Sunday, December 27, 2009

The Holy Family of Jesus, Mary and Joseph

Readings for December 27, 2009, The Holy Family of Jesus, Mary and Joseph:

Feast of the Holy Family 2009

By Deacon Lawrence N. Kaas
December 27, 2009

We hear very little of Jesus before his public ministry in the New Testament. We have one story of him in today's Gospel. St. Luke recalls for us how Jesus, at 12 years of age, was separated from Mary and Joseph. Mary and Joseph presumed that the young Jesus was in the caravan leaving Jerusalem after the festival. Those of us who raised boy's would not find this very unexpected. Nevertheless, in this case, Mary and Joseph were wrong. They had presumed that Jesus was among their relatives and friends. We wouldn't find this unreal, as our boy's would have been with their friends on such a trip. They did eventfully find him in the temple asking the doctors questions. I always find this interesting because this picture is not as it seems. There is a method of teaching that is called Rabbinic Argumentation. This method is a way of asking question after question until the ones questioned arrives at the right answer. This could, very will be why they were so astonished at him.

We would find it very unsettling if this were our boy and I'm betting that it has happened to every family who has a boy. Our breath and heart nearly fall from our body, at the sudden realization that the boy is lost. So must it have been with Mary and Joseph. They however must have experienced at least some pride as Jesus showed so much understanding in his exchange with the teachers of the Temple.

It is understandable that Mary would have asked, "Son why have you done this to us?" Jesus' answer is enlightening. "Did you not know that I must be in my Father's house?" The Evangelist comments at this point that Mary and Joseph did not, however, comprehend this answer of Jesus.

Today is the Feast of the Holy Family, celebrated as we revel in the joy of the birth of the Christ Child. Today's feast and the Gospel text suggest for us the familiarity and comfort of being home.

The enjoyment of being home is not a universal phenomenon., Not even the Scriptures say this is so. All we need to do is consider the parable told by Jesus in the Gospel of Luke called the Prodigal Son.

We know that the younger son in the parable is not satisfied being at home. Why else, then, would he request prematurely his share of the estate, collect his belongings and set off to a distant country. Home, just was not the place he wanted to be at this time. The older son, even with his resentment against the younger brother and father, rather likes being at home. The father acknowledges this, too. He says to the older son, "You are here with me always."

We must be careful not to interpret "house" in an exclusively physical sense, however. Being in the Father's house carries with it the connotation that we abide in the Lord's work, that we share in the concerns he has.

On the liturgical feast dedicated to family life, we must admit candidly that the place where the family dwells, the house, is often filled with discord. Perhaps, some of the discord is the result of family members who choose against dwelling in the presence of the Lord above everything else.

Rather that it being a dwelling place of peace and security, the house is where family members fight – sometimes to the point of violence. Peace-makers are needed at kitchen tables more than they are needed at international conferences if ever we look at the statistics of domestic abuse.

In the Christmas season, we look upon Jesus as the Prince of Peace. The peace he brings to us is the fruit of reconciliation. The Son in taking on human flesh, being born in the likeness of men, reconciles the Father with his wayward adopted children.

The Incarnate Son did not just say peaceful things; he did them. The supreme peaceful act, of course, was laying down his life for us. The death of Jesus on the Cross brings about the forgiveness of sin. We must be inclined to testify to this truth with our lives, a point St. Paul makes abundantly clear in today's second reading. We must be ready to forgive one another he says, and this we all know starts in our families. This is how we change the society we live in. Family reconciliation is the stepping-stone to international reconciliation.

Jesus' work of reconciling sinful humanity with the Father is preeminently a work of restoring us to God's House. Reconciliation makes us fit as it were to dwell with the Lord. In St. John's Gospel, Jesus declares to the apostles that there are many dwelling places in the Father's house.
Inside the Father's house, with all its dwelling places, we still sit down together and dine at one at the messianic banquets. But before sitting down there, we must be reconciled. The hard work of reconciliation on earth culminates in the Eucharist.

The prodigal son, when he returns to his father's house, is received with joy. The joy of family life is not, then, in the value of the house but in the values that are lived there. Families who practice a Christ-like love in their houses are rich beyond description. The word of Christ dwells in them. Who could be wealthier than that?
More:

Saturday, December 26, 2009

New on the Blogroll: Patrick Madrid

I've known about the Patrick Madrid, blog for a while. Now, it's time to add it to the blogroll. What reminded me was Mr. Madrid's post on the cathedral fire in Ireland.

Anyway, " 'Just another guy with a blog. No big whoop.' " is now on the blogroll.

Irish Cathedral Burned: St. Mel's, Longford

My guess is that it'll take a while to figure out just what started the fire in Longford's St. Mel's yesterday. The Catholic Church in Ireland hasn't had much good news lately.
"The Bishop of Ardagh and Clonmacnoise, Dr Colm O'Reilly, has said he will restore St Mel's Cathedral in Longford after a devastating fire on Christmas morning caused damage estimated at more than €2 million.

"Gardai in Longford say that, while an investigation is already under way into the cause of the fire, a full forensic examination of the scene will not be possible until the fire services have made the building safe and handed it over to gardaí...."
(RTÉ News)
That €2 million is, I assume, €2,000,000.1 That would make the damage around 2,800,000 USD (xe)
Arson? Maybe, Maybe Not
If I let my imagination go one way, it's "obvious" that this fire "must be" arson, a response to the Murphy report and a very serious problem with an archdiocese in Ireland caught trying to shield at least one pedophile priest, and cover up the scandal.

But there's no evidence of that. A whole lot of things can go wrong in a building that's over a century and a half old - or any other building.

On the other hand, there's no evidence that it's not arson.

Like I said, investigators aren't being allowed into what's left of the cathedral yet.

I checked, just a minute ago (1:37 p.m. Central). Sure enough, the speculation's starting: Or, rather, acknowledgment that - given recent events in Ireland - arson is by no means incredible as an explanation for how the fire started.

It's 'Obvious?' Not to Me, Not Yet

The only thing that seems certain right now is that a fine building, built in the mid-1800s (RTÉ), burned. And that there was a whole lot of damage.

The most recent news reports I saw said that investigators couldn't get inside yet, because the cathedral may not be structurally stable any more.

The fire started sometime after the end of St. Mel's midnight Mass. One report said "The fire is understood to have started just after 5am on Christmas Day." (RTÉ)

For everyone concerned, I hope this fire wasn't arson. That sort of hate isn't good for anyone (September 1, 2009)

This is just a suggestion: but you might consider praying for the Church in Ireland, and for folks living in Longford. They're not having a particularly good time, these days.

"St Mel's Cathedral fire"

longfordleader1, YouTube (December 25, 200)
video, 2:09

(no description)

This is the video which also appears on Patrick Madrid's post, "Christmas Morning Shocker: Majestic Irish Cathedral Destroyed by Fire " (December 26, 2009).

"Longford Cathedral Christmas Day Inferno"

michaelcabz, YouTube (December 25, 2009)
video, 2:38

"Christmas morning fire at St Mel's Cathedral Longford"

Definitely amateur video of the fire - whoever's holding the camera tilts it on its side at one point, to get the cathedral's tower in the picture. That's not a criticism: amateur video, that doesn't get cut and spliced by news editors, can give at least as good a 'picture' of what's happened as the more polished professional shots.

"LONGFORD CHURCH FIRE"

DOCDOHERTY2009, YouTube (December 25, 2009)
video, 5:54

"This was the scene hours after the fire first occured at st mels cathedral in longford!"

Never mind the all-caps headline and exclamation mark: This is another good bit of amateur video, showing what seems to be a later stage of the fire, with ambient sounds and the voices. Also shows a bit of the streets of Longford: and a reporter and cameraman interviewing a fireman. Firefighter. Whatever.

Posts about the Church in Ireland: Posts touching on hate: Another blogger's commentary: In the news:
A tip of the hat to patrickmadrid, on Twitter, for the heads-up on this event.

1 Differences between American and British terms for big numbers used to start with 1 times 10 to the ninth, or 1,000,000,000 (" 'billion': a U.K. view" alt-usage-english.org - and there's a rather snippy comment elsewhere online)

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Pope Attacked at Christmas Eve Mass: And What He Said

I got back from Christmas Eve Mass at Our Lady of the Angels church, here in Sauk Centre, over an hour ago. It was a good Mass - but nowhere near as eventful as the one at St. Peter's in Rome. For which I'm duly grateful.

Pope, Cardinal Attacked at Christmas Eve Mass

First, the good news: Pope Benedict XVI is okay, after being grabbed and knocked down by a woman at today's Christmas Eve Mass.

Now, the bad news: Cardinal Roger Etchegaray seems to have a broken leg. He's been hospitalized. He was knocked down, too.

The woman apparently pulled something like this before. There are trade-offs between security and the Pope having contact with people.

It's anyone's guess, why the woman jumped over a barrier and went for the Pope. She's been detained for questioning, according to Reuters, and hasn't been identified.

Now Something Really Important: What Pope Benedict XVI Had to Say

More to the point, Pope Benedict XVI had good advice in his Christmas Eve homily. The full text of the English translation is several places online, including: I recommend - strongly - reading the full text. But, here are a few excerpts. Consider them intellectual appetizers.
"...'To you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord' (Lk 2:11). The Lord is here. From this moment, God is truly 'God with us'. No longer is he the distant God who can in some way be perceived from afar, in creation and in our own consciousness. He has entered the world...."

"...The story of the shepherds is included in the Gospel for a reason. They show us the right way to respond to the message that we too have received. What is it that these first witnesses of God's incarnation have to tell us?

"The first thing we are told about the shepherds is that they were on the watch – they could hear the message precisely because they were awake. We must be awake, so that we can hear the message. We must become truly vigilant people...."

"...to develop a receptivity for God: for the silent promptings with which he chooses to guide us; for the many indications of his presence. There are people who describe themselves as 'religiously tone deaf'. The gift of a capacity to perceive God seems as if it is withheld from some. And indeed - our way of thinking and acting, the mentality of today's world, the whole range of our experience is inclined to deaden our receptivity for God, to make us 'tone deaf' towards him...."

"...God comes to us as man, so that we might become truly human. Let us listen once again to Origen: 'Indeed, what use would it be to you that Christ once came in the flesh if he did not enter your soul? Let us pray that he may come to us each day, that we may be able to say: I live, yet it is no longer I that live, but Christ lives in me (Gal 2:20)' (in Lk 22:3).

"Yes indeed, that is what we should pray for on this Holy Night. Lord Jesus Christ, born in Bethlehem, come to us! Enter within me, within my soul. Transform me. Renew me. Change me, change us all from stone and wood into living people, in whom your love is made present and the world is transformed. Amen."
(Benedict XVI, via Catholic News Agency)
There's quite a lot more. As I wrote, I strongly recommend that you read the whole homily.

And, Merry Christmas!

Vaguely-related posts: In the news:
A tip of the hat to catholicism, on Twitter, for the heads-up on this news item.

Christmas? Yeah, it's a Pretty Big Deal

Tomorrow this family will be celebrating a very special occasion: Christmas, the Mass at which we celebrate the birth of our lord, Jesus.

You've probably heard and read this before. It's been repeated enough times, over the last two millennia:
"...Now there were shepherds in that region living in the fields and keeping the night watch over their flock.

"The angel of the Lord appeared to them and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were struck with great fear.

"The angel said to them, 'Do not be afraid; for behold, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people.

"For today in the city of David a savior has been born for you who is Messiah and Lord.

"And this will be a sign for you: you will find an infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger.'

"And suddenly there was a multitude of the heavenly host with the angel, praising God and saying:

" 'Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.'

"When the angels went away from them to heaven, the shepherds said to one another, 'Let us go, then, to Bethlehem to see this thing that has taken place, which the Lord has made known to us.'..."
(Luke 2:8-15)
May the peace of God be with you and yours.

Related posts:

Three Things That Go By the Name of Christmas

My oldest daughter brought a paraphrased remark by C. S. Lewis to my attention a few minutes ago: "...there are actually three different things that go by the name of Christmas: a religious festival, a popular holiday, and a commercial racket.' ("True Meaning Of Christmas" TV Tropes)

That's short, pithy, and makes a fine aphorism. Being the sort of person I am, and given the source of the quote, I did a little digging.

Sure enough: That's a pretty good summary of two paragraphs in an essay by C. S. Lewis:
"...Three things go by the name of Christmas. One is a religious festival. This is important and obligatory for Christians, but as it can be of no interest to anyone else, I shall naturally say no more about it here. The second (it has complex historical connections with the first, but we needn't go into them) is a popular holiday, an occasion for merry-making and hospitality. If it were my business to have a 'view' on this, I should say that I much approve of merry-making. But what I approve of much more is everybody minding his own business. I see no reason why I should volunteer views as to how other people should spend their own money in their own leisure among their own friends. It is highly probable that they want my advice on such matters as little as I want theirs. But the third thing called Christmas is unfortunately everybody's business.

"I mean of course the commercial racket. The interchange of presents was a very small ingredient in older English festivity. Mr. Pickwick took a cod with him to Dingley Dell; the reformed Scrooge ordered a turkey for his clerk; lovers sent love gifts; toys and fruit were give to children. But the idea that not only all friends but even all acquaintances should give one another presents, or at least send one another cards, is quite modern and has been forced upon us by the shop-keepers. Neither of these circumstances is in itself a reason for condemning it. I condemn it on the following grounds...."
(What Christmas Means to Me, "God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics", C. S. Lewis (copyright 1970 by Trustees of the Estate of C. S. Lewis))
After copying the excerpt for this post, I signed up on TV Tropes and added a comment on that particular page, with a link to the Google Books entry: and found out that Amazon.com has the "God in the Dock" book in stock.

Happy Christmas Eve!

New on the Blogroll: Living Catholicism

I ran into a new-to-me blog today, Living Catholicism, looking for a writeup on St. Francis of Assisi and the now-traditional nativity scene.

Living Catholicism looked pretty good at the moment - and a few minutes later - so I added it to the blogroll.

Christmas Nativity Scenes and St. Francis of Assisi

I've written before, that the Catholic Church doesn't miss many opportunities to use visual displays. (August 11, 2009)

Odds are, you already know about St. Francis of Assisi and the traditional Nativity scene, or creche. Or, maybe you don't. Maybe you spell it "crèche."

Whether you use an anglicized spelling or not, a nativity scene depicting the baby Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and others in that Bethlehem manger has been part of Christmas traditions for centuries.

More specifically, 786 years. St. Francis of Assisi arranged for a living Creche in a cave in Italy.

It wasn't the first Creche, by a long shot. As the Living Catholicism blog put it:
"...From the early days of the Church, believers painted scenes of the birth of Christ beginning in the catecombs.[!] These scenes became a staple of Christian life and carried on through the years. In the time of St. Francis of Assisi, the images had taken a new form: faithful Catholics would sit[!] out mangers in front of their local church, but these mangers were often jeweled and made of gold to represent who they held. St. Francis marvelled[!] at this and felt that the people were forgetting the humble, poor birth of our Lord Jesus...."
(Living Catholicism (December 9, 2006))
In 1223, Francis gathered people for the first living crèche - the way we're used to seeing it. Why "crèche"? That's French for "manger."

The custom caught on, and in many parts of the world - including my household - a small representation of a small livestock holding facility is part of the Christmas season.

Those nativity scenes of gold and jewels? I don't have a problem with them, so much. There's nothing wrong with using precious materials to show how precious the person they're representing or framing is. It's a mark of respect.

I also don't have a problem with being reminded that Jesus was born in the equivalent of garage, and laid in a container that normally held feed for cattle.

More-or-less related posts: Background:

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Irish Catholic Church Meltdown: I'm Disappointed, But Not Disheartened

The Catholic Church in Ireland is in the news again. Another bishop has offered his resignation. As I wrote, earlier this month:
"...The usual apostles of Maria Monk and Thomas Nast will, probably, say this is what Catholics do all the time. Nothing new there. ("Catholics Don't Believe the Bible: Who Knew?" (September 26, 2008))

"American college professors, some of them, will see the Murphy Report as more proof that they're right about those people who wallow in "self-satisfied ignorance" - and aren't at all like tolerant, open-minded academic people. Again, nothing new. (" 'Self-Satisfied Ignorance?' Eucharist, Quran, and Atheist Book Trashed" Another War-on-Terror Blog (August 5, 2008))..."
(December 11, 2009)
A bit of background, from "Pedophile Priests: In Ireland This Time" (December 11, 2009):
  • The Murphy report, prepared by the Irish government, confirmed claims that
    • (Some) priests had abused children in Ireland
    • The Dublin archdiocese had tried to cover up the scandal
  • Utterly unacceptable as the abuse is
    • Only a few priests appear to be involved
  • The Vatican hadn't done anything to stop the abuse
    • Because the Dublin archdiocese hadn't mentioned it in their reports
    • Until the Holy See found out what was happening
      • Now the Dublin archdiocese is being scrutinized
      • An Irish Cardinal and Archbishop were ordered to go to Rome
        • Where they got 90 minutes up close and personal with Vatican officials
It would have been nice if this abuse had never happened. I wish it hadn't. But it did, and now it's being dealt with.

Bishop James Moriarty, the headline figure in today's news, isn't mentioned in the Murphy report: and appears to have been guilty of not doing something. In 20-20 hindsight, it's pretty obvious that he should have asked the Dublin archdiocese to look at the records of the one priest Bishop Moriarty caught taking photos of children while they were changing. (Reuters Canada, BBC)

Bishop Moriarty didn't have access to the records, himself: and didn't know that the priest had a record of unacceptable behavior.

And yes, he should have asked for a background check.

And the archdiocese shouldn't have been trying to cover up the mess.

And the priest shouldn't have taken those photos.

Now Bishop Moriarty is offering his resignation.

Hats off, by the way, to BBC. The British news service has put Bishop James Moriarty's full statement online: "Bishop James Moriarty statement in full" BBC (December 23, 2009).

Bishop Moriarty's statement, as posted by BBC, ends with these words:
"... I know that any action now on my part does not take away the suffering that people have endured. I again apologise to all the survivors and their families.

"I have today offered my resignation as Bishop of Kildare and Leighlin to the Holy Father.

"I hope it honours the truth that the survivors have so bravely uncovered and opens the way to a better future for all concerned.

"I will endeavour to continue to do my best, as I have throughout my 48 years of ministry, to share Christ's light and hope for the world.

"We are about to celebrate Christmas, a time when we welcome Christ as the 'light that darkness could not overpower'. It is this truth that leads us forward. Christ is our light.

"May the blessing, the grace and the peace of Christmas be with us all."
(BBC)
Hypocritical? Self-serving? Some will see Bishop Moriarty's statement that way. I don't, but I'm a Catholic.

It's not that I blindly trust every individual who says that he or she is Catholic, or every individual church official. I'm well aware that Catholic laity, deacons, priests and bishops are human beings. And that mankind has a long history of messing things up:
"For mischief comes not out of the earth, nor does trouble spring out of the ground; 2But man himself begets mischief, as sparks fly upward."
(Job 5:6,7)

The Body of Christ, The Temple of the Holy Spirit, and Me

The Catholic Church is more than a rogue archdiocese; more than a Catholic politician who supports policies that violate Church teachings; more than a Catholic layman who dresses up as Santa Claus and murders a family.

The Catholic Church is the Body of Christ; Temple of the Holy Spirit; with roots in eternity; supported by God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God in three persons, who created Heaven and Earth. My loyalty is to God and His Church: and my prayer is:
"Lord, send us priests.

"Lord, send us many priests.

"Lord, send us many holy priests."
(quoted July 5, 2009, unknown source)
Somewhat-related posts: In the news: Background:

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Giving Gifts at Christmas is Good: But Get a Grip!

I've been making a list of 'Christmas' videos, in another blog. ("- - - Videos of Christmas Lights, Holiday Lights, and Music" Apathetic Lemming of the North (last updated December 22, 2009))

Santa Claus and Hot Lingerie Models

One of them's a rather nice "Carol of the Bells" music track, with a slide show of Christmas-themed graphics and photos. The (automatically-selected) frame from that particular video was, in this case, not at all that typical of the show as a whole:


"It's Good to be Santa?"

"A Christmas Tradition"? As one of my grown kids said, seeing that picture, "it's good to be Santa." If most of the helpers looked like that, yeah: until Mrs. Claus caught on, at least.

Those ladies weren't the "hot lingerie models," by the way. The Oddly Enough blog posted "The Steamy Lingerie Models who Saved Christmas!" Yesterday. I thought it was funny: but your experience may vary. It reads in part:
"...My publisher gave me a hefty advance to write a feel-good new Christmas story for children, to take its place up there with 'The Polar Express' and such-like.

"I'm required to use the phrase 'Steamy Lingerie Models' in the title because it seems research shows that dads do 80 percent of the holiday book shopping for their kids...."
(Oddly Enough (December 21, 2009))

Christmas: Not the Season to Overspend

Which brings me to what may become a sort of Christmas tradition in this blog: a harangue about some deplorable aspect of the holiday season.

I wrote about the warm-fuzzies approach to "the true meaning of Christmas" in television programming last year. What I find particularly irksome there is that so much of it is aimed at children.



Well, that was last year. I may get back to 'and the real meaning of Christmas is being all fuzzy and nice' another time - but this time I've decided to go ballistic over the crass commercialism that as so grievously afflicted this holy season.

Don't get me wrong: I actually like the glitz and kitsch of pre-Christmas marketing. For a fellow who likes Mozart, Hokusai, and Rembrandt, I've got a pretty high tolerance for tasteless showiness and excessively garish or sentimental art. Maybe because when it's done by someone who isn't a Euro-American, it's often been called called "folk art."

Which is another topic.

As I wrote in another blog: "...Nothing quite says 'it's Christmas!' like a snowboarding polar bear and blue poinsettias...."



I think there are better ways to say "it's Christmas" - but there's nothing quite like this season's marketing.

Going Crazy at Christmas? You've Got Company

This is the time of year where headlines like "authorities find bodies in apparent murder-suicide" appear with accounts of (generally husbands and/or boyfriends) who snapped: next to ads for Jamaican vacations, 50-dollar toys and the latest in Christmas bling.
'We'd Solve All Our Problems by Banning Something I Don't Like' - Not
We'd solve all our problems by banning television/newspapers/whatever? I don't think so. Technology makes it easier for us to do what we want to: but I don't buy the idea that television or any other gadget makes us want to do something. Cain predates Bing Crosby's specials by millennia; and we had thieves and murderers long before television, steam engines, the moldboard plow, and steel knives were around.

Of course, there's the idea that we'd solve all our problems if America - and the world - were run along groovier lines. Capitalism has its problems - but so does every system that involves human beings. I've written about that before (August 8, 2009) Bottom line: I think there were reasons why people were trying to break out of countries run by commissars, and occasionally trying to break into America.
Christmas, the Winter Solstice, and All That
Quite a few cultures and religions make a big deal out of the winter solstice. For people living in what's laughably called the northern temperate zone, the day when night stops getting longer and there's evidence that life will return to the world is cause for celebration.

The Catholic Church doesn't miss many opportunities to use symbols. Talking about Christmas festivities being deliberately placed on and near the winter solstice, the Pope said:
"...Beyond its historical dimension, this mystery of salvation also has a cosmic dimension: Christ is the sun of grace who, with his life, 'transfigures and enflames the expectant universe' (cf. Liturgy)...."
(Benedict XVI (December 21, 2008))
What bothers a lot of folks about Christmas isn't where in is on the calendar: It's the stress involved in getting gifts. Lots of them. Preferably expensive ones.

As the old song goes:
"...I'll go in the red like a knucklehead
"Cuz I'll squander all my pay.

"Oh, I yust go nuts at Christmas
"Shopping sure drives me berserk
"On the day before, I rush in a store
"Like a pure bewildered yerk...."
(YouTube video via Apathetic Lemming of the North (December 15, 2009")

Giving Gifts at Christmas: It's Some Kinda Plot, Right?

Actually, there's something to the idea that there's a hidden motive behind the crazy overspending on gifts in America (and, quite possibly, elsewhere) this time of year.

Yes, manufacturers and retailers benefit when people buy their products: and they've learned to whip up perceived needs for their tomato slicers; diamond-tipped solid gold swizzle sticks; and all the rest.

They're not the ones who got the ball rolling, though, on giving gifts for Christmas. The Catholic Church encouraged - and encourages - people to do so.

But, follow the trail back a bit further and you'll find another responsible party: God.
"...For us, God has become a gift. He has given himself. He has entered time for us. He who is the Eternal One, above time, he has assumed our time and raised it to himself on high. Christmas has become the Feast of gifts in imitation of God who has given himself to us. Let us allow our heart, our soul and our mind to be touched by this fact! Among the many gifts that we buy and receive, let us not forget the true gift: to give each other something of ourselves, to give each other something of our time, to open our time to God. In this way anxiety disappears, joy is born, and the feast is created...."
(Benedict XVI (December 24, 2006))
Yes, people have made a mess of this pious custom of exchanging and giving gifts. No surprises there: It's what we do. People have made a mess of marriage, too. For starters, that Ephesians thing? (September 24, 2009)

Picking up on the Pope's remarks, where'd he'd said: "In this way anxiety disappears, joy is born, and the feast is created."
"...During the festive meals of these days let us remember the Lord’s words: "When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite those who will invite you in return, but invite those whom no one invites and who are not able to invite you" (cf. Lk 14:12-14). This also means: when you give gifts for Christmas, do not give only to those who will give to you in return, but give to those who receive from no one and who cannot give you anything back. This is what God has done: he invites us to his wedding feast, something which we cannot reciprocate, but can only receive with joy. Let us imitate him! Let us love God and, starting from him, let us also love man, so that, starting from man, we can then rediscover God in a new way!..."
(Benedict XVI (December 24, 2006))
I've run into worse advice.

More-or-less-related posts: Background:

Friday, December 18, 2009

"If you must see ghosts ..." Materialism, Being Spiritual, and Uncle Deadly

A Muppet Show episode - I think it was the one that introduced Uncle Deadly - had the back-stage Muppets telling Kermit that the theater was haunted. Kermit assured them that there was a 'rational' explanation for what they'd seen. Then, as I recall, Uncle Deadly did a horror-house 'bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha' laugh. Kermit's reaction was something along the lines of 'or, not.'

I know: that's pretty vague. It's been years (decades?) since I saw that episode, and I wasn't taking notes.

The (very entertaining) Muppet Show episode's gag relied on a notion that's deeply embedded in American culture - western culture, in general, I think.
  • "Supernatural" means "irrational" or "illogical"
  • "Logical" and "reasonable" people 'know' that "supernatural" things aren't
    • Real
    • Logical or reasonable
For folks who put their brains in 'sleep' mode inside church; or whose religious leaders focus on emotional highs, rather than deep thought, that may be true.

There are even Catholics who are convinced that faith and reason are utterly, completely, totally incompatible.

Well, that's what they believe.

Me? I looked up what the Church teaches: and came up with a different answer. (March 20, 2009) I think being a convert helps. That, plus having a mind that won't treat facts and assumptions the same way, and a habit of:
  • Testing assumptions
  • Verifying facts
I've written about faith and reason before: check out "More-or-less-related posts", below.

Materialism, the Sixties, and All That

I spent my teens in the sixties - a colorful decade, even if you weren't following Timothy Leary's "turn on, tune in, drop out" advice. Various sorts of "materialism" weren't really popular then. Quite a few of America's youth - myself included - were taking a long, hard look at "success" and "the American Dream," and deciding that they didn't like the trade-offs.

Don't get me wrong: I have nothing against people making money, even making lots of money. Provided they do so ethically, and use their wealth responsibly. (More, December 14, 2009, in another blog)

Which is another topic.

A lot of kids in the sixties looked at what their parents said they believed, and how their parents lived. Quite a number decided to bail out of their parents' value systems. Can't say that I blame them. You heard "hypocrite" a lot in those days.

I didn't think my parents were hypocrites, then, and I don't now. I think I understand what they believed, and why they believed it. But I also learned too much about the Catholic Church, and had to join.

Which is yet another topic. ("Firebase Earth" (April 5, 2009) is a brief, if unconventional, account of my conversion)

An 'up' side of the sixties was the way that people - young people in particular - recognized a spiritual void in their lives, and were trying to fill it.

A (big) 'down' side was the array of weird ideas that dropped into the culture then - or, to use another metaphor, rose to the surface like a drowned muskrat.

Let's Remember: "Spiritual" Doesn't Mean "Good"

A science fiction story I read, a few decades back, discussed an imaginative idea - and a theological howler. In the story, our heroes met intelligent creatures that weren't like us. These aliens weren't made of wet organic stuff: their bodies were electrical fields and currents. Sort of like ball lightning.1

So far, so good. I'm not convinced that highly-evolved static cling could be alive, let alone intelligent - but the idea was good enough for a story.

Then the author made a remarkable statement. Two of them.
  1. These creatures, because they had no physical bodies were 'pure spirits'
  2. And therefore incapable of sin!
Let's look at those ideas:
  1. These (fictional) energy beings had been specifically described as being made of electrical fields and charges
    • Which are very much a part of the physical world
  2. 'Pure spirits' can sin
    • Case in point: Satan2
I'm pretty sure how the author came up with the idea of those sinless energy beings. 19th and 20th century western culture, some of the Christian subcultures, anyway, got the idea that sin was something you do with your body. So far, so good: but they got bogged down in the old notion that physical things are bad, spiritual things are good. That doesn't wash.

Sin is:
"An offense against God as well as a fault against reason, truth, and right conscience. Sin is a deliberate thought, word, deed, or omission contrary to the eternal law of God...." ("Catechism of the Catholic Church", Glossary, S)
And, no, the physical world isn't inherently bad. We've had that issue crop up, from early on (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 465, 285 - Gnosticism and all that) My take on it is that God made the physical world (but no, I'm not a creationist), God said that it was good - several times. I'm convinced that God isn't too stupid to tell the difference between 'bad' and 'good', and that God doesn't make junk.

Some of the early heresies, in addition to having all-too-familiar notions about who - and what - God is, held that "...the world (at least the physical world) is evil, the product of a fall, and is thus to be rejected or left behind (Gnosticism)...." (Catechism, 285)

Just like disco balls, the old heresies keep coming back - with shiny new covers and new names, but the same wack ideas.

Back to that story: Those energy beings were no more "pure spirit" than I am. They weren't wet and sticky inside, like plants and animals are, but energy of any sort is very much a part of the physical universe. If you've ever completed an electrical circuit with part of your body, you should know that. (I have - and don't intend to repeat the experience.)

There are sins that involve the body - like purposely getting drunk or cheating on your spouse. But sin is something you do mostly with your mind - and you don't need a body to defy God.

Bottom Line: The Matter is Real; So is Spirit; We're Both

Here's a pretty good definition of what a human person is:
"PERSON, HUMAN: The human individual, made in the image of God; not some thing but some one, a unity of spirit and matter, soul and body, capable of knowledge, self-possession, and freedom, who can enter into communion with other persons--and with God...."
(Catechism, Glossary, P)

Exorcists: They're Real

The Catholic Church in America seems to be remembering that the spiritual world exists, that some of the free-willed spirits aren't all that nice, and that there's a reason for having exorcists. (Conclusion 22, "A Report of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops Subcommittee on Lay Ministry Committee on the Laity" USCCB, and definition of exorcism in "E", Glossary, Catechism of the Catholic Church) Whew! That was a long title.

In fairness, dealing with unpleasant realities by ignoring them doesn't seem limited to America:
"...Far from mere literal interpretation of the text and far from eisexegesis or mutilated hermeneutical approach to an apocalyptic writing such as the Book of Revelations I have just cited, the entire Bible, Old and New Testaments, bears witness to the existence of the devil.

"The Church recognized these and offered courses on 'de Demonio'. Besides, she not only provided the rite of exorcism but made room for the exorcists. This seems to have fallen into disuse over the last few decades...."
("II ORDINARY SPECIAL ASSEMBLY FOR AFRICA OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS" (October, 2009))
The good news is that the role of exorcist is being reviewed.

And no, the movies aren't the best place to learn about exorcism.

Exorcism, Divination, and Magic

Exorcism is:
"The public and authoritative act of the Church to protect or liberate a person or object from the power of the devil (e.g., demonic possession) in the name of Christ...."
(Catechism, Glossary, E)
It can be a "simple exorcism prayer in preparation for Baptism" - or an application of divine authority delivered by an official exorcist.

On a related topic, the Church has a word to say about divination and magic: Don't. (Catechism, 2115 and following)
"All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one's service and have a supernatural power over others—even if this were for the sake of restoring their health—are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion...."
(Catechism, 2117)
In other words, it's okay to be a stage magician and pull hats out of rabbits. (Now that would be a trick.)

Trying to "tame occult powers"? Thank you, no. I do not want to go one-on-one against a fallen archangel, or any of Satan's lot. Taking on a main battle tank in my skivvies, armed with sharp stick, would give me better chances of success. And survival.

What Got Me Started On This?

I ran across this quote today:
"...Materialism is in fact no protection. Those who seek it in that hope (they are not a negligible class) will be disappointed. The thing you fear is impossible. Well and good. Can you therefore cease to fear it? Not here and now. And what then? If you must see ghosts, it is better not to disbelieve in them...."
(Chapter 10.1, "That Hideous Strength" C. S. Lewis (1946))
That started me thinking - and writing - and here I am.

One More Thing!

Having been out of touch with informed spiritual awareness for so long, it's no wonder that westerners get it wrong so often. A case in point:
"Ghost Rider"
Office for Film and Broadcasting, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

"Lightweight supernatural action adventure based on the Marvel Comics' character about a motorcycle daredevil, Johnny Blaze (Nicolas Cage), who makes a deal with the devil (Peter Fonda) and is cursed with having to serve as his 'bounty-hunter' - transforming into a flaming skeletal biker astride a fiery chopper by night - to escape damnation by stopping a renegade fallen angel (Wes Bentley) from unleashing hell on earth. Despite a dumb script and risible theology, the film never takes itself too seriously, and Cage-s campy but committed performance is laced with enough humor to make the hokey ride sufficiently diverting B-movie fare. Some parents may find the demonic elements problematic, but it's little more than a comic book retelling of 'Faust,' and, while, of greater concern, vengeance, not justice is meted out by Blaze, love is ultimately shown to be stronger than evil, with a recurring theme of redemption and second chances. Stylized violence, some horror images, a vulgar gesture, scattered crude language and couple of instances of profanity. A-III -- adults. (PG-13) 2007..."
A few comments, and I'll sign off for the night.

That A-III rating? Here's how the USCCB film reviews explain it:
"...The classifications are as follows:
  • "A-I -- general patronage;
  • "A-II -- adults and adolescents;
  • "A-III -- adults;
  • "A-IV**
  • "L -- limited adult audience, films whose problematic content many adults would find troubling. L replaces the previous classification, A-IV.
  • "O -- morally offensive.
"** Discontinued classification. All archived movies that were originally in the A-IV category are now classified as L."
That's right: "Ghost Rider" Got an A-III rating. the USCCB film reviewers thought - rightly, I think - that the film was suitable for adult audiences, but not so much for adolescents or children.

But, O - morally offensive? No. L - a film with "problematic content many adults would find troubling"? Again, no.

What's "risible theology"? Risible means "arousing or provoking laughter". (Princeton's WordNet) I haven't seen "Ghost Rider", but Hollywood is pretty good at mangling theological concepts.

As my father told me, "don't attribute to malice, what can be explained by stupidity." Or, I think, ignorance.

More-or-less-related posts:
1 (I know: there are scientists who say it doesn't exist - mostly, I think, because they can't explain just how it works.

Sort of like thunderstorm sprites, which were 'well known' to be hallucinations seen by simple, credulous people like soldiers in Vietnam and airline pilots. Until an astronaut's video camera recorded the phenomena. The astronaut's report could be written off as another "hallucination." The video camera? Even scientists who only read their own books weren't quite willing to say that a video camera had experienced hallucinations.

Posts relating to thunderstorm sprites and other "hallucinations:" More, about ball lightning: 2 There are some pretty good discussions of Satan online:

Sunday, December 13, 2009

Yesterday was the Feast Day of Our Lady of Guadalupe

¡Viva la Virgen de Guadalupe!

Or, 'long live Our Lady of Guadalupe!'1

Yesterday was the feast day of Our Lady of Guadalupe. This morning's reading from the New Testament included the bit from Rv 11:19a; 12:1-6a, 10ab; 12:1-6, 10. It's the part that includes "1A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman2 clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars."


The person in the hood may not have been feeling entirely well: Our Lady of the Angels church wasn't all that cold today. Or maybe she wanted to make sure people saw the upper part of the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe on the back. December 13, 2009.

I've written before, about Our Lady of Guadalupe. ("Our Lady of Guadalupe: Empress of the Americas" (August 11, 2009)) As I wrote then, the insides of Catholic churches aren't for the most part, known for being bland. We do know how to make use of images, to get people's attention and help them remember the Church's teachings.

Today, for instance, there was a reproduction of the image that's on Juan Diego's tilma, on display at the front of the church. Until the homily (that's Catholic for "sermon"). Then the deacon picked up the picture and, followed by two altar servers carrying candles, went up and down the aisles. He stopped once, while Father Statz was still talking, and was told to keep walking. Which, of course, he did.

Sure, I'd have paid attention to the homily anyway: but it's a bit easier to remember, with the visual memory of that image being processed around the sanctuary.

Worship, No! Venerate, Yes

You don't have to venerate Mary to be Catholic, but quite a few of us do. That's "venerate," not "worship."
"VENERATION (OF SAINTS): Showing devotion and respect to Mary, the Apostles, and the martyrs, who were viewed as faithful witnesses to faith in Jesus Christ. Later, veneration was given to those who led a life of prayer and self-denial in giving witness to Christ, whose virtues were recognized and publicly proclaimed in their canonization as saints (828). Such veneration is often extended to the relics or remains of those recognized as saints; indeed, to many sacred objects and images. Veneration must be clearly distinguished from adoration and worship, which are due to God alone (1154, 1674, 2132)."
(from Glossary, Catechism of the Catholic Church)

"WORSHIP: Adoration and honor given to God, which is the first act of the virtue of religion (2096). Public worship is given to God in the Church by the celebration of the Paschal Mystery of Christ in the liturgy (1067)."
(from Glossary, Catechism of the Catholic Church)
When it comes to Mary, whoever looks to her will get essentially the same instructions she have the servers at that wedding feast at Cana: " 'Do whatever he tells you.' " (John 2:5) It was right after that that Jesus started with water and stone jars, and ended with wine.

The point is, go toward Mary and she'll point you toward Jesus.

At Guadalupe, she was wearing a sash that - following local custom - identified her as being pregnant. Yes, I know: my Lord had been born over a dozen centuries before Mary appeared to Juan Diego. What can I say? She's shown up holding an infant Jesus, and I'm not going to argue with her Son and His Father over what can and can't be done in their creation.

There's a novena to Our Lady of Guadalupe in "Liturgy Guide Respect Life 2009-2010," Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. The specified dates for the novena (December 4 to December 12) are past now, but I don't see how it would hurt to start now - or whenever.

From the second day:
"Mary, Mother of divine grace, you appeared to Juan Diego standing on the moon and robed in a royal mantle adorned with stars, showing that you are the Queen of Heaven and Earth, yet far from a haughty or distant Queen. With hands folded in supplication, eyes cast downward in humility and compassion, you did not ask for a temple where you could be honored, but one where you could attend to the 'weeping and sorrows of … all the people of this land, and of the various peoples who love me....' May all who are sorrowing due to abuse, violence, exploitation, neglect, and all sins against the dignity of life, fly to you, Mother, for comfort and hope."
("Liturgy Guide Respect Life 2009-2010")
That "supplication, eyes cast downward in humility" probably doesn't sit too well with people whose assumptions about the world were set somewhere in the sixties: but the way I see it, Mary is "Queen of Angels" - it's not such a stretch to see the angels as a sort of military outfit, a queen is a sort of leader, so Mary can be seen as the leader of a military organization. A general of sorts. I'd say she can afford to be a bit humble. (August 11, 2009)

What's a novena? Nine days of reflections and prayers. And, another topic.

Related posts: Background, about Our Lady of Guadalupe

Friday, December 11, 2009

Pedophile Priests: In Ireland This Time

The Catholic Church in Ireland hit the international news. The Archdiocese of Dublin, anyway.

Pedophile Priests: Here We Go Again

It seems that (some) priests in the Archdiocese of Dublin 'abused children.' If they followed the general pattern of the Amchurch meltdown, most of the raped boys, but the news reports I read didn't say. Maybe this lot went after girls. The point is, some as-yet-unspecified number of priests lusted after children, did something about it, and got the local church authorities to cover up the scandal.

Unsuccessfully, in the long run. (Didn't anybody learn from Watergate?)

The usual apostles of Maria Monk and Thomas Nast will, probably, say this is what Catholics do all the time. Nothing new there. ("Catholics Don't Believe the Bible: Who Knew?" (September 26, 2008))

American college professors, some of them, will see the Murphy Report as more proof that they're right about those people who wallow in "self-satisfied ignorance" - and aren't at all like tolerant, open-minded academic people. Again, nothing new. (" 'Self-Satisfied Ignorance?' Eucharist, Quran, and Atheist Book Trashed" Another War-on-Terror Blog (August 5, 2008))

Abusive Priests in the News

Taking a look at today's and yesterday's news, all the articles mentioned that priests abused children. Some articles, but not all, mentioned the Murphy Report by name. None that I read said whether boys and/or girls were abused. Maybe news editors don't want people to get the wrong(?) idea.

The way news reports danced around just who or what "Murphy" was got my attention, so I looked at news originating in the United Kingdom. I found a lead (link, actually) on BBC. ("Pope Benedict shares Irish 'child abuse outrage' " BBC (December 11, 2009))

That BBC link led me to The Dublin Archdiocese Commission of Investigation. The three members of the commission are:
  • Judge Yvonne Murphy (Chairperson)
  • Ita Mangan
  • Hugh O'Neill
  • Maeve Doherty is the solicitor to the Commission
A bit more link-following, and I found a download page for "Commissions of Investigation Act 2004" (Act No. 23 of 2004)(pdf format). The Oireachtas is the Irish Republic's parliament. (Princeton's WordNet) Now, the Irish Republic is the government of Ireland (distinct from "Northern Ireland," for which we have the last Henry to thank). And the Irish Republic most certainly is not the Irish Republican Army, which is another thing entirely.

So, the Murphy Report is what a commission of the Irish government had to say.

Why I Don't Miss the Good Old Days

The timeline for the Dublin Archdiocese meltdown seems to follow what happened in the Catholic Church in America. I don't know who's accused in Ireland, but here in America the pedophile priests seem to have been from a relatively small cadre of priests, who went through seminary around the sixties and seventies.

I remember those "good old days:" the talent and death of Jimi Hendrix; the wisdom of Professor "Turn on" Timothy Leary; the grooviness of Woodstock; the charmingly clueless idealism and the acid heads.

It was a colorful period (remember psychedelic art?), no doubt: but not one known for rigorous adherence to traditional beliefs and practices. Like keeping your zipper up. With 20-20 hindsight, I'm not surprised that a whole lot of the American pedophile priests are around my age: that was not a time when young minds were encouraged to follow dusty old rules taught by fuddy-duddys. Like, it turns out, the notion that children aren't sexual playthings.

Relive the "good old days?" Thank you, no: I got out alive; for which I'm duly grateful. Many didn't.

Summoned to the Holy See: Yes, the Church is Taking This Seriously

It would have been nice if:
  1. Another bunch of pervert priests hadn't messed around with kids
  2. The local Church authorities hadn't tried to cover up the scandal
  3. The Holy See (Vatican, to most Americans) had somehow known something was going to go wrong
    • And stopped it before it started
That's not the way it happened. But, now that the Holy See knows that they have been, in effect, lied to: Headquarters here on Firebase Earth is definitely paying closer attention to the Archdiocese of Dublin.
"Pope Benedict XVI and high-ranking members or the Roman Curia met with two members of the Irish bishops' conference in the papal library on Friday to listen to their concerns and discuss the issue of sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of Dublin. The Pope was admittedly 'deeply disturbed and distressed' by the contents of the Murphy Report released on Nov. 29 and expressed his commitment to investigating the matter further.

"Cardinal Sean Brady of Armagh, Northern Ireland, and Dublin Archbishop Diarmuid Martin met for 90 minutes with Vatican representatives, including Secretaries of State Tarcisio Cardinal Bertone, Archbishop Fernando Filoni, and Archbishop Dominique Mamberti. Also present were Cardinal Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Cardinal Re, Cardinal Ballestrero, Cardinals Wells and the Irish Nuncio...."
(Catholic News Agency)
That's sort of like field commanders called to the Pentagon, where top brass explain to them why they're supposed to pay attention to orders.

I'm confident, going to keep an eye on another fouled-up mess. And, I trust, encourage the Archdiocese of Dublin to make reparations to the victims.

That's not, I think, a vain hope. It's happening here in America. Not that anything will give the now-grown kids their lives back.

You might give a thought to praying for everyone involved: the kids (many now grown); the offending priests, the collaborating Church officials; everybody. That's pray for: not against. Forgiveness is a big part of what the Catholic Church teaches. (July 23, 2009) But that's getting into another topic, and it's getting late.

Sort-of-related posts: In the news:
More:

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Jessica Logan, Sexting, Suicide, What Guys Want, and Malignant Virtue


"There are times, Charles, when even the unimaginative decency of my brother and the malignant virtue of his wife appear to me admirable."
(Lord Peter Wimsey, in Murder Must Advertise, Dorothy L. Sayers (1933))

A young woman, Jessica, the only child of Cynthia and Albert Logan in Cincinnati, hanged herself last year.

I didn't think suicide was a good idea before I became a Catholic. That's just as well: If I'd 'trusted my feelings,' I probably wouldn't be alive today. I still don't think suicide is a smart move, and now know a few more of the reasons. (January 28, 2009)

Since I'm going to say some things that will sound "judgmental" by the standards of America' dominant culture, I'd better give a little background first.

I Don't have Authority to Judge Anybody

I take this pretty seriously:
" 'Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you. Why do you notice the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove that splinter from your eye,' while the wooden beam is in your eye? You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother's eye."
(Matthew 7:1-5)
Like the subheading says in another post, "Judging Someone Else? I Don't Need That Kind of Trouble". (August 27, 2009)

Saying that what another person does, on the other hand, I am allowed to point out. Look at it this way: if you saw your blindfolded friend walking toward the top of a cliff, would you be 'nice,' and not mention that he'd better stop?

Suicide isn't Right, and We Shouldn't Do It

I wrote about what the Catholic Church teaches about suicide, earlier this year. (January 28, 2009)

This is over-simplified, but:
  • Killing someone for personal motives is wrong
    • Even if the person is yourself
  • We don't "own" our life
    • God does
    • We're stewards
  • Killing ourselves affects everybody we know
    • And will know
  • After murdering someone else, the living murderer can repent
  • After killing yourself, you're not alive
    • Which could make repenting - or anything else - a bit difficult
So someone who's committed suicide is doomed? Depends on who you listen to. Me, I listen to the Catholic Church:

"Catholics Believe Suicides Go to Hell, Right?"

"This might be a surprise:
" 'We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.
(2283)
(January 28, 2009)

Modesty is a Good Idea, Even if the Grocery Magazines Don't Agree

You've seen them in the grocery checkout line: magazines with covers that display an improbably attractive woman and article titles like "How to Dress for Sex," "What To Do For Your Man - So He Won't Leave You" and "How to Have Sexy [hair, clothes, body parts, whatever]."

I've been over this idea a couple of times, at least.
"...this is a 'divisive' point. Men in western countries have learned to expect the titillation of watching nubile young women bouncing in their bikinis on the beach. Depriving them of this (right?) certainly could be a 'divisive' issue...."

"...Sure: right now, after decades of bikinis, hot pants and nipple rings, it's hard to imagine that anyone would be mean-spirited enough to deprive hot-blooded men of their jollies. Or women of the opportunity to be regarded as 3D living color moving centerfolds...."
(August 16, 2009)
Don't get me wrong: human sexuality is a wonderful part of our existence. But it isn't the only part: and there's a balance to be achieved, between celebrating what we are, and making ourselves seem to be objects - not people.

Jessica Logan and the Respectable People of Cincinnati

First, a bit about Jessica Logan.

Short version: Jessica Logan was born in 1990. By the end of July 2008, she had sent young man a photo of herself, from the neck down, wearing no clothes; graduated from high school, and killed herself.

The young man passed Jessica's photo on to four other young women. After that, Jessica was hounded by the "good," "respectable" people in her peer group, and rejected from parties because she had a "reputation."

Spare me from such respectability.

Sexting: 'Everybody' is Doing It

Sort of.

"Sexting" is a fairly new term, and doesn't seem to have worked its way into the more conventional online dictionaries. There is, however, an article in Wikipedia with some background and - more to the point - links to source material: "Sexting." Briefly, the article defines sexting as "...sending sexually explicit messages or photos electronically, primarily between cell phones...."
"...Jessie was not alone in sending nude cell-phone photos. Her friends point to the increasing pressure on teenage girls to send nude photos to their boyfriends.

"A national study by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy revealed that 1 in 5 teen girls or 22 percent say they have electronically sent or posted nude or semi-nude images online of themselves...."
(Cindy Kranz, via Cincinnati.com)
Nothing new here. When I was a teen, back in the sixties, it was "Polaroids," a brand name that covered any of the available quick-developing cameras. What's different about sexting is that a racy digital photo can be distributed much faster than a "Polaroid." And, the digital photo can be replicated over and over again.

I remember being a teenage boy - and don't ever want to be like that again. Adolescence doesn't seem to be any easier for teenage girls who are becoming young women.

Never Mind What He Wants

It's not quite true, that human males think only about sex from around the age of 13 to 125. For Americans, anyway, there's food, cars, and sports, too. Other cultures may have something other than cars - and American culture seems to be replacing cars and motorcycles with electronic gadgets. But that's another topic.

The fact is, men tend to be a bit obsessive about women. Good thing too, or it would take a whole lot more to get us thinking about settling down. Which is yet another topic.

The problem is: Guys are really, really interested in sex. The more ethically-challenged of us will lie, cheat, steal or - on occasion - kill for it. I'm not justifying that sort of behavior. At all. But, let's face it: some guys are loathsome jerks. Or act the part very well.

And all of us, if we're even close to being 'husband' material, aren't going to have a physically distant, purely Platonic, interest in our girlfriends. We're not supposed to ask for nude photos, premarital sex, or related favors: but we are not likely to regard a young woman as 'just another person, like me.'

There's a greeting card I ran into, decades ago. On the front is

"I ASKED MY MOTHER WHAT YOU'D WANT FOR YOUR BIRTHDAY."

Inside: "SHE SAID, 'NEVER MIND WHAT HE WANTS, GIVE HIM A CARD."

Some mothers still have that sort of wisdom. Probably a combination of knowledge passed down over generations of women and their daughters, and a lifetime's experience of dealing with my half of humanity.

Back to that Cincinnati article:
"Jessica Logan's nude cell-phone photo - meant for her boyfriend's eyes only - was sent to hundreds of teenagers last year in at least seven Greater Cincinnati high schools.

"The 18-year-old Sycamore High School senior was then bombarded with taunts: slut, porn queen, whore.

"On July 3, Jessie hanged herself in her bedroom...."

"...She couldn't even escape when she went home, her close friends said.

" 'I'd be with her and she'd get numbers that weren't even in her contacts, random numbers that she didn't know, texting her, "You're a whore, you're a slut," ' Lauren said.

" 'Or, she'd get on MySpace and get messages from people calling her those names, or Facebook would be the same way. It was constant. She'd go home thinking, "Oh I'm going to get away from this," but she never could get away from it.'..."
(Cincinnati.com)

Malignant Virtue and the Cincinnati Schools

I think there's plenty of blame to go around: but I'm not going to be sixties-fashionable and blame Jessica's parents. They were, it seems, trying to defend their daughter.

It didn't help that she was 18 by the time the photo was hitting the fan.

The Sycamore Community Schools Board of Education weren't exactly inactive in the matter of Jessica and the "upstanding," "respectable" people who were harassing her. The Logans were sent truancy notices often enough to show that the system really cared.

Hey, who really expects school officials to deal with something like this, anyway? Even if they thought about getting involved, someone might point out the danger they'd face, from infringing on rights to privacy or expression or whatever.

Bitter? Yeah. I am, a little. I was in the education racket for a while, got out, and can't say I'm sorry I did. There are decent people still inside, but as for the system as a whole - but that's yet another topic.

I have no idea what sort of person Jessica Logan was - is. She apparently didn't have the defenses many of us have, against opinions of others. Her decision to hang herself was not, I think, prudent. But I don't have all the facts, and - like I wrote before - I'm not allowed to judge persons.

What people do, on the other hand, again repeating myself, is within the scope of acceptable commentary.

There are five people in particular, who in my opinion acted with at best a callous disregard and reckless indifference to the welfare of others:
  • Ryan Salyers
    • Jessica's ex-boyfriend
    • Who showed Jessica's photo to four other girls
  • Sara Jane Ramsey
      Girl #1, presumably
  • Courtney Richardson
      Girl #2, presumably
  • Emily Stachler
      Girl #3, presumably
  • A minor identified only as A.R
      Girl #4, presumably
With friends like those, you don't need enemies.

The behavior of those persons, and others, is the subject of a lawsuit, so insert "allegedly" every second or third word.

With legal action to help focus their attention, these young people have an opportunity to reevaluate their motivations and decisions. I don't know that they are responsible for Jessica Logan's death: but the special attention that their community showered on Jessica probably wouldn't have happened, if young Mr. Ryan Salyers hadn't shown Jessica's photo to the four other girls - and if all of them hadn't seen to it that the photo was spread around, where it could do the most harm.

Cause and Effect? Yeah, I Think They Exist

Actions have consequences. That's not a popular idea in some circles, but I've seen things that are hard to explain in terms other than "cause and effect."

Sometimes it's pretty obvious: like holding a cement block over your foot and letting it drop. Unless you're wearing some really fancy footwear, your foot will 'just happen to' start hurting a fraction of a second later.

Other times, the cause-effect links aren't quite so obvious.

Like Jessica Logan's case.

Malignant Virtue and "Hypocrisy," Real and Imagined

"Harper Valley PTA" (Tom T. Hall (1968)) was a very popular song in the late sixties. A decade later it was made into a movie (1978) and a television series (1981-1982). I like the song (haven't seen the screen adaptations), and think the Tom T. Hall lyrics say something about the disconnect between what some 'proper' people say they believe - and expect others to do - and how they live, themselves.

As described in the song, the Harper Valley PTA members are hypocrisy personified. (Video micro-reviewed at "Harper Valley PTA - Yeah, There Are People Like That," Apathetic Lemming of the North (December 8, 2009))

Problem is, the idea seems to have taken root that people who say that something that's popular and feels good at the moment - like cheating on your wife or doing drugs - are hypocrites. Because they support unpopular or inconvenient standards.

But What About the Pedophile Priests?!

It's true. A tiny minority of American priests raped boys.

That wasn't right.

It was wrong.

If they were also preaching adherence to Catholic teaching, yes: they were exhibiting hypocritical behavior.

Which wasn't right.

And was wrong.

Moving along.

Having Standards, Hypocrisy, and Being Human

I'm a hypocrite, in the sense that I am not a perfect example of a Catholic citizen, husband, and father: and still think that these standards are right.

God willing, I'll keep shoveling trash out of my mind until it's all gone, or I die. I often feel that I'll still have backlog at the end. Some days, I feel like it's one step forward and two steps back: but that's emotions. They're valuable indicators that something is happening - but I don't rely on them. Which is (good grief) another topic. Several, actually.

By the way, along with murder and suicide, the Catholic Church doesn't approve of hypocrisy. (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2468, Mark 12:15, and Matthew 23:13, for starters)

Harper Valley PTA: or, How Not to Run a Community

"Harper Valley PTA" - which is a song I still like - getting back to the late sixties and seventies (aayiii!) was part of a set of cultural changes: in which
  • Some Americans began re-evaluating their relentless pursuit of wealth and social standing
  • Others dug psychological trenches in defense of what they called "the American dream"
  • Quite a few people around my age decided that the whole materialistic culture - and anything else their parents had told them - should be jettisoned

Options, Choices, Results

I never bought into the "tune in, turn on, drop out" ethic: but I did take a long, hard look at my options.

Then I chose to live in a way that was optimized for learning and didn't take having "a successful career" into account. I still think I made the right decision.

As I said, I think folks had reason for rejecting the ethic expressed in 'I'll lie for the company, I'll cheat for the company, I'll steal for the company - but I'll never give up my principles!' (From one of the final scenes in Brigadoon" (1954), I think). Rejecting every part of 'conventional middle-class morality:' not so much.

I can see why folks rejected 'middle-class values.' But I don't think that rejection was such a good idea. Not as implemented.

Ever since, quite a few people have been hesitant to recommend old-fashioned ideas like not shacking up, getting married, being loyal to your wife or husband, and not giving someone a nude photo of yourself.

Stripped of weird cultural accretions like the infamous double standard of the fifties, and the idea that God commands women to wear skirts - during Minnesota winters - I think these rules are intended to keep us from killing each other and ourselves. And, more positively, guiding us into a better life.

In Conclusion (FINALLY!)

I started writing this post about nine and a half hours ago. I've had two meals and attended to several other tasks, too: so don't be too impressed with the amount of time I put in.

The points I was trying to get across were:
  • Ladies, if he says he'll leave unless you send him a naughty photo
    • Take him up on his offer
    • Or leave him first
    • Odds are, this won't be the last dicey demand he makes
  • Guys, don't ask for a naughty photo
  • If you do get a naughty photo, don't send copies to everybody you know
  • If you're so embarrassed and humiliated and rejected that you think you'd be better off dead
    • Odds are really good that you won't
    • Change happens: and this, too will pass
      • Maybe like that triple-cheese anchovy and Tabasco pizza you had
      • But it will pass
  • If you feel that you're morally or spiritually superior to someone you know
    • Look out: and
      • Take a long, hard, look at yourself
      • See what happens when you apply the standards you have for others on yourself
    • Even if you (seriously) think you're better than someone else
      • Use that hyper-spiritual nature of yours and
        • Don't call the person a whore, slut, or whatever
And, if that sounds hard to do: I don't claim that doing the right thing is easy.

More-or-less-related posts:
News and views:

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.