Tuesday, August 19, 2008

The Ironic Catholic Speaks to Obama

.
Op-Ed: Sen. Obama, the Theologian's "Pay Grade" Isn't Hard to Make, Actually

To: Senator Obama
From: The Ironic Catholic

Rick Warren: "When does a baby in the womb receive full human rights?... "
Obama: "... whether you're looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity ... is above my pay grade."

First, Senator Obama, I am a theologian. And the first clue you didn't know what you were talking about on this particular question was the assumption that scientists and theologians are even on the same pay-grade chart. Seriously, I don't begrudge scientists getting paid fairly for difficult research through a few zillion dollars in soft grants. But when a theologian actually gets a grant from a funding agency to do research, we're so shocked we begin to do the happy dance to Schubert's Ave Maria, and hang the consequences. It's that unusual for theologians to make money. Indeed, some of our parents begged us to major in the big bucks disciplines, like studio art or anthropology or Russian lit. But I digress.

Since my theologian's pay grade (after you include the three months I'm not on contract but research anyway, the virtually unpaid work I do for dioceses and churches on the side, and lets not forget the thankless but utterly vital work of humor blogging) = diddly/squat [Now there's a word I haven't heard in a long time and have never before seen in print. She must have a bunch of kids, I'd bet.], I think we can take that as a monetary baseline for having theological guts. You most certainly do make the pay grade to make a decision on when a conceived child gains human rights. That pay grade is the divine gift of your conscience and free will. Everyone makes that decision--how and when we value human life--through their actions, whether they make 10 cents an hour or a few million a year (ahem).

But let me give you some credit. I think what you meant is that question is a highly sophisticated one and you're a pragmatist (although since pragmatism is as typically American as apple pie, I don't see how that is "change you can believe in"). Well, fine. I tend to agree these right to life questions can become very complex quickly. But there is something about all this that is, at root, simple: when you call us to have compassion on the poor, to create economic policies that support families, to offer a just wage... even when you call for us to end a war quickly for the sake of all lives involved... that speaks to a regard for human life. And that human life began at conception: all the DNA zipped into place immediately and it keeps growing until it dies a natural death, or it is stopped by an outside force. And even if you find that beginning point of human life hard to accept (and honestly, I don't think most people do), wouldn't it just be prudent to accept this point and refrain from policies that end these lives? Your own state, Illinois, declared a moratorium on executions the question was debated whether their human rights were being violated. How did everyone else merit the preferential option for the poor and vulnerable? (By the way, that's a good theological teaching. Look it up on Google. That's free knowledge, you know. Helpful for the whole formation of conscience thing.)

I have words for your opponent as well on other policies, but that's another day. In any case, you have an opportunity here to promote policies that defend all human life. And let me tell you, searching your conscience and acting in truth doesn't cost you a dime. I'll bet my pay grade on that.

Monday, August 18, 2008

Out-of-State Pro-Abortion Cabal Targets South Dakota Pro-life Initiative

.
Washington DC, Aug 16, 2008 (CNA).- A South Dakota initiative on the November ballot that would ban abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or a threat to the mother’s life has mobilized national abortion rights groups in opposition. The groups see the state ballot’s Initiated Measure 11 as a “first step” in a legal challenge to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

“Let’s not kid ourselves," Nancy Keenan, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice America, told reporters at a press conference in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday. "The people behind this effort [want] to make South Dakota the first step in a long-term campaign to mount a legal challenge to Roe."

According to Cybercast News Service, Keenan was joined by Cecile Richards, who is president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, and Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Richards said the initiative is a “cynical effort” to use South Dakota to further their goal of challenging “the fundamental right of women in this country that supported the right decision to make these personal decisions.”

A South Dakota proponent of the bill questioned the location of the press conference, which was held far from her home state.

“It seems desperate to me that they would hold a press conference in Washington, D.C.," Leslee Unruh, a leader of the South Dakota organization Vote Yes for Life, told Cybercast News Service.

Vote Yes for Life is the organization behind Initiated Measure 11, South Dakota’s third recent attempt to ban abortion. Two years ago South Dakota voters rejected a referendum for a complete ban on abortion by 56 percent to 44 percent.

Unruh explained that Initiated Measure 11 was drafted after surveying voter opinion concerning why they voted against the 2006 ballot measure. Such surveys found that South Dakota voters did not want to see abortion used as birth control and would accept a ban that included exceptions for rape, incest, and cases where the life of the mother is endangered.

She told Cybercast News Service that the ballot measure is “designed to go to the Supreme Court.”

Unruh said national attention from pro-abortion groups could be counterproductive for Initiated Measure 11’s opposition.

"Grassroots always trumps money in South Dakota," Unruh said. "People in South Dakota don't like it if they think someone nationally is trying to tell them what to do." Catholic News Agency

Sunday, August 17, 2008

Jesuits Leave Mankato - I.V.E. Moves In

.
Who?

I.V.E. -- Instituto del Verbo Encarnado

What? Who are they? Never heard of them!

Wait a sec! In Espanol, I.V.E. is pronounced "e bay!" Did Bishop Harrington buy them on the eBay auction page.


No, he just got busy when he found out that the Jesuits were going to leave the parish of St. Peter and Paul in Mankato after 130 years. He called on his contacts in Rome and told them his needs. Good for him. No merging of parishes necessary in this case.


What is the Institute of the Incarnate Word?

The Institute of the Incarnate Word, often referred to as "the IVE" (from the Spanish "Instituto del Verbo Encarnado") is a Catholic men's religious congregation founded in Argentina on March 25, 1984 by Fr. Carlos Miguel Buela.*

We bear the name "of the Incarnate Word" in recognition of the central mystery of our Faith, and indeed, the axis around which man's entire existence must be understood, the Incarnation of the Son of God. Our charism is broad based, we seek to inculturate the Gospel, to evangelize all cultures in order to bring Christ to the entirety of man and to all of mankind. We are, therefore, a missionary order, and we seek to cultivate an authentic and fervent missionary spirit whether we are working in the United States or Sudan or Pakistan, trying always to use those elements of culture which are noble and are in keeping with the spirit of the Gospel, and to reject those which are detrimental to the Catholic faith, and therefore, to the good of man. Thus we work in many different apostolates: as parish priests, running orphanages, teaching in seminaries and in various intellectual apostolates, seeking always to sow the Faith in absolute fidelity to the Church and Her magisterial teaching, and avoiding the false lures of relativism, synchretism, materialism, and the like. In all of these apostolates and in everything that we do, we want to live out the virtues of emptying oneself kenosis: humility, justice, sacrifice, poverty, long suffering, obedience, merciful love: simply put, to "take up the cross" in imitation of Christ.

We are a clerical institute, and therefore most of our members are priests, however, we also have a number of religious brothers. In addition, our congregation has two branches, one which is apostolic and one which is contemplative: about 10% of our members are monks. We currently have approximately 325 priests and 350 men in formation in our congregation worldwide.


The other parts of the Religious Family of the Incarnate Word are our religious sisters, who are called the Servants of the Lord and the Virgin of Matara (SSVM) and the Third Order, which is composed of lay men and women: married, single and consecrated. St Peter & Paul, Mankato

Thanks to the Ironic Catholic for the "eBay" angle.


I.V.E. Priests to Staff Mankato Parish

Jesuits to Leave Mankato




Guess who's headed to Rome?

.
.
La Crosse's Bishop Raymond Burke, St. Louis' current Archbishop, held his final Mass in St. Louis today, as he is set to leave for Rome to become the head of the Vatican's highest judicial court, the Apostolic Signatura. More red is probably in his future when the Pope selects the next batch of cardinals.

Archbishop Raymond Burke celebrated his farewell Mass today at the St. Louis Cathedral Basilica -- a goodbye to the archdiocese he presided over for more than four years. The St. Louis Roman Catholic community returned the sentiment, sending Burke off in grand style.

Well-wishers packed the Basilica, which holds more than 1,200 people, some standing in the aisles and watching on a large-screen TV.

A 15-minute opening procession included ethereal choir music, incense and the colorful uniforms of various Catholic organizations. Seven bishops, including those from the dioceses of Jefferson City, Kansas City-St. Joseph, Springfield-Cape Girardeau and Springfield, Ill., concelebrated the Mass with Burke.

The archdiocese's priests and seminarians processed with Burke before the Mass.

Standing high above his former flock, wearing a golden mitre and carrying a golden crosier, Burke spoke. In his homily, Burke said in his "relatively brief time" in St. Louis, God "never ceased to increase my pastoral love for you.''

At the end of his 20-minute sermon, the crowd gave Burke a standing ovation.

Burke is scheduled to leave St. Louis later this week. . . .

The timing of Burke’s transfer to the Vatican — not even five years into his tenure in St. Louis — was more of a surprise than the position itself. The archbishop, widely acknowledged as one of the most accomplished canon lawyers in the world, worked on the staff of the Vatican’s high court, called the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, for five years before being named bishop of LaCrosse, Wis., his home diocese, in 1995.

The Signatura is an appellate court that hears disputes among Vatican tribunals and offices. In 2006, Benedict named Burke to be one of the 15 judges on the Signatura.

In an interview with the St. Louis archdioce's newspaper published last week, Burke that when he first arrived in St. Louis in 2004, he saw how "strong" and "welcoming" the Catholic community here was.

He said he hoped his successor would continue his work with the infrastructure and growth at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary. He said he hoped more progress will be made in repealing the 2006 amendment to the Missouri constitution that protects all forms of stem cell research allowed under federal law, and in "mak(ing) our schools more truly Catholic." St. Louis Today



The Life You Save May Be Your Own by Flannery O'Connor

.
Another in an irregular series of short stories by Catholic authors, for the dog days of Summer.

The old woman and her daughter were sitting on their porch when Mr. Shiftlet came up their road for the first time. The old woman slid to the edge of her chair and leaned forward, shading her eyes from the piercing sunset with her hand. The daughter could not see far in front of her and continued to play with her fingers. Although the old woman lived in this desolate spot with only her daughter and she had never seen Mr. Shiftlet before, she could tell, even from a distance, that he was a tramp and no one to be afraid of. His left coat sleeve was folded up to show there was only half an arm in it and his gaunt figure listed slightly to the side as if the breeze were pushing him. He had on a black town suit and a brown felt hat that was turned up in the front and down in the back and he carried a tin tool box by a handle. He came on, at an amble, up her road, his face turned toward the sun which appeared to be balancing itself on the peak of a small mountain.
The old woman didn’t change her position until he was almost into her yard; then she rose with one hand fisted on her hip. The daughter, a large girl in a short blue organdy dress, saw him all at once and jumped up and began to stamp and point and make excited speechless sounds.
Mr. Shiftlet stopped just inside the yard and set his box on the ground and tipped his hat at her as if she were not in the least afflicted; then he turned toward the old woman and swung the hat all the way off. He had long black slick hair that hung flat from a part in the middle to beyond the tips of his ears on either side. His face descended in forehead for more than half its length and ended suddenly with his features just balanced over a jutting steel-trap jaw. He seemed to be a young man but he had a look of composed dissatisfaction as if he understood life thoroughly.
“Good evening,” the old woman said. She was about the size of a cedar fence post and she had a man’s gray hat pulled down low over her head.
The tramp stood looking at her and didn’t answer. He turned his back and faced the sunset. He swung both his whole and his short arm up slowly so that they indicated an expanse of sky and his figure formed a crooked cross. The old woman watched him with her arms folded across her chest as if she were the owner of the sun, and the daughter watched, her head thrust forward and her fat helpless hands hanging at the wrists. She had long pink-gold hair and eyes as blue as a peacock’s neck.
He held the pose for almost fifty seconds and then he picked up his box and came on to the porch and dropped down on the bottom step. “Lady,” he said in a firm nasal voice, “I’d give a fortune to live where I could see me a sun do that every evening.”
“Does it every evening,” the old woman said and sat back down. The daughter sat down too and watched him with a cautious sly look as if he were a bird that had come up very close. He leaned to one side, rooting in his pants pocket, and in a second he brought out a package of chewing gum and offered her a piece. She took it and unpeeled it and began to chew without taking her eyes off him. He offered the old woman a piece but she only raised her upper lip to indicate she had no teeth.
Mr. Shiftlet’s pale sharp glance had already passed over everything in the yard—the pump near the corner of the house and the big fig tree that three or four chickens were preparing to roost in—and had moved to a shed where he saw the square rusted back of an automobile. “You ladies drive?” he asked.
“That car ain’t run in fifteen year,” the old woman said. “The day my husband died, it quit running.”
“Nothing is like it used to be, lady,” he said. “The world is almost rotten.”
“That’s right,” the old woman said. “You from around here?”
“Name Tom T. Shiftlet,” he murmured, looking at the tires.
“I’m pleased to meet you,” the old woman said. “Name Lucynell Crater and daughter Lucynell Crater. What you doing around here, Mr. Shiftlet?”
He judged the car to be about a 1928 or ‘29 Ford. “Lady,” he said, and turned and gave her his full attention, “lemme tell you something. There’s one of these doctors in Atlanta that’s taken a knife and cut the human heart—the human heart,” he repeated, leaning forward, “out of a man’s chest and held it in his hand,” and he held his hand out, palm up, as if it were slightly weighted with the human heart, “and studied it like it was a day-old chicken, and lady,” he said, allowing a long significant pause in which his head slid forward and his clay-colored eyes brightened, “he don’t know no more about it than you or me.”
“That’s right,” the old woman said.
“Why, if he was to take that knife and cut into every corner of it, he still wouldn’t know no more than you or me. What you want to bet?”
“Nothing,” the old woman said wisely. “Where you come from, Mr. Shiftlet?”
He didn’t answer. He reached into his pocket and brought out a sack of tobacco and a package of cigarette papers and rolled himself a cigarette, expertly with one hand, and attached it in a hanging position to his upper lip. Then he took a box of wooden matches from his pocket and struck one on his shoe. He held the burning match as if he were studying the mystery of flame while it traveled dangerously toward his skin. The daughter began to make loud noises and to point to his hand and shake her finger at him, but when the flame was just before touching him, he leaned down with his hand cupped over it as if he were going to set fire to his nose and lit the cigarette.
He flipped away the dead match and blew a stream of gray into the evening. A sly look came over his face. “Lady,” he said, “nowadays, people’ll do anything anyways. I can tell you my name is Tom T. Shiftlet and I come from Tarwater, Tennessee, but you never have seen me before: how you know I ain’t lying? How you know my name ain’t Aaron Sparks, lady, and I come from Singleberry, Georgia, or how you know it’s not George Speeds and I come from Lucy, Alabama, or how you know I ain’t Thompson Bright from Toolafalls, Mississippi?”
“I don’t know nothing about you,” the old woman muttered, irked.
“Lady,” he said, “people don’t care how they lie. Maybe the best I can tell you is, I’m a man; but listen lady,” he said and paused and made his tone more ominous still, “what is a man?”
The old woman began to gum a seed. “What you carry in that tin box, Mr. Shiftlet?” she asked.
“Tools,” he said, put back. “I’m a carpenter.”
“Well, if you come out here to work, I’ll be able to feed you and give you a place to sleep but I can’t pay. I’ll tell you that before you begin,” she said.
There was no answer at once and no particular expression on his face. He leaned back against the two-by-four that helped support the porch roof. “Lady,” he said slowly, “there’s some men that some things mean more to them than money.” The old woman rocked without comment and the daughter watched the trigger that moved up and down in his neck. He told the old woman then that all most people were interested in was money, but he asked what a man was made for. He asked her if a man was made for money, or what. He asked her what she thought she was made for but she didn’t answer, she only sat rocking and wondered if a one-armed man could put a new roof on her garden house. He asked a lot of questions that she didn’t answer. He told her that he was twenty-eight years old and had lived a varied life. He had been a gospel singer, a foreman on the railroad, an assistant in an undertaking parlor, and he had come over the radio for three months with Uncle Roy and his Red Creek Wranglers. He said he had fought and bled in the Arm Service of his country and visited every foreign land and that everywhere he had seen people that didn’t care if they did a thing one way or another. He said he hadn’t been raised thataway.
A fat yellow moon appeared in the branches of the fig tree as if it were going to roost there with the chickens. He said that a man had to escape to the country to see the world whole and that he wished he lived in a desolate place like this where he could see the sun go down every evening like God made it to do.
“Are you married or are you single?” the old woman asked.
There was a long silence. “Lady,” he asked finally, “where would you find you an innocent woman today? I wouldn’t have any of this trash I could just pick up.”
The daughter was leaning very far down, hanging her head almost between her knees, watching him through a triangular door she had made in her overturned hair; and she suddenly fell in a heap on the floor and began to whimper. Mr. Shiftlet straightened her out and helped her get back in the chair.
“Is she your baby girl?” he asked.
“My only,” the old woman said, “and she’s the sweetest girl in the world. I wouldn’t give her up for nothing on earth. She’s smart too. She can sweep the floor, cook, wash, feed the chickens, and hoe. I wouldn’t give her up for a casket of jewels.”
“No,” he said kindly, “don’t ever let any man take her away from you.”
“Any man come after her,” the old woman said, “ ‘ll have to stay around the place.”
Mr. Shiftlet’s eye in the darkness was focused on a par,t of the automobile bumper that glittered in the distance. “Lady,” he said, jerking his short arm up as if he could point with it to her house and yard and pump, “there ain’t a broken thing on this plantation that I couldn’t fix for you, one-arm jackleg or not. I’m a man,” he said with a sullen dignity, “even if I ain’t a whole one. I got,” he said, tapping his knuckles on the floor to emphasize the immensity of what he was going to say, “a moral intelligence!” and his face pierced out of the darkness into a shaft of doorlight and he stared at her as if he were astonished himself at this impossible truth.
The old woman was not impressed with the phrase. “I told you you could hang around and work for food,” she said, “if you don’t mind sleeping in that car yonder.”
“Why listen, Lady,” he said with a grin of delight, “the monks of old slept in their coffins!”
“They wasn’t as advanced as we are,” the old woman said.


The next morning he began on the roof of the garden house while Lucynell, the daughter, sat on a rock and watched him work. He had not been around a week before the change he had made in the place was apparent. He had patched the front and back steps, built a new hog pen, restored a fence, and taught Lucynell, who was completely deaf and had never said a word in her life, to say the word “bird.” The big rosy-faced girl followed him everywhere, saying “Burrttddt ddbirrrttdt,” and clapping her hands. The old woman watched from a distance, secretly pleased. She was ravenous for a son-in-law.
Mr. Shiftlet slept on the hard narrow back seat of the car with his feet out the side window. He had his razor and a can of water on a crate that served him as a bedside table and he put up a piece of mirror against the back glass and kept his coat neatly on a hanger that he hung over one of the windows.
In the evenings he sat on the steps and talked while the old woman and Lucynell rocked violently in their chairs on either side of him. The old woman’s three mountains were black against the dark blue sky and were visited off and on by various planets and by the moon after it had left the chickens. Mr. Shiftlet pointed out that the reason he had improved this plantation was because he had taken a personal interest in it. He said he was even going to make the automobile run.
He had raised the hood and studied the mechanism and he said he could tell that the car had been built in the days when cars were really built. You take now, he said, one man puts in one bolt and another man puts in another bolt and another man puts in another bolt so that it’s a man for a bolt. That’s why you have to pay so much for a car: you’re paying all those men. Now if you didn’t have to pay but one man, you could get you a cheaper car and one that had had a personal interest taken in it, and it would be a better car. The old woman agreed with him that this was so.
Mr. Shiftlet said that the trouble with the world was that nobody cared, or stopped and took any trouble. He said he never would have been able to teach Lucynell to say a word if he hadn’t cared and stopped long enough.
“Teach her to say something else,” the old woman said.
“What you want her to say next?” Mr. Shiftlet asked.
The old woman’s smile was broad and toothless and suggestive. “Teach her to say ‘sugarpie,’ “ she said.
Mr. Shiftlet already knew what was on her mind.
The next day he began to tinker with the automobile and that evening he told her that if she would buy a fan belt, he would be able to make the car run.
The old woman said she would give him the money. “You see that girl yonder?” she asked, pointing to Lucynell who was sitting on the floor a foot away, watching him, her eyes blue even in the dark. “If it was ever a man wanted to take her away, I would say, ‘No man on earth is going to take that sweet girl of mine away from me!’ but if he was to say, ‘Lady, I don’t want to take her away, I want her right here,’ I would say, ‘Mister, I don’t blame you none. I wouldn’t pass up a chance to live in a permanent place and get the sweetest girl in the world myself. You ain’t no fool,’ I would say.”
“How old is she?” Mr. Shiftlet asked casually.
“Fifteen, sixteen,” the old woman said. The girl was nearly thirty but because of her innocence it was impossible to guess.
“It would be a good idea to paint it too,” Mr. Shiftlet remarked. “You don’t want it to rust out.”
“We’ll see about that later,” the old woman said.
The next day he walked into town and returned with the parts he needed and a can of gasoline. Late in the afternoon, terrible noises issued from the shed and the old woman rushed out of the house, thinking Lucynell was somewhere having a fit. Lucynell was sitting on a chicken crate, stamping her feet and screaming, “Burrddttt! bddurrddtttt!” but her fuss was drowned out by the car. With a volley of blasts it emerged from the shed, moving in a fierce and stately way. Mr. Shiftlet was in the driver’s seat, sitting very erect. He had an expression of serious modesty on his face as if he had just raised the dead.
That night, rocking on the porch, the old woman began her business at once. “You want you an innocent woman, don’t you?” she asked sympathetically. “You don’t want none of this trash.”
“No’m, I don’t,” Mr. Shiftlet said.
“One that can’t talk,” she continued, “can’t sass you back or use foul language. That’s the kind for you to have. Right there,” and she pointed to Lucynell sitting cross-legged in her chair, holding both feet in her hands.
“That’s right,” he admitted. “She wouldn’t give me any trouble.”
“Saturday,” the old woman said, “you and her and me can drive into town and get married.”
Mr. Shiftlet eased his position on the steps.
“I can’t get married right now,” he said. “Everything you want to do takes money and I ain’t got any.”
“What you need with money?” she asked.
“It takes money,” he said. “Some people’ll do anything anyhow these days, but the way I think, I wouldn’t marry no woman that I couldn’t take on a trip like she was somebody. I mean take her to a hotel and treat her. I wouldn’t marry the Duchesser Windsor,” he said firmly, “unless I could take her to a hotel and give her something good to eat.
“I was raised thataway and there ain’t a thing I can do about it. My old mother taught me how to do.”
“Lucynell don’t even know what a hotel is,” the old woman muttered. “Listen here, Mr. Shiftlet,” she said, sliding forward in her chair, “you’d be getting a permanent house and a deep well and the most innocent girl in the world. You don’t need no money. Lemme tell you something: there ain’t any place in the world for a poor disabled friendless drifting man.”
The ugly words settled in Mr. Shiftlet’s head like a group of buzzards in the top of a tree. He didn’t answer at once. He rolled himself a cigarette and lit it and then he said in an even voice, “Lady, a man is divided into two parts, body and spirit.”
The old woman clamped her gums together.
“A body and a spirit,” he repeated. “The body, lady, is like a house: it don’t go anywhere; but the spirit, lady, is like a automobile: always on the move, always…”
“Listen, Mr. Shiftlet,” she said, “my well never goes dry and my house is always warm in the winter and there’s no mortgage on a thing about this place. You can go to the courthouse and see for yourself. And yonder under that shed is a fine automobile.” She laid the bait carefully. “You can have it painted by Saturday. I’ll pay for the paint”
In the darkness, Mr. Shiftlet’s smile stretched like a weary snake waking up by a fire. After a second he recalled himself and said, “I’m only saying a man’s spirit means more to him than anything else. I would have to take my wife off for the week end without no regards at all for cost. I got to follow where my spirit says to go.”
“I’ll give you fifteen dollars for a week-end trip,” the old woman said in a crabbed voice. “That’s the best I can do.”
“That wouldn’t hardly pay for more than the gas and the hotel,” he said. “It wouldn’t feed her.”
“Seventeen-fifty,” the old woman said. “That’s all I got so it isn’t any use you trying to milk me. You can take a lunch.”
Mr. Shiftlet was deeply hurt by the word “milk.” He didn’t doubt that she had more money sewed up in her mattress but he had already told her he was not interested in her money. “I’ll make that do,” he said and rose and walked off without treating with her further.
On Saturday the three of them drove into town in the car that the paint had barely dried on and Mr. Shiftlet and Lucynell were married in the Ordinary’s office while the old woman witnessed. As they came out of the courthouse, Mr. Shiftlet began twisting his neck in his collar. He looked morose and bitter as if he had been insulted while someone held him. “That didn’t satisfy me none,” he said. “That was just something a woman in an office did, nothing but paper work and blood tests. What do they know about my blood? If they was to take my heart and cut it out,” he said, “they wouldn’t know a thing about me. It didn’t satisfy me at all.”
“It satisfied the law,” the old woman said sharply.
“The law,” Mr. Shiftlet said and spit. “It’s the law that don’t satisfy me.”
He had painted the car dark green with a yellow band around it just under the windows. The three of them climbed in the front seat and the old woman said, “Don’t Lucynell look pretty? Looks like a baby doll.” Lucynell was dressed up in a white dress that her mother had uprooted from a trunk and there was a Panama hat on her head with a bunch of red wooden cherries on the brim. Every now and then her placid expression was changed by a sly isolated little thought like a shoot of green in the desert. “You got a prize!” the old woman said.
Mr. Shiftlet didn’t even look at her.
They drove back to the house to let the old woman off and pick up the lunch. When they were ready to leave, she stood staring in the window of the car, with her fingers clenched around the glass. Tears began to seep sideways out of her eyes and run along the dirty creases in her face. “I ain’t ever been parted with her for two days before,” she said.
Mr. Shiftlet started the motor.
“And I wouldn’t let no man have her but you because I seen you would do right. Good-by, Sugarbaby,” she said, clutching at the sleeve of the white dress. Lucynell looked straight at her and didn’t seem to see her there at all. Mr. Shiftlet eased the car forward so that she had to move her hands.
The early afternoon was clear and open and surrounded by pale blue sky. Although the car would go only thirty miles an hour, Mr. Shiftlet imagined a terrific climb and dip and swerve that went entirely to his head so that he forgot his morning bitterness. He had always wanted an automobile but he had never been able to afford one before. He drove very fast because he wanted to make Mobile by nightfall.
Occasionally he stopped his thoughts long enough to look at Lucynell in the seat beside him. She had eaten the lunch as soon as they were out of the yard and now she was pulling the cherries off the hat one by one and throwing them out the window. He became depressed in spite of the car. He had driven about a hundred miles when he decided that she must be hungry again and at the next small town they came to, he stopped in front of an aluminum-painted eating place called The Hot Spot and took her in and ordered her a plate of ham and grits. The ride had made her sleepy and as soon as she got up on the stool, she rested her head on the counter and shut her eyes. There was no one in The Hot Spot but Mr. Shiftlet and the boy behind the counter, a pale youth with a greasy rag hung over his shoulder. Before he could dish up the food, she was snoring gently.
“Give it to her when she wakes up,” Mr. Shiftlet said. “I’ll pay for it now.”
The boy bent over her and stared at the long pink-gold hair and the half-shut sleeping eyes. Then he looked up and stared at Mr. Shiftlet. “She looks like an angel of Gawd,” he murmured.
“Hitch-hiker,” Mr. Shiftlet explained. “I can’t wait. I got to make Tuscaloosa.”
The boy bent over again and very carefully touched his finger to a strand of the golden hair and Mr. Shiftlet left.
He was more depressed than ever as he drove on by himself. The late afternoon had grown hot and sultry and the country had flattened out. Deep in the sky a storm was preparing very slowly and without thunder as if it meant to drain every drop of air from the earth before it broke. There were times when Mr. Shiftlet preferred not to be alone. He felt too that a man with a car had a responsibility to others and he kept his eye out for a hitchhiker. Occasionally he saw a sign that warned: “Drive carefully. The life you save may be your own.”
The narrow road dropped off on either side into dry fields and here and there a shack or a filling station stood in a clearing. The sun began to set directly in front of the automobile. It was a reddening ball that through his windshield was slightly flat on the bottom and top. He saw a boy in overalls and a gray hat standing on the edge of the road and he slowed the car down and stopped in front of him. The boy didn’t have his hand raised to thumb the ride, he was only standing there, but he had a small cardboard suitcase and his hat was set on his head in a way to indicate that he had left somewhere for good. “Son,” Mr. Shiftlet said, “I see you want a ride.”
The boy didn’t say he did or he didn’t but he opened the door of the car and got in, and Mr. Shiftlet started driving again. The child held the suitcase on his lap and folded his arms on top of it. He turned his head and looked out the window away from Mr. Shiftlet. Mr. Shiftlet felt oppressed. “Son,” he said after a minute, “I got the best old mother in the world so I reckon you only got the second best.”
The boy gave him a quick dark glance and then turned his face back out the window.
“It’s nothing so sweet,” Mr. Shiftlet continued, “as a boy’s mother. She taught him his first prayers at her knee, she give him love when no other would, she told him what was right and what wasn’t, and she seen that he done the right thing. Son,” he said, “I never rued a day in my life like the one I rued when I left that old mother of mine.”
The boy shifted in his seat but he didn’t look at Mr. Shiftlet. He unfolded his arms and put one hand on the door handle.
“My mother was a angel of Gawd,” Mr. Shiftlet said in a very strained voice. “He took her from heaven and giver to me and I left her.” His eyes were instantly clouded over with a mist of tears. The car was barely moving.
The boy turned angrily in the seat. “You go to the devil!” he cried. “My old woman is a flea bag and yours is a stinking pole cat!” and with that he flung the door open and jumped out with his suitcase into the ditch.
Mr. Shiftlet was so shocked that for about a hundred feet he drove along slowly with the door still open. A cloud, the exact color of the boy’s hat and shaped like a turnip, had descended over the sun, and another, worse looking, crouched behind the car. Mr. Shiftlet felt that the rottenness of the world was about to engulf him. He raised his arm and let it fall again to his breast. “Oh Lord!” he prayed. “Break forth and wash the slime from this earth!”
The turnip continued slowly to descend. After a few minutes there was a guffawing peal of thunder from behind and fantastic raindrops, like tin-can tops, crashed over the rear of Mr. Shiftlet’s car. Very quickly he stepped on the gas and with his stump sticking out the window he raced the galloping shower into Mobile. Lycos Short Stories

We could solve the illegal immigration problem quickly.

.
Start arresting and sending the owners and managers of the companies who employ illegal immigrants to jail.

If the managers who replace them find that they can't make money when they have to pay a living wage to the replacement employees, maybe they are in the wrong business.

Companies go out of business every day when they can't compete. It's called capitalism or free enterprise.

Small town, Postville, Iowa, struggles after the immigration raid.

Saturday, August 16, 2008

Stopping the Same Sex Marriage Juggernaut

.

Same-Sex Marriage and the Mockery of Being

by Dr. Jeff Mirus, July 18, 2008

Within a short space of time, the states of California, New York, Massachusetts and Maryland have taken steps toward greater recognition of same-sex marriage. These steps have prompted a number of statements from various groups of bishops around the country, statements which can do little more than offer proper instruction in an apparently losing cause. The same-sex juggernaut rolls on. Why?

Episcopal Statements

Of the episcopal statements I have seen, the one issued on May 22nd by the Maryland Catholic Conference is perhaps the frankest and the most entertaining. Referring to Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley’s long-standing promise to the gay lobby to sign their domestic-partnership bills into law, the bishops said that “he punched their ticket without first checking where their bus was headed,” putting Maryland “on the road to becoming California East.” Very pithy, but perhaps the best recent episcopal statement was issued on June 9th by the New York State Catholic Conference, after Governor David Paterson directed state agencies to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions.

Consider the clarity of the New York bishops’ central point:

Marriage always has been, is now and always will be a union of one man and one woman in an enduring bond. This is consistent with biology and natural law, and should be obvious to all, no matter what their religion or even if they have no religion at all. It is a mutual personal gift between the two that serves the individual couple in many ways, allowing them to grow in love and, through that love, to bring forth children.

Just as important, this union also serves the larger society. Marriage provides a stable family structure for the rearing of children and is the ultimate safeguard so that civil society can exist and flourish. This is why civil society through the ages has recognized its duty to foster and respect marriage between a man and a woman.

Moreover, while acknowledging that benefits can be provided to unmarried couples as desired, the New York bishops are quick to remind us that “the question of such benefits should not be allowed to cloud the discussion because, in truth, the movement for ‘same-sex marriage’ is less about such benefits than it is about societal acceptance and approval of homosexual relationships.” Other statements were issued by the California Catholic Conference, the Bishops of Los Angeles, and the Bishops of Sacramento, responding to the California Supreme Court’s ruling permitting same-sex marriage. But if you can read only one of these local episcopal statements on what is a common problem, I recommend the complete text from New York.

How Is this Possible?

Despite these episcopal efforts, however, the same-sex juggernaut rolls on. It seems that a large number of Americans—especially those in the privileged classes of education, media and politics—simply do not see what was obvious to everyone as little as a generation ago. They do not see that marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman is a contradiction in terms. Instead, they see same-sex marriage as part of a universal right of self-determination, a right which must be actualized in our laws and policies if we are to avoid unfair discrimination. How is it possible that the minds of so many have become so clouded on this issue in so short a time?

The answer lies in the widespread mechanistic and instrumental view of reality progressively adopted by our culture over the past two hundred years. By “mechanistic”, I mean the idea that anything and everything may be tinkered with, adjusted, altered, or manufactured to produce a desired result. By “instrumental”, I mean the attitude that anything and everything is an instrument to be used for my own ends. This view of reality can be traced back a very long way in various forms, but the explosion of material progress through the manipulation of nature and machinery beginning in the 19th century catapulted this view to dominance. The further dramatic explosion of both information and material benefits in the latter part of the twentieth century served to complete and intensify this gradual shift of perception. As a result, most of us now view reality far differently than would have been possible in an earlier era.

The problem with this shift is that it ignores the nature of being as a given, as something which we receive so that it might disclose itself to us on its own terms. If I instinctively see everything as an instrument for my own purposes (including my own body), and if I believe I can always figure out a way to manipulate things to suit my purposes, then two things happen: First, I become extremely self-centered; second, I become blind to any meaning which exists in the very nature of things, closed to the gift of creation which beckons me to live according to a purpose that has been stamped into my own being from outside.

The Mockery of Being

The evidence that we are largely closed to this gift is all around us. Sin is nothing more than the act of making instruments for our own purposes out of things which possess their own independent finality, and of manipulating (or mechanizing) things in ways which abuse their own natures. One reason our culture no longer recognizes sin is that mechanization and instrumentalization constitute our standard view of the universe. Occasionally this problem is called to our attention in some new and even more extreme departure from reality, such as same-sex marriage, but the underlying worldview passes almost beneath our notice.

When an instrumental approach to reality becomes a substitute for love itself, it is particularly damaging. Though we may not understand this, we feel it very quickly whenever we are used by someone whom we love and who claims to love us. We feel cheapened; we feel betrayed; ultimately, we feel that we have been mocked. In fact, whenever love is replaced by manipulation, whenever what should be the object of love becomes a mere instrument for something else, things have gone terribly wrong. The same cheapening is at work. The failure to recognize and act on the true worth of the other is always a betrayal, always a mockery.

But this mockery of being that some of us so easily see in same-sex marriage—and which many others can no longer see at all—was preceded by a great deal of the same in other areas. Our culture has worked itself up to it bit by bit. We don’t make a life-long commitment to the “other” in a marriage; instead, we are in it for what we can get out of it, and we use easy divorce as a means of serializing our use of others for this purpose. We don’t “have” babies out of the love engendered in this union; rather, we “make” babies, or not, to suit our desires, contracepting and aborting (or engaging in necessarily sterile sexual acts) to prevent an undesired consequence, and resorting to a manufacturing process (such as in vitro fertilization or surrogate motherhood) when the reproductive “process” doesn’t “work”. We don’t commit ourselves to the authentic family which grows from the intense self-giving of a marital relationship; instead, we create alternative families, celebrating single parenting or homosexual adoptions. We don’t nurture life: we manufacture it to cure our own diseases and to slake our own thirst for immortality, disposing of it when it becomes a bother.

If all this is true, we must face a serious question: What grounds does our culture have for denying to same-sex “couples” the same “rights” to mechanize and instrumentalize that we prize so highly in our heterosexual relations—and indeed in too many other aspects of our lives? If we too are closed to the gift of being, blind to its disclosure of interior mystery, and incapable of that radical self-giving and receptivity which is love itself, then what possible line can we draw in the cultural sand?

Breaking the Cycle

I am well aware that there are many who, through openness to being and to God Himself, strive to avoid all of this mockery, and to live in reverence for what we have been given. Nonetheless, all of us have been influenced by the pervasive mockery of being that characterizes our culture, the constant demand to instrumentalize and mechanize for our own purposes, to use everything for self-gratification, to ignore all meaning beyond our own desires. Indeed, the relatively obvious contemporary issues related to homosexual rights are but the tip of a large and treacherous iceberg floating largely beneath the surface of our perceptions.

For this reason, we must frequently remind ourselves of the pervasiveness of our own mockery of being, of how common it is in so much that we take for granted as unobjectionable, of how many excuses we make for it in our own lives and the lives of those we love. If we have any understanding at all, we cannot be surprised by what is happening in the area of homosexual rights. Nor can we foolishly believe that what is happening can be stopped without a deep reform of our culture’s entire attitude toward being. This is a reform that must begin in our own hearts, our own perceptions, our own openness to that which is given. Granted, this is not a political solution. But it is the only possible basis for one. We—you and I—must cease to mock. Catholic Culture

Better Late than Never: the Assumption by "Treasure Chest"

.
In the olden days, before horror comics, this is what we Catholics enjoyed:

New Chancellor for Archdiocese

.
  • August 12, 2008
  • Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis Names Jennifer Haselberger as Chancellor for Canonical Affairs
  • Jennifer M. Haselberger, bishop’s delegate for canonical affairs of the Diocese of Fargo, will join the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis as chancellor for canonical affairs on August 18th. She succeeds Sister Dominica Brennan, OP, who is leaving the Archdiocese after 16 years of service, to assume a new position as Director of Mission Integration for her order, the Dominican Sisters of Springfield, Illinois.

    Haselberger, who holds a PhD in philosophy from the University of London and a licentiate in canon law from Catholic University Leuven in Belgium, has served the diocese of Fargo as bishop’s delegate for canonical affairs since December of 2007, though she has done canonical law work for that diocese since 2006. Before joining the Fargo diocese, she was chancellor and director of the tribunal for the Diocese of Crookston, Minnesota where she also served as Director of Safe Environment.

    Archbishop Nienstedt praised Sister Brennan for her wise counsel, knowledge of canon law, and many organizational contributions over the years. “Her fidelity to church law and her important service to three different Archbishops will not soon be forgotten,” he said. At the same time, Nienstedt welcomed Haselberger, calling her “studious, thoughtful, and extremely well prepared” to assume her new duties at the Archdiocese.

    A graduate of the College of St. Catherine, Haselberger attended Moundsview High School in Arden Hills, but has spent much of her adult life abroad. She has lived in four foreign countries, including China and Africa and has traveled to over 50 countries. She has also taught canon law.

    The Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis serves a Catholic population of more than 650,000 who worship in 218 parishes throughout a 12 county area. It also encompasses two of the nation’s largest Catholic universities, a major and minor seminary for the training of priests, 14 Catholic high schools, 93 Catholic elementary schools, a combined total of 37 hospitals, elderly residences and nursing homes, and Catholic Charities of the Twin Cities, which is second only to the government as the major provider of charity, housing, and human services in the Twin Cities.

    Official Press Release


Friday, August 15, 2008

Who wouldda thunk it? Pembina, ND, Church Celebrates 190 Years

We forget that the first Catholics to this area came from British North America, as it was called in those days.
.
A North Dakota church is celebrating its 190th anniversary.

The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary Catholic Church in Pembina started in 1818, when colonists moved there and asked for a Roman Catholic priest.

A priest came from Montreal, and the first Mass was celebrated in Pembina in September 1818.

The church served French fur traders and their families who settled the region.

Fargo Roman Catholic Bishop Samuel Aquila and Manitoba Archbishop Emilius Goulet are to preside over a Friday night Mass.

It also marks the feast of the church's namesake, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, a holy day in the Roman Catholic Church. Dickinson Press

Veritatis Splendor (Splendor of Truth)

.
Clayton Emmer, former Minnesotan, now living in Los Angeles and blogging at The Weight of Glory, is in the process of posting his annotated version of Pope John Paul II's wonderful encyclical, Veritatis Splendor (The Splendor of Truth) on its fifteenth anniversary. He has posted it in several parts.

The Splendor of Truth

Today is the fifteenth anniversary of John Paul II's encyclical letter Veritatis Splendor ("The Splendor of Truth").

I've been thinking a lot about this particular letter lately. Its critique of contemporary trends in moral theology seems even more prophetic now. I think, in particular, about all of the arguments being presented by dissenters in the Church today re: contraception, homosexuality, etc. Of course, these arguments were around at the time the letter was written, and they haven't changed much since. The voices of dissent have, in many cases, simply become more shrill and, in some quarters, unquestioned... a "dictatorship of relativism", as then-Cardinal Ratzinger aptly named it.

Veritatis Splendor is perhaps one of the most difficult letters of JPII to digest, as it makes deep forays into philosophy to make its case. It was one of the first letters of JPII I ever encountered, and, in retrospect, I think it's one I most appreciate because I really had to grapple with it, to work at understanding his arguments and his thesis. MORE August 6, 2008

The True Light that Enlightens Everyone
In this post, I'll continue exploring the contents of Veritatis Splendor. Here is the introduction to the text:Jesus Christ, the true light that enlightens everyone

1. Called to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, "the true light that enlightens everyone" (Jn 1:9), people become "light in the Lord" and "children of light" (Eph 5:8), and are made holy by "obedience to the truth" (1 Pet 1:22).

This obedience is not always easy. As a result of that mysterious original sin, committed at the prompting of Satan, the one who is "a liar and the father of lies" (Jn 8:44), man is constantly tempted to turn his gaze away from the living and true God in order to direct it towards idols (cf. 1 Thes 1:9), exchanging "the truth about God for a lie" (Rom 1:25). Man's capacity to know the truth is also darkened, and his will to submit to it is weakened. Thus, giving himself over to relativism and scepticism (cf. Jn 18:38), he goes off in search of an illusory freedom apart from truth itself. More August 10, 2008

The Purpose of Veritatis Splendor
At the end of the introduction to his encyclical letter on moral theology, Pope John Paul II lays out clearly the purpose of the document he is presenting.4. At all times, but particularly in the last two centuries, the Popes, whether individually or together with the College of Bishops, have developed and proposed a moral teaching regarding the many different spheres of human life. In Christ's name and with his authority they have exhorted, passed judgment and explained. In their efforts on behalf of humanity, in fidelity to their mission, they have confirmed, supported and consoled. With the guarantee of assistance from the Spirit of truth they have contributed to a better understanding of moral demands in the areas of human sexuality, the family, and social, economic and political life. In the tradition of the Church and in the history of humanity, their teaching represents a constant deepening of knowledge with regard to morality.8 MORE August 14, 2008


Someone came to Him (Mt 19:16)
In this post, I'll begin unpacking the first chapter for Veritatis Splendor, John Paul II's encyclical letter on the moral life. The letter begins with an extended meditation on the story of the rich young man who approaches Jesus with a question.

CHAPTER I -

"TEACHER, WHAT GOOD MUST I DO...? " (Mt 19:16) -
Christ and the answer to the question about morality


"Someone came to him..." (Mt 19:16)

6. The dialogue of Jesus with the rich young man, related in the nineteenth chapter of Saint Matthew's Gospel, can serve as a useful guide for listening once more in a lively and direct way to his moral teaching:
"Then someone came to him and said, 'Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?' And he said to him, 'Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments. 'He said to him, 'Which ones?' And Jesus said, 'You shall not murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; Honour your father and mother; also, You shall love your neighbour as yourself.' The young man said to him, 'I have kept all these; what do I still lack?' Jesus said to him, 'If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me' " (Mt 19:16-21).13
More

Pope Benedict: Mercy over Severity

.
A couple of weeks ago, Pope Benedict while on his vacation in the Italian Alps, met with the local diocesan priests to talk with them about the state of the Church from their perspective. He answered some questions (submitted in advance) and John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter comments upon them in his weekly column.

One in particular has generated heated discussion among some U.S. Catholics. Mark Shea, a prolific (and terrific) blogger (Catholic and Enjoying It) and magazine journalist, started it out by writing about Those Angry Traditionalists in InsideCatholic.com Those angry traditionalists are responding with equal warmth on the AngelQueen Forum and other traddy websites.

The final question came from a local pastor named Fr. Paolo Rizzi, and it expressed a typical pastor's gripe: Too many kids these days, Rizzi complained, come forward for First Communion and Confirmation but don't show up at Mass on Sunday. Sometimes, he said, he's tempted to tell them, "Just stay home for all of it!" Rizzi asked the pope what pastoral strategy he would suggest.

In response, Benedict said that when he was a younger priest, he was "rather more severe," taking the position that if candidates didn't practice the faith on a regular basis, they shouldn't receive the sacraments. Today, however, he said he sees things a little differently.

"In the course of time, I have realized that we have to follow the example of the Lord, who was very open with people who were at the margins of Israel," he said. "If we can see even a tiny flame of desire for communion in the church … it seems right to me to be rather generous."

Naturally, Benedict said, when the faith is completely absent, administering the sacraments would be a sham. He described the phenomenon in terms any pastor will readily recognize: "Where there is no element of faith … First Communion would just be a party with a big lunch, nice clothes and nice gifts," the pope said.

At the same time, Benedict said, even small stirrings of the faith ought to be encouraged rather than snuffed out, and thus his instinct is usually to err on the side of mercy.

Amazon buys AbeBooks

.
Some of you who hate to pay 20 or 30 dollars for a book, have discovered the charm of haunting used book stores to find the novel or information you are seeking. The computer savvy among you no doubt have discovered on-line purchasing of used books. This gives you access to thousands of used book stores from around the world.

The big player in this market is AbeBooks.com, with 13,000 dealers who have over 100 million books for sale through Abe (Advanced Book Exchange).

I've bought and sold many books through Abe and its competitors, Alibris.com, Biblio.com and of course, Amazon.com. I've never been disappointed.

But ownership of the used book market is becoming far more concentrated, the Bookseller reports:


Amazon is buying rare and out of print books specialist AbeBooks for an undisclosed sum. The takeover, which is subject to regulatory approvals, is expected to be completed during the fourth quarter of 2008.

AbeBooks' website has been trading since 1996 and has 13,500 bookseller members, who pay a monthly subscription fee to list their books. The website features more than 110 million used, rare and out of print books for sale from thousands of indies across the world. . . .

The takeover is the third major acquisition Amazon has made this year. It took over digital book download site Audible for $300m in March and also bought online fabric store Fabric.com in June.AbeBooks will continue to maintain all of its websites as part of the takeover.

Here's a tip for you. Abe Books also owns a search service called Bookfinder.com. Bookfinder searches all of the the major used book marketing websites and ensures that you can get the lowest price possible on your purchase.

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Scandals even in the Church in Regensburg, Germany

.
The German internet site, Kreuz.net (Cross.net), which covers Catholic news from mostly Germany and Austria and some other parts of Europe, reports today on an ongoing scandal in the city of Regensburg, Germany. Kreuz.net at times to seem to be akin to our Spirit Daily.com. It looks for the sensational.

This part might be a real English language scoop. Apparently, Monsignor Georg Ratzinger, the Pope's elder brother, is nearly blind. Pray for him.

But he still celebrates Mass every morning at a cathedral chapel. He is driven by a cathedral official who parks illegally directly in front of the door to the church. Last February, he was fined 15 Euros for parking illegally for 45 minutes. He refused to pay it.

He wrote a letter to the city's mayor, asking for a special permit. The mayor gave him a handicap permit. But there is no handicap parking zone in that location. Now the driver is pulling rank and asking for an exception.

Apparently Msgr. Ratzinger "pulls rank" in other matters, too. When he flies to Rome to visit his brother, Lufthansa, the German airline, flies him for free, the Italian government treats him as an official guest, and he gets a police escort when he is driven to St. Peter's Basilica, where of course, you know that's where his younger brother lives.

But the city of Regensburg refused Msgr. Ratzinger's driver the special permit. It says that it wants to treat all its citizens equally. And besides, it pointed out that there is much suitable parking nearby.

The driver is still parking illegally each day. But for some reason, the police haven't given him any more tickets. Kreuz.net guesses that they are "bending the rules." Kreuz.net



Want to Read the New Testament in its Original Language?

.
Would you like a richer understanding of the New Testament? Or more insight for teaching God's Word? Or perhaps the knowledge to decide between Bible translations? If so, the MacLaurin Institute's upcoming course, Introduction to New Testament Greek 1, can help. Designed for the absolute beginner, this 15-week class is the first of a two-part course that will teach you the basics of reading and translating the New Testament with confidence and competence. The course will meet from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. every Tuesday night starting September 2 (location TBD). At a cost of only $100 for the equivalent of a three-credit course in New Testament Greek, your course registration fee represents another Institute contribution to the community and its members. For more information or to register, email petelackey@att.net or call 763-208-5652.

Archbishop Charles Chaput: "Serious Catholicism for a serious election"

.
by George Weigel

Full disclosure, up front: Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver is an old friend; the Archdiocese of Denver syndicates this column to Catholic papers throughout the country; I played a (very) minor role in introducing Archbishop Chaput to my friends at Doubleday. So I’m not exactly a disinterested party in the matter of the archbishop’s new book, Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living Our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life. I trust that doesn’t preclude my suggesting that it’s essential reading for serious Catholics in an election year fraught with consequence for core Catholic issues in 21st century America.

Archbishop Chaput is a pastor, first and foremost; his book is a pastor’s book. It’s informed by scholarship, and by the archbishop’s extensive experience in wrestling with issues at the intersection of morality and public policy. At the same time it’s a book for ordinary Catholics who want to be faithful to the Church and faithful to the first principles of justice in their civic lives. Here’s the argument, concentrated into nine key points.

1. Schizophrenic Catholicism is neither Catholic, nor responsible, nor patriotic. “We have obligations as believers,” the archbishop writes. “We have duties as citizens. We need to honor both, or we honor neither.”

2. Postmodern secularist skepticism about the truth of anything is soul-withering; in C.S. Lewis’s phrase, it makes “men without chests.” The current social, political, and demographic malaise of aggressively secularist Europe is an object lesson, and a warning, for America: “A public life that excludes God does not enrich the human spirit. It kills it.”

3. The new anti-Catholicism in the U.S. is not built around antipathy to the papacy, the sacraments, consecrated religious life, or the other bugaboos of those who once ranted about the “Whore of Babylon.” Rather, it’s an assault on religiously informed public moral argument of any sort, an attack against “...any faithful Christian social engagement.” So we can’t rest easy with the fact that the Catholic Church plays a considerable role in American society. There are forces in the land that would banish Catholicism, and indeed classic biblical morality, from a place at the table of democratic deliberation.

4. Because the Catholic Church’s defense of the first principles of justice—principles that can be known by reason—has specific policy implications for public life, the Church’s teaching has political “side-effects.” Anyone who considers this partisan meddling is simply mistaken. The most powerful “political” statement Catholics and other Christians make is to acknowledge the sovereignty of Christ as the first sovereignty in our lives. This confession of faith in fact helps make democracy possible, by erecting a barrier against the modern state’s tendency to fill every nook and cranny of social space.

5. America was founded on the convictions that there are moral truths that we can know by reason, and that the state has no business doing theology. The result was the vibrant, religiously informed public moral culture that amazed Alexis de Toqcueville in the 19th century. That distinctive American experience later shaped Vatican II’s teaching on religious freedom and the limited, constitutional state.

6. Work for social progress, however noble, is no substitute for ongoing personal conversion to Jesus Christ. True conversion will almost inevitably extract costs in politics. Catholic politicians who seek to avoid these dilemmas by hiding in the underbrush of a public square stripped of religious and moral reference points should reflect on the lives of Thomas More and Martin Luther King.

7. There is a bottom line in all this: the life issues are “foundational … because the act of dehumanizing and killing the unborn child attacks human dignity in a uniquely grave way.”

9. Responsible citizenship means making choices, not simply voting the way our grandparents did. Citizenship is an exercise in moral judgment, not in tribal loyalty.

10. Nothing in politics is perfect, including candidates. Yet unless we fight for the truth, “we become what the Word of God has such disgust for: salt that has lost its flavor.”

Good stuff. Buy one yourself; buy another for a friend. Denver Catholic Register


Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Holy Days of Obligation

.
For those who weren’t aware, this coming Friday August 15 th is a Holy Day of Obligation for Catholics in the United States. The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, commemorating Mary’s body being taken up to heaven, is one of six prescribed days (in addition to Sundays) that Catholics in the United States are required to attend Mass. These Holy Days are January 1, the feast of Mary, the Mother of God; Ascension Thursday, 40 days after Easter; August 15, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary; November 1, All Saints; December 8, the Immaculate Conception; and December 25, the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

In some dioceses throughout the country (and elsewhere), the Ascension has been moved to the following Sunday. Also, certain holy days in the United States - the feast of Mary, the Mother of God, the feast of the Assumption, and the feast of All Saints - are moved to Sunday when the actual feast days fall on Saturday or Monday, to reduce the pressure on priests to celebrate so many Masses in a short period of time. However, the obligations of the Immaculate Conception and Christmas are never moved to Sunday because of their great importance in the life of the Church. (This means that even when Christmas is on a Saturday, Sunday, or Monday, as it was a few years ago, Catholics must attend two separate Masses to fulfill both the regular Sunday and the Christmas obligations.)

Attending Mass on Sundays and Holy Days is the first in the list of the precepts of the Church. The Code of Canon Law lists ten days as Holy Days of Obligation: in addition to the six listed above, they include January 6, Epiphany; the feast of Corpus Christi on the Thursday following Trinity Sunday; March 19, the feast of St. Joseph; and June 29, the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul. Where they are not counted as Holy Days of Obligation, Epiphany, the Ascension, and Corpus Christi are moved to the following Sunday. (Epiphany is moved to the Sunday between January 2 and 8.)

Some countries include all of these Holy Days, most include fewer, and some places have additional Holy Days that are not part of these ten (Ireland, for example, counts St. Patrick’s Day as a Holy Day of Obligation). In Hawaii, there are only two Holy Days - Christmas and Immaculate Conception - because the Bishop of Honolulu asked for and received an indult for this in 1992 so that Hawaii’s practices are in conformity with those of the South Pacific Islands.

Canon Law also states that, on these days, the faithful “are to abstain from those works and affairs which hinder the worship to be rendered to God, the joy proper to the Lord’s day, or the suitable relaxation of mind and body.” In an attempt to follow this directive, our store is closed on all Holy Days of Obligation. Very few places do this (and of course for many people it isn’t feasible or possible not to work on these days), but it gives us an opportunity to be an example to others while we try to worship God as we are called to do on Holy Days.

These holy day feasts are kept important in the Church so that, even with our busy and hectic lives, once in awhile we are forced to slow down and think about our faith and what we believe, beyond just our normal Sunday Mass attendance. This is partially why Christmas and the Immaculate Conception are retained no matter what day of the week they fall on, because they are so important in the life of the Church (although, of course, all Holy Days are important). Feast days are intended to celebrate and remember those people and events that have helped shape and exemplify the Church and her teachings, and those that are Holy Days of Obligation are meant to make us even more aware of these feasts.

So don’t forget to go to Mass on Friday to celebrate the life of Mary and the end of her time here on earth. Musings from a Catholic Bookstore

A slice of life in the City of St. Paul

.
Unfortunately, I had to run over to St. Paul this morning to go to confession. Fortunately, Nativity of Our Lord has confession before the 8:15 Mass on Monday through Friday. Fortunately, there wasn't a long line and I did what needed to be done. Thank you, Lord.

St. Paul and Minneapolis are called the Twin Cities. But I think that rather than being "identical cities", they are twins with different fathers and different mothers. Culturally there are a lot of differences. St. Paul is more "family style", laid back and conservative, although a strong DFL core of voters keeps it in the blue column, generally. Unless they work there, most people in St. Paul don't visit Minneapolis more than once every ten years, if that often.

Minneapolis wants to be like Boston or San Francisco. Enough said about that. (Although there are some St. Paul-like neighborhoods). Many Minneapolitans do get over to St. Paul to shop or dine on Grand Avenue or in many of the other neat locales.

Of course, as often as not, they get lost, because of the ridiculous street address system. The numbers go to 99 before changing, thus the 800 block might be three or four blocks long. (The original system was created after water meters were installed. Some genius thought it would be neat to give houses the same number as their water meter.)


I was struck as I drove through the Saintly City towards my destination to see four people at a bus stop in a single family residential neighborhood, standing in a row, each about six feet from the next. Nobody talking, not even reading a paper. Maybe they all had one of those music thingies in their ear. Not very neighborly, I thought; St. Paul must be changing. Lots of unfriendly types moving in.

Then, as I swung around the corner at my destination and lurched out of the car, I glanced down the street about a block, there were ten young women, late teens to early 30's maybe, all walking closely together in a group, and sure enough, headed towards Nativity, 30 minutes early for the Mass and maybe a rosary first. A few others joined them later.

I guess St. Paul hasn't changed. Thank God. It's too crowded in Minneapolis. If they started coming over here to shop and dine, the lines would be too long.

How to Conduct Politics as Catholics. Abp. Chaput's Denver Memorandum

.
A book by American archbishop Chaput is making a stir ahead of the presidential elections, against those who want to water down the faith or remove it from the public sphere. Chaput's book has also elicited strong interest in Rome.

The Archbishop of Denver is one of the premier leaders not only of the Church in America but in the world. His fidelity to the faith, clarity of conviction and inspired leadership have made the Denver Archdiocese one of the premier Sees in America. His latest book book is a blueprint for the exercise of Faithful Catholic citizenship.
The Archbishop of Denver is one of the premier leaders not only of the Church in America but in the world. His fidelity to the faith, clarity of conviction and inspired leadership have made the Denver Archdiocese one of the premier Sees in America. His latest book book is a blueprint for the exercise of Faithful Catholic citizenship.
ROMA (Chiesa) - A few days ago, a book was released in the United States that will be widely discussed, especially in the run-up to the presidential elections. The author is Charles J. Chaput, archbishop of Denver.

Chaput, 64, born to a farming family in Kansas, is a member of the Native American tribe of the Prairie Band Potawatomi. He is a Franciscan, of the Capuchin order. Before going to Denver, he was bishop of Rapid City in South Dakota. He is among the candidates for two top-level archdioceses waiting for new archbishops: New York and Chicago.

The title of the book itself gives a hint to its contents: "Render Unto Caesar. Serving the Nation by Living Our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life." It is right to give Caesar what belongs to him. But one serves the nation by living out one's own Catholic faith in political life.

Chaput moves decisively against the prevailing cultural tide in the media, in the universities, among political activists, a tide that wants to thrust the faith from the public stage.

But he is also issuing a challenge to the American Catholic community. There are 69 million Catholics in the United States, one fourth of the population. More than 150 congressmen say they are Catholic. In the Senate, the Catholics are one out of four. They are the majority on the Supreme Court. But, the author of the book asks, what difference do they make?

Among the American bishops, Chaput is one of the most decisive in taking clear positions on abortion, the death penalty, immigration. In the controversy over giving communion to "pro-choice" Catholic politicians, he maintains that those who ignore the Church's teaching on abortion are no longer in communion with the faith. They separate themselves from the community of the faithful. And therefore, if they take Eucharistic communion, they commit an act of dishonesty.

In the United States, this controversy remains highly charged. The latest flare-up was set off last April, when during the Masses with the pope on his visits to Washington and New York, the "pro-choice" Catholics Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and Rudolph Giuliani received communion.

But Chaput's book goes much deeper. It urges Catholics to live their faith to the full, without compromise. If American Catholics are going through a crisis of faith, of mission, and of leadership – he writes – the task of overcoming this belongs to all, to the faithful as to the bishops.

And this task has repercussions for the entire world. American Catholics cannot tolerate it if the United States exports violence, greed, and disdain for human life. They must work actively to bring their nation back to being a beacon of civilization, of religious harmony, of freedom, of respect for the person.

Chaput's book has also elicited strong interest in Rome. The same day on which it came out in the bookstores, August 12, "L'Osservatore Romano" dedicated an extensive review to it, written by Robert Imbelli, a priest of the archdiocese of New York and a professor of theology at Boston College. Chiesa- Sandro Magister

Magister, acknowledged as one of Italy's most informed lay experts on the Vatican and its doings, usually has his facts together. He mentions Archbishop Chaput as being a possible replacement for one of two cardinals. Cardinal George of Chicago is only 71. Cardinal Egan of New York is already 76 and waiting for a replacement so he can retire. One wonders if Cardinal George has recurring health problems. He suffered from bladder cancer in 2006. Does Magister know something that we here in the U.S. are not aware of?

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

Minnesota Face of the New Atheism

.
Exclusive Interview With the Professor Who Profaned the Eucharist

I never expected to become the one Catholic journalist to be granted an interview with Paul Zachary (PZ) Myers, the notorious professor who profaned the Eucharist for his Internet audience.

After having him on my Internet radio show, The Heart of the Matter on Catholic Radio International.com July 10, I asked for a follow-up interview with him by phone.

He agreed.

“Professor Myers, there is a palpable level of hatred towards religion on your blog,” I told him. “What’s the source?”

“Oh, it’s not hatred,” he said. “It’s contempt.” So began my conversation with PZ Myers, the University of Minnesota, Morris, biology professor and self-proclaimed “godless liberal,” who will be forever known as the man who took the Blessed Sacrament, pierced it with a rusty nail and threw it in the garbage — all photographed and displayed on the World Wide Web.

Myers is, as Bill Donohue of the Catholic League described him to me, “the face of the new atheism: irrational, dogmatic and hate-filled.”

Working closely with professor Richard Dawkins of Oxford University, Myers is a rising star among atheists. Writing several times a day on his blog Pharyngula, Myers influences thousands worldwide. His reach should not be underestimated. Nature magazine voted his blog the No. 1 science blog in 2006. His posts routinely draw thousands of comments.

Myers, 51, is unassuming-looking and, despite his raving blog posts, is soft-spoken and careful in choosing his words. He moved from semi-celebrity among atheists and evolutionists to widespread notoriety when he blogged a tirade about the University of Central Florida student Webster Cook, who stole the Blessed Sacrament and held it hostage.

In his blog post, titled “It’s a Frackin’ Cracker,” Myers raged that if someone would send him a “cracker” he would “show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare.” Myers’ “Cracker” post was tracked by Blogpulse.com (Nielson’s online rating service) as the No. 1 read and discussed blog post in the world. Two weeks later and again on his blog, Myers desecrated the Eucharist and proclaimed, “Nothing is sacred.”

The Catechism teaches that “Sacrilege consists in profaning or treating unworthily the sacraments and other liturgical actions, as well as persons, things or places consecrated to God. Sacrilege is a grave sin especially when committed against the Eucharist, for in this sacrament the true body of Christ is made substantially present for us” (No. 2120).

The Confraternity of Catholic Clergy July 31 proposed a national day of prayer and fasting in the wake of Myers’ desecration of the Eucharist. The group’s statement condemned Myers’ actions as “reprehensible, inexcusable and unconstitutional. His flagrant display of irreverence by profaning a consecrated Host from a Catholic church goes beyond the limit of academic freedom and free speech.”


Portrait of an Atheist

I began my interview by asking him about his religious background.

“I was brought up as a casual Lutheran and left the church when I was 14,” he said. “I was not fervent in my beliefs. It was one of those things where you go to church every week.”

That Myers has the equivalent of a junior high school education in religion is glaring. He understands little about the history and function of the Catholic Church and even less about the place of the Eucharist in the lives of Catholics. When I told him that many have laid their lives on the line to protect the Blessed Sacrament, he recoiled in disbelief, saying, “Really? People really do that!?”

This premeditated ignorance toward religion doesn’t seem to bother Myers, however. He is an empiricist and counts as “true” only knowledge that arises from experience.

“Religion,” he continued, “has been selling everybody a bill of goods for so many years; it’s about time somebody spoke up and said that it’s a load of nonsense.”

I decided to call his bluff. “Has Christianity contributed anything to humanity?” I asked him.

“Well,” he said in a matter-of-fact tone, “there is this general property of religion — it’s great at building community. Religion has been a good thing for many individuals; it has brought them together and given them comfort. But over all, religion … holds back humanity.”

What, I asked, about the Church’s role in founding the first Western hospitals, universities, banks and even many breakthroughs in science? He interrupted me, irate and incredulous:

“No, people made those contributions to Western Civilization.”

That the Church was involved in the very foundations of our Western culture is, according to Myers, irrelevant.

“That’s like saying,” he continued, “that because for so many years people got smallpox, smallpox is to be credited for all the virtue men have done.”

As I talked with Myers I was struck by an irony: For a scientist whose job it is to observe cause and effect, he has a poor understanding of the cause, Catholicism, and its effects on world culture. He does not see Christianity as an elevating force in the world, but rather as a strange superstition — akin to banging a pot to scare away the moon.

Father Thomas Loya, a Chicago Byzantine Catholic priest, spoke with Myers and me on my show The Heart of the Matter.

“PZ Myers would have you believe that faith is a crutch, something that makes you feel better but in the long run holds you back,” said Father Loya. “This is an old saw. Faith, and not the trappings of faith [religiosity], is no crutch. It is a lifelong process that holds us accountable to a person, a personal God, and not some abstract philosophy.”


The Men He Hates

When discussing religious leaders like the Holy Father, Myers is insulting, dismissive and even bigoted — though he insists the demeaning ways he describes the Holy Father are legitimate criticism.

Myers seems to be tormented by a number of perceived persecutors. Mark Mathis and Bill Donohue rank high on the list.

Mathis, the associate producer of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed starring Ben Stein, interviewed Myers in the spring of 2007 for the film, which was initially called Crossroads.

Myers claims he was interviewed under false pretenses and the footage was used (in Expelled) as “creationist propaganda.” He has undertaken a private crusade to torment Mathis at public gatherings, even calling on his followers to inundate radio stations with phone calls when Mathis is on.

I spoke with Mathis about Myers’ charges, and Mathis said, “PZ knew that we were making a film about evolution and religion. He even signed the release that gave the filmmakers the right to use the footage as they saw fit.”

But as much as he opposes Mathis, Myers has an even more intense dislike of Donohue.

“He is a professional demagogue,” says Myers, “out there to stir up outrage and make money for himself. He is there to play the martyr and feed the persecution complex.”

Donohue and the Catholic League have sounded the alarm, and loudly, about Myers, especially concerning his antics with the Eucharist.

For his part, Donohue called Myers “part egotist, part bigot — his behavior is clearly designed to insult, hurt and intimidate Catholics.

“We want to know what the University of Minnesota [Morris] is going to do about professor Myers,” Donohue continued. “Clearly, the university would act in a situation in which someone was burning a cross to harass African-Americans or spray-painting swastikas to intimidate Jews. Why will they not act in this case?”

Good question.

I called the university and spoke with Daniel Wolter, director of the news service in the Office of University Relations.

In response to my questions, Wolter e-mailed me a prepared statement in which Jacqueline Johnson, chancellor at the university, said that the school had deactivated the link from the university’s website to Myers’ blog, but would not take any action against Myers because the university and Board of Regents “affirms the freedom of a faculty member to speak or write as a public citizen without institutional discipline or restraint.”


What’s Going on Here?

I asked Myers, “You have, throughout your blog, described Catholics as stupid, stupider, scary, dark age fanatics” and words that we can’t print. This language doesn’t strike you as bigoted?”

“Why should it?” he replied. “I am making honest characterizations of individual people.”

“But in desecrating the Eucharist,” I continued, “you have insulted and hurt thousands of Catholics. What do you have to say for that?”

Myers’ answer was true to form: “The whole silly part of this whole episode is that I’ve got so many people writing me and saying that I have seriously hurt them. But what have I done? I have thrown away a cracker.”

Father Loya also pointed out that in desecrating the Eucharist, Myers’ real target might be the Church — “like a little girl trying to hurt another little girl by pulling the head off her doll.”

“His ‘contempt’ for religion reveals some wound, some hurt,” suggested Father Loya. “Is it evil? Yes. But having said that, know that he is acting out of anger, some hurt.”

Noting that the Eucharist, as a sacrament, is a visible sign of the invisible reality of our unity with Christ, Father Loya said Myers has performed “his own sacrament in reverse,” by making the invisible reality in his life — his anger — visible.

“But even in this inverted action, don’t you see what Christ is doing? He is, once again, going to the cross so that we may draw nearer to him,” said the priest. “Rather than coming down on us with fire, as we might deserve, he is loving us through his humiliation and suffering, turning us back to him.” National Catholic Register

Jeff Gardner is CEO of CatholicRadioInternational.com

You can reach him at jgardner@catholicradiointernational.com