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.  

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.  

RANT - COUNTER RANT: INCOHERENCY IS NO DETERENT

From the case file of "Why We Need to Teach Our Children Logic" comes this letter from Nancy Dollard in the Akron Beacon Journal.  It combines banning guns and abortion rights.  Put aside, for a moment, whether you thing guns should be legal or not and just take in the letter.

"I was horrified," she writes," to see a mass shooting at Planned Parenthood, a wonderful organization that helps women and men and is progressive about abortion rights."

Unless one is already opposed to abortions, this sentence seems logical.  Good people are shot by bad people.  However, if you see abortion as the taking of an innocent life, then this is a story of people taking the lives of people who take lives.  Only one of them profits by it though.

"Women have the right to have an abortion at any stage and to be free from gun violence."

This is true in our country.  Women have a right to take the life of the human being in their womb but they are themselves protected from any violence.

"Unfortunately, mass shootings are too common now because of the radical-right, National Rifle Association gun mentality which won't give up any rights."

So, you want someone to freely give up their rights, rights being something two sentences ago you held so dear, because somebody tangentially associated with them (albeit in a violent, and by the way, illegal way) wants someone else to give up their rights.  

"I'm sick of guns and mass shootings, and it's time to tell the NRA and hunting groups that we need every gun and round of ammunition in a registered federal database so we can prevent the next mass shooting."

I might use the same argument against abortion.  I am sick of so many human beings being slaughtered in their mother's womb.  I am tired of hearing that human body parts are being sold by Planned Parenthood for profit.  It horrifies me that humans are now being found dumped in local trash yards, not only morally disgusting but illegal.  It sickens me that men can treat women like objects because there is no longer a consequence to their actions.

(I'm skipping a little here) ". . . and get a required yearly mental health exam for anyone who works with a gun or owns multiple guns and rounds."

The writer wants everyone who works with a gun to undergo yearly mental health exams.  I wonder if she would be equally open to women being fully informed about her abortion before it takes place along with a similar waiting period before the abortion as there is with the purchase of a gun?

"It is time to put the safety of normal people first."  That is, people who take human lives but not the many people who own guns and do not.  " They (normal people) abhor guns and gun violence."

Yes, they do.  They certainly do.

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.

NEVER STOP THINKING IT THROUGH

A little bit of marketing goes a long way. Putting the right spin on a topic may sway public opinion in any direction on any particular topic. Just for example, in many circles the Church is labeled as being more restrictive in rights of human beings such as in the case of abortion. Some ways in which this is done is by portraying the teachings of the Church in this matter as being the whim of white haired old men in Rome forcing their morality on women and the rights that they should have over their own bodies; rights that those cranky old men retain while taking them away from women. “Keep your rosaries off my ovaries” is a common slogan.

It is proposed that pro-abortionists are more compassionate because they care about women and extending such rights to them; rights which “the Church” wishes to curtail. The two sides can then be separated into “pro-women” and “anti-rights” camps. If nobody bothers to think beyond these first salvos of the argument it seems to be pretty clear who cares more about women, rights, and freedom.

But is this the case? The Church puts forth that far from being more limited in extending rights that individuals should have over their bodies than the pro-abortionists, the Church casts a far greater net, includes more people, grants more freedoms and protects more rights. Human dignity, the right to life, the right to integrity of one’s body is preserved not just for those who can speak for themselves, not just for those with power, money, or influence, not just for those who can be seen, not just for those who have developed enough skills, not just those protected by law, not just those who are seen as productive to society, but all human beings, men and women alike, old and young, capable and challenged. No, the Church, the teaching of Christ are not more restrictive than Pro-Choicers, it is far more generous. And of course it will not seem so to those who wish not to recognize human life as human life and who feel restricted in their choice to end a human life that is not desired by them for one reason or another, but it cannot be argued (at least I think) that their net of human life to which they extend protection and integrity of life is far smaller than the Church – interestingly enough this is so even with those who are aborted who are female.

WHY WE ARE SOMETIMES BUFFALO-ED

An interesting tidbit was in the paper yesterday. An anthropologist named Colin Turnbull took his African guide for a plane ride. Looking out the window he wanted to know what the insects he saw on the ground were. When told that they were buffalo he erupted in laughter. He didn’t know about visual perspective and thus that objects seem to shrink in the distance. Coming closer to the objects he became frightened as the appeared to grow.

Myers had a very perceptive comment to make about this. He said, “We perceive the world not just as it is, but as we are.” How we interpret our world has a lot to do with how understand it.

This gives us a hint as to the weak link in the pro-life movement. It sounds so obvious doesn’t it? Who wants to be anti-life? Who wants to destroy their children? Who would want to make it not only possible but a legally protected right that people can take the life of the children with more legal clemency than taking the life of the pet dog?

Nobody.

I mean nobody.

Not one sane person.

And that includes most of the most dedicated self proclaimed pro-choice people.

Like the Pygmy in the plane that refused to believe that the insects he saw were actually buffalo, “pro-choice” persons do not see realities that pro-life people see. They do not see a baby, they see a clump of cells that could become a baby. They do not see the damage to the dignity and bodily integrity of women but that they are free of undesirable results. They see independence from men and not that men have been relinquished of responsibility. They see the event only affecting them; not the father, other children, grandparents, etc. They do not see freedom, they see the freeing of unnecessary societal restraints. They do not see that having the option out promotes the need for even more abortions, but see it as a safeguard against oppression. They do not see the richness of life but the escape from poverty.

So, suppose for a moment that you are pro-choice and you see the world as they do. You believe that you are fighting for the good. Being called a murderer, a hater of women, a sinner, being vilified is not something that is going to turn your heart. If anything it is evidence of exactly the thing you are trying to escape and will entrench you more deeply in your position. (Once again, is the alternative really becoming someone who calls persons like me a baby hater?)

The task then at the same time becomes easier and more monumental. It is easier because now we know more about what it is we are dealing with and can address that. It becomes more monumental because this job will be much more difficult.

One woman who used to work for NOW said one of the best things we can do is educate, educate, educate about life – scientific facts. And of course pray. Pray like gangbusters. Be compassionate and welcoming. How this exactly plays out each of us must discover. But if we want true and lasting change this is the only way. Having abortion only outlawed without conversion of hearts means much less and will always be in danger of being overturned. This is a war of hearts.

WHY THAT THERE IS A SAINT JOSEPH DAY MEANS SOMETHING

Sebastian and I went for a long walk along the railroad tracks yesterday and it is with much joy that I announce that the crocuses are out and blooming in northeast Ohio. This is one of those particular moments it is a delight to believe in a beneficent, Creator God.

There are those, among whom I count some of my friends, who see the crocus and know what a wonder it is that it exists by result of pure chance. All of existence came into being through the passage of enough time (and some inexplicable inertia) so that enough particles came together to form a crocus. Which of course means (please pardon the use of the word) that the crocus means nothing. That I appreciate it means nothing. That I enjoy it, in the end, means nothing. There is no logic to its existence. If one says there is logic, logic presupposes a thinker and even if that logic is the universe itself that means it itself is a god of sorts and had a force capable of making sense and form and existence. That we shall look at in a moment. This inert stuff that became a “stuff” that later animate stuff came to think of as a crocus. But even self awareness and thinking would be largely an illusion. Tomorrow all of the vast stuff that makes up what we call the universe could come together and all of it make a star, or a stone, or ’46 Plymouth Special Deluxe and would have the exact same meaning which really is nothing.

There are those, again among whom I count some friends, who look upon the crocus and see intelligence; an intelligence worth worshipping. Creation itself is a god worthy to call upon and appreciate and adore. Indeed I may become a crocus some day. There is a great force that guides what is into life and beauty. Someday my life force will be absorbed into the greater force but really so what? As a crocus I will hardly remember running through the field. I might as well never have existed before or again if memory plays no role. But even if memory played a role I just assume not be part of this cycle. Going through puberty once was enough. I would even less want to come back as one of Sebastian’s pups going through puberty and have nothing to look forward to than this same cycle for all of eternity. So that leads being absorbed into this great force like a raindrop falling into the ocean and losing its identity. Not a cheery thought.

So what can be the meaning of life? Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow you die! Gads, what an awful existence. Pointlessness rarely if ever brings about joy. After a while the realization that “This is it and it will only go downhill from here” as one nears death is not something to grasp the imagination of a man and propel him to great acts of love, charity, sacrifice – will not induce hope – cannot bring you meaning and therefore ultimate joy. The crocus is a great cosmic joke whose punch line is not funny to the one on whom it is being played.

Then there is the position that today is more and more thought foolish and out of fashion; to look upon a crocus and see God and not God. To see something that participates in God yet is not God itself nor worthy or worship. To see in its petals signposts to God, fingerprints of God, the meaning of God that gives us hope for it points beyond itself. The Christian message is that God is a Person and this life is simply a pilgrimage to Him – we are not to be obliterated or absorbed but to be fulfilled in Him. We have hope, we have some place to go, we have meaning, and this can lead us to self sacrifice, to love, to join in the creating spirit. This is a joy because we will imitate what we see in the crocus.

If one sees the crocus as a fluke he will not put too much stock into existence besides that which serves to make his miserable existence better. The crocus may just as well be stomped on as let alone for it means the same thing. Therefore if it suits me kill life – in the womb, in the jail, when it is too old, when it is too sick, when it occupies my land. Why not? Nature herself will warm and feed us as well as wipe us out without a moment’s notice by giant wave, raging fire, landslide, volcano, tornado, wild beast, pandemic, heat, cold, gas, virus, or banana peel. Why should not man, product of this indifferent universe as a whole end up any different?

Or if it be a god we can do not much more than hold hands and watch our leaves wither, turn brown, and decay, and hope that we are not the last for this spring and have to watch the rest go. I’m god, and you are god. Then again, so are the stars and my slippers. As when marriage amongst any combination of people held together by vows starts to mean nothing, when everything is god, nothing is god. And in the end it is the same as if everything was a fluke and the god we imitate resembles deeply the copying of kind and cruel nature to end in obliteration.

But for the Catholic we are called to live above this. Contrary to popular conception we do not take life all that seriously. It is greatly respected and protected, but it and even death is a passing fancy and nothing compared to the life to come. We are called neither to worship the crocus nor ignore it but simply to enjoy it for what it is – a taste of eternal good things to come.

Even if this were not true (and it is) I would rather be a fool and happy, the right, doomed, and incapable of sustaining this deep and abiding joy when death walks down my front walk.

WELL, WELL, WELL, - DEEP SUBJECT

There is an old saying, which I will rephrase aware that they are young readers under the age of 50, that states, “You don’t relieve yourself in your own well.” I would imagine that there are few people who are willing to dispute this. I would take it a step further. I would argue that it should also be a truism that one should not allow others to relieve themselves in your well either for the exact same reason.

This deep and aquatic reference is only tenable if everybody agrees that we are using the same well. It does not make any difference of you are only using “your side” of the well. Once your relief hits the watery reserve hidden beneath our feet, your relief becomes my anxiety. You may claim your right to use your side of the well as you see fit (it is, after all, on your side of the property line) but it effects me as it will you even though you prefer to deny that has any real and lasting impact on either of us.

Such is the trouble with the assertion of a recent Letter to the Editor in the Akron Beacon Journal. To quote the author asserts, “I am so sick and tired of hearing these people who don’t have a life of trying to tell women what they should or shouldn’t do concerning an abortion. This is a personal decision and is nobody’s business.”

This is a phrase often thrown out as a truism that is expected to be taken as obvious as the ones mentioned above. But I would caution the person on the other end of the argument from letting it pass. Here is truism that is not really all that clear. Is it true that this effects the woman and nobody else? Is it true that her decision to abort really has no effect on my side of the well? Can she keep her relief on her side of the water?

I think it would be much easier to prove that the decision to abort has a poisonous effect on society as a whole as a person’s personal decision to smoke has an effect on others in the room. It may not be as easy to quantify but it is still there.

I do wish the contraceptives and abortion worked for the betterment of society. I do! It would make my life a whole lot easier. I could say that, well, true the Church teaches this way but you know, it works, it does not effect me or society as a whole, and so knock your socks off. But I can’t. Hidden away behind all of the hype are the statistical conveniently ignored or maliciously obfuscated.

So how does that effect society as a whole? Look at our art, our movies, televisions, computers, billboards. See what is taught and reinforced in our schools. Aid from governments being held hostage to their direct intervention in family life. More and more woman treated as objects to be used and then set aside. Far from curing the problem of single parent households or youth parenting we have an explosion of it. This effects every fiber of our society. We are not islands. Our actions are not as private as we would like to believe. Just because the well is unseen or you wish not to believe it does not mean that what you pour into it is not having negative consequences for the people around you. It merely means you no longer have to deal with it. We all will have to. And not in the most pleasant of ways.

ON YOUR MARKS!

Do you believe in the five second rule? An M&M saved from the floor and ingested by one party leaves the other party disgusted. The offending party cries out, “There’s a five second rule!” but the offended party steadfastly declares that there is no such thing. It is difficult for the discussion to move forward because each refuses to give way to the other’s basic set of presumptions.

Dr. Andrew Trew, a bioethicist that we are fortunate to have living in the Diocese of Cleveland points out that the reason life issues are so difficult to discuss is that we are starting with two completely different sets of assumptions. The beginning point is not the baby or the man on death row or what (or rather who) have you, but with an understanding of what life is. Here are two common points of view.

The first is the Christian, particularly Catholic point of view. Life comes from God and is therefore a gift entrusted to us. We are not only matter but also spirit made in the image and likeness of the God who fashioned us and we are to grow to become more like him. Because there is a God who created us purposefully and that there is a purpose to life, and goal to be achieved, there is therefore a universal order of absolutes and truth which can be reached through faith and reason. Thus all life is to be treated with dignity and respect and so the taking of life can only be done in the most dire and strictest set of circumstances.

The secular view, which runs counter to the Christian/Catholic point of outlook, begins from these presumptions: Life evolved by random consequence and therefore exists for itself so that the person who “has” life therefore owns it. We are material (animal) and, if we so choose, we are to develop the image we have of ourselves. Because life began by random chance there is no more meaning to life than what we declare it to have and therefore truth is subjective and open to opinion except that which can be proven through science and reason. Because of this life acquires the value which we assign to it and can be done away with morally through human legislation for scientific, safety, convenient, therapeutic, environmental, or other reason deemed beneficial by those in a position (have the power) to make such decisions.

This is part of the reason we have difficulty carrying on the debate. We are running two different races, running in two different directions with two different starting points, each yelling at the other as we pass, “Hey! You’re running the wrong way!” No we’re not. We are, each of us, running the right way to two different finish lines. In essence there are two different religions at work and both carry some mighty presumptions. Because of these presuppositions the beginning standpoint for the Catholic is the obligation of service and care for the other while the secular starting place is “my rights.” “Can’t we all just get along” is not a great option. It is like putting two teenagers in a room and telling one they have the right to paint the room green and listen to acid rock and the other can paint the room white and blast their Mozart – the positions are antithetical.

Thus the argument will not be won through simple rhetoric for we are speaking different languages. It will be won through the winning of hearts to the noble and well lived out cause.

THE END

Just in time for Right to Life Month the state of Ohio has executed a man who is accused of some pretty heinous crimes. The whole drama took on the scent of a made for T.V. movie as the pathetic man accused the state prison system of making him obese and, he hoped, making it cruel and inhumane punishment to execute him because the procedure might not work well and painlessly on so much flesh.

Well, be that as it may, it occurred without a hitch, at least not an earthly hitch, and the man is experiencing his eternal consequences whatever they may be. There are two comments in Tuesday’s paper about this death that are deserving of comment. The first concerns his parting words in an article entitled, “Cursing onlookers, Cooey executed.” When the warden asked him if he had anything to say he replied, “ You **** haven’t paid any attention to what I’ve had to say in the past 22 and half years, why are you going to pay attention to what I have to say now?”

Of course, maybe they tried. Who knows? But that lingering comment reminds me of one of the primary reason we are, in general, opposed to the death penalty. As horrible as this man may be, forever now he has lost the chance to redeem his soul. And worse than that is that somebody is responsible for his loss of opportunity. The scriptures said today about others who prevent God’s children from the chance of entering heaven, “This generation will be charged with their blood! Woe to you . . . you have taken away the key of knowledge. You yourselves did not enter and you stopped those trying to enter.” Heavy stuff.

Just as disturbing is the way that it was reported. Painting the man in the most vile terms possible (and arguably justifiably so) it then went to describe the almost pleasant way that he died. “Died peacefully . . . needles inserted gently . . . inserted without difficulty . . . he exhaled with a faint noise . . . and he was dead.” All very clean. All done. We’ve cleaned up the spot on the floor. I find it creepy that there was very little solemnity or notice that a man’s life was taken – even if you believe it was justifiable. Very every life taken lightly the next life is less valuable. I want Cooey’s death to be respected because I want your and my life to be held in high esteem.

Please do not assume because I may be cautious on capitol punishment that I am soft on crime. If someone stole from the parish I would be the first to call the police and persecute (I mean prosecute) to the fullest extent of the law. But (and this may actually sound cruel too I realize) I have always been disappointed in movies where the “bad guys” died in the end. If they die, that’s it. No more punishment. No more consequences (at least in this world). One of the best movies to counter this was “The Shawshank Redemption” where one of the villains who was tormenting our protagonist was so badly injured that he would be in a wheel chair eating his lunch through a straw for the rest of his miserable life. That is punishment. But it would also give him a chance to have a change of heart and soul.

Thanks for reading. This was bothering me and I needed to share. I’m sure not all of you will agree but that is why there is a comment section and a little button above that says, “Start your own blog.” ;)

IN OTHER NEWS:

Here are the answers to yesterday’s quiz. (Good job Katherine!)

MEN:
CPPS Society of the Precious Blood
CSC Congregation of the Holy Cross
CSJ Congregation of Saint Joseph
CSSP Holy Ghost Fathers
MM Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers
O de M Mercedarians
OFM Order of Friars Minor (Fransicans)
OSB Order of Saint Benedict (Benedictans)
SJ Society of Jesus (Jesuits)
SM Society of Mary (Marianists)
SSS Congregation of the Blessed Sacrament

WOMEN
FDC Daughters of Divine Charity
HM Sisters of the Humilty of Mary
HMSS Mercidarian Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament
IHM Sisters, Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
OCD Discalced Carmelite Nuns
OP Sisters of Saint Dominic (Order of Preachers)
OSST Sisters of the Most Holy Trinity
OSU Ursuline Sisters
PCC Poor Clare Nuns
PCPA Poor Cares of Perpetual Adoration
PSDP Little Sisters of the Poor
SC Sisters of Charity
SJSM Sisters of Saint Joseph of Saint Mark
SND Sisters of Notre Dame

NO PASSING IN THE PASSIVE LANE

This makes me so sad.

A friend of mine has had his life course set over the weekend. Actually I could write this about any number of people I know. They are talented, spookily intelligent, well spoken, healthy, good looking, have engaging personalities, have many opportunities available to them, but they did not engage life and take advantage of their outrageous assets. Afraid to commit to anything, they pee (I so wanted to use a harsher word) away their treasure like a gambler who thinks there will always be more money to replace that which he has lost.

Perhaps you try to say something. If you say too much you are a nag. If you say anything less you are not heard. This must be part of the frustration of being a parent; seeing one that you love making horrible decisions and not being able to do a darn thing about it.

This friend fell prey to the unfaithful promises of the condom. Continually leaving all of his life’s options open, life chose for him. And it is a sad and difficult situation. But it is his now for better or for worse. Thank God that when push comes to shove he is a stand up guy.

Another friend was engaging in a different sort of risky behavior and almost lost health, job, wife, and kids. He was lucky and escaped his train wreck with only relatively minor scrapes and bruises. This time.

I don’t believe there is a Catholic vocation crisis. There is a crisis of nerve. A crisis in commitment. If it were only about Catholic vocations, other denominations would not be feeling the pinch either. Marriages would not fail at a 50% rate. Young people would not be choosing to just skip exchanging vows altogether.

We were not put here to watch T.V. reruns and wait till life comes and slaps us in the face. We were given gifts and talents to take life by the reigns and do something with it. You might get bucked, but if you get bucked at least it will be while trying to do something great, not sitting on the couch eating chips or engaging is some activity that causes people to wonder about your lack of common sense.

To have an idea about that which you believe, to have something to strive for, to have direction, to give your capacities use, to give your potential meaning, this is why you are here. You have a soul, a mind, and a body. You have been freed from sin and death, endowed with gifts of the Holy Spirit. Don’t let them rot away.

And if you have already found yourself in the middle of train-wreck, make it the most spectacular train-wreck ever. Do not be content to lay on the tracks thinking, “Oh well,” but climb to the top of the destruction and drag along as many survivors as you can. Make people look at you in awe and dare them not to know that you accomplished this with the gifts that God gave you.

“Who dares nothing need hope for nothing.” Schiller Don Carlos

“He who dares magnificently can expect magnificent rewards.”

JUST ANOTHER BOMB THREAT

Finals week at my alma mater approximately fifteen year ago and another building is closed. Why? “Oh, someone called in a bomb threat,” my friend says with a rather “ho-hum” attitude. “Probably wasn’t ready for his final,” and we rolled our eyes.

In a less desirable part of town a student is robbed and shot. Just another crime. The University responded by putting emergency phones up.

What is different about today? We take bomb threats much more seriously. A gun on campus and a disgruntled student can mean more than a robbery, it can mean thirty dead. Why?

Perhaps it has to do with the cheapening of human life. If you can make one life less valuable, all life becomes less valuable. We kill “those evil people in that country,” we kill some of our criminals, will assist suicide, we abort millions of people sometimes for just not being the right kind of person or as healthy as we would like, through pornography we can learn to treat persons as objects to do with as we will, advertising not only skews what is valuable about us as human beings but humans are also used as objects to sell, and thanks to the myth of safe sex and faulty contraception that often does not prevent births nor prevents illness and/or death, we at least have the illusion that we can use a person sexually and walk away without any consequences or responsibilities AND WE ARE TAUGHT THAT THESE ARE THINGS NOT TO FEEL GUILTY ABOUT. Then why are we surprised when someone solves their problems with guns and death? There is no longer the strong community taboo against even thinking of such methods. If you take all of this into account, Cho’s statements make horribly logical sense. He simply took our secular societal view to its logical end, an end which sees human life as something to be used and death as an answer to problems. Why is anyone shocked?

Perhaps it is a good sign however that on the front page of the PD right next to “A KILLER SPEAKS” is a much smaller headline, “Ban on abortion method upheld,” as many see this form of abortion as far too close to infanticide. Interesting also that it did not say (as it usually does) “Abortion foes win victory” or “Blow for women’s rights.” Is there a possibility that we have seen we have come to far?

A LETTER TO A FRIEND - PART I

The Triduum is upon us and as such I am not able to craft an entry for you each day. This is probably the exact time that inspirational messages should be put forth preparing us for the great celebration of Easter, but parish comes first and I must focus energies there.

In lieu of a full daily blog entry a letter will be shared with you over the next three days. (It is a long letter.) It was written in response to a post that I received from a person whom I dearly love. Our view of the world differs dramatically and that invariably leads to in depth conversations.

I was struck that this site has been a part of her reading. She challenged me on my pro-life stance, which shows up from time to time on Adam's Ale, and it caused me to sit back and discern the calling to be pro-life. The following is my response to her thought-provoking questions. (Most of the links were included in the "letter.")

First a preface: Over at "For God, Country, and Yale" there is a great little synopsis of a talk given by Professor Richard Stith that sets the back ground well for this letter and makes clear the difficulties.

And now, excerpts from the letter:

I agree with you, abortion is an ugly solution to an ugly problem. It is also a symptom, not the root of the problem. Solutions to the real problem will depend on one’s stance as to when a person has basic inherit dignity. (Links courtesy of Being Frank) Do we always have this dignity or must we earn it? Do we have it sometimes and not at others depending on circumstances? What criteria can we use so as make it Okay to kill a human being in the womb? Can we say it is because they are soulless (as so many have been declared throughout history in order to justify our abuse of them)? Is it because the embryo is not a known person yet? Could it be because he or she does not look like a person yet? Because they’ve not been heard as a person yet? Because they have not yet exercised enough of what an average older human person has done in order to be declared worthy of life? Are we willing to say that a human person does not deserve dignity; that they only deserve dignity because of what they are able to do including surviving outside of the womb? (In other words, is nobody due dignity and rights simply for being human? Must they be able to do something for it?) This has universal implications.

And how do we draw the line for when it is Okay to do away with a baby and when it is not? The first trimester? What absolute criteria would keep us from not going into the second or third (other than to say, “We wouldn’t”)? If we can make a clear case abortion in the first trimester, it is not too difficult to make a case for it at any period while in the Mother’s womb. From there it is not hard to make a case able to do the same thing in the early stages of infancy as indeed some are already advocating. Is there really a great deal of difference between a recently born baby boy and his twin sister still in the womb? What if one were to become deformed or mentally reduced after birth to an extent at which we would have said it would be permissable to abort them before birth? Are they now less than? Why not? If we say so about a human life in the womb, what is to prevent us eventually applying the exact same criteria for those outside of the womb?

Once it becomes legal in any case to do away with a person, it places the basic right to life of the next person in line on shakier ground thereby establishing a slippery slope that is difficult to contain since basic human dignity is compromised.

The next in line might be the disabled (who were protesting in fear at the capitol during the Right to Life rallies. According to many who are for abortion, they were not worthy to have been born in the first place. Ask those at the rally how they feel about that.) What about the elderly? What about my Dad? Is he less of a human being and less deserving the respect we give human beings because of his Alzheimer’s? Why not?

What of assisted suicide? The fact is that most people who are talked out of suicide end up with satisfying lives. Yet just when people are at their lowest ebb and in need of human support to be with them through their darkest moments, some want the right to confirm them in their unworthiness and assist them in destroying themselves. Life becomes a commodity that can be wasted at will. This too has implications outside of the focused area of assisted suicide.

What about criminals? Or “the enemy?” Every time we place anyone on the “Okay to Kill” list, our own case for dignity is weakened, our own safety in this world is compromised, which may not seem so terrifying until it does begin to effect your neighbor or oneself.