Liberal Catholics, Transubstantiation and Boise St

Index of Liberal Catholic Warriors for the Faith:

• Under Construction. See Episcopalian.

C'mon guys, don't ever lose your sense of humor. I mean your faith, well.... But never lose your sense of humor. Think of it as the only true historically peer-reviewed commandment.

I used to feel bad for liberal Catholics during the past score-ish years. Clearly discouraged by John Paul II's longevity and succession, their liberalism seemed to represent the 10th step in a 12-step program to leave the Church. Their main concerns have always struck me as more political than spiritual. The list is familiar:

• Female priests
• Nuanced stance on abortion
• Acceptance of homosexuality

One thought bothered me about that list. Transubstantiation. How could they keep transubstantiation off the list for so many years. I mean granted their main issues were literally sexy or sexual, but theologically speaking, they couldn't hold a jock strap [or panty] to transubstantiation in terms of the difficulty of true acceptance of Catholic teaching. That's why transubstantiation is the Boise State of Catholic theology. Think of the scandal if Boise State were kept out of the the BCS title game after 1,863 undefeated years.

Then one day it hit me like as if I was staring at Marcee in a Beautiful Mind. It's not real. Their list is not real. It's interesting and focus-grouped, but it doesn't represent the main concerns of adult Catholics, even liberal ones. A list of real concerns about the difficulty in accepting Catholic teaching would be more varied and less aligned with politically correct issues of the day.

Ever since that day, I'm the jaded guy in the crowd on the ground seemingly unaffected by the threats of 'jumping' from liberal Catholics on the ledge. If asked, my advice would be to go ahead and jump. Who knows, the distance they fall may not be as far as their oscillation would suggest.

If you think that opinion is judgmental, then you need to brush up on the difference between having an opinion on issues in the public domain and the type of judgment we are admonished not to engage in in the scriptures. One involves forming an opinion to the best of our abilities and the other presumes to know God's will. As an example, while I would prefer, if asked, that liberal Catholics jump, that is not judgmental. If I presumed to know where they would land when they jumped, now that's judgmental.

I recommend Fr Barron's take on the issue, although I doubt he would reciprocate.

Read more!

Three Pages into Three Thousand Years

Three pages into Three Thousand Years and I have an issue. A new low.

Advent is a good reminder to attempt to deepen the faith. So when I read great things about Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years, I bought the used book and began to read with little expectations of finishing the 1,016 page book, but expecting to gain a better historical perspective in specific areas which interested me. The author, Diarmaid MacCulloch, was apparently a lapsed Anglican who was raised in the faith and treated his subject with respect.

Using my Mortimer Adler training, I began with the part of the book which most interested me, Chapter 3: A Crucified Messiah. Just three pages in I came across my first bomb:

Luke's birth narrative, the more elaborate [Matthew is the other] explains that Jesus's parents traveled from Nazareth to Bethlehem at the time of Jesus's birth because they had to comply with the residence terms of a Roman imperial census for tax purposes .... This does not ring true ... Roman authorities would not have held a census in a client kingdom of the empire such as Herod's, and in any case there is no record elsewhere of such an empire-wide census, which would certainly have left traces around the Mediterranean. The story seems to embody a confusion with a well-attested Roman imperial census which certainly did happen, but in 6 CE, far too late for the birth of Jesus [the birth is estimated between 7 and 4 BE], and long remembered as a traumatic event because it was the first real taste of what direct Roman rule meant for Judea. The suspicion therefore arises that someone writing a good deal later, rather hazy about the chronology of decades before, has been fairly cavalier with the story of Jesus's birth, for reasons other than retrieving events as they actually happened.

In a thousand page book, I expected to read a lot of hedging about conflicting accounts. But here MacCulloch calls Luke a liar [naturally using testosterone-deficient language, i.e. cavalier], with no attempt to reconcile the dates giving Luke the benefit of the doubt. What a prick.

In didn't take much research to discover that there are plenty of explanations for the discrepancy. The most complete explanation was provided by a blog post by J. Hampton Keathley, III titled, Acclamations of the Birth of Christ (Luke 2:1-20). Keathley summarizes the issue:

Critics have challenged Luke's statement because they claim Josephus, a Jewish historian, placed this [census] at least ten years later [6 CE] after Archelaus had been deposed and Quirenius had been sent as a Syrian magistrate in charge of this registration. Their point is Quirinius did not govern here until several years later.

Keathley then offers three possible solutions for the historical discrepancies:

1. There were two registrations. There is evidence that such registrations happened periodically about every 14 years and that Quirinius could have been twice in charge of these registrations. Luke shows us from Acts 5:37 that he was aware of the later registration or census of Quirinius, the one reported by Josephus. In other words, Luke shows us from Luke 2:1-2 and Acts 5:37 that there very well could have been two registrations conducted by Quirinius and this fits with archaeological findings as well as with Josephus’ account.
2. An eminent archaeologist named Jerry Vardaman has done a great deal of work in this regard. He has found a coin with the name of Quirinius on it in very small writing, or what we call ‘micrographic’ letters. This places him as proconsul of Syria and Cilicia from 11 B.C. until after the death of Herod. It means that there were apparently two Quiriniuses. It’s not uncommon to have lots of people with the same Roman names, so there’s no reason to doubt that there were two people by the name of Quirinius. The census would have taken place under the reign of the earlier Quirinius. Given the cycle of a census every fourteen years, that would work out quite well.
3. Quirinius had a government assignment in Syria at this time and conducted a census in his official capacity. Details of this census may have been common knowledge in Luke’s time but are now lost to us. An incomplete MS describes the career of an officer whose name is not preserved but whose actions sound as if he might have been Quirinius. He became imperial “legate of Syria” for the “second time.” While this is ambiguous, it may be a clue that Quirinius served both at the time of Jesus’ birth and a few years later.

The complete explanation by J. Hampton Keathley, III is copied at end of the post.

Onward, Christian soldiers, page four beckons.

----------------------------------------------------
Acclamations of the Birth of Christ (Luke 2:1-20)
By: J. Hampton Keathley, III
http://bible.org/article/acclamations-birth-christ-luke-21-20#P69_15704

...

This brings us back to our passage where we want to observe another historical detail in the account of Christ’s birth—the census to be taken. Again, remember Galatians 4:4 which says, “but when the fulness of time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman …”

“That a decree went out … a census …” The word “census” here is apographo, which means “the taking of a census, registration, or enrollment.” The KJV has “taxed,” but the word actually referred to a census (though a taxing often followed based on the census or registration.) It was a registration for taxing purposes.

Critics have challenged this statement by Luke because they claim Josephus, a Jewish historian, placed this at least ten years later after Archelaus had been deposed and Quirenius had been sent as a Syrian magistrate in charge of this registration. Their point is Quirinius did not govern here until several years later.

Several years ago a writer for Life Magazine, Robert Coughlan used this along with some other things to claim the whole story of Jesus Christ was without historicity and should not be relied upon. But this assumes that we have all the information of this time and know more than Luke could have possibly known.

How do we deal with this apparent historical discrepancy? There is evidence that such registrations happened periodically about every 14 years and that Quirinius could have been twice in charge of these registrations. Luke shows us from Acts 5:37 that he was aware of the later registration or census of Quirinius, the one reported by Josephus. In other words, Luke shows us from Luke 2:1-2 and Acts 5:37 that there very well could have been two registrations conducted by Quirinius and this fits with archaeological findings as well as with Josephus’ account.

There is also another solution proposed by some archaeologists. In discussing the problem of this census with John McRay, a well known archaeologist, Lee Strobel describes part of the conversation with McRay who said in the interview, “An eminent archaeologist named Jerry Vardaman has done a great deal of work in this regard. He has found a coin with the name of Quirinius on it in very small writing, or what we call ‘micrographic’ letters. This places him as proconsul of Syria and Cilicia from 11 B.C. until after the death of Herod.”4

Being somewhat confused by this reply, he asked, “What does this mean?” McRay replied:

It means that there were apparently two Quiriniuses. It’s not uncommon to have lots of people with the same Roman names, so there’s no reason to doubt that there were two people by the name of Quirinius. The census would have taken place under the reign of the earlier Quirinius. Given the cycle of a census every fourteen years, that would work out quite well.5

Walter Liefeld in The Expositors Bible Commentary points out another possible solution.

Quirinius had a government assignment in Syria at this time and conducted a census in his official capacity. Details of this census may have been common knowledge in Luke’s time but are now lost to us (cf. E.M. Blaiklock, “Quirinius,” ZPEB, 5:56). An incomplete MS describes the career of an officer whose name is not preserved but whose actions sound as if he might have been Quirinius. He became imperial “legate of Syria” for the “second time.” While this is ambiguous, it may be a clue that Quirinius served both at the time of Jesus’ birth and a few years later (cf. F.F. Bruce, “Quirinius,” NBD, p. 9).6

Regardless of the view one takes to solve this seeming discrepancy, over and over again archaeology has demonstrated the trustworthiness of the Bible on one supposed discrepancy after another. Luke was a painstakingly accurate historian who carefully investigated everything from the beginning regarding the life of Christ (Luke 1:1-4). In all fairness, we must assume that Luke knew something that we do not and wait for the evidence to come in. Earlier, when Strobel questioned McRay about Luke as a historian, McRay replied:

The general consensus of both liberal and conservative scholars is that Luke is very accurate as a historian, … He’s erudite, he’s eloquent, his Greek approaches classical quality, he writes as an educated man, and archaeological discoveries are showing over and over again that Luke is accurate in what he has to say.”7

In view of these facts, we need to give Luke, who lived then, the benefit of the doubt and wait for more evidence to surface.
----------------------------------------------

Read more!

Faith: Best Defense is a Good Heart

Recently I watched Bill Maher's 2008 comedy/documentary film, Religulous, a play on the words religion and ridiculous. As the title suggests, the the film is not subtle about its intent or treatment of the believers it mocks [think Borat Gone God]. Although I am a believer, I found the film useful in that it catalogs the typical attacks on people of faith. Given Maher's well know adversarial views towards faith, it was surprising to see someone like Francis Collins put himself in a position of having to trust the line of questioning and editing by those hostile to his beliefs.

It was unsurprising to see many every day people -- believers unprepared to defend those beliefs in coherent sound bites, let alone after editing for comedic effect -- made to look foolish as they struggled to explain their beliefs under mostly playful taunting by Maher. It reminded me of the Grouch Marx line about not wanting to be part of any club which would have me as a member. To paraphrase, the last people you want defending the faith on film are those who don't see how a Borat-like interview might make them look bad.

There was one pleasant surprise. I heard an obvious inconsistency in Maher's attacks. When told that the New Testament does not contradict the Old Testament, but rather fulfills it, Maher's reaction was that he was unimpressed given that the New Testament writers had the advantage of tailoring their work to fit Old Testament narratives they were familiar with. The problem with that assertion was that Maher immediately then proceeded to make an issue of how the virgin birth is only mentioned in two Gospels [Matthew & Luke] as a reason to doubt its accuracy. So in the first example, the Bible's consistency is seen as contrived and in the second example, a lack of consistency is evidence of its unreliability.

Predictably, this Sunday's ethernet homily by Fr Vallee sheds wisdom on how to think about and possibly defend the Good News:

The Gospel tonight presents us with a frightening and apocalyptic vision. Does it not strike you that passages like these have an oddly surreal and dreamlike character to them? There is a priest I once knew, not a terribly intelligent or well-educated priest, who insisted on interpreting these passages literally, as if Jesus were coming down to our parking lot any second now in a fiery chariot so that he could beat up the bad people and carry the good people to heaven. This interpretation is not only idiotic, it is heretical. All the way back to Augustine, the basic sense of Scripture has been understood as allegorical, not literal.

The key to understanding passages like this passage is to understand its dream-like quality. God speaks through human instruments and He speaks human words, in a human way. ... The Apocalyptic passages from Luke are very much like Christian opera. They present us with beautiful and dramatic symbols which help us to understand what it means to be Christian in a sinful world. But they do not predict the end of the world, as if God were some sort of divine fortune teller.

To have faith is to learn to dream the dreams of God. The Gospel gives us a vision or a symbol of what life can be. To believe is to learn to live within that symbol and dream the dreams of God....

If you cannot grasp the beauty of that image with your heart, you will never understand what it means with your head. The apocalyptic passages of Luke, like the startling visions of John in Revelation, are not descriptions of how the world will end; they are extraordinary and operatic symbols that tell us what in means to be a Christian here and now in a world full of disgrace -- and even more full of grace.

The email address to request to be put on Vallee's email distribution list is Cioran262@aol.com. To see the entire homily click on 'read more.' Search for other Fr Vallee homilies in this blog by entering 'Vallee' in the search box in the upper left hand corner or look for Fr Vallee in the Labels.

----------------------------------------------------
Fr Vallee Homily on Luke Prophecy -- November 14 2010

I. Apocalypse
In today’s Gospel we are given a strange and scary vision of the end. We will be getting a lot of this as Luke’s Jesus approaches Jerusalem. Fire on the earth, wars, famines and plagues are predicted. Seems like some things never change! Remember before 2000, all of our computers were going to blow up at the same time. The comet was going to bring about the Apocalypse. Right until the present day, if the Tea Party people are to be believed, we are on the verge of socio-economic and moral meltdown. Jesus could not be more clear: “Yes, times are tough they always have been and always will be. But if you walk by faith and not by fear, not a hair on your head will be harmed.” There is always a good reason to panic and a better reason to have faith, which is why I was not a member of the moral majority and cannot join the Tea Party.

II. Philosopher
When I am not here at St. MT/Kevin’s, I teach in a seminary. I have one of the strangest of all jobs: I am a philosopher. It is my job to ask annoying and unanswerable questions, which doesn’t make me a lot of fun at parties. Anyway, here goes with the annoying questions: What do these strange and scary words from the St Luke’s Gospel mean? Do they literally predict a Second Coming or is there some deeper meaning?

III. The Gospel
The Gospel tonight presents us with a frightening and apocalyptic vision. Does it not strike you that passages like these have an oddly surreal and dreamlike character to them? There is a priest I once knew, not a terribly intelligent or well-educated priest, who insisted on interpreting these passages literally, as if Jesus were coming down to our parking lot any second now in a fiery chariot so that he could beat up the bad people and carry the good people to heaven. This interpretation is not only idiotic, it is heretical. All the way back to Augustine, the basic sense of Scripture has been understood as allegorical, not literal.

IV. The Key
The key to understanding passages like this passage is to understand its dream-like quality. God speaks through human instruments and He speaks human words, in a human way. Imagine if you went to the opera and saw Hansel and Gretel. In order to understand the opera, you must understand the literary form of the fable. If you do not, then you will completely misunderstand the work and think that there really are old witches who cook and eat lost children in the forest. My priest friend has made the same mistake with the words of Scripture. The Apocalyptic passages from Luke are very much like Christian opera. They present us with beautiful and dramatic symbols which help us to understand what it means to be Christian in a sinful world. But they do not predict the end of the world, as if God were some sort of divine fortune teller.

V. To believe is to dream the dreams of God
To have faith is to learn to dream the dreams of God. The Gospel gives us a vision or a symbol of what life can be. To believe is to learn to live within that symbol and dream the dreams of God. Our Lord Jesus is daily becoming present in our lives. He comes with all the power and glory of heaven made manifest on earth. His is the King of kings and Lord of Lords and we are washed clean in his blood. Most importantly, if we walk by faith, not fear, not a hair on our heads will be harmed.

If you cannot grasp the beauty of that image with your heart, you will never understand what it means with your head. The apocalyptic passages of Luke, like the startling visions of John in Revelation, are not descriptions of how the world will end; they are extraordinary and operatic symbols that tell us what in means to be a Christian here and now in a world full of disgrace -- and even more full of grace.
----------------------------------------------

Read more!

Tell The Boys I Am Waiting For Them In Heaven

"Tell the boys I am waiting for them in Heaven," was one of the last thoughts Don Bosco spoke.

This weekend the relics of Saint John Bosco will be among us in Miami. More specifically, his remains will come to the church which bears his name and that I have attended [off and on, now on] since the mid-1960's. It is a time of great joy and anticipation. Last night, a meeting led by Father Juan Carlos Paguaga, the pastor at St. John Bosco Catholic Church, was attended by over 100 people. Each person there had committed to serving in some way. If you get a chance to see the relics, please notice those whose guests you are for that brief time. They will not soon forget the experience.

Pivotal moment in Don Bosco's life

When he was nine years old, he had a dream that was prophetic.

He seemed to be in the middle of a crowd of children at play, some of whom were cursing. Suddenly, the young John threw himself at them, hitting and kicking them to make them be quiet. But a man appeared before him who said: “Don’t hit them, with kindness and love you must win over these your friends. I shall give you a Teacher under whose guidance you will be able to become wise, and without whom, all wisdom becomes nonsense”. That person was Jesus, and the Teacher would be the Virgin Mary, under whose guidance he placed his whole life.

Who dies for a lie?

In one of my favorite book of apologetic's, Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ presents the following arguments about the validity of the Resurrection:

J. P. Moreland's circumstantial evidence added final documentation for the Resurrection. First, the disciples were in a unique position to know whether the resurrection happened, and they went to their graves confirming it was true. Nobody knowingly and willingly dies for a lie. Second, apart from the Resurrection, there's no good reason why Paul and James would have been converted and would have died for their faith. Third, within weeks of the Crucifixion, thousands of Jews began abandoning key social practices that had critical sociological and religious importance for centuries. They believed they risked damnation if they were wrong. Fourth, the early sacraments of communion and baptism affirmed Jesus' resurrection and deity. And fifth, the miraculous emergence of the church in the face of brutal Roman persecution "rips a hole in history, a hole the size and shape of Resurrection," as C. F. D. Moule put it.

So to those with doubts [so this is self-directed part of the time], the question is;

Who dedicates their life over just a dream at the age of nine?

Read more!

Griese: Miami Legend Honored

I have written before about how much I admire Bob Griese. As a kid, he was almost a default hero as the Miami Dolphins quarterback. But as the years passed, when things beyond sports matter more in how you think about people, Griese, a fellow Catholic, remained admirable.

His alma mater, Purdue University, also finds much to admire about the man:

The Davey O'Brien Foundation announced Boilermaker icon Bob Griese as the recipient of the 2010 Davey O'Brien Legends Award, which recognizes a college or professional quarterback who has made a significant contribution to the game of football, distinguished himself as an extraordinary leader and demonstrated exemplary conduct on and off the football field.
...
The legendary broadcaster is also very committed to giving back to the community. He serves as Chairman of the Board of Advisors of the Moffitt Cancer Center, is a Board member of the Don Shula Foundation, and is a senior member of the Orange Bowl Committee. He is a devoted supporter of Judi's House, and he has endowed a football scholarship at his alma mater, Purdue University.

Article referenced is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------
Bob Griese To Receive Davey O'Brien Legends Award

Boilermaker icon recognized as a quarterback who has made a significant contribution to the game of football, distinguished himself as an extraordinary leader and demonstrated exemplary conduct on and off the football field.

Sept. 2, 2010

FORT WORTH, Texas - The Davey O'Brien Foundation announced Boilermaker icon Bob Griese as the recipient of the 2010 Davey O'Brien Legends Award, which recognizes a college or professional quarterback who has made a significant contribution to the game of football, distinguished himself as an extraordinary leader and demonstrated exemplary conduct on and off the football field.

"We are extremely proud to add Bob Griese to the esteemed list of Legends Award recipients," said Scott Murray, Chair of the Legends Committee for the Davey O'Brien Foundation. "It is only appropriate that he is honored for his dedication, leadership and commitment to the game of football."

The award will be presented at the 34th Annual Davey O'Brien Awards Dinner on Feb. 21, 2011 at The Fort Worth Club in Fort Worth, Texas. Griese joins a prestigious list of recipients which includes Dan Fouts (2009), Joe Theismann (2008), Steve Spurrier (2007), Paul Hornung (2006), Len Dawson (2005), Archie Manning (2004), Terry Bradshaw (2003), Bart Starr (2002) and Roger Staubach (2001).

"I am honored to receive the Legends Award and to be mentioned with some of football's greatest quarterbacks," said Griese.

The standout quarterback from Evansville, Ind. earned All-American honors at Purdue where he threw for 4,541 yards and 28 touchdowns. Griese led the Boilermakers to three consecutive winning seasons from 1964 to 1966, including the 1966 Big Ten championship and the school's first appearance in the Rose Bowl, where they defeated USC 14-13.

Griese, known as the "Thinking Man's Quarterback," was drafted by the American Football League's (AFL) Miami Dolphins in 1967. He went on to help lead them to three consecutive Super Bowl appearances, including back-to-back championships in 1972 and 1973.

An AFL All-Star during his first two years, Griese was named consensus All-Pro quarterback in 1971 and 1977, made six appearances in the Pro Bowl and was voted the Dolphin's Most Valuable Player six times by South Florida media.

During his 14 pro seasons with the Dolphins, he threw for 25,092 yards and 192 touchdowns. He also rushed for 994 yards and seven scores. Griese's accomplishments were celebrated with his induction into the College Football Hall of Fame and Indiana Football Hall of Fame in 1984 and into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1990. His No. 12 jersey became the first in Dolphins' history to be retired.

After retiring from the NFL, Griese began his career in broadcasting in 1982 as a NFL analyst for NBC Sports. In 1987, he was hired as a television commentator for college football on ABC and ESPN.

The legendary broadcaster is also very committed to giving back to the community. He serves as Chairman of the Board of Advisors of the Moffitt Cancer Center, is a Board member of the Don Shula Foundation, and is a senior member of the Orange Bowl Committee. He is a devoted supporter of Judi's House, and he has endowed a football scholarship at his alma mater, Purdue University.

Griese has three sons, and he and his wife, Shay, live in Jupiter, Florida.

About The Davey O'Brien Foundation The Davey O'Brien Foundation (the Foundation) was founded in 1977 to honor and remember the strong character and leadership of football great, Davey O'Brien. Widely known for its Davey O'Brien National Quarterback Award®, the Foundation recognizes champions on and off the field through national awards programs encouraging academic and career success. The Foundation has given away more than $800,000 in scholarships and university grants to help high school and college athletes transform leadership on the field to leadership in life. More information about the Foundation can be found at www.DaveyOBrien.org.
----------------------------------------------

Read more!

Cuban Catholic Hierarchy: Wheat or Chafe?

Please read the recent post by Robert Molleda over at his Searching for Signs blog. I agree with Robert's thoughts on the topic of the failure of the 'Cuban Ecclesiastical Hierarchy.'

It is tempting to compare this ongoing failure of the Cuban Catholic Church to other failures of the Church in general, but that type of speculation would just be lending comfort to our enemies at this point. But another thing that I will avoid is describing their behavior is inexplicable. What reason do we have to look beyond the obvious? The appear to be acting out of fear for their own well being -- personal security as well as positioning to remain unaffected over future upheavals, i.e. 'Hey remember us Commandantes, we didn't rock the boat' -- instead of compassion for their most needy and brave flock. Could it be that the bravery of the dissidents so highlights their own fecklessness that the Catholic hierarchy in Cuba has actually come to hate them as much as the Communist ruling class?

Whatever past compromises the 'Cuban Ecclesiastical Hierarchy' may have made, they received a pass of sorts for the tricky conditions they were operating under. That pass has clearly expired and they have been exposed to a great extent. Today the higher echelon of the Cuban Catholic Church behaves cowardly. Who concludes otherwise and why?

May God bless the dissidents. May the current powers that be in the Catholic leadership of Cuba survive any future sifting, even as I believe they behave like chafe.

Read more!

What Gordon Solie Could Teach Major Scobie

Reading Henry Graham Greene, I get the feeling of watching someone trying to wrestle with God. His main characters bring the admirable intensity of a Dan Gable to the match, but lack the perspective of a Gordon Solie. I am an agnostic when it comes to characterizing the Soliesque perspective as either appreciating the absurd or just a professional weariness, but I know a healthy balance when I see it.

In Greene's perfectly titled novel, The Heart of The Matter - characters seem to do nothing but get to the heart of matters [the third of his four major Catholic novels] - his introspective thoughts are given voice mainly through his protagonist, Chief of Police Major Henry Scobie. Late in the novel, Greene gives us a clue as to why he wrote those type of novels.

She sat there, reading poetry, and she was a thousand miles away from the torment that shook his hand and dried his mouth. She would understand, he thought, if I were in a book, but would I understand her if she were just a character? I don't read that sort of book.

You get the idea that Greene wrote books that he wished others would write, thereby sparing himself the work. Characters who gave voice to moral concerns and reflections. After reading Greene, it's easy to see why he 'didn't read those sort of books.' How could they compare to the thoughts running through his fascinatingly descriptive, rational and decidedly unhappy mind? Just a few of the many interesting thoughts from the novel:

Why ... do I love this place [Haiti] so much? It is because here human nature hasn't had to time to disguise itself? Nobody here could ever talk about a heaven on earth. Heaven remained rigidly in its proper place on the other side of death, and on this side flourished the injustices, the cruelties, the meanness that elsewhere people so cleverly hushed up. Here you could love human beings nearly as God loved them, knowing the worst: you don't love a pose, a pretty dress, a sentiment artfully assumed.

It seemed to Scobie that life was immeasurably long. Couldn't the test of man be carried out in fewer years? Couldn't we have committed out first major sin a at seven, have ruined ourselves for love or hate at ten, have clutched at redemption on a fifteen-year-old death-bed?

He had no sense of responsibility towards the beautiful and the graceful and the intelligent. They could find their own way. It was the face for which nobody would go out of his way, the face that would never catch the covert look, the face which would soon be used to rebuffs and indifference that demanded their allegiance. The word 'pity' is used loosely as the word 'love': the terrible promiscuous passion which so few experience.

While rarely does Greene share happy thoughts, they do bring pleasure. The type of pleasure that survives beyond the moment of exposure. So while few if any of Greene's thoughts run the risk of being uttered by anyone looking to sell you something or entertain you beyond the written word, they rang true to this reader.

As a way of savoring the book, I've gathered my favorite Greene thoughts into three categories at the end of the post.

• Killer Sentences
• Masters of the Universe, Beware
• Wrestling with God

The excerpts may not mean as much to those who have yet to read the book, but are still worth reading. You understand? It's what Major Scobie could not, sah.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Heart of the Matter by Graham Greene - excerpts

Killer Sentences

He lifted the moist hand and kissed the palm: he was bound by the pathos of her unattractiveness.

There was something defenseless, it seemed to Scobie, in his whole attitude: he stood there waiting for people to be friendly or unfriendly - he didn't seem to expect one reaction more than another. He was like a dog.

He listened with the intense interest one feels in a stranger's life, the interest the young mistake for love [ouch].

He had the sense of an animal which had been chased to its hole.

'Oh, is that all?' she asked with immense relief, and irritation at her ignorance moved like hatred unfairly in his brain.

He read somewhere that love had been invented in the eleventh century by troubadors. Why had they not left us with lust?

But if romance is what one lives by, one must never be cured of it. The world has too many spoilt priests of this faith or that: better surely to pretend a belief than wander in that vicious vacuum of cruelty and despair.

Sometimes his eyes strayed to the walls seeking a cockroach, but you couldn't have everything.

Honesty was a double-edged weapon, but intelligence looked after number one [picture a young Dyer making notes here].

It was like having a box of chocolates in a bedroom drawer. Until the box was empty it occupied the mind too much.

'Your work is more important to you than I am,' Helen said, and the banality of the phrase, read in how many bad novels, wrung his heart.

He felt as though he had exiled himself so deeply in the desert that his skin had taken on the colour of the sand.

The soda hissed in the glasses and Yousef drank greedily.

Masters of the Universe, Beware

Against the beautiful and the clever and the successful, one can wage a pitiless war [hear that Heat fans], but not against the unattractive: then the millstone weighs on the breast.

They had been corrupted by money, he had been corrupted by sentiment. Sentiment was more dangerous, because you couldn't name its price. A man open to bribes was to be relied upon below a certain figure, but sentiment might uncoil in the heart at a name, a photograph, even a smell remembered.

He had no sense of responsibility towards the beautiful and the graceful and the intelligent. They could find their own way. It was the face for which nobody would go out of his way, the face that would never catch the covert look, the face which would soon be used to rebuffs and indifference that demanded their allegiance. The word 'pity' is used loosely as the word 'love': the terrible promiscuous passion which so few experience.

What an absurd thing it was to expect happiness in a world so full of misery. ... Point me out the happy man and I will point you out either extreme egotism, evil - or else absolute ignorance [insert Ari Gold, 'boom' here].

Wrestling with God

Why ... do I love this place [Haiti] so much? It is because here human nature hasn't had to time to disguise itself? Nobody here could ever talk about a heaven on earth. Heaven remained rigidly in its proper place on the other side of death, and on this side flourished the injustices, the cruelties, the meanness that elsewhere people so cleverly hushed up. Here you could love human beings nearly as God loved them, knowing the worst: you don't love a pose, a pretty dress, a sentiment artfully assumed.

She was crying. He felt an enormous tiredness, bracing himself to comfort her. 'Darling,' he said, 'I love you.' It was how he always began. Comfort, like the act of sex, developed a routine.

It seemed to Scobie that life was immeasurably long. Couldn't the test of man be carried out in fewer years? Couldn't we have committed out first major sin a at seven, have ruined ourselves for love or hate at ten, have clutched at redemption on a fifteen-year-old death-bed?

The truth, he thought, has never been of any real value to any human being - it is a symbol for mathematicians and philosophers to pursue. In human relations kindness and lies are worth a thousand truths.

It was a formality, not because he felt himself free from serious sin but because it had never occurred to him that his life was important enough one way or another. He didn't drink, he didn't fornicate, he didn't even lie, but he never regarded this absence of sin as virtue. When he thought about it all, he regarded himself as a man in the ranks, the member of an awkward squad, who had no opportunity to break more serious military rules.

It seemed to him for a moment that God was too accessible. There was no difficulty in approaching Him. Like a popular demagogue He was open to the least of His followers at any hour. Looking up at the cross he thought, He even suffers in public. [All pause and insert a Klymaxx-type rap about how Greene's too gu-gu-good].

She said furiously, 'I don't want your pity.' But it was not a question of whether she wanted it - she had it. Pity smouldered like decay at his heart. He would never rid himself of it. He knew from experience how passion died away and how love went, but pity always stayed. Nothing ever diminished pity. The conditions of life nurtured it. There was a single person in the world who was unpitiable, oneself.

O God, give me death before I give them unhappiness.

The priests told one that it was the unforgivable sin, the final expression of an unrepentant despair, and of course one accepted the Church's teaching. But they taught also that God had sometimes broken his own laws, and was it less possible for him to put out a hand of forgiveness into the suicidal darkness than to have woken himself in the tomb, behind the stone? Christ had not been murdered - you couldn't murder God. Christ had killed himself: he had hung himself on the Cross ...

How often, he thought, lack of faith helps one to see more clearly than faith.

He thought: pious people, I suppose, would call this the devil speaking, but he knew that evil never spoke in these crude answerable terms: this was innocence.

The words of the Mass were like an indictment.

Innocence must die young if it isn't to kill the souls of men.

When he was young, he had thought that love had something to do with understanding, but with age he knew that no human being understood another. Love was the wish to understand, and presently with constant failure the wish died, and love died too perhaps or changed into this painful affection, loyalty and pity.

She sat there, reading poetry, and she was a thousand miles away from the torment that shook his hand and dried his mouth. She would understand, he thought, if I were in a book, but would I understand her if she were just a character? I don't read that sort of book.

This was what human love had done to him - it had robbed him of love for eternity. It was no use pretending, as a young man might, that the price was worth while.

All you have to do now is ring a bell, go into a box, confess ... the repentance is already there, straining at your heart. it's not repentance you lack, just a few simple actions ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Read more!

Wenski Has Much Currency On Immigration

In the first chapter of his book, Money Mischief, Milton Friedman relates an example of how some islands in Micronesia used round stones, anywhere from one foot to twelve feet in diameter, to represent currency. [It is unknown whether this is where the phrase, 'he's got stones' originated.]

In one case, the German Government, on purchasing the islands, attempted to get the island chiefs to repair the roads. The locals resisted. The Germans levied a fine which was extracted by marking a number of the most valuable stones with a black cross. The act impoverished the chiefs and forced them to fix up the roads. The fine was recognized as paid when the officials washed the black mark from the stones. Wealth had been temporarily taken and then restored by affecting their currency.

The point of the story is that currency can take on many different forms. Currency is merely a tangible representation of wealth. Wealth must be created by the land or labor of society. If governments create currency unrelated to the actual wealth being created in the society, then we get what we have today; TARP, Ireland, Greece, Spain, and ....

Take a look at the picture above. The love and respect shown Archbishop Thomas Wenski represents currency in the immigration debate. In the parlance of the day, the dude in the black cape is seriously loaded. He was not given that currency, he earned it. This from the Miami Herald's article about his return to Notre Dame d'Haiti:

As he entered the Little Haiti Catholic church he founded 29 years ago, a crowd of thousands, some with tears of joy, quickly gave the Most Rev. Thomas Wenski the treatment of a rock star on Sunday. Waving their hands in the air, they snapped photos, held out tape recorders and clutched portraits of him.

``Byenvini Lakay Ou,'' they said, ``Welcome back home.''

For the estimated 2,500 Haitian Catholics from across South Florida who came to Notre Dame d'Haiti -- a crowd typically reserved for Christmas or Easter -- the event was not to be missed. The beloved Polish-American priest, one who had guided the region's Haitian-American community since its early days, had returned, this time as the new archbishop of Miami.

``Many of us are who we are because of you,'' the current pastor, the Rev. Reginald Jean-Mary, told a teary Wenski, who celebrated Mass in perfect Creole for more than two hours in the standing-room-only church.

On Sunday, after celebrating two English Masses and a Spanish Mass days before, Wenski proudly slipped back into the role he has long played: a champion of Haitian Catholics, who represent a majority of the island nation's vibrant community in South Florida. ``Notre Dame, this church here, it represents the Haitian community,'' Wenski said to parishioners, many who skipped work and some who traveled from as far as West Palm Beach to meet the pastor they still affectionately call Pè, or Father.

An overflow crowd jammed the church's courtyard and hallways and packed hundreds of outdoor chairs as a closed-circuit TV system broadcasted the 59-year-old's remarks. It was his first stop at Notre Dame since he was tapped to lead the region's 800,000 Catholics in late April.

The celebration, full of upbeat hymns, dancing and praiseful ``hallelujahs,'' brought together faithful churchgoers as well as those for whom church isn't always a Sunday ritual. There were grandmothers who had not seen Wenski for years, teenagers who he had baptized and those who had only heard of him through word-of-mouth.

``This is a good Haitian friend,'' said 55-year-old Jean Bourgiquot, who had never met Wenski, but echoed a common refrain: Wenski isn't just a man that knows Haitians, but ``a Haitian.''

Archbishop Wenski, has weighed in on the immigration debate. This from his Op-Ed in the Miami Herald:

Victor Hugo's 19th-century novel Les Miserables tells how pride and neglect of mercy represented in the bitterly zealous legalism of Inspector Javert ultimately destroys him. Today, modern-day Javerts, on radio and TV talk shows, fan flames of resentment against supposed law breakers, equating them with terrorists intent on hurting us. However, these immigrants ask only for the opportunity to become legal -- to come out of the shadows where they live in fear of a knock on their door in the dead of night or an immigration raid to their work place. Like Jean Valjean, today's migrants only look for the opportunity to redeem themselves through honest work. Today, many take umbrage at the Catholic bishops' advocacy on behalf of these ``illegals'' -- but, in doing so, we stand in a proud moral tradition, like the novel's benevolent Bishop Myriel, who gave his candlesticks to the desperate Jean Valjean and protected him from arrest by Javert.

While I myself am sympathetic to the Arizona law -- i.e. what are border states supposed to do when their urgent concerns are not shared by their federal government? -- my thoughts and votes on this issue can be affected by those who come to the debate with serious moral currency.

In this sense, and this sense only, Archbishop Wenski is the anti-Crist.

Back in Novemebr 2008, there was an interesting article about seminarians at St. John Vianney by one of the writers of the Wenski article, Jaweed Kaleem. One of the most positive [i.e. fair] articles on Catholics, was possibly written by a Muslim [my assumption based on his name]. As the old saying goes, only in Miami.

Wenski's Op-Ed in the Miami Herald on Immigration Reform is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------
Let `illegals' stay, earn their citizenship - BY THOMAS WENSKI

U.S. BISHOPS - www.miamiarch.org

To those who accused Jesus of breaking the laws of his day, he replied, in Mark 2:27: ``The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.''

This teaching underscores the point that positive law, even Divine positive law, is meant to benefit, not to enslave, mankind. The patriots who broke the law by tossing tea into Boston Harbor understood this -- as did Rosa Parks, who broke the law by refusing to give up her bus seat to a white man. When laws fail to advance the common good, they can and should be changed.

Our immigration laws need to be changed: They are antiquated and inadequate for the promotion and regulation of social and economic relations of 21st-century America. On this point everyone seemingly agrees. However, the solutions proposed should not make the situation worse. Outdated laws, ill adapted to the increasing interdependence of our world and the globalization of labor, are bad laws. Proposed changes, however, must take into account both human dignity and the national interest.

For this reason, the U.S. bishops and a broad bipartisan coalition ranging from unions to chambers of commerce have supported broad comprehensive immigration reform that, while addressing future needs for labor by providing for a legal guest-worker program, also offers an ``earned'' path to legalization for those 10 million or so workers already in the country as well as fixing the unacceptable backlogs for family reunification visas that keep families separated for intolerable lengths of time.

A narrow, restrictive legislation focusing on solely ``enforcement'' will only make matters worse. Indeed, a billion dollars has been spent on border enforcement over the past 10 years -- and yet, until this current recession, illegal immigration had increased because the labor market demanded willing and able workers. Illegal immigration should not be tolerated. It leads to abuse and exploitation of the migrants themselves; and, ultimately, businesses that rely on their labor -- and, in doing so, help fuel the growth of the American economy -- would prefer and benefit from a reliable, legal work force.

But, fixing illegal immigration does not require the ``demonization'' of so-called ``illegals.'' America has always been a land of promise and opportunity for those willing to work hard. We can provide for our national security and secure borders without making America, a nation of immigrants, less a land of promise or opportunity for immigrants.

Victor Hugo's 19th-century novel Les Miserables tells how pride and neglect of mercy represented in the bitterly zealous legalism of Inspector Javert ultimately destroys him. Today, modern-day Javerts, on radio and TV talk shows, fan flames of resentment against supposed law breakers, equating them with terrorists intent on hurting us. However, these immigrants ask only for the opportunity to become legal -- to come out of the shadows where they live in fear of a knock on their door in the dead of night or an immigration raid to their work place. Like Jean Valjean, today's migrants only look for the opportunity to redeem themselves through honest work. Today, many take umbrage at the Catholic bishops' advocacy on behalf of these ``illegals'' -- but, in doing so, we stand in a proud moral tradition, like the novel's benevolent Bishop Myriel, who gave his candlesticks to the desperate Jean Valjean and protected him from arrest by Javert.

For this reason, we call upon Congress to seize the opportunity for a comprehensive fix to our broken immigration system. To date, its failure to act has contributed to neo-nativist anti-immigrant sentiment and to ill-advised initiatives like Arizona's recent immigration law that usurps what is the purview of the federal government.

A nation that honors lawbreakers like the patriots of the ``Boston Tea Party,'' a nation that can allow the dignified defiance of Rosa Parks in her act of lawbreaking to touch its conscience, is a nation that also can make room for modern-day Jean Valjeans. We can be a nation of laws, without becoming a nation of Javerts. As Jesus reminded the embittered zealots of his day, laws are designed for the benefit -- not the harm -- of humankind.

Thomas Wenski is the archbishop of the Archdiocese of Miami.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/06/06/1667159/let-illegals-stay-earn-their-citizenship.html#ixzz0qAqb65aE
----------------------------------------------

Read more!

A Child's Life May Depend On It

Jorge Plasencia, co-founder and chairman of Amigos For Kids, highlights the need for all of us to be proactive about possible child abuse or neglect which we may become aware of.

An excerpt from his column in the Miami Herald:

According to the U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect, 41 percent of child fatalities, because of abuse or neglect, occur to children less than a year old. Seventy-five percent are children under the age of 4. These are not children who can escape their abusers. These are not children who can simply call 911 or file a restraining order or run away from home.
...
Please, please get involved. A child's life could depend on you. Know some of the signs of abuse or neglect. Keep an eye out for: nervousness around adults, aggression toward adults or other children, inability to concentrate, dramatic changes in personality, interest in sexual activities that are not appropriate for the child's age, frequent or unexplained bruises or injuries, low self-esteem and poor hygiene.
...
If you suspect abuse or neglect, report it! You can reach the Florida Abuse Hotline at 1-800-96-ABUSE (1-800-962-2873), or dial 911 to reach the police department if you sense a child is in immediate danger.

Article referenced is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A child's life could depend on you

BY JORGE A. PLASENCIA - amigosforkids.org

April 9, 2010

Each year in the United States, almost one million children are abused or neglected by those most close to them. Almost 2,000 of these children die. In 1990, the grim reality of this abuse confronted our community.

The small body of Lazaro Figueroa, known as Baby Lollipops, was found beaten and malnourished in a cherry hedge on Miami Beach. Lazaro's story inspired us to create Amigos For Kids, in 1991, an organization dedicated to preventing child abuse.

April is National Child Abuse Prevention Month. Amigos For Kids spearheads awareness efforts in our community, partnering with numerous entities including Miami-Dade County Public Schools. It is encouraging that we, as a community, designate this month to remind us to protect those who are most vulnerable and defenseless, though it is indeed tragic such a need exists.

The Department of Health and Human Services reports that the majority of abused children face neglect; the remainder withstand physical, sexual and emotional abuse. More than half of those children are abused by people whom they trust. Abusers can be parents, relatives, babysitters, teachers or coaches.

Child abuse does not discriminate and transcends gender or race. According to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System, four children die each day as a result of neglect or abuse. Of the children who do not suffer fatal injuries at the hands of their abusers, many grow up to become, themselves, abusers -- violence begetting violence in a cycle that many in America are all too familiar with.

According to the U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect, 41 percent of child fatalities, because of abuse or neglect, occur to children less than a year old. Seventy-five percent are children under the age of 4. These are not children who can escape their abusers. These are not children who can simply call 911 or file a restraining order or run away from home.

Be their voice

These are children who depend on us, their neighbors and teachers and bus drivers and friends, to be a voice for them when they cannot speak. They depend on us to protect them, to recognize signs of abuse and take action to end this injustice.

Each week in this country, child-protection agencies receive more than 50,000 reports of suspected child-abuse cases. Child-protective agencies like Florida's Department of Children & Families tell us that more than two-thirds of those reports provide sufficient cause for an investigation to be performed. But if we are reporting every case of child abuse, why do 2,000 American children still die at the hands of their abusers? Because we look the other way. We are busy. We do not want to get involved or overstep boundaries or tell someone else how to parent their child.

Please, please get involved. A child's life could depend on you. Know some of the signs of abuse or neglect. Keep an eye out for: nervousness around adults, aggression toward adults or other children, inability to concentrate, dramatic changes in personality, interest in sexual activities that are not appropriate for the child's age, frequent or unexplained bruises or injuries, low self-esteem and poor hygiene.

If you suspect abuse or neglect, report it! You can reach the Florida Abuse Hotline at 1-800-96-ABUSE (1-800-962-2873), or dial 911 to reach the police department if you sense a child is in immediate danger.

While reporting suspicions is imperative to halting child abuse, I firmly believe that we can do more to prevent it from occurring in the first place. We can call or write our elected officials to educate them about the abuse issues in our community. We can work with our school districts and faith-based communities to support programs for new parents. We can reach out to the families in our communities. We can keep a watchful eye out for families that abuse drugs and alcohol, have difficulty controlling anger or stress or appear uninterested in the care, nourishment or safety of their children.

We can provide a sympathetic ear, offer advice to those who turn to us, and, above all, trust our gut instincts. This is what Amigos For Kids works tirelessly to accomplish.

Save a life

Every child deserves to grow up in a happy home with loving and supportive caretakers. I was at a dinner a few years back in Washington, D.C., honoring Nancy Reagan. She was asked why she championed drug-free kids and made this her legacy with the ``Just Say No'' campaign.

She replied, ``I felt if we made one child not try drugs, it was all worth it.''

While we sadly cannot ensure a happy home and loving parents for every child, I believe that after reading this, if one person decides to report a case of child abuse or neglect, we saved another life. After all, there is no excuse for child abuse.

Jorge A. Plasencia is cofounder and chairman of Amigos For Kids.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/04/09/v-print/1570449/a-childs-life-could-depend-on.html#ixzz0kjJXhoxO
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Read more!

Garden Variety: Eden, Gethsemane & Arimathea's

Have you ever reflected on the role gardens play in our Christian faith? I hadn't thought of it until I read this homily by Fr Valle. An excerpt from his Easter homily:

It is very interesting that Mary ends up in a garden looking for Jesus. After all, this whole lovely and terrible game of sin and salvation began in a garden way back in Genesis. John Paul II tells us that if we understand the first three chapters of Genesis, we understand the entire history of sin and salvation. While a pope who many call great, doesn’t need me to tell him that he is right, the Pope is exactly right. What began in the garden of Eden comes full circle in the garden of Joseph of Arimathea, where they buried the body of Jesus in an empty tomb.

The email address to request to be put on Vallee's email distribution list is Cioran262@aol.com. To see the entire homily click on 'read more.' Search for other Fr Vallee homilies in this blog by entering 'Vallee' in the search box in the upper left hand corner or look for Fr Vallee in the Labels.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fr Vallee Easter 2010 Homily

I. John Paul II
It is very interesting that Mary ends up in a garden looking for Jesus. After all, this whole lovely and terrible game of sin and salvation began in a garden way back in Genesis. John Paul II tells us that if we understand the first three chapters of Genesis, we understand the entire history of sin and salvation. While a pope who many call great, doesn’t need me to tell him that he is right, the Pope is exactly right. What began in the garden of Eden comes full circle in the garden of Joseph of Arimathea, where they buried the body of Jesus in an empty tomb.

II. Where are you?
Chapter three of Genesis gives a perfect picture of what exactly went wrong with sin or what is precisely wrong with sin. Notice the last verse of chapter two: "The man and woman were both naked and yet they felt no shame." This is an interesting passage. Nakedness and sexuality are both innocent. Adam and Eve feel no shame before one another and before God because there is nothing of which to be ashamed. Shame comes with disobedience and sin in chapter three. But that is a small point. Here is the main point: After the Fall, God walks in the cool of the garden and calls out, “Adam, where are you?” Adam replies, "we heard you walking in the cool of the garden and we hid ourselves for we were naked." God replies, "who told you that you were naked, did you eat of the fruit of which I told you not to eat?" Adam then blames Eve, Eve blames the snake, and so it goes.

III. The Hebrew You
The blame game aside, here is what is interesting. Hebrew is more like Spanish or French, than like English, in one specific sense. In English there is only one word for "you." If I am talking to the president, it is "you." If I am talking to my niece, it is still just "you." In Spanish, if I am talking to the President, it is usted. If I am talking to my niece, it is tu. Hebrew, however, has not two but 32 different forms of the pronoun you, each signifying different degrees of intimacy and formality. This makes perfect sense. We have one word for snow. The Eskimos have many words for snow. The Jews were a tribal people, hence the question of the other’s precise relationship to me is of crucial importance. When God says, "where are you, Adam?" He is using the most intimate possible form of you. When Adam replies, "We heard you walking in the cool of the garden," He uses the form of you one would use with a judge, something like, We heard you, "Sir."

IV. Got to get ourselves back to the garden...
If you know about Jewish theology, you know that this an amazing phrase and is almost sui generis [JC: unique]. The Jews held that you were not even allowed to speak or write down the name of God. Yet here in Genesis, Adam and God speak with utter intimacy. This is the whole point. The deepest and most deadly effect of sin is loss of intimacy with our God. Because of sin, human beings and God are no longer on a first name basis. Adam, after sin, calls God, "Sir," not "daddy." We no longer stand face-to-face with God in the garden and call one another by our first names. Loss of intimacy with God is the result of sin. And the whole history of salvation is nothing but an attempt, in the words of the Joni Mitchell song, "to get our ourselves back to the garden."

V. Abba in Gethsemane
Let’s fast forward to another garden, the Garden of Gethsemane. There Jesus faces torture and death. Notice his prayer in that garden. He prays, "Abba, let this cup pass me by, yet not my will but your will be done." Abba is a very interesting word. It is an Aramaic word and it is a baby’s word. It means dada or papi. Jesus realizes, as he bares the full weight of our sins, even though he himself does not sin, that loss of intimacy with his Father is the most terrible thing he must face. On the cross he will cry out "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?" Foreseeing that most horrible moment, Jesus cries out, Abba, daddy, papi. Be with me as a father is with his little baby.

VI. The Garden of the Tomb
We come, now, to the final garden, the garden of the empty tomb. I have always loved the Gospel text from St. John. Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene but she does not recognize him, she thinks he is the gardener. It is a lovely passage. Jesus almost seems to be teasing her. I mean he knows very well who she is looking for and why she is crying. Still, he asks: "Woman, who are you looking for?" Mary, then, kind of falls apart. She is somewhat hysterical: "Please, Sir, tell me where you have taken his body, so that I can go and be with him." Finally, it is as if Jesus cannot stand to tease her any longer and he breaks the tension with a single word: "Mary." With that word, her name, Mary recognizes her Lord.

VII. Full circle
With that one word, we have come full circle from Genesis. Jesus Christ by his Passion, death and rising, restores what was lost at the Fall. Now Mary Magdalene, a human being, stands face to face with her God in the garden and they call each other by their first names -- playfully, tenderly, with utter intimacy. John Paul II is saw it so clearly. If you understand the first three chapters of Genesis, you understand the entire history of sin and salvation. What was lost in a garden is regained in a garden, human beings once again stand face to face with God and whisper tender endearments ... Christ has conquered death by death. And the result of that victory is that God is once again "daddy, papi, abba."
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Read more!

One Possible Response to Tebow Super Bowl Ad

The fact that there are people in our society who take offense to the Tebow family story being a part of the Super Bowl made me think. Who or what would constitute the flip side to the Tim Tebow story?

Dear Potential Parental Unit:

Hey, I know you're cringing at the thought of ever getting a letter or anything else from me. Thanks for having the courage to read it. I know you're feeling guilty, but this won't be that type of letter, trust us. I know you'll always feel conflicted about me and as you'll learn, that's not bad. I'm limited in what I can share, but I can tell you that if you're not conflicted at least part of the time in your world, you're not doing it right.

Let me get straight to my point. Turns out I have a soul and that soul remained untouched by sin. In a very real way, you were responsible for my existence and guaranteed where I got to spend eternity. The price for that need not be our eternal separation. That's the one thing I most want to tell you. The Enemy wants to keep that thought out of your head. To quote the chatty Polish dude among us lately, "don't be afraid." Nothing about eternity is ordained as long as you can take a breath in your world.

This place is indescribable, so I won't try. But here is where tragedies come to morph into something else, something good. Which is why even our separation can have a blessed ending. You won't truly know this until it's too late to do something about it. But like the kid from Dublin sings, this is a "place that has to be believed to be seen." The smart move [Tessio notwithstanding] is believing.

Peace

While I am not aware of the existence of any such letter, I pray as to the the accuracy of its content.

For a good recap of the Tebow controversy, check out Robert Molleda's blog post.

Read more!

Tuning Out, But Not Turning Away

I heard it twice on the radio before I really heard it. Twin sisters and a six year girl old were gunned own on Thanksgiving by their own brother. This is why I don't watch local TV news anymore. Reading about the tragedy seems more appropriate -- in that it lends itself to more reflection -- than the creepy 'excitement' that permeates TV coverage of these type of tragedies.

So I try and not watch the coverage, not because I am shocked that people are capable of terrible acts, but because I always seem to be shocked when people commit terrible acts. Better to pray for the victims. My Catholic faith teaches me to pray for the perpetrator as well, but frankly, I never seem to get to the evil-doers.

The resumé of the poor family involved is instructive in that they touched so many key places in our community. Which Miamian could feel impervious based on the following list:

• Our Lady of Lebanon Eastern Catholic Church
• Miami-Dade County Courthouse
• Miami-Dade Guardian-ad-Litem Program
• University of Miami
• Florida International University
• Gulliver Prep Academy
  
• Our Lady of Lourdes Academy
• Epiphany Catholic School

Today's paper brought the final roundhouse blow of the tragedy; This wasn't the first murder spree in this family. Back in 1973:

The twins' aunt -- Salwa Merrige-Abrams, a well-known opera singer and the sister of Michael Merhige, who is father of the twins and the suspected shooter -- killed her husband and two children at her home in Miami.

So what is the Christian response to living with the evil which is always amongst us, even when it does not shock us during Thanksgiving? C.S. Lewis' thoughts:

Now is our chance to choose the right side. God is holding back to give us that chance. It won't last forever. We must take it or leave it.

If you choose God, pray that your actions reflect your choice.

Articles referenced are copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Singing sisters silenced forever in Thanksgiving tragedy
Posted on Fri, Nov. 27, 2009
BY CAROL MARBIN MILLER AND JENNIFER LEBOVICH
jlebovich@MiamiHerald.com

Police are searching for Paul Michael Merhige in connections with a shooting that left four people dead on Thursday night in Jupiter.

Two years ago, twin sisters Carla Merhige and Lisa Knight volunteered at Miami's juvenile lockup, singing as a duet in front of dozens of troubled girls during Christmas.

Lisa, with her country twang, and Carla, with the more soulful voice, performed before scores of girls who were awaiting trial.

On Thursday, the voices of the two 33-year-old women were silenced forever.

Police say their brother, Paul Michael Merhige, gunned them down, also killing two other relatives -- his aunt, 76-year-old Raymonde Joseph, and 6-year-old Makayla Sitton -- at a family Thanksgiving gathering in Palm Beach County. Injured were two others, including Lisa's husband, Patrick Knight, 37. Authorities said Lisa Knight was pregnant. The motive was unclear.

Police fanned out across South Florida in search of Merhige late into the night Friday. Merhige, 35, who lived in Kendall, had fled in a blue 2007 Toyota Camry.

Little is known about him, though friends said Lisa Knight often spoke about her brother and the wonderful times they had together as kids. He graduated from Gulliver Prep and the University of Miami.

On Friday, friends of both women -- who had been born and raised in Miami -- mourned the violent end to their lives, filling the Facebook walls of the sisters with condolences.

The twins were ``inseparable,'' speaking on the phone several times daily, spending holidays together and going on joint family vacations, said Sonia Ferrer, the director of Miami-Dade's Guardian-ad-Litem Program, where Carla worked.

``They each made each other whole,'' Ferrer said. ``Carla was very proud of her sister's accomplishments, and her sister was very proud of Carla.''

Said Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman, who helped arrange the holiday season concerts: ``[Singing] was a gift they had, and they shared it with everyone -- especially the children. I never saw the two sisters without a smile.''

``They were the loveliest human beings you ever could meet,'' Lederman said. ``This is so sad.''

The sisters had ``angelic'' voices, often singing at courthouse holiday parties. They also sang at their church, Our Lady of Lebanon on Coral Way, and at funerals, weddings and other occasions, friends said.

The sisters went to Epiphany Catholic School -- where they sang duets in elementary school talent shows -- and then Our Lady of Lourdes Academy.

Lisa graduated from the University of Miami, where she later got an MBA; Carla from Florida International University.

Lisa Knight left a job at the Miami-Dade County courthouse a few years ago to work with her mother at Coldwell Banker in Pinecrest. She was remembered as a devoted friend, who always had time for others and was knowledgeable beyond her years.

``If you wanted advice she'd always have an ear for you to talk and basically be a friend,'' said Miguel Arellano, a real estate agent at Coldwell Banker. ``She always had wonderful advice for people. She was very caring and loving.''

Her husband, Patrick Knight, is a litigation attorney and motivational speaker.

Colleagues of Carla Merhige, a children's advocate who spent nine years at the guardian's office and recently started a new assignment working with adolescents aging out of the foster care system, described her as dedicated to children and families -- and a wonderful co-worker.

On Wednesday, Ferrer said, Merhige worked late into the evening to make sure that a Thanksgiving donation from the mayor of Doral got to 35 needy families in time for the holiday.

``She didn't want to impose any anybody else, but she wanted to make sure the families got what they needed,'' Ferrer said.

Kadie Black, legislative affairs director for Our Kids, Miami's private foster care agency, knew Merhige for years because Black -- whose mom, Joni Goodman, was then the guardian program's director -- virtually grew up around children's advocates and volunteers.

When Goodman was given a national guardian-ad-litem award in Washington last year, Merhige insisted on traveling to the capital -- paying her own way -- to share in Goodman's joy, Black said.

``She was just loved by everybody,'' Black said. ``Every time she was around people, she was just contagious -- her smile, her willingness to go above and beyond. She was a very special person.''

The past few years, Merhige sang at Our Kids' annual Adoption Day celebration, in which juvenile court judges formalized scores of adoptions, clearing the way for Miami-area children to begin new lives with permanent families.

``Carla was amazing,'' said Fran Allegra, Our Kids' executive director, who added Merhige offered to sing because she wanted to ``be a part'' of something special.

The sisters were close in good times and bad.

Lisa comforted Carla after her fiancé died suddenly of an aneurysm two years ago, Black said, and Carla was still recovering from the loss.

For months after her fiancé's death, Lederman said, Carla could no longer sing. But slowly, she regained her voice, and was back on stage again, holding her sister's hand.

The sisters were connected ``physically, emotionally, in every which way,'' said Miami-Dade Court administrator Ruben Carrerou, who hired Lisa Knight several years ago to be his executive assistant. Her death was ``like losing a daughter.''

Said Ferrer of Miami-Dade's Guardian-ad-Litem Program: ``They both came into the world together, and they left together.''

The Palm Beach Post contributed to this report.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Violent deaths mar Merhige family history
Posted on Sat, Nov. 28, 2009
BY ELINOR J. BRECHER
ebrecher@MiamiHerald.com

The Thanksgiving Day tragedy in Palm Beach County bears an eerie similarity to a prior violent episode in the Merhige family.

In July 1973, the twins' aunt -- Salwa Merrige-Abrams, a well-known opera singer and the sister of Michael Merhige, who is father of the twins and the suspected shooter -- killed her husband and two children at her home in Miami.

The mezzo soprano -- who gave up a high-profile career to raise her children -- died five days later, at 43, of a drug overdose.

It happened one day after Merrige-Abrams, a Brooklynite who Anglicized the family's Syrian name, and James Abrams, 45, a National Airlines pilot, had been in court for a final divorce hearing.

She shot him, daughter Melissa Ann, 10, and son Jack, 14, with a .38 caliber revolver.

The Abrams' 19-year marriage broke up after Jim had an affair with a flight attendant, fell in love and moved out.

Retired Miami police officer Lloyd Hough, sole investigator on the 1973 murders, came to know Michael Merhige well at the time.

He recognized him in television coverage of Thursday's events.

"They're a super-nice family,'' Hough said. "It's the same family.''

He recalled that Jim Abrams came to his ex-wife's house, in the 5400 block of Southwest 60th Court, after she called saying she needed to see him.

Before he got there, she put the children and their poodle mix into her car. A stereo blared.

As Abrams lit a cigarette in the master bedroom, his ex-wife shot him four times in the chest.

She then called Jack into the house and emptied the gun into his body, reloaded, brought Melissa Ann into a different room and shot her.

She again reloaded, said Hough, then swallowed a handful of barbiturates and lapsed into a coma.

Police found her on the living room floor near her piano. She later died at South Miami Hospital.

The dog was still in the car when Hough arrived at the house, a detail that helped him figure out how Salwa managed to kill three people in 10 minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Read more!

Weakness Which Leads To Perfection

What is meant in St Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians, where he notes that God spoke to him saying, "My grace is enough for you, for in human weakness the power of God reaches perfection?" Fr Vallee gives us his thoughts on it and concludes his homily this way:

The point is that it does not matter what Paul’s “weakness” is. We all have weaknesses and stuff about ourselves we are ashamed of. The point is God’s response to Paul’s weakness. Because God addresses our weaknesses with the same words. God tells Paul: “My grace is enough for you, for in human weakness the power of God reaches perfection.” We don’t have to be perfect. In fact, the fact that we are not perfect is precisely what forces us to realize our need for God’s grace. Ignatius of Loyola wrote: Take Lord, and receive all my liberty, my memory, my understanding and my entire will, all I have and call my own. You have given all to me. To you, Lord, I return it. Everything is yours; do with it what you will. Give me only your love and your grace; that is enough for me.

The email address to request to be put on Vallee's email distribution list is Cioran262@aol.com. To see the entire homily click on 'read more.' Search for other Fr Vallee homilies in this blog by entering 'Vallee' in the search box in the upper left hand corner or look for Fr Vallee in the Labels.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fr Vallee Homily - July 4, 2009

I. Thorn in the flesh, angel of Satan
One of the most amazing passages of Scripture, in my view at least, is today’s second reading from Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians. Paul writes: “In order that I might not become inflated and arrogant, I was given a thorn in the flesh, an angel of Satan, to beat me and keep me from becoming proud. Three times I begged the Lord to take this from me. But he said, ‘My grace is enough for you, for in human weakness the power of God reaches perfection.’” This is a very beautiful and yet somewhat enigmatic passage. Notice that Paul does not tell us what exactly this “thorn in the flesh” might be. We can be pretty sure as to what it is not. It is not pain or persecution, trials or tribulations. Why? Because Paul just told us that he willingly boasts of what he suffers for the sake of the Gospel. So what is it that so torments Paul? One thing is sure, it something that Paul sees as a weakness and something not to boast of but to be ashamed of.

II. First Possible thorn: character flaw
There are many possibilities as to the nature of this “angel of Satan.” Let’s look at three. First, Paul could be referring to some sort of a character flaw on his part. He had several to deal with. His worst problem was that he had a terrible temper and an acidic tongue. When Barnabas in Acts, asks him to take back John Mark, Paul says he is a baby and should go back home to his mommy. In Galatians, he writes, with a somewhat poisonous pen, “how stupid can you be!” Later in Galatians, Paul writes, “Henceforth, let no man bother me, for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord’s passion.” One thing is certain, Paul was not so good at playing nice with the other children.

III. Second: Physical problem
The second possibility is that Paul could have been talking about some sort of physical problem which may have gotten in the way of his preaching the Gospel. For example, it is believed that Paul stuttered. This, of course would have affected his ability to preach the Gospel. In the 20th chapter of Acts we read that Paul was preaching, “on and on” and a young man got so bored that he fell from a third story window and died. Paul had to go down and raise him from the dead. My homilies are not always great but I have never killed anyone. Which is all for the best, being that I am not at all confident about the raising from the dead part afterwards. Also, when Paul describes his fits and seizures, some modern doctors have surmised that he was perhaps an epileptic. Of course, is always a bit dangerous to perform such anachronistic diagnoses.

IV. Moral Problem
The third and, I think, the most interesting possibility is that Paul is alluding to some sort of moral flaw, some sort of sin he struggles with. We have already seen that he has a bit of trouble with wrath and pride and envy. But maybe it is something else. A French psychologist wrote a book in the 1980s which analyzed all of Paul’s comments about women and suggests that Paul does not like them very much. Not to put too fine a point on it but that Paul perhaps struggled with desires which ran contrary to nature. Of course, there is no way to know being that Paul doesn’t say.

V. Grace is enough
The point is that it does not matter what Paul’s “weakness” is. We all have weaknesses and stuff about ourselves we are ashamed of. The point is God’s response to Paul’s weakness. Because God addresses our weaknesses with the same words. God tells Paul: “My grace is enough for you, for in human weakness the power of God reaches perfection.” We don’t have to be perfect. In fact, the fact that we are not perfect is precisely what forces us to realize our need for God’s grace. Ignatius of Loyola wrote: Take Lord, and receive all my liberty, my memory, my understanding and my entire will, all I have and call my own. You have given all to me. To you, Lord, I return it. Everything is yours; do with it what you will. Give me only your love and your grace; that is enough for me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Read more!

The Episcopal Church: Unstiff Competition

The lack of class exhibited by the local Episcopal Church in general and Bishop Leo Frade in particular, makes one conscious that religions, even those with similar beliefs, are in competition for parishioners. So with an eye towards highlighting differences, something which Bishop Frade has been doing with a surprisingly cheerful enthusiasm, let's check out the competition.

At first glance, the Episcopal Church appears so flexible as to its core beliefs, that I would not be surprised to see Plastic Man at their next poaching press conference. The only delay might be that he needs to get a girlfriend [or boyfriend in select dioceses] at his side before they go on camera.

Even determining how to refer to the Episcopal Church is not a simple proposition. The former Joe Robbie Stadium looks stable in comparison. A brief rundown of its history:

• Church of England in British North America (1497–1775).
• Forced to break with the Church of England after the American Revolution.
• Became First Anglican Province outside the British Isles (1789).
• During the American Civil War, an Episcopal Church in the Confederate States of America was temporarily formed from the dioceses within the seceded states.
• The Reformed Episcopal Church broke away in 1873.
• The Continuing Anglican Movement broke away in 1977 out of frustration over the Church's position on homosexuality, the ordination of openly homosexual priests and Bishops, and abortion among others.
• Six Anglican organizations, calling their alliance Common Cause, broke away in 2004 to promote 'orthodox Anglicanism.'
• The Anglican Church in North America broke away in 2008 to form a "separate ecclesiastical structure" for Anglican faithful in North America, distinct from the Episcopal Church in the USA, since it believed that Church to be heretical.
• Today known as The Episcopal Church, The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America and the Anglican Church in Canada, they are the arm of Anglicanism in North America.

What Episcopalians Believe on Issues

Ordination of Women

• In 1976, the General Convention amended Canon law to permit the ordination of women to the priesthood.
• Most dioceses of the Episcopal Church ordain women as priests and bishops.
• However, the full Anglican Communion [of which the Episcopal Church is part of] does not universally accept the ordination of women. Some individual US dioceses do not either.
• The General Convention [GC] reaffirmed in 1994 that both men and women may enter into the ordination process, but also recognized that there is value to the theological position of those who oppose women's ordination [JC - no word on whether any remaining testicles in the faith were actually removed during the session, or whether it was assumed they no longer existed].

Homosexuality

• The Episcopal Church affirmed at the 1976 GC that homosexuals are "children of God" who deserve acceptance and pastoral care from the church.
• However in 1991, the GC seemed to contradict itself when it affirmed that "physical sexual expression" is only appropriate within the monogamous, lifelong "union of husband and wife."
• In 1994, the GC determined that church membership would not be determined on "marital status, sex, or sexual orientation". The GC also discourages the use of conversion therapy to "change" homosexuals into heterosexuals."
• The first openly homosexual bishop--a divorced father of two--Gene Robinson, was elected in June 2003.

Abortion

• 1958 -- Held a strong pro-life position, stating, "Abortion and infanticide are to be condemned."
• 1967 -- The 62nd GC of the Episcopal Church supported abortion law "reform," to permit the "termination of pregnancy" for reasons of life, rape, incest, fetal deformity, or physical or mental health of the mother.
• 1982 -- The 66th GC condemned the use of abortion as a means of gender selection and non-serious abnormalities.
• 1988 -- The 69th GC developed a position that stated, "All human life is sacred. Hence it is sacred from its inception until death." The statement goes on to call for church programs to assist women with problem pregnancies and to emphasize the seriousness of the abortion decision.
• 1994 -- The 71st GC expressed "unequivocal opposition to any ... action ... that [would] abridge the right of a woman to reach an informed decision about the termination of her pregnancy, or that would limit the access of a woman to a safe means of acting upon her decision."
• In 1997, at the 72nd General Convention, the delegates approved a resolution that did not condemn partial-birth abortions but expressed grave concerns about the procedure, "except in extreme situations."
• The Episcopal Church currently supports abortion and opposes efforts to restrict it.
• Recently, the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, MA, chose a lesbian, pro-abortion president to lead the seminary.
• Ms Katherine Hancock Ragsdale recently gave a sermon where she stated, "Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done."

The shift in the Episcopalian position on abortion no doubt reflects 'progress' in the secular world. Given that background, the shift in allegiance by Fr Cutie is nothing if not logical. An ostensibly confused priest simply could not refuse a certifiably confused Church.

The Catholic Church is often criticized for moving too slowly. I think the Episcopal Church is a good example of why we should continue to do so.

Read more!

What Real Catholics Believe

The simple answer is, The Creed. But as to the controversial issues, such as abortion, the title post is an oxymoron. Catholics are to taught to avoid judging others [ i.e. who is the real ...?]. We are taught instead to pray for those we disagree with [the essence of the Christian message], while trying to remain as obedient as possible to the tenets of the faith in our own lives.

However, although most Catholics attempt to practice the obedience and restraint asked of them, not all do. Which creates the following frustrating scenario; Catholics who do not feel bound by the Church's teachings frequently become the loudest voice in the public square. In effect, they contradict the stated beliefs of the Church, benefit from the restraint and obedience shown by those who do comply with the Church's teachings and then lecture the obedient Catholics as lacking the intellect and courage which drove them to their heroic opposition, or so they tell us.

In National Review, George Weigel, analyzes President Obama's comments at Notre Dame and points out how he attempted to inject himself into our Catholic debate:

What was surprising, and ought to be disturbing to anyone who cares about religious freedom in these United States, was the president’s decision to insert himself into the ongoing Catholic debate over the boundaries of Catholic identity and the applicability of settled Catholic conviction in the public square. Obama did this by suggesting, not altogether subtly, who the real Catholics in America are. The real Catholics, you see, are those like the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, who are “congenial and gentle” in persuasion, men and women who are “always trying to bring people together,” Catholics who are “always trying to find the common ground.” The fact that Cardinal Bernardin’s undoubted geniality and gentility in bringing people together to find the common ground invariably ended with a “consensus” that matched the liberal or progressive position of the moment went unremarked — because, for a good postmodern liberal like President Obama, that progressive “consensus” is so self-evidently true that one can afford to be generous in acknowledging that others, less enlightened but arguably sincere, have different views.

In a way, worrying too much about these matters, is an example of a lack of faith. Our God and our faith have survived much more serious issues than presumptuous charlatans in the public square, but the urge to strike back in all sorts of ways is strong. But not, thankfully, overwhelming. For this peaceful balance to continue, we pray.

What do real Catholics believe? This faith [redacted by local Archdiocese] is hard, man.

The Nicene Creed, George Weigel's article referenced and President Obama's speech at Notre Dame are copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nicene Creed

We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in being with the Father. Through Him all things were made. For us men and our salvation He came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary , and became man. For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate; He suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day He rose again in fulfillment of the scriptures: He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son, He is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama and the ‘Real’ Catholics - The president inserts himself into a religious debate. By George Weigel - May 18, 2009

Passionate debates over doctrine, identity, and the boundaries of “communion” have been a staple of the American religious landscape for centuries: Trinitarians vs. Unitarians in 19th-century New England; Modernists vs. Fundamentalists in early-20th-century Presbyterianism; Missouri Synod Lutherans vs. Wisconsin Synod Lutherans vs. Other Sorts of Lutherans down to today. Yet never in our history has a president of the United States, in the exercise of his public office, intervened in such disputes in order to secure a political advantage.

Until yesterday, at the University of Notre Dame.

The principal themes of President Obama’s Notre Dame commencement address were entirely predictable; indeed, in some offices I know, betting pools were forming last week on how many of the Catholic Left hot buttons Obama would hit. In the event, he hit for the cycle several times over, mentioning “common ground”; tolerance and reconciliation amid diversity; Father Hesburgh; respect for those with whose moral judgments we disagree; problem-solving over ideology; Father Hesburgh; saving God’s creation from climate change; pulling together; Father Hesburgh; open hearts; open minds; fair-minded words; Father Hesburgh. None of this was surprising, and most of it was said with the president’s usual smooth eloquence.

What was surprising, and ought to be disturbing to anyone who cares about religious freedom in these United States, was the president’s decision to insert himself into the ongoing Catholic debate over the boundaries of Catholic identity and the applicability of settled Catholic conviction in the public square. Obama did this by suggesting, not altogether subtly, who the real Catholics in America are. The real Catholics, you see, are those like the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, who are “congenial and gentle” in persuasion, men and women who are “always trying to bring people together,” Catholics who are “always trying to find the common ground.” The fact that Cardinal Bernardin’s undoubted geniality and gentility in bringing people together to find the common ground invariably ended with a “consensus” that matched the liberal or progressive position of the moment went unremarked — because, for a good postmodern liberal like President Obama, that progressive “consensus” is so self-evidently true that one can afford to be generous in acknowledging that others, less enlightened but arguably sincere, have different views.

Cardinal Bernardin gave a moving and powerful testimony to Christian faith in his gallant response to the cancer that finally killed him. Prior to that last, great witness, however, the late archbishop of Chicago was best known publicly for his advocacy of a “consistent ethic of life,” in which the abortion issue was linked to the abolition of capital punishment and nuclear arms control. And whatever Bernardin’s intentions in formulating what came to be known popularly as the “seamless garment” approach to public policy, the net effect of the consistent ethic of life was to validate politically the intellectual mischief of Mario Cuomo’s notorious 1984 Notre Dame speech and to give two generations of Catholic politicians a virtual pass on the abortion question by allowing them to argue that, hey, I’m batting .667 on the consistent ethic of life.

The U.S. bishops abandoned the “seamless garment” metaphor in 1998, substituting the image of the “foundations of the house of freedom” to explain the priority to be given the life issues in the Church’s address to public policy — and in the consciences of Catholic politicians. The foundations of the house of freedom, the bishops argued, are the moral truths about the human person that we can know by reason. Those truths are embodied in law in what we call civil rights. Thus, the life issues are the great civil-rights issues of the moment. This powerful argument did not, however, sit well with Catholics comfortable with the Cuomo Compromise (“I’m personally opposed, but I can’t impose my views on a pluralistic society”), for these good liberals and progressives had long prided themselves on being — like Father Hesburgh — champions of civil rights.

So the “seamless garment” went underground for a decade, only to be dusted off by Douglas Kmiec and others in the 2008 campaign; there, a variant form of the consistent ethic was used to argue that Barack Obama was the real pro-life candidate on offer. As casuistry, this was risible. But it worked well enough that Catholic Obama-supporters on the Notre Dame board saw their chances and took ’em, arranging for the president to come to Notre Dame to complete the seamless garment’s dust-off and give it a new lease on life by presenting the late Cardinal Bernardin — “a kind and good man . . . a saintly man” — as the very model of a real Catholic in America. Not the kind of Catholic who would ever criticize Notre Dame for bestowing an honorary doctorate of laws on a man determined to enshrine in law what the Catholic Church regards as a fundamental injustice. Not the kind of man who would suggest that, with the life issues, we’re living through the moral equivalent of the Lincoln/Douglas debates, with Barack Obama unhappily choosing to play the role of Stephen A. Douglas. Not a man, in other words, like Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, Cardinal Bernardin’s successor, the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and one of the most articulate critics of Notre Dame’s decision to honor a president who manifestly does not share what Notre Dame claims is its institutional commitment to the Church’s defense of life.



Whether or not President Obama knew precisely what he was doing — and I’m inclined to think that this politically savvy White House and its allies among Catholic progressive intellectuals knew exactly what they were doing — is irrelevant. In order to secure the political advantage Obama had gained among Catholic voters last November, the president of the United States decided that he would define what it means to be a real Catholic in 21st-century America — not the bishop of Fort Wayne–South Bend, who in sorrow declined to attend Notre Dame’s commencement; not the 80-some bishops who publicly criticized Notre Dame’s decision to invite the president to receive an honorary degree; not the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which explicitly and unambiguously instructed Catholic institutions not to do what Notre Dame did. He, President Obama, would settle the decades-long intra-Catholic culture war in favor of one faction — the faction that had supported his candidacy and that had spent the first months of his administration defending his policies.

At the Seventh Provincial Council of Baltimore in 1849, the U.S. bishops petitioned the Holy See to grant the archbishop of Baltimore the title of Primate of the Catholic Church in the United States (as, for example, the archbishops of Québec City and Mexico City are the “Primates” of their respective countries). The Holy See declined and, ever since, the archbishops of Baltimore have had to settle for being the ordinaries of the “premier” see in American Catholicism. Barack Obama at Notre Dame was not so modest. Rather like Napoleon taking the diadem out of the hands of Pope Pius VII and crowning himself emperor, President Obama has, wittingly or not, declared himself the Primate of American Catholicism.

What the bishops of the United States have to say about this usurpation of their authority will be very interesting to see. Whether Obama’s Catholic acolytes will recognize a genuine threat to religious freedom in what they are already celebrating as their Notre Dame victory over the pro-life yahoos and reactionaries will also be instructive.

— George Weigel is distinguished senior fellow of Washington’s Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he holds the William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below is the text of President Obama's Notre Dame commencement speech, as prepared for delivery. Full video is below.

Thank you, Father Jenkins for that generous introduction. You are doing an outstanding job as president of this fine institution, and your continued and courageous commitment to honest, thoughtful dialogue is an inspiration to us all.

Good afternoon Father Hesburgh, Notre Dame trustees, faculty, family, friends, and the class of 2009. I am honored to be here today, and grateful to all of you for allowing me to be part of your graduation.

I want to thank you for this honorary degree. I know it has not been without controversy. I don't know if you're aware of this, but these honorary degrees are apparently pretty hard to come by. So far I'm only 1 for 2 as President. Father Hesburgh is 150 for 150. I guess that's better. Father Ted, after the ceremony, maybe you can give me some pointers on how to boost my average.

I also want to congratulate the class of 2009 for all your accomplishments. And since this is Notre Dame, I mean both in the classroom and in the competitive arena. We all know about this university's proud and storied football team, but I also hear that Notre Dame holds the largest outdoor 5-on-5 basketball tournament in the world - Bookstore Basketball.

Now this excites me. I want to congratulate the winners of this year's tournament, a team by the name of "Hallelujah Holla Back." Well done. Though I have to say, I am personally disappointed that the "Barack O'Ballers" didn't pull it out. Next year, if you need a 6'2" forward with a decent jumper, you know where I live.

Every one of you should be proud of what you have achieved at this institution. One hundred and sixty three classes of Notre Dame graduates have sat where you are today. Some were here during years that simply rolled into the next without much notice or fanfare - periods of relative peace and prosperity that required little by way of sacrifice or struggle.

You, however, are not getting off that easy. Your class has come of age at a moment of great consequence for our nation and the world - a rare inflection point in history where the size and scope of the challenges before us require that we remake our world to renew its promise; that we align our deepest values and commitments to the demands of a new age. It is a privilege and a responsibility afforded to few generations - and a task that you are now called to fulfill.

This is the generation that must find a path back to prosperity and decide how we respond to a global economy that left millions behind even before this crisis hit - an economy where greed and short-term thinking were too often rewarded at the expense of fairness, and diligence, and an honest day's work.

We must decide how to save God's creation from a changing climate that threatens to destroy it. We must seek peace at a time when there are those who will stop at nothing to do us harm, and when weapons in the hands of a few can destroy the many. And we must find a way to reconcile our ever-shrinking world with its ever-growing diversity - diversity of thought, of culture, and of belief.

In short, we must find a way to live together as one human family.

It is this last challenge that I'd like to talk about today. For the major threats we face in the 21st century - whether it's global recession or violent extremism; the spread of nuclear weapons or pandemic disease - do not discriminate. They do not recognize borders. They do not see color. They do not target specific ethnic groups.

Moreover, no one person, or religion, or nation can meet these challenges alone. Our very survival has never required greater cooperation and understanding among all people from all places than at this moment in history.

Unfortunately, finding that common ground - recognizing that our fates are tied up, as Dr. King said, in a "single garment of destiny" - is not easy. Part of the problem, of course, lies in the imperfections of man - our selfishness, our pride, our stubbornness, our acquisitiveness, our insecurities, our egos; all the cruelties large and small that those of us in the Christian tradition understand to be rooted in original sin. We too often seek advantage over others. We cling to outworn prejudice and fear those who are unfamiliar. Too many of us view life only through the lens of immediate self-interest and crass materialism; in which the world is necessarily a zero-sum game. The strong too often dominate the weak, and too many of those with wealth and with power find all manner of justification for their own privilege in the face of poverty and injustice. And so, for all our technology and scientific advances, we see around the globe violence and want and strife that would seem sadly familiar to those in ancient times.

We know these things; and hopefully one of the benefits of the wonderful education you have received is that you have had time to consider these wrongs in the world, and grown determined, each in your own way, to right them. And yet, one of the vexing things for those of us interested in promoting greater understanding and cooperation among people is the discovery that even bringing together persons of good will, men and women of principle and purpose, can be difficult.

The soldier and the lawyer may both love this country with equal passion, and yet reach very different conclusions on the specific steps needed to protect us from harm. The gay activist and the evangelical pastor may both deplore the ravages of HIV/AIDS, but find themselves unable to bridge the cultural divide that might unite their efforts. Those who speak out against stem cell research may be rooted in admirable conviction about the sacredness of life, but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved.

The question, then, is how do we work through these conflicts? Is it possible for us to join hands in common effort? As citizens of a vibrant and varied democracy, how do we engage in vigorous debate? How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without demonizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side?

Nowhere do these questions come up more powerfully than on the issue of abortion.

As I considered the controversy surrounding my visit here, I was reminded of an encounter I had during my Senate campaign, one that I describe in a book I wrote called The Audacity of Hope. A few days after I won the Democratic nomination, I received an email from a doctor who told me that while he voted for me in the primary, he had a serious concern that might prevent him from voting for me in the general election. He described himself as a Christian who was strongly pro-life, but that's not what was preventing him from voting for me.

What bothered the doctor was an entry that my campaign staff had posted on my website - an entry that said I would fight "right-wing ideologues who want to take away a woman's right to choose." The doctor said that he had assumed I was a reasonable person, but that if I truly believed that every pro-life individual was simply an ideologue who wanted to inflict suffering on women, then I was not very reasonable. He wrote, "I do not ask at this point that you oppose abortion, only that you speak about this issue in fair-minded words."

Fair-minded words.

After I read the doctor's letter, I wrote back to him and thanked him. I didn't change my position, but I did tell my staff to change the words on my website. And I said a prayer that night that I might extend the same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me. Because when we do that - when we open our hearts and our minds to those who may not think like we do or believe what we do - that's when we discover at least the possibility of common ground.

That's when we begin to say, "Maybe we won't agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions.

So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women."

Understand - I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away. No matter how much we may want to fudge it - indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory - the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable. Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.

Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.

It's a way of life that has always been the Notre Dame tradition. Father Hesburgh has long spoken of this institution as both a lighthouse and a crossroads. The lighthouse that stands apart, shining with the wisdom of the Catholic tradition, while the crossroads is where "...differences of culture and religion and conviction can co-exist with friendship, civility, hospitality, and especially love." And I want to join him and Father Jenkins in saying how inspired I am by the maturity and responsibility with which this class has approached the debate surrounding today's ceremony.

This tradition of cooperation and understanding is one that I learned in my own life many years ago - also with the help of the Catholic Church.

I was not raised in a particularly religious household, but my mother instilled in me a sense of service and empathy that eventually led me to become a community organizer after I graduated college. A group of Catholic churches in Chicago helped fund an organization known as the Developing Communities Project, and we worked to lift up South Side neighborhoods that had been devastated when the local steel plant closed.

It was quite an eclectic crew. Catholic and Protestant churches. Jewish and African-American organizers. Working-class black and white and Hispanic residents. All of us with different experiences. All of us with different beliefs. But all of us learned to work side by side because all of us saw in these neighborhoods other human beings who needed our help - to find jobs and improve schools. We were bound together in the service of others.

And something else happened during the time I spent in those neighborhoods. Perhaps because the church folks I worked with were so welcoming and understanding; perhaps because they invited me to their services and sang with me from their hymnals; perhaps because I witnessed all of the good works their faith inspired them to perform, I found myself drawn - not just to work with the church, but to be in the church. It was through this service that I was brought to Christ.

At the time, Cardinal Joseph Bernardin was the Archbishop of Chicago. For those of you too young to have known him, he was a kind and good and wise man. A saintly man. I can still remember him speaking at one of the first organizing meetings I attended on the South Side. He stood as both a lighthouse and a crossroads - unafraid to speak his mind on moral issues ranging from poverty, AIDS, and abortion to the death penalty and nuclear war. And yet, he was congenial and gentle in his persuasion, always trying to bring people together; always trying to find common ground. Just before he died, a reporter asked Cardinal Bernardin about this approach to his ministry. And he said, "You can't really get on with preaching the Gospel until you've touched minds and hearts."

My heart and mind were touched by the words and deeds of the men and women I worked alongside with in Chicago. And I'd like to think that we touched the hearts and minds of the neighborhood families whose lives we helped change. For this, I believe, is our highest calling.

You are about to enter the next phase of your life at a time of great uncertainty. You will be called upon to help restore a free market that is also fair to all who are willing to work; to seek new sources of energy that can save our planet; to give future generations the same chance that you had to receive an extraordinary education. And whether as a person drawn to public service, or someone who simply insists on being an active citizen, you will be exposed to more opinions and ideas broadcast through more means of communications than have ever existed before. You will hear talking heads scream on cable, read blogs that claim definitive knowledge, and watch politicians pretend to know what they're talking about. Occasionally, you may also have the great fortune of seeing important issues debated by well-intentioned, brilliant minds. In fact, I suspect that many of you will be among those bright stars.

In this world of competing claims about what is right and what is true, have confidence in the values with which you've been raised and educated. Be unafraid to speak your mind when those values are at stake. Hold firm to your faith and allow it to guide you on your journey. Stand as a lighthouse.

But remember too that the ultimate irony of faith is that it necessarily admits doubt. It is the belief in things not seen. It is beyond our capacity as human beings to know with certainty what God has planned for us or what He asks of us, and those of us who believe must trust that His wisdom is greater than our own.

This doubt should not push us away from our faith. But it should humble us. It should temper our passions, and cause us to be wary of self-righteousness. It should compel us to remain open, and curious, and eager to continue the moral and spiritual debate that began for so many of you within the walls of Notre Dame. And within our vast democracy, this doubt should remind us to persuade through reason, through an appeal whenever we can to universal rather than parochial principles, and most of all through an abiding example of good works, charity, kindness, and service that moves hearts and minds.

For if there is one law that we can be most certain of, it is the law that binds people of all faiths and no faith together. It is no coincidence that it exists in Christianity and Judaism; in Islam and Hinduism; in Buddhism and humanism. It is, of course, the Golden Rule - the call to treat one another as we wish to be treated. The call to love. To serve. To do what we can to make a difference in the lives of those with whom we share the same brief moment on this Earth.

So many of you at Notre Dame - by the last count, upwards of 80% -- have lived this law of love through the service you've performed at schools and hospitals; international relief agencies and local charities. That is incredibly impressive, and a powerful testament to this institution. Now you must carry the tradition forward. Make it a way of life. Because when you serve, it doesn't just improve your community, it makes you a part of your community. It breaks down walls. It fosters cooperation. And when that happens - when people set aside their differences to work in common effort toward a common good; when they struggle together, and sacrifice together, and learn from one another - all things are possible.

After all, I stand here today, as President and as an African-American, on the 55th anniversary of the day that the Supreme Court handed down the decision in Brown v. the Board of Education. Brown was of course the first major step in dismantling the "separate but equal" doctrine, but it would take a number of years and a nationwide movement to fully realize the dream of civil rights for all of God's children. There were freedom rides and lunch counters and Billy clubs, and there was also a Civil Rights Commission appointed by President Eisenhower. It was the twelve resolutions recommended by this commission that would ultimately become law in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

There were six members of the commission. It included five whites and one African-American; Democrats and Republicans; two Southern governors, the dean of a Southern law school, a Midwestern university president, and your own Father Ted Hesburgh, President of Notre Dame. They worked for two years, and at times, President Eisenhower had to intervene personally since no hotel or restaurant in the South would serve the black and white members of the commission together. Finally, when they reached an impasse in Louisiana, Father Ted flew them all to Notre Dame's retreat in Land O'Lakes, Wisconsin, where they eventually overcame their differences and hammered out a final deal.

Years later, President Eisenhower asked Father Ted how on Earth he was able to broker an agreement between men of such different backgrounds and beliefs. And Father Ted simply said that during their first dinner in Wisconsin, they discovered that they were all fishermen. And so he quickly readied a boat for a twilight trip out on the lake. They fished, and they talked, and they changed the course of history.

I will not pretend that the challenges we face will be easy, or that the answers will come quickly, or that all our differences and divisions will fade happily away. Life is not that simple. It never has been.

But as you leave here today, remember the lessons of Cardinal Bernardin, of Father Hesburgh, of movements for change both large and small. Remember that each of us, endowed with the dignity possessed by all children of God, has the grace to recognize ourselves in one another; to understand that we all seek the same love of family and the same fulfillment of a life well-lived. Remember that in the end, we are all fishermen.

If nothing else, that knowledge should give us faith that through our collective labor, and God's providence, and our willingness to shoulder each other's burdens, America will continue on its precious journey towards that more perfect union. Congratulations on your graduation, may God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read more!