will need are:
The Complete Stories (CS)
Mystery and Manners (MM)
Week One (Aug. 1): The Vocation of Flannery O’Connor
Week Two (Aug. 8): The River (CS)
Week Three (Aug. 15): Good Country People (CS)
Week Four (Aug. 22): Parker’s Back (CS)
Week Five (Aug. 29): The Fiction Writer and His Country (MM)
Why should we cultivate leisure in our lives and how do we go about it? By the same token, how do we justify what can seem like a waste of time? Tune in to hear Fr. Gregory's takes on humane standards of flourishing that can save you some of the sorrow of the workday world : )
This past Friday, my flight back to DC from Raleigh was delayed some eight hours in total. While at first I was able to cope, in the end I got to feeling pretty tender. In the midst of silly circumstances, what resources did I have -- do you have -- for navigating the trials of life? Watch to find out : )
Working on an entire album of lofi music. Here's one of those songs. Album should drop next week. THEN, a couple of weeks after that we hope to have our 24/7 stream up and running.
THE ERROR OF ARIUS ABOUT THE INCARNATION
In their eagerness to proclaim the unity of God and man in Christ, some heretics went to the opposite extreme and taught that not only was there one person, but also a single nature, in God and man. This error took its rise from Arius. To defend his position that those scriptural passages where Christ is represented as being inferior to the Father, must refer to the Son of God Himself, regarded in His assuming nature, Arius taught that in Christ there is no other soul than the Word of God who, he maintained, took the place of the soul in Christ’s body. Thus when Christ says, in John 14:28, “The Father is greater than I,” or when He is introduced as praying or as being sad, such matters are to be referred to the very nature of the Son of God. If this were so, the union of God’s Son with man would be effected not only in the person, but also in the nature. For, as we know, the unity of human nature arises from the union of soul and body.
The...
RESTORATION OF MAN BY GOD THROUGH THE INCARNATION
We indicated above that the reparation of human nature could not be effected either by Adam or by any other purely human being. For no individual man ever occupied a position of pre-eminence over the whole of nature; nor can any mere man be the cause of grace. The same reasoning shows that not even an angel could be the author of man’s restoration. An angel cannot be the cause of grace, just as he cannot be man’s recompense with regard to the ultimate perfection of beatitude, to which man was to be recalled. In this matter of beatitude angels and men are on a footing of equality. Nothing remains, therefore, but that such restoration could be effected by God alone.
But if God had decided to restore man solely by an act of His will and power, the order of divine justice would not have been observed. justice demands satisfaction for sin. But God cannot render satisfaction, just as He cannot merit. Such a service pertains to one who ...
My wife and I had a miscarriage today. We decided to name the child,
Caelum Spes Lewis.
Please pray. And thank you for your prayers.
Quote of the Day
"Let us thank God for having called us to His holy faith. It is a great gift, and the number of those who thank God for it is small."
St. Alphonsus Liguori
Today's Meditation
“[The] ultimate end of man we call beatitude. For a man’s happiness or beatitude consists in the vision whereby he sees God in His essence. Of course, man is far below God in the perfection of his beatitude. For God has this beatitude by His very nature, whereas man attains beatitude by being admitted to a share in the divine light.”
—St. Thomas Aquinas, p. 119
Daily Verse
"Peter [said] to them, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit. For the promise is made to you and to your children and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will call."" Acts 2:38-39
St. Margaret of Cortona
Saint of the Day
St. Margaret of Cortona (1247-1297) was born in Tuscany, Italy, the only child of a ...
A few times over the past month, I’ve said things I’ve regretted. Probably more than a few times, I’ve said things I should regret but don’t—either because I haven’t realized they were regrettable or because I’ve already forgotten them.
And when you have a large YouTube channel like I do, those regrets can feel all the more magnified. It’s one thing to say something thoughtless or stupid in a private conversation, but it’s another to have your words out there permanently for thousands—sometimes millions—of people to hear. I also am embarrassed to admit—despite the countless teachings of the saints, which we’ll get into below—that I don’t often reflect on just how powerful speech really is. Fr. Basil Nortz, says, “speech is one of the noble prerogatives of our human nature. It is a great dignity, and like all great dignities, it carries a great responsibility.” But that, right there. That sentiment? I almost never think about that.
I know, in principle, that words shape reality, relationships, and even our own souls. But I don’t think I’ve ever, for a sustained period, deliberately refrained from speaking while around other people. The idea of choosing silence—of being intentional about when to speak and when not to—often feels foreign to me. Mea culpa.
I want to get better at this.
St. James, in one of the most striking passages in the New Testament, warns:
"If anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body... The tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness... It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison." (James 3:2, 6, 8)
Or what about this from our Blessed Lord:
“I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” (Matthew 12:36-37)
Nervous yet?
Our speech can build up or destroy, lead others to truth or error, and even shape the kind of people we become. The saints, in their wisdom, saw both the necessity of guarding our tongues and the spiritual power of silence. Their words challenge us to rethink how we use speech and to embrace silence as a means of growing in virtue.
Here are ten insights from the saints on the importance of guarding our tongues and cultivating holy silence. Let me know which one struck you below.
St. John of the Cross: “What we need most in order to make progress is to be silent before this great God with our appetite and with our tongue, for the language he best hears is silent love.” (Sayings of Light and Love, n. 132)
St. Faustina: “In order to hear the voice of God, one has to have silence in one's soul and to keep silence; not a gloomy silence but an interior silence; that is to say, recollection in God.” (Diary of St. Faustina, n. 118)
St. Benedict: “Speaking and teaching are the master's task; the disciple is to be silent and listen.” (Rule of St. Benedict, Ch. 6, "Restraint of Speech")
St. Francis de Sales: “Speak only when it is more beneficial than silence.” (Introduction to the Devout Life, Part III, Ch. 30)
St. Augustine: “The tongue should be restrained, like steam in a pot, so that words do not boil over rashly.” (Exposition on Psalm 39)
St. Thomas Aquinas: “A man’s speech is good insofar as it is ordered to good.” (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 110, a. 1)
St. Teresa of Ávila: “I could not understand what good it did to keep filling the world with words.” (The Way of Perfection, Ch. 20)
St. Arsenius the Great: “I have often regretted the words I have spoken, but I have never regretted my silence.” (Sayings of the Desert Fathers, Arsenius 13)
St. Isaac the Syrian: “Love silence above all things, because it brings you near to fruit that the tongue cannot express.” (Ascetical Homilies, Homily 64)
St. Basil the Great: “Speech is the organ of this present world, but silence is the mystery of the world to come.” (Homily on Psalm 28)
Okay. Now I’m going to go inside (I’m writing this out on my porch) and try to implement point number 4. Pray for me, please. And I’ll pray my rosary tonight for all who will read this.
Below is an imagined Socratic dialogue between a Catholic (Leo) and a Protestant (Martin). It is not intended to be an exhaustive argument but rather to help Catholics see that there is strong Patristic evidence for the early Church's belief in the authority of the Pope.
Special thanks to Madeline McCourt for her assistance in editing this article.
Martin: I’ve heard it said that the early Church gave unique authority to the Bishop of Rome, but honestly, I just don’t see it. To me, it seems like a later development rather than something the early Christians actually believed.
Leo: That’s an understandable concern, and one I’ve heard before. But if we take an honest look at the writings of the early Church Fathers, they seem to say something very different. Let’s start with Ignatius of Antioch. He wrote around A.D. 110 and called the Church of Rome the one that “holds the presidency.” Doesn’t that suggest a kind of leadership role?
Martin: Not necessarily. When Ignatius says that Rome “holds the presidency,” he could be referring to its importance as the capital of the empire, not as some kind of spiritual authority.
Leo: That’s an interesting point, but Ignatius doesn’t frame it that way. He’s writing to a church, not the emperor or the civic authorities. And he specifically praises the Roman Church for its spiritual character, saying it’s “worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing.” Moreover, he commends them for teaching others and instructing the faithful. That’s not a description of political power—it’s spiritual authority (Letter to the Romans 1:1, 3:1).
Martin: Even so, Ignatius doesn’t explicitly say that the Roman Church has authority over other churches. He’s being respectful, but respect isn’t the same as submission.
Leo: Fair enough, but let’s consider Pope Clement I. Around A.D. 80, he wrote to the church in Corinth to address a serious dispute. He doesn’t just offer advice—he commands them to reinstate their leaders and warns them that disobedience to his letter would put them in “no small danger.” Clement even claims to be speaking “through the Holy Spirit” (Letter to the Corinthians 1, 58–59, 63). Why would a bishop in Rome have the right to intervene in the internal affairs of a church in Greece unless there was an acknowledged authority?
Martin: Maybe Corinth respected Clement’s wisdom, but that doesn’t mean they recognized him as having jurisdiction over them. He could have been acting as a wise elder, not as a pope.
Leo: That’s possible, but Clement’s tone doesn’t suggest he’s merely offering advice. He writes as someone with the authority to settle the matter definitively. And we see this pattern again with later bishops of Rome. Take Pope Victor, who excommunicated the churches in Asia Minor over the date of Easter. Other bishops appealed for peace, but they didn’t deny that Victor had the authority to make such a decision (Eusebius, Church History 5:23:1–24:11). If the early Church didn’t recognize the authority of the Bishop of Rome, why didn’t they challenge his right to excommunicate?
While reading the Mass readings in my Magnificat this evening, I came across a beautiful excerpt from St. John of the Cross. I won’t share the entire passage, as writing it out would take some time, but it’s the kind of text that reads like a series of aphorisms. The only thing I’ve added are the numbers, to present his words more clearly.
St. John of the Cross, pray for us.
The further you withdraw from earthly things the closer you approach heavenly things.
Whoever knows how to die in all will have life in all.
Abandon evil, do good, and seek peace.
Anyone who complains or grumbles is not perfect, nor even a good Christian.
The humble are those who hide in their own nothingness and know how to abandon themselves to God.
If you desire to be perfect, sell your will, give it to the poor in spirit.
Those who trust in themselves are worse than the devil.
Those who do not love their neighbor abhor God.
Anyone who does things lukewarmly is close to falling.
Whoever flees prayer flees all that is good.
Conquering the tongue is better than fasting on bread and water.
Suffering for Gopd is better than working miracles.
As for trials, the more the better. What does anyone know who doesn’t know how to suffer for Christ.
May the wisdom of St. John of the Cross inspire us to strive for holiness and draw closer to Christ, following his example of humility, prayer, and trust in God. Which of his insights struck you the most?
