Showing posts with label Catholic counter-culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Catholic counter-culture. Show all posts

Saturday, April 13, 2013

Malignant Virtue and the Monkees

As a youth, frightfully 'religious' radio preachers helped me learn to love rock and roll. They also encouraged me to take a long, hard look at Christianity, and religion in general.

Eventually, I decided that religion wasn't necessarily a psychiatric disorder, and became a Catholic.

Malignant virtue of the 'kill a commie for Christ' variety may have inspired songs like this:
"...Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...."
John Lennon, "Imagine" (1971)
(posted oldielyrics.com) (March 12, 2011)

Status Symbol Land

Many in my generation realized that something had gone horribly wrong with the 'American dream.' I was one of those who decided that 'success' wasn't worth the tradeoffs. I like living here, and that's another topic. (January 12, 2010, July 4, 2011)

Songs like 1967's "Pleasant Valley Sunday" reflected an impression that unswerving dedication to getting more stuff was a bad idea.



It's not the money that gets us in trouble: it's love of money. 1 Timothy 6:10 and all that.

Vaguely-related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Monday, July 2, 2012

"A Profoundly New Way of Understanding Business Enterprise"

I'm covering a lot of ground in this post. This list of headings helped me sort out the ideas. Your experience may vary:
I had a lot to learn when I became a Catholic, and still do.

The Church has been teaching why it's important to love God, love my neighbor, and that everybody's my neighbor, to anyone who'd listen for two millennia. The basic principles are simple: applying them, not so much.

I discovered that I had to unlearn a few things, including my attitude toward "social justice." Like many other 'crazy kids' in the '60s and '70s, I thought that American culture needed reform. We won: and I was appalled at the direction those 'reforms' went.

I still think American culture needs reform: which isn't the same as wanting a return to 'the good old days.' And that's another topic.

Social Justice: Catholic Style

When I ran into the phrase "social justice" in Catholic documents, I cringed: expecting calls for more of the social engineering efforts we've endured in recent decades.

But I read them anyway.

Now I know that "social justice" has been part of the Church's mission: ever since my Lord said things like "...love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you...;" and told a story about servants and using wealth. (Matthew 5:43-44; Matthew 25:14-30, Luke 19:11-27)

The Catholic Church's social justice doesn't reflect 19th century Laissez-faire economics, 21st century American conservative values, or the preferred reality of today's establishment. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1928-1942; 2239; 2442)

The Catholic Church is literally καθολικός, universal. For two thousand years, the message for all humanity has been 'love God, love your neighbor,' and 'everybody's our neighbor.' (Matthew 22:36-40, Mark 12:29-31, Luke 10:25-27; Matthew 5:43-44, Luke 10:29-37; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1822, 1825)

'Out of Step?' I'm Okay With That

I'm not surprised that what the Church says seems 'out of step' with extremes of both liberal and conservative ideas.

And I certainly don't think that the Church's position on social justice is "moderate."

But, as I learned in the '60s: being out of step with the status quo doesn't mean something is wrong.

Change, Risk, and Business

"Today's international economic scene, marked by grave deviations and failures, requires a profoundly new way of understanding business enterprise. Old models are disappearing, but promising new ones are taking shape on the horizon. Without doubt, one of the greatest risks for businesses is that they are almost exclusively answerable to their investors, thereby limiting their social value...."
("Caritas in Veritate," 40)
"Social value?" business?!! That reminds me of the well-intentioned cooperatives my wife and I shopped at, a few decades back. Some of them maintained good quality control: some didn't, which is very bad news for anyone selling food. Or buying it.

But, like I said, the Catholic approach to social justice is 'out of step' with contemporary culture. We're counter-cultural: very counter-cultural. And always have been.

Benedict XVII isn't 'anti-business.' He does, however, point out factors which make ethical lapses easy.
  • Company directors
    • Often stay in charge for a short time
    • Are expected to focus exclusively on short-term profit
  • Awareness of social responsibility is hindered by
    • Outsourcing of labor
    • Acquiring supplies from many territories
    • Selling to geographically broad markets
I see no indication that Benedict XVI thinks that a global economy is bad; just that it's hard to get feedback about social impact, when companies:
  • Get a new boss every few years
  • Deal with sources all over the word for
    • Employees
    • Supplies
  • Provide goods or services all over the world

Learning the Value of Social Responsibility

"...Today's international capital market offers great freedom of action. Yet there is also increasing awareness of the need for greater social responsibility on the part of business...."
("Caritas in Veritate," 40)
In the long run, ethical behavior is profitable. Unethical behavior - isn't. I think more business leaders will start realizing that they need to 'think big' in terms of time, as well as global markets. They may not call the principle "natural law," but that's what they'll rediscover. Or collapse:

Ethics Matter

"...Even if the ethical considerations that currently inform debate on the social responsibility of the corporate world are not all acceptable from the perspective of the Church's social doctrine, there is nevertheless a growing conviction that business management cannot concern itself only with the interests of the proprietors, but must also assume responsibility for all the other stakeholders who contribute to the life of the business: the workers, the clients, the suppliers of various elements of production, the community of reference...."
("Caritas in Veritate," 40)
For now, I'll settle for "ethical considerations that ... are not all acceptable from the perspective of the Church's social doctrine...." It's a start: and a huge improvement over previous behavior that gave free enterprise such an abysmal reputation.

I'm a practicing Catholic: part of an outfit that's thousands of years old, rooted in eternity, with a mandate to teach people to love their neighbors. We're also forbidden to "make" people change their minds. (Catechism, 2106)

It's been slow going, but we have made progress:

Investment Ethics

"...By contrast, though, many far-sighted managers today are becoming increasingly aware of the profound links between their enterprise and the territory or territories in which it operates. Paul VI invited people to give serious attention to the damage that can be caused to one's home country by the transfer abroad of capital purely for personal advantage[95]. John Paul II taught that investment always has moral, as well as economic significance[96]. All this - it should be stressed - is still valid today..."
("Caritas in Veritate," 40)
I'm going to 'turn up the volume' on the emphasis Benedict XVI gave in one sentence:
"John Paul II taught that investment always has moral, as well as economic significance[96]."
("Caritas in Veritate," 40)
In recent (by my standards) years, my wife and I noticed 'SRI,' or 'socially responsible investing' show up in financial planning literature. I'm 60: and never assumed that Social Security would 'take care of everything.' That's not quite another topic.

Some of the SRI packages were of the 'save the gay and lesbian codependent whales' variety: probably well-intentioned; and quite likely popular with folks who hadn't noticed the passing of bell bottoms and disco.

Other packages made a little more sense, at least for folks who think it's immoral to invest in tobacco or demon rum.

I'll grant that there's medical research, real research, not the 'cancer causes cell phones' stuff, demonstrating a link between excessive use of tobacco and lethal medical problems. Alcohol abuse is real: and that's another topic.

Not All CEOs are Rapacious Twits

I think this bears repeating. Benedict XVI, in addition to saying that ethics matter in business and investment, said:
"...many far-sighted managers today are becoming increasingly aware of the profound links between their enterprise and the territory or territories in which it operates...."
("Caritas in Veritate," 40)

Short-Term Profit; Long-Term Failure

I think this is a sort of elaboration on the old notion that 'get rich quick' schemes are a bad idea:
"...What should be avoided is a speculative use of financial resources that yields to the temptation of seeking only short-term profit, without regard for the long-term sustainability of the enterprise, its benefit to the real economy and attention to the advancement, in suitable and appropriate ways, of further economic initiatives in countries in need of development...."
("Caritas in Veritate," 40)
That papal admonition to look past the quick bucks, to what happens after the spike in profits, reminded me of this bit of:
"Which of you wishing to construct a tower does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if there is enough for its completion?

"Otherwise, after laying the foundation and finding himself unable to finish the work the onlookers should laugh at him

"and say, 'This one began to build but did not have the resources to finish.' "
(Luke 14:28-30)
Sure, Luke was writing about dedication to following Jesus: but I think it the idea of understanding the costs - and implications - of a decision can be applied to other situations.

Employment isn't Exploitation

I suspect that this is one of the places where "Caritas in Veritate" is supposed to be "purposefully vague." Benedict XVI doesn't say:
  • Exporting investment and skills is good
  • Providing employment in another country is bad
I think there's a good reason for this apparent 'vagueness.' It's not that simple. Not in this case:
"...It is true that the export of investments and skills can benefit the populations of the receiving country. Labour and technical knowledge are a universal good. Yet it is not right to export these things merely for the sake of obtaining advantageous conditions, or worse, for purposes of exploitation, without making a real contribution to local society by helping to bring about a robust productive and social system, an essential factor for stable development."
("Caritas in Veritate," 40) [emphasis mine]
I've run into folks who quite sincerely fear that the 'beautiful people' in some remote spot will be 'ruined' by vile American greed.

I'm not at all happy about some of my native culture's tendency to value possessions over principles. On the other hand, I don't think that there's virtue in depending on antique technology and dubiously dependable weather for food, clothing, and shelter.

I do think that Benedict XVI has the right idea: learning skills and making a living are good. Getting ripped off is bad.

Besides, taking the long view: I hope that folks all over the world become reasonably prosperous. On a material level, it'll mean better living conditions for everyone: and more markets for countries whose people have been keeping up with contemporary tech.

I don't necessarily count on this, but there's always the chance that folks who don't have to concentrate on not starving this season may decide to "seek the truth." (Catechism, 2467) On the other hand, maybe they'll watch Gilligan's Island reruns. But at least they'll have more options.
More posts about "Caritas in Veritate" (Charity in Truth)
"Caritas in Veritate"
Related posts:
More:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, June 30, 2012

College Kids, "100% Organic Sex," and Me

I grew up in the '60s, and learned that something can be "legal" and be wrong. I still think that's true. (June 29, 2012) I also learned that sex was good. Which it is. (January 23, 2012)

I'm a practicing Catholic, have good reasons for 'all of the above,' and I'll get to that.

Sex And College Kids

I haven't been 'one of those crazy kids' for a long time. Quite a few years ago I visited a college I'd attended. The professors looked like kids to me.

The college kids? They haven't changed all that much. They still want to change the world:
"100% Organic Sex"
Aggie Catholics (June 29, 2012)

"...If anything can be said of our generation, it's this: We want sexy back. Our parent's generation, well, they lost it. They delivered to us a world with sky-high rates of divorce, abortion, and STDs; a world bored with sex and bored with romance; a world in which more and more people are turning to pornography to find sexual satisfaction; a world in which 1 in 5 women report being sexual assaulted, and the human body - the sexiest thing in the universe - is used to sell cars.

"After extremely little consideration, we decided we don't want that. We want awesome relationships and mind-blowing sex lives. We want women and men to be respected and loved for who they are...."
This video's embedded in the Aggie Catholics post:

"Sex Drive and Contraception "

video, 0:57
1fleshfilms, YouTube(June 5, 2012)

I checked out links in the post and video, and I agree: women deserve better. These 'crazy kids' know what they're talking about:

Men, Women, and the 'Good Old Days'

The pale men who ran America talked about old-fashioned values: which included the idea that sex was a bond between husband and wife, and blessed couples with babies.

They also cherished the "double standard." They'd married a "nice" girl, and expected their daughters to be "nice," too.

These pillars of the community often believed it was okay for their sons to enjoy the company of 'loose women:' as long as junior followed father's example, and settled down with a "nice" girl.

Sometimes the ethically-changed man would stop having fun with 'naughty' women after he married. Sometimes following the "thou shalt not get caught" principle was good enough. For men.

"Harper Valley PTA" expressed the sort of respect those 'good old-fashioned values' had earned.

"She's as smart as a man" was a 'compliment.' Even so, quite a few men realized that "the little woman" might wonder why sexy coeds and secretaries had to take unexpected nine-month vacations.

"The pill" must have looked like a wonderful solution. Suddenly "baby, you know you want to" might not sound quite so selfish. Since "liberated" women got pregnant anyway, they needed to be 'fixed.' So 'when the boyfriend tells you to' abortions became legal.

Cynical? Maybe. But I think men were the 'winners' in the sexual revolution. In the short term, from an extremely selfish point of view.

(A tip of the hat to @aggiecatholics, St. Mary's, on Twitter, for the heads-up on "100% Organic Sex")

But it Says in the Bible - - -

I've read Ephesians 5:22, by the way. I know that some men use that verse as an excuse to treat their wives like a household appliance, with a status somewhere between their dog and their favorite chair.

Incredibly, some women went along with the idea.

I don't, since I've read Ephesians 5:21-30: and never learned that women were inferior to men.

I'm also a Catholic. There are some things I have to believe:
" 'God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them.'218 Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is 'in the image of God'; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created 'male and female'; (IV) God established him in his friendship. "
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 355)
Yes, I noticed the word "man," and the personal pronoun. The Catechism is translated into English: not the language today's establishment prefers. I've been over that before:
I'm convinced that men who see their wives and girlfriends as servants, at best, are wrong; along with the women who play along with that belief. The Catholic Church teaches that men and women are people, with equal dignity. (Catechism, 2335)

But even if I had the power to "make them believe" something different, I wouldn't.

More accurately, I couldn't. The Church also says " 'Nobody may be forced to act against his convictions, nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his conscience in religious matters in private or in public....' " (Catechism, 2106)

Sex, Dignity, and the Image of God

The idea that sex and sexuality is good, but can be misused, runs through Catholic tradition. Here's a quick overview:
Yes, I know about pedophile priests.

About men, women, and all that, here's part of what the Church says:
"Each of the two sexes is an image of the power and tenderness of God, with equal dignity though in a different way. The union of man and woman in marriage is a way of imitating in the flesh the Creator's generosity and fecundity: 'Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh.'121 All human generations proceed from this union.122"
(Catechism, 2335)

Freedom to Act Like God Matters

I have to support religious freedom, including the right to act as if God matters. That's why I've been joining a few dozen other folks near the parish church each evening, and writing at least one post each day during Fortnight For Freedom..

Religious freedom is important. So his human life. Here's where I get those ideas:
  • Religious freedom is vital
    (Catechism, 2104-2109)
    • For everybody
      (Catechism, 2106)
  • Some actions are always wrong
    (Catechism, 1789)
    • Even if the President says it's okay
      (Catechism, 2242)
  • Human life
    • Is sacred
      (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2258)
    • Begins at conception
      • (Catechism, 2270, 2274)
  • Murder is wrong
    (Catechism, 2259-2262, 2268-2269) (June 28, 2012, June 26, 2012)
Some of what I believe is very counter-cultural. That's not the same as conservative: or liberal.I'm described as a conservative more often than folks think I'm liberal: but I'm neither. I'm a practicing Catholic.

I've discussed what I believe, and why, fairly often. Including:
Like I've said before, Catholics aren't Calvinists. The Catholic Church isn't what you've probably read about in the papers: see links under "Related posts - The Catholic Church."

Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Memoirs of a Lab Rat

I grew up in the '60s, and learned that actions can be legal: but wrong. When I became a Catholic, I had to unlearn some things, but that's not one of them. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2242)

I'm a practicing Catholic, so some of my values are still counter-cultural. For example, I think human life is sacred. It follows that I think murder, killing an innocent human being, is wrong: even if it's legal, and called something else. (Catechism, 2258, 2259-2262, 2268-2270)

Bioethics, "The Disabled," and All That

The National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC) and National Catholic Partnership on Disability (NCPD) have what I think is a good idea:
"Fortnight resource combines religious liberty, outreach to disabled"
Michelle Bauman, CNA (Catholic News Agency (June 27, 2012)

"Two national Catholic groups have released a list of suggested activities to defend religious liberty and reach out charitably to those with disabilities.

" 'We hope you take advantage of these resources and share them with others,' said the National Catholic Bioethics Center in a June 18 statement announcing the initiative.

"The bioethics center has joined with the National Catholic Partnership on Disability - a group that works to help those with disabilities participate fully in the Church and in society - to create a list of 14 actions aimed at supporting religious freedom and reaching out to the disabled...."
I wasn't quite sure what to expect when the article's third paragraph ended with "the disabled." Like I said, I grew up in the '60s: and get cautious when someone refers to people as a class. Sometimes it's valid, like "Americans," or "car owners."

By the way, I think the NCBC, NCPD, and CNA could have made the material a little easier to find. Maybe I wasn't searching for it in the way they expected. I tracked down a resource matching the description CNA gave on the NCPD website. (www.ncpd.org)

'I Love The Poor - - - '

I think trouble starts when the 'I love the poor, I can't stand that trailer trash next door' attitude takes over. It's probably easier to see a problem when it's 'those people over there' who forget that subsets of humanity are groups of individuals.

Happily, the rest of the CNA article was pretty clear that "the disabled" are a group of people. At various points, it was disabled:
  • Individuals
  • Veterans
  • Those who are ...
That's good enough for me.

"Quality Lifestyle"

I've explained why being used as a sort of lab rat gave me a personal perspective on bioethics. (February 3, 2009)

Being born with bad hips, a condition exacerbated by deliberate neglect, left me unable to tap dance or set track records.

I wasn't, from the point of view of someone who enjoyed sports, or dancing, living a "quality lifestyle."

Yet, despite being 'denied' a 'normal' life, I preferred being alive to the alternative: and still do. Being blessed with a painful disability helped me see the "lifestyle" argument 'from the inside.'

I was very young when I realized that killing people who wouldn't live a "quality lifestyle" was a really bad idea.

Compared to what some folks who weren't killed 'for their own good' endure, I've had a fairly easy life. But I think I can say from experience that: yes, it really is better to be alive than dead. Even with a defective body.

If you've never heard "quality lifestyle" as a reason to kill defective people, I'm not surprised. I haven't heard it for decades. Like most euphemisms, its usefulness declined when too many folks thought through that particular 'they're better off dead' line. My opinion.

Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, June 24, 2012

Curing the Sick, Helping the Poor; Yes:
Killing the Innocent; No

America's national government has decided that freedom of religion means allowing religious people to go into a building now and then, and do religious stuff. I think that's a good idea.

Worship, and More

Worship is an important part of being Catholic. But there's more to it than that. My faith requires that I act as if God matters, whether I'm in a church or not.

The feds have decided that just about every business, hospital, and other outfit in America must pay for what's euphemistically called 'women's health services.'

The Obama administration has magnanimously allowed an exemption for folks with scruples about killing very young people. That seems very broad-minded, until one takes a close look at the "exemption."

As I wrote yesterday:
"...To qualify for the privilege of not killing people, or paying assassins, organizations must:
  • "Be non-profit
  • "Exist to inculcate religious values
  • "Primarily serve and employ
    members of their own faiths
"Think about it. If a hospital exists to cure the sick, it doesn't qualify. If a business makes a profit, it doesn't qualify. If a church hires people without discriminating on the basis of religion, it doesn't qualify...."
(June 23, 2012)
I'm not impressed by that "exemption." Not favorably, anyway. More to the point, every Catholic bishop in America says that forcing America's subjects to kill young people or pay someone else to do the job is a bad idea.

Archbishops, too. (June 23, 2012) Here's more of what Archbishop Lori said:
"...Religious organizations such as Catholic hospitals, inner-city schools and charitable agencies do not qualify for the exemption because they are committed to serving all in need, regardless of their faith.

"Thus, the Church is only 'religious enough' for a religious exemption if it 'confines itself to the sacristy,' but not if it attempts to reach out 'by hiring those of other faiths and by serving the common good,' Archbishop Lori observed.

"He warned that this very narrow definition of church and religion that is embedded in the mandate 'is likely to spread throughout federal law' if not swiftly removed...."
(Michelle Bauman, CNA/EWTN News)

'Human Beings are People,' and Other Counter-Cultural Ideas

What Archbishop Loris said sound very harsh: Catholic hospitals will treat the sick, but not kill people; and that Catholic inner-city schools are willing to educate poor people, but won't kill their babies.

This rigid refusal to go along with legalized murder isn't as uncaring as it may seem. Archbishop Lori is Catholic. We think human beings are people. All human beings: even young, sick, and useless ones.

I wrote about my take on freedom, and what an archbishop said, yesterday:
Folks acting as if some human beings aren't, or aren't quite, people is nothing new. Toward the end of the 19th century, an American author wrote what I think is one of the most eloquent literary criticisms of a traditional attitude:
"...'...We blowed out a cylinder-head.'

" 'Good gracious! anybody hurt?''

"No'm. Killed a [redacted].'

"' Well, it's lucky; because sometimes people do get hurt....'..."
(Mark Twain, "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" Part 2 (1885), Chapter XXXII., via Project Gutenberg)
(June 24, 2011)
That book was banned a few decades back, because Twain used the word [redacted], and that's almost another topic.

Human Life is Sacred: All Human Life

I'm a practicing Catholic, so what I think and how I live is counter-cultural. That's nothing new.

The idea that a person should love God, neighbors: and that everybody is a neighbor is nearly as radical now as it was when my Lord was here, two millennia back. We're making progress, though. (May 6, 2012)

I can't 'go with the flow' and accept what America's establishment calls 'women's health services.' That's because I'm a Catholic, and so must act as if human beings are people. All human beings: not just the useful, good-looking, healthy ones. Like I said before, I'm part of a counter-culture.

Here's a quick overview of why I can't go along with killing innocent people. Not even if the president says it's okay:
  • Human life
    • Is sacred
      (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2258)
    • Begins at conception
      • (Catechism, 2270, 2274)
  • Murder is wrong
    (Catechism, 2259-2262, 2268-2270)
  • Legitimate defense is permitted
    • But not more violence than necessary
      (Catechism, 2264)
    (Catechism, 2263-2267)
  • Abortion is wrong
    (Catechism, 2270-2275)
    • Because even very young human beings are people
      (Catechism, 2273-2274)
  • Euthanasia is wrong
    (Catechism, 2276-2279)
  • Suicide is wrong
    (Catechism, 2280-2283)
    • But regarding the soul of someone who commits suicide
      • Despair is not an option
      • "The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives."
      (Catechism, 2283)

All Human Life: Really

Since I think all human life is sacred, how can I justify capital punishment? It's simple: I don't. (April 27, 2012, October 2, 2008) (and click capital punishment in this blog's Label Cloud)

I haven't posted as often about capital punishment as I have about abortion and euthanasia. That's because right now, the establishment isn't as enthusiastic about capital punishment as it was in my youth.

Like I've said before, change happens: and some change is for the better.

Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, June 22, 2012

Supporting Freedom, and Other Subversive Activity

Americans have important decisions to make. I think they boil down to the sort of options Joshua presented:
" 'Now, therefore, fear the LORD and serve him completely and sincerely. Cast out the gods your fathers served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the LORD.

"3 If it does not please you to serve the LORD, decide today whom you will serve, the gods your fathers served beyond the River or the gods of the Amorites in whose country you are dwelling. As for me and my household, we will serve the LORD.' "
(Joshua 24:15-15)
A couple dozen centuries later, deciding whether or not to follow Joshua's example is just as important. And just as difficult. My opinion.

The reasons I became a Catholic are the same ones Peter gave for staying with my Lord:
"Jesus then said to the Twelve, 'Do you also want to leave?'

"Simon Peter answered him, 'Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.

"We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.' "
(John 6:67-69)
I've been over that before. Fairly often. (April 1, 2012)

Religious Freedom and 'My End of the Boat'

I don't see the point in believing something and not acting as if the belief matters. That's part of why I think being free to practice religion is important. More to the point, the Catholic Church says I have to support religious freedom: for everybody. I'll get back to that.

Catholics are the obvious targets of an attack on religious freedom in America. I think quite a few folks who aren't Catholic realize that 'my end of the boat isn't sinking' isn't a sensible attitude. 'The masses' are getting uppity. Or are waking up, depending on your point of view.

My take on the week's news:
  1. "The Faith Community" - But Whose?
  2. Knights of Columbus Partisan? Yes and No
  3. School Bus Firebombed? Ignore it, They're Catholic
My views, and values, are counter-cultural. These posts may explain what I believe, and why:

1. "The Faith Community" - But Whose?

"Leaked e-mail shows media campaign against US bishops"
Kevin J. Jones, CNA/EWTN News(June 21, 2012)

"A leaked e-mail shows that the Democratic-leaning organization Faith in Public Life is running a behind-the-scenes media effort to undercut the U.S. bishops and the 'Fortnight for Freedom' events intended to rally opposition to the HHS mandate.

"Bill Donohue, President of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, released the e-mail detailing the campaign on June 18. He said a copy of the e-mail had been leaked to him.

"Donohue said 'fair minded persons' may disagree with the religious freedom effort 'but there is something unseemly going on when those who work for a George Soros-funded group are quietly providing talking points to the media.'..."
I don't have a problem with folks "quietly providing talking points to the media." Providing press releases, and touching base with reporters and editors, us one way to 'spread the word' in this culture.

I'm not offended when a dairy company tells editors about a new kind of butter, and I don't think it's unethical for someone who's concerned about public safety to prepare a list of 'talking points' about pot holes, or whatever specific issue they're aware of.

Freedom of speech is important, and "providing talking points" cab help get discussions going.

'The Pothole Plot'

Let's imagine that the 'important' folks in some city assume that 'those people over there' like pot holes. It's 'well known' that 'they' go out at night and make pot holes.

That's a hypothetical - and ridiculous - situation. But if a city's mayor, newspaper editors, and influential citizens, were convinced that pro-pot-hole people were a menace: I think that providing talking points to unmask the malefactors might not be a good idea.

Catholics and America's Cultural Baggage

America has a long tradition of distrust, at best, toward Catholics and the Catholic Church.


(From Thomas Nast Portfolio, Ohio State University, used without permission.)

More recently, America's 'important' folks have embraced a way of life which devalues the very young, the very sick, and the useless. That's contrary to Catholic teaching: which makes the Catholic Church an enemy of America's establishment. (September 15, 2011)

In this sort of situation, I don't think establishment news media needs help. They're doing a fine job of attacking the Catholic Church on their own.

"Adversarial" - No Surprises Here

"...The June 7 e-mail from John Gehring, Faith in Public Life's Catholic Program Director, is addressed to reporters, editors and columnists. It describes itself as a 'backgrounder' and contains talking points, adversarial questions for Catholic bishops and recommendations of experts to interview.

"It appears aimed at shaping a narrative skeptical towards Catholic objections to a Department of Health and Human Services mandate that requires employers, including many Catholic institutions, to provide insurance coverage for sterilization and contraception, including some abortion-causing drugs...."
(Kevin J. Jones, CNA/EWTN News)
Like I've said before, the Catholic Church has counter-cultural ideas about who is a human being, and killing innocent people. I think that's starting to change, now that some folks started noticing gaps in the population. (June 6, 2012)

You Won't Kill? How Selfish!

"...'Are you willing to sacrifice Catholic charities, colleges and hospitals if you don't get your way on the contraceptive mandate?' reads one proposed question for a bishop.

" 'Are you willing to drop all health insurance for your employees?' reads another.

"The e-mail encouraged journalists to 'ask critical questions' about the bishops' 'sweeping claims' in light of a 'charged political backdrop' ahead of the 2012 election. It noted that both the June 8 'Stand Up for Religious Freedom' rallies and the June 21-July 4 'Fortnight for Freedom' campaign include Catholic dioceses.

"CNA sought comment multiple times from Gehring and Faith in Public Life but did not receive a response...."
(Kevin J. Jones, CNA/EWTN News)
The lack of response isn't surprising. Today's establishment has as much trouble making its preferred reality seem reasonable as the WASP nest of my youth did. My opinion.

It's much easier to be a staunch defender of 'women's health care' against those 'sexist,' 'racist,' 'homophobic' 'oppressors' if the 'oppressors' keep quiet.

'It's Okay: They're Not Real People'

A major problem with "contraception," as practiced in America, is that the process often kills very young people. Euphemisms like 'plan B,' or 'morning after' pills describe drugs which take the life of a unborn baby.

This is legal in America, since we're supposed to believe that human beings don't become people until we get to an arbitrary age.

On a related topic, what the Catholic Church says about sex and related topics isn't what you may have read in the papers:
Maybe you know someone who's Catholic at the top of his lungs, and hates everybody who isn't just like him. Some of the world's billion-plus living Catholics are jerks. That doesn't change what the Church teaches. Moving on.

Getting a Grip About "Progressive"

"...On its website, Faith in Public Life describes itself as 'a strategy center for the faith community advancing faith in the public square as a powerful force for justice, compassion and the common good.' It runs strategic communications and 'narrative-setting' campaigns. The organization says it can identify 'moments of opportunity when a targeted event or campaign can effectively broaden or shift the values debate.'

"It works to insert its perspective into political debates and to highlight 'progressive and moderate people of faith at key moments.'..."
(Kevin J. Jones, CNA/EWTN News) [emphasis mine]
I'm a practicing Catholic, so I'm not "progressive." I'm not conservative, either: and I'm certainly not "moderate." I'm Catholic. (November 3, 2008)

The Catholic Church isn't "progressive" in the contemporary political sense. For two millennia we've been passing on the same message:
Folks seem to be realizing, slowly, that 'those people over there' are people. (May 6, 2012) That, I think, is "progress."

"Deep Pockets" - Those Nasty, Rich, Catholic Oppressors?

"Deep pockets" is a nifty little phrase, appealing to the notion that 'anybody with more money than I have is greedy and dishonest.' 'Otherwise, how could he have more money than I do?'

I don't think wealth, or poverty, are indications of virtue or vice: and that's another topic.
"...Reporters should consider asking about the Knights of Columbus, an organization with deep pockets,' the e-mail advised. Gehring tried to paint Supreme Knight of Columbus Carl Anderson as a political partisan, noting his work in the Reagan administration and his time as a legislative assistant to Republican Sen. Jesse Helms in the late 1970s and early 1980s....

"...The Catholic League's Bill Donohue was critical of the media effort, saying Gehring's e-mail encouraged the media to 'the victim' and target those who refuse to compromise their principles."
(Kevin J. Jones, CNA/EWTN News)
In a way, the "progressive" Faith in Public Life is upholding a fine old American tradition: hostility toward the Catholic Church.


(from H.E. Fowler, via Wikipedia, used w/o permission)
"Crowley, Jeremiah J. (1913) 'The Pope: Chief of White Slavers High Priest of Intrigue,' p. 430"

That sort of thing makes me glad that 'the good old days' aren't coming back. More topics.

2. Knights of Columbus Partisan? Yes and No

"Archbishop Lori: labeling Knights of Columbus partisan is an 'injustice' "
Michelle Bauman, CNA/EWTN News (June 14, 2012)

"Archbishop William E. Lori of Baltimore argued that it is an 'injustice' to imply that the Knights of Columbus' support for defending religious freedom creates a sense of partisanship.

"At a June 13 press conference at the U.S. bishops' spring general meeting in Atlanta, the archbishop was questioned by Jerry Filteau of the National Catholic Reporter about funding for the bishops' campaign to defend religious liberty.

"Filteau said that he had heard 'rumors' that much of the funding for the bishops' effort is coming from the Knights of Columbus, whose head, Carl Anderson, is a former Reagan administration official.

"He suggested that there may be 'a partisanship aspect to the whole thing.'

"'Oh my goodness, Jerry,' Archbishop Lori responded...."
Please bear with me: I think it's important to know what words mean, and how they're used. Here are 'dictionary' definitions of "partisanship" and "partisan:"
  • Partisanship (Noun)
    • An inclination to favor one group or view or opinion over alternatives
    (Princeton's WordNet)
  • Partisan (Noun)
    • A fervent and even militant proponent of something
    • An ardent and enthusiastic supporter of some person or activity
    • A pike with a long tapering double-edged blade with lateral projections
      • 16th and 17th centuries
  • Partisan (Adjective)
    • Devoted to a cause or party
    (Princeton's WordNet)
Words have at least two sorts of meaning. One is the 'dictionary' meaning: what the word literally means. Another is what the word implies:
  • Denotation (Noun)
    • The act of indicating or pointing out by name
    • The most direct or specific meaning of a word or expression
      • The class of objects that an expression refers to
    (Princeton's WordNet)
  • Connotation (Noun)
    • What you must know in order to determine the reference of an expression
    • An idea that is implied or suggested
    (Princeton's WordNet)
For example: if I said that a dachshund was a dog, I'd be using "dog" in it's literal, or denotative, sense; but if I called another person a dog, I'd be using the word in one of its connotative senses. In that case, I'd either be complimenting the person's unswerving loyalty; or, more likely, insulting the person.

I've noticed that "partisanship" is what 'the other party' does. "Partisanship" has negative connotations, implying that 'those partisans over there' care more about some nasty idea they've got, than about putting a chicken in every pot, saving the environment, sustainable tofu, or whatever the 'right-minded' folks prefer.

Supporting Freedom, and Other Subversive Activity

"...'Think of what the Knights of Columbus does for the Catholic Church and for many other humanitarian causes,' he [Archbishop Lori] said. 'To try to say that is in some way partisan is, in my opinion, sort of an injustice.'

" 'It seems to me the Knights have been very generous to a whole variety of causes,' the archbishop observed.

"He acknowledged that the organization has contributed to the bishops' religious freedom efforts but added that 'other groups have as well,' including Our Sunday Visitor, the Order of Malta and many others.

" 'So it is not just one group,' he said. 'It is not in any way partisan, either in its spirit or in its funding.'..."
(Michelle Bauman, CNA/EWTN News)
I think it's clear that Archbishop Lori was using "partisan" in its connotative, negative sense: and that he clearly understood what the reporter was doing.

I'm part of the Knights of Columbus, and agree with the archbishop. I do not think that Knights of Columbus are "partisan," or exhibit "partisanship" in the conventionally negative sense.

On the other hand, I think Knights of Columbus is "partisan," in the literal sense of the term.

We favor the view that God exists, and matters. We also support freedom of religion: even though the establishment doesn't approve. In both cases, we don't have many options. We're a Catholic organization. We're stuck with the values that go with being Catholic. I've already mentioned some of these counter-cultural values:

Religious Freedom, Acting Like God Matters

"...Recent months have united Catholics from across the country in efforts to defend religious liberty from numerous threats, including a federal mandate that will require employers to offer health insurance that covers contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs.

"The mandate has drawn widespread criticism for violating religious liberty. The bishops have worked with individuals and groups of various faiths to speak out against the regulation and ask the Obama administration to respect the rights of those with religious objections...."
(Michelle Bauman, CNA/EWTN News)
I think what "religious freedom" means depends on who you listen to.

The establishment seems to think that "religious freedom" means letting those religious people go into a building once a week, where they do religious stuff.

I think that "religious freedom" should include letting folks who think God exists act as if God matters: 24 hours a day, seven days a week, all year. It looks like quite a few folks see "religious freedom" the way I do: and this has the establishment worried.

I can see why.

3. School Bus Firebombed? Ignore it, They're Catholic

A tip of the hat to Patty Garza, for the heads-up on this article. ("Anti-Christian Terrorists Bomb #Prolife Bus in Rockford,ILL;Media silent" Patty Garza, Google+ (June 18, 2012))
"Pro-life Catholic school bus allegedly firebombed in Illinois, media silent"
Joe Newby, Spokane Conservative, via examiner.com (June 18, 2012)

"According to a report at the Pro-Life Corner, a Catholic school bus belonging to Our Lady of the Sacred Heart Academy was allegedly firebombed Friday night. The bus is well known in the area for its pro-life messages and calls to end abortion.

"Pictures posted by the Pro-Life Corner shows windows broken in on both sides with extensive fire damage inside the bus.

" 'It has been speculated that this bombing of a pro-life Christian school bus is in retaliation for the closing of the Rockford abortion mill that is located not far from where the school bus was attacked,' the Pro-Life Corner said, however, that has not been corroborated.

"Adding insult to injury, the local media has so far refused to report on the incident, but the Rockford Register Star managed to report on an incident that took place twelve years ago...."
I'm not surprised that a Catholic school bus getting firebombed is a non-event that never happened - as far as establishment news is concerned.

Maybe it's an intentional effort to skew pubic perceptions by filtering out 'irrelevant' information.

Maybe editors and reporters have mental blinders keeping them from seeing what doesn't fit their preconceptions. Maybe it's both, plus other factors.

Whatever the reason, the results are the same. (April 1, 2010)

Criminal Investigation: Maybe

"...On Monday, the Rockford Fire Department confirmed the attack with The Blaze.

" 'An employee also said that when authorities arrived at the scene to put out the fire, a bottle was found nearby. This fact, teamed with footage of broken windows and damage inside of the vehicle, seems to corroborate the notion that a firebomb (i.e. molotov cocktail) was employed,' Billy Hallowell wrote.

"The Department also confirmed that authorities arrived on the scene around 3 a.m. Saturday and Hallowell suggested that the attack 'may not yet be on reporters' radar,' as it was first reported early Saturday morning.

"The Pro-Life Corner, however, says that is not the case, and notes that the paper reported on another vehicle that had been set afire early Friday morning.

" 'Arson is the suspected cause of a car fire around 1 a.m. today in the 600 block of North Winnebago Street,' the Register Star reported Friday...."
The term "Molotov cocktail" is in the Register Star's headline:
I think the implication that public officials are acknowledging the attack - and apparently investigating it as a possible crime - is a hopeful sign. Authorities don't always view violent attacks on folks who don't have the 'right' ideas as criminal. Or even unreasonable. (March 23, 2011)

Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

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

Pinterest: My Stuff, and More

Visit Brian H.'s profile on Pinterest.

Advertisement

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light Candle  • Find 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.