Bishop D'Arcy breaks his silence on Notre Dame

Bishop John M. D'Arcy, who was very involved in the Notre Dame scandal of earlier this year (which AmP covered extensively), breaks his long silence about what the Notre Dame situation was about, and what it wasn't about, in a reflection written for America magazine (odd that he chose to publish for this publication, considering their editorial position on the affair - maybe he considers it mission territory).

For skimmers, I'll excerpt Bishop D'Arcy's concluding questions to Catholic universities:

Do you consider it a responsibility in your public statements, in your life as a university and in your actions, including your public awards, to give witness to the Catholic faith in all its fullness?

What is your relationship to the church and, specifically, to the local bishop and his pastoral authority as defined by the Second Vatican Council?

Finally, a more fundamental question: Where will the great Catholic universities search for a guiding light in the years ahead? Will it be the Land O’Lakes Statement or Ex Corde Ecclesiae?

.... On these three questions, I respectfully submit, rests the future of Catholic higher education in this country and so much else.

I will be eager to see which Catholic universities joyfully respond to the bishop's questions, and with some apprehension, I await the stony silence of many more. I cringe at the possibility that some may even try to wiggle their way out of his challenge.

Biden claim: "I'm a John XXIII guy, I'm not a Pope John Paul guy."

I don't understand how someone can seriously say this about themselves:

"I was raised as a Catholic, I'm a practicing Catholic, and I'm totally at home with the Catholicism that I was raised in and this whole culture of social responsibility, reaction to abuse of power, the whole notion that there is collective civic responsibility. It's the Catholic consciousness that I'm totally comfortable with."

... only to spew this nonsense:

"It is not choice. It's always a very, very, very difficult, difficult decision. I know that, my church has wrestled with this for 2,000 years.

We've always believed from the outset that abortion is wrong. But throughout the years, debated the degree to which it is wrong. There are always cases where it is never a first choice. It is always viewed as a dire decision. But throughout the church's history, we've argued between whether or not it is wrong in every circumstance and the degree of wrong. Catholics have this notion, it's almost a gradation.

We have mortal sins, venial sins, well, up until Pius IX, there were times when we said, 'Look, there are circumstances in which it's wrong but it is not damnation. Along came Pius IX in the 1860s and declared in fine doctrine, this was the first time that it occurred that it was absolute human life and being at the moment of conception. It's always been a debate."

And then conclude by saying:

"I take my religion very seriously."

(... just obviously not enough to study it.)

Oh well, I guess I'm just no Joe Biden.

Another jem:

"I'm a John XXIII guy, I'm not a Pope John Paul guy."

At least that puts him ahead of John Kerry, who claimed he was a "Pope Pius XXIII" kind of guy.

Ph/t: Whispers.

European and American bishops talk about the financial crisis

An EU perspective:

Members of the Social Affairs Commission of COMECE met in Paris on 8-9 October for their annual meeting. Their exchange of views on the topic of "The future of social protection and social policy in Europe" was marked by the crisis in the financial markets and its consequences for social policy in Europe.

At the end of the meeting, Bishop Reinhard Marx, archbishop of Munich and President of the Commission, said: "At the present time it is the case that the governments of the EU should undertake all possible efforts to end this crisis of confidence which is undermining the financial markets. The social teaching of the Church has for a long time recognised the idea of global governance in order to bring justice, transparency and responsibility into the world's financial markets. Now the time has come to implement this social teaching. It is also important for our governments, as well as for the EU-Institutions, to start caring for the situation of those citizens who - without being responsible - will nevertheless have to carry the social consequences of the financial crisis. We have arrived at the precise moment where the European social model should prove itself in order to avoid turning the financial crisis into a political and social crisis."

Archbishop O'Brien of Baltimore, the first diocese of the United States, talks about the books:

These are uncertain times. Banks are failing, Wall Street is reeling, and the cost of just about everything seems to be through the roof. Talk of bailouts and mergers, record declines and a looming recession – not to mention the fast-approaching presidential election – has much of the nation in a frenzy of uncertainty and worry. Understandably, many people, when not peeking through their hands at their investment account statements, find themselves taking inventory these days. This local Church is, too.

The Gospel and our own Church teaching reminds us that we must be good stewards of those gifts that have been so generously bestowed on us. It is a priority of this local Church – at every level – to ensure that our limited resources are used to the best possible effect.

Sober words as we go into our weekend. Let's take stock, pray and keep moving.

Ph/t: Rocco.

These days are a helpful reminder to America that the ideal of "radical individualism" is a mirage: we are all deeply connected to one another, and must (prudently) help shoulder each others' burdens.

Today is the feast of Guardian Angels

Learn about the feast as celebrated by the Church, and about guardian angels in Church teaching.

And for an extended reflection upon the role guardian angels play in our lives, read Fr. Joseph Ventura:

"One of the most consoling doctrines of Scripture is that of the guardianship of angels; the doctrine which teaches that man in this world is guided and protected by invisible beings called angels."

Commentary: LA bishops' statement about "Gay Marriage"

Available as a PDF on the archdiocese website here, reproduced in full below:

The Catholic Bishops of the United States have affirmed repeatedly that persons with a homosexual orientation "must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity."

Accordingly the Bishops condemn all forms of violence, scorn, and hatred—whether subtle orovert—against men and women who are homosexual. All people, regardless of sexual inclination, are called to holiness; and "should be encouraged to take an active role in the faith community" and to live according to its teachings.

Nonetheless, the Church cannot approve of redefining marriage, which has a unique place in God's creation, joining a man and a woman in a committed relationship in order to nurture and support the new life for which marriage is intended. The meaning of marriage is deeply rooted in history and culture, and has been shaped considerably by Christian tradition. Its meaning is given, not constructed. "When marriage is redefined so as to make other relationships equivalentto it, the institution of marriage is devalued and further weakened."

The state has a primary and fundamental obligation to protect and promote the family,which is rooted in marriage and sustained by it. Some benefits currently sought by same sex partners can already be obtained without regard to marital status. For example, individuals can agree to own property jointly with another, and they can generally designate anyone they choose to be a beneficiary of their will or to make health care decisions in case they become incompetent.

Other desired benefits such as sharing in a partner's health insurance could be made available without the drastic step of a cultural or legal redefinition of marriage.

Let us strengthen our resolve to respect the dignity of each human being and to protect the sanctity of marriage, asking God's guidance in our efforts to promote the common good central to a free and democratic society.

I thought this statement was a good and sufficient one until I realized that, golly, it doesn't mention a single reason for the Church's teaching that homosexual acts are wrong, that allowing homosexual partners to marry is imprudent, that homosexual persons are called to lives of chastity, etc.

Would it have been so bad if they had made their document two pages instead of just one, I wonder?

Today, meanwhile, the California Supreme Court has allowed Californians to vote this November and decide whether to ban same-sex marriages.

In this sort of political climate, it is imperative upon the bishops of not only Los Angeles, but all California to uphold and witness to the Church's understanding of anthropology and divinely-revealed teaching on the subjects of sex and marriage. The clock is ticking.

The ill fruits of the sexual revolution: U.S. sets record in sexual disease cases

ATLANTA - More than 1 million cases of chlamydia were reported in the United States last year — the most ever reported for a sexually transmitted disease, federal health officials said Tuesday.

"A new U.S. record," said Dr. John M. Douglas Jr. of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

More bad news: Gonorrhea rates are jumping again after hitting a record low, and an increasing number of cases are caused by a "superbug" version resistant to common antibiotics, federal officials said Tuesday.

Syphilis is rising, too. The rate of congenital syphilis — which can deform or kill babies — rose for the first time in 15 years. [-Associated Press]

I'm sure that the solution which will be proposed by experts tomorrow during tomorrow's reactions to the news will be to promote condoms.

Conveniently, the blame for the current lack of sufficient condom use in America will be set squarely on the shoulders of the Catholic Church's oppressive hierarchy. And it won't be the first time.

Because, ya know, the same people who are disregarding the Church's teaching on chastity and monogamy always are dutifully obeying her prohibition on condomized intercourse. Yeah, sure.

Once again, a UN official blames the Catholic Church for the spread of AIDS

I guess the Reuters reporter and I simply have a difference in perspective:

Reuters:

The rapid spread in Latin America of the virus that causes AIDS is made worse by the Roman Catholic Church's stand against using condoms, a U.N. official said on Monday.

I respond:

The rapid spread in Latin America of the virus that causes AIDS is made worse by young people not following the Church's teaching on promiscuous premarital sex, the AmericanPapist said on Tuesday.

Reuters:

..."In Latin America the use of condoms has been demonized, but if they were used in every relation I guarantee the epidemic would be resolved in the region," said Alberto Stella, the UNAIDS Coordinator for Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica.

I respond:

..."In Latin America the Church's teaching has been ignored, and if every person followed her teaching, I can even more guarantee the epidemic would be resolved in the region, said Thomas Peters, the AmericanPapist in Washington DC.

Reuters:

... The Catholic Church, which holds sway in Latin America despite the rise in evangelical churches, opposes all forms of contraception and instead promotes abstinence as a way to avoid spreading AIDS.

I respond:

The Catholic Church, which is actually joined by the evangelical churches on the issue of teaching that premarital sex is immoral, opposes all inadequate responses to this disease and instead promotes abstinence as a way of attacking the underling cause of the aids epidemic, e.g., rampant premarital sex (and by the way, does Reuters truly believe that the folks who are already disobeying the Church about premarital sex aren't in fact also using condoms as well?).

Maybe an analogy would help make this point more clear:

If we notice that a culture is getting into the habit of hitting each other over the head with baseball bats, should we respond by a) giving them Styrofoam pads to put on the bats so they don't hurt each other as much, or be) should we teach them to stop hitting each other with the baseball bats in the first place?

Intelligent readers will hopefully be able to make the appropriate conceptual substitutions.