Saturday, October 31, 2009

Health Care Reform, or 'Who Needs a Conscience? This is Medicine!'

You may find something from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in your church bulletin this Sunday. The American Bishops are trying to make it possible for people to both follow their conscience and keep their jobs. Or, standing in the way of an enlightened policy of state-sponsored health care.

How you see the bishops' action depends on what you think is real.

From the USCCB:
"...'Health care reform should be about saving lives, not destroying them,' the insert states. It urges readers to contact Senate leaders so they support efforts to 'incorporate longstanding policies against abortion funding and in favor of conscience rights' in health reform legislation.

" 'If these serious concerns are not addressed, the final bill should be opposed,' it adds.

"The insert highlights the Stupak Amendment from Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) that, it states, 'addresses essential pro-life concerns on abortion funding and conscience rights.'..."
(USCCB)
The National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC) supports the USCCB action.
"...Not only should taxpayers not be required to pay for immoral procedures, but provisions also must exist to prohibit mandates on providers. Excluding such provisions is contrary to the integrity of a free and pluralistic society. The NCBC believes that immoral mandates will be imposed if there is no explicit conscience provision, especially in the presence of a public option..."

"...The Stupak Amendment...if adopted would address essential pro-life concerns on abortion funding and conscience rights in the House version of the health care reform bill..."

"...For more information go to http://www.usccb.org/healthcare/. Parishes across the country will be invited to make use of educational materials, including a web address that allows parishioners to send an e-mail message to Congress with a click of a button.

"The bishops have asked for swift action in contacting congressional members through e-mail, phone calls or faxed letters. To take action go to http://www.nchla.org/issues.asp?ID=51. Our country is at a crossroads, not only in terms how our most vulnerable members will be treated, but also in terms of the future of conscience protections. ..."
(NCCB)
The vote could come in early November, so if anything is going to be done, it needs to be done soon. I'm glad to have the option of emailing - it's a whole lot easier, and makes it more likely that I'll get the message off.

That "To take action go to http://www.nchla.org/issues.asp?ID=51..." link takes you to a page on the National Committee for a Human Life Amendment website. You'll find links to information about "Conscience Problems in Health Care Reform Bills," "Current Policy on Federal Abortion Funding," and "What is the Legal Status Quo on Abortion?" - and a parish bulletin insert in English and in Spanish. Also links to letters and other documents.

Action Alert from the National Committee for A Human Life Amendment, October 30, 2009

The problem with 'health care reform' is that "...None of the bills retains longstanding current policies against abortion funding or abortion coverage mandates, and none fully protects conscience rights in health care...." (National Committee for A Human Life Amendment)

This link takes you to a page on the National Committee for A Human Life Amendment website, with information and a "send e-mail to Congress" button: http://www.nchla.org/actiondisplay.asp?ID=279.

The NCBC has information about the "Stupak Funding Amendment to H.R. 3200 (7/31/2009)" at http://www.nchla.org/docdisplay.asp?ID=278, the "Stupak Conscience Amendment to H.R. 3200 (7/31/2009)" at http://www.nchla.org/docdisplay.asp?ID=280, and other legislative information. on that Health Care Reform page, too.

I clicked that "send e-mail to Congress" button on the Action Alert page, decided to use what they'd written with no additions, and filled in the "User Information" so that the system would know which members of Congress represent me.

The system worked, apparently, and sent emails to the offices of Senator Amy Klobuchar, Senator Al Franken and Representative Collin Peterson: all from Minnesota.

That didn't take long, and was pretty easy.

No pressure, but if you think letting people follow their conscience is a good idea: this is about as easy a way of supporting that belief as you'll find.

Related posts: In the news: Background:

Friday, October 30, 2009

John Holdren Quote Could be Accurate: That Bothers Me

I really don't know what to think of this.
"...For example, under the United States Constitution, effective population-control programs could be enacted under the clauses that empower Congress to appropriate funds to provide for the general welfare and to regulate commerce, or under the equal-protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Such laws constitutionally could be very broad. Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society. Few today consider the situation in the United States serious enough to justify compulsion, however...."
You've probably never heard of my source for that, and I haven't been able to confirm that it's a quote from John Holdren's "Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions" (Paul R. Ehrlich; Anne H. Ehrlich; John P. Holdren. ISBN 0716705958 (1973)).1

The same source added:
"...To control population in America, Holdren further writes that he favors 'adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods.'..."
Naturally, people defending America's dominant culture insist that Obama's advisor for Science and Technology couldn't possibly have written anything like that. It's sort of like eugenics: before people in Auschwitz and Dachau were found and rescued, saying that the unfit should be purged for the good of the race sounded pretty cool and sophisticated; after, not so much.

Naturally, there have been what is becoming the usual warning: criticism of the positions of President Obama's advisers is wrong. "Right-wing Attacks on Science Adviser Continue", Pratt, Andrew Plemmons, Science Progress (July 21, 2009) for example.

Disco, the Population Explosion, and All That

I think the copyright date of that book Holdren co-authored is important: 1973. So is the name of one of the co-authors, Paul Ehrlich.

Back in the mid-seventies all right-thinking (left, actually) people on campus knew that if American imperialist aggression leading to a nuclear apocalypse didn't kill us, the population explosion would. Paul Ehrlich made quite a name for himself, saying that Earth couldn't possibly support all those people. (Emotion Trumping Reason...)

Finally 1980, 1985, and 1999 passed.
  • The American life expectancy did not drop to 42
  • Famine and disease didn't purge humanity down to a nice 1,500,000,000 or so
  • The number of Americans stubbornly refused to get down to Ehrlich's 22,600,000 survivors
The bleak outlook that just has to be so is now Global Warming. But Paul Ehrlich still has his fans. (December 23, 2008)

The point of that history lesson is that presidential adviser John Holdren was a lot younger in 1973 - and following the lead of what he'd probably been told were the best minds of the period. I wasn't surprised to see that Mr. Holdren's co-authored book was published in 1973. I was doing time in college then, and remember how 'obvious' the perils of overpopulation were supposed to be.

However, I've also noticed that Earth's population has passed 6,000,000,000 - with food production keeping up and then some. Yes, people are starving: but it's a matter of getting food to them, not being unable to produce enough. ("Darfur and the United Nations: Something's Happening," Another War-on-Terror Blog (July 11, 2008))

I'd be willing to dismiss both Holdren quotes, except that I was there, on a college campus, back in the mid-seventies: and recognize a set of ideas that were the norm for earnest depopulators.

What bothers me is the possibility that John Holdren, like many others, may not have been paying more attention to this culture's 'serious thinkers,' and less to what's actually been happening, for the last third of a century.

Related posts:
Updated 6:12 p.m. Central (October 30, 2009)
I found a few typos, and a missing subheading, which have now been corrected.
1 I don't have a copy of the book on hand, don't have the budget to purchase one, and - given the 'publish now' pace of the blogosphere - don't have the weeks, or months, or year or so it could take to borrow a copy through a library system.

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Halloween's Coming: Why aren't I Ranting?

Back in the 'good old days' of my youth, which I'm sincerely glad to have in time's rear-view mirror, a few 'good Christians' went in for an eldritch brew of numerology, fortunetelling and yellow journalism. They were very 'Biblical' about it, though, and probably didn't see anything odd about their beliefs.

That was then. I haven't run into anything quite like that lot for a few decades. Either 'spiritual' fashions have changed, or it was a very regional subculture. Can't say that I miss it.

What I have run into (and avoid, when possible) more recently are rants about Halloween. The holiday, in some people's view, is Satanic: along with beer and Bingo. All of which can be badly misused, of course.

Halloween and Those People

I think part of the problem, apart from the scary costumes and gory movies, is that Halloween isn't a particularly 'American' holiday.
"The celebration of Halloween has dual origins. The first is in a pre-Christian Celtic feast associated with the Celtic New Year. The second is in the Christian celebration of All Saints Day (Nov. 1st) and All Souls Day (Nov. 2). In the British Isles November 1st is called All Hallows, thus the evening before is All Hallows Eve...."
(EWTN)
Yeah: Halloween has roots in old Celtic traditions and beliefs; but its name comes from its close association with not one but two (shudder) Catholic celebrations. I know: EWTN refers to All Saints Day and All Souls Day as "Christian" celebrations - and so they are - but they're also something that 'those Catholics' do.

I suspect that the candy hit the fan in the 19th century:
"...With the massive emigration of Irish in the last century the All Hallows Eve customs of costumes, jack-o-lanterns and trick or treating, were transported to North America...."
(EWTN)
As an ancestor of mine said, about another ancestor of mine, "he doesn't have family: He's Irish." I don't imagine that Halloween celebrations' association with 'those Irish' helped its reputation.

Halloween, Beer, and Bingo

Catholicism doesn't seem very "Christian" from some points of view. My faith isn't based on the idea that beer and Bingo are works of the devil, along with a handful of other aspects of life that a particular subculture doesn't approve of.

Sure: alcohol abuse is a problem, and so is compulsive gambling. But America tried Prohibition - and most people in this country know how well that went over.1 The Church has prohibitions, but they're against getting drunk, or indulging in any sort of excess. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2290)

When it comes to trick-or treats and other non-destructive aspects of Halloween, the Catholic Church doesn't mind. You can get an idea of what does matter in the reviews of current movies.

It might surprise you. Ten years ago, "The Canterville Ghost" (1944) was recommended family viewing for Halloween.

This year, "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian" (2009) got an "A-I -- general patronage" rating from the USCCB. On the other hand, "9" (2009) was rated "L -- limited adult audience, films whose problematic content many adults would find troubling." Or, apparently, in the case of this adult, annoying.

How Could Catholic Bishops Possibly Disapprove of an "Artistically Accomplished" Movie?

I'm a bit disappointed by that review of "9": I've seen ads for the movie and had it on my 'see it someday' list.

The USCCB isn't trying to be a killjoy with its rating the movie. The Catholic bishops are making an effort to inform Catholics - and anybody else who's interested - what Catholicism is, and how Catholic beliefs are applied in today's culture.

The "9" review gives the bottom line good news and bad news about the movie in the first paragraph:
"Artistically accomplished but intellectually problematic animated fantasy in which the doll-like titular creature ... leads a band of similar beings ... as they battle giant mechanical monsters amid the ruins of a post-apocalyptic world. ... implicitly contrasts a naysaying version of religious faith with enlightening science, a false dichotomy that, despite some eventual modifications, requires mature deliberation by spiritually well-grounded viewers...."
(movie review, USCCB)
Showing sophistication and 'intelligence' by contrasting "a naysaying version of religious faith with enlightening science" is firmly anchored in this culture's assumptions. But that doesn't mean that it's true.

And I see that I've drifted into another topic. Which I've discussed recently. And probably will, again.

Almost-related posts:
Background:
1Actually, while it lasted it created a source of revenue for at least one monastery in this area. They made a tidy income, manufacturing stills which were in high demand between passage of the 18th and 21st amendments to the Constitution.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

New on the Blogroll: National Catholic Bioethics Committee

I've added the National Catholic Bioethics Committee website to the blogroll, under organizations, after using a FAQ page from their website in a post today:

Monday, October 26, 2009

Vaccines, Aborted Babies, and Catholic Bioethics

It would be nice to live in a period when 'medical ethics' didn't seem like an oxymoron. If you've heard that some (not all) vaccines are made from parts taken from aborted babies, you heard right.

Disgusting? I think so: but then I'm one of those people who thinks that killing babies isn't nice, and that we shouldn't do it.

There's a pretty good FAQ page on the National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC) website: Misapplied apostrophe in the title notwithstanding, this is a pretty good look at Catholic beliefs as applied to the existence of vaccines made from aborted babies. I was unaware of the National Catholic Bioethics Center until this week, when rajouimet, on Twitter, posted a link to this FAQ page.

Two points:
  • There does not appear to be any connection between H1N1 flu vaccine and the aborted-babies vaccines discussed in the FAQ
  • There some types of vaccines for which there is no alternative to the abortion-linked vaccines
    • No doubt there should be
    • But there isn't
This does not mean that Catholics have to refuse vaccinations. From that FAQ page:
"...Are there any vaccines for which there are no alternatives?

"Unfortunately, at present there are no alternative vaccines available in the United States against rubella (German measles), varicella (chickenpox), and hepatitis A. All of these are grown in the cell lines WI-38 and/or MRC-5. (See note #7 of the statement of the Pontifical Academy for Life for a listing of vaccines and their source).

"What do I do if there is no alternative to a vaccine produced from these cell lines?

"One is morally free to use the vaccine regardless of its historical association with abortion. The reason is that the risk to public health, if one chooses not to vaccinate, outweighs the legitimate concern about the origins of the vaccine. This is especially important for parents, who have a moral obligation to protect the life and health of their children and those around them...."
(NCBC)
Farther down, the FAQ page outlines how you can make your objections known to the vaccine's manufacturer.

As I see it, the bottom line is that Catholics aren't required to be so heavenly-minded that we're no earthly good. Making vaccines from aborted babies is wrong, and makes me cringe, just thinking about it. But - and this is important - as a Catholic I'm obligated to be a responsible member of my culture. I've discussed this before, in connection with voting. (November 1, 2008)

In terms of public health, right now there simply are no vaccines available for a number of serious diseases - that don't have loathsome roots. As an American citizen, I have a choice:
  • Refuse inoculations for these diseases
    • Tell myself what a fine, pure person I am
    • Risk infecting my
      • Family
      • Community
  • Get inoculated
    • Pray that Western civilization will change its mind about killing
      • Babies
      • Other inconvenient people
    • Find out what companies make these vaccines
      • Let them know that I don't approve of using cells from aborted babies
      • Again, pray
Is this a perfect solution? Offhand, I'd say 'no.' But I've gotten used to living in an imperfect world.

About the National Catholic Bioethics Center

I did a little checking around, and the NCBC appears to be what it claims to be: a Catholic organization dedicated to "...to promote and safeguard the dignity of the human person in health care and the life sciences...." (NCBC About page) And, I've found that several people have served both the NCBC and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Looks like the NCBC is legit.
Again, a tip of the hat to rajouimet, on Twitter, for the heads-up on that FAQ.

Copernicus, Galileo, Science, and a Reality Check

It's a little hard, sometimes, to remember that there was a time when robot spaceships weren't exploring the solar system.

And that there was a time when the orbits of planets around the sun weren't known with the precision that astrogation requires.

Over four centuries ago, Copernicus did groundbreaking work, suggesting that heliocentrism - the idea that the sun was the center of the universe - was a better match with observed phenomena than the Aristotelian Earth-centered universe.

That's fairly common knowledge, at least among people who are more than slightly interested in science.

Copernicus was a What?!

Here's something you may not have learned in high school.
Church officials of the mid-16th century had no problem with the idea of heliocentrism in the 16th century: as long as it was presented as a hypothesis: not as an established fact.

Copernicus delayed formal publication of his masterwork until after his death. Smart move, considering the sort of flack he'd most likely have gotten if he was still alive when it hit the press. (Gutenberg had invented movable type about a hundred years earlier.)

Part of Copernicus' concern was probably Martin Luther's followers and their literal reading of passages like Psalms 93:1 and 104:5. ("...The world will surely stand in place, never to be moved." and "You fixed the earth on its foundation, never to be moved." respectively)

More importantly, perhaps, Copernicus had a pretty good idea as to how scientists of the 16th century would take his ideas.

Those scientists knew that Earth was the center of the universe. It was obvious, from their point of view: Aristotle had said so, and Claudius Ptolemy had agreed. And that, as far as the scientific minds of the 16th century were concerned, was that.

Galileo, Theories, Facts, and Personality

Galileo got quite an eyeful when he looked through a telescope: mountains and valleys on the moon; and moons moving around Jupiter. Those were remarkable observations, and gave considerable weight to the idea that the Earth-centered universe of Aristotle didn't match what can be observed.

And the moons of Jupiter clearly went around Jupiter - not around Earth. Or the sun.

So what got Galileo in trouble? He:
  • Presented his heliocentric hypothesis as a fact
  • Belittled people who didn't agree with him in tracts and pamphlets
    • In rather strong terms
I get the impression that Galileo rubbed people the wrong way: sort of like sandpaper on a sunburn. And, again, insisted that his heliocentric model be taken as fact.

Sure, he was right: but it took about a century to collect and analyze the data required to prove that his model was right. Or pretty close, anyway.

Besides his #30 grit personality, Galileo took his heliocentric hypothesis out of the realm of science, and added a theological twist.

Here's what Pope John Paul II had to say, in 1992:
"...Secondly, the geocentric representation of the world was commonly admitted in the culture of the time as fully agreeing with the teaching of the Bible of which certain expressions, taken literally seemed to affirm geocentrism. The problem posed by theologians of that age was, therefore, that of the compatibility between heliocentrism and Scripture.

"Thus the new science, with its methods and the freedom of research which they implied, obliged theologians to examine their own criteria of scriptural interpretation. Most of them did not know how to do so.

"Paradoxically, Galileo, a sincere believer, showed himself to be more perceptive in this regard than the theologians who opposed him. 'If Scripture cannot err', he wrote to Benedetto Castelli, 'certain of its interpreters and commentators can and do so in many ways'. We also know of his letter to Christine de Lorraine (1615) which is like a short treatise on biblical hermeneutics...."
(Pope John Paul II)
Like the 16th century scientists and Martin Luther, the Catholic theologians who looked at Galileo's heliocentric model - and his arguments for it - didn't realize that people would be walking on the moon in a few centuries. And they didn't have the data that later generations would collect, demonstrating that Galileo's heliocentric model was a pretty good fit with reality.

All they saw was an irritating fellow with ideas that ran counter to their notions of what the Bible said - and who insisted that his ideas be accepted as fact, not as an idea which could be tested.

Back to that 20th century Pope:
"...From the beginning of the Age of Enlightenment down to our own day, the Galileo case has been a sort of 'myth', in which the image fabricated out of the events was quite far removed from reality. In this perspective, the Galileo case was the symbol of the Church's supposed rejection of scientific progress, or of 'dogmatic' obscurantism opposed to the free search for truth. This myth has played a considerable cultural role. It has helped to anchor a number of scientists of good faith in the idea that there was an incompatibility between the spirit of science and its rules of research on the one hand and the Christian faith on the other. A tragic mutual incomprehension has been interpreted as the reflection of a fundamental opposition between science and faith. The clarifications furnished by recent historical studies enable us to state that this sad misunderstanding now belongs to the past.

"From the Galileo affair we can learn a lesson which remains valid in relation to similar situations which occur today and which may occur in the future...."
(Pope John Paul II) [emphasis mine]
The story of heroic Galileo, stalwart defender of Truth, opposed by a superstitious rabble of fancy-dress religious bigots, is quite firmly planted in Western culture. The standard-issue post-Enlightenment version of the big, bad Church against noble, truth-defending Galileo is the one I learned - and believed for a while. And had to reject, as I dug into the facts of the case.

Heliocentrism, Evolution, and Here We Go Again

I doubt that many people today really believe that everything revolves around a central, stationary, Earth.

The idea that planets, including Earth, go around the sun seems to have been accepted by most people: including quite a number of evangelical/fundamentalist Christians.

These days, it's evolution that's got some people defending what they're convinced are "Bible truths" against big, bad science: and others defending science against 'those superstitious Christians.'

Sometimes it's tempting to agree with George Bernard Shaw: "Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that man can never learn anything from history."

Let's see what one scientist was saying, earlier this year, about heliocentrism and evolution, theory and fact:
"...I am a little disturbed when I hear people talking about the theory of evolution. This would be like talking about the theory of heliocentrism. Heliocentrism was a theory four hundred years ago, in the times of Galileo and Copernicus. Today it is a fact. Evolution was a theory two hundred years ago, when the hypothesis was proposed simultaneously by Lamarck in France and by Erasmus Darwin, the grandfather of the famous Charles, in England. I think, today, biological evolution is a fact, it is based on overwhelming evidence and so when we talk about theories, evolution is no longer a theory. Mechanisms of evolution are theories. You can discuss the importance of natural selection or genetic drift or other mechanisms. But the fact of biological evolution is, in my opinion, and I think in the opinion of all scientists, undisputable...."
("Scientific Insights into the Evolution of the Universe and of Life," Plenary Session 31 October - 4 November 2008 Acta 20 Vatican City, 2009 pp. LXVIII-622 ISBN 978-88-7761-097-3 (available from www.casinapioiv.va/content/accademia/en/publications/acta/evolution.html)
That's not a typo at the bottom: Those words were published by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, earlier this year. The whole document is available in *.pdf format on the Vatican's website.

I wouldn't advise holding one's breath, waiting for the Pope to say that God's not real and that we're merely random collections of elements that just happen to be here.

But let's get real.
  • Change happens
  • The world has changed in the last few billion years
These are ideas that an educated Catholic can accept.

Me? I have no problem with the idea that God is smarter than I am, and quite able to manage a cosmos that's vaster than I can imagine.

As I ended yesterday's post:
"...St. Albert the Great was convinced that all creation spoke of God and that the tiniest piece of scientific knowledge told us something about Him. Besides the Bible, God has given us the book of creation revealing something of His wisdom and power. In creation, Albert saw the hand of God...."
("The One Year Book of Saints") [emphasis mine]
Related posts:
More related posts:
Background:

Sunday, October 25, 2009

A Patron Saint of - Scientists?!

I doubt that many people really think Earth is flat these days, but there are still plenty of quaint notions that 'everybody knows.' Like faith and reason being utterly opposite ideas. And, of course, that religion is utterly opposed to science. (March 20, 2009)

I can see where the idea that faith and reason, religion and science, are seen as bitter enemies. Bishop Ussher, when he wasn't writing about " 'papists' and their 'superstitious' faith and 'erroneous' doctrine" (Linder), used the best (Protestant) Bible scholarship of his day to determine the date, in the year 4004 B.C., when the world was created.

Between Ussher and his acolytes, and fans of Thomas Carlyle, it's easy to get the impression that religious people - particularly Christians - live in a special little world of their own.

Darwin and Huxley's mix of science and proselytizing, and the (in my view) imprudently passionate and somewhat clueless responses by well-meaning Christians, helped establish the idea that faith isn't reasonable.

I've written about that sort of thing before: and linked to those posts toward the end of this one.

Me? I can't assume that faith is opposed to reason, because I've studied Catholic teachings: and converted to Catholicism.

I don't expect to convince anyone who earnestly believes that Science (capital "S") is all about reality and that those religious people over there are a lot of superstitious atavisms.

And I wouldn't expect to change the mind of someone who was passionately convinced that Faith (capital "F") is utterly unrelated to reason. That doesn't mean that I agree with either, or that I've bought into the idea that (A) can equal (not-A). I'm not that "sophisticated."

The Patron Saint of Scientists?!

Albert had the reputation of being a wizard and magician during his lifetime. He wasn't, but I can see how that happened.

He was the son of a military lord in Emperor Frederick II's army, back in the 13th century, but took a more scholarly career track than his father's. After joining the Dominicans, he was given several teaching assignments, and then ordered to to set up a Dominican house in Cologne. Which is how he ran into Thomas Aquinas, but that's another story.

Albert was allowed to settle in Cologne in his later years, which seems to have given him time to pursue some of his own interests. He built a laboratory of sorts where he conducted experiments in chemistry and physics.

I suppose the plants, insects, and odd chemicals he collected and used helped build his reputation as a wizard.
"...He died a very old man in Cologne on November 15,1280, and is buried in St. Andrea's Church in that city. He was canonized and declared a Doctor of the Church in 1931 by Pope Pius XI. His writings are remarkable for their exact scientific knowledge, and for that reason he has been made the patron saint of scientists.

Thought for the Day: St. Albert the Great was convinced that all creation spoke of God and that the tiniest piece of scientific knowledge told us something about Him. Besides the Bible, God has given us the book of creation revealing something of His wisdom and power. In creation, Albert saw the hand of God....
"
("The One Year Book of Saints")
Related posts: Background:

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Catham Priest Edward Hinds Murdered: Time to Think, Pray

This is very bad news for one community:
"The janitor at St. Patrick's Church has been charged with murder in the slaying of the church's pastor, the chief prosecutor said Saturday.

"Jose Feliciano stabbed the Rev. Ed Hinds 32 times with a knife after the two got into an argument on Thursday, Morris County Prosecutor Robert Bianchi said. The Roman Catholic priest's body was found in the church's rectory Friday morning.

"Feliciano, 64, has been employed with the church for 17 years, Bianchi said...."
(CNN)
Living a thousand miles west of St. Patrick's Church in Chatham gives me an emotional distance from this terrible situation - for which I'm duly grateful.

A Man Kills a Priest: Everybody Knows What That Means'

There's a dreary sameness to the sort of response a crime like this evokes.

Inevitably, someone brought up the homosexual priest angle in The Star-Ledger's comments:
"Posted by rockman67
"October 24, 2009, 5:53PM

"Sorry, I believe in 2 sides to every story.
Is this possibly a lovers quarrel ?
Was the priest going to say something to others which immensely upset the janitor ? Unfortunately the janitor cracked for some very major reason.
"
(The Star-Ledger)
None of the news articles I read mentioned motive: Hardly surprising, for a murder discovered Friday and solved Saturday. Someone else suggested that the killing was race-related - The priest was a Euro-American, the killer Puerto Rican - and yet another vented this all-too-familiar sentiment:
"Posted by playitleo
"October 24, 2009, 6:27PM

"One more reason to build a wall on the boarder."
(The Star-Ledger)
I assume that playitleo meant "border" - and does not recommend building a wall on some unspecified tenant of a boarding house. But you never know.

Murder Hurts People

Me? I think that a priest is dead, that the killer was a loved and respected member of the community - I'll get back to that - and that people in St. Patrick's parish are hurting. Bad.

The reason that Jose Feliciano killed Father Edward Hinds is important - and could be almost anything, based on what's in the news. But the motive isn't, in a way, as important as what the murder has done to the community.
"...Feliciano, who had worked at the church for 17 years and was known as 'Mr. Jose,' had lived at a house adjacent to St. Patrick's with his wife before he moved to Pennsylvania, parishioners said. Teenagers home from college would often visit Feliciano, who would always comment on how much they had grown, said parishioner Michael Marotta.

" 'He was more than just the maintenance man,' Marotta, 47, said. 'He's part of the fabric of St. Pat's.'..."
(The Star-Ledger)
Mr. Marotta summed up the situation pretty well, I think:
"...Parishioner Michael Marotta, 47, said he would not have hesitated to leave his three children in the care of either Hinds or Feliciano, whom he described as caring, quiet, hardworking men. Marotta, whose 10-year-old son is enrolled at St. Patrick's School, said Feliciano lived in a home next to the church until a few years ago.

" 'Everyone loses in this,' said Marotta, who lives down the street from the church. 'The church, the broader Chatham community and the Hinds and Feliciano families. It's disheartening.'..."
(AP) [emphasis mine]

Murder Isn't Nice: And We Shouldn't Do It

No surprises here: The Catholic Church doesn't approve of murder, and devotes a hefty chunk of the Catechism to explaining why. (Article 5 / The Fifth Commandment, Catechism of the Catholic Church) As so many things are, the matter of 'don't kill' is a bit complicated.

The Church doesn't preach pacifism. (I know - someone reading this has run into a Catholic who does. Quite a few Catholics haven't learned - or have forgotten - what the Church teaches.) We are allowed to defend ourselves. (2264)

So Father Hinds was not disobeying Church teachings when he tried to keep from being killed. It's even okay for one person to act in defense of someone else. "Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others...." (2265)

But that's getting into a whole different topic.

Forgive?!

It's easy for me, a thousand miles away and with no deep personal connections to Catham or its citizens, to talk about forgiveness in a situation like this. Anyway, I've written about that sort of thing before.

Something to remember, I think, is that God does forgive us. "After his fall, man was not abandoned by God...." (410)

Pray

Finally, if you're hard-up for something to pray about: I think those folks in Catham can use all the help they can get.

Related posts, touching on forgiveness: In the news:

Prayer Suggestion: Cancer Treatment

My oldest daughter passed along a prayer request, now I'm doing the same.

The mother of one of her instructors is going in for cancer treatment this Thursday, and the instructor - as I understand it - asked for prayers.

Monday, October 19, 2009

Mother Teresa of Calcutta, and Going Against the Grain

Mother Teresa of Calcutta was beatified six years ago today, on World Mission Sunday of 2003.

She may or may not be declared a saint. From what I see, she looks like a shoo-in for sainthood: but I don't have all the facts, and I'm content to wait until - and if - the church says she's one of the saints.

Which brings up an interesting question: what is a saint?

I ran into a pretty-good definition in a news article:
"A saint is one who doesn't put themselves at the center, but rather chooses to go against the grain and live according to the Gospel, says Benedict XVI...."
(ZENIT.org)
That "going against the grain" may be part of the reason that people like Mother Teresa of Calcutta get called 'hypocrites' (Mother Teresa of Calcutta: She's No Princess Di" (May 8, 2009)) - or worse.

But nobody said that following the gospels was a guarantee for top billing in the world's 'most popular' lists. I'm just glad that Mother Teresa of Calcutta, with some remarkable exceptions is admired by so many.

Maybe some of the people who think Mother Teresa of Calcutta was doing something right will find out why she acted the way she did.

Back to that "going against the grain" thing. I used a couple of quotes for a post in another blog last week. I think at least one of them applies here:
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it."
G. K. Chesterton, "Everlasting Man" (1925)

"Idolatry is committed, not merely by setting up false gods, but also by setting up false devils; by making men afraid of war or alcohol, or economic law, when they should be afraid of spiritual corruption and cowardice."
G. K. Chesterton, Illustrated London News (ILN) September 11, 1909)

Both via The American Chesterton Society.
(Apathetic Lemming of the North "Going With the Stream; Setting Up False Devils" (October 13, 2009))
Related posts: Background:

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Mother Teresa of Calcutta: Albanian Government Wants Her Body

Mother Teresa of Calcutta is in the news again.

She's buried in the Calcutta, India, headquarters of the Missionaries of Charity: the order she founded. Albania wants her body buried in Albania.

I can see their point. Mother Teresa was born in Macedonia, but her parents were Albanians. (EWTN) She grew up in Macedonia. This is what she said about who and what she is:
" 'By blood, I am Albanian. By citizenship, an Indian. By faith, I am a Catholic nun. As to my calling, I belong to the world. As to my heart, I belong entirely to the Heart of Jesus.' Small of stature, rocklike in faith, Mother Teresa of Calcutta was entrusted with the mission of proclaiming God's thirsting love for humanity, especially for the poorest of the poor. 'God still loves the world and He sends you and me to be His love and His compassion to the poor.' She was a soul filled with the light of Christ, on fire with love for Him and burning with one desire: 'to quench His thirst for love and for souls.'..."
("the Vatican")
Like I said, I can see the Albanian government's point. There are a number of reasons why they'd like Calcutta's nun buried in their soil: sentimental; economic; and probably political.

Personally, I hope her bones remain in India. But, happily, I have nothing to do with that decision-making process.

Mother Teresa of Calcutta was Beatified When?

BBC is of the opinion that Mother Teresa of Calcutta was beatified in 2002. Pope John Paul II and the Vatican record that she was beatified on October 19, 2003. I think I see where the BBC got their idea:
"...Pope John Paul II permitted the opening of her Cause of Canonization. On 20 December 2002 he approved the decrees of her heroic virtues and miracles."
(the Vatican)
That "approved the decrees" business isn't something you hear in everyday English on either side of the Atlantic.

If I'm reading the Vatican's biography of Mother Teresa of Calcutta right, the Vatican gave the official go-ahead to investigating whether Mother Teresa of Calcutta qualified as a recognized saint less than two years after her death in 1997. By late 2002 paperwork on the results of the investigation to date was in place for her being beatified.

Mother Teresa of Calcutta was beatified later, though: on October 19, 2003, though: that year's World Mission Sunday. (the Vatican)

'You're Known by the Enemies You Keep'

Even before she died, Mother Teresa of Calcutta was being spoken of as a 'living saint.' I'm a practicing Catholic, and don't anticipate the final decision of the Church: but she does look like a slam-dunk certainty for sainthood.

Not everybody sees her that way, of course. I discussed what some of the world's more, ah, sophisticated and earnest people think of Mother Teresa in another blog. (August 7, 2007) At that time, the remarkably long and deep 'dark night of the soul' which Mother Teresa had experienced was becoming public knowledge. People who apparently equate 'being spiritual' with an experiencing an emotional high assumed that she was, at best, a hypocrite.

Doing research for this post, I found that Showtime aired "Holier than thou" sometime around 2005. Two entertainers showed what I suppose is a strong sense of social justice - or something - by saying of Mother Teresa: "She had the f—king coin and pissed it away on nunneries," and referring to the nuns of her order as "f—king c—ts."
Mother Teresa: She's No Princess Di
I think can see the entertainers' point of view. Unlike, say, Princess Di, Mother Teresa didn't act at all like a proper celebrity-philanthropist. She actually got up close and personal with the poor, lived with them, and was responsible for running a global organization to benefit them.

Don't get me wrong: I can try to understand the point of view of another person, without accepting it. When studying anthropology, I learned about the philosophical and religious significance of human sacrifice: but that doesn't mean I think the Aztecs or Phoenicians were on the right track.1

Like the people who were clueless about what a dark night of the soul is, these entertainers were (I hope) abysmally ignorant of what suffering means in Catholic teaching.
"...'...But when they [the entertainers] mock the Catholic Church's teaching on the meaning of suffering, and when they say of the poor that "They had to suffer so that Mother F—king Teresa could be enlightened," then they are behaving like monsters.'..."
(Catholic League President William Donohue, Catholic News Agency)
As the subhead says, 'you're known by the enemies you keep.' These entertainers expressed about the same opinion of Mahatma Gandhi and the Dalai Lama.

I suppose "Holier than thou" could be what is called 'sophisticated' entertainment for those of discerning tastes. Or maybe it was that version of malicious 'social justice' that I ran into from time to time in the sixties and seventies: which seemed to consist primarily of spiteful diatribes against people and organizations which were actually doing something for others.

Related posts: In the news: Background:
1 I'm reminded of a Scientific American article, several decades ago, which earnestly stated that human sacrifice had never occurred: and that when it was practiced, it was not as done as often as was reported.

Monday, October 5, 2009

A Quick Update On Indonesia's Searchers and Survivors

A quick update on the situation in western Indonesia:
"Lost hamlets to become mass graves after huge quake"
Jakarta Post (October 5, 2009)

"West Sumatra decided Sunday to turn a hillside in Padang Pariaman regency, where three hamlets and hundreds of villagers were swallowed by landslides after a powerful earthquake, into mass graves, as hopes faded for more survivors.

" 'The decision on the mass grave was agreed today in a meeting with local leaders. There is little possibility of survivors and we are prioritizing those with a higher chance of survival,' said West Sumatra administration spokesman Dede Nuzul Putra in Padang, the provincial capital.

" 'The victims have been buried more than five days, it is unlikely they could survive.'

"The hamlets of Kapalo Koto, Cumanak and Lubuk Laweh in Patamuan district disappeared along with 400 people when the 7.6-magnitude quake hit West Sumatra last Wednesday, swallowing them up in a torrent of mud and rocks.

"The landslides produced an area of devastation at least five kilometers wide, making it difficult for rescuers to find the victims...." [emphasis mine]
Five kilometers is over three miles. Yes, I should think it would be hard to find victims under those circumstances.

My heart - and prayers - go out to people who lost family and friends in last week's disasters.

That was a hard decision: whether to keep searching for people who were in what is now a miles-wide mess of mud and debris - or take the limited number of searchers away from that area to places where there's a less-remote chance that they'll find survivors.

Related posts:

Sunday, October 4, 2009

Indonesia: Digging for Corpses; Weddings and Relief Efforts

Earlier this week, in another blog, I wrote about a tsunami in Sumatra, and said that I didn't plan to follow that particular event. (September 30, 2009)

Today, several major earthquakes and at least one storm later, I see that I've been writing more about Indonesia's disasters than I'd planned. Sumatra is an island, part of western Indonesia. It's a beautiful part of the world - although the natural beauty is punctuated by tropical storms, earthquakes, and the occasional volcano. (Remember Krakatoa? It's in that neighborhood.)

My hat's off to people living in areas that were hit recently. From the sounds of it, they're making do with what they have - and in at least one case not letting an earthquake get in the way of getting married.
"Indonesian Villagers Use Bare Hands to Dig Up Corpses"
The Associated Press, via FOXNews (October 04, 2009)

"With no outside help in sight, villagers used their bare hands Sunday to dig out rotting corpses, four days after landslides triggered by a huge earthquake obliterated four hamlets in western Indonesia.

"Officials said at least 644 people were buried and presumed dead in the hillside villages in Padang Pariaman district on the western coast of Sumatra island. If confirmed it would raise the death toll in Wednesday's 7.6-magnitude earthquake to more than 1,300, with about 3,000 missing.

"The extent of the disaster in remote villages was only now becoming clear. So far, aid and rescue efforts have been concentrated in the region's capital, Padang, a city of 900,000 people where several tall buildings collapsed...."
"Indonesians hold weddings despite devastating quake"
Reuters India (October 4, 2009)

"Roni Gustiawan's house was destroyed by a powerful earthquake four days ago, but on Sunday, dressed in traditional Indonesian red and gold finery, he married his 25-year-old fiancee regardless.

"The period immediately after the fasting month of Ramadan, which ended last month, is considered an auspicious time for many Indonesian Muslims to marry.

" 'We had scheduled it for Sunday and we had already sent invitations so it couldn't be delayed,' said Gustiawan in front of his shattered home.

"He was speaking shortly after the wedding and relaxing with a cigarette in a canopy tent decorated with gold streams and traditional red wedding motifs. His bride, Evi Susanti, also wore red and gold Minang wedding clothes, including a traditional pointed hat inspired by the horns of a water buffalo...."
"Sumatra quake: Aid worker's diary II"
BBC (October 4, 2009)

"Patrick Fuller of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies travels to an open-air clinic in Pariaman district, which was close to the epicentre of Wednesday's deadly quake in Indonesia.

"Off to an 0530 start this morning, thanks to the heat and mosquitoes in my airless room.

"It was a slightly fretful night as I was conscious of staying on the second floor of a large concrete structure, perhaps not the best option given the continued aftershocks.

"I wanted to visit one of the health posts set up in Pariaman district, which was at the epicentre of the quake.

"The road was choked with a bizarre array of organisations wanting to do good, from a squad of teenagers on mopeds with Dynasty Computers delivering boxes of noodles to the homeless, to members of the Singapore armed forces and the Indonesian 4x4 club. ..."
"With no outside help in sight..." and "...choked with a bizarre array of organisations wanting to do good..." aren't necessarily contradictory. If I'm reading the map right, Padang Pariaman district covers a swath of land over fifty miles wide by a hundred or so long. With roads and infrastructure messed up by earthquakes and storms, getting around could be tricky. That AP article may be describing a place that Mr. Fuller can't get to - easily, at least.

A Bit About Indonesia - Who's There & How to Help

Indonesia isn't a particularly Catholic country. About 86.1% of the people follow Islam.1 ("World Factbook," CIA)

Even so, we Catholics have units on the ground in Indonesia, including: Catholic Relief Services is there, too: "Catholic Relief Services Responds to Four Emergencies in One Week" CRS press release (September 30, 2009). Indonesia isn't the only place where people can use help. Today, CRS is asking for donations to help with any of five major issues.

The less high-profile Jesuit Relief Services Indonesia doesn't make it quite as easy to donate - but they've left a major clue or two for the motivated philanthropist. ("Welcome to JRS Indonesia" - "Bank Detail For JRS Indonesia Programmes" is in the lower-right corner of the page. I haven't researched it, but you should be able to work out how to get money to JRS with a little research, starting with that bit.)

Related posts: In the news: Background:
1The 2000 census showed that Indonesians are
  • 86.1% Muslim
  • 5.7% Protestant
  • 3% Roman Catholic
  • 1.8% Hindu
  • 3.4% Other or unspecified
    (CIA)
Americans' religious beliefs are a little more eclectic, as shown by a 2007 estimate:
  • 51.3% Protestant
  • 23.9% Roman Catholic
  • 12.1% Unaffiliated
  • 4% None
  • 1.7% Mormon
  • 1.6% other Christian
  • 1.7% Jewish
  • 0.7% Buddhist
  • 0.6% Muslim
  • 2.5% Other or unspecified
    (CIA)
Indonesia is, arguably, more "Muslim" than America is "Christian:" as I pointed out November 26, 2007, in Another War-on-Terror Blog.

A (Fairly) Brief Digression

Another War-on-Terror Blog has been noted and placed on a list of "Best Conservative Blogs" - I'm rather honored by that.

Since I make no attempt to hide the fact that I hope Al Qaeda and the Taliban don't succeed, and that I don't see America as the cause of most (if not all) of the world's problems, I'm pretty 'obviously' a conservative.

I'm certainly not an American liberal. I've discussed that before, in "Conservative? Liberal? Democrat? Republican? No, I'm Catholic" (November 3, 2008).

On the other hand, I don't match the 'conservative' stereotype that some people live down to. (See " 'They're all Muslims' - This Does Not Help,"
Another War-on-Terror Blog (December 29, 2007))

Happily, contemporary analogs of Maria Monk and Thomas Nast notwithstanding, America is quite tolerant of non-WASPS. For the most part. (See "The Pope, Angola, and the News: No Wonder 'Everybody Knows' What Those Catholics Are Like" (March 22, 2009))

I think being a willing follower of the "whore of Babylon" has made me a bit more aware of what others who aren't 'real Americans' - by the standards of, say, the late Timothy McVeigh - have to deal with.
"...I am not a Muslim, but I think I may understand how Muslims sometimes feel in America. I converted to Catholicism as an adult, partly as a result of trying to find out what made Catholicism so bad. I'm very much aware of how ignorance of an identifiable group of people can be associated with fear and loathing of that group - and how knowledge of such a group very seldom is...."
(Another War-on-Terror Blog (July 21, 2008))
I most likely won't be discussing Islam or Muslims and Muslimas very much in this blog: It's 'A Catholic Citizen in America,' after all. But this selection of posts from another blog might help explain why I try to understand people and what they believe.

Saturday, October 3, 2009

Global Warming, End Times - 'We're All Gonna Die' Over the Last 45 Years Or So

I don't remember the first time I heard about the imminent coming end of the world, but I'm pretty sure it was after I turned 13. By the time I was 20 or so, I'd noticed a pattern.

'And We're All Gonna Die' Has a Rather Broad Appeal, Doesn't It?

Remember the famines and pestilences of the 1970s and 80s, that killed off most of the human race?

Probably not, since they didn't happen.

They were supposed to, though. ("Food, Agriculture, Technology, and City Folks," Drifting at the Edge of Time and Space (October 2, 2009))

Paul Ehrlich's 'relevant' predictions; nuclear winter; acid rain; 'everything causes cancer;' and that perennial favorite of the last decade or so, global warming; seem to be a secular analog of what this post is about.

Armageddon is Coming! In Three to Five Years - Read All About It for $14.95

That price is just a guess. Quite a few years ago, you could read all about the coming apocalypse for about $4.95. Back in 2004, adult fiction paperbacks (other than 'mass-market') sold for an average of $14.95 - and just a little before that the 'read all about it' books ran for about the same price: although I seem to remember it going up to $19.95.

Small price to pay for getting the inside track at Armageddon, I suppose.

I Take the Word of God Seriously

I'm a Christian and a Catholic. My faith is based on the Bible, the Magisterium, and Tradition. (October 2, 2008) Even if I hadn't been taught - and believe - that the Bible is the Word of God, I'd be interested in what God had been prompting people to record over the last few thousand years.

On the other hand, I haven't taken the passing parade of end-of-the-world warnings - and the books that go with them - as being quite the same thing.

A weird combination of numerology, thinly-disguised fortunetelling and yellow journalism - all wrapped up in a very spiritual package - was part of the background noise in the culture I grew up in. After a little youthful interest, I noticed how the deadlines 'from the Bible' kept passing by - to be replaced with a new deadline and new explanation by the next wannabe prophet.

I didn't take them any more seriously than I took Elvis sightings, later.

Messing With the Word of God

Intentionally buying or selling of spiritual things is a really bad idea. (Catechism of the Catholic Church (2121), Acts 8:9-24)

I'd be much more concerned about the people who wrote those 'Armageddon is coming' books, as a group, if I wasn't pretty sure that they actually believed what they were writing.

Why Three to Five Years?

Good question - but that range was pretty consistently used.

From a marketing point of view, three to five years is a pretty good choice of time. It's close enough to get people interested, curious, or scared out of their wits: But far off enough to let quite a few copies of the book be sold.

Cynical? Maybe. There could easily be other explanations.

Numerology Isn't What it Used to be

Maybe it was just the area I grew up in, but back in the sixties I heard quite an array of radio preachers reading things in the Word of God that were - well, remarkable.

That was a long time ago, and I wasn't taking notes, but as I recall a fairly typical claim would tie Joseph Stalin's birth date, the number 666, and Halloween together. I must be one of 'those' people - I still don't see how it all adds up to Armageddon in the early seventies (I must have slept through it - can't remember a thing).

I don't doubt that what the preachers quoted really was in the Bible - that sort of thing is too easy to check on. Their numerological calculations, though: those I can't take seriously, except as a sort of engrossing intellectual parlor game.

My favorite observation/prediciton from that period wasn't numerological at all, though. I can't remember quite what part of Revelation he pulled it from, but we were supposed to believe that locusts - some kind of insect-like bug, anyway - was an obvious reference to some sort of missile launcher the Russians had added to their arsenal. And that, it seemed, proved that the Russians were going to be there - soon - at Armageddon. (The Soviet Union was, anyway - they often didn't distinguish all that much between Russia and the U.S.S.R. - I'll get back to that.)

Decades later and about 125 miles down the road, numerology seemed to have dropped out of favor. Can't say that I miss it - although my hat's off to the people who came up with those strange, quirky correlations. It takes a sort of talent to start with a verse in the Bible; find numbers in it; add, subtract, multiply, divide and/or systematically substitute the numbers; and come out with a hot topic in current events.

Back to That Russian Missile Launcher and the Beast

The radio preachers were particularly earnest about the Soviet Union.

I can see why, in a way. One of the national symbols for Russia is a bear. A bear is in the book of Revelation. The feet of one, anyway. Or something that looked like a bear's feet. I can sort of see where the preachers got the idea. (Revelation 13:1-2)

I don't think that the Soviet Union was the best thing that ever happened to Russia: but I don't think Russia is the beast with "blasphemous name (s)" on it.

But then, I've never bought into the end-of-the-world predictions, either.

I must not be very spiritual. Or something.

What Set All This Off?

I've been reading about the terrible effects of a series of earthquakes in and around Indonesia. My family's prayed about it - which is about the limit of the useful contribution we can make to rescue and recovery efforts.

Maybe because I've been running seriously short on sleep - I got to bed at about 4:30 and 5:00 in the morning the last two (nights? mornings?) - I remembered the sort of 'and it's a sign of the end times' pronouncements that would have been filling the airwaves back in the 'good old days,' after a horrific disaster like that.1

By early afternoon, ideas were arranging themselves in a vaguely orderly way - and I've learned to take advantage of moments like that. Once I got started, the result still seemed on-topic for this blog, so I finished the thing off.

Why Have So Many People Been Convinced For So Long that The World Is Going to End Soon?

It's not just a particular branch of Christianity - 'and we're all gonna die' predictions about the end of humanity, civilization, and spotted owls, have been around for as long as I've been inclined to notice such things.

Whether it's Armageddon or acid rain, quite a number of people seem convinced that something just simply awful is just around the corner.

Saying 'people are like that' affirms that (some) people like to see disaster looming - or at least are inclined to do so. But saying 'people are like that' doesn't address why that trait runs through humanity.

I don't have an answer: just a speculation or two.

I think that being convinced that disaster is around the corner may be a misfiring of the sort of caution and foresight that keeps us (usually) from eating the seed grain, spending the money we'll need for fuel next winter, or forgetting to keep some gas in the car's tank.

I also think that the reason for a fascination with global warming or Armageddon may be related to whatever it is that makes people fans of horror films. There's a kind of thrill to being scared half (or more) out of one's wits.

But that's just speculation.

Vaguely-related posts:
1 'Good old days?' I remember the fifties - they had their up side, but so has every other period I've lived in. They weren't quite the 'happy days' some folks like to remember.

They weren't "the best of times...the worst of times." They were times - like every other; variously appealing and appalling, and each quite unique.

Indonesia: Lots of Earthquakes, Lots of People Killed; Lots More Needing Help

A piece from BERNAMA, the Malaysian News Agency, was a refreshing change of pace. Instead of a litany of complaints, accusations, and finger-pointing, the reporter wrote about how much help was coming to Indonesia from around the world. ("World Shows Solidarity Over West Sumatra Earthquake" BERNAMA (October 3, 2009))

That's nice to see. The article focuses on government efforts: naturally enough, since they're fairly easy to track. Generally, the national government is only too happy to send a press release or two, showing how much they care. I'm not being cynical - that's part of the officials' job. And national governments are in a position to allocate significant resources to relief.

Non-governmental help happens - but that doesn't get as much attention, it seems.

Just a Thought: Prayer Wouldn't Hurt

My family, when we got the news about the situation in Indonesia, prayed for the survivors - the dead - and the folks who are helping the survivors deal with what's happened.

Sure 'it isn't practical.' But it doesn't hurt. And I think it does make sense to ask God for help - and to ask others to pray with me. I don't know where I ran into this, but remember reading something like 'God knows - but He likes to be asked.'

There's something to that.

Prayer and the Pope

In a way, I'm just doing 'follow the leader.' Pope "Benedict XVI is offering his prayers for earthquake victims in Indonesia, and is encouraging aid workers in their efforts to help the survivors...." (Zenit)

Catholics Doing More than 'Just' Pray

After a little digging, I found this press release: "Trócaire arrives in Padang in response to quake."

"...Trócaire is part of a worldwide confederation of Catholic development agencies called Caritas...."

Never heard of either? No big surprise there, unless you're among the many who have been helped by them.

Sort-of related posts:

Indonesian Earthquake: Links to News, and Rambling on About Estimates and Common Sense

Quite a few places have been hit by earthquakes this week. Many of them in Sumatra.

The number of dead in Indonesia is 540 (local authorities) or 1,100 (U.N. official), and it's quite possible that 4,000 are trapped under the rubble. Someone with the U.N. explained that the 1,100 figure was an early estimate. (CNN) I'm inclined to believe the U.N. numbers - and those of the local officials: because I think they're two different counts.

It's likely enough that the local officials are counting people they actually know are dead: Folks who stopped living rather abruptly when the earthquake hit, and whose bodies have been found. In some parts of the world, local officials seem to under-report problems: probably to keep themselves from looking bad. I have no idea if that happens in Indonesia, but I have no reason to think so.

An early estimate that's roughly twice the actual death toll is what a responsible emergency-response official might reasonably come up with. Think about it:
  • An earthquake hits
  • Communications lines are down
  • Survivors and reconnaissance shows that some small communities aren't there any more
  • It's obvious that a lot of people died
  • Survivors are going to need help
    • Including finding the dead, so they can be buried, cremated, or whatever the local custom is
      • That's not just 'being nice'
        • Dead bodies, left unattended, serve as incubators for a smorgasbord of loathsome diseases
  • Survivors could use outside help
Imagine you're responsible for putting out a call for help. People at the other end will want to know how big the problem is. You could give a low-end estimate, and hope for the best.

'Hey, the ground shook, some buildings collapsed, we don't have power, telephones don't work, and nobody's answering radio calls: How bad can it be?'

No: that's not sensible. Taking available information, including known body counts, multiplying that by a factor to account for what can't be known, and asking for help to cover a reasonably pessimistic scenario - yeah, that makes sense.

It's like the fire department in the small town where I live. A fire alarm at the school brings a substantial fraction of the force immediately - often with more coming in a second wave.

Usually it's an overreaction. But I don't think it's unreasonable. Think of the alternative: One fire truck and a firefighter with a portable extinguisher shows up. Generally, that's all that's needed. Except this time, the fire started in the library and the place is going up like kindling. One dude with a squirt bottle, no matter how sincere, isn't going to be much help.

Back to Indonesia - We don't know how many people died. We probably won't for weeks - or months - or we may never know for sure. Some of the areas were hit hard.

Asking for more help than is actually needed, in circumstances like this, isn't all that bad an idea.

Related posts: In the news:

Like it? Pin it, Plus it, - - -

Pinterest: My Stuff, and More

Advertisement

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store

Popular Posts

Label Cloud

1277 abortion ADD ADHD-Inattentive Adoration Chapel Advent Afghanistan Africa America Amoris Laetitia angels animals annulment Annunciation anti-catholicism Antichrist apocalyptic ideas apparitions archaeology architecture Arianism art Asperger syndrome assumptions asteroid astronomy Australia authority balance and moderation baptism being Catholic beliefs bias Bible Bible and Catechism bioethics biology blogs brain Brazil business Canada capital punishment Caritas in Veritate Catechism Catholic Church Catholic counter-culture Catholicism change happens charisms charity Chile China Christianity Christmas citizenship climate change climatology cloning comets common good common sense Communion community compassion confirmation conscience conversion Corpus Christi cosmology creation credibility crime crucifix Crucifixion Cuba culture dance dark night of the soul death depression designer babies despair detachment devotion discipline disease diversity divination Divine Mercy divorce Docetism domestic church dualism duty Easter economics education elections emotions England entertainment environmental issues Epiphany Establishment Clause ethics ethnicity Eucharist eugenics Europe evangelizing evolution exobiology exoplanets exorcism extremophiles faith faith and works family Father's Day Faust Faustus fear of the Lord fiction Final Judgment First Amendment forgiveness Fortnight For Freedom free will freedom fun genetics genocide geoengineering geology getting a grip global Gnosticism God God's will good judgment government gratitude great commission guest post guilt Haiti Halloween happiness hate health Heaven Hell HHS hierarchy history holidays Holy Family Holy See Holy Spirit holy water home schooling hope humility humor hypocrisy idolatry image of God images Immaculate Conception immigrants in the news Incarnation Independence Day India information technology Internet Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Jesus John Paul II joy just war justice Kansas Kenya Knights of Columbus knowledge Korea language Last Judgment last things law learning Lent Lenten Chaplet life issues love magi magic Magisterium Manichaeism marriage martyrs Mary Mass materialism media medicine meditation Memorial Day mercy meteor meteorology Mexico Minnesota miracles Missouri moderation modesty Monophysitism Mother Teresa of Calcutta Mother's Day movies music Muslims myth natural law neighbor Nestorianism New Year's Eve New Zealand news Nietzsche obedience Oceania organization original sin paleontology parish Parousia penance penitence Pentecost Philippines physical disability physics pilgrimage politics Pope Pope in Germany 2011 population growth positive law poverty prayer predestination presumption pride priests prophets prostitution Providence Purgatory purpose quantum entanglement quotes reason redemption reflections relics religion religious freedom repentance Resurrection robots Roman Missal Third Edition rosaries rules sacramentals Sacraments Saints salvation schools science secondary causes SETI sex shrines sin slavery social justice solar planets soul South Sudan space aliens space exploration Spain spirituality stem cell research stereotypes stewardship stories storm Sudan suicide Sunday obligation superstition symbols technology temptation terraforming the establishment the human condition tolerance Tradition traffic Transfiguration Transubstantiation travel Trinity trust truth uncertainty United Kingdom universal destination of goods vacation Vatican Vatican II veneration vengeance Veterans Day videos virtue vlog vocations voting war warp drive theory wealth weather wisdom within reason work worship writing

Marian Apparition: Champion, Wisconsin

Background:Posts in this blog: In the news:

What's That Doing in a Nice Catholic Blog?

From time to time, a service that I use will display links to - odd - services and retailers.

I block a few of the more obvious dubious advertisers.

For example: psychic anything, numerology, mediums, and related practices are on the no-no list for Catholics. It has to do with the Church's stand on divination. I try to block those ads.

Sometime regrettable advertisements get through, anyway.

Bottom line? What that service displays reflects the local culture's norms, - not Catholic teaching.