YOU ALWAYS SAY MORE THAN YOU INTEND TO REVEAL

There is a saying that goes, “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”  When a person is not careful about their speech they can end up revealing much more than they intend.  It is part of the “why” behind the Gospel injunction to always be truthful and speak that which is Good, True and Beautiful.

Take today’s Gospel for example.  Jesus drives out a mute demon and his detractors say, “It is by the prince of demons that he drives out demons.”  In their carelessness in denouncing Jesus, they inadvertently bring Him some credence.  Notice that they didn’t say, “Nothing happened.”  Clearly something happened and they needed a way to discount it and so ascribed the miraculous thing they witnessed as being evil.

So first they inadvertently give great testimony to something that they themselves witnessed.  Then they reveal something about themselves in turn.  Jesus explains the weak logic of their argument and then says, “Those who are not with me are against me.”  Who is He?  God.  If one are not with God, with whom else can one be?  There is a lot of things being revealed here though an attempted deception.

Something similar happened in the local newspaper recently.  In a letter to the editor this week entitled, “Stop the Hatred,” the author rallied against what she saw as growing division in the United States.  She wrote, “If you are an anti-Semite, racist or whatever else, bigotry is an equal opportunity killer.”  What is interesting here is that she takes a group of people (who by and large are clearly in the wrong from a Christian point of view) and separates them from the rest of the “good people” (My words, not hers) and then sort of sets up this “we good people” pointing that the “bad people” and berating them.  “What these bigots don’t realize . . .”  (To whom is she speaking?  People who who are not bigots?  Wouldn’t they already know this?)  While I agree with her premise that if we allow hatred of any group, we may, one day, find ourselves on the wrong end of the stick, her method for getting there is not to engage those whom she may desire to convert to a more loving stance, but to put them in a group and denounce them and inadvertently becomes, at least somewhat, what she hates.

In another interesting article in the Beacon Journal this past Saturday entitled, “Planned Parenthood funding cut.”  The subtitle was, “Federal Appeals Court upholds laws ending flow of state dollars to abortion providers.”  The title and much of the writing is an enormous reversal of language normally used in the public media.  There was no mention of “abortion foes” (as opposed “Pro-Life Advocates” that those who promote life would prefer to be called) or the masking of abortion by the writer as “women’s health care” and in describing an abortion procedure the baby is referred to as a fetus not a mass of cells.   

Is this, too, starting to reveal a change in popular culture?  Only time will tell.  It was only one article.  But it was published and makes one wonder what truths it may be revealing.

MONDAY DIARY: If you CAN make it here, you can make it ANYWHERE

What SNOPES has to say on the new bill in New York
What the New York State CATHOLIC CONFERENCE says.

WHERE YOUR TREASURE IS, THERE IS YOUR HEART

A friend of mine lives on a farm about a forty minute drive from the parish.  He is having a rough go of it lately and it is not because of the snow and cold.  It is because of woodpeckers.  He has a wood house and the woodpeckers have targeted it for their pecking of wood.  He has tried everything.  He put up fake owls, he started blasting “woodpeckers in distress” calls over loudspeakers, freshly painted his house (as was recommended by experts) but nothing works.  Every day there is a couple of more holes, about half an inch across, many of which are clean through the siding.  So he has to go out and fill in the holes almost every day.  He is not happy.

He can’t do anything to kill the woodpeckers.  They are federally protected and he could get into a hole basket full of trouble if he resorted to that.  Yet if he and his wife should conceive their child, they have a federally protected right to do to that child what it is illegal to do to that woodpecker.  With the woodpecker we say, “Well, it may greatly upset your life but you going to have to find a way to cope with it.  That’s life.”  When it comes to their child we say, “Well, if he is going to greatly upset your life, you can get rid of him.  That’s life.”

I am not for the overturning of the protection of woodpeckers.  Maybe we could extend the rights to humans in the womb (and extend to the parents more assistance than we do to woodpecker sufferers - which I know many of you do!)

Today is the national day of prayer for the legal protection of human life in the womb.  Please consider offering a prayer and engaging in some action, exercising the rights, privileges, dignity and power that you have on behalf of one who currently, legally has none of these in our country.

POPE FRANCIS, THE DEATH PENALTY & HERESY

When there was such a thing as institutional slavery, the Church recognized this as a fact of the world and gave teachings based on those given in Scripture on how those who “owned” slaves should treat their servants.  Over the course of time, the Church recognized that, because each human person has an inalienable dignity, nobody could possibly be “owned” by anybody and to be a person who “owned” slaves was inherently evil.  This happened at a time when the Christian world was sufficiently awakening to the evil of this practice it was possible to bring this abomination to an end.  

This was not a change in the teachings of the Church.  It was a development in the understanding of the inherent worth of each individual human soul.  It was a slow and painful path.  But the moment there was any recognition that the oppressed person was in fact a person with a soul, with dignity and worth, who was saved by the Passion of Jesus Christ, it was inevitable that slavery would be done away with.  The very idea of a “slave owner” was poisoned with the first drop of Christ’s blood and every subsequent teaching and recognition of the value of life brought it closer and closer to death.

In my opinion, the recent teaching of Pope Francis on the death penalty can be seen in the same light.  What he now says (though I understand the difficulty in the way he said it) does not negate the realities and teachings of the past.  By the time we get to St. John Paul II, because of the advancement of culture and our ability to detain and isolate persons who are a serious threat to society, he had difficulty imagining any scenario in which the death penalty could be used.  He stood at the precipice of the seamless garment of the respect of human life, unable to imagine the need for civilized Christians to resort to killing an otherwise detained person for the sake of the salvation of the world.

As there was a point in which slavery was no longer a tenable option for Christians, Pope Francis says such has the time come for the death penalty.  

Many will disagree.  Many will disagree with the way he said it.  Many will disagree with the format in which he said it.  Indeed, the reader of his article may think the pope was either premature in this declaration or a bit of a Pollyanna in his worldview or that he took one step too far, but, in my opinion, the one wagon that no one should jump on is that he has been speaking heresy.  It is not only unhelpful to the conversation it does not display an understanding of how the Church has operated for 2,000 years.  

AM I NEXT? MAYBE

Persons with Downs Syndrome can rest easy.  They will no longer be discriminated against in the termination of their lives.  A Columbus judge has determined that it is unconstitutional to limit abortion for the reason that parents don’t want their child because that child has Down Syndrome.  Planned Parenthood has lauded the ruling that “A woman should be able to trust her physician and have confidential conversations without worrying about government interference.”  What is left off of the end of that sentence is “concerning the death of their child that doesn’t meet up with their standards.”

What I just wrote is very divisive.  It would be difficult for a person who feels that such a child is not a human being to have a civil conversation with me I would imagine.  But A) such persons tend not to read my blog and B) it truly is a horrific path we are on and so many people are terribly blind to it.

Yesterday students from across the country walked out of their schools to protest guns and the death of students due to mass shootings.  “Are we next?” was one of the signs in the Akron Beacon Journal this morning.  The last time I encountered a sign that asked that question was from a person in a wheelchair in Washington D.C. protesting abortions.  What if that person could have been diagnosed in the womb of having some condition that would land her in a wheelchair?  Who could face her and say, “I would have protected the right for your parents to terminate your life for the simple reason that you would end up in a wheelchair”?

Is the problem really guns?  Maybe in part.  But could the bigger problem be that we keep chipping away at a general respect for life?  As we sanitize our culture of the dignity of the human person, cultural laws, turning inwardly as a humanity, thinking that there is no meaning beyond what men invent and falling deeper into nihilism, could it be that we are simply just losing the idea that life is inviolable?  Once one determines Jack can be done away with, is it much of a step to say that Jill could be also?  It is a slippery slope.

It is the difference between the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” and “Love they neighbor.”  Not killing is controlling outward behavior.  Loving is changing hearts and minds.  Go ahead and ban every last gun, but if you are not going to change hearts and minds toward the dignity of all human life, then you also better ban knives, nail clippers, razors, any liquids over 3 oz. . .

Oh wait.  We already do that.

GET RID OF "THEM"

A few years ago it was obvious that the Catholic Church should get rid of celibacy because it led to sexual abuse.  With the latest round of sexual abuse in news, sports, entertainment, and politics (and there are some other major areas that have yet to be tapped,) to what should we attribute it now?  Should we get rid of politics and entertainment?  Should we get rid of men?  Most of these people are married, should we rid ourselves of the obvious scourge of marriage?  Maybe we should level the playing field so that nobody has power.  (But of course, then who would have the power to enforce that?)  On to what bandwagon should we all jump this time?

May I suggest one?  How about the bandwagon that says all humans have inherent dignity, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.  It is when we start chipping away at the eternal worth of any human soul that all people’s worth is damaged.  If I am willing to put the child in the womb, the criminal, the sick and elderly to death, then I too have decreased in value as the bar for the worthy has been raised against me - I come closer to being the person to be used by others for their own end.

We need heroes and role models; saints and stars.  But we cannot place them on so high a pedestal (and the rest of us so low to the ground) that they can use that glory to dazzle the eyes of those who gaze up that them, blinding them of their own dignity and allowing themselves to be mistreated.

There is no lifestyle (married, single, divorced, celibate, etc) that causes someone to be an abuser.  There are people with power who are abusers regardless of their lifestyle.  These abuse scandals are an alarm that we all need help in becoming a healthier culture, not a bunch of irate and blind finger pointers.  It is the sin we will not tolerate from anyone.

LOSS OF FAITH - LOSS OF LIFE

I remember the first time I had the courage to eat at a restaurant alone.  It was a Taco Bell.  I was in junior high school.  I went in, ordered, ate, and then went home.  This was a huge breakthrough for me.  Telling my parents excitedly about it one could see in their faces a mild mixture of amusement and befuddlement.  But being a lone in public was difficult for me (other than bike rides and hikes and the like) and a taco changed my world.

To varying degrees each of us needs alone time and people time.  Difficulties in life begin when we get too much of either.  Too much community can lead to depression just as much as too much alone time.  As an introvert, I often get “peopled out.”  But as a nation, there is a trend to be alone in a crowd.  We are becoming disconnected, fragmented, and largely left alone behind the walls of self.

In a recent article entitled, “Dying of Despair” in “First Things,” Aaron Kheriaty writes about the growing suicide epidemic in the United States.  “Depression is now the most common serious medical or mental health disorder in the United States,” he reports.  And it isn’t just the dispossessed, the addicts, the “failers" and the victims.  It is skyrocketing among those we think as privileged, successful and should have every worldly reason to live.  (We don’t hear about that much though.)  If you want more on this you can read the article in the August/September 2017 issue.

Kheriaty attributes this culture of death to the increasing isolation of the individual from a cohesive and supportive social structure.  (Read family and religion)  The continuing fractioning of marriage and family and the growing number of “nones” religiously set people adrift where they have to create their own world of meaning, of dignity, of self worth, of purpose and of love.  The problem is that when you have this idea alone on an island, it is difficult to maintain it with any sense of belief or joy.

From Freud to Jung, there seems to be a recognition that there are aspects of Catholic culture (particularly confession of all things) that are very beneficial for the human person.  Emile Durkheim (1897) suggests that, “Catholic societies helped reduce suicide while greater individual autonomy and social isolation in Protestant societies tended to increase it.”  (See above article.)

I see this as an example in my own life.  I was enveloped and supported in the life of my home parish growing up.  I was encouraged in a faith life that gave meaning and hope to my existence from a source far bigger than mere human concepts.  I was brought together in a community of believers at least once a week.  We volunteered together.  This was encouraging even in life’s more common moments.  I remember when I was quite young and the men of the parish were together working on some project, and they told one an older boy to flex his arm.  The men laughed an patted him on the back.  Next was me.  I was a scrawny kid but they supported me just the same.  It was an introduction to Christian acceptance and manhood from a source far greater than just what I came up with as an individual. 

That is Christianity at its best: forming community and family - that we may all be one.  It is possible to enter into our churches and still be alone and we need to work at that.  And it is not as though if we put prayer in schools and everybody went to church that all of our problems would be solved.  It’s more complicated than that.  But there is no denying that the death of faith runs tangentially with the increasing death of individuals by their own hands.

IS THERE ANYTHING GOOD TO COME OUT OF THE MURDER OF THE PRIEST IN FRANCE?

The murder of the priest in France is both sad and frightening.  It is difficult to find anything but tragedy in the whole situation.  Even the Pope made the statement, "Some might think it is war of religion. It is not. All religions want peace. Others want war.”  Is there even the slightest ray of hope or goodness in this situation or is it all just a horrible, black happening in a cold universe?

Today’s Gospel sheds light on this question.

In Matthew 13:47-53 it talks about the Kingdom of Heaven being like a giant net thrown into the water hauling up everything in its path.  This net would be about a quarter of a mile long and six to ten feet in depth with floating cork on the upper side and weights on the lower.  One team would keep an end on shore while the other team took the opposite end out into the water and then swing it around ending up a distance down the shore.  Then the two teams would haul it ashore and everything in the mouth of the net would be trapped.  The fishermen would then have to sort through that which was good and preserve it, and that which was bad and discard it.

The fish are all of humanity.  The fishermen are God’s angels.  The net is the final judgment that all must face.  Notice that both good and bad alike are caught in the net.  That means that the Kingdom of Heaven exists in the this world right along side the kingdoms of earth.  There is goodness and grace in the world right now.  The Kingdom exists whenever and wherever you live it.  

At the moment the story in France was taking place, both kingdoms were present and in action.  To many people, it appears that the kingdom of this world prevailed.  But we know that the matter was settled about 2,000 years ago.  It is not unlike the Japanese soldiers that were found still fighting WWII on islands years after they lost and the war over.  They may still fight and appear to win a battle on some island, but the matter is already settled.

As we all are, both the priest and his attacker are to face death.  When the final net is dragged in, that is when the victory of that particular battle will finally be revealed, not earlier this week.  So we do not fear.  We love life and are not afraid to die.  Death for the Christian is an entrance into true life where there will not longer be a mixing of the two kingdoms.

We mourn for the priest and that community.  We also know that there is still hope there and goodness to be expressed.  We pray for his attacker because he chose a path destined for loss. We have no need to answer with anger and hate.  

YOU ARE BEAUTIFUL

Before you declare, “Nyope,  Not me.  This is ridiculous.” let me make my case.  If, at the end, you still don’t agree with me, you’ll still be wrong, but at least you read to the end.

Your life is amazing.  It is not supposed to be exciting all the time.  In fact, it is rarely exciting except to the most attentive and, for the others for whom it actually is, . . . well . . . they are just odd.  They are the exception that proves the rule.

You are living a fairy tale.  An incredible story is playing out in the living of your life.  The problem (if you are not buying this) is that you are used to it.  Somewhere (I forget where) Pope Benedict talked about how terrible it is to grow accustomed to the miraculous.  But we do.  Jesus Christ suffered and died for you, opened up paradise, made you a child of God, and gives Himself to you, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity in the Eucharist!  And we yawn and say, “Yeah.  I know.  What’s on T.V. tonight?”

In his essay, “Baby Worship,” Chesterton writes, “The supreme adventure is being born.  There we do walk suddenly into a splendid startling trap.  There we do see something of which we have not dreamed before.  Our father and mother do lie in wait for us, like brigands from a bush.  Our uncle is a surprise.  Our aunt is, in the beautiful common expression, a bolt from the blue.  When we step into the family, b the act of being born, we do step into a world which is incalculable, into a world which had its own strange laws, into a world which could do without us not a world that we have not made.  In other words, when we step into a family, we step into a fairy-tale.”

“Perhaps I’ll grant you that,” you might think.  “But after that?  Blah!”

Poppycock!

Think of your average fairy tale or movie.  One distills to a short book or two hours out of a life time to make it interesting.  As for drudgery, as beautiful as the story of Cinderella is, she spent A LOT of time in mourning for her parents, being treated as slave labor, and having no means of hope.  The people in Frozen spend most of their lives being miserable.  “Inside Out,” “Bring Him Home,” “Bridge of Spies,” “Revenant” all have incredible amounts of boring, monotonous, what seems to be life wasting time glossed over or slashed out entirely to present a movie that keeps you on the edge of your seat.

During the parts that were exciting, the people that lived them did not necessarily like it, think it special, or want it.  Those who were in trouble wanted to sit on the porch and drink lemonade.  Those trapped at home dream of flying to Mars.  Those with curly hair want straight hair and those with no hair would be happy with chia pet hair.  The point is, there needs to be tension and or loss in this life for the greatness to make itself truly felt and not lost among the mundane. 

Often in these stories, the realization that they were in a great story line was not until it was over and somebody points it out to them.  Sometimes it takes an outsider to say, “Wow!  What a life!”

St. Francis spent A LOT of time in angst, worry, and controversy.  So did Blessed Mother Theresa.  Outsiders say, “Wow, what a life!  I wish I could have that excitement or peace.”  We review their lives as they do us and think, “What an adventure.  What a unique and exciting life compared to boring old me.”

Stop it.

Even if you don’t see a payoff coming (which would ruin it anyway) know that your heavenly Father has something tremendous waiting for you who loved Him in this life.  “Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it so much as dawned on man” what God has waiting.  It will blow whatever expectations you have out of the water and make it all worth it.

Here is my challenge to you today.  See your life anew.  When you look outside, SEE the tree that you don’t notice anymore because it is always there.  It is different today than it was yesterday.  Appreciate today the place where you live.  No, it is not ideal.  But you have much for which to be grateful.  It is home base for your fair tale.  It will loom large in the telling of your story some day (even if it is just to God.  But I doubt it.)  Put on your least favorite clothes, go to your least favorite room, look at the least favorite thing in the room, see it, recognize it, and challenge it to play a role in your fairy tale.  Then let it sit and stew and worry about it and you go live.

And decide to be happy.  When you are bored, remember a time you were so crazy that you wish you had more time to be bored.  When you are crazy busy, remember the time you were bored and wish you had something to do.  

And pray.  

CONSISTANCY

This is a short excerpt from this past Sunday's homily.

Last Thursday night we had a Parish Council meeting and somebody asked the question, “Is our parish seen as a place where a family contemplating seeking an abortion might come to seek council?”

Wow, what a question.  It made me stop and think.

I looked up some surveys online and the general gist is that women who have had abortions say they didn’t approach fellow church goers or their pastors because they feared they would be looked down upon.

Wow again.  That kind of stings.

As a Church we provide help for those experiencing unexpected pregnancies.  Parishes raise funds for and volunteer at pregnancy clinics.  We provide resources and counseling for those who choose life.  As a Church we provide counseling for mothers who had abortions and who are now grieving.  But in the very teeth of this action, can we love as God chooses to love us even with all of our faults and failings?  Whereas we can ever approve, assist, or give permission for this drastic act, can we none-the-less be seen as non-condemnatory and loving to the point that someone so desperate that they are contemplating having an abortion may see each and every one of us as a person to approach for prayer and guidance?

To lead them back to the God who loved them even before they were knit together in their Mother’s womb?

TOLLERANCE - BUT ONLY A CERTAIN AMOUNT AND ONLY ON THE TOPICS THAT I CHOOSE

Here’s an interesting statistic for you:  Approximately 300 persons per year are killed in the state of California in hit and run accidents.  That means most days a Californian will kill another Californian with his car and then drive away to avoid responsibility.  Yesterday on NPR an official of the state said (and this is an approximate quote since I was driving and unable to write down what I heard) that this is a horrible situation – near four times the national average – and that “a cultural change must take place.”  His concern is California’s lack of concern for accidents in which human lives are effected.  You cannot simply hit a human being with your car and then drive away.

 

But I thought, “Why not?”  Is change what California really wants?  Are they prepared to do what would be required in order to effect a “cultural change?”  Or do they have exactly what they want?

 

Consider this about the Golden State:  They are on the verge of allowing physician assisted suicide.  They are a death penalty state.  Abortion rights are vigorously upheld.  The state self-funded embryonic stem cell research.  And these are just some of the issues that over a period of time teach a people that when life inconveniences you, you may do away with it. 

 

If you teach a rectory dog to bark whenever someone rings the doorbell, you can’t expect him not to do so on the occasion that this time it is the bishop that is ringing the bell.  In a similar way, when you teach a body of people that when your life might be change in a way that you don’t like you have a right to ask for death, you can’t expect that people to keep such a belief in tight little boxes.  Why is it Okay to kill a child in the womb that will take away my college career or Okay to allow grandma to do away with herself before she eats up my time or inheritance, but it is not Okay from me walk away from an accident (after all, it was only an accident right?) since it will simply eat up my time, attention, and resources and not really solve anything?

 

So California, are you really ready for a “cultural change?”  My prayers are with you.

"PERSON"AL

I wrote a letter to the editor recently and it hasn't appeared so I thought I would share it with you.

 

 

Dear Editor,

 

In her letter, Maria Miranda (Resist Campaign to Restrict Abortion) states that “the decision to terminate a pregnancy is intensely personal and private. . .”  Unfortunately she does not tell us why this is so.  This statement is the same that has been used throughout history to shut down interference and conversation concerning the way husbands have treated their wives, how parents disciplined their children, and how persons have treated their slaves.  The only way Maria’s statement could make sense at all is if the being within the mother’s womb, that has all of the chromosomes and DNA of a unique human individual, is not a person at all.  That such a large percentage of citizens of the United States do recognize the humanity of the person within her womb makes the argument that this is a private matter as untenable in this case as it had at one time in those others mentioned above.

 

To quote Elizabeth Cady Stanton, a pioneer of the American Women’s Rights Movement, on her views on abortion, “When we consider that woman are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."

 

Rev. John A. Valencheck

UPDATE:  I spoke about this letter in my homily this past weekend at it started some interesting philosophical debates after Mass.  One of the most interesting was a distinction between a personal and private belief and that of action.  Our government has always been involved when actions start effecting other people, but personally held beliefs and thoughts of the individual we hold sacrosanct.  So that a person believes that abortion is a good that should be available to anyone at anytime is a right in our nation, but what we focus on is when that belief is put into action (and in this case, an unique human person's rights are destroyed.)  To have it any other way would have our nation act as thought police.  Nice distinction. 

"JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED?" THINK AGAIN.

In a front page article above the fold in the Akron Beacon Journal Congressman Tim Ryan made the announcement last week that he was no longer pro-life.  Though I am disappointed in his decision and vehemently opposed to his position, I was appreciative of the fact that he made his view know without vitriol.  Where he crossed the line was using his Catholic faith to bolster his position.  His presentation at this point became misleading and manipulative.

 

There are a couple of points he used to explain his change of heart but there is one in particular that was just flagrantly wrong.  Ryan, who the article describes as, “a practicing Roman Catholic,” said, “The church (sic) has taught me to be compassionate and non-judgmental.”  He said this in reference to women who seek abortion.  It did teach him to have compassion.  It did not teach him to through good judgment out the window.

 

The new Gospel of Tolerance has only one passage in Scripture, “Judge not lest ye be judged.”  This passage has been misinterpreted as meaning that we cannot be opposed to what another person does (unless of course you disagree with Gospel of Tolerance which will not be tolerated.)  Any number of Scriptures passages would adjure us to use wise judgment when discerning the actions of others.  The caution in this passage is referring to a tendency to overreact, which may recoil and end up bringing condemnation on ourselves, or the wrong temptation to judge the state of a person’s soul rather than the value of their action.  But to use this passage as a club to stop conversation (though he says otherwise) is an abuse of the passage.

 

“This is really about the role of the government in all of this,” Ryan states, “and the government’s involvement seems like a major over-reach.”  But of course the government always has been and continues to be involved in such matters.  When things go wrong; when one person is an unwilling participant, when one is underage, when things are done in an inappropriate place or way, when one wants to be married to more than one person, the government is there.  With the new Affordable Healthcare Act, not only is the government involved, it is dragging in others who do not even want to be involved.  The government’s fingerprints are all over this intimate moment.  So with Ryan, I would agree that the government should be less involved.

 

That is until another underrepresented, voiceless, vulnerable person is involved.  For when a government starts deciding who has a soul and who does not, when it ceases to protect the weakest members of its people, that government is failing.

 

I respectfully submit that this is what your faith was trying to teach you Congressman Ryan.  If you want to continue to hold your new position, please do not mistakenly use your faith for your justification.

NEW AND IMPROVED FREEDOM

In the “revolution” for sexual freedom, Chesterton suggests we ask the question, from what we are seeking freedom.  To that we might add, “And is what we are doing actually bringing us into greater freedom?”

 

A sure sign that a community is breaking down is that it relies more heavily on its officials to keep the peace rather than the community making sure that nothing nefarious is going on.  I could not get in trouble as a kid much as I may have wanted to.  Our neighborhood was so tightly knit that if I dropped a penny on the way home my parents would have received three phone calls that “little Johnny was throwing money all over town.”  This is one of the reasons I became a priest.  Why bother being bad?  I couldn’t get away with it anyway.

 

That neighborhood has changed dramatically.  Today if you would call many of the parents on the street and tell them that their kid was spray painting graffiti on someone’s house you would first be met with refusal (not my kid) and then anger, “How dare you!  What did you do to cause my child to have to spray paint Mrs. McDonald’s house?”  A that point the police move in, not because the community is stronger and so can bring them in, but because it is beginning to fail; it must bring them in.  It is weak.

 

In our new sexual freedom, we have seen, from professional sports, to college campuses, high schools, celebrities, politicians, and now even Joe and Mary down the street, not the community holding up standards and keeping individuals responsible, but more and more bringing in the state to make people responsible for their actions.  This is not a sign that we have more freedom, more respect for each other, or that we are more empowered, or that women are better respected, or that we have less to hide, or even that we are, as a whole, happier, but that we are less empowered and so must rely on the big stick.

 

Granted, there have always been persons who were not able to be kept in check by the community.  That is why there are police forces and soldiers.  When society is healthy, these services are there to protect our freedoms, not enforce them. 

GET SMART

When I was in college I was eligible for Social Security benefits because the government felt that my father did not make enough money.  But, don’t you know, just as I was entering college they raised the threshold just enough that I would not receive any benefits.  Go figure.

 

But that was Okay, for the very next year my father was retired for half of the year and his income was less and therefore I was once again eligible for benefits!  Except that they had changed the standards again and I was out of the group.

 

But that was Okay, because the next year my father would have been retired the entire year, making substantially less than he did just two year ago and once again I was eligible.  Except, of course, that they changed the requirements once again and once again I was left out of the group.

 

This is not about a social security check.  The fact is that I didn’t need it although it might have been fun.  But it is an example on how slight changes in law can leave you out in the cold if you are on the margin.  One slight change and you can go from favored status to non-favored status.

 

That is what the pro-life movement is about.  When any person is considered Okay to put to death, the pool of what it is to be human with dignity and rights grows smaller and those not at the center of the pool see the edge move closer toward them. 

 

The scary thing is that it doesn’t take much to be moved from the center of the pool to the edge.  An accident, a false accusation, a disease, old age, loss of a job, an incident that can take place in the twinkling of an eye can move you from the center of the pool to the edge.  (Look at the minister from Hudson in jail in a foreign country accused of human trafficking.  Though seemingly innocent, things could go terribly wrong very quickly.)  I remember being shocked at a Pro-Life march in Washington D. C. seeing people in wheel chairs holding signs that asked the question, “Am I next?”  That they could even think that a possibility says something about where we are going as a people.

 

Today, in particular, we are encouraged to pray for the legal protection of unborn children.  Masses for Peace and Justice are being celebrated.  Thousands of people are weathering the bitter, bitter cold on the Life March in Washington today.  You are encouraged to pray and fast.  It doesn’t even have to be a full fast.  Give up the last cup of coffee.  Leave the last cookie on the plate.  Don’t grab that handful of nuts.  And every time you have the urge and wish that the beautiful, steaming, yummy mug of coffee was at your hand, offer it up with a prayer for those whose lives are not held as dear and worthy as yours.

TRUST ME - THIS IS A KILLER

Yes . . . It’s a guilty pleasure . . .

 

I will admit that I watch “Dexter.”  For those unfamiliar with this show: it is the story of a mass murderer trying to live a normal life – except for those pesky murders.

 

For those familiar with the show: Don’t worry.  I will not be giving anything away.  I’m only on season three. 

 

Now, let me say from the start that much of the show is reprehensible.  That is the great thing about Netflicks: the “ff” button.  I do not recommend the show.  That being said if one pays attention carefully (at least in the three seasons that I have seen) they do grapple with lots of hot button issues concerning life, love, the role of faith, the dignity (or lack thereof) of the human person and so forth.  I rarely agree with the title character no matter how sympathetic they try to make him with swelling music, kind words, and someone saying to him, “This is the right thing.”

 

Dexter supposedly is unable to have feelings; particularly complicated feelings such as love.  He works hard then trying to figure what to do to express love to those close to him and make them feel love.  It is a radical decision for the other with little consolation to himself.  Inside his head he is saying, “This is all fake.  If they only knew I don’t know a thing about love.”  From a spiritual standpoint he is in the deepest throws of love.  If he acted lovingly toward those for whom he had great feelings of love, big whoop.  As Scriptures says, “even the pagans do the same.”  But he overcomes his deficit to love mightily.  His is probably the purest love in the show. 

 

Well, except for those murders.

 

That is the part of the show that peaks my interested.  The producers go through great lengths to make Dexter a lovable character.  And he had a code by which he lives; he will only kill those who kill and have escaped responsibility for their murders and who will most likely kill again.  So if you would become friends with Dexter, you most likely would never experience the dark side of him that “needs” to kill.  You would only know this great guy.

 

Think of that for a moment.  Allow Dexter to not be safely on the other side of the screen.  Suppose he was a true friend of yours and you know about his propensity for snuffing out life.  Could you be his friend and allow him to live his life as he allows you to live yours?  Though a bit odd and maybe a tich distant, he is thoughtful, friendly, pleasant, helpful, and fiercely loyal.  And really, he only takes the life of those many would say “deserve to die.”  Some would day that he is making the world a better place.

 

But he is in your living room having a beer with you and you can sense that you about to have a severe disagreement about something.  Though he says he would never turn his butchery on you, do you completely trust him?  Can you?  Would you not have some fear that the line that separates the “worthies” from the “worthless” might slip – maybe even for just a moment – and in a moment of passion you would become a victim instead of one of the protected class?

 

I submit that this is a wonderful analogy for our modern state which Pope Benedict calls a throw away culture.  The list grows of people we can discard – that are on the wrong side of the line.  This week was a story that there are more people on death row in Ohio than in a long time.  There is physician assisted suicides, euthanasia, abortion, and now we are on the verge of federal mandates forcing churches to be direct agents in actions they believe to be violations of human dignity.  There are questions about how we treat the poor, the insane, the refugee, the addict, the ignorant, the disenfranchised, and even the criminal. 

 

For every person added to this list of undeserving of life, the line that separates each of us from the undesirables creeps up.  It may seem a far distance away, but it is only an accident, a false accusation, or change in government away.  Many priests talk about the future and wonder if we will now end up in jail some day for teaching something that has been a part of our core beliefs for 2,000 years.

 

It’s the Dexter effect.

 

And it makes me wonder.