Papist Picture of the Day - 10/31/08

[For today's blog topics, scroll down or click here.]

"Uh, uh, uh - did I say you could touch the book?"

[source: REUTERS/Tony Gentile (VATICAN)

The fight for your Sunday morning parish parking lot

This Sunday, the last one before next Tuesday's election, folks will likely be placing flyers on cars parked in Catholic parish parking lots around the country.

Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good is trying to stop that phenomenon. They want to keep people in the mindset they already have, and they don't want their minds changed last minute.

Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good has been roundly criticized by many Catholic bishops, such as Archbishop Chaput and Bishop Martino. They areinvolved with the Democratic party and have been charged with taking money from prominent pro-abortion activists.

Anyway, here is what they are telling their members to do this weekend (underlining mine):

"We are asking our supporters to join us this Sunday to keep our parishes from becoming partisan battlegrounds in this election. Here's what you can do to help:

• Inform your Pastor today of your concern that outside groups may try to flyer cars during Mass on Sunday and encourage him to instruct the ushers to monitor the church parking lot during the worship service.
• Volunteer to monitor your own church parking lot this Sunday, and ask others to join you in monitoring their church.
• If you do encounter people in the parking lot, respectfully ask them to leave and remove their literature, and inform the ushers immediately.
• Refrain from distributing, on any Church property, any election materials except those approved by the USCCB (Faithful Citizenship), your local bishop or State Catholic Conference. Do not distribute any partisan campaign literature or voter guides (even non-partisan guides).
• Do what you can this weekend to help safeguard our Sunday Mass as a sacred time that should never be used for political gain."

Did you get all that? Monitoring the lot, enlisting ushers, removing flyers?

What do you think about this? Do you take the side of Catholics in Alliance or do you think it's fair for other groups to try to get their message out?

What this email tells me is that Catholics in Alliance is primarily trying to neutralize other members of the Church who wish to provide information to their brothers and sisters in Christ on important issues. But I do realize there are other dynamics involved here, which is why I'd like to have your input as well.

So please discuss.

update: LifeNews notes that Catholics United is encouraging the same tactics:

CU spokesman James Salt emailed his pro-Obama team Thursday night and called the literature drops a "final act of desperation" by the "religious far right" and falsely claimed that the distribution of pro-life information "defies" the Catholic bishops -- who have said the pro-life issue trumps all others in the election.

"The goal of this activity is to convince Catholics that it's immoral to vote for candidates who don't subscribe to the right's narrow agenda," Salt claims.

Salt says Catholics United is heading up the campaign to "put the brakes" on the literature drops.

CNA also weighs in.

It bears repeating: Bishops who speak, speak this way

At least in the overwhelming majority of cases. Bishops who are not adopting this strong rhetoric calling Catholics to vote an informed conscience on the issue, particularly, of abortion can be counted on one hand.

Another case in point to close-out the day: Bishop Robert Carlson of Saginaw whose statement (PDF) treats the presidential election as well as pro-ESCR Proposal 2 in Michigan (which I have discussed here).

Since I see no need to reduplicate work already done well, please see Fr. Z's analysis of the document.

Abp. of Omaha: "No proportionate reason outweights abortion"

As a perfect example of what I see as a clear and growing trend, I submit this letter on voting entitled "Deciding the values that are most important to us" (PDF) by Archbishop Elden Curtiss of Omaha.

The general framework of this letter, and other letters recently published by American bishops:

• Catholics have a moral responsibility to vote and participate in the democratic process
• Catholics have to vote according to a well-formed conscience - and that means well formed by Catholic principles, not ideological or partisan preconceived notions
• Catholics must vote to respect and preserve the dignity of every human life
• Among modern threats to that dignity, nothing matches the ongoing grave evil of abortion

What happens next is interesting, and novel, but again - it's happening more and more often....

After laying out the four steps above, the bishop will add a fifth step - his personal conclusion:

"I cannot conceive of a proportionate reason that could outweigh the deaths of nearly 50 million children killed by abortion."

"Those who do not understand or accept this basic human right [to life] are unworthy of our trust."

Of course, this is a great simplification. And Bishop Curtiss adds the needed qualifications:

"We are surely not one-issue people because we have to be concerned about the well-being of everyone in our society, and especially those who are hurting and in need. We have to be concerned about women with unplanned pregnancies who are without the resources to give birth or to care for their babies. We are rightfully concerned about candidates for public office who do not seem to care about babies after they are born and their mothers, and their future welfare. But the very first right we must protect, if all human rights are to be protected, is the right to life for the unborn."

Anyway, this is just no. 84 on a list of over 115.

Poll: CA Gay Marriage Ban numbers down

AP:

A new poll shows California voters who oppose the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriages slightly ahead going into Tuesday's election.

The Field Poll released Friday had opponents of the ban with a 49 percent to 45 percent edge. That's much closer than in previous surveys over Proposition 8.

I know - it's just a poll, but for any CA readers who thought they could just stay at home on Tuesday...

Photo: Pope Benedict blesses Stephen Hawking

A meeting of spiritual and scientific heavyweights:

Read about the occasion here.

photo credit: REUTERS/Osservatore Romano (VATICAN)

Friday link dump

I know, pleasant sounding blog title, right?

Anyway, links people have been sending me that might be of interst to you:

• http://www.onebabyonevote.com/ (Questions for pro-life, undecided voters)
• Bishop Loverde of Arlington, VA on "change for the right reasons"
• Vatican Encourages Psychological Testing to Prevent Homosexual Priesthood (LSN)
• Breaking news: Planned Parenthood admits infanticide (Jill Stanek) (LifeNews)
• Catholic voters no longer beholden to bishops and abortion (Jill Stanek)
• Render Unto Caesar (The Catholic Thing)
• Barack Obama's Health Care Plan Covers Abortion, Would Require Tax-Funding (LifeNews)
• Bishop Robert Carlson of Saginaw MI's statement for Catholic voters
• Bishop Tobin: "I don’t know about you, dear reader, but I could never vote for a candidate – of any party for any office – who supports laws that promote or allow the death of thousands of children in the hideous crime of abortion. I just don’t want that on my conscience."
• Bishop Zubik says "he will open up all the churches on Monday – some around the clock – so people can come pray about how they should vote on Tuesday"

And that's just a fraction of the stuff that comes across my desk daily. I think this is the good stuff.

update:

• Barack Obama Repeats Pro-Abortion Litmus Test for Supreme Court Judges (LifeNews)
• New Video Ad: Barack Obama Wants to Reverse Ban on Partial-Birth Abortions (LifeNews)
• Archbishop Elden Curtiss of Omaha (PDF file!): "I cannot conceive of a proportionate reason that could outweigh the deaths of nearly 50 million children killed by abortion."

On supporting one another in pursuit of the good and true

Doing the right thing often isn't easy.

Bishop Robert Vasa, in his most recent column, tells us one way that he is encouraged:

It might be a perception that my boldness regarding pro-abortion politicians is courageous but in truth I only follow the lead of those who exemplify a boldness far greater than my own. The bold speaking out on the part of Archbishop Raymond Burke regarding the contentious issue of Catholic pro-abortion politicians and Holy communion emboldens cowards like me to follow his example. The firm and measured response of Cardinal Egan and a variety of other Archbishops and Bishops to misleading statements of the Speaker of the House emboldens others, like myself, to shake off the shackles of fear and to stand with them.

Fr. Thomas Euteneuer, on Comending the Bishops:

Faithful Catholics in the US have been both stunned and gratified by the recent show of episcopal strength in dealing with the heretical nonsense of “Catholics” in public life who clearly misrepresent the Church’s teaching on vital issues.

... The trend is truly heartening. Let’s pray that it continues! Much more could be done, of course, but I am grateful that more bishops are standing up to strengthen and protect the faith of millions.

... [I would mention] the strong pro-life stances of Archbishops Burke (now in Rome) and Chaput (Denver) as well as Bishops Vasa (Baker, OR), Farrell and Vann (Dallas, TX), Martino (Scranton, PA) and Mallooly (Wilmington, DE) who are representatives of a group of other bishops who have made their voices heard forcefully on the Catholic voting issue.

... Thankfully, there are many more examples of episcopal courage that we could add to the reflections but suffice it to say that there seems to be a new wind blowing through the College of Bishops all around the world these days.

... We also need to thank them personally when they speak out in order to encourage them to do even more! Now that the example has been set, let us hope that other bishops and priests will have the audacity of our hope in Christ to go out and do the same!

What they said.

Papist Picture of the Day - 10/30/08

[For today's blog topics, scroll down or click here.]

Some days the Pope's thinking cap can't handle the pressure.

[source: REUTERS/Giampiero Sposito (ITALY)]

So, three nuns write a letter to a newspaper ...

... and the punchline to the joke is: "Because they think they know theology!"

The context:

Three paragraphs of dripping, swarmy sarcasm from these three nuns, penned in response to Archbishop Charles Chaput's noble efforts to defend the unborn. And then this little gem:

We also appreciate the respect for primacy of conscience in our decision-making, as enunciated by Josef Ratzinger, now our current pope, Benedict XVI, who wrote: “Over the pope, as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else — if necessary, even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority.”

Nice pull quote, sisters. But clearly it needs context. Otherwise, as I'm sure we'd all agree - ahem, I'm sure we'd all agree - the unfettered primacy of conscience would allow you to do, well, anything.

It would allow you, for instance, to support abortion.

... oh wait, you do.

It would allow you, for instance, to support gay marriage.

... oh wait, you do.

It would allow you, even, to deny that all salvation is through Jesus.

... oh wait, you do.

With that in mind, read their closing statement:

"We are making our ballot choices as adults and as faithful citizens who have weighed the issues in light of the gospels and the justice teachings of our church. We encourage all Catholics to do likewise."

Yes sisters, you clearly set a wonderful example of faithful citizenship lived in the light of the gospels, informed by the justice teachings of our church.

Tell me, what do the gospels say about lying?

On the lies that pro-Obama Catholics tell

Well, some Bishops and writers aren't letting them get away with it.

First, a writer:

During this election cycle a study on abortion released by Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good has received plenty of attention from Democrats and Barack Obama supporters.

The spin is that state pro-life laws only have a small impact on abortion rates, and increasing welfare expenditures is the superior way to reduce abortion.

But in today's National Review Online, Professor Michael New of the University of AL and the Witherspoon Institute identified - surprise - errors in the study's methodology.

New conducted a proper analysis of the exact same data used by CACG and found pro-life laws - specifically public funding restrictions and informed consent laws - are effective at lowering abortion rates.

New also found the amount of money spent on welfare appears to have only a marginal impact on the incidence of abortion.

Second, a bishop:

The Diocese of Scranton, Pennsylvania has continued educating its members on the importance of life during this election season. In a new video titled, “The Catholic Church and Life Issues,” the diocese refutes claims by groups such as Catholics United and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good that Catholics can vote for a pro-choice politician.

The video, which is posted on the Diocese of Scranton web site, discusses the importance of defending human life this election, though some groups are targeting Catholics to convince them that the issue is not one of relevance. (CNA)

The video:



Now if only we had the resources to get this message out to as wide an audience as these Soros-funded front-groups can.

Oh, and before I forget, guess who is on board with these groups offering an "alternative pro-life position" ... Fr. Thomas "Nothing New" Reese. (Why "Nothing New", you ask?)

NCR introduces "New voices from young Catholics"

National Catholic Reporter evidently saw the writing on the wall and is trying something new.

It's called "Young Voices" and here's how they describe it:

The future of our church is in the hands of a generation coming of age in the first decade of the 21st century. NCR went looking among this generation and found four young Catholics -- Nicole Sotelo, Kate Childs Graham, Mike Sweitzer-Beckman, Jamie L. Manson -- from different backgrounds and with different connections to the church. They will be sharing their stories in this space weekly.

Two possible goals here:

• Maybe they'd like to have subscribers under 40 again (no offense)
• Maybe they'd like to convince their subscribers over 60 that they are not a dying breed

Regardless of the conjectural editorial motivation, their inaugural column is by Nicole Sotello on Proposition 8.

Her thinly-veiled disagreement with the teaching of the bishops on this topic runs as follows:

But I wonder what type of laws we are preserving. We’ll be keeping a system of marriage laws that are not about love, but about privilege. Our current civil marriage laws privilege heterosexual men and women who happen to be fortunate in finding a partner. These couples receive special benefits with regard to taxes, pension plans, health care, social status and a variety of other societal advantages. Those who happen to be unlucky in love or whose families do not fit the mold are left out: unmarried parents with children, unmarried elderly individuals who live together and care for one another, and so on.

But marriage is a privilege - not a right. If it was a right, I could demand to be married - and as easier as that might make things for me on a friday night, it's clearly not reality. And marriage as a civil institution says nothing about love - that's a sacramental/interpersonal category, so it's unfair to ask if civil marriages are about "love". Try arguing that in a court.

Moving on: yes, marriage law privileges heterosexual couples, but why? Because they are the fundamental unit of society and society has an interest in protecting and fostering them. Society doesn't have that same interest in fostering the relationship between my brother and I, even if we share a house and expenses together (we don't, he has to graduate college first).

Protecting marriage is not about excluding people who are "left out". Even if gay marriage were approved by the state, that would do nothing to address the other situations Nicole talks about, including the unmarried, single-parents, etc. So that's really a completely separate issue.

And that coy "families who don't fit the mold" line? Please, if you're going to be a columnist, actually talk about the things you want to talk about. Don't use code language like that. Try being specific and explicit.

Oh, and in a column talking about Proposition 8, ya know that might be a really good time to express your understanding of the Church's teaching on homosexual unions and the civil ramifications.

My final take:

168 words of forgettable.

For anyone who's ever had a political sign stolen

Margaret Cabaniss at IC has the story:

On Monday, [Shawn Turschak] ran wires from his house and hooked the signs into a power source for an electric pet fence. Then he mounted a surveillance camera in a nearby tree and wired it to a digital recorder.

Tuesday afternoon, the camera saw this: A neighbor trotting up with an Obama-Biden sign, grabbing a handful of volts as he touched a McCain-Palin sign, then fleeing at top 9-year-old boy speed.

Video here.

In my neighborhood here in Washington DC there is a single McCain sign among myriads of Obama signs that I walk past everyday. I think it's a wonder that it's still standing.

Picture: what do you think of this crosier?

Archbishop Reinhard Marx of Munich-Freising:

Here is a larger picture where the crosier is more visible.

Wikipedia's crosier entry.

Tracking the Catholic Vote

Another nibble:

The race has tightened in part because of changes in a couple of important swing voting groups. Independents back Obama by 5 percentage points today, down from a 9-point edge last week. Similarly, among white Catholics, Obama held an 11-point edge over McCain last week and today they split 46-46. (Fox News)

The spread among all Catholics favors McCain, I would imagine.

And at last count:

"Among the over 110 bishops who have spoken out in this election in defense of Church teaching are 69 ordinaries (bishops who head dioceses). That's over one-third of the 197 dioceses and archdioceses in the United States." (Inside Catholic)

Excommunicate, already!

"Sign it. Seal it. Deliver it." says Canon Lawyer Ed Peters:

The more modernistic the liberal clerical cohort in Australia tries to become, the older are the heresies that they promote. Lately, one Fr Peter Dresser is promoting his own brand of Arianism, a heresy that basically denied the divinity of Christ, and which was solemnly rejected by the Council of Nicaea (325). "No human being can ever be God," writes Fr. Dresser in a booklet distributed to the faithful, "and Jesus was a human being. It is as simple as that."

Okay, here's my version of simple: "No Catholic priest may deny the divinity of Christ, and Dresser is a Catholic priest. It's as simple as that." If Fr. Dresser really denies the divinity of Christ (among several other things!), declare his formal excommunication and expel him from the clerical state. Do it quickly, do it cleanly, and do it without rancor. But do it.

Nice of Fr. Desser to make things easy on us.

He also claims Joseph was the biological father of Jesus, and the Virgin Mary had six children.

Bishop Finn on becoming the "Church militant" again

You know when you see a column titled "Warriors with Our Eyes Fixed on Heaven" you're in for some good stuff:

I am sometimes amazed at the casual manner with which Christians, Catholics included, take up our life within what Pope John Paul II rightly called the "culture of death."

The Church, by comparison, reminds us that we are engaged - by reason of our Baptism and Confirmation - in a battle, "not with flesh and blood, but with the principalities and powers, with the rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in heaven." (Eph 6:12)

Jesus Christ has won the ultimate battle, but we, in the course of our human life must make our choice, determining on whose side we will live and die. Whose side will you choose?!

What is at stake in this battle is our immortal soul, our salvation. My responsibility as bishop is with the eternal destiny of those entrusted to my care. My total energies must be directed to the well being of those who otherwise may come under the spell of a radically flawed and fundamentally distorted moral sense, at odds with what our Mother the Church teaches.

There are objective and transcendent truths. There is such a thing as right and wrong. There is a legitimate hierarchy of moral evils, and the direct willful destruction of human life can never be justified; it can never be supported. Do you believe this firm teaching of the Church?

How does Bishop Finn take his coffee?

Extra bold.

Update: ‘Fireproof’ Earns Twice As Much As ‘Religulous’

This news warmed my heart:

Fireproof has earned twice as much at the box office as Religulous.

Both opening weekend box office numbers and total to date are as close to two-to-one as you can get. On their respective opening weekends (one week apart), the barely advertised Fireproof earned $6.8 million while the highly advertised Religulous earned only $3.4 million. As of the date of this post the numbers are $23.6MM vs $10.6MM.

And let’s not even get into the profit margin side of things. Fireproof had an ROI of $46 for every dollar spent while Religulous earned $4 for every dollar (probably less, if marketing is considered).

It couldn't have happened to a nicer solipsist.

.. and shouldn't the picture have Maher on the left instead of the right?

Picture: St. Louis Claims First *Pregnant* Catholic Priest

RiverFrontTimes:

"A little over a year ago, 26-year-old Jessica Rowley shattered the stained-glass ceiling, so to speak, by being ordained a Catholic priest. Now the St. Louisan is on the verge of giving birth to her first child, and a Washington, D.C.-based group that advocates for women’s ordination says that makes Rowley the world’s first pregnant Catholic priest."

Her husband is a United Church of Christ minister. So which church will the baby be baptized in?

"That's a good question," says Rowley, with a laugh. "It's a topic of conversation in our home a lot. We're going to baptize him in both churches."

Why, of course! Why didn't I think of that? I'm so narrow-minded with my solutions sometimes....