<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

The Eve of Lent
Heading off to Des Moines for the day: meeting my brother Lynn for a hockey game, a nice meal, and some hanging out, in reverse order. It's just about a 200-mile drive from the house. I'm looking forward to a double treat--the time with my brother and the quiet of the drive to help get me ready for Lent. I've had many good Lents. 1970, the months before I was baptized; 1988, my last one in my hometown; 1986, the one I began at Madonna House in Combermere, Ontario; a few I lived in Iowa. I got over my long-held apprehension by looking at it (at my dear wife's suggestion) as one of those retreats I love to go on. When I'm off at a monastery or retreat center, it's not so excruciating to give up internet, tv, desserts, staying up late, etc. and giving in to quiet time, prayer, and reflection. Someobdy in the St Blog's commentariat (can't remember who) had an outstanding suggestion for Lent: getting up at the sound of the alarm. No snooze button. No lazing in bed. That seems like a perfect way to start a Lenten day. We'll see if I can manage it tomorrow on the heels of that three-hour drive home from the game, heading into 6:15AM Mass at the parish. Let's keep one another in prayer today, eh?

Monday, February 27, 2006

Gaudium et Spes 21
Gaudium et Spes 21 is a bit lengthy, but bear with it. It capsulizes a wise approach in dealing with atheism and some of the problems often thrown in the face of the Church. In her loyal devotion to God and (humankind), the Church has already repudiated (cf. Pius XI, encyclical letter Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937: AAS 29 (1937), pp. 65-106; Pius XII, encyclical letter Ad Apostolorum Principis, June 29, 1958: AAS 50 (1958) pp. 601-614; John XXIII, encyclical letter Mater et Magistra May 15, 1961: AAS 53 (1961), pp. 451-453; Paul VI, encyclical Ecclesiam Suam, Aug. 6, 1964: AAS 56 (1964), pp. 651-653) and cannot cease repudiating, sorrowfully but as firmly as possible, those poisonous doctrines and actions which contradict reason and the common experience of humanity, and dethrone (humankind) from (their) native excellence. Okay. First, we Christians hold that faith is ennobling. The overall thrust and result of Christianity is a heightened sense of "excellence" as the council bishops taught it. The sense that faith exists to denigrate (or drug) the masses must be vehemently disproved. Still, she strives to detect in the atheistic mind the hidden causes for the denial of God; conscious of how weighty are the questions which atheism raises, and motivated by love for all (people), she believes these questions ought to be examined seriously and more profoundly. Typical Vatican II optimism: know the questions raised by one's philosophical adversary. Answer the questions on the terms given in the public debate. Those who seek the title "apologist" might do well to consider this tack. The Church holds that the recognition of God is in no way hostile to (human) dignity, since this dignity is rooted and perfected in God. For (a person) was made an intelligent and free member of society by God Who created him (or her), but even more important, he (or she) is called as a son (or daughter) to commune with God and share in His happiness. Human happiness, not human suffering is God's will. She further teaches that a hope related to the end of time does not diminish the importance of intervening duties but rather undergirds the acquittal of them with fresh incentives. Christians possess a duty in the earthly life. Most of all, the duty is to work as an agent of charity and justice, lest believers be betrayed by a false passivity and non-believers be scandalized by unconcern: By contrast, when a divine instruction and the hope of life eternal are wanting, (human) dignity is most grievously lacerated, as current events often attest; riddles of life and death, of guilt and of grief go unsolved with the frequent result that (people) succumb to despair. Go to God with questions say the bishops: Meanwhile every (person) remains to him (or her-)self an unsolved puzzle, however obscurely he (or she) may perceive it. For on certain occasions no one can entirely escape the kind of self-questioning mentioned earlier, especially when life's major events take place. To this questioning only God fully and most certainly provides an answer as He summons (people) to higher knowledge and humbler probing. Atheism is treated as an illness, and the remedy is twofold: The remedy which must be applied to atheism, however, is to be sought in a proper presentation of ... (1) the Church's teaching (2) as well as in the integral life of the Church and her members. The understanding is that apologism is two-fold: not just imparing information, but living the faith. For it is the function of the Church, led by the Holy Spirit Who renews and purifies her ceaselessly,(cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Chapter I, n. 8: AAS 57 (1965), p. 12) to make God the Father and His Incarnate Son present and in a sense visible. Not just real presence, but a visibly evident one as well. Consider this advice: This result is achieved chiefly by the witness of a living and mature faith, namely, one trained to see difficulties clearly and to master them. Many martyrs have given luminous witness to this faith and continue to do so. This faith needs to prove its fruitfulness by penetrating the believer's entire life, including its worldly dimensions, and by activating (the believer) toward justice and love, especially regarding the needy. What does the most reveal God's presence, however, is the ... charity of the faithful who are united in spirit as they work together for the faith of the Gospel (cf. Phil. 1:27) and who prove themselves a sign of unity. Social gospel Catholics should be cheered by this assessment, which is a true one, I believe. While rejecting atheism, root and branch, the Church sincerely professes that all (people), believers and unbelievers alike, ought to work for the rightful betterment of this world in which all alike live; such an ideal cannot be realized, however, apart from sincere and prudent dialogue. Shared goals imply the dialogue needed to get things done. Also, freedom is to be a given, as we read in the earlier document Dignitatis Humanae: Hence the Church protests against the distinction which some state authorities make between believers and unbelievers, with prejudice to the fundamental rights of the human person. The Church calls for the active liberty of believers to build up in this world God's temple too. She courteously invites atheists to examine the Gospel of Christ with an open mind. The concern shared with all people is for human dignity. The Church of Gaudium et Spes possesses a quiet confidence about faith, belief, and purpose. I can see how this message would be heartening to Third World or other oppressed persons. It's a matter of right perspective, but I agree that Christian faith must be evident to non-believers, especially in the way faith is practiced publicly and how believers interact with the needy. Above all the Church knows that her message is in harmony with the most secret desires of the human heart when she champions the dignity of the human vocation, restoring hope to those who have already despaired of anything higher than their present lot. Far from diminishing (humankind), her message brings to (their) development light, life and freedom. Apart from this message nothing will avail to fill up the heart of (the person): "Thou hast made us for Thyself," O Lord, "and our hearts are restless till they rest in Thee."(St. Augustine, Confessions I, 1: PL 32, 661)
Looking For It
I have to wonder about some of the St. Blogetariat. A bit of a furor over "nakedness" here. Aside from a deceptive post title, "Get naked this Lent with Richard Rohr," the author seems to have forgotten a classic Pauline message of comfort: What will separate us from the love of Christ? Will anguish, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or the sword? (Romans 11:35) The author confesses: I really don't go looking for this stuff. Sure seems like it, taking a fairly well-known Scriptural allusion out of context. I hear there's a Catholic charities board in Boston defying their new cardinal-in-waiting. Why not go over there to play?
Moon In Perspective

Mimas orbits over Saturn's night side in this January image from Cassini. Two remarkable things ... First is the size of Saturn's moons in relation to the planet. Mimas is not a giant like our own moon, which ranks number six in the solar system. Mimas is about as wide as the state of Ohio--one-eighth our moon's diameter. Saturn is about nine times as wide as the earth. Even Titan is dwarfed by Saturn, and the other moons are pretty insignifcant in size.

Below is a simulated view of Mimas as seen from Saturn. That little fingernail clipping at center is Mimas. It's about a fist away from either the left or right edge of the view below. This moon appears about as big as one of the eyes in the "man in the moon" does from your backyard.

Second, note the degree of shine on Saturn's night side. That's reflected light from the rings. And though scientists speculate that if all the ring material were put together, the resulting "moon" would be about the size of Mimas. Yet if we were hovering above Saturn cloudtops in a zeppelin at night, the arch of the ring in the sky would be far more glorious than a full moon or rainbow. Don Dixon painted this daytime scene of the rings from Saturn. The night view would be much better.


Two Forms of Yoga
From my friend Tom. If you take Mardi Gras to extremes, be sure to keep your yoga straight. Better yet, hold off on those asanas till the next day.
Young Catholic Journalism
According to CNS, Horizons, the newspaper of the Byzantine Ruthenian Eparchy of Parma (Ohio) has opened up its children's page to children's input. Rita Basalla, principal of Cleveland's St. Mary Elementary School: "The hope is that the students will see how what is taught really does affect our daily lives. The students will become active participants rather than simply receptors of information." A few things: - See how "active participation" has infected non-Roman Catholics? - I don't know if diocesan print media ever circulates significantly to pre-teens. But the effort here should be applauded.
The Armchair Liturgist 8: Ashes Outside of Mass
A timely topic for the series: under what circumstances would you armchair liturgists permit or encourage the distribution of ashes outside of Mass. I had a specific request by e-mail this morning from a parishioner: I work at (a) hospital. (Another parishioner) works with me and we were having a discussion about if as a eucharistic minister could you get ashes at church and give them out like at our work? A couple of women asked if we could do that would we give them ashes at work because when they get home their service is over. How would you respond? - Tell 'em that ashes are not obligatory and if they can't make 6:15 AM Mass, it's not a big deal? - Offer to lead a word service at the hospital (say around noon) and bring ashes to any patients there? Does your parish send people to nursing homes, possibly with Communion? Or is that the priest's job? Note: On many of these armchair liturgy questions, I've already made my call on it. I'm not necessarily looking for advice, though I've been fascinated by the input on these. The intent is to get you thinking about the unusual or odd decisions that parish staffs are confronted with on the liturgy front. PS Trivia question: May non-Catholics receive ashes?

Saturday, February 25, 2006

The Armchair Liturgist part 5B
Okay. Here's what we did with Stations and 24-Hour First Friday Adoration. Last Lent was the first year we did weekly adoration and weekly stations. They were not a favorite of our former pastor, so he alternated them in 2004 and years prior to that. I knew that it is possible to have Stations while the Blessed Sacrament is exposed, but the deciding factor was that some of our parishioners might not. Rather than get into a big educational thing, we (mostly me and the staff with consultation from some of the liturgy committee) decided to do Stations on the four Fridays from March 10th through 31st. Another factor in that decision was that last year I led Stations three times. Many of the groups that had traditionally led stations started begging off a few years ago, and the expanded schedule ended up in my lap. Now it's a whole new set of leaders--which is a good development. Though I didn't talk about it with the braintrust behind 24-Hour Adoration, I thought a singular focus for their group these first few months was an important consideration.
The Armchair Liturgist part 7
Interestingly, there is a push from a few parishioners to go Perpetual Adoration. How would you liturgy folks out there handle it? Do you think I should or would be supportive of it? Do you piece it together in stages or take the plunge? Do you need a separate chapel for it?
More on the "Gay Takeover"
CNS reports from Rome on a seminar entitled "The Homosexual Question: Psychology, Rights and the Truth of Love." It seems one-sided to me. And a bit paranoid. In a public conference Feb. 23, professors teaching the seminar spoke at length about the threats posed by the gay rights movement and said current legislative proposals around the world could have far-reaching effects on how society is structured. Comments like this always slay me. Depending on whom you ask, homosexuals make up 4 to 10% of the human population. The majority prefer not to bother with marriage and family. I'm curious to know how this would have the impact some say it would. Perhaps if heterosexual marriage were outlawed. But nobody's suggested that. Perhaps if heterosexuals began choosing gay activity because they found it (?) an improved way to be. But I haven't heard of that. Except in prisons. French Msgr. Tony Anatrella, a psychoanalyst and consultant to the Pontifical Council for the Family, said gay couples were unable to give children the model of sexual difference that any child needs to develop his or her own sexual identity. Does Anatrella suggest that genital sexual expression is the only model for sexual identity? I've hardly ever heard gay people advocating they are a "third sex," though I know that some extremists advocate five, not two. He referred to one recent study, which he said showed that 40 percent of children raised by homosexuals became homosexuals themselves. Msgr. Anatrella said there were other psychological "collateral effects" of being raised by a same-sex couple that show up only in adulthood, including anxiety over sexual differentiation. When it comes time for these young people to form their own families, they suffer because they have not learned to accept the sexual difference between two adults, he said. A few things: - First, parenting by SSA individuals and couples should be studied. Some SSA parents suggest they impart advantages to their children because of certain healthy aspects of their approach to relationships. I can understand how it would be difficult for extreme findings to gain a fair hearing. It's got to be worth the attempt. - Second, Anatrella's comments lean toward it all being about the adults. It's not. Even if certain risk factors were elevated for children of gay couples, the baseline of comparison is not healthy heterosexual couples. It's life in a non-permanent home versus being parented by someone other than the "ideal" heterosexual couple.
Pope Addresses Union: Three Fidelities
Zenit reports. Want to bet that fidelity to profit is not one of them? 1. Fidelity to workers The person is the "measure of the dignity of work" (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, No. 271). For this reason, the magisterium has always recalled the human dimension of the activity of work and has redirected it to its true aim, without forgetting that the biblical teaching on work culminates in the commandment to rest. 2. Fidelity to democracy ... which alone can guarantee equality and rights to everyone. Indeed, there is a sort of reciprocal dependence between democracy and justice that impels everyone to work responsibly to safeguard each person's rights, especially those of the weak and marginalized. Fascinating take. Imagine: democracy is an institution dependent on justice and dedicated to the protection of the weak. 3. Fidelity to the Church It is not by accident that John Paul II addressed these words to you on 1 May 1995: "The Gospel alone renews the ACLI"; they still mark out the principal route for your association, since they encourage you to put the Word of God at the center of your life and to see evangelization as an integral part of your mission. The brief address was given on the 60th anniversary of the Italian Christian Workers' Associations.

Friday, February 24, 2006

Using and Knowing Your Bibles
There's concern in the cafeteria that Americans are getting cheated on Bible translations. Well, no. No wonder EWTN uses the Ignatius (=RSV Catholic Edition) Bible instead of the bland NAB. Well, at least it goes with the equally bland, flawed English translation of the Mass we still have. Both approved by Rome. By this reasoning the curia just wants to keep us down on the farm. The Canadians are permitted to use the NRSV in liturgy. If the new, more faithful and poetic one ever makes it out of committee (the usual suspects are holding it up), maybe we'll get a better Bible translation, too. Oh yeah, that wonderful desire to make everything accessible, until it sounds like elementary school poetry. Actually, the movement is to make the Bible more faithful to the Latin Vulgate. Sorry; beauty, poetry, and even common sense is not part of the orthodox equation in this instance. I'm not sure why Gerald is upset, though. There's a misunderstanding that the RNAB is the only approved Bible for Catholics. Wrong. It's the only approved one for liturgy. If you're talking personal study, prayer, or bedtime reading, there are a number of approved translations and even paraphrases out there. Don't let the liturgy wars distract your focus.
Jubilee!
Celebrate us! (At the risk of not sounding sufficiently theocentric.) My bishop columnizes about our diocese's jubilee. It's an unusual one, in that 1956 saw the merger of two 19th century sees, Kansas City and St Joseph. I pray that our patrons, Our Lady the Immaculate Conception, and her just and faithful spouse, St. Joseph, will assist us in giving proper honor and glory to Our Lord Jesus Christ in this historic year. Amen
Friday, Beer, and Beef
Rock on "Indult." And no, it's not what you think. Check out his web site--I go daily. His recent posts gently noting various inconsistencies and fumbles on the Catholic Right have him labelled as a "progressive" and a "liberal" in some corners. Tell the truth, I think the progs just know how to keep their head down when the whispers are flying. Plus, the self-styled orthodox seem to have adopted the motto: "He who is not with us is against us." (And pity the poor Eldad and Medad that cross us.) St Patrick's Day falls on a Friday, a Lenten Friday to boot. What do you think? Let them off the hook with permission to down some tradi corned beef? Six years ago I suggested to my then-pastor to give those requesting an "indult" a choice: abstain from meat or alcohol. A nasty smile emerged on his face. I think he's assigned to the Basilica near the Field of Dreams. Maybe Dyersville Catholics will have the Choice. Rock mentions Cardinal Krol resisted the Saturday night Mass till 1983. Philly wasn't on my prog radar in those days, so I never heard of that. But let me shcok the St Blog's world by stating I'm not so sure Saturday night Masses are such a good practice.

Thursday, February 23, 2006

Gaudium et Spes 20
Gaudium et Spes continues its analysis of atheism: Modern atheism often takes on a systematic expression which, in addition to other causes, stretches the desires for human independence to such a point that it poses difficulties against any kind of dependence on God. Those who profess atheism of this sort maintain that it gives (people) freedom to be an end unto (themselves), the sole artisan and creator of (their) own history. They claim that this freedom cannot be reconciled with the affirmation of a Lord Who is author and purpose of all things, or at least that this freedom makes such an affirmation altogether superfluous. Favoring this doctrine can be the sense of power which modern technical progress generates in (humankind). I think there is the lure of technology, yes. I wonder how much reliance on human independence is a staking out of personal independence in response to the experience of injustice. In other words, "Now that I'm finally free of my ... abuser/corrupt government/the people who tried to keep me down"--fill in the blank--" and God wasn't with me in any of this, why should I lean on him now?" Not to be overlooked among the forms of modern atheism is that which anticipates the liberation of (people) especially through his economic and social emancipation. This form argues that by its nature religion thwarts this liberation by arousing ... hope for a deceptive future life, thereby diverting him from the constructing of the earthly city. Consequently when the proponents of this doctrine gain governmental rower they vigorously fight against religion, and promote atheism by using, especially in the education of youth, those means of pressure which public power has at its disposal. They're talking marxism, right? The marxists certainly hammered away on the passive approach to life's problems: "Just wait till you die and heaven awaits in the next life." Of course that would be unsatisfactory. Not necessarily from a selfish view, but even from the view of wanting a better life for one's neighbors, friends, and even one's children.
Frenzy
Mark Shea can be a snappy writer sometimes. But occasionally, he's just clueless. And not enjoyable. Like this headline: 16 States Have Citizens Sensible Enough to Think that Experimenting on Children with Gay Adoption is a Bad Idea 34 States say, "Hey! What could it hurt?" If only the question centered on those nasty gays stealing children from nice, well-mannered, suburban straight couples. Thing is, that about 127,000 kids are waiting to be adopted. Right now. No legal entanglements. No stalking birth parents. No overseas trips. No foreign red tape. C'mon people, pony up in line. There's about three to four times as many kids in foster care. If the hierarchy wants to make determinations about the moral quality of prospective parents when overseeing the adoption of children, that is within their privilege. But unless 127,000 kids start disappearing off the adoption rolls next week, protests against gay people adopting children will fall under one of two categories: - ignorance of the adoption need in the US - immorality in promoting the abandonment of parentless children
Who Speaks For Religious Orders?
I saw Archbishop Rode's comments on religious the other day. I almost commented on it, but I often ask myself, "Why would I?" I'm not a vowed religious. I'm not a formal associate of an order. One of CNS's paraphrases: Since the Second Vatican Council, he said, some orders have abandoned their traditional fields of apostolate, only to lose themselves in uselessness or unproductive activities. The result is stagnation, (Rode) said. Rode is the prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. He is a Vincentian, so perhaps he speaks with somewhat more credibility than a diocesan priest. But I confess my weariness of non-religious attempting to frame the debate in terms of the liberal/conservative divide or the flashpoints of dress and charism. Or men defining what role women are to have. Rode concedes: Throughout the history of the church, religious orders and congregations were always the ones pushing forward, bringing dynamism and a call for holiness. They were always on the front lines. And religious orders, especially women, were certainly at the forefront of Vatican II reforms. It might be argued that some lost their bearings in the process. (Of course, some Catholics would say that everybody with the exception of the SSPX lost their bearings.) Compared to the lukewarm renewal in the Liturgy of the Hours, or Catholic education, or the Sacrament of Reconciliation, women religious were considerably less fearful in implementing Vatican II. Joan Chittister is not St Blog's favorite daughter, but I didn't care much for Amy's comment on her thread treating this issue: But Sister Joan's stance towards the present situation is just odd. She writes of how healthy her community is now - why? Not because it's, you know, growing, but because the individuals within that community are free, creative and led by the Spirit where ever. It's one of those examples of how making your definitions clear is so important. Most of us would define a healthy community as one which gives life to others, and, to put it bluntly, reproduces. I've visited the Erie Benedictines. I would say that their community seemed healthy to me. You can tell a lot about it from its liturgy, and I saw more than just liturgy during my visits. Is reproduction not going on there? I saw younger sisters there. And I've known a number of women about my age and younger heading into non-traditional orders. Taking Chittister's definitions out of context doesn't do the discussion justice. I could just as easily surf SSPX web sites and come up with out-of-context photos and commentary that shows that for schismatic clergy, it's all about finery, privilege, and narcissism. But what would be the point? So I posted: (S)elf-determination has always been a hot spot for religious orders. What's the role of the local bishop? Rome? superiors? All that stuff. The question of self-determination is not about women saying, "It's about me, me, me!" It's about a community defining its own charism. Not having well-intentioned folks from outside the order or community imposing someone else's view. If the liberal orders have so little to offer, to less attractive to young people, and have so little future, why is there so much ink expended on them? Wishing the orders will die out -- especially actively rooting for it with a knowing smirk -- strikes me as greatly uncharitable. The future will tell. To this comment, the usual paranoia in reply: Because before they die out they're responsible for forming the next generation of young people, many of whom won't only avoid joining their liberal religious orders, but having been steeped in their liberal view of Catholicsm won't actively join in the life of the Church in general. Last time I looked there were quite a few Catholic liberals. You'd have a hard time saying we're dying out. The blogosphere seems to have an endless run of frustrating stories on how the Church has too many liberals involved in parishes. ... because they still have a lot of money and a lot of control over Catholic institutions. I am somewhat concerned that some of the few "late vocations" to these orders are single people who see a lot of money and power for the taking. I think I see. No people, but lots of money. Somehow, the USCCB has been duped by this. Why else would they foster a religious retirement collection? One of my mother's friends once let loose with a bit of profanity in the church restroom. A sister, not in a trad habit, made a comment to her. When relaying the story over their morning coffee, our neighbor asked my mom, "How do they expect us to know how to behave if we can't tell who they are anymore?" There's a convenience in seeing women religious as Hollywood portrays them. Most of all, they're absolutely non-threatening. I won't say that I've always had smooth sailing with sisters. I'm a product of Catholic schools and I've worked in parish ministry for almost twenty years. I've met women religious who have been petty, condescending, bitter, mean, unjust, and just plain unreligious. They tend to stand out from the usual run of women who embody a sense of sacrifice, commitment, tenacity, and best of all: faith. Some religious need no habit to distinguish themselves from the ordinary believers. And if women religious have somehow missed the boat by becoming lawyers, college presidents, campus ministers, diocesan bureaucrats, nurses, psychologists, spiritual directors, and peace activists, then I haven't seen it from my experience of the many sainted people I've known. Some of the anger toward religious has roots in bad personal experiences. And some of it is no doubt a function of preferring women religious to be safe figures. You can see a trad habit at several paces away. But usually, real holiness is within, and a person needs to get closer to encounter it.
Pluto Makes a Case for Planethood
Not even the sun's inner planets have rings. It seems Pluto may have them, according to a research team from the Southwest Research Institute. Not even the solar system's inner planets (all much larger than Pluto) have rings. The controversy in astronomical circles is whether or not Pluto qualifies as a true planet. It seems there's not such a cut-and-dried boundary, especially since an object larger than Pluto has been discovered orbiting the sun a bit farther out. If Pluto is a planet, then this other body certainly deserves the classification. But what if dozens of Pluto-sized orbs are found in the cold orbits beyond Neptune? Do they all get the designation? Rings or not, I still think the better case is to demote Pluto from planethood. Look at the size over to the left. The moon is about one-half bigger than Pluto. If we do find dozens of buddies for Pluto, where would we draw the line between planet status and big comet? Pluto is about 1300 miles across. Is the dividing line 1000? 500? Charon, named for the boat captain who ferried the dead across the river Styx to Pluto's underworld realm, is a bit bigger than Texas. The new moons are about the size of a county: 36 and 30 miles across each, as far as we can tell. It will be interesting to see what they are named. Proserpina, the consort of the underworld god, will probably be reserved for that larger body. Moons are always named for people, and Pluto has some associates: Sisyphus (condemned to roll that stone up the hill), Cerberus, the three-headed hound. Maybe Orpheus and Eurydice. Any would be better than P1 and P2. More of a concern will be the aim of the New Horizons probe when it arrive at Pluto in 2015. The moons P1 and P2 are farther out from Pluto than the large moon Charon. The four rings systems of the outer planets are all contained around and inside the orbits of the largest moons. If Pluto has rings they might be in the path set for New Horizons.

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

North Americans Iced
The Canadian and US men's hockey teams lose in the Olympic quarterfinals. This side of the Atlantic, the blame game commences. I'm looking forward to seeing some hockey, though. Meeting up with my bro for a game next week in Des Moines.
SLJ Reunion
A feature from CNS: Dan Schutte, Tim Manion and Jesuit Fathers Bob Dufford, John Foley and Roc O'Connor were St. Louis Jesuits before they were "the" St. Louis Jesuits who created a new kind of Scripture-based contemporary music for use at Mass. But a series of e-mail conversations among the men starting in 2003 resulted in a reunion in a recording studio in Portland, Ore., last year. Even Manion came for a few days to add guitar and vocals to a new collection, "Morning Light." "It was an amazing experience. ... It was like magic," Schutte said. "It's like we were whole again." Their Feb. 18 concert in Washington was one of five reunion appearances the group planned for 2006. Manion was scheduled to join them for a concert in St. Louis this Friday. Lest detractors of contemporary sacred music think it's all about old guys (How old is my hero Claudio Monteverdi, anyway?) these people put a young face on liturgical music. (And they're not going away.) Those Jesuits guys appear to have aged gracefully, anyway.
More Faith at the Olympics
CNS bit on guys from the US bobsledding team: Curt Tomasevicz, a Catholic "acolyte" from Shelby, NE, and Brock Kreitzburg, a Christian chaplain from Akron, Ohio, said that sharing a strong faith in God has acted as a special bond between them as they prepare to go for medals with their Olympic teammates Feb. 24-25. "There aren't too many Christians, especially, who are authentically living out (their faith), in the world of athletics," Kreitzburg said. "I think it's because athletics is very self-centered, a self-motivated world." Acolyte? Not being snarky; just asking.
Conscience, Examination of
Archbishop Forte gives one at the end of his pastoral letter. It's based on the Ten commandments. Part 4 of the letter is up today, too. It's well worth reading.
Armchair Liturgist Part 6
Seemingly in keeping with CS's theme of the week, Zenit's weekly liturgy question is on the Sacrament of Reconciliation: Please, I should like to know if it is correct to give general absolution to, say, a group of 15 elderly people living in a nursing home and brought together for Mass in a small room. Please note: (a) It is impossible to hear their confession individually as they are placed very close to each other in their wheelchairs. (b) When asked how many are going to receive Communion (to consecrate the necessary quantity of hosts) they all want to receive. Could I prepare them with a good act of sorrow and then give them general absolution, making it clear to the nurses and relatives that this absolution is not for them. And if general absolution is permitted in this case, what about the obligation of confessing grave sins later on? H.D., Melbourne, Australia If you want to see Fr McNamara's reply, go here. But feel free to weigh in from the armchair, if you care to do so.
Musician Placement in Catholic Worship

Amy's pondering it. I have more to say than might fit in a reasonably-sized comment, so let's kick off the discussion here. I think the origins and motivation of the Catholic Cantor Placement deserves more analysis. It's not going away any time soon - in fact, the determination of music groups to be placed in the front, along with their cantor, doesn't show any signs of slowing down - most church renovations/new construction feature that front position, which is just really too bad. If all it is is repositioning in the "front," then I'd agree. I do think people did give the matter a lot of thought in the 60's and 70's. Lofts were a problem for a number of practical reasons: - Sometimes the organist and choir didn't want upstart groups there. - Sometimes there wasn't room - Most old churches were wired for sound amplification in the sanctuary, so that's where groups could make use of existing technology. - Up front was also closer to members' families, and facilitated the group sitting in the pews and paying attention during the readings, the homily, etc.. And I'm sure that some people were nightclub or coffeehouse refugees and craved the attention of a Sunday morning audience in addition to what they had the night before. But that's little different from musical performing hijinx that often go on in choir lofts. Most upfront musicians in the early days after Vatican II had a significant difference from performers: they didn't get paid--sometimes the parish budget didn't even provide expenses. I've been to a couple of Masses this past year in which there was, indeed a cantor, but he (in both cases, different parishes) was in the rear, in the choir loft. Very nice, and no one in the congregation seemed to mind. If one accepts the notion that ministry implies a relationship, the American expectation might be that one would see the person. The psalmist should certainly be seen, preferably at the ambo. On hymns that everybody sings, I don't see why the music can't be announced, then led by the organ (or whatever instrument) without a singer on the mic. Granted, many parishes, including my own, are so used to a singer on mic they are actually loathe to sing the very few times they don't have a songleader. My cantors know to back off from the mic after the hymn or acclamation starts. If a congregation is trained to follow the organ rather than arm waving, then yes, they shouldn't mind not seeing a person singing the songs they know they should sing. What's missing from the discussion, however, is a frank appraisal of the rationale behind this. What contemporary Catholic music groups and cantors are attempting to emulate, it seems to me, isn't the classical Protestant structure in which the choir was, indeed, in front, but the more relaxed, mostly evangelical praise-band-group model. And why are they seeking to imitate it? Because it seems, in their eyes, to work. I think Amy misses the real reason here: good ol' fashioned American pragmatism. If you don't have enough people for a choir, use a single singer. If you can't hear the person, get them a microphone. If you don't have mic jacks anywhere but in the sanctuary, use them. If your parish and neighbors have been using altered pre-conciliar churches as models for the past decades, you imitate that when you build a new building. Trust me: we're not getting ideas from Joel Osteen or Jerry Falwell. When I arrived at my current parish, the renovation debate was raging: where will the musicians be? It was presented as a two-option deal: Go to the loft. Go up front. And all I could think of was, "What a damfool way to run a renovation!"

Go to the loft? Go up front? Which one? The obvious answer is neither one. We have a cross-shaped building, so neither the loft nor upfront provide any particular advantage. Lofts do facilitate hearing a choir because of elevation combined with being at the long end of a building. Singing around corners is another matter. The choir and cantor/songleader/psalmist are part of the assembly. They lead music when it is time to sing. Otherwise they are just plain lay people, not performers, not paid professionals, not showpieces. If the acoustics don't break the deal, a choir belongs as a part of the assembly: neither in a loft, not "up front."

In my mind, two traditional layouts are ideal for finding a middle ground that satisfies the requirements for good liturgy. On the left is the antiphonal layout. People sit on both sides of a wide aisle facing the altar, ambo, font, and one another. Put a eucharistic chapel on one end, a pipe organ on the other, leave room for lots of processions, and have at it. On the right is the most traditional liturgical layout: around a common table. Just like at the Last Supper or at the Passover table. In each case, the musicians are not banished to a loft nor are they put up on a stage. For that matter clergy are no longer on the performing stage either. It's not about individuals or groups. It's about worshipping God, and facilitating the service needed at common worship.

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Liturgy, Beauty, Beholder's Eye, etc.
The New Liturgical Movement blog has a post on "Beauty is of the Essence of Liturgy," reprinted from the Fruit of Contemplation blog. Natch, I had to put in my two cents' worth. Shawn from NLM responded to my post: Still, one thing you can say in such cases, even when done not well, its objectivity at least helped prevent some of the problems we have today in the liturgy, and at very least it maintained its theocentricity. I'm not ready to concede the 1970 Missal isn't theocentric. A Catholic would be obliged morally to presume it is. Masses of either era have particular problems with local clergy or people, and there are doubtless stumbling blocks within each rite. Most of today's problems are rehashes of yesterday's unsolved problems. As I posted there, In a way, those who celebrated the reformed rite poorly are persisting in a groundless trust in pre-conciliar rubricism. - Just change the Mass and it will all be fine. - Just follow the directions faithfully and it will all be fine. But come now Todd, I know of various liberal liturgists (by no means fans of the old rite) who will admit that the revolutionary liturgical changes that swept through did do damage to the faithful and resulted in losses. Sure. But that doesn't mean the changes weren't justified. The implementation was indeed poor in many respects. But that's what we have: flawed human beings who live in our neighborhood doing liturgy in a flawed way. It doesn't mean that liturgical reform is somehow not appropriate or even unnecessary, but it does say something about why the Church, inspired by the Holy Spirit, had always gone by the tried and true method of organic liturgical development. Not always. First, organic development wasn't a strongly articulated conciliar principle. The post-Trent Church pretty much ignored it. Second, the Church has often just gone the route of suppression, rather than development. As for music, that the Church has identified particular forms as having a prominence is a matter of textual record and fact of course. This ought to be taken seriously. As for modern forms, what needs to be looked at it what the Church has decreed in their regard. I originally addressed the point of beauty in the liturgy. What the Church decrees is not always the most beautiful, though admittedly beauty can be something of a personal taste. Taking beauty alone, neither the organ nor plainsong have any particular advantage over any other instrument or genre. If we're talking beauty as the very best of ourselves than we can put into artistic expression in the praise of God, then indeed, the Church is wise to permit a wide range of styles and instruments. But let's not kid ourselves that beauty is the number one argument for many prelates. Personally, I think it should be one of many. But the distinction is in the give-and-take between various factors: faithfulness, catechetical weight, local ability & minimum standards, and culture among others.
The Mystery Worshipper Strikes Again
Just discovered this feature. I like it. MW went to a 6:30 PM holy day Mass at St Patrick's Cathedral in midtown Manhattan. No music. Maybe the tourists want it non-musical or something, but a cathedral church that can't muster an organist for an evening holy day Mass for over a thousand people hardly compares to most any serious liturgical parish. We had choirs for each evening liturgy, though I confess it was practice night for each. Somebody needs to brief the Archbishop of New York and the cathedral rector on GIRM.
Freak of Nature? I Think Not.

More evidence that Upstate New York is not a normal kind of place: icicles don't point down.

Wind blown ice forms on a decorative light house along Lake Erie in Hamburg, N.Y., Friday, Feb. 17, 2006. Winds gusting up to 77 mph knocked out power to at least 1,000 homes and closed schools from Buffalo to Rochester. (AP Photo/David Duprey)

Thanks to my friend Tom for passing this along.


Pax Liturgica
"(T)he Catholic Church continues convinced that, to foster peace and understanding between peoples and men, it is necessary and urgent that religions and their symbols be respected," the Pope said today. Overheard: Lib: Drat! No more making fun of ground-dragging vestments! Trad: Dang! No more David Haas song parodies!
Yet More On Reconciliation
This time from Rome. Zenit has been publishing Chieti-Vasto Archbishop Bruno Forte's pastoral letter on "Reconciliation and the Beauty of God." Part three is here, and the other sections are easily reviewed: Part 1 Part 2 More to follow.
Armchair Liturgist Part 5
Here's a good one for you. The parish has just begun First Friday 24-hour adoration in the church. Lent is coming up. The parish traditionally offers stations of the cross Fridays during the season at 6PM. Do you:
1. Decline to offer Stations on those two Fridays and keep adoration?
2. Cancel adoration because you're covered by weekly adoration/Benediction each Tuesday from 1pm till 7?
3. Pray Stations in church during adoration?
We've made our call, but I'm curious: what would you do?

More on Sin, Penance, and Confession
It's a good topic. Below, John addresses some portions of last night's post. My response follows. John asked, "... why the term 'magical absolution'?" I think this attitude is part of the problem. Using a term like this certainly discourages the use of the Sacrament. Since I was referring directly to the reports of priests who were serial penitents in addition to their activity as serial predators, I think my meaning is clear. While it is true that grave sins are often difficult to disengage from, the reports that sex abusers (or any other persistent sinner) can dodge confessors and be relieved of taking responsibility for making a firm effort to reform probably does far more harm to the image of the sacrament than most anything else. I've heard very little input from the laity along the lines of "Wow! They can forgive a sex abuser dozens of times. My petty little sins should be a piece of cake!" (The pastor) needs to educate his people and inform them that they are sinners and that sacramental forgiveness is essential. He needs to reach the people who are in mortal sin. It's an obligation that comes with Orders. Well, that would be a possible approach when dealing with children. More often adults are led by actions and example. It's a fine line between a priest who has gone overboard in being public with his sinfulness and one who sets an example for parishioners. Bishops are even more of an obstacle at times. Do parish priests cultivate a humble attitude that comes with awareness of being a sinner? I know some in 12 Steps who can do so. And a few others besides. The faithful should pack the Church for Confession; the people should hunger and thirst for the forgiveness that they need and that only this Sacrament offers. And being made clean, they should rejoice and be glad in it. It's not "magical," it's a miracle of grace. Agreed. The question is: how to get there from here. The Vatican II renewal of Penance has been pretty much a failure in that regard. We know the old way didn't do it. The new ways -- such as they are -- don't. Time for a third approach.

Monday, February 20, 2006

Take Sin For Example
Liam and John are having a good discussion below on confession. Feel free to join in; the more the merrier. I'd like to branch off from that discussion on the general sense of sin: how it may be lacking, who provides bad examples for it, how priests may or may not encourage sacramental confession, how it might be well or poorly compared to practice before the council, and how well the reform of the Rite of Penance may have been handled. 1. I do think there's a lightened sense of guilt among Catholics. Guilt and sin, however, are two somewhat different animals. If I had a choice between a sense of guilt and a sense of sin, I'd take the latter. Most of us probably would. The former might include a sense of guilt for situations for which we might not be culpable. It's possible "devotional" confessions include some of that. The few priests I've spoken with about confession seem to have a low opinion of what some penitents bring to the sacrament, and most of that is a misplaced sense of guilt masquerading (or replacing) a sense of sin. 2. I certainly think there's a loss of responsibility in society and in the Church. I wouldn't confine this to the laity alone. Clergy and bishops, whether they realize it or not, are part of the problem. The handling of the sex abuse crisis has done grave harm to the credibility of bishops. Evasive administration, be it in the name of legal protection, ignorance, or whatever, seriously impairs the bishops' example of penitence. The sacrament of penance is gravely harmed when reports surface of serial abusers going to confession over and over again. A penitent must make a sincere act of contrition. A serial sinner clearly needs something more than magical absolution. The sacrament, for a few significant cases has been a means of reinforcing sinful behavior, not a sacramental means of forgiveness. 3. Most parish priests, especially liberals and neo-orthodox clergy, have little idea of how to promote a renewal of the sacrament in their parishes. The reformed rite calls for the cultivation of the sacrament in parishes. Most clergy are going through the motions: either preaching from the pulpit and scheduling hours in accord to what the parishioners need. Or they're supplementing form I with occasional forays into form II. In my mind, the numbers don't add up. Even if priests were successful in developing good practices for the sacrament, they would need to reallocate vast amounts of time to hear the confessions they might hope to get. What would a good celebration of form I entail? The Rite of Penance presumes Scripture. I'd think five minutes would be speedy, perhaps a liturgical abuse. But let's take it. In a parish of 500 households, at five minutes per confession, a confessor could reconcile 1500 sinners in 120 hours. How often should one make a good confession? If monthly, you're talking 25-30 hours a week. Trim it back to the 1/3 who attend Mass on any given weekend, and we're at a more manageable 8-10 hours a week. 4. Who knows if Catholics were better at non-devotional confession before the Council? If we're talking warm bodies in confessionals, 1960 has it all over 2006. On the other hand, that was the only form for the rite: nothing communal, and very few appointments. 5. Maybe we have to face the possibility that further reform and renewal is needed in the sacrament. Society might be ready for it. We have 12 Step programs all over the place that encourage a thorough examination of conscience and a frequent return to said examination as needed. More than half the steps touch on some aspect of taking personal stock, taking responsibility, confessing to another human being, making amends, and maintaining personal health. If Catholics are as bad off as some suggest, the 12-Step groups have eclipsed us. I think there are serious questions concerning how schools and Religious Ed programs handle the sacrament. I think enough adults are adrift and would prefer to take their chances rather than be embarassed in returning to the practice without knowing for sure what to do. Liam and John were critical about confession by appointment, but I can see how that might be very beneficial to someone who wants to come in, chat about the expectations of the rite before taking the plunge directly. And lastly, ten, twenty years of form III was not enough time to assess if it was working as part of the sacramental picture. Form III is ideally suited to devotional confessions. If a parish offered it monthly, it might well inspire more people to take advantage of forms I and II. Enough for tonight. Discuss, if you wish.

Gaudium et Spes 19

Gaudium et Spes 19 begins with a basic religious tenet, then begins to address the phenomenon of atheism as well as some related notions.

The root reason for human dignity lies in (the) call to communion with God. From the very circumstance of (their) origin (humankind) is already invited to converse with God. For (people) would not exist were (they) not created by God's love and constantly preserved by it; and (they) cannot live fully according to truth unless (they) freely acknowledge that love and devote (themselves) to (their) Creator.

This would be the psalmist's thinking:

When you take away their breath, they perish and return to the dust from which they came. When you send forth your breath, they are created, and you renew the face of the earth. (Ps 104:29b-30)

And the council bishops are careful to speak of two sets of folks: those who have never been exposed to God, and those who have rejected God:

Still, many of our contemporaries have never recognized this intimate and vital link with God, or have explicitly rejected it. Thus atheism must be accounted among the most serious problems of this age, and is deserving of closer examination.

One might thnik a more accommodating view would be to see the phenomenon of atheism as an opportunity, rather than as a problem. But the council counts it as a "serious problem."

The word atheism is applied to phenomena which are quite distinct from one another. For while God is expressly denied by some, others believe that man can assert absolutely nothing about Him. Still others use such a method to scrutinize the question of God as to make it seem devoid of meaning. Many, unduly transgressing the limits of the positive sciences, contend that everything can be explained by this kind of scientific reasoning alone ...

The flip side of this would be those who insist that God can indeed be deduced by natural observation ...

... or by contrast, they altogether disallow that there is any absolute truth.

Yes, we have a recognition of relativism.

Some laud (humankind) so extravagantly that their faith in God lapses into a kind of anemia, though they seem more inclined to affirm (people) than to deny God.

And they mean a humanism? Just for the record, I think we need to take the liturgy scuffles over "we" songs with a grain of salt when it comes to this principle. A critic would be hard-pressed to get any singing parish, much less any composer to admit the liturgy is heading to a self-congratulatory state. That's an unverified criticism coming from many people who have their own ax to grind when it comes to the issues of art, leaderhsip, liturgy, and personal taste.

Again some form for themselves such a fallacious idea of God that when they repudiate this figment they are by no means rejecting the God of the Gospel. Some never get to the point of raising questions about God, since they seem to experience no religious stirrings nor do they see why they should trouble themselves about religion.

Yes, the notion of raising questions: that's a difficult one for some non-atheistic folk. GS 19 notes that some people bring laudable values to their personal approach, but falter when such values are elevated to the level of God. Recent human experiments in marxism, capitalism, and other non-Christian philosophies.

Moreover, atheism results not rarely from a violent protest against the evil in this world, or from the absolute character with which certain human values are unduly invested, and which thereby already accords them the stature of God. Modern civilization itself often complicates the approach to God not for any essential reason but because it is so heavily engrossed in earthly affairs.

Undeniably, those who willfully shut out God from their hearts and try to dodge religious questions are not following the dictates of their consciences, and hence are not free of blame; yet believers themselves frequently bear some responsibility for this situation.

In a document addressed primarily to Christians, if not Catholics, it's appropriate for us to examine the ways in which we fail at evangelization, or worse, we succeed in a sort of anti-evangelization. Chasing people away, that is. Or as one of my commenters so brilliantly put it, SCGS*.

For, taken as a whole, atheism is not a spontaneous development but stems from a variety of causes, including a critical reaction against religious beliefs, and in some places against the Christian religion in particular. Hence believers can have more than a little to do with the birth of atheism.

"More than a little" is a generous statement.

To the extent that they neglect their own training in the faith, or teach erroneous doctrine, or are deficient in their religious, moral or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than reveal the authentic face of God and religion.

This is very much in the "spirit," if you will, of Vatican II. An acknowledgement that we have a "serious problem" in the world. A corollary acknowledgement that Christians bear partial responsibility for it. And a challenge to renew the Church so as to address our culpability.

When I read sections of Gaudium et Spes or other council documents, I find a deep sense of sin -- something which I'm not altogether sure has vanished from the Church. I think certain Catholics have certain blind spots in this regard. The challenge of Vatican II was clearly not a condemnation from the bishops, but a challenge to believers to work more faithfully in the realm of religion and the spiritual.

* Small Church Getting Smaller


Saturday, February 18, 2006

Robinson Walking Backward
Zenit has an interesting interview posted with Father Jonathan Robinson, author of the book "The Mass and Modernity: Walking to Heaven Backward" What I have tried to do in my book is to step outside this ecclesiastical framework and examine how the Enlightenment and Enlightenment-era philosophers -- especially Kant, Hegel and their successors -- changed how people in the West understand and perceive God, man, society, religion, community and much more. I'm sure this is an interesting book. In the interview, Robinson seems to tie in the advent of modern philosophy with Roman Catholic liturgical shortcomings. I don't see how it fits, but maybe it's better to wait for the book. Robinson applies his understanding of Newman, the source of his subtitle: Newman was not preaching the modern idiocy that we have to sin in order to be virtuous, but he was reminding us that bad practice is based on confused and false principles, and it is by an often bitter experience that we finally see the truth a bit more clearly. I think that confused and false principles have seriously damaged the liturgy. That means that any reform, or renewal, of the liturgy will cause us to walk to heaven backward. It's presumed that those confused and false principles date from the Council. But I'd suggest that many of them crept into liturgical practice since Trent. It's hard to believe every priest everywhere, thanks to the bulwark of the 1570 Rite, was able to keep modernism at bay. The Church is supposed to bring something to the world, not accommodate its message to what it thinks Tom, Dick or Harry will swallow. Well, of course it is. No serious Catholic would suggest otherwise. If by authentic liturgical renewal you mean a liturgy based on God's revelation -- and not on our aspirations -- as well as serious preaching based on this same revelation, and finally on an attempt to live holy lives, then nothing more is required. The only effective way of overcoming false views about human nature and the meaning of life is by an effort to present to our times the mysterious reality of the Paschal Mystery in a more vivid and unsentimental way. Robinson has a point here, especially if we understand that the point of Sacrosanctum Concilium was to purge a failing liturgy from the sentimental aspects of tradition. It's hard to see how a fussy focus on particulars: ad orientam posture, fancy vestments, or the appeal of a childhood remembrance of an idealized liturgy can be considered part of liturgical renewal. The original 1962 Rite indult was a concession to clergy who were unable (or unwilling) to adapt. Was such an indult provided with counterweights to encourage deeper prayerfulness or holiness? Of course not. The 1570 Rite--to some eyes--was already perfection on earth. Robinson is correct that liturgy should be about God. Too often we are presented with the false choice: liturgy is about the gathered assembly or about the priest who confects and doesn't need any other mortal body in sight. The truth lies somewhere outside of extremism and somewhere in the realization that authentic liturgical reform will, though with faltering steps, lead is to a sincere worship of God and open to earthly sancitification of the people involved.
Kids Adopted By Homosexual Parents
The water of discussion is pretty well poisoned to begin with, so it's hard to see that saying anything at all about it will come to much good. Amy reports on the Boston Globe editorial. While respecting the church's right to its opinion, it has become increasingly hard to demonstrate what harm might come from gay adoptions. Many studies, including a 2004 article in the journal Child Development, research from 2002 by the Child Welfare League of America, and a major survey in 1995 by the American Psychological Association all conclude that children brought up by single-sex couples were virtually identical to other children in academic performance, socialization, and sexual orientation. A news outlet's editorial staff is entitled to an opinion, but that doesn't stop some Catholics from falling into either the trap of absolutism or snarkiness. Headlines such as "The Globe issues its instructions to the bishops of Massachusetts" cannot help but turn up the heat in discussion. Is it helpful? Does it further the Church's ideals? You tell me. I wasn't wholly impressed with George Rekers's summary of the anti-gay adoption case. Rekers and other commenters at Amy's overlook the basic question I've raised time and time again, usually with little more than evasion and flimsy charges of dissent. Is it wrong to ask: Is the parentless child better off in a group home or in temporary foster situations than being placed permanently with a gay person or couple? Rich Leonardi, to his credit, responds seriously to my question: Regarding the questions you ask at the end of your post, the lack of "permanence" in homosexual relationships is what makes placing children with such couples so risky, i.e., these typically are children who already have experienced disruptive transitions in their lives; we shouldn't be increasing the odds that they will face more of them. No foster or adoption placement is without risk. Many foster and adoptive parents bring their own baggage into the endeavor to bring a child into their home. My experience with state agencies is that social workers are scrupulous and careful in their screening of potential parents. Anita and I had the experience of going through the ringer. I have no reason to doubt that gay couples are examined with any less diligence. Substantial numbers of children remain without parents. Many are in the foster care system, and though they might enjoy some of the benefits of a home life with parents and siblings, foster care is not always permanent. In striving to reunite foster children with birth parents, a great deal of risk is undertaken. In almost all cases, the children would have been better off being adopted during infancy, regardless of the parents' promises or wishes to get their act together. But the legal and social care systems make a presumption in favor of blood over the health of children. For the children of addicts, it's often a no-win scenario: reunification often takes place months or years after initial separation, and the critical ages of 0-3 are messed up with impermanence. If the reunification fails, the children have lost much of their attractiveness to prospective parents. Before they are adopted by gay couples, children are already living in a 100% impermanent situation. By definition--otherwise they wouldn't be available to be adopted. Comparing the birth children of a heterosexual couple to the adopted child of a homosexual couple is a straw man argument. The real comparison is with the life a child would have not being adopted. Parenting instincts are independent of a couple's sex life or sexual orientation. My daughter was not the physical result of my wife's and my marital relationship. Yet our ties with our daughter are not less strong than the ties between biological parents with their biological children. Why? Because parenting, at its root, is love. And love is a choice. Not a biological urging. I remain unconvinced that homosexual people are less capable of choosing to love children and rear them to a healthy adulthood in the context of a family. Their sexual relationship does not enter into child-rearing in the presumed best of circumstances that we would expect of heterosexual couples. And if it did so in a way harmful to a child, no social worker would ever place a child with a sexually damaged couple or person. I think a church organization must come to terms with church teaching, certainly. If a bishop finds he cannot permit involvement in permitting children to be adopted by gay couples, then the solution seems straight-forward: time to withdraw from the business of adoption, and leave it to others. That would be a prudential judgment, in my view. It would not necessarily be the only faithful response to church teaching. But I'm convinced the Church might consider a prudential rather than a strict absolutism in looking at this. It might be one thing if less-qualified gay couples were given the opportunity to adopt over and above more suited heterosexual couples. But this isn't happening. Tens of thousands of children languish in foster care, awaiting adoption, but there are simply not enough parents, single, gay, or straight, willing to fill the need. In the end, it isn't about the parents and their lifestyle. It should be about the children and their needs. I have my own beefs with the adoption process as it runs in the US. (Call me and ask me sometime, and I'll give you an earful you never expected.) Keeping the focus on the parents, their needs and sins and all, reinforces the notion of children as less than fully human and more as possessions to be used by adults. Children have a right to a stable and nurturing home. Every child that goes without such a home is an accusing finger pointed at whomever thwarts the just end of a stable upbringing. The primary morality coming into play involves the best possible result for all unparented children. What the parents are or what they do is secondary, given the understanding that they make the choice to parent needy children in the most healthful and sound way they are able.

Friday, February 17, 2006

"The Sky Is Not Falling!"
Usually when ice melts, it's getting warmer. If Greenland is getting snowier, we have a balance. Maybe. What I'd be worried about (more than Muslims or cultural relativists if I were a European) is the addition of large amounts of fresh water to the North Atlantic. A decrease in salinity could alter the ocean currents (salt water is heavier than fresh) and send the Gulf Stream to Africa. If that happens (and it's happened before) Europe is likely to get a whole lot snowier in the winter. Maybe the Sahara gets green like it was 10,000 years ago. Wouldn't that be a kick? So is global warming a mirage? Part of the problem is that we don't know the climate triggers with absolute certainty. The problem is not necessarily a warmer planet, but the alteration of carefully balanced planet-wide cycles. We wouldn't need to go whole ice age or warm a bit more to see massive shifts in food growing zones around the planet. Ice Age or Warm Earth? Either one spells "Dark Ages" to me.
Liturgical Abuse!
Cardinal Francis Arinze, head of the curial congregation responsible for liturgy, is not having a good week with neo-orthodox nitpickers. Rock provides this photo of him committing that most heinous of liturgical abuses ... wearing the stole on the outside of the chasuble. This on top of his chilly commentary on widening the use of the Tridentine Missal reported earlier this week on CNS: While some have proposed a wider indult to allow use of the pre-Vatican II Tridentine Mass with fewer restrictions, Cardinal Arinze said he is happy with Pope John Paul II's rules, which require the involvement of the local bishop. "When you speak of wider use for everybody, it raises some questions, which have to be examined more carefully," he said. I'm not about to start a Cardinal Arinze Fan Club, but note that Arinze has moved closer to Roger "no 'e'" Mahony on the St Blog's Spit List of Prelates.

Another Olympian of Faith
CNS picks up the faith angle on another Catholic Olympian, Carolyn Treacy of the women's biathlon (skiiing plus shooting). CNS reports: Carolyn Treacy, the so-called underdog biathlete, found the needed calm and inner strength to make the XX Olympic Winter Games by praying a novena to the Infant of Prague. Facing top-notch athletes and harsh, icy weather at the mid-January Olympic trials in Fort Kent, Maine, the 23-year-old native of Duluth, Minn., recited the spiritual prayer "every day, once an hour for nine hours in a row," she told Catholic News Service Feb. 13.

Treacy, who proudly noted she was born on the feast of St. Joseph, March 19, said her Catholic faith helps her commit so much time and energy training to become an Olympian.

"Sometimes I struggled doing the biathlon because I thought of other people with no money and no opportunity to pursue a sport," she said.

The "underdog" on her life plans after the Games: "I've been in biathlon for eight years and this has been my final goal. I'll finish school this year and I'm getting married this summer, so I knew there wouldn't be many more chances."
Papal Reflection on the Hours
Pope Benedict has continued his predecessor's reflections on psalms and biblical canticles begun five years ago. If you're interested in a look back, the Zenit archives have them all. Speaking on the Magnificat (Luke 1:46-55) the pope says: It is a canticle that reveals the spirituality of the biblical "anawim," namely, of those faithful who acknowledged themselves "poor" not only because of their detachment from all idolatry of wealth and power, but also because of their profound humility of heart, free from the temptation to pride, open to saving divine grace. Later he draws upon St Ambrose: In this wonderful commentary on the Magnificat of St. Ambrose I am always moved by this amazing word: "If, according to the flesh, Christ has only one mother, according to faith all souls engender Christ; each one, in fact, receives in himself the Word of God." Thus the holy doctor, interpreting the words of the Virgin herself, invites us to offer the Lord a dwelling in our souls and in our lives. Not only must we bear him in our hearts, but we must take him to the world, so that we too might engender Christ for our times. Let us pray to the Lord to help us to praise him with Mary's spirit and soul and to take Christ again to our world. These psalm commentaries would be useful for Sunday Mass homily preparation, especially as many popular homily resources ignore the second Scripture citation of the Mass.
Arinze on Benedict on the Neocatechumenal Way
Zenit has an interview. I found this tidbit interesting: It stemmed from the results of this congregation's examination of the way in which the Neocatechumenal Way has celebrated holy Mass for many years, as, following the approval of the statutes by the Pontifical Council for the Laity -- for a five-year period -- the rest of the Vatican dicasteries had to effect the approvals in their domain. Our congregation's domain is the liturgy. To carry out this examination, we created a mixed commission of persons named by the Neocatechumenal Way and by our congregation. In the discussions, many practices emerged which they carry out during the Mass. They were examined and it was seen that many of them were not done according to the approved books. A mixed commission? That seems very generous to me. Most often the perception is that Rome works top down, period.
The Shape of Things To Come
Movies, that is, according to Rick Norwood, media reviewer for the sf site. St Blog's hot (and other) spots: The Da Vinci Code by Akiva Goldsman, from the novel by Dan Brown. Goldsman wrote A Beautiful Mind. But he also wrote Lost in Space and Batman and Robin. My prediction: terrific box office, really dumb movie. Coming in 2007: Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian Movie reviews I usually take with a grain of salt. I do latch on to one or two writers who seem to think along the same lines as I do. Norwood mostly has my take on tv sf. So if it makes the anti-DVC crew feel any better, the sf take on expecting a "really dumb movie" might do the trick.

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Category S, for Saturn
This storm reported by Cassini scientists would stretch from Texas to Maine. Here's a link for a podcast of the Saturnian lightning. The beginning of Psalm 29 (except for the "waters;" Saturn has no liquid water oceans) seems appropriate: Give to the Lord, you heavenly beings, give to the Lord glory and might; Give to the Lord the glory due God's name. Bow down before the Lord's holy splendor! The voice of the Lord is over the waters; the God of glory thunders, the Lord, over the mighty waters. The voice of the Lord is power; the voice of the Lord is splendor.
On Eagles' Wings
Pat yourselves on the back, you silly liberal environmentalists. Our bird friend's back. Of course, that means that thirtieth century Catholics might actually know what the song is about. Just keep Dick Cheney away from them, okay?
Guilty Pleasure
I confess the one aspect of the Catholic Blog Awards I do like: checking the links for good blogs I've missed. I think Josh should do the blogosphere a favor and once he gets his voting mechanisms figured out and his 2006 banners sent out to the winners, post all the original nominees with links. At least he got the Back Pew and the Angry Twins posted on the link section under the ballot. One major blogger reports he cannot vote. Not that his wife is physically preventing him, but the award page says he's already done so. Maybe it's that voting once every twenty-four hours thing. Did I mention the one vote-one day approach is curious?
What George Could Do
Lots of talk around the blogosphere about Cardinal George and what people think he should do. It runs the usual gamut between resign and keep his hopes up in the face of nasty, liberal persecution. I found a sensible statement on the Cardinal George web site that many neo-orthodoxites might consider: Suspicion and skepticism of every liberal Catholic critical of Cardinal George because of the failures of a few is unreasonable. Oops; wrong quote. Here's the real thing: Suspicion and skepticism of every bishop because of the failures of a few is unreasonable. Wait! They're both good advice. Cardinal George's problem is not, as his letter to Chicago Catholics says, the "embarassment" of another predator priest. It's that his archdicoesan appeal is in full gear this month and ... wait--sorry; that's not the problem either. The cardinal has a credibility problem. He has a priest accused of a horrible crime. His problem is, that in finding out about it, didn't drive out to the parish, sit down, and get the straight (or whatever) stuff from the guy in person. A bishop is responsible for his clergy, no matter who ordained and recruited them. Christus Dominus 16 provides some substantive teaching: Bishops should always embrace priests with a special love since the latter to the best of their ability assume the bishops' anxieties and carry them on day by day so zealously. They should regard the priests as sons and friends (cf. John 15:15) and be ready to listen to them. and: They should be solicitous for the spiritual, intellectual and material welfare of the priests so that the latter can live holy and pious lives and fulfill their ministry faithfully and fruitfully. If my friend or daughter were in trouble, I'd sure as hell not send a lawyer or babysitter to handle the problem. And if Chicago is too big for any archbishop to handle, perhaps four or five more manageable sees can be manufactured out of it. Or minimally, George needs a co-adjutor. The call for the cardinal to resign are premature. He did a good thing by visiting the parish and facing the music. His letter to the Chicago laity was about as strong as skim milk, but he does have the finances of the archdiocese hanging around his neck. If a priest is accused of a sexual crime, I'd expect the bishop to be personally involved. That means victims as well as accused. That so many bishops haven't been involved does not speak well of the understanding of some bishops for basic principles of Christianity, much less church teaching. The fact that the Dallas charter doesn't outline specific pastoral steps to take is no excuse. Cardinal George seems to be a smart guy, for being a conservative. He's well-regarded among his colleagues, and that's not all bad. And if he's late to realizing the danger the American bishops are still wading through, then the next several months will tell if he's suited for his job, won't they? To be sure, people will be watching.
Don't Hate Me Because ...
Wasn't that a shampoo or cosmetics commercial? Don't hate me because I'm beautiful? rocky mountain woman at Busted Halo suggests: Stop condemning Catholics, like myself, who voted for Bush because of his strong stand against abortion. Condemn? Hate? Not me. But I think we can be critical of Catholics who voted Republican, the first party, as Liam reminds us, that included a significant number of supporters who advocated legal abortion. Every time I check, they still have pro-choice or pro-abortion folks among their numbers. And let's check the man himself on his abortion record: Did Texas see a significant drop in the number of abortions in the late 90's? The US since 2001? And so what if the Supremes roll back 20th century decisions on abortions? It's only going to return the matter to the states, and do you really think that state politicians are going to be any more vigorous than their buds campaigning nationally were? The Republicans will never stand behind a Life Amendment--and face it: that's the only thing we can reasonably hope for on the national front politically. The Bishops in the United States called all of us to consider the abortion issue above the other issues based on their document the Gospel of Life. But please, let's not pass off a matter of prudential judgment on something as flimsy as "The bishops made me do it." What is the point of having a social order that is able to provide universal health care and protects the poor if we are still allowing the systematic killing of the youngest and most vulnerable? A nice comfortable theoretical. The sad truth is that the main item on deck isn't universal health care, but the dismantling of the safety net to pad the coffers of special interests. Our president jacks up the war budget and still talks about tax cuts. What happened to the value of sacrifice? If the war is truly a just cause, let the president go to Big Bidness and the wealthy Americans and say to their faces: "America has been very good for you. It's time for you to shoulder your fair share along with the middle-class and the poor. It's time to make sacrifices for the troops and for the promotion of democracy in Iraq and around the world." Many Americans, including our bishops, have been brainwashed by the political culture. We have more options than one of the two major parties. And we should all be clear that given two generations of abortion availability, plus bi-partisan support for that choice, the real pro-life struggle will take place in the hearts and minds of those considering ending a pregnancy. If Catholic voters are smart in 2008, they will make one of three choices: - They will abandon the Republicans, who haven't been able to nudge abortion practices off point since 1981. - They will find an alternative, even if it means voting third party. - They will abstain from voting from any and all races without viable pro-life candidates. My advice to Catholic voters concerned about abortion: ignore everything a politician says. But even if you ignore my advice and you've voted for another Rove disciple taking office in 2009, I won't hate you because you're a rube.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

The Alliance for Moderate, Liberal and Progressive Blogs

Join | List | Previous | Next