Stuff

I am sorry that I have not kept up with my blog, but it has been busy and pushing my blog aside has been one of the better things I have done with my time. Since I have been gone, my oldest son started Kindergarten. He cried the entire first day of school. It was a rough couple of weeks. He is doing well now, seems to be enjoying school, but it still makes him a little nervous. Since I have been gone, I also began (with great trepidation) as a catechist for eighth graders at my parish. I teach Church history and mostly blather on and on - it is sort of like beating them with a stick until they're senseless. But if by the time the year is finished they know nothing but God is love, I will be happy. If I know it by the time the year is finished, I will be ecstatic.

Jack, that great lover of the automobile - specifically the truck - discovered the Disney-Pixar film Cars and I am ready to blow my brains out - it is on all the time.

Speaking of the boy, Jack used to answer "No" for every question asked of him - regardless of whether me meant yes or no - I am proud to report that he has finally begun saying, "Yes," which for him comes out quite handsomely as "Yessir." Very respectful and very southern, and it makes me chuckle every time he says it to my wife - everyone gets "yessir," irrespective of sex or age. We also recently discovered that he likes country music. I am considering changing his name to Hank.

Cate is growing too quickly; she has four teeth now. She enjoys time rooting around on the floor - and there are always great treasures to be found on our floors. Our family is in love again.

I have begun the discipline of writing; I sit down at my old green Hermes 3000 and type every morning. Not as much as I would like on most days, since I have other responsibilities. But I have about 100 pages now and am moving forward quite nicely. It is very rewarding seeing and feeling the pile of typed pages grow. It's a nice stack now and is roughly a third of the way into my first draft (my excremental draft, as Anne Lamott would say). If I do die before I finish, please burn it without reading it. "The earth was formless and void" - all that.

I hope all of you are well and I am looking forward to the time when we can simply sit down together for a while. Virtual is fine in the absence of actual, but it sure falls short.

Diocese of Charleston on Fr Newman's Comments

THE DIOCESE OF CHARLESTON
Statement of Monsignor Martin T. Laughlin
Administrator of the Diocese of Charleston

CHARLESTON, S.C. (November 14, 2008) - This past week, the Catholic Church’s clear, moral teaching on the evil of abortion has been pulled into the partisan political arena. The recent comments of Father Jay Scott Newman, pastor of St. Mary’s Catholic Church in Greenville, S.C., have diverted the focus from the Church’s clear position against abortion. As Administrator of the Diocese of Charleston, let me state with clarity that Father Newman’s statements do not adequately reflect the Catholic Church’s teachings. Any comments or statements to the contrary are repudiated.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, “Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions.” The Catechism goes on to state: “In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path; we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.”

Christ gives us freedom to explore our own conscience and to make our own decisions while adhering to the law of God and the teachings of the faith. Therefore, if a person has formed his or her conscience well, he or she should not be denied Communion, nor be told to go to confession before receiving Communion.

The pulpit is reserved for the Word of God. Sometimes God’s truth, as is the Church’s teaching on abortion, is unpopular. All Catholics must be aware of and follow the teachings of the Church.

We should all come together to support the President-elect and all elected officials with a view to influencing policy in favor of the protection of the unborn child. Let us pray for them and ask God to guide them as they take the mantle of leadership on January 20, 2009.

I ask also for your continued prayers for me and for the Diocese of Charleston.

Thanks be to God.

No Communion for Obama Supporters

This statement by Fr Newman angers me on a number of levels. Perhaps as Catholics we need to hang up our citizenship altogether, because there is not a guiltless place to lay one's head on the political landscape. If one must do penance after voting for Obama, then one must do penance after voting for McCain. Perhaps one ought to do penance for voting for George W. Bush who bloodied our hands in an unjust war and taught us how to justify torture. Perhaps one ought to do penance for voting for Bush Sr., since after Clinton took office the number of abortions dropped by nearly half a million from where it had previously stood. I swear, how we love to bully and sway until those around us cower, delighted.

I thank God for those bishops willing to lovingly rebuke Catholic politicians who are ignorant of the Church's teaching on abortion. Where are the bishops in the Church who are willing to stand up against this kind of behavior, which plays at holiness but forgets charity? It's just more Turkish Delight.

A Time to Gather

It is time to vote. Remember that how you vote has less bearing on the course of events than you believe it does. And that your prayers have more. Remember that whomever is elected, we will be all right. Remember that our hope is in Christ. Remember that we are brothers and sisters. You and I have been given our freedom, dignity and responsibility by God. We are answerable for how we use these gifts. So we become informed citizens with Christ-formed consciences, we pray, and we do the best we can. Nothing more or less. Make sure you love your neighbor as you vote and as the returns roll in. Bless, do not curse. Remember that God is love. As much as it is up to you, live in peace with all people. Pray for our peace. Pray for the Church. Pray for our leaders, spiritual and political. Sit in silence and pray. Do not judge. Love one another. Be not afraid.

Fear and Politics (and Funny)

"A Complicated Life"

I like my Sharing Widget in the sidebar, my ability to share posts and articles that I find, in some way, meaningful with people who are kind enough to visit my own site. So I want to point your attention to an article I read this morning written by Fr Tobias, an Orthodox priest, at "Second Terrace." He says things well. And this post, while very political is also apolitical, i.e. nonpartisan. It's about being Christian and being a Christian in America. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it.

November 5

It's sad to me that red and blue run deeper in us in this country than our catholicity - our communion in Christ. I can't wait till November 5, not so that we can turn a corner in our country (whatever corner that might be politically), but so that the Body of Christ can once more appear to be the Body of Christ. Where my being a brother at least seems to be more important than whether I am red or blue, or different from you. When I no longer have to worry about being shoved aside or turned away from because I disagree with you about what it's about. What business does judgment have to be so cherished within the Body of Christ? It's a cancer. It kills, devours and destroys.

Life is beautiful. It rises up out of the One who is Life. People are to be loved. That one is not my enemy. Nor this one. Elections are important, this one perhaps especially so, but is it important enough to divide the Body? Where is our kinship? Where is our communion? Where are those ties that are stronger than patriotism and thicker than blood?

There should be no issue that separates me from you. We are Christ's. We do our best to be obedient, to be humble, to patiently endure. We work. We pray. We do not kick and spit at and beat one another. We don't even treat our animals that way.

We cannot judge and love at the same time, wrote Fr. Neuhaus recently in First Things. And though we sometimes disagree, that statement is unequivocally true. It is central to Whose we are. And it is a choice set before us today. We cannot love God and hate our brother. Perhaps we can get that right before November 4 so that unity doesn't seem such a farce on November 5.

A Little Saturday Morning Gas

The very day after the morning I tell my mother how disturbing it is to me that the McCain campaign has done nothing to stop the building anger and fear toward Obama in their rallies, McCain steps up and affirms Obama as a good family man (who just happens to pal around with terrorists). The GOP campaign, specifically Gov Palin and campaign ads, fed this fire. I hope they can put it out. I hope they do their best to try to. That being said, "Thank you, Sen McCain. It's good to see you again."

---

The next time I get flak for the size of my family, I'm saying, "Listen, Pal. That 10 trillion dollars ain't gonna take care of itself."

Speaking of which, I was at Wal-Mart the other day with the two boys. The cavernous temple evoked a happy volley of shrieks, as per usual - not terribly piercing, just happy. A lady down the aisle glowered at us. Then she took several opportunities to look at us blackly as we wheeled by. After checking out, we passed her again with her adult daughter. As we passed she began telling her about the audacity of my children's vocalizations. "I swanny. Wal-Mart ain't no library, lady."

Second Debate

I slept through it, to be honest. No engagement, on my part, other than my buttocks with my recliner and my eyes with their lids.

Let me just comment on what I imagine happened: The debate had no gaffes, no defining moments, just a lot of McCain being angry and Obama imperturable. Oh, and a whole lot of the same, oft-heard phrases.

God Love 'Em

Palin did well last night. I thought Biden did better, but at least Palin was coherent. Speaking of incoherence, after reading the text of Katie Couric's interview with Gov Palin, I've concluded that the McCain campaign is justified in accusing Couric of "Gotcha" journalism. There are clever little traps here that Katie sets - yes, that's journalism for you; yes, Palin ought to be able to navigate tough journalists. But the journalist's purpose is to inform the public about what the candidate believes, where she stands, rather than try to make her look like an idiot (at which they were quite successful, with no little help from Gov Palin). Also, journalists should hold her accountable for her own history and her own words rather than expecting her to know the minutiae of McCain's 132-year-long voting and speaking records. That would strain the brainpans of all but the most erudite of us.

One other thing, lay off on the pro-life issue, media. And since you won't: Palin, stand up. "Darnit, youbetcha I'm pro-life and here's why." It is our argument that is supported by science, reason and faith. Yes, the right to kill our babies in the womb is the law of the land. But guess what, Washington Herd, it's an immoral law. Life is not about women's rights. If it were, the government wouldn't be able to draw the line anywhere in a woman's womb, as it most certainly does. Indeed, if it were simply a matter of women's rights, the government wouldn't even be able to draw the line outside the womb.

Oh, and, just curious, did anyone besides my wife and I, hear Palin, after she corrected him, call the senator, Obiden? We laughed for half an hour about it, doing our best at Tina Fey.

First Debate

Yawn.

Nothing new last night. Nothing earth-shaking or jaw-dropping. Wouldn't it be great if we just let the two candidates debate with one another - you know, argue? Civilly, of course. Let them sit down and hash it out, drinking whisky, smoke hanging in the air above them and half-filled ashtrays before them, as they discuss rogue nations and nuclear proliferation. Something more dramatic, more film noir. That would be a debate worth watching.

Maybe the veeps will take it there.

If they don't, perhaps I will.

The Disqualification of a Candidate

I'd like to hear people's thoughts on this short article.

Palin 2: Equal Time

To say that I don't get Sarah Palin does not mean that I don't like her - just that I don't get all tingly when I think about her. I'm cautious about her because she's a wild card - I don't feel like I know who she is or how competent she is. She may do swimmingly. She may even be wicked good. I'm waiting.

In the meantime, it unnerves me, as it unnerves many of you, that some in the press and some Democrats disparage her so. And all of it stems out of, or seems to from my listening to their coverage, the fact that she is staunchly pro-life. They despise that this woman (that any woman) could be against women's rights, against advancing women's health. They continue to ignore or reject or spin the fact that we who are for life are not against women's rights or against advancing women's health, but that we do not believe that any person - male or female - has the right to end human life, especially not the innocent among us. They refuse to acknowledge that we believe, from both theology and science, that life begins at conception. This is a life issue; it's a human rights issue for us rather than a civil rights issue. That it even needs to be said 30+ years into the disagreement is a sad commentary. The constant spinning from the Left, since Palin's selection, aggravates even me.

At least be gracious enough to understand that we approach the issue from two distinct places rather than label all who disagree with you as sexist or ignorant or just dumb. There is no danger of Roe v. Wade being overturned in the admission that we are in disagreement about when life begins, when human rights are given by God. The "new culture war" that the Left so lately chatters on about is not the doing of the Right, but rather the result of the silencing efforts of the Left. Yes, we still disagree. We haven't gone anywhere or become "enlightened." But, at the same time, our disagreement doesn't need to be a cause for apoplexy; it ought to drive us forward into conversation. Until we acknowledge what each of us believes, we will be doomed to "culture war." We need some domestic diplomacy.

That also means that those of us who are pro-life need to calm down. We must stop the name-calling and the diatribes and the condemnation. Those on the Left are people. Image-of-God people. People God loves and on whom he pours out his mercy - no more or less than you. It is not us-them (it never is with people), it is only us. And it is incumbent upon me to love them and to honor them. That is my obligation as a Catholic.

Nevertheless, I need to go clean up the kitchen. That, too, is my obligation.

Palin

I don't get Sarah Palin. Maybe she's like Facebook for me: I enjoy having the page, but I don't find it particularly engaging or addictive. I like the connection, certainly, I just don't get the buzz. (As I've said here before, I'm a little slow.) So the only thing Palin has going for her, that I can determine, is that she's your average Jane Evangelical. But I don't understand, as Peggy Noonan recently wrote, that she "killed" at the convention. I suppose it depends on your meaning and, perhaps more, your perspective. The only thing I heard at the convention from Palin was trash talk - and not even uncommonly good trash talk, but just your ordinary trash talk that you read daily on conservative blogs. Rush trash. She came out swinging, certainly.

I like that she's pro-life. I love that she kept a baby with Down Syndrome and has a fairly large family. I like that she's able to come out after a week of media battery and deliver. I like that she's a woman and a mother and a wife.

Is there something more here, something I'm missing? Or is it simply that unenthusiastic McCain supporters ("Well, he's more pro-life than that baby-killer Obama") finally got someone ardently pro-life and unarguably alive?

Forgive my sarcasm.

I tease you because I love you.

Piper Hit a Home Run

I laughed out loud when I saw little Piper Palin with her brother. My girls do the same thing to our babies when we're not looking. It's insanely sweet.

The Nominees at Saddleback

"If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being."

- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

First things first: While I did not write about his passing, Solzhenitsyn has whispered quietly, in the background of my mind, for many years now. I respect his voice, as one respects the prophetic voice that one finds in the exile, and I also greatly respect his artistry. May he rest in peace and may his memory be eternal.

Now for the potstirring.

Obama and McCain both answered questions from Pastor Rick Warren yesterday at Pastor Warren's church, Saddleback, in California. I found the informal forum last night interesting. It surprised me how well McCain fared with Evangelicals and conservatives - his storytelling worked. Amidst the ensuing hubbub, however, are a couple of points and or questions I'd like to throw out there into the inane ether of the blogosphere.

I liked hearing, and the audience certainly liked hearing, McCain say that he was pro-life and that his presidency would be pro-life. I liked hearing him say that life begins at conception. But what bugs me about McCain, and what I find disingenuous - at best - is that he also supports embryonic stem cell research. I would like to hear him explain himself on that point.

That doesn't mean Senator Obama comes out bright and shiny like a new penny. Some people, including some professional analysts, think Obama was vague in his answers to some of the questions. Now I didn't think he was. I always find Obama thoughtful and intelligent, and he seemed so to me last night. He is also responding to questions the answers of which (his answers) will float with that audience about as well as a lead balloon. It's like talking evolution at Ken Ham's dinner table. It takes some guts. Then again, as I've said before, I like Obama - he comes across easy and reasonable to me. But he didn't say anything new or shocking last night. That doesn't mean I liked his answers concerning those questions. That doesn't mean on those questions I thought his answers better than McCain's.

What disturbed me last night, because it was new, was the question about evil. Pastor Warren asked something along the following lines: Do you believe evil exists? And, if so, what should be done about it? I liked Obama's answer okay in that it covered a variety of evils - with the potential of evil even in our country. McCain, on the other hand, answered from the stump, which I found particularly disturbing. When asked about evil, do you go into a tirade about destroying al Qaeda and bin Laden? Chasing bin Laden to the gates of hell? Which brought to mind the Solzhenitsyn quote. Here it is again:

"If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being."

I understand these men are running for the presidency. They're not theologians or philosophers. I understand that they equivocate as they deem necessary. They're more concerned with their talking points than with real questions. I don't want it justified or need it explained to me. But evil is far more cunning than Senator McCain gives it credit. And such a simplistic and vehement answer to such a terrible question unnerves me.

Just a Fool Disagreeing with an Archbishop

Over at First Things last Tuesday, the Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, Archbishop of Denver, wrote an article titled, "Thoughts on 'Roman Catholics for Obama '08.' " It was written in response to a group of Catholics that use parts of another one of his articles to justify voting for Senator Obama in spite of his being pro-choice. His Excellency makes it clear that Roman Catholics for Obama (RCO) has not quoted him fully and makes the case for extreme caution before voting for a pro-choice politician. His Excellency is not willing to do so. (I would encourage you to read the article.)

And so, fuel to the fire, there has been much sound and fury in the blogs among fundamentalist and conservative Catholics.

But before I go on, let me provide some brief background information about Catholics and Catholicism. First, there are what I would consider fundamentalists in Catholicism. These are the same kind of fundamentalists that you know in whatever religion or Christian denomination you may move in. I'm not speaking here of Christians who adhere to the fundamentals of their faith - the denotative understanding of the term, as has been formerly understood in Protestant Christianity. These Catholics and Christians are conservative, but that isn't their distinguishing feature. What distinguishes them is that they bandy fear about as a bludgeon. And while it is effective, it is not Christian (that is not to say that they are not Christians). It lacks mercy.

So these fundamentalists pick up Archbishop Chaput's essay and they roll it tightly into a club. They call Obama supporters soft-brained, and some even relegate his supporters to hell. They compare the senator with Moloch. Who, if you remember, was offered babies in sacrifice by throwing them into a fire - thousands of babies.

Now, quickly, I want to say that I am not questioning whether any of these people are Christian or Catholic. I'm not equipped to make that judgment; I don't have the authority to make that determination; it's not my job. And I believe they're good-hearted and well-intentioned. And their vitriol rises up out of their love for children. These are people just like you and me, they too need to be examining their lives to see if they are in the faith, working out their salvation in fear and trembling, uniting themselves to Christ, converting evermore to him each day.

Let me also be clear in saying that Archbishop Chaput, from what I have read of and about him is no fundamentalist. He gives his reasons for voting pro-life. And having a strong opinion on a matter is not the same as judging everyone who disagrees with that opinion. His Excellency believes that there is no moral issue (where there is disagreement in our parties, I imagine worldwide poverty is not under consideration) that outweighs the issue of abortion. And I agree with him. He makes an excellent argument. But I disagree with him here, in that I don't believe it's simply a weighing match. The archbishop says that the Democratic party has not gotten better on the issue of life and therefore he can't vote for such a candidate in good faith. That is all well and good. However, while the Republican party talks a good talk concerning the abortion issue, they have had nearly 30 years of mostly Republican power, and one begins to wonder whether talk is all the Republican party has.

I am sure about one thing as it concerns abortion and politics: My vote for a pro-life Republican president will not diminish the number of abortions in our country in the next four years or the next 40. I believe this to be true based on the past 35 years. I don't believe it anymore than I believe Obama's election would diminish racism or that Hillary's would diminish sexism - perhaps all three nominee's elections could be wonderful symbols, but only in the modern sense of symbols, lacking any substance. These are the kinds of symbols that effect nothing other than making us feel good about ourselves.

Let me say that I am resolutely pro-life. I do not believe abortion is an issue of women's rights but an issue that concerns the dignity and sanctity of life itself. I find the whole mess abominable. And I reject it as firmly as I can along with the Catholic Church and most of Christianity. But that does not mean that I cannot vote for a pro-choice politician because of other moral considerations. Not because they are pro-choice, that would be grave error, but in spite of their being pro-choice. And I can do so in good conscience because, frankly, the Republican party has dropped the ball - if it ever was in play.

I have not, by the way, decided to vote for Senator Obama in November. It may seem so, but that would be a mistaken impression. There is a lot of time between now and then and there needs to be a lot of prayer and consideration. I struggle with this issue constantly. And if you are wondering whether to choose between my wisdom and the archbishop's, I would strongly urge you to follow his Excellency. He is older and has more experience with this issue. And he knows Christ better than I.

We must pray for our parties' nominees - for wisdom, which begins with the fear of God, and for love of all people.

(Let me make a distinction, after all is said and done. It is one thing to vote for a politician in spite of his or her being pro-choice. It is another thing to be a politician and to cast votes against life. These are two very different things, and if you'd like to have that conversation, I would be glad to take it up in the combox.)

Arinze on Catholic Politicians and Abortion

HT: Red Neck Woman

The Aftermath

Shortly after lunch I arrived bravely at my polling place with kids in tow. Unaffiliated with a party, I chose to vote in the Democratic primary. I was given a once-over on how to operate the touch screen booths (which are decidedly un-booth-like and uncomfortably public). I was told to "mash" this or that part of the screen. To "mash" this on-screen button to correct a mistake, and to "mash" the top, actual button when I was ready to cast my vote. It was a lot of work to restrain the giggle that threatened publicity. Regionalisms are rich additions to the English language, but even after 15 years living in North Carolina, they catch me off-guard.

The alcohol referendum had so many ways to vote for or against it that I figured everyone in town could vote a different way and we would still not have a decision. I tried to vote in a way that would not disagree with my other votes, but wasn't sure I succeeded. Vote for or against sales "on-premises" and "off-premises," vote for or against sales only in restaurants, vote for or against sales of "only fortified wine," vote for or against the operation of ABC stores, vote for or against whether you want your neighborhood to spiral down into crime after sordid crime due to the sale of alcohol - that sort of thing. Long story short: 300 of us were against ye olde fyre water and 200 were for it. Liquor runs and beer dashes will remain part of rural North Carolina life.

Per a local news clip, the Baptist Church up the road cheered when they heard the referendum results at 9:30. They said they could go to beds with happy hearts. And while I had voted for them to go to bad saddened and heavy-hearted, I'm glad that someone could. The rest of us had to drive 20 minutes up the road in order to do the same.

Devil May Care

This morning at 7:00, I heard pounding outside the window (the windows have been open for some time in North Carolina). I looked outside and found Grandma X., across the road, in her robe with a hammer and a sign. She's driving a stake into the heart of the devil, and it reads "Vote NO Alcohol May 6."

We go to the polls here in North Carolina on Tuesday. But as you can see there are bigger fish to fry than a silly little presidential primary. This happens to be a dry county. And whether we, as a community, jump off the wagon is up for vote.

Now I'm a big fan of temperance, certainly its spiritual necessity, but to show all my cards I'm also a fan of seconds. (No cult of the body practiced here.) I'm quite at odds, however, with the temperance movement and fail to understand sympathies for it today. I suppose many people have seen their share of pulpit beatings on the subject. I suspect many people know someone who succumbed to ye olde fyre water.

For me, however, there were two sins committed in those strange times when teetotalers gained the power of prohibition: Wasting so much good alcohol and injuring the word temperance for over a century. And the sin against our language is the worse because it still shades meaning today. At least the short epochs of Prohibition in our country produced some fine domestic brews.

If we vote No on Tuesday, I will be okay. No home brewing for me, of course, but that doesn't change anything. So pound the stake in deep, Grandma X. If you wouldn't mind, though, could you wait till 8:00 a.m. next time?