I must say I was unimpressed with her inability to think on her feet or to sound like a wise, seasoned jurist. She was no intellectual giant, nor a polished person. Also, I tend to think her testimony was an out and out lie when she denied that she believed her gender and race make her a better judge than a white male. She's been saying it for years, not just on one occasion, not just off the cuff. She also lied when she talked about deciding simply based on facts, not on empathy. She really tied herself up in knots today. By chance I saw Lindsey Graham nail her, with his quiet southern, but clear and firm, voice. He nailed her on her apparent prejudices. I was amazed that she didn't want to assert we are at war--though that's something for the legislative and executive branches to address--but she will have to understand military justice and international treaties, however, as we've seen in recent years. I was also amazed that her feelings about 9-11 as a NYer was about her sorrow for what happened and how many suffered. She didn't offer that she was frightened or shaken by an act of terrorism by foreigners in an American city or anything like that. Another major point was when Graham, about 6 different ways, pointed out to her that if he, or another white man, had made a similar statement, even if only to inspire young white men, his career would be over. Period. CNN experts were impressed w/Graham's excellent cross-examination, according to the link in my prior sentence.
She had to restrain herself and think of how to respond to various questions I thought. I have observed her o the various tapes as a gregarious person who is a loose cannon and says what she thinks instinctively, which is not good politically.
Some critiques that interested me: Here on use of foreign law--again she backs of past views; here Federalist Society members discuss the hearings, one liberal law prof says she either lied or is very unqualified to be on SCOTUS;
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Another Move for "Common Ground"
Not. Obie's latest czar, for science, (I guess he longs to rule a totalitarian Russia here in the US) recommends forced abortions and sterilization to curb the population. Hmmm...sounds like SCOTUS Justice Ginsberg's view of abortion.
[John] Holdren (with the Ehrlichs) notes [in their 1977 book Ecoscience] the existence of “moral objections to some proposals...especially to any kind of compulsion.” But his approach is completely amoral. He implies that compulsory population control is less preferable, because of some people's objections, but he argues repeatedly that it is sometimes necessary, and necessity trumps all ethical objections.
He writes:
Several coercive proposals deserve discussion, mainly because some countries may ultimately have to resort to them unless current trends in birth rates are rapidly reversed by other means. Some involuntary measures could be less repressive or discriminatory, in fact, than some of the socioeconomic measures suggested.
Holdren refers approvingly, for example, to Indira Gandhi's government for its then-recent attempt at a compulsory sterilization program:
India in the mid-1970s not only entertained the idea of compulsory sterilization, but moved toward implementing it...This decision was greeted with dismay abroad, but Indira Gandhi's government felt it had little other choice. There is too little time left to experiment further with educational programs and hope that social change will generate a spontaneous fertility decline, and most of the Indian population is too poor for direct economic pressures (especially penalties) to be effective.
When necessary, then, compulsory sterilization is justified. This attitude suffuses the following passage, in which the possibility of putting a “sterilant” into a population's drinking water is seriously discussed. Holdren and his co-authors do not recommend this particular method, but their objections to it are merely practical and health-related, not moral or stemming from any concern for human freedom:
Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the oposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock...Again, there is no sign of such an agent on the horizon. And the risk of serious, unforeseen side effects would, in our opinion, militate against the use of any such agent, even though this plan has the advantage of avoiding the need for socioeconomic pressures that might tend to discriminate against particular groups or penalize children.
******All-Star Game in Our Town
Neat to watch--except had to turn the channel for clip of Obie w/players. Will do again for the volunteer rewards and first pitch...and whenever he gets in the booth with Joe Buck and McCarver. I guess Joe and Tim wanted to be remembered for presidential associations other than being on the Lewinsky tapes.
I bet Joe wishes his dad were here.
---
As an aside, I have been surprised over the years to find that Buck-McCarver have their critics who really don't like their work in the booth. Not sure why. I haven't watched tv baseball with any regularity since about 1978 or so. Then only the WS or All Star or whatever.
---
Had to turn away at the bottom of the 2nd. Get back to DC...better yet, how about Kenya [TGL: I am afraid there are legitimate Qs. Then how about Indonesia?]
---
Came back in top of 3rd. Yeah, NL for taking the lead. Nice pitching and Pujols made up for that error nicely. [He plays for Jesus, you know!]
---
Sara Evans. Is she the woman who's on Sean Hannity often? Sorry I missed Sheryl Crow. Did she gloat that Abp. Burke is now gone? Did Obie?
----
Gateway Pundit asserts that Obie was booed and threw a sissy pitch. I can hear a hum of boos under the cheering, I think. I can't see where the pitch went, so I can't say it was wimpy. My laptop had a hard time playing this. Well, Obie didn't win MO or SO-IL.
I bet Joe wishes his dad were here.
---
As an aside, I have been surprised over the years to find that Buck-McCarver have their critics who really don't like their work in the booth. Not sure why. I haven't watched tv baseball with any regularity since about 1978 or so. Then only the WS or All Star or whatever.
---
Had to turn away at the bottom of the 2nd. Get back to DC...better yet, how about Kenya [TGL: I am afraid there are legitimate Qs. Then how about Indonesia?]
---
Came back in top of 3rd. Yeah, NL for taking the lead. Nice pitching and Pujols made up for that error nicely. [He plays for Jesus, you know!]
---
Sara Evans. Is she the woman who's on Sean Hannity often? Sorry I missed Sheryl Crow. Did she gloat that Abp. Burke is now gone? Did Obie?
----
Gateway Pundit asserts that Obie was booed and threw a sissy pitch. I can hear a hum of boos under the cheering, I think. I can't see where the pitch went, so I can't say it was wimpy. My laptop had a hard time playing this. Well, Obie didn't win MO or SO-IL.
Anglican Schism Inevitable?
With the US Episcopal church deciding to approve gay ordinations and bishops, officially.
Nationalized Insurance and Abortion and Hyde Bill
Wow. All these recent topics wrapped up into one column by the incomparable Phyllis Schlafly.
First, General problems:
Second, privacy concerns (so, HIPPA can't protect us):
Modernizing health-care records means putting all your health-care information on computers where it will be accessible to government bureaucrats to help them decide the comparative effectiveness of proposed tests and treatments in relation to your age and health (a.k.a. rationing). Private information can leak out and be used against you by employers, prospective employers, health and life insurance, ex-spouses or political opponents.
****
Finally, the elephant in the room:
First, General problems:
Instead of allowing insurance to compete by offering different benefit packages, the Democrats are considering insurance mandates to cover exotic benefits that individuals may not want to buy, such as in-vitro fertilization, hair transplants, rehab services, hearing aids, sex-change operations, prescription drugs, abortions, mental health and substance-abuse programs.
The Democrats intend to prohibit low-cost policies for catastrophic care. They want to bar you from buying cheaper insurance in other states.
The Democrats intend to impose community rating on a federal level, which means all customers will be offered the same rates regardless of age, obesity, smoking or other lifestyle differences. This forces young people to subsidize older patients.
The Democrats intend to launch a "public option" to compete with private insurance. Government subsidies for the public option would soon drive private insurance out of business and become the "single-payer" (government plan) that the liberals really want.
Obama promised that if you like your current insurance, you can keep it -- but that option will soon be gone under Obama reform. Your employer could cancel his company-paid insurance (because it's cheaper to pay a fine, instead), or your insurance (because it can't compete with government subsidized insurance) could cancel your company.
****Second, privacy concerns (so, HIPPA can't protect us):
Modernizing health-care records means putting all your health-care information on computers where it will be accessible to government bureaucrats to help them decide the comparative effectiveness of proposed tests and treatments in relation to your age and health (a.k.a. rationing). Private information can leak out and be used against you by employers, prospective employers, health and life insurance, ex-spouses or political opponents.
****
Finally, the elephant in the room:
Unless it is excluded, abortions will be covered by national health care, thus making the taxpayers pay for hundreds of thousands of abortions every year. That's why 19 pro-life Democrats, organized by Rep. David Boren, D-Okla., sent a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi warning that they "cannot support any health-care-reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health-insurance plan."
The Obama plan will permanently put unaccountable bureaucrats (who have never treated a patient) in charge of decisions about if and when you can get the procedures and treatments you and your doctor believe are necessary.
Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., believes this is "a make-or-break moment for Americans" and a battle we can and must win. As a physician, he reminds us that we can't effectively treat a problem unless we get the diagnosis right, and the Democrats have misdiagnosed the problem as too little rather than too much government intervention.
***
Big unweildly and remote don't usually go over well with Americans as consumers or employees. That's one reason why anti-trust laws were implemented.
The "Humdinger" in Florida Murders
I was curious to follow this murder of this nice, wonderful couple. I started to wonder whether at least one of the killers believed that the couple adopted his disabled child, previously abandoned, I guess. There are 7 arrested in these murders now. Well, wait. the first sentence says 7; another sentence says 6. Then another sentence says 6-8 people are involved in this methodical planned murder.
Obie Lied to Benedict XVI
According to Gateway Pundit's research. Obama-care will fund abortions. Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) stumbled over the words "Planned ....Parenthood" and "abortion" in her admission that the bill would send funds to PP. The audio-tape I heard also had the Senator hammering on the desk/table in front of her as she stumbled and sought an evasion.
Year for Priests: Today's Priest
Today's priest: Fr. Benjamin J. Stern
Ordination date: May 26, 2007
Status: Active diocesan priest
Current assignment:
Ordination date: May 26, 2007
Status: Active diocesan priest
Current assignment:
St. Dominic Parish, Parochial Vicar
*****
NOTE: A reader tells us Fr. Stern is an author of this book The Search for Catholicism.
Prayer for Fr. Stern and all priests in the Belleville diocese and in the Church worldwide:
by St. Therese of Lisieux
O Jesus, eternal Priest,
keep your priests within the shelter of Your Sacred Heart,
where none may touch them.
Keep unstained their anointed hands,
which daily touch Your Sacred Body.
Keep unsullied their lips,
daily purpled with your Precious Blood.
Keep pure and unearthly their hearts,
sealed with the sublime mark of the priesthood.
Let Your holy love surround them and
shield them from the world's contagion.
Bless their labors with abundant fruit and
may the souls to whom they minister be their joy and
consolation here and in heaven their beautiful and
everlasting crown. Amen.
More on Catholics on SCOTUS
The WSJ notes that the Dems were freaked by Alito becoming the 5th Catholic on the court, but not about Sotomayor becoming the 6th. [Because they conclude she's not a practicing, faithful Catholic who will vote for life?]
How different from just a few years ago. Back when the nominee was Sam Alito, talk was about the "fifth Catholic" on the bench. Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority, complained that "with Alito, the majority of the Court would be Roman Catholics."
Before that it was John Roberts. In the run-up to his confirmation, the Los Angeles Times ran a piece headlined "Wife of Nominee Holds Strong Antiabortion Views." Though the article conceded that a "spouse's views normally are not considered relevant in weighing someone's job suitability," plainly these were not normal times. Mrs. Roberts, the paper pointed out, had worked for a group called "Feminists for Life," and was characterized as an "extremely, extremely devout Catholic."
And let's not forget Bill Pryor, whose Catholicism came into question when he was nominated for the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2003. Back then, Mr. Leahy's colleague, Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.), put his worries about Mr. Pryor's faith this way: "His beliefs are so well known, so deeply held, that it's very hard to believe -- very hard to believe -- that they're not going to deeply influence the way he comes about saying, 'I will follow the law.'"
It's possible, of course, that Democrats and their allies in the media and activist community no longer regard Catholics with the suspicion they did back when President George W. Bush's nominees were up for consideration. More likely, the relatively soft reaction to Ms. Sotomayor's Catholicism is because of a calculation that when it comes to hot-button issues such as abortion or gay marriage, she doesn't really believe what her church teaches.
Robert George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton, says the Sotomayor hearings highlight a glaring double standard about how the Catholicism of judicial nominees is treated -- and the great irony this treatment exposes.
***From the Book of Paul to Jo-Jo and Loretta
Get back. Get back. Get back to where you once belonged.
Get back. Get back. Get back to where you once belonged.
Get back Obama.
Your wife is waiting for you
In her high-priced shoes
And her J. Crew sweater
Get back home--you better.
Get back. Get back. Get back to where you once belonged.
Get back. Get back. Get back to where you once belonged.
******
So, to encourage Obie not to hang out at the All-Star Game, where is it that he should go back to? Multiple choice:
NOTE: Yes, there have been frequent presidential first pitches in baseball. The last sitting presidents to throw out the first All-Star game pitch: Gerald Ford (1979) and G HW Bush (1992), both en route to losing re-election. The biggest problem is Obie just won't go away from the public eye and keeps injecting himself into leisure and pleasure activities of the people.
Get back. Get back. Get back to where you once belonged.
Get back Obama.
Your wife is waiting for you
In her high-priced shoes
And her J. Crew sweater
Get back home--you better.
Get back. Get back. Get back to where you once belonged.
Get back. Get back. Get back to where you once belonged.
******
So, to encourage Obie not to hang out at the All-Star Game, where is it that he should go back to? Multiple choice:
- The White House
- Chicagoland
- Honolulu
- Kenya
NOTE: Yes, there have been frequent presidential first pitches in baseball. The last sitting presidents to throw out the first All-Star game pitch: Gerald Ford (1979) and G HW Bush (1992), both en route to losing re-election. The biggest problem is Obie just won't go away from the public eye and keeps injecting himself into leisure and pleasure activities of the people.
Vatican Investigations
- The Legionaries of Christ investigations begin on Wednesday this week. A priest has broken away from the order, it appears, and is speaking more frankly than any one from that movement has until now. Fr. Berg has become a priest in the archdiocese of New York. [I wonder what Fr. Jonathon Morris is doing since he coincidentally moved to NYC in recent months. Ah, he's been temporarily assigned to Old St. Patrick's in NYC. [PDF] Did he get incardinated to the NYC archdiocese as well? At least he's anchored to a parish. That will be of infinite help I imagine.]
- American women religious are still stunned that they require any attention from the Vatican. They want to be independent operators. The comments of the nuns themselves provide the evidence that the visitations are so necessary.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Is Obama Playing Another Catholic Card?
He's putting another Catholic in a post in the administration. This time, it's a small town doctor, who dealt with Katrina aftermath, as Surgeon General. The doctor is a black woman who is Roman Catholic. Interestingly, Bill Donohue (Catholic League) likes this pick. Fr Z has Donohue and other information. My first thought without demographic information was to wonder whether a small town doctor can deal with the administrative responsibilities of a federal bureaucracy.
Fr Z links to Lifesite which says Dr. Benjamin, a seemingly very fine woman and doctor who has performed great work for the poor, recommends that all future doctors be required to learn to perform abortions. So, she's a polemist? I hope this is wrong, because otherwise, she sounds like quite a fine woman and doctor.
Obie's loading it up with pro-abortion Catholics, even after his meeting with the pope? Does Obie really have an explicitly Catholic agenda underlying his marxist agenda? Is he out to destroy the influence of the Church authority in America? The Catholic Church is the world's strongest opposition to statism and immoral society.
Fr Z links to Lifesite which says Dr. Benjamin, a seemingly very fine woman and doctor who has performed great work for the poor, recommends that all future doctors be required to learn to perform abortions. So, she's a polemist? I hope this is wrong, because otherwise, she sounds like quite a fine woman and doctor.
Obie's loading it up with pro-abortion Catholics, even after his meeting with the pope? Does Obie really have an explicitly Catholic agenda underlying his marxist agenda? Is he out to destroy the influence of the Church authority in America? The Catholic Church is the world's strongest opposition to statism and immoral society.
Year for Priests: Today's Priest
Today's Priest: Fr. Thomas Stout
Ordination date: May 28, 1977
Status: Active diocesan priest
Current assignment:
Ordination date: May 28, 1977
Status: Active diocesan priest
Current assignment:
St. Leo Parish, Modoc;
St. Joseph Parish, Prairie du Rocher, Parochial Administrator
NOTE: A very busy priest--for now! Tomorrow, Fr. Stout will be transferred and be pastor of only Sacred Heart Parish in DuQuoin. Sounds like a fair and well-deserved assignment.
[NOTE: SORRY ABOUT MY ERRORS. Sometimes I am in too much of a hurry. Other times, such as a half hour ago the kids were breathing down my neck. They actually want to be fed lunch. The nerve!]
****
Prayer for Fr. Stout and all priests in the Belleville diocese and in the Church worldwide:
by St. Therese of Lisieux
O Jesus, eternal Priest,
keep your priests within the shelter of Your Sacred Heart,
where none may touch them.
Keep unstained their anointed hands,
which daily touch Your Sacred Body.
Keep unsullied their lips,
daily purpled with your Precious Blood.
Keep pure and unearthly their hearts,
sealed with the sublime mark of the priesthood.
Let Your holy love surround them and
shield them from the world's contagion.
Bless their labors with abundant fruit and
may the souls to whom they minister be their joy and
consolation here and in heaven their beautiful and
everlasting crown. Amen.
Go to Your Office and Get Work Done
On the other hand, maybe not. But get back to Washington. Leave the game alone.
--
UPDATE: I wonder if Obie got this idea from watching Pinky and the Brain?
--
UPDATE: I wonder if Obie got this idea from watching Pinky and the Brain?
Another Catholic on SCOTUS
Sotomayor if confirmed (which is likely) will be the 6th Roman Catholic (at least nominally) on the SCOTUS. Souter was the lone Episcopalian. We also have 2 Jews and 1 protestant on the court. The Episcopal Church was grown directly out of the American Revolution as members of the Anglican Church disengaged from that state-run religion established by Henry VIII. Episcopals were the heart of America, once. Now...well...[see this for instance.] Back to Sotomayor and a Catholic SCOTUS:
Is it too much to ask for a moment of silence for the demise of the Episcopal seat on the U.S. Supreme Court? Episcopalians might have gained a celebrity when Alberto Cutié (aka "Father Oprah") left the Roman Catholic
It has been downhill for Episcopalians since, well, the
What is intriguing about this story is how little anxiety it has stirred up. Within hours of her nomination on May 26, Sotomayor's pronouncements on race and ethnicity were being parsed like the Talmud, but so far no one seems to care that her appointment would give Catholics a stranglehold over America's highest judicial body.
When
John Jay, an Episcopalian who would become the nation's first chief justice, agitated in the 1780s for legislation that would have effectively barred Catholics from holding office in
It is easy to find a story in the attacks and counterattacks swirling around the Sotomayor nomination, but sometimes the story is in the silence. Two recent books about U.S. Catholicism refer to anti-Catholicism in their subtitles as "the last acceptable prejudice." Not so. There are Americans who object on principle to the Vatican's positions on abortion, homosexuality and contraception. And there will always be fundamentalists, such as Bob Jones Jr., who denounced Catholicism as "a satanic counterfeit." But anti-Catholicism is dead here both ideologically and institutionally. For evidence of this happy development, we need look no further than the collective yawn of American Protestants and atheists alike over the prospects of a Supreme Court only 33% less Catholic than the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
In a 2007 speech, Justice
But I don't buy it. Catholics cannot help but interpret the Constitution in light of their own traditions of sin and redemption, Scripture and authority, just as women cannot help but read the law through a lifetime of experience in a female body. Most Americans know this, which only makes their collective yawn over the impending Catholic supermajority all the more astounding. Clearly, Catholicism has gone mainstream.
******
Here we go in that last para, the concern that a (uniquely) Catholic approach to public policy will be pursued, at least at the court. Recall, I said that this concern might arise in light of the liberal Catholics' claims that Obie's agenda is THE Catholic agenda. We could experience a protestant/Jewish/other backlash against this Catholic triumphalism coming from the Left. And it won't come from the Catholic Right.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Death of an Associate: Follow-Up
A man I worked with years ago was killed in Iraq on Memorial Day. I finally looked up his funeral information. He was a Roman Catholic. I had no idea. I knew at least a couple of his legal assistants in Chicago were Catholic and would go to noon mass during the workday, which I, the apostate feminist, didn't get at the time. Needless to say, I do now. May Terrence Barnich rest in peace and may perpetual light shine upon him.
A Response to KKT
Obie is hardly a pope to American Catholics--at least to faithful ones. [KKT=Kathleen Kennedy Townsend]
Former Maryland Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend has a provocation styled as argument in Newsweek which holds that Barack Obama better represents the values and aspirations of American Catholics than Pope Benedict XVI.
It's piffle, yes, but it also shows the shifting ground on which politicians struggle for Catholic votes.
After a years-long trend of Democrats struggling to keep once-solid support among Catholics, Kennedy argues that the core issues are shifting from the bright-line concerns relating to human life and family to the more esoteric concerns relating to economic justice.
Pope Benedict, she suggests, is mean to women and gay people and too slow to start preaching the virtues of socialism, while American Catholics are socially moderate and fiscally liberal:
"Yet polls bear out that American Catholics do not want to be told by the Vatican how to think. Despite the rhetoric of love and truth, the Vatican shows disdain (if not disgust) toward gays. But 54 percent of American Catholics find gay relationships to be morally acceptable, according to a 2009 Gallup poll. Meanwhile, against all scientific evidence and protestations from clergy on the ground, the pope claims that condoms aggravate the spread of AIDS. Seventy-nine percent of American Catholics disagree, according to a 2007 poll by Catholics for Choice."
Kennedy does not mention the movement among Catholics and non-Catholics alike against abortion on demand. In 2004 when John Kerry was groping for Catholic votes, 43 percent of Catholics identified themselves as pro-life compared to 52 percent in May of this year.
But what Townsend really misses is the shift in what it means to be Catholic.
As Catholics in America get more diverse with each generation -- economically, ethnically, geographically — saying they share anything in common other than their faith will be increasingly hard.
Once an expression of and aid to unity in the face of a dominant protestant culture, Catholicism is now the dominant denomination and cultural mobility has eliminated much of the cultural significance.
Arguments about what defines Catholics beyond the ecclesiastical are increasingly hard to make. When Townsend’s grandfather was buying elections, "Catholic" was a catch-all category for recent immigrants, blue collar workers, ethnic sub-groups — people who weren’t in the dominant culture.
***
Former Maryland Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend has a provocation styled as argument in Newsweek which holds that Barack Obama better represents the values and aspirations of American Catholics than Pope Benedict XVI.
It's piffle, yes, but it also shows the shifting ground on which politicians struggle for Catholic votes.
After a years-long trend of Democrats struggling to keep once-solid support among Catholics, Kennedy argues that the core issues are shifting from the bright-line concerns relating to human life and family to the more esoteric concerns relating to economic justice.
Pope Benedict, she suggests, is mean to women and gay people and too slow to start preaching the virtues of socialism, while American Catholics are socially moderate and fiscally liberal:
"Yet polls bear out that American Catholics do not want to be told by the Vatican how to think. Despite the rhetoric of love and truth, the Vatican shows disdain (if not disgust) toward gays. But 54 percent of American Catholics find gay relationships to be morally acceptable, according to a 2009 Gallup poll. Meanwhile, against all scientific evidence and protestations from clergy on the ground, the pope claims that condoms aggravate the spread of AIDS. Seventy-nine percent of American Catholics disagree, according to a 2007 poll by Catholics for Choice."
Kennedy does not mention the movement among Catholics and non-Catholics alike against abortion on demand. In 2004 when John Kerry was groping for Catholic votes, 43 percent of Catholics identified themselves as pro-life compared to 52 percent in May of this year.
But what Townsend really misses is the shift in what it means to be Catholic.
As Catholics in America get more diverse with each generation -- economically, ethnically, geographically — saying they share anything in common other than their faith will be increasingly hard.
Once an expression of and aid to unity in the face of a dominant protestant culture, Catholicism is now the dominant denomination and cultural mobility has eliminated much of the cultural significance.
Arguments about what defines Catholics beyond the ecclesiastical are increasingly hard to make. When Townsend’s grandfather was buying elections, "Catholic" was a catch-all category for recent immigrants, blue collar workers, ethnic sub-groups — people who weren’t in the dominant culture.
***
Byrd and Melanie Billings, RIP
This couple was murdered in their home in Florida. The couple is very remarkable in that they adopted 12 children, particularly those with special needs, in addition to having 4 children from prior marriages between themselves. The sheriff said the case would prove to be a "humdinger" and much larger and more complex than anticipated. Wow. There is no word as to whether relatives or business associates or other acquaintances were involved, what the motive was or what. It must have been a planned murder, given the complexities involved--or a planned robbery gone wrong? The authorities have arrested only a Mr. Gonzalez who tampered with evidence by painting the van that was used in the crime. Many more arrests are expected, authorities said.
May the Billings rest in peace and may perpetual light shine upon them. Mother Mary watch over their children now left without the security of parents and a safe, happy home.
May the Billings rest in peace and may perpetual light shine upon them. Mother Mary watch over their children now left without the security of parents and a safe, happy home.
D-I-V-O-R-C-E and Kids and Homeschooling
I don't think this is the first such case and it won't be the last. Many similar cases arise when a couple divorces and one "gets religion" or falls away from the faith that unified the family. A man is divorcing his wife and insists as part of the divorce that the wife stop homeschooling and put the children in a private school.
The STL PD article doesn't delve into why the couple is divorcing or why he wants the children in a school, except that he complains that the wife is getting emotional needs met through the homeschooling. Yeah? That's called being a mother, bud. Is he not getting the attention he wants? Does he have a honey on the side? Does he want to be sure the wife goes to work so his child-support, alimony are minimized? I don't know the man's motives, but I don't think they're good. Divorce is never good or fun; arguably necessary at time, but not good.
Local homeschoolers will be rallying outside the court when the trial begins. The mother's lawyer is disappointed in the public spectacle being made by the mom. Everything is apparently at issue in this divorce. Poor, poor children!
*See Bud and Bai McFarlane for a prominent and Catholic example of such a mess.
The STL PD article doesn't delve into why the couple is divorcing or why he wants the children in a school, except that he complains that the wife is getting emotional needs met through the homeschooling. Yeah? That's called being a mother, bud. Is he not getting the attention he wants? Does he have a honey on the side? Does he want to be sure the wife goes to work so his child-support, alimony are minimized? I don't know the man's motives, but I don't think they're good. Divorce is never good or fun; arguably necessary at time, but not good.
Local homeschoolers will be rallying outside the court when the trial begins. The mother's lawyer is disappointed in the public spectacle being made by the mom. Everything is apparently at issue in this divorce. Poor, poor children!
*See Bud and Bai McFarlane for a prominent and Catholic example of such a mess.
Ginsburg, Eugenics and Abortion
Earlier this week Justice Ruth B Ginsburg was quoted that she thought the prevailing view of abortion was that its purpose was to cull the human population of undesirables. Of course, the NYT skipped right over that bombshell and didn't ask about the basis for her statement, whether it was her own view as well and so on. I'd like to know more about her statements. I am willing to consider that it's not her own view, but her historical memory of the prevailing view of the time. Others are starting to ask as well. From religion reporter Damien Thompson in the UK:
Bloggers are incredulous. This is what Creative Minority Rreport had to say yesterday:
Bloggers are incredulous. This is what Creative Minority Rreport had to say yesterday:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s comments about using abortion as population control raised a lot of eyebrows in the blogosphere. Over 9,236 to be precise, according to Google blog search.
Huge sites too like Hot Air featured the story prominently. Even Drudge ran with the story yesterday.
But as of this morning the mainstream media have completely ignored the story about one of the most powerful people in the country essentially endorsing eugenics on populations “we don’t want to have too many of”.
What the heck is going on here? What are we to make of the media’s complete silence on this issue? They don’t see a little eugenics between friends as a big deal? They thought it was taken out of context?
As the large metropolitan newspapers die, they’re wondering why. This is why.
Fair point. You might think the New York Times might want to trumpet its exclusive. But the mindset of that pompous, prickly, boring, self-regarding publication is so overwhelmingly liberal that it didn’t even realise it had a story on its hands.
****
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Joe Jack$on: Opportuni$tic Heel
No, I'm not talking Joe "Is She Really Going Out with Him?" Jackson, but the hard-driving father of Michael et als. He's already seeing dollar signs in his eyes as he looks at Michael's fatherless children. May this man never get near those kids. Perhaps Mrs. Jackson ought not get them for this reason alone. Makes me think of the MLK offspring and their greed.
Some reasons to pity MJ; other reasons to condemn him.
Some reasons to pity MJ; other reasons to condemn him.
Talk About Compassion
The ailing Ted Kennedy asked Obama to deliver a private letter to the pope, which Obie did. As I have said, I certainly don't regard the Kennedys as a premier example of Catholicism in this country. Yet, we can have compassion for the man as he suffers from a serious condition. Perhaps he is requesting prayers in his final years/days...and seeks some reconciliation or promises some fidelity? It is often difficult for us to realize that the possibly most shocking Catholic teaching is that of forgiveness. God's door is always open to all of us, like the prodigal son. It is difficult to be like God in our daily lives, forgiving those who harm us intentionally or not, and not to act like the righteous son as well.
May the senator find peace and reconciliation with Our Mother Church and God.
May the senator find peace and reconciliation with Our Mother Church and God.
Sullying Thomas Jefferson
This information that there is no clear evidence, historical or DNA, that Thomas Jefferson fathered any slave child, much less Sally Hemmings' in particular, needs to get out there. Too bad Jefferson was a slave-holder, otherwise Robert Ellsberg might consider him eligible for his All Saints book, but then Jefferson favored freedom, including religious, and held slaves and was an American patriot. Not Ellsberg's kind of guy.
To think that my huz and I, pre-kids, trotted down to Monticello and took the tour during which this scandalous rumour was repeated...in front of other families and their kids. Is there any need to discuss this rumour--true or false--on tours which include families and children?
To think that my huz and I, pre-kids, trotted down to Monticello and took the tour during which this scandalous rumour was repeated...in front of other families and their kids. Is there any need to discuss this rumour--true or false--on tours which include families and children?
Blasphemy? Heresy? Apostacy? Schism?
I have no idea as to the correct label for this article by no less than a Kennedy. We no longer look to the Kennedys to be our premier example of Catholicism. This article is why Jon Boehner and other Catholic Republicans have to speak out on the Dems' attempt to "own" Caritas in Veritate as the moral foundation of their statist agenda. The liberal pro-abortion Catholics in America regard Obama as their pope. They are set for schism, at least in spirit, I'd say. This article was published before the meeting between Obie and Benedict XVI and thus is unaware of the moral formation that Benedict XVI put on Obie with Dignitas Humanae. Benedict and George W Bush clearly had a mutual regard for one another and W had a great profound respect for Catholicism. While certainly many politically conservative Catholics worked hard to justify Bush's policies as being in line with Catholic morality, not all were, eg, Iraq war. But the politically conservative Catholics were never so bold and indecent as the Dem Catholics have been particularly this week and at the time of the Notre Dame speech. The goal of Obie, some say, is to separate the faithful from their shepherds. Now, the ultimate separation is articulated: the Church in America from the Holy Father. American Catholics are to follow instead Barack Obama--young, inexperienced, lacking an understanding of American, Catholic and world history--whose personal experience as a Christian is limited to black liberation theology and whose associates throughout his life have primarily been marxists and anti-American-ists. While certainly, Catholicism is not so much pro-American, as if America is always just, right and perfect, it is not anti-American either. That describes the Catholicism of Robert Ellsberg, Orbis book writer, whose All Saints chronicles many Catholics whom he considered "saintly" in their lives, which is fine. The book, however, centered on many Catholic ordained and lay, and other, missionaries to Latin America who came to embrace marxism as the way to save the poor, indigent peoples. That same book put down Paul VI's Humanae Vitae as being a disapppointment.
Barack Obama, inadequate to lead the Free World, is to be our American Pope. Shame on Mrs. Kennedy Townsend. A couple of excerpts from this 2 pager:
****
All the polling she cites and the desire to follow Pope O is evidence that a good chunk of the American Catholic populace is simply not Roman Catholic. The Church hasn't changed or moved; they have.
Hey, how will the protestants, Jews, atheists, Hindus, etc., feel about the US pursuing a Catholic governance policy? Alinsky extensively used Catholics to pursue his agenda, recall
Barack Obama, inadequate to lead the Free World, is to be our American Pope. Shame on Mrs. Kennedy Townsend. A couple of excerpts from this 2 pager:
Tomorrow Pope Benedict XVI and President Barack Obama meet for the first time, an affair much anticipated and in some circles frowned upon by American Catholics in the wake of Obama's controversial Notre Dame commencement speech in May. Conservatives in the church denounced Obama's appearance as a nod by the premier Catholic university to a conciliatory politics that heralds the start of a slippery moral slope.
In truth, though, Obama's pragmatic approach to divisive policy (his notion that we should acknowledge the good faith underlying opposing viewpoints) and his social-justice agenda reflect the views of American Catholic laity much more closely than those vocal bishops and pro-life activists. When Obama meets the pope tomorrow, they'll politely disagree about reproductive freedoms and homosexuality, but Catholics back home won't care, because they know Obama's on their side. In fact, Obama's agenda is closer to their views than even the pope's.
It's fitting that Obama's visit comes just days after the publication of "Charity in Truth," a Vatican encyclical that declares unions, regulation of capitalism's excesses, and environmentalism to be ethical imperatives. The document gives moral credence to Obama's message and to progressive politics writ large.
*****But there they part ways. Politics requires the ability to listen to different points of view, to step into others' shoes. Obama might call it empathy. While the pope preaches love, listening to the other has been a particular stumbling block for the Catholic hierarchy (as it is for many in power). The hierarchy ignores women's equality and gays' cry for justice because to heed them would require that it admit error and acknowledge that the self-satisfied edifice constructed around sex and gender has been grievously wrong. Before he became John Paul II, Karol Wojtyla had a telling all-or-nothing formulation: "If it should be decided that contraception is not an evil in itself then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit is on the side of the Protestant Churches."
That attitude has resulted in some heinous decisions. Most famously, in the lead up to the encyclical "Humanae Vitae" in 1968, an advisory body of theologians and laity empaneled by the pope advised that the church should reverse its position on birth control and concede that the issue should be a question for morality and for science. But authority—not truth, not love—prevailed: Pope Paul VI, listening to the advice of Wojtyla, disagreed with the majority of these advisers, who had voted 69 to 10 for change, fretting that to change this position would weaken his authority.
In the same vein, American bishops in the 1970s struggled to produce a paper that would address the concerns of women. After nine years of effort, they gave up. Why? According to Bishop P. Francis Murphy, bishops see themselves as "teachers, not learners: truth can not emerge through consultation." Pope Benedict, having lived in the safety and security of the Vatican for much of his professional life, is part of this culture that silences dissent. (His last job was as the enforcer of doctrine.)
*****
She wants to set morality by polling. Her claim about the Church's "disdain (if not disgust) toward gays" is libel and could be open to a defamation lawsuit if the Church or a bishop felt so inclined. Heck, the way the courts are, the Church would lose. We are in a terrible fight for our faith in America, folks.
Yet polls bear out that American Catholics do not want to be told by the Vatican how to think. Despite the rhetoric of love and truth, the Vatican shows disdain (if not disgust) toward gays. But 54 percent of American Catholics find gay relationships to be morally acceptable, according to a 2009 Gallup poll. Meanwhile, against all scientific evidence and protestations from clergy on the ground, the pope claims that condoms aggravate the spread of AIDS. Seventy-nine percent of American Catholics disagree, according to a 2007 poll by Catholics for Choice.****
All the polling she cites and the desire to follow Pope O is evidence that a good chunk of the American Catholic populace is simply not Roman Catholic. The Church hasn't changed or moved; they have.
Hey, how will the protestants, Jews, atheists, Hindus, etc., feel about the US pursuing a Catholic governance policy? Alinsky extensively used Catholics to pursue his agenda, recall
Friday, July 10, 2009
It Must Be
A liberal Chicagoan commenting here of late. I don't know whether that commenter is Roman Catholic, but the comments this week from this person smell of arrogant Chicagoland attitude toward any one south of I-80. This person is probably amazed that I can spell well enough to get various thoughts out on the web (thank goodness for spellcheck, eh?), however disjointed this reader thinks those thoughts may be.
--Upon further review, our source appears to be Grosse Pointe, MI. I wonder how that hopenchange is working up there.
--Upon further review, our source appears to be Grosse Pointe, MI. I wonder how that hopenchange is working up there.
Year for Priests: Today's Priest
Today's Priest: Fr. Joseph Thoonkuhzy
Ordination date: March 12, 1958
Current status: Retired, living in India
NOTE: I want to know this priest's story. How did he come to Belleville? His last name appears to be Indian. Was he a native who somehow came to the Belleville diocese and became a priest under its auspices, then returned to the homeland? Inquiring minds want to know. Google yields a few hits. This Messenger piece from 2008 provides a bit of information: Also celebrating his golden anniversary is Father Joseph Thoonkuzhy who served in the Belleville diocese for 10 years beginning in 1986. In the Belleville diocese he served as a hospital chaplain, parish administrator and pastor. He was incardinated as a Belleville diocesan priest in 1991 and retired in 1996.**
----
Ordination date: March 12, 1958
Current status: Retired, living in India
NOTE: I want to know this priest's story. How did he come to Belleville? His last name appears to be Indian. Was he a native who somehow came to the Belleville diocese and became a priest under its auspices, then returned to the homeland? Inquiring minds want to know. Google yields a few hits. This Messenger piece from 2008 provides a bit of information: Also celebrating his golden anniversary is Father Joseph Thoonkuzhy who served in the Belleville diocese for 10 years beginning in 1986. In the Belleville diocese he served as a hospital chaplain, parish administrator and pastor. He was incardinated as a Belleville diocesan priest in 1991 and retired in 1996.**
----
Prayer for Fr. Thoonkuzhy and all priests in the Belleville diocese and in the Church worldwide:
by St. Therese of Lisieux
O Jesus, eternal Priest,
keep your priests within the shelter of Your Sacred Heart,
where none may touch them.
Keep unstained their anointed hands,
which daily touch Your Sacred Body.
Keep unsullied their lips,
daily purpled with your Precious Blood.
Keep pure and unearthly their hearts,
sealed with the sublime mark of the priesthood.
Let Your holy love surround them and
shield them from the world's contagion.
Bless their labors with abundant fruit and
may the souls to whom they minister be their joy and
consolation here and in heaven their beautiful and
everlasting crown. Amen.
Report on the Audience
This is an extended article (not more than one page, though) about today's audience with some good background on the Obama-Catholic issues. The pope, however, did center on sending a message about human life to Obie.
"It's a great honor," Obama said as he greeted the pope, thanking him for this first meeting, which lasted 30 minutes. They sat down at the pontiff's desk and exchanged pleasantries before reporters and photographers were ushered out of the ornate room.
The pope was heard asking about the Group of Eight summit, the meeting of developed nations that concluded before Obama's arrival at Vatican City. Obama said it "was very productive."
After the meeting, the Vatican said the two leaders discussed immigration, the Middle East peace process and aid to developing nations. But the Vatican's statement also underscored the pair's deep disagreements on abortion.
"In the course of their cordial exchanges, the conversation turned first of all to questions which are in the interest of all and which constitute a great challenge ... such as the defense and promotion of life and the right to abide by one's conscience," the statement said.
Even in his gift to the U.S. leader, the pope sought to communicate his beliefs. Benedict gave Obama with a copy of a Vatican document on bioethics that hardened the church's opposition to using embryos for stem cell research, cloning and in-vitro fertilization.
"Yes, this is what we had talked about," Obama said, telling the pope he would read it on the flight to Ghana.
Earlier, the pope's secretary, the Rev. Georg Ganswein, had told reporters the document would "help the president better understand the position of the Catholic church."
Upon leaving, Obama again thanked the pope. "We look forward to a very strong relationship between our two countries," he said.
***
Obama met first with Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican's secretary of state, before meeting Benedict in the pope's study.
Obama's wife, Michelle, joined him at the end of the meeting, and gifts were exchanged. Daughters Malia and Sasha, who accompanied their parents on the weeklong trip, also met Benedict. They were ushered out of the room before the media were allowed back in.
Several senior White House staff members also met the pope, with some either shaking his hand or kissing his ring.
****
Interesting that there were not photos of the children with the pope. Media were not permitted by the Vatican.
Fr. Sirico on Caritas in Veritate
I've been waiting to read Fr. Sirico's views. [I read recently his brother is the actor who played Paulie Walnuts on Soprano's. Hmmm...] Excerpt from WSJ today:
In his much anticipated third encyclical, Caritas in Veritate (Love in Truth), Pope Benedict XVI does not focus on specific systems of economics -- he is not attempting to shore up anyone's political agenda. He is rather concerned with morality and the theological foundation of culture. The context is of course a global economic crisis -- a crisis that's taken place in a moral vacuum, where the love of truth has been abandoned in favor of a crude materialism. The pope urges that this crisis become "an opportunity for discernment, in which to shape a new vision for the future."
Yet his encyclical contains no talk of seeking a third way between markets and socialism. Words like greed and capitalism make no appearance here, despite press headlines following the publication of the encyclical earlier this week. People seeking a blueprint for the political restructuring of the world economy won't find it here. But if they look to this document as a means for the moral reconstruction of the world's cultures and societies, which in turn influence economic events, they will find much to reflect upon.
Caritas in Veritate is an eloquent restatement of old truths casually dismissed in modern times. The pope is pointing to a path neglected in all the talk of economic stimulus, namely a global embrace of truth-filled charity.
Benedict rightly attributes the crisis itself to "badly managed and largely speculative financial dealing." But he resists the current fashion of blaming all existing world problems on the market economy. "The Church," he writes, "has always held that economic action is not to be regarded as something opposed to society." Further: "Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations."
The market is rather shaped by culture. "Economy and finance . . . can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful ones. But it is man's darkened reason that produces these consequences, not the instrument per se. Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility."
****
GOP Catholics Respond to Caritas in Veritate
Likely owing to the obvious attempts by the American left to conclude that the pope approves their radical agenda and the salivating over Obie's meeting with the pope, the Republican House leadership, Jon Boehner and Thaddeus McCotter, who are Roman Catholics, make a few points. That is good not to cede the field to the likes of pro-abortion Dems such as Jim McGovern et al in the House and U.S. government in general.
---
---
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Republican Policy Committee Chairman Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI) today issued the following joint statement regarding Pope Benedict XVI's new encyclical, Caritas in Veritate:
"Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, is neither an indictment of capitalism nor an endorsement of any political or economic agenda, and ideologues and politicos hoping to spin it as either are destined to be unsuccessful.
"The Holy Father’s central point in Caritas in Veritate is that at times of economic challenge, the inherent dignity of the individual must be preserved and sustained through genuine charity and compassion. This message is clearly distinct from efforts to 'remake' government into a soul-crushing centralized welfare state in which independent citizens are remade into dependent servants. In the encyclical, the Pope stresses that the human being must remain as the center of our free-market system. He warns that individuals, families, churches, communities, and businesses must never become subservient to the state. He emphasizes that the sanctity of all human life must always be protected. And he advocates conservation, not radical environmentalism.
"Caritas in Veritate is not a political document, but rather a complex work that warrants careful and thoughtful contemplation by American Catholics and non-Catholics alike at this time of economic anxiety."
#####
Credit to Michelle
She did wear black, with sleeves and a mantilla. She looks very nice, in fact. Good job...though some commentary has been made on the gift here and here. I think Obie made an effort. At least it pre-dated the 20th C. Did the redemptorists steer him wrong?
Politico's Preview of Today's Meeting
Obie has an affinity for the Catholic Church--as practiced by Fr. Pfleger, I'd wager. George W Bush also has an affinity for the Church. The mutual regard between W and B16 appeared rather genuine and meaningful. We'll see here. When the Pres favors infanticide and euthanasia, it's hard to see how the pope can regard him so warmly. "Common ground" appears to be the buzz word and the name of a movement related to Obie's agenda--or the desire to support his agenda.
--
We'll be out for a while. We'll do the post-mortem later. Again, the black-mantilla watch is on. I don't see how she could screw this up with other recent examples so clear. I really will be surprised if Michelle does NOT follow protocol. I'll be grateful if she does. Her reputation for dressing appropriately and following western protocols is greatly lacking. No wonder she doesn't go to Arabic/Muslim nations where roles and protocol for women are very strict.
--
We'll be out for a while. We'll do the post-mortem later. Again, the black-mantilla watch is on. I don't see how she could screw this up with other recent examples so clear. I really will be surprised if Michelle does NOT follow protocol. I'll be grateful if she does. Her reputation for dressing appropriately and following western protocols is greatly lacking. No wonder she doesn't go to Arabic/Muslim nations where roles and protocol for women are very strict.
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Bishop Contrary to Encyclical?
Oh, dear. Was the pope speaking to the developing nations where workers have no rights? Or to Catholic educators in the Scranton diocese, where the bishop is opposed to their unionization? Dig this, too, the bishop eliminated parish school boards which dealt with teachers in the past. Now they all deal with the diocese. Yeah, let's end those lay boards! At the most, lay boards should be responsible for doing the ground work to aid the pastor in decisionmaking, be advisory.
Catholic Triumphalism
From the Catholic Dems, as if a Dem president has never met a pope before. They and Obie keep thinking it's all about Obama the man. There seems to be this misunderstanding that he's now, Obama the President of the United States of America. The President of the USA is a very important person with lots of power in this world, to do good, we always hope. These pro-abortion Catholic Dems are just gleeful as can be about the meeting tomorrow. Fr Z's fisking of the salivating by Rep McGovern et al in a National Catholic [sic] Reporter write-up.
I met McG's wife in NoVa (before I became a dowdy SO-IL hausfrau, you know--I am pushing 118; I hope I'm not too bad these days!). She was very nice. Interestingly, they lived in NoVa for years while he was a House staffer. So, he represents a district he hadn't lived in for years prior to gaining his seat. The system sucks in that regard--and many others.
Excerpt from Fr Z. Quite funny!
Just off the phone with a teleconference called by the [squishy Kmiec] Catholic Democrats. They had [Catholic pro-abortion] Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro of Connecticut [a member of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus] and [Catholic pro-abortion] Congressman Jim McGovern of Massachusetts [solidly pro-abortion, backed by NOW] speaking about Pope Benedict XVI’s encyclical Caritas in Veritate and about tomorrow’s meeting between the pope and President Obama.
The big question (asked by Michael Paulson of The Boston Globe) was about tomorrow’s meeting. Is it symbolism or is it significant? [Symbolic is significant.]
The representatives were both adamant that this was no mere photo-op. [Based on….?]
McGovern said, "In the past there have been symbolic meetings that amounted to no more than photo-ops and nice press releases. [For example?] But my sense of President Obama is [Get ready for the gushy part…] that he doesn’t do symbolism. [ROFL! Doesn’t he?] He is not going through the motions. This is man who ran for president with a deep desire to change the world for the better. He is a man with a mission." [And no symbolism was involved.]
"I believe that [Obama] really wants to change things," [So do I.] McGovern said. "And I think this pope, with the encyclical that he has issued has put forward a framework not just for the Untied States to follow but for the rest of the world to follow. … [I he suggesting that the Pope Benedict’s teaching in Caritas in veritate andPope, er um, President Obama’s agenda are in harmony?]
"I have high expectations for this meeting. … I believe this meeting has the potential to have a lasting impact, to help not only inspire but to provide—quite frankly—[get this…] the political cover in some cases to move forward in some of these areas that up to this point have been difficult for politicians to deal with." The difficult issues he cited were peace in the Middle East, extreme poverty and hunger. [I would add African issues, too. But, I suspect that these pro-abortion Dems mean something else as well.]
"My expectation and my hope for this meeting tomorrow is that it will be about real things and about results," he said. [Do these well-informed pro-abortion politicans understand that the meeting will be about 15 minutes long, minus the photos?]
***
And for the record, other leaders are meeting privately with the pope as well, including Canadian PM, non-Catholic Stephen Harper, who's got his own Catholic problem of late. Not sure that the problem is of his own making. The bishop should have known better than to give him communion at the state funeral, I'd say. At weddings and funerals, which are attended by non-Catholics often, guests should be informed that communion is for Catholics only.
The pope is also slated to meet this week with the Australian PM Kevin Rudd and the Japanese PM, a Roman Catholic, Taro Aso. Obie isn't the only leader to obtain a private meeting with the Holy Father this week. These may be leaders he had not met previously who are obtaining individual audiences with week while all are assembled in Italy for G8.
****
Obama's State Protocol Dept. strikes again on gag gifts. The St. John Neuman stole was not used by the Saint in life. Read Fr. Z's post including the revealing update.
I met McG's wife in NoVa (before I became a dowdy SO-IL hausfrau, you know--I am pushing 118; I hope I'm not too bad these days!). She was very nice. Interestingly, they lived in NoVa for years while he was a House staffer. So, he represents a district he hadn't lived in for years prior to gaining his seat. The system sucks in that regard--and many others.
Excerpt from Fr Z. Quite funny!
Just off the phone with a teleconference called by the [squishy Kmiec] Catholic Democrats. They had [Catholic pro-abortion] Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro of Connecticut [a member of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus] and [Catholic pro-abortion] Congressman Jim McGovern of Massachusetts [solidly pro-abortion, backed by NOW] speaking about Pope Benedict XVI’s encyclical Caritas in Veritate and about tomorrow’s meeting between the pope and President Obama.
The big question (asked by Michael Paulson of The Boston Globe) was about tomorrow’s meeting. Is it symbolism or is it significant? [Symbolic is significant.]
The representatives were both adamant that this was no mere photo-op. [Based on….?]
McGovern said, "In the past there have been symbolic meetings that amounted to no more than photo-ops and nice press releases. [For example?] But my sense of President Obama is [Get ready for the gushy part…] that he doesn’t do symbolism. [ROFL! Doesn’t he?] He is not going through the motions. This is man who ran for president with a deep desire to change the world for the better. He is a man with a mission." [And no symbolism was involved.]
"I believe that [Obama] really wants to change things," [So do I.] McGovern said. "And I think this pope, with the encyclical that he has issued has put forward a framework not just for the Untied States to follow but for the rest of the world to follow. … [I he suggesting that the Pope Benedict’s teaching in Caritas in veritate and
"I have high expectations for this meeting. … I believe this meeting has the potential to have a lasting impact, to help not only inspire but to provide—quite frankly—[get this…] the political cover in some cases to move forward in some of these areas that up to this point have been difficult for politicians to deal with." The difficult issues he cited were peace in the Middle East, extreme poverty and hunger. [I would add African issues, too. But, I suspect that these pro-abortion Dems mean something else as well.]
"My expectation and my hope for this meeting tomorrow is that it will be about real things and about results," he said. [Do these well-informed pro-abortion politicans understand that the meeting will be about 15 minutes long, minus the photos?]
***
And for the record, other leaders are meeting privately with the pope as well, including Canadian PM, non-Catholic Stephen Harper, who's got his own Catholic problem of late. Not sure that the problem is of his own making. The bishop should have known better than to give him communion at the state funeral, I'd say. At weddings and funerals, which are attended by non-Catholics often, guests should be informed that communion is for Catholics only.
The pope is also slated to meet this week with the Australian PM Kevin Rudd and the Japanese PM, a Roman Catholic, Taro Aso. Obie isn't the only leader to obtain a private meeting with the Holy Father this week. These may be leaders he had not met previously who are obtaining individual audiences with week while all are assembled in Italy for G8.
****
Obama's State Protocol Dept. strikes again on gag gifts. The St. John Neuman stole was not used by the Saint in life. Read Fr. Z's post including the revealing update.
Not My Kids
I think we will opt out of the swine flu scare this fall. I won't let them stick my kids. I just don't get the hype about all this.
When in Rome...
Oh, dear! Seignior Berlusconi's tendencies rubbing off? Zarkozy looks on with amusement. Posted on the front of Drudge.
I See Now
Why the Brits are claiming Michelle Obama has fashion sense. All you have to do is skim down the gossip articles about how all the Brit pop culture people--most of whom I've never heard of--dress. Absolutely vulgar more often than not. Indeed, that Michelle merely covers her "swim suit private areas" while not being as dowdy as Mrs. Brown, is adequate to be considered a fashion icon in that nation.
If you dare, skim down the right hand side here at the UK Daily Mail.
If you dare, skim down the right hand side here at the UK Daily Mail.
If Killing Babies is Okay, We Have No Moral Boundaries
Lifesite News has a story of the violence and morbid "taunting" (?) of the pro-life pray-ers by the staff at the Rockford IL Planned Parenthood abortuary. Fr Z offers this story up as good cause for NOT toning down pro-life rhetoric. We are dealing with killers, here, after all.
The vehicle reportedly struck Scott Griffin on Wednesday as it drove into the driveway of the abortion facility, where pro-lifers say workers frequently drive recklessly in an apparent attempt to intimidate those praying and handing out pro-life literature.
The vehicle reportedly struck Scott Griffin on Wednesday as it drove into the driveway of the abortion facility, where pro-lifers say workers frequently drive recklessly in an apparent attempt to intimidate those praying and handing out pro-life literature.
"The dark colored SUV the clinic worker was driving hit Scott Griffin with the mirror on the passenger side so hard the mirror was slammed back into the vehicle and Mr. Griffin was stunned and bruised," Rockford pro-life veteran Kevin Rilott said.
"After the clinic worker hit him she didn't slow down or stop to see how he was - she just kept going."
Another witness, George Lambert, said the female clinic worker "really nailed the guy hard - I couldn't believe she didn't even stop to see how he was."
City Attorney Kerry Partridge refused to comment on whether any suspects had been questioned or charged, saying only that the case is still under investigation.
--A bit disturbing that the city hasn't taken action as if pro-lifers are okay to be attacked.
LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) has previously reported on the bizarre behavior of the owner and a local abortion supporter at Rockford's Northern Illinois Women's Center. Pro-life protesters have been regularly harassed and grotesque displays remain in the abortion mill's windows, including rubber chickens hanging from nooses, a crufied rubber chicken, a nun doll in a miniature coffin and displays with crucifixes and the words "Jesus loves you a**holes."One of the most recent additions to the facility's displays is a hand-written sign that reads "NIWC 50,000; JC 50," which indicates the number of abortions performed at the Northern Illinois Women's Center in comparison to 50 saved from abortion by "J.C." - or Jesus Christ.
In March, LSN reported that two young African-American men persuaded their female companion not to abort her child after they were horrified by the rubber chickens hanging by nooses in the abortion facility windows, which pro-lifers at the scene pointed out to them.
***
These people in the abortuary are very morally ill.
Americans on the Encyclical
Well, as you know, Catholic morality is not poll-driven. If it were, gay activity would be hunkey dorey, we'd have all kinds of feminist priestesses, there'd be no sin. In short, we'd look like the Episcopal Church USA.
The moral question for me is to what extent do the pope's ideas fall under prudential judgment or are they required to be adhered to or advocated in this case? Without a reformed UN, I don't see the global economic regulator as a viable option. It would be meant to destroy the U.S. I think that reasoned and productive international agreements, multi- or bi-lateral would be a way to get toward these goals of the pope's. The pope released the document with the G8 in mind, not with Obie at the center, for goodness sake.
Now, the questions are not "Do you agree with Pope Benedict XVI..." But general about whether an international organization should regulate the U.S. economy. But, it is true that Americans' opposition to such international regulation would imply opposition to B16's idea.
The moral question for me is to what extent do the pope's ideas fall under prudential judgment or are they required to be adhered to or advocated in this case? Without a reformed UN, I don't see the global economic regulator as a viable option. It would be meant to destroy the U.S. I think that reasoned and productive international agreements, multi- or bi-lateral would be a way to get toward these goals of the pope's. The pope released the document with the G8 in mind, not with Obie at the center, for goodness sake.
Now, the questions are not "Do you agree with Pope Benedict XVI..." But general about whether an international organization should regulate the U.S. economy. But, it is true that Americans' opposition to such international regulation would imply opposition to B16's idea.
Just 17% of Americans agree with Pope Benedict XVI’s call for more international regulation of the U.S. economy, as part of a new papal encyclical urging world leaders to steer the world economy in a more moral direction.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of American adults believe international organizations like the United Nations should have less influence on U.S. economic policy, not more. Twenty-four percent (24%) are not sure.
Investors are even more adamant: 67% favor less international regulation of the American economy.
Seventy-three percent (73%) of Republicans and 63% of adults not affiliated with either major political party say international organizations should have less influence over the U.S. economy. Democrats are more closely divided, but a plurality (44%) agree.
The pope released the encyclical on Tuesday in advance of his meeting later in the week with President Obama, but only 25% of Americans believe it is possible to regulate the world economy to steer it in the direction of morality and a pursuit of the common good.
Forty-seven percent (47%) say it is not possible to regulate the world economy to achieve these goals. Again, however, a substantial number (28%) are not sure.
****
Curbing "Undesirable Populations"
That is what Justice Ginsburg thought that Roe v Wade was about. Dear G*d. She only reaffirms Margaret Sanger's objective in abortion as eugenics.
JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.
****
Q: If you were a lawyer again, what would you want to accomplish as a future feminist legal agenda?
JUSTICE GINSBURG: Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don’t know why this hasn’t been said more often.
Q: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.
Q: When you say that reproductive rights need to be straightened out, what do you mean?
JUSTICE GINSBURG: The basic thing is that the government has no business making that choice for a woman.****
Send Them FEMA Trailers
The poor people still displaced from the L'Aquila earthquake were kept away from the G8 spouses touring the damage. One thing I hope that Michelle learns from this trip is that white people suffer too. Not all whites, even in America, are privileged and wealthy. The article also indicates that the women met with the pope yesterday.
***
This article says that M Obama skipped the meeting since she and Obie are having a private audience on Friday. Will she wear black with sleeves and a mantilla? That's the Q.
***
Photo in this article. [scroll down past the fashion commentary on Mrs. Brown.] ALL the women have head-coverings. Asian & African women have their bright colored head-coverings co-ordinating with their native dress. Nice photo! [I still need to figure out how to post photos herein. Bear with me.][The Brit press are really enjoying that the Italian equalities minister was once a topless model. They single out the US first lady when she's involved, rather than focus on their own Mrs. Brown in the first instance.]
***
This article says that M Obama skipped the meeting since she and Obie are having a private audience on Friday. Will she wear black with sleeves and a mantilla? That's the Q.
***
Photo in this article. [scroll down past the fashion commentary on Mrs. Brown.] ALL the women have head-coverings. Asian & African women have their bright colored head-coverings co-ordinating with their native dress. Nice photo! [I still need to figure out how to post photos herein. Bear with me.][The Brit press are really enjoying that the Italian equalities minister was once a topless model. They single out the US first lady when she's involved, rather than focus on their own Mrs. Brown in the first instance.]
Year for Priests: Today's Priest
Today's Priest: Fr. Joseph Trapp
Ordination date: May 23, 1959
Status: Active diocesan priest
Current assignment: Pastor, St. Joseph parish, Bentonville
--NOTE: What a long tenure of service to the Church! God bless Fr. Trapp. Keep him in good health and strength.
****
Ordination date: May 23, 1959
Status: Active diocesan priest
Current assignment: Pastor, St. Joseph parish, Bentonville
--NOTE: What a long tenure of service to the Church! God bless Fr. Trapp. Keep him in good health and strength.
****
Prayer for Fr. Trapp and all priests in the Belleville diocese and in the Church worldwide:
by St. Therese of Lisieux
O Jesus, eternal Priest,
keep your priests within the shelter of Your Sacred Heart,
where none may touch them.
Keep unstained their anointed hands,
which daily touch Your Sacred Body.
Keep unsullied their lips,
daily purpled with your Precious Blood.
Keep pure and unearthly their hearts,
sealed with the sublime mark of the priesthood.
Let Your holy love surround them and
shield them from the world's contagion.
Bless their labors with abundant fruit and
may the souls to whom they minister be their joy and
consolation here and in heaven their beautiful and
everlasting crown. Amen.
Peacenik First Family
Should the daughter of the president of the U.S.A. sport a t-shirt with a global political message while abroad with her father who's at multilateral meetings...and who just sold us out by agreeing to unilaterally disarm his people? [I say unilaterally b/c Russia doesn't have to do it. It's like global warming policies. Only Obie's really going to do it.] The UK press picked up on the anti-nuke t-shirt right away. I hope she's not planning to tour any churches in those short shorts. I also hear that short shorts are not what Americans should wear in Europe. It's just not the style there. I certainly got that strong warning for Russia for safety reasons--not to look like tourists and easy marks for gypsies. Long pants or skirts.
A Woman Religious on Current Religious Life
Fr Z posts a summary by a reader of a longer article by a nun who's justifying the modernist practices of some/many women religious orders. Reader's summary with Fr Z's BOLD emphasis and red commentary:
Sister Sandra is looking at data on religious life and interpreting it, and in so doing draws some conclusions. Primary among her conclusions is that Vatican II has established vowed religious as an entirely new way of Religious Life in the Church. She writes, "we (and many Congregations like us) are in the process of becoming, or already have become, a new form of Religious Life that has emerged since Vatican Council II." She says that because of Vatican II, "We are a Religious Congregation. But, as we will discuss in the next major section, our life also involves some very significant discontinuities with earlier understandings of enough of the constitutive dimensions of that life that it is really a new form in relation to traditional apostolic Congregations." [A least she is up front about "discontinuity".] She then goes on to refer to Canon Law’s references to the various forms of religious life, and says that her IHM sisters and others like them are emerging as a new form of Religious Life just as the mendicant orders did centuries earlier. [Perhaps… but they sought approval for their way of life.] The term “new form of Religious Life” would have been used, for example, of the mendicants when they became recognizably distinct from the monastics. Both forms were forms of Religious Life; the mendicants were simply, as a form, younger or newer. We are probably becoming, or have already become, a new form in this sense, i.e., a new form of Religious Life."
Now, here comes what I thought was the most interesting part, and what shows her true disdain for the Church. She makes the explicit claim that they are not bound to the institutional Church and that their mission and ministry is their own, not the hierarchy’s. [Winner winner chicken dinner! You knew that had to follow as the night the day.] She writes, "Religious Life, as a charism or gift of the Spirit, has a prophetic identity and role in the Church. [Ahhhh…. that’s their excuse. They’re prophets! They don’t have to be bound by law, or even the vows they took.] That role is not an office or official task assigned to us by the hierarchy and governed by them. This is important, especially in regard to ministry. Although we are public persons in the Church in virtue of our public profession and the approval of our Constitutions, we are not, as Religious, agents of the institutional Church. That is part of the job description of the ordained." [And, perhaps that means they are not at the service of the Church. Also, if they do have some relationship to their Constitutions, don’t those Constutitions still describe an purpose for their institutes or orders? Don’t they still describe an apostolate? A reason to exist?]
Despite her claim of discontinuity, she then goes on to claim that the modern religious are actually part of an organic development of religious life, and she compares the mobility of the early mendicants, the new form of Religious Life, with the modern day women religious, who live in apartments instead of convents, and so forth. She also goes on to interpret canon law (and she admits perhaps outside of the intent of the writers of the 1983 code) so that it permits her desire not to wear the habit. She says that by the 1983 canon placing the regulation of habit in the hands of "proper law," i.e. the law of the Order, that it is perfectly justified that they simply wear a gold ring on their wedding finger to represent their vows.
Anyway, if you’d like I can prepare you a more detailed synopsis of the document, but it’s pretty much along these lines. She attempts to prove her view of Religious Life as being in continuity with the 2,000 year teaching of the Church while at the same time explicitly admitting that she is seeking to establish a new order in total discontinuity with the Church.
****
Sister Sandra is looking at data on religious life and interpreting it, and in so doing draws some conclusions. Primary among her conclusions is that Vatican II has established vowed religious as an entirely new way of Religious Life in the Church. She writes, "we (and many Congregations like us) are in the process of becoming, or already have become, a new form of Religious Life that has emerged since Vatican Council II." She says that because of Vatican II, "We are a Religious Congregation. But, as we will discuss in the next major section, our life also involves some very significant discontinuities with earlier understandings of enough of the constitutive dimensions of that life that it is really a new form in relation to traditional apostolic Congregations." [A least she is up front about "discontinuity".] She then goes on to refer to Canon Law’s references to the various forms of religious life, and says that her IHM sisters and others like them are emerging as a new form of Religious Life just as the mendicant orders did centuries earlier. [Perhaps… but they sought approval for their way of life.] The term “new form of Religious Life” would have been used, for example, of the mendicants when they became recognizably distinct from the monastics. Both forms were forms of Religious Life; the mendicants were simply, as a form, younger or newer. We are probably becoming, or have already become, a new form in this sense, i.e., a new form of Religious Life."
Now, here comes what I thought was the most interesting part, and what shows her true disdain for the Church. She makes the explicit claim that they are not bound to the institutional Church and that their mission and ministry is their own, not the hierarchy’s. [Winner winner chicken dinner! You knew that had to follow as the night the day.] She writes, "Religious Life, as a charism or gift of the Spirit, has a prophetic identity and role in the Church. [Ahhhh…. that’s their excuse. They’re prophets! They don’t have to be bound by law, or even the vows they took.] That role is not an office or official task assigned to us by the hierarchy and governed by them. This is important, especially in regard to ministry. Although we are public persons in the Church in virtue of our public profession and the approval of our Constitutions, we are not, as Religious, agents of the institutional Church. That is part of the job description of the ordained." [And, perhaps that means they are not at the service of the Church. Also, if they do have some relationship to their Constitutions, don’t those Constutitions still describe an purpose for their institutes or orders? Don’t they still describe an apostolate? A reason to exist?]
Despite her claim of discontinuity, she then goes on to claim that the modern religious are actually part of an organic development of religious life, and she compares the mobility of the early mendicants, the new form of Religious Life, with the modern day women religious, who live in apartments instead of convents, and so forth. She also goes on to interpret canon law (and she admits perhaps outside of the intent of the writers of the 1983 code) so that it permits her desire not to wear the habit. She says that by the 1983 canon placing the regulation of habit in the hands of "proper law," i.e. the law of the Order, that it is perfectly justified that they simply wear a gold ring on their wedding finger to represent their vows.
Anyway, if you’d like I can prepare you a more detailed synopsis of the document, but it’s pretty much along these lines. She attempts to prove her view of Religious Life as being in continuity with the 2,000 year teaching of the Church while at the same time explicitly admitting that she is seeking to establish a new order in total discontinuity with the Church.
****
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Life Without Mercy
What an expression that might mean many things. Here, it is the sentence handed down to a man who killed an unborn baby while seriously injuring its mother, in a shooting. This is a pro-life verdict and sentence.
Abortion is death without mercy.
Abortion is death without mercy.
You Knew It Was Coming, Pete!
Massachusetts--in these trying economic times, where surely the state's budget it very tight--is suing the federal government on the current definition of marriage. Oh, gosh, no. There's no way that we can be affected by the choice of another state to approve gay legal unions and call them "marriage." Also, this is a huge waste of federal and state and court budget resources. Let the gay people sue themselves, if they must. They are a very, very small portion of the human population. Why should we turn ourselves into pretzels for them?
A Novel Way to Care for the Poor & Sick
A very coherent doctor who spoke with such clarity (on Sean Hannity just now) included an idea that could be pursued to help the poor obtain medical care: a pro bono obligation that would be a deduction in taxable income (or tax obligation, I guess). What a novel idea. Interesting that lawyers have that for themselves to give legal representation to the poor. I bet they get to write off those expenses. Why can't doctors do that? I think this is an extra-ordinarily good idea. It may not eliminate poor and elderly using government insurance that currently exists, but it would sure minimize such uses and expenses to the taxpayers. It would certainly obviate any need to implement the "health care reform" bills on tap right now.
Any thoughts from doctor or lawyer or other public policy experts who read here?
Any thoughts from doctor or lawyer or other public policy experts who read here?
More Reax on Caritas in Veritate
Fr. Raymond de Souza:
The economic crisis, which Benedict blames on investments that were motivated for “speculative” reasons rather than authentic development, highlights that moral behaviour — honest, generous and not selfish — makes for good economics, as well as good ethics.
“Development is impossible without upright men and women, without financiers and politicians whose consciences are finely attuned to the requirements of the common good.”
Forty years after Paul VI wrote on these questions, Benedict acknowledges that billions of people in vast areas have lifted themselves out of poverty — principally through markets which unleash the creativity and productivity of the human person. Benedict’s focus, however, is not on the successes of the past generations, but on those who have not yet participated in the prosperity of recent decades.
He calls for massive redistribution of wealth, protecting social security systems, strengthening labour unions, combating hunger by investments in rural life, enhancing access to employment, avoiding excessive protection of intellectual property especially in health care, granting access to world markets for the agricultural produce of poor nations, more open immigration policies and a significant increase in foreign aid. Indeed, Benedict argues the welfare systems in rich countries should be made more efficient, curbing bureaucratic waste, with the savings redirected to foreign aid.
****
The last papal encyclical on economic matters was written in 1991 by John Paul II, who made a significant break with his predecessors in emphasizing the positive role of business, free markets and the role of creativity in the economy. He went as far as to say that economic liberty is an essential liberty alongside religious liberty, political liberty and legal liberty.
Benedict has taken a substantial step back from that analysis — the role of the entrepreneur and the potential for wealth creation are secondary. The primary focus is on redistributive solutions to economic disparities. How to reconcile the two approaches remains a task for theologians and economists to work out.
****
Fr de Souza points out some of the things that concern me. I wonder how developed nations feel about the idea of rooting out fraud and sending the savings abroad--how do recipients of those funds feel about it? As far as charitable giving, while I don't have #s in front of me, the U.S. is the most generous of nations for private and public giving. Oh, and to protect social welfare systems, we need to have more babies who become productive adults to contribute to the system. Some of these prescriptions enumerated in the document don't sound well-thought out for their practicality.
----
Action Institute has a full web page dedicated to the encyclical. links to a variety of articles about the document. [Fr Sirico's own article pre-dates the release, so it's irrelevant at this point.]
From the Acton "Powerblog"--Top Post (there are actually multiple views from multiple Acton members posted at the blog)
The economic crisis, which Benedict blames on investments that were motivated for “speculative” reasons rather than authentic development, highlights that moral behaviour — honest, generous and not selfish — makes for good economics, as well as good ethics.
“Development is impossible without upright men and women, without financiers and politicians whose consciences are finely attuned to the requirements of the common good.”
Forty years after Paul VI wrote on these questions, Benedict acknowledges that billions of people in vast areas have lifted themselves out of poverty — principally through markets which unleash the creativity and productivity of the human person. Benedict’s focus, however, is not on the successes of the past generations, but on those who have not yet participated in the prosperity of recent decades.
He calls for massive redistribution of wealth, protecting social security systems, strengthening labour unions, combating hunger by investments in rural life, enhancing access to employment, avoiding excessive protection of intellectual property especially in health care, granting access to world markets for the agricultural produce of poor nations, more open immigration policies and a significant increase in foreign aid. Indeed, Benedict argues the welfare systems in rich countries should be made more efficient, curbing bureaucratic waste, with the savings redirected to foreign aid.
****
The last papal encyclical on economic matters was written in 1991 by John Paul II, who made a significant break with his predecessors in emphasizing the positive role of business, free markets and the role of creativity in the economy. He went as far as to say that economic liberty is an essential liberty alongside religious liberty, political liberty and legal liberty.
Benedict has taken a substantial step back from that analysis — the role of the entrepreneur and the potential for wealth creation are secondary. The primary focus is on redistributive solutions to economic disparities. How to reconcile the two approaches remains a task for theologians and economists to work out.
****
Fr de Souza points out some of the things that concern me. I wonder how developed nations feel about the idea of rooting out fraud and sending the savings abroad--how do recipients of those funds feel about it? As far as charitable giving, while I don't have #s in front of me, the U.S. is the most generous of nations for private and public giving. Oh, and to protect social welfare systems, we need to have more babies who become productive adults to contribute to the system. Some of these prescriptions enumerated in the document don't sound well-thought out for their practicality.
----
Action Institute has a full web page dedicated to the encyclical. links to a variety of articles about the document. [Fr Sirico's own article pre-dates the release, so it's irrelevant at this point.]
From the Acton "Powerblog"--Top Post (there are actually multiple views from multiple Acton members posted at the blog)
This basic truth, however, has never weighed heavily with the post-Vatican II Catholic left (most of which is hovering on or over the edge of 60). For them, like the secular Left, everything is political. Hence we can expect plenty of “proof-texting” of Caritas in Veritate. Proof-texting is the art of taking statements from a text to establish the validity of particular claims, even though the text itself, when read as a whole, does not support such contentions.
Catholic leftists have, for example, emphasized the pope’s references to what he considers to be the need to bolster social security systems in the wake of globalization (CV 25). They neglect to mention, however, that Benedict has a somewhat different vision of social welfare - one that is more decentralized, less bureaucratic, and more civil society-orientated (CV 60) than the creaking state incubators of soft despotism slowly turning Western Europe into a global economic irrelevancy.
Sometimes, however, proof-texting is not enough. Hence we find Catholic leftists more-or-less ignoring Benedict’s insistence (echoing John Paul II) that life issues – specifically abortion, euthanasia, and the eugenic planning of births - are at the core of justice questions and that to ignore these specific issues is to acquiesce in enormous damage to human culture.
They are also deeply unhappy with Caritas et Veritate’s repeated referencing of Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical Humane Vitae, which reaffirmed orthodox Christianity’s vision of sexual morality, because many of them have invested enormous energy over the past 41 years trying to nuance away or outright deny Catholicism’s defined teachings in these areas.
Of course Caritas in Veritate expresses plenty of prudential judgments with which Catholics on the right and left may legitimately take issue. It cannot be said enough: Catholics are free to disagree among themselves and even with the pope about those matters the Church considers prudential - which includes the overwhelming majority of economic policy-issues, but not subjects such as abortion and euthanasia — as Benedict himself affirmed in a 2004 letter to the then-archbishop of Washington D.C.
***
It is unfortunate that the Action Institute doesn't have any direct response itself to the economic content of the encyclical. Fr de Souza is right that the apparent retreat from economic liberty is a bit disappointing. The overemphasis on government's role is very European, frankly. Obie must be pleased with this stuff.
Secular Reviews of the Encyclical
Get Religion scours the web for Brit and US secular media views on Caritas in Veritate. The couple of non-spiritual points that jump out at me are concern for the idea of a world-wide institution to oversee financial markets. The document appears to prefer a reformed U.N. to take on that task. That seems to be the most objectionable aspect of the document to me. Yes, there is concern for the developing world's nations having a voice in international policy-making and treaties.
The document also seemed to acknowledge that some policies of the undeveloped world are holding the people back. The talk about rights of workers to organize does not seem to be meant for the developed world, where such rights are firmly established (and in the US we might be more concerned about a worker's right not to organize with others). The messages are not just for the U.S. and Europe, but we should be aware of those that relate to our nation. By the way, the document does not denounce or recommend outlawing markets, as if it could be done. It talks about moral participation and responsible roles for government--yes, an over-generalized statement.
The document also seemed to acknowledge that some policies of the undeveloped world are holding the people back. The talk about rights of workers to organize does not seem to be meant for the developed world, where such rights are firmly established (and in the US we might be more concerned about a worker's right not to organize with others). The messages are not just for the U.S. and Europe, but we should be aware of those that relate to our nation. By the way, the document does not denounce or recommend outlawing markets, as if it could be done. It talks about moral participation and responsible roles for government--yes, an over-generalized statement.
A Word of Support
Drudge is highlighting Michelle in sheath, fitted dresses in Rome. This is very European in summer. It's fine. Though, given the formality, it's good to have a smart jacket on hand, as would do in DC. I'd wear sheath in the summer and have a coordinating jacket on hand.
The real question has to do with, if she plans to meet the Holy Father with Obie Friday, will she wear appropriate black, including sleeves and more importantly, a mantilla. It is customary. I also read once that Catholic monarchs are to wear white dresses and mantillas.
****
Thurs Addendum: I gotta tell you, I remarked to my huz a couple of nights ago how gauche it was to see all those faux blondes (now Dana "What was the Bay of Pigs?" Parino is blond as Suntan Barbie) in sleeveless dresses and knit tops on FOX. Where are their jackets and sleeves. Too much skin. Greta is the most respectable woman on that network. She dresses in business blouses with collars and jackets over them. She's not quite as blonde either. It seems that Bill O'R requires 2 blondes for each segment. Even Rush jokes about them manufacturing the lip-glossed blondes. [OK. There are some pretty brunettes but they are few.]
The real question has to do with, if she plans to meet the Holy Father with Obie Friday, will she wear appropriate black, including sleeves and more importantly, a mantilla. It is customary. I also read once that Catholic monarchs are to wear white dresses and mantillas.
****
Thurs Addendum: I gotta tell you, I remarked to my huz a couple of nights ago how gauche it was to see all those faux blondes (now Dana "What was the Bay of Pigs?" Parino is blond as Suntan Barbie) in sleeveless dresses and knit tops on FOX. Where are their jackets and sleeves. Too much skin. Greta is the most respectable woman on that network. She dresses in business blouses with collars and jackets over them. She's not quite as blonde either. It seems that Bill O'R requires 2 blondes for each segment. Even Rush jokes about them manufacturing the lip-glossed blondes. [OK. There are some pretty brunettes but they are few.]
Year for Priests: Today's Priest
Today's Priest: Fr. Charles W. Tuttle
Ordination date: June 8, 1974
Status: Active diocesan priest
Current Assignment: Canonical pastor, St. Augustine Parish, Breese; pastor at St. Anthony's, Beckmeyer [his bio doesn't have both assignments listed; other google information turned this up including at other diocesan links]
****
Ordination date: June 8, 1974
Status: Active diocesan priest
Current Assignment: Canonical pastor, St. Augustine Parish, Breese; pastor at St. Anthony's, Beckmeyer [his bio doesn't have both assignments listed; other google information turned this up including at other diocesan links]
****
Prayer for Fr. Tuttle and all priests in the Belleville diocese and in the Church worldwide:
by St. Therese of Lisieux
O Jesus, eternal Priest,
keep your priests within the shelter of Your Sacred Heart,
where none may touch them.
Keep unstained their anointed hands,
which daily touch Your Sacred Body.
Keep unsullied their lips,
daily purpled with your Precious Blood.
Keep pure and unearthly their hearts,
sealed with the sublime mark of the priesthood.
Let Your holy love surround them and
shield them from the world's contagion.
Bless their labors with abundant fruit and
may the souls to whom they minister be their joy and
consolation here and in heaven their beautiful and
everlasting crown. Amen.
PETA Has a Point
You know, when you listen to a PETA person, as I am on Laura Ingraham, they are right that we must treat animals humanely and that there is unnecessary brutality in animal husbandry ("factory farms") and slaughter houses in the process of providing meat for food for us people. I agree that such activities should be conducted morally. Okay. Yet, I eat meat and I would never have a cat or dog or any pet--maybe a fish--in my home. I am very allergic to cats; I think dogs yield the similar allergy. I will not clean up after pets. We had dogs growing up. They belong outside. Our neighborhood doesn't do fences.
Laura I. asked her guest whether she is pro-human-life. It appears that the guest may be herself to some wiggly extent, but of course, many PETA types are pro-abortion. I won't quibble that much with their group, but it is a serious moral incongruency. Sure.
The point I thought of when I started listening is that many people who are "moderate" on abortion, or even progressive Catholics who care more about "social economic justice" will say as we do about animals. Sure, you're right, it would be nice if we had fewer abortions, but, well, sometimes it's necessary. We need to eat juicy steaks; we need to kill babies that prevent us women from having lucrative careers. So, you know....some life has to be sacrificed.
I am quite sure, underneath it all, that we have greater moral justification for using animals to meet our human needs, than we do for killing nascent (or any age) human life that is inconvenient to our perceived needs and underlying ambitions. The Church teaches that human life is of greater value than animal life. Period.
****
UPDATE: Animal rights and animal husbandry groups come out of the woodwork on this stuff. I did not condemn any one's farm or animal-raising. They must have people assigned to do google searches and respond to stuff that concerns them. If a farm uses brutality, it sounds bad to me. I don't know which farms do what. I don't search as I shop. I'm not an uber-animal rights person, believe me. I hate dogs and cats--in my house especially.
Laura I. asked her guest whether she is pro-human-life. It appears that the guest may be herself to some wiggly extent, but of course, many PETA types are pro-abortion. I won't quibble that much with their group, but it is a serious moral incongruency. Sure.
The point I thought of when I started listening is that many people who are "moderate" on abortion, or even progressive Catholics who care more about "social economic justice" will say as we do about animals. Sure, you're right, it would be nice if we had fewer abortions, but, well, sometimes it's necessary. We need to eat juicy steaks; we need to kill babies that prevent us women from having lucrative careers. So, you know....some life has to be sacrificed.
I am quite sure, underneath it all, that we have greater moral justification for using animals to meet our human needs, than we do for killing nascent (or any age) human life that is inconvenient to our perceived needs and underlying ambitions. The Church teaches that human life is of greater value than animal life. Period.
****
UPDATE: Animal rights and animal husbandry groups come out of the woodwork on this stuff. I did not condemn any one's farm or animal-raising. They must have people assigned to do google searches and respond to stuff that concerns them. If a farm uses brutality, it sounds bad to me. I don't know which farms do what. I don't search as I shop. I'm not an uber-animal rights person, believe me. I hate dogs and cats--in my house especially.
Russians Have Seen Their Share of Marxists
And know a fraud when they see one. I guess the NYT is very puzzled. Ah, it must be because they're racists, the NYT posits.
****
I can tell you from firsthand experience that Russians do not like Muslims and to make the point clear to us Americans, the N-word is used to describe Muslims. Now, it happens that Obie has Muslim connections and is dark-skinned. They might very well not be open to him for racial, plus they have a great skepticism of government that we don't in the U.S.
“We don’t really understand why Obama is such a star,” said Kirill Zagorodnov, 25, one of the graduates. “It’s a question of trust, how he behaves, how he positions himself, that typical charisma, which in Russia is often parodied. Russians really are not accustomed to it. It is like he is trying to manipulate the public.”
Others suggested that after decades of social turmoil, Russians were simply exhausted with politics, and had been so often disappointed by Western leaders that they were not inclined to get excited by the latest one. Asked by one Moscow newspaper what they expected to come out of Mr. Obama’s visit, most respondents had the same answer: traffic jams.
Some Obama aides said they were struck by the low-key reception here, especially when compared with the outpouring on some of his other foreign trips. Even Michelle Obama, who typically enjoys admiring coverage in the local news media when she travels, has not had her every move chronicled here.
In the background is the question of race, which Russians view through a complicated prism. For decades, Soviet propaganda hammered home the idea that the United States was an irredeemably racist country, as opposed to the Communist bloc nations. But Russia in recent years has been plagued by racist violence against people from the Caucasus region and Central Asia, as well as other immigrants.****
I can tell you from firsthand experience that Russians do not like Muslims and to make the point clear to us Americans, the N-word is used to describe Muslims. Now, it happens that Obie has Muslim connections and is dark-skinned. They might very well not be open to him for racial, plus they have a great skepticism of government that we don't in the U.S.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
