One tendency being, when I display any irritablility, any anger, any sadness, any tiredness, with my facial expression or actions or words, the emotions come across rather...dramatic. It's beneficial whenever I teach high school choir, because it knocks students into a sort of healthy fear. I have a secret weapon. They don't see it coming. They think, oh she's gonna be a real pushover. We're gonna be able to get away with anything. But, they soon learn that I have a look from Hades that sends them into the utter recesses of despair and repentance. I love it. I would assume it will prove useful with my own children as well someday.
But the tendency can become an obstacle. Take for instance, yesterday, when I taught a piano lesson at an hour much too early for an actor who rehearsed until midnight the previous night, and suffers from a severe case of insomnia, or, as C-ham'n'eggs reminds me, a whacked out sleep schedule. The disadvantages ensue when said piano student's mother calls me as I am driving to the lesson to tell me she'll be late, and already exhausted and perhaps...grumpy?...all I can think is how I could have slept precious few more minutes. My tone in response to her must have shown my irritability, for she responded back with such curtness in her own tone, and then proceeded to tell me later, after the lesson, that I haven't been myself lately. I don't know what that means...haven't been myself....because it seems only fair to me that I would be allowed the irritability that anyone else is allowed, and it could still be considered "myself", that I was being myself, just an irritated self. But! Such cards I am dealt, and as Kddub's grandfather reminded us in a recent post, it's not what cards we have, but how we play them that counts.
I have a point to all this.
Tuesday I reacted strongly to an AP article about Pope Benedicts's document addressing Protestant "eclessial communities." I hope that you read the comments which followed, because it turns out my reaction was premature and unnecessary, and that the article was misleading and erroneous on many accounts. And I fear that my reaction came across as stronger than I intended.
Pope Benedict was present at the Second Vatican Council, though at the time known by the name Ratzinger, and since the council, he has done much work to dispel false interpretations of the Unitatis Redintegratio, a Decree of Ecumenism issued by the Council. I encourage anyone interested to read it. It is beautiful and encouraging, when seen in the correct light, that is when viewed in light of unity of all Christians. Keeping in mind that Catholics view the Reformation as sinful in regards to a separation from what they know as "the true Church," consider the following quote from the Decree,
When re-reading the Vatican II decree, I came across this admonition, directed to Catholics but relevant to me as well.
My attitude and tone in my previous post did not reflect such a worthy calling. I am sorry for any confusion or misunderstanding that my dramatic ranting inspired, or for any offense taken at my anger.
Another example of how Catholicism has been wrongly conveyed, and how if we as Protestants don't take the time to dig further, we will be in danger and at fault for accepting what is untrue.