Showing posts with label authority. Show all posts
Showing posts with label authority. Show all posts

Sunday, October 12, 2014

Synod 14: What I Expect, and What I Don't


(From John Hart Studios, used w/o permission.)

This post is not about global warming, the coming ice age, or manure burying London. Don't laugh: in 1894 the Times of London ran a warning that London would be under nine feet of manure by 1944. (July 9, 2011)

Wikipedia has a list of fizzled apocalypses, from 634 BC to 2013 AD; and that's another topic. Topics. (February 25, 2014; November 29, 2013)

Synod 14, an extraordinary assembly of the Synod of Bishops, is in progress. It's running from the 5th to the 19th of this month.

In this post, I'll be looking at what I expect from Synod 14; what I don't expect; and why I'm not upset that Synod 14 probably won't address the annual collision of Mother's Day and fishing season in Minnesota.

Walleyes, Mother's Day, and 15 Minutes of Fame


I gather that a Cardinal got his 15 minutes of fame from a sound bite about feelings. What he said may have been taken out of context.

In any case: he's one cardinal, from one country, attending a meeting of an outfit that's catholic, καθολικός, universal.

Sometimes individual nations get special attention, like when the pope thanked Jordanian authorities and people for helping refugees from Syria and Iraq. He also urged "...the international community not to leave Jordan, who is so welcoming and so courageous, alone in the task of meeting the humanitarian emergency...." (May 24, 2014)

So, why doesn't the Church 'do something' about the problem? For one thing, the Pope can't force anyone to be nice. For another: we're already there, and have been for some time, with organizations like Caritas Jordan.

Getting back to the synod, and how we get things done — the Catholic Church is hierarchical and authoritarian: which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Besides, the Pope isn't the boss. He's just a vicar, with limited authority, standing in while my Lord is away, and I've been over this before. (February 19, 2009)

The Church has principles that apply to everyone, but we're not forced into one cultural mold. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1204-1206, 1686, 1935, 2524)

That irks folks who seem convinced that everybody should behave exactly the way 'decent' people did in the 'good old days:' as they remember them. And that's yet another topic.
Minnesota's 'Mother's Day Crisis'
Mother's Day is May 10 next year. As usual, it's the same day that Minnesota's walleye, sauger, northern pike, stream trout in lakes, smallmouth bass, and assorted other subdivisions of fishing season open.

Some wives and mothers are avid anglers, others see no problem with not having their husbands underfoot that day: but some probably resent the coincidence.

Neither my wife or I fish, so it's not an issue in our household. But I can imagine a married couple being torn between the fishing season opener and Mother's Day each year.

I have a bit more trouble imagining someone being upset because of the Catholic Church's silence on Minnesota's 'Mother's Day crisis.'

I'll be surprised, though, if someone doesn't get attention by being upset over the Church's refusal to rewrite at least part of the Decalogue.

The points of contention will probably include same-sex marriage and the 'right' of partners to cheat on their spouse. Oddly enough, the 'right' of someone to marry a goldfish may not receive quite so much attention.

If you're bracing yourself for a screed against 'those sinners over there,' relax: I'm Catholic. I'm not allowed to hate anybody. It's against the rules.

The Rules: Simple, not Easy


The rules are very simple. We're supposed to love God, and love our neighbor. (Matthew 22:36-40, Mark 12:28-31)

We're also supposed to see everybody as our neighbor. No exceptions. (Matthew 5:43-44; Mark 12:28-31; Luke 10:25-30; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1825)

As I've said before, love isn't approval.

Sometimes the 'friends don't let friends drive drunk' principle applies, and love demands disapproval. Even if the drunk friend really wants to drive. (June 28, 2011; April 26, 2011)

I think part of the explanation for the Vatican's office library having about 85 kilometers of shelving is that for two millennia now, folks have been trying to weasel out of those simple rules. And that's yet again another topic. (June 3, 2012)

"Mixed Marriages:" It's Not what You May Think


Marriage is very important for Catholics who understand our faith. (Catechism, 1601-1658)

It's a sacrament and a vocation. (Catechism, 1601, 1603)

That reminds me — you may read about Synod 14's position on "mixed marriages." It's not what you may think. We're not supposed to be shocked and horrified when the daughter of a 'nice' family wants to marry an Irishman; or the family's son has his eye on a Pinay.

In this context, a "mixed marriage" is a "marriage between a Catholic and a baptized non-Catholic." (Catechism, 1633)

My wife and I had a "mixed marriage" until I became a Catholic. We still have a "mixed marriage" in the ethnic sense: she's German/Dutch, and I'm Norwegian/Irish/Scots-Irish.

Not very many generations back, one of my foremothers said, "he doesn't have family: he's Irish." The daughter of a decent family married the Irishman anyway. (July 6, 2014)

What Not to Expect



(From News.va, used w/o permission.)

I'm quite confident that some folks will be upset about what Synod 14 finally decides.

Those who think Ephesians 5:22 defines wives as household servants may denounce the synod for being too liberal. Others, who want the Church to redefine marriage as 'whatever I like,' will get opportunities to say that the synod is too conservative.

I've run into some 'Catholic' families where the husband goes to work, ignores the kids, and takes his wife for granted; while his wife stays home, watching soap operas: but it's not how we're supposed to live.

Proverbs 31:10-31 defines "a worthy wife," and she bears little resemblance to the fluffy 1950s stereotype:
"She picks out a field to purchase; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard."
(Proverbs 31:16)
The Catholic Church can't rewrite the Decalogue, or anything else in the deposit of faith. I've talked about the Bible, Sacred Scripture; Tradition; and the Magisterium; before. (October 2, 2008)
"The apostles entrusted the 'Sacred deposit' of the faith (the depositum fidei),45 contained in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to the whole of the Church....

" 'The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.'47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

" 'Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it....' "
(Catechism, 84-86) [Emphasis mine]

Same Mission, New Techniques


Synod 14 is not, I am quite sure, discussing whether to replace the deposit of faith with whatever is fashionable in lower Manhattan, Botswana, or anywhere else. We don't operate that way.

Our standing orders, as outlined in Matthew 28:19-20, haven't changed in two millennia.

What changes is how we present the "Sacred deposit" of the faith. Techniques that worked in first-century Rome were a thousand years out of date by the time my Viking ancestors stopped pillaging my Celtic ancestors.

And what worked in 11th century Europe is a thousand years out of date today. The Catholic Church is old, ancient. But we are not futilely trying to drag humanity back to an imaginary 'good old days.'

We're doing what we've been doing for two millennia: showing, to the best of our abilities, that loving God, loving our neighbor, and seeing everyone as our neighbor, is a good idea.

As the centuries rolled by, some of us did well: others, not so much. We're still cleaning up messes left by the likes of Karl der Große. I trust that Charlemagne meant well: and that's — another topic. (May 18, 2014)

Part of Synod 14's job, as far as I can tell, is deciding how we can best share the truth with folks in the 21st century:
"...The challenge for this synod is to try to bring back to today's world, which in some way resembles that of the early days of the Church, the attractiveness of the Christian message about marriage and the family, highlighting the joy which they give...."
("Synod14 - First General Congregation: 'Relatio ante disceptationem' of the General Rapporteur, Card. Péter Erdő," (October 6, 2014)[Original text: Italian. This is an unofficial translation])
I put links to background documents and articles from the Vatican Information Service and Vatican Radio at the end of this post, along with excerpts from some of the articles: and a longer excerpt from that unofficial translation.

More of my posts, mostly about:
Excerpt from an unofficial translation from the First General Congregation (October 6, 2014):
"...Conclusion

"If we look at the origins of Christianity, we see how it has managed — despite rejection and cultural diversity — to be accepted and welcomed for the depth and intrinsic force of its message. Indeed, Christian revelation has manifested the dignity of the person, not to mention love, sexuality and the family.

"The challenge for this synod is to try to bring back to today's world, which in some way resembles that of the early days of the Church, the attractiveness of the Christian message about marriage and the family, highlighting the joy which they give, but, at the same time, respond, in a true and charitable way (cf. Eph 4:15), to the many problems which have a special impact on the family today and emphasizing that true moral freedom does not consists in doing what one feels or living only by one's feelings but is realized only in acquiring the true good.

"In a real way, we are called upon, above all, to put ourselves alongside our sisters and our brothers in the spirit of the Good Samaritan (cf. Lk 10: 25-37): being attentive to their lives and being especially close to those who have been 'wounded' by life and expect a word of hope, which we know only Christ can give us (cf. Jn 6:68).

"The world needs Christ. The world needs us too, because we belong to Christ."
("Synod14 - First General Congregation: 'Relatio ante disceptationem' of the General Rapporteur, Card. Péter Erdő," (October 6, 2014)[Original text: Italian. This is an unofficial translation][Links added.])
Background:
In the news:
Excerpts from the news:
"Synod concludes first phase of debate on family life"
Vatican Radio, via News. va (October 10, 2014)

"...Supporting children of separated families, reaching out to the widowed and lonely, and accompanying couples searching for reconciliation and healing in their lives. Those are some of the practical questions being discussed in the Synod Hall by participants who’ve come from all corners of the globe to share their perspectives on the problems facing family life today. Central to these debates are the very real experiences of men and women serving as experts and auditors. People like Jocelyne Khoueiry, a former leader of a female Christian militia group during Lebanon’s civil war and founder of an organisation for lay women in her country.

" 'We fought in the past,' she said, 'to protect our sovereignty and our country but now we're fighting to rebuild our culture and our identity, based on the values and principles that we have always dreamed of.'

"Those values include the central role of the family as the foundation of society. But how can the Church also reach out to men and women whose marriages have broken down? How can it help children of separated families, learning to deal with new parental figures in their lives? For the first time today I also heard how the Church needs to be more attentive to those who are widowed, a condition that will effect one member of every couple at some point in their lives.

"Another hot button issue that emerged from the questionnaires ahead of this Synod was family planning and the very high numbers of Catholics who ignore the Church's ban on artificial methods of contraception. Alice and Jeffrey Heinzen urged couples to look again at the advantages of natural methods of fertility regulation, which they say can now prove up to 99% effective, if they are properly understood and practised...."
"Synod: the Church, a place for families in crisis"
Vatican Radio, via News.va (October 9, 2014)

"What can the Church do to accompany families in difficult pastoral situations such as the separated, divorced or divorced and remarried, single parents, teen mothers, children from broken homes? What is the Churches pastoral outreach concerning unions of persons of the same sex? These were the topics of discussion in the 8th General Congregation of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops on 'The pastoral challenges of the family in the context of evangelization'.

"The Wednesday afternoon session was led by the President Delegate on duty, Card. Raymundo Damasceno Assis, Archbishop of Aparecida (Brazil). He warned against a shortsighted legalistic approach stating that the Church wants to fathom the depths of these difficult situations in order to welcome all of those involved so that it may be a paternal home where there is a place for everyone with his or her life's difficulties.

"The discussion was introduced by the testimony of auditors Stephen and Sandra Conway, from South Africa. They are regional Retrouvailles leaders for Africa, an organization that helps marriages in crisis.

"They told participants that 'financial difficulties, infidelity and family of origin issues are common problems'. However they also pointed to a predominant 'singles married lifestyle' which begins innocently but over time drives a wedge between the couple....

"...The couple also spoke of requests from same sex unions or couples to take part in their counselling course.

"Testimonies from married couples have introduced each session of debate at the Synod. To date a common factor running through these presentations but which has received little or no media coverage is children. Passing on the faith to children, the effects of family breakdown on children, children from mixed marriages, abandoned children, the inability to have children...."
Posted by 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, September 14, 2014

Gamaliel and the Centurion

Between spending my teens in the '60s and stubbornness worthy of a mule, my attitude toward "authority" had been less than fawning.

Happily, I married a woman with a very low tolerance for nonsense. She pointed out that I had no problem with authority. It was pompous nitwits who claim authority that set my teeth on edge. (December 2, 2012; March 30, 2011)

That helped explain why I became a Catholic, and that's another topic.

The Centurion


One of my favorite folks in the Bible shows up in Matthew, a little after the Sermon on the Mount. He refused something Jesus offered — and was commended by my Lord:
"4 When he entered Capernaum, 5 a centurion approached him and appealed to him,

"saying, 'Lord, my servant is lying at home paralyzed, suffering dreadfully.'

"He said to him, 'I will come and cure him.'

"The centurion said in reply, 6 'Lord, I am not worthy to have you enter under my roof; only say the word and my servant will be healed.

"For I too am a person subject to authority, with soldiers subject to me. And I say to one, "Go," and he goes; and to another, "Come here," and he comes; and to my slave, "Do this," and he does it.'

"When Jesus heard this, he was amazed and said to those following him, 'Amen, I say to you, in no one in Israel 7 have I found such faith."...
(Matthew 8:5-10)
These days, someone in the centurion's position might have said, 'I understand chain of command:' which isn't blindly following orders, and that's yet another topic. (March 12, 2012)

Or maybe not so much. I can't remember a time when I didn't recognize my Lord as the Son of God: although my understanding of faith has grown a great deal over the decades.

Gamaliel


Another of my favorite folks is Saul's mentor, Gamaliel:
"6 But a Pharisee in the Sanhedrin named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, respected by all the people, stood up, ordered the men to be put outside for a short time,

"and said to them, 'Fellow Israelites, be careful what you are about to do to these men....

"...So now I tell you, have nothing to do with these men, and let them go. For if this endeavor or this activity is of human origin, it will destroy itself.

"But if it comes from God, you will not be able to destroy them; you may even find yourselves fighting against God.' They were persuaded by him."
(Acts 5:34-35, 38-39)
This teacher of the law had the good sense to realize that God is large and in charge: and that "activity ... of human origin" self-destructs if it violates natural law.1

The Eastern Orthodox Church recognizes Gamaliel as a Saint, and that's yet again another topic.2

Kingdoms, Dynasties - - -


Studying history, I focused on what happened before about 476 AD. From my point of view, that's when Western civilization's 'reset' button got punched.

Since we're still working on the post-Roman iteration — we don't know how it'll turn out yet. I'm cautiously optimistic, and that's still another topic.

One of my professors said that nations or kingdoms don't last more than about two centuries. Remember: this was the late '60s and early '70s. I now see the cultural and legal upheavals as the start of long-overdue reforms. Some didn't go as well as I'd hoped, but many did. (February 9, 2014)

There's a little truth to the 'two centuries' claim: human institutions don't last forever.

Making a quick spot check in Europe's history, I see that the Obodrite realm lasted 35 years, from about 1090 to 1125 or 1093 to 1128 — or thereabouts. By one reckoning, the House of Habsburg lasted 760 years, from around 1020 to 1780.  Maybe 200 years is an average, maybe not.

Come to think of it, the Spanish branch of the Hapsburgs started around 1516, and married close relatives until earning oblivion in 1700: almost exactly two centuries. (December 13, 2013)

On the other hand, some civilizations of the ancient world were remarkably durable.

Egypt under the pharaohs lasted from about 3000 BC to 30 BC, when it became a Roman province. That's remarkable, but over that three-millennia span dynasties rose and fell, and there were at least two major interruptions.

I'm a bit more impressed by Rome: as a Republic from 509 to 27 BC, and an Empire from 27 BC to 476 AD in the west, 330 to 1453 in the east.

Rome's constitution and laws changed over those thousand years: but there was, I think, more continuity than we see in ancient Egypt. Roman law in the Imperial period arguably laid foundations for today's international law, and that's more topics.

- - - and the Catholic Church


After two millennia, and more than a dozen centuries into the current iteration of Western civilization, the bark of Peter has had 264 senior officers on deck.

Some of our Popes, including two from the 20th century, are canonized Saints.

Others were anything but.

Benedict IX, for example, was elected Pope three times — was kicked out of the position twice, and sold the papacy once. That was roughly a thousand years back. The Church hit another rough patch from about 1316 to 1447.

Oddly enough, knowing about Popes who were — ethically challenged? — helped convince me that my Lord's authority had been passed from Peter to Linus, and so on to Benedict XVI and now Francis.

I also knew that the Catholic Church had endured, with an unbroken transfer of authority, for nearly two thousand years: despite the fall of Rome, the occasional knave like Benedict IX, and the Black Death.

Human institutions don't last that long. Not with that sort of continuity.

"...Until the End of Time..."


I'm impressed by folks like that centurion, Gamaliel, and the criminal who said " 'Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.' "

Somehow they knew, or suspected, that this Nazarene was from God.

Nearly two thousand years later, we've had good Popes, bad ones, and some who were good men but inept administrators. We've had folks who said they were the Pope, but weren't.

But the Catholic Church is still here.

I could assume that the Church was incredibly lucky — or accept what my Lord said to Simon Peter in Matthew 16:18.

Applying Occam's razor, I decided that what the Catholic Church had been saying from the start was the most likely explanation. We've had help.

We're guided by Sacred Scripture, Tradition (with a capital "T"), and the Magisterium. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 75-95)

Our Tradition is the apostolic teaching authority, a "living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit."3 (Catechism, 77-79)

For two milllenia we have persevered: through the rise and fall of kingdoms, empires, and civilizations; despite Manichaeism, Benedict IX (we've up to Benedict XVI now), and paparazzi. I expect 'more of the same' until our Lord returns: no matter how long "soon" is.
"Jesus said to him in reply, 'Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood 12 has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.

"And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, 13 and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

"I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.' "
(Matthew 16:17-19)
"11 Then Jesus approached and said to them, 'All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

"Go, therefore, 12 and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,

"teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. 13 And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.' "
(Matthew 28:18-20)
"And so the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved by an unending succession of preachers until the end of time...."
("Dei Verbum," 8)
Background:
Part of my take on our first two millennia:
1 Natural law: unchanging ethical principles woven into the universe, truth present in the core of each of us, and perceptible through reason. How we apply these principles varies from one era to another, and depending on local circumstances. (1954-1960)

2 More than you may want to know about Gamaliel:
3 Tradition with a capital "T" is not the same as trying to live in the 1950s:
" 'In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority.'35 Indeed, 'the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.'36

"This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, 'the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes.'37 'The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her belief and her prayer.'38

"The Father's self-communication made through his Word in the Holy Spirit, remains present and active in the Church: 'God, who spoke in the past, continues to converse with the Spouse of his beloved Son. And the Holy Spirit, through whom the living voice of the Gospel rings out in the Church - and through her in the world - leads believers to the full truth, and makes the Word of Christ dwell in them in all its richness.'39"
(Catechism, 77-79)
Posted by 1 comment:
Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, September 13, 2014

Chain of Command and a Simple Choice

When I learned who currently held the authority my Lord gave Simon Peter, recorded in Matthew 16:13-19, I didn't have much choice: I had to join the Catholic Church.

In a sense, I 'knew too much.'

I could either claim to follow Jesus and acknowledge the Son of God's authority, passed along in unbroken succession through the rise and fall of kingdoms, empires, and civilizations — or not. As Simon Peter said, it's a simple choice:
"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)
That's "simple," not "easy." My Lord was quite clear about what we should expect if we follow the Son of God. (Matthew 10:38; Mark 8:34; Luke 9:23; John 13:15, 36)

Like the song says:
"By the light of burning martyrs, Christ, Thy bleeding feet we track...."
(Once to Every Man and Nation; Lyrics by James R. Low­ell, in the Bos­ton Cour­i­er, De­cem­ber 11, 1845. Music by Thom­as J. Will­iams)
Somewhat-related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Getting a Grip About Politics and Principles

Right now, in America, it's fairly easy to see most positions on social issues as being either "conservative" or "liberal."

I've been called a conservative. Some of what I think needs changing makes me look like a liberal. My views are too definite to let me seem 'moderate.'

Responsibility: Social and Personal

Growing up in the '60s colored my sense of social responsibility. I was, and am, concerned about how we manage the environment. I was even in a peace march, although I wasn't your standard-issue peacenik.

As a Catholic, I have to participate in my society and contribute to the common good: particularly where I have personal responsibility, like in my family and work. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1913-1917)

Remembering 'the Good Old Days'

I endured the end of 'the good old days,' and they weren't.

My memory is too good to let me imagine that we'd all be better off if 'she's as smart as a man' was seen as a compliment, and folks who didn't look Anglo had an unreasonably hard time finding decent jobs or housing.

I'm hardly a "conservative," certainly not the sort who seriously believes that turning the clock back is either prudent or possible.

On the other hand, I don't think that supporting the new status quo is a good idea. Replacing contempt for 'the poor,' 'minorities,' and a few other blocks of individuals with a sincere if misguided concern was a step in the right direction.

However, we've tried treating social ills by dividing people along ethnic, economic, and psychological lines. It doesn't work. My opinion.

I am not a "liberal:" not the sort who doesn't seem to realize that 1967 is history, not current events.

Local Standards, Unchanging Principles

I'm an American, living in the 21st century. I drive on the right-hand side of the road, often use forks but seldom eat with chopsticks, and wear pants instead of a kilt.

Those are accepted standards of behavior: today; here. Customs like those change, and that's okay.

Some things don't change. Natural law, ethical principles woven into creation, is constant. Exactly how we apply it changes: but not the principles. (July 11, 2012)

Laying Foundations For Generations to Come

Some folks seem unable to sort out personal preference, community standards, and unchanging principles. Insisting that a mid-20th-century style is the unchanging dress code of God can leave a regrettable impression: and that's another topic. (August 20, 2012)

The permanent rules are simple: Love God, love your neighbor; everyone is your neighbor.1

They'll still matter, when folks see Democrats, Republicans, Whigs, Tories, Optimates and Populares as roughly contemporary.

The society our descendants live in won't be perfect, but it could be an improvement on today's. I'm cautiously hopeful that we'll pass on a world that's a little better than the one we received: and that's yet again another topic.



I put together a very short summary of what the Catholic Church says how we should run things. Authority, by the way, doesn't mean that 'the boss is always right.' It's exercised legitimately only when acting for the common good. (Catechism, 1903)
  • Authority
    • Is necessary in a community
      (Catechism, 1897)
    • Must act for the common good
      (Catechism, 1902)
    (Catechism, 1897-1904)
  • The common good
    • Involves effects of
      • The community on individuals
      • Individuals on the community
        (Catechism, 1905)
    • Requires
      • Respect for each person
        (Catechism, 1907)
      • The well-being of the group
        (Catechism, 1908)
      • Peace
        (Catechism, 1909)
    (Catechism, 1905-1912)
  • Government
    • Should promote the good of
      • The community
      • Individuals in the group
      (Catechism, 1910)
    • Form of government and method of selecting rulers
      • Should be freely chosen by the citizens
      • Must follow ethical standards
      (Catechism, 1901)
Related posts:
1 One or two simple rules: Love God, love your neighbor; everybody's your neighbor.
(Matthew 5:43-44; 22:36-40; Mark 12:29-31; Luke 10:25-27; 29-37; Catechism of the Catholic Church 1822, 1825-1825)
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, February 11, 2013

Pope Benedict XVI: 2005-2013

Joseph Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI in April, 2005. Now he's announced that he's resigning. Pretty soon we'll have another pope.

In one way, it's a very big deal.

On the other hand, the authority my Lord gave Peter has been handed on hundreds of times before. Popes come and go, the bark of Peter keeps sailing through time. Change is part of this creation, and that's another topic.

Predictably silly 'news' reporting has started. I don't know how much of European editorializing about "machinations and plots," "deadly centralism," and "a bygone age" will come across the Atlantic. ("Le Monde," as reported by BBC News) I've put brief excerpts from the news, about Pope Benedict XVI's resignation, at the end of this post.1

The Catholic Church is old - ancient. We've been around for two millennia. I don't think the Church is an outmoded relic, though. But then, I'm one of those people who follow @Pontifex: Benedict XVI's Twitter account.

I think Fulton Sheen was right:
"There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church - which is, of course, quite a different thing."
(Bishop Fulton Sheen, Foreword to Radio Replies Vol. 1, page ix (1938), via Wikiquote)
Somewhat-related posts:
1 Benedict XVI in the news:
"The unexpected announcement that rang out in the Concistory Hall"
L'Osservatore Romano, via NEWS.VA (February 12, 2012) [it's 'tomorrow' now, in Europe]

"Dismay, surprise, amazement and emotion at the words of Benedict XVI who announced his decision to 'renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome'. These sentiments were etched on the faces of the cardinals, bishops and prelates - assembled for the Ordinary Public Concistory on Monday morning, 11 February, in the Concistory Hall of the Apostolic Palace - who heard the unexpected announcement in the Pope's own voice.

"Everyone's eyes met, a light murmur swelled in the hall and astonishment faded into sorrow. Yet, after the first few moments of confusion, the unanimous recognition that the Pope's act was a very lofty act of humility made headway among those present - who included the papal masters of ceremony, representatives of the postulations, choristers of the Sistine Chapel Choir, papal chair bearers and technicians.

"It was a decision that took everyone by surprise. As did the fact that the Pope - accompanied by Archbishop Georg Gänswein, Prefect of the Papal Household, and Archbishop Guido Pozzo, the Pope's Almoner, Mons. Leonardo Sapienza, Regent of the Papal Household, and Alfred Xuereb of the Pope's Private Secretariat – chose to communicate it personally, when, at the end of the celebration of Midday Prayer and after the announcement that the three canonizations on the agenda of the Concistory would be held next 12 May, he read the Latin text of the Declaratio written in his own hand. Speaking in a firm, calm voice, while those present listened to him in an almost unreal silence, he explained the reasons for his decision, made 'with full freedom', and 'after having repeatedly examined my conscience before God'...."
"Pope Benedict resigns: European media stunned"
BBC News (February 11, 2012)

"European media comments on the Pope's dramatic resignation draw attention to the huge challenges that have tested his papacy, but there is also some admiration for his bold, highly unusual decision to quit.

"Writing in France's centre-left Le Monde newspaper, Stephanie Le Bars says the end of Pope Benedict's papacy is overshadowed by 'machinations and plots'...."
"Pope cites waning strength as reason for resignation"
David Uebbing, CNA/EWTN News (February 11, 2012)

"Pope Benedict XVI told a gathering of cardinals Feb. 11 that he no longer has the strength to carry out ministry and will resign on Feb. 28.

" 'I have convoked you to this Consistory, not only for the three canonizations, but also to communicate to you a decision of great importance for the life of the Church.

" 'After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry,' Pope Benedict said...."
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , ,

Sunday, December 2, 2012

Gratitude, Authority, and Duty

I wrote about gratitude, emotions, and reason last Sunday; also imaginary turkeys:
Like I said then: "gratitude" can be something I feel, an emotion; or it can be a reasoned decision. There's nothing wrong with emotions, by themselves, and that's another topic. (December 18, 2011)

Another Angle on Gratitude, and Authority

By the time I finished writing last Sunday's 'being Catholic' post, I'd gone off on a tangent - nothing new there.

Oddly enough, the tangent had nothing to do with geometry or pianos, and that's yet another topic.

I deleted the 'extra' text after copying and saving it. Later I decided that there was enough there to make another post: after a bit of editing.

Authority: Legitimate and Otherwise

There's a connection between gratitude and authority. That doesn't mean that people who aren't the boss should behave like Uriah Heep's unctuous brother. And it certainly doesn't mean that anybody who sits behind a big desk or wears a suit is always right.

I used to think I didn't like authority. Then my wife pointed out that I was quite comfortable with authority: it was pompous nitwits who claimed authority that bothered me. She was right, of course. (March 30, 2011)

Sadly, authority can be misused. Sometimes folks with authority hurt those who they're supposed to help. Yes, I know about the pedophile priests.

But authority, and sensible respect for authority, is important. It starts in the family: or should.

Families: Society at the Cellular Level

The family is the "original cell of social life." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2207) It's where we're supposed to learn about taking care of each other. (Catechism, 2208)

I was blessed with good parents. They made mistakes, sometimes major mistakes, but I never doubted that they loved me. Sadly, not everyone has that experience.

Too many parents apparently demand respect from their children, without earning it. I think some attacks on 'traditional values' trace back to parents who abused their authority. I've been over this before:

Duties for Everyone

Parents are supposed to lead a family, which doesn't mean that kids 'have no rights:'
  • Families are important
    (Catechism, 2210)
  • Family members have duties
Children are supposed to respect their parents. That respect is supposed to come from a sense of gratitude. Bear in mind that this is the way families are supposed to work: not what happens when broken parents fail their children.
"Respect for parents (filial piety) derives from gratitude toward those who, by the gift of life, their love and their work, have brought their children into the world and enabled them to grow in stature, wisdom, and grace. 'With all your heart honor your father, and do not forget the birth pangs of your mother. Remember that through your parents you were born; what can you give back to them that equals their gift to you?'19"
(Catechism, 2215)
Not all parents make it easy for their children "to grow in stature, wisdom, and grace:" but that's the way it's supposed to work.

Nations

It's a big jump, going from from families to nations: but there's still a need for authority, respect, and (usually) obedience.
"The duty of obedience requires all to give due honor to authority and to treat those who are charged to exercise it with respect, and, insofar as it is deserved, with gratitude and good-will.
"Pope St. Clement of Rome provides the Church's most ancient prayer for political authorities:18 'Grant to them, Lord, health, peace, concord, and stability, so that they may exercise without offense the sovereignty that you have given them. Master, heavenly King of the ages, you give glory, honor, and power over the things of earth to the sons of men. Direct, Lord, their counsel, following what is pleasing and acceptable in your sight, so that by exercising with devotion and in peace and gentleness the power that you have given to them, they may find favor with you.'19"
(Catechism, 1900)
"It is the duty of citizens to contribute along with the civil authorities to the good of society in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom. The love and service of one's country follow from the duty of gratitude and belong to the order of charity. Submission to legitimate authorities and service of the common good require citizens to fulfill their roles in the life of the political community."
(Catechism, 2239)
I've run into folks who apparently thought that 'good' citizens should submit to national authorities.

That's not what the last paragraph said:
"...Submission to legitimate authorities and service of the common good require citizens to fulfill their roles in the life of the political community."
(Catechism, 2239) [emphasis mine]
Here's where it gets interesting.

Moral Legitimacy

Obedience and respect for authority are important. I can't disregard leadership that I don't like, and claim virtue.

But that doesn't mean everything a leader says is right:
"Authority does not derive its moral legitimacy from itself. It must not behave in a despotic manner, but must act for the common good as a 'moral force based on freedom and a sense of responsibility':21
"A human law has the character of law to the extent that it accords with right reason, and thus derives from the eternal law. Insofar as it falls short of right reason it is said to be an unjust law, and thus has not so much the nature of law as of a kind of violence.22
"Authority is exercised legitimately only when it seeks the common good of the group concerned and if it employs morally licit means to attain it. If rulers were to enact unjust laws or take measures contrary to the moral order, such arrangements would not be binding in conscience. In such a case, 'authority breaks down completely and results in shameful abuse.'23"
(Catechism, 1902, 1903)
"The eternal law" is natural law, the set of ethical laws woven into the universe. They're as real as the physical laws.

Consequences of ignoring physical laws can be as obvious as a brick dropped on one's foot. Consequences of ignoring ethical laws are real, too: but can take longer to become obvious. My opinion. I've discussed natural law before. (July 4, 2012)

'I was Only Following Orders'

Folks who had helped Germany's 1933-1945 leadership had some explaining to do when the 'Thousand Year Reich' failed to perform as advertised.

It wasn't the first time folks said they 'were only following orders,' it wasn't the last. Sometimes claiming that being ordered to do something nasty worked as a defense, sometimes it didn't. (Superior orders, Wikipedia)

My opinion is that Thomas More and John Fisher were right, and that my long-term plans are best served by doing what's right: not what's easy or expedient.

Will I follow through on that brave sentiment? Ask me after the Last Judgment, and that's still another topic.

"...Contrary to the Demands of the Moral Order..."

Unthinking obedience is not a good idea. Not if I take what the Catholic Church says seriously:
"The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. 'Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.'48 'We must obey God rather than men':49
"When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.50
"Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution."
(Catechism, 2242, 2243)
Note: the Church doesn't say that armed resistance to oppression by political authority is never legitimate. On the other hand, Catechism, 2243, says that using force to resist a rogue ruler is acceptable only if:
  1. Violation of fundamental rights is
    • Certain
    • Grave
    • Prolonged
  2. All other means of redress have been exhausted
  3. Such resistance will not provoke worse disorders
  4. There is well-founded hope of success
  5. It is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution

Faith, Government, and Conscience

America's national government still allows citizens to follow our faith: inside a church. For that, I'm grateful.

The other 167 hours a week, though, the government expects us to follow government orders: even if doing so violates basic ethical principles.

Looking at today's America and item #2 in that five-point list, I believe that we still have quite a few options.

We're stuck with the current chief executive for another four years, but there's a midterm election coming. It will be an opportunity to swap out some members of Congress.

Finally: As a Catholic, I wouldn't be allowed to force another person to believe what I do, even if I had that sort of power. We're told that:
  • 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, 2258)
    • Begins at conception
      • (Catechism, 2270, 2274)
  • Murder is wrong
    (Catechism, 2259-2262, 2268-2269)
By the way, another blogger posted an excellent list of reasons for celebrating. I agree with her, even though I agree that recent American election results were disappointing:
Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, November 2, 2012

A Senator and a Bishop; Another Sex Scandal; and Religious Freedom

There's more to my faith than this, but it's important:
  • Religious freedom is vital
    (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2104-2109)
    • For everybody
      (Catechism, 2106)
This isn't the sort of "freedom" that means "free to agree with me."

It's the freedom to act as if God matters - or not. I think deciding that God's real, and matters, is prudent. But as a Catholic I wouldn't be allowed to 'make' you believe that: even if I could.

Freedom isn't always popular. Government leaders sometimes find it annoying. Particularly when someone starts talking about ethics and voting. That's the first news item I discuss this week.
  1. Conscience and a Senator
  2. Another Sex Scandal
  3. Chicago Declaration: Religious Freedom; for Everyone
Like I said, there's more to my faith than supporting religious freedom. The most important rules are:
There's more - there always seems to be more - like:
  • People
    • Aren't all alike
    • Have equal dignity
    • Must not be treated unjustly
    (Catechism, 1934-1938)
  • Faith
    • Is important
      (Catechism, 1814-1816)
    • Without works is dead
      (Catechism, 1815)
    • Must be
      • Kept
      • Acknowledged
      • Lived
      • Professed
      • Spread
      (Catechism, 1816)
Here's a sampling of what it's like, living in a society where leaders don't like 'old fashioned' ideas like people having equal dignity, or faith being important.

1. Conscience and a Senator

"North Dakota bishop stands by pastoral letter on election"
Carl Bunderson, CNA (Catholic News Agency) (October 31, 2012)

"Bishop David D. Kagan of Bismarck defended his letter on the election which was read this weekend at parishes in North Dakota, against demands by a state senator that it be withdrawn or changed.

"Bishop David D. Kagan of Bismarck defended his letter on the election which was read this weekend at parishes in North Dakota, against demands by a state senator that it be withdrawn or changed....
(Carl Bunderson, CNA)
I doubt that the state senator would be upset if Bishop Kagan had been the sort of nice, inoffensive, preacher who spreads sweetness, light, and vaguely 'spiritual' soundbite.

From the point of view of folks who like the status quo, Catholic Bishops in America have been downright uppity lately. From my point of view, I'm delighted that Catholic leaders are acting like leaders who are Catholic.

Before getting back to Bishop Kagan and an upset senator, a point or two about the Catholic Church and acting as if God matters.

Ethics and the Establishment

American law won't let priests tell us who to vote for.

But it's legal for us to be told why we should vote for or against issues, and how we should make decisions about voting. Given the alternatively-ethical standards of today's establishment, this situation could change.

Folks who like the status quo trying to 'protect' America from people who want something better is nothing new, and that's another topic:

Vote Smart: Resources

Catholic bishops in America have published quite a few resources for folks who give a rip about elections and voting, including these:
Basically: ethics matter; a candidate's appearance doesn't; and 'my family always voted for this party' is a lousy way to choose.

"A Properly Formed Conscience"

" 'It's with a properly formed conscience, which we regularly nourish with prayer, the sacraments, and continued study, that we can...set a good example, which ultimately isn't about you or me,' Bishop Kagan told CNA Oct. 30.

"The example we set, he emphasized, presents Christ to other people...."
I think Bishop Kagan could have stayed out of trouble if he'd mentioned "a properly formed conscience," and left it at that. A strong indication that he's not going to affirm the 'do whatever you feel like doing' standard of today's American culture is the phrase "...which ultimately isn't about you or me...."

"Seek ... What is True and Good"

"...Bishop Kagan issued the letter asking parishioners 'to vote as a Catholic citizen with a properly formed Catholic conscience.'

"Bishop Kagan wrote that the teachings of the Church are 'the means for us to properly form our consciences so that we seek always what is true and good.'..."
(Carl Bunderson, CNA)
"That which is true and good" might not seem particularly threatening. The trouble, as I see it, started because Bishop Kagan got specific about what's true and good: and what's not.
"He [Bishop Kagan] went on to say that intrinsically evil actions, such as abortion and euthanasia, 'must always be rejected and opposed,' and that issues that do not directly affect the life and dignity of people are secondary to these.

"Though Bishop Kagan 'will not tell you how to vote,' he wrote that 'I ask you to vote for the candidates who represent you as Catholic citizens. Please do not vote for the candidate who is most likeable.'...
(Carl Bunderson, CNA)

North Dakota Senator Instructs Catholic Bishop on Church Teaching

"Responding to an advance copy of the letter, however, state senator Tim Mathern asserted in an Oct. 23 statement that the obligation to 'follow your conscience' is in conflict with the obligation of Catholics to form their conscience according to Church teaching, and that Bishop Kagan's teaching 'short circuits conscience formation.'..."
(Carl Bunderson, CNA)
I'm inclined to think that a Catholic Bishop might know more about theology and Catholic teaching than a state Senator.

Happily, state senators don't currently have the authority to silence a bishop. I hope that continues to be the case.

I also intend to vote next week.

If enough Americans have been paying attention, we may be able to keep our freedom to act as if God matters.

If not, the establishment will win: and the American government will keep trying to make people of faith shut up and follow orders.

2. Another Sex Scandal

First of all: Yes, I know about the pedophile priests. Now, about sex, the BBC, and the Vatican.
"Vatican condemns sex abuse in wake of Jimmy Savile revelations"
CNA/EWTN News (October 30, 2012)

" The Vatican has reiterated condemnation of sexual abuse following allegations against deceased British TV star Jimmy Savile, who during his life was given a papal knighthood for his charity work...."
Jimmy Savile isn't a Catholic priest, but he did get a papal knighthood.

I'm not shocked and horrified that the Vatican rewarded someone for doing good work: and that this person later turned out to have done something bad.

For two thousand years, the Catholic Church has been run by human beings. We're finite creatures. We don't know everything: that includes priests, bishops, and the Pope. "Papal infallibility" doesn't mean that the Pope knows everything, and that's yet another topic.

Which reminds me: We all deal with original sin, some better than others; some worse. "Original sin" isn't the idea that God botched the creation of humanity, and that's still another topic or two. (July 25, 2012, July 11, 2012, November 27, 2011)

"Heinous Crimes of Sexual Abuse of Children"

"...'The Holy See condemns in the strongest terms the heinous crimes of sexual abuse of children, takes very seriously what has come to light about Jimmy Savile,' said Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi on Oct. 27.

" 'It is deeply saddened that a person who is stained in this way could in his lifetime be proposed for an honor by the Holy See, which, in the light of what has been learned recently, certainly should not have been given.'..."
(CNA/EWTN News )
Despite the impression many Americans have, the Catholic Church says that:
  • Sexuality is
    • Good
      (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2331-2336)
    • Very important
      (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2332)
  • Rape is
    • Bad
      • We shouldn't do it
    • Very bad when done by someone in a position of trust
    (Catechism, 2356)
Again, I know about the recurring pedophile priest story.

What some priest did was bad. The occasional attempts to cover up their misdeeds was bad: and very stupid. People who had nothing to do with this evil are paying the consequences, and I've been over this before. Often:
Should someone who sexually abused minors have been given rewards for charity work? Probably not. But I seriously doubt that Pope Bl. John Paul II and Queen Elizabeth II of England got together and said, "we know this guy's a villain, so we'll reward him."

Apparently not even the BBC knew about Savile's extracurricular interests. Not officially, anyway.

Jimmy Who?

Maybe Jimmy Savile was as high-profile as the Beatles on this side of the Atlantic. Then again, maybe not. Either way, Sir James Wilson Vincent "Jimmy" Savile, OBE, KCSG seems to have had zipper issues:
"...Savile died October 2011 and was a popular media personality in Britain starting in the 1960s. However, some 300 cases of sexual abuse of minors, both male and female, have come to light since his death....

"...Following the sex-abuse allegations, the head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, Archbishop of Westminster Vincent Nichols, wrote the Vatican asking if it were possible to revoke Savile's papal knighthood...."
(October 30, 2012)
The Vatican hasn't removed him from the register of folks who have gotten papal knighthoods - because there is no such register. Folks who get that sort of reward don't even show up in the yearbook:
"Fr. Lombardi said in his statement that the honor 'perishes with the death of the individual,' and so there is no process for removing the knighthood posthumously.

" 'Since there is no permanent register of persons who have received such recognition, it is not possible to expel a dead person from a register that does not exist. Decorated names do not appear at any time in the pontifical yearbook.'..."
(CNA/EWTN News )

"What is Most Important..."

"...'What is most important is therefore to reiterate the strongest condemnation of all sexual abuse, particularly against children, as serious crimes. On this the Holy See is steadfast.'

"The BBC, for whom Savile worked as a TV and radio presenter, is under review for its child protection and sexual harassment policies....

"...The BBC is also being scrutinized for its shelving of a 2011 report on claims against Savile which was being prepared for the TV program Newsnight."
(CNA/EWTN News )
Maybe the BBC just happened to not notice a few hundred illicit sexual encounters by one of their top performers: and also just happened to keep a report on the shenanigans from being aired. Or maybe someone in the BBC knew, and didn't want to embarrass Jimmy Savile.

Do I think that the BBC is run by pedophiles who routinely and systematically rape minors? No: Jimmy Savile's case may be an isolated one.

Or maybe BBC executives didn't see anything wrong with one of their top attractions having a little 'fun' on the side. I really don't know.

Fixing the Problem, Getting a Grip

I'm upset that some priests used the respect and authority that comes with their position to permanently injure the psyches of some children and young people. If anything, I'm more upset about their immediate superiors who apparently knew what was happening, and ignored the situation.

This was wrong.

It was not right.

It should not have happened.

But it did, and now the Church is paying (literally) reparations: and fixing the problem. If that's not what you read in the papers, I'm not surprised.

I'm not quite so surprised that the Vatican took so long to start sorting out these cases.

For one thing, the Vatican's staff isn't enormous. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) is the office that handles abuse cases, among other duties. There are about 45 people of the CDF staff. That's one CDF staffer for every 22,222,222 Catholics.

For another, lurid tales about the Satanic Catholic Church have been part of American culture for centuries. Maria Monk's perennial bestseller was set in Canada, but it's still being reprinted for the U.S.A. market. I'm not surprised that real complaints of sexually aggressive priests didn't stand out from the background noise:

3. Chicago Declaration: Religious Freedom; for Everyone

"Chicago Declaration gathers support for religious freedom"
Michelle Bauman, CNA (Catholic News Agency) (October 24, 2012)

"A new declaration signed by business and cultural leaders in Chicago voiced support for the U.S. Constitution's religious freedom protections and emphasized the importance of education and engagement on this fundamental right in the face of current threats.

" 'In recognizing the unique and indispensable role of religion in our society and in the development of people, we affirm the positive good that religion plays in resisting vice and degradation, and in building virtue and a more noble humanity,' the signatories of The Chicago Declaration stated.

"Noting that religious freedom is 'the indispensable means of ensuring the hopeful vitality of our people and Constitutional Republic,' they warned that 'to lose it is to lose the heart of the nation and the Republic itself.'...
What I hope does not get ignored in other reports about the Chicago Declaration is that "various religious and political backgrounds discussed current threats to religious freedom and signed the declaration to affirm their support for the Constitution." (Michelle Bauman, CNA)

These are not religious crazies who want everybody to agree with them or be punished. They're folks who think that Americans should be free to act as if God matters: or as if there is no God. The key word here is "free."

I'm convinced that God exists. But I'm also a practicing Catholic: and as I've said before, that means that I must support religious freedom. For everybody.

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

  • A 'Saint Brian,' Sort of
    My name is Brian Gill. In keeping with the customs of my culture, the first name is one which my parents chose for me, the last is the name ...
  • Blind Mice; Heroism During the 'Batman' Killings
    The London 2012 Olympics start today: but instead of analyzing the significance of a South Korean flag being displayed with a North Korean...
  • A Catholic Citizen in America: New Location
    The good news is still that Blogger's changes haven't made images in my posts here unviewable. ( May 6-16, 2016 ) Instead of jumpi...
  • Mass Murder in Orlando
    I'd be writing a longer, more detailed, post about this; but still haven't resolved some technical issues. ( May 6, 2016 ; updated M...
  • Elijah and Pushing a Rock
    10th Sunday in Ordinary Time, 2016: 1 Kings 17:17 - 24 Galatians 1:11 - 19 Luke 7:11 - 17 Third Sunday of Easter, 2016 by Deacon L...

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.