Birthday and Life

A few weeks ago, on Friday the 13th, I celebrated a birthday, my 80th, and I’m slowly coming to terms with it all. I suppose, from one perspective, it’s just another birthday, one among many. But it’s also a birthday I never really expected to reach. When I was younger, 80 seemed so very, very old and I simply never really considered living that long. And later, as a Naval aviator, I thought my life might be cut short by some unanticipated, catastrophic event in either war or peace. But, surprisingly, I survived, and here I am, 80 years old! And it still seems so very, very old. But I thank God for permitting me to live so long, and ask what He still has in store for me. After all, He didn’t keep me alive just to count the days or aimlessly stumble about, but to do some good. Sometimes, though, the good we’re called to do is involuntary, simply the result of God’s work. We do it but don’t ever, at least in this life, either understand or see its results. So, as Jesus commands us, “Repent, and believe in the Gospel” (Jn 3:15). Yes, we are called to repentance and to faith, and to keep doing as He commands throughout our days. 

Another redeeming value is my heath; it remains reasonably good, at least for now…although I could stand to lose a few pounds. I’m working on that, and still get up at 5 am every day to take my 2-mile fast walk. I also toss about 50 newspapers from driveways to front doors. Neighbors think I do this out of kindness, but in truth I reap the benefit of bending over to pick up each newspaper and give my back and tummy a minor workout. As a result, I have no problem reaching my 10,000 daily steps, although I’m not sure why that’s a desirable goal. Why 10,000, this remarkably round number, when 9,571 or 11,212 are probably just as good? But my little smart watch (Fitbit) tells me this is important, so I acquiesce and work to achieve this goal. Perhaps that’s the reason we need goals, easily defined, grasped, and achievable goals…like 10,000.

Other goals and hopes are, of course, far more important. For example, the American Catholic bishops have instructed Catholics to vote for life, to vote against those advocating abortion. We can only hope the faithful will listen and obey. That’s right, when the Church speaks definitively, when it speaks from its magisterial teaching authority, we are called to obey. The existing culture of death, which currently rules much of our political life, must be resisted by the faithful. You might not “like” every politician who pledges to support a culture of life. You might disagree on some issues, but as one spokesman for the bishops said, "At the forefront of 'life issues' is the right to be born as the right upon which all other 'life issues' rest.” We cannot, then, vote for anyone who supports abortion, the intentional taking of an innocent human life.

I’ve always believed that ultimately abortion will be overcome by prayer and through the work of the Holy Spirit, who alone can change the hearts and minds of the people. But that doesn’t mean we just ignore the political and simply turn it all over to God, while turning away from the evil surrounding us. The trouble is, when you’re surrounded, you really can’t turn away. And, anyway, God likes to use us to fulfill His work in the world. Just don’t fall into the trap of thinking it’s our work, our effort that brings God’s will to fulfillment. As Mary said, just “Do whatever He tells you” (Jn 2:5). And pray for life!

D is for Democrat…and Death

I haven't posted anything about the recent Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade -- not because of a lack of interest...far from it. We simply had a few health crises to deal with in our normally peaceful home. Diane fell and broke her wrist, and last Thursday, the same day the court released its decision, she underwent some rather complex surgery that includes screws and metal plates. She came through it all very well and we hope she's on a fast track to full recovery. This morning she had a post-op appointment and initial therapy session, and all was good, so God be praised! I'm happy and thankful. On Friday, I underwent some oral surgery which left me grumbling about the resulting pain until Diane pointed to her wrist. Yep, she has it far worse than I, so the state of our relative suffering is now clearly understood, making me the primary caregiver. Please pray that the quality of my cooking doesn't add malnutrition to her problems.

Anyway, here a few thoughts about the current chaos. I try not to get too political on this blog, at least not too often, but in today’s world few issues are purely political since most also encompass faith and morality. A perfect example is the United States Supreme Court’s decision on Thursday to overturn its earlier (1973) Roe v. Wade decision. The chaos in the streets, the violent attacks on pro-life centers, and the scurrilous claims and offensive comments by politicians, members of the mainstream media, Hollywood celebrities, and the professional pro-abortion crowd...well, it all typifies the ironic lack of choice desired by those who insist on labeling themselves "pro-choice." 

I am, of course, pleased and thankful about the decision, but I'm also disgusted with the hypocrisy, lies, and hatred we’ve had to witness these past few days. In truth, we’ve witnessed all of this for weeks, ever since the leak of the draft majority opinion and the resulting intimidation and threats aimed at the Court’s justices. So…what are we to make of it all?

First of all, the Court's decision did not ban abortion in the United States. It merely stated that the Constitution does not include a "right" to abortion. The earlier 1973 decision was based on a Constitutionally non-existent right to privacy invented by the earlier court; therefore, the current Court ruled that, when it comes to abortion or anything else not specifically included in the Constitution, the 10th Amendment holds; that is: 

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Constitutionally, therefore, the Court considered abortion a state issue, and the people of each state can decide on its legality. This, of course, really upsets the pro-abortion folks because they know if will lead to open debate in state legislatures and the public revelation of the truth about abortion. It will lead people to understand the inherent violence of abortion, a horrendous, barbarous act that destroys the lives of the most innocent among us. So long as Roe v. Wade was considered "law," abortion became an issue that could be pushed aside: "It's been decided; there's no need for further discussion." But now, the discussion, and the truth, will enter the public square and I believe the inherent goodness of most Americans will become evident. We shall see. 

Sadly, though, the Democrat Party is almost exclusively pro-abortion. They have become the party of both death and racism. How many people know that the leading cause of death among Black Americans is abortion. Why? Because Planned Parenthood, an organization that financially supports so many Democrat politicians, was formed by Margaret Sanger, a racist who wanted to eliminate the "lesser races." Why do you think so many Planned Parenthood "clinics" are located in minority communities? And how many Americans realize that it was the Democrats who were the party of slavery? Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, Republicans were far more united than Democrats in support of civil rights legislation, while many Democrats voted in opposition. You won't hear that taught in our "woke" public schools.

For the past few days, in advance of the November elections, the Democrats have been trying to shift focus from inflation to abortion, hoping the people will forget about the nation's crumbling economy, climb aboard their sinking ship, and vote instead based on their support for abortion "rights." Yesterday I saw the results of a poll asking Americans what their #1 issue would be in the ballot box. 28% said abortion, while 60% said inflation. The news commentator believed abortion would, however, climb and eventually become the major issue. Of course, he assumed those 28% were all pro-choice. I disagree. For example, I and most of my pro-life friends have always given priority to abortion. For over forty years, I've considered abortion my #1 concern when it comes to voting. Indeed, I have never voted for a pro-choice politician, and actually voted for several Democrats because they were pro-life, and their Republican opponents were not. And I've been a registered Republican since I came of age. 

I may be wrong, but I believe the pro-abortion position will show itself as a big loser politically, especially if the radicals continue to demonstrate their terroristic tendencies. America is a nation of hard workers and entrepreneurs and creators and innovators. We are a nation of builders; a nation that strives to build up, and not tear down. We are a God-fearing nation, not one that tries to cast God out of the public square. We are also a nation of life-givers, live-savers, and life-believers, not a nation of life-destroyers. Too many of our politicians, self-isolated in their D.C. cocoon, simply don't understand this. Perhaps they'll come to appreciate it in November.

In the meantime, sisters and brothers, pray for life and let the world know it!

Fr. Reese, S.J. and Pope Francis

There was an old joke that listed a few things the pope doesn’t know about the Church. As I recall (hard to do these days), one of those things was “what the Jesuits will do next.” Presumably this no longer applies since for the first time in history we have a Jesuit pope. Of course, even Pope Francis may not be able to predict what each of his fellow Jesuits decides to say or do or write. 

This week, for example, American Jesuit, Rev. Thomas Reese, S.J., wrote down a few of his thoughts on Pope Francis’ recent hospitalization. Fr. Reese, who writes a column for Religion News Service suggested that the 84-year-old pope’s illness, hospitalization, and surgery formed what might be a key event in Francis' papacy. According to Fr. Reese, “…even with the best prognosis, age is catching up with Francis. Barring a miracle, he will only be expected to continue as pope for five or six years. We may look back at his hospitalization as the moment that marked the beginning of the end of his papacy.”

As you might expect — after all, he is a Jesuit — Fr. Reese has a distinct point of view that does not always coincide with the Church’s teachings on a number of issues. A former editor-in-chief of America, the left-leaning Jesuit journal, and columnist for the National Catholic Reporter, Reese has espoused some interesting religious, political, and moral positions. For example, he really dislikes what he calls the “unreformed liturgy” — aka, the Latin or Tridentine Mass — and says that young people should not be permitted to attend such Masses. 

More troubling, however, were his comments during the 2020 presidential campaign when he declared approvingly that, “A Catholic Democrat might feel impelled to vote for Biden despite his position on abortion and gay marriage because of other morally grave reasons, for example, his positions on racism, immigration, global warming and COVID-19.” Since the Church considers abortion nothing less than murder, the slaughter of innocents, one wonders whether Fr. Reese would consider it okay to overlook a candidate's support for a new Holocaust or for Communist China's enslavement of Uyghurs and Kazakhs so long as his policies were correct when it came to issues like climate change. 

New York's Cardinal Dolan made this case in his public rebuke of Fr. Reese when he wrote that the priest's approach was nothing less than a "...capitulation to the abortion culture, and a grave weakening of the powerful pro-life witness...Thank God, those who believed that slavery was a moral horror, a cancer on our country, and contrary to the higher values of a lawful republic, could never accept this capitulation." 

Over the years Fr. Reese has been consistent in downplaying the Church's teaching on abortion. For example, he likes to quote the U.S. Bishops document, Faithful Citizenship, while avoiding its strong language regarding abortion. He also came out strongly against government defunding of Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. In the same way he avoids mentioning Pope Francis' very public condemnation of abortion and abortionists, whom the pope compared to "Mafia hit-men." As the pope said, "Is it legitimate to take a human life to solve a problem? Is it permissible to hire a hitman to solve a problem?...human life is sacred and inviolable and the use of prenatal diagnosis for selective purposes should be discouraged with strength." One suspects Fr. Reese isn't very pleased to hear his fellow Jesuit speaking with such moral clarity.

In this latest column, Fr. Reese again avoids these life issues and seems more concerned that Pope Francis has perhaps not done enough to ensure his successor will follow in what Fr. Reese consider the correct ideological path: "If his papacy is reckoned a failure, it will be because Francis failed to replace or outlast the clerical establishment put in place by John Paul and Benedict. His papacy will only succeed if he is followed by popes who are in sync with his approach to Catholicism, and this is not guaranteed." No, indeed, Father, it is not guaranteed, thanks to the Holy Spirit. Fr. Reese also wrote that "Francis has rebranded the papacy for the 21st century with a pastoral, prophetic and inclusive voice." After the truly pastoral and prophetic papacies of Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI, this seems a rather odd thing to say, and I expect Pope Francis would agree.

Finally, Fr. Reese's comments about the pontiff's illness might also be an indication of the real and perhaps serious nature of Pope Francis' health. The Vatican has rarely been very open about popes and their health issues. Too often a pope must die before the world learns he was seriously ill.

It's all very interesting, though. And Fr. Reese will likely get lots of airtime on those networks that despise the Church and its teachings. But that's just another reason I always tell my friends not to believe a word you hear or read about the Catholic Church in the secular media. 

We are left with an ailing pope for whom we pray daily. We pray for his full recovery and for his wisdom in these times of moral relativism and political and social chaos. We need him to speak clearly and loudly to the world on faith and morals.

Pray for Pope Francis...oh, yes, and pray, too, for Fr. Reese.

Strange Times, Stranger Thoughts

Corruption and more. Okay, I’m bothered by odd thoughts during these even odder times. For example, a few weeks ago I told Diane I was pretty sure that, whatever the ultimate outcome of the election, Joe Biden would not be the sitting president two years from now. I simply believed that, should he be elected, corruption or dementia or other health issues would catch up with him and force him out of office. As a long-time resident of The Villages, I know that many 78-year-old men are in excellent physical and mental shape and could no doubt handle the rigors and demands of the presidency...but not all. And Joe...well, he just doesn't seem to be running on all cylinders these days. Should Biden depart office ahead of schedule — something I believe many of the movers and shakers who supported him have planned for — Kamala Harris would become president, a possibility that should frighten anyone with any sense. It should certainly cause serious concern for any believing Christian or Jew. 

Thank God for God, Who remains in charge of our decaying world. We need to pray, folks. As St. Paul reminded us in today's liturgy:

Rejoice always. Pray without ceasing. In all circumstances give thanks, for this is the will of God for you in Christ Jesus. Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophetic utterances. Test everything: retain what is good. refrain fro every kind of evil [1 Thes 5:16-22].

Read these words every day, to remind yourself to follow God's will, and that everything in our lives calls for rejoicing and prayers of thankfulness. These words of St. Paul also make an excellent brief examination of conscience.

Oddity in St. Peter’s Square. Did you happen to catch the sneak peek offered to the public of the so-called Nativity scene destined for St. Peter's Square? Only one word can adequately describe it: hideous! Some call it art, but I prefer to label it trash. I have no problem with much contemporary art, and actually have a couple of signed prints from Dali and Chagall, along with works of several other modern artists. But this Nativity display has to be the ugliest ever devised, certainly the ugliest ever displayed publicly by the Church. That the Church founded by Jesus Christ would consider this an appropriate symbol to represent our Savior’s birth boggles the mind. Take a look:

Such a heartwarming a scene! But even more bizarre, and uglier still, is this unique pair of characters who resemble escapees from a low-budget Star Wars wannabe movie.

Okay, that sheep kinda resembles a sheep, one suffering from a disease of his wool coat, but want exactly are the others? I first thought they were an astronaut and an alien, but perhaps they represent those who must wear HAZMAT gear during the current pandemic. Who knows?

Of course the "angelic" figure that towers over the entire scene is especially bothersome:

And to show how deeply affected were those among the faithful privileged to view the preview, one Italian observer noted: 

"Ugliness is the first thing you notice, followed by a lack of familial warmth and the distancing guaranteed by the cylindrical figures. If you wish to judge harshly, the cylinders call to mind the sacred poles of Satanic cults condemned in the Bible." 

Yes, indeed, it looks like something one would expect to find when excavating a pagan Canaanite temple.

I’m pretty sure Pope Francis had nothing to do with the decision to display this ugly collection of weirdness, but he has unfortunately surrounded himself with folks who probably believe it to be a perfect depiction of the familiar scene described by St. Luke. I'll assume the pope has not yet seen it. After all, he recently tweeted:

"Accompanied by the Mother of Jesus on the journey towards Christmas, in these times that are difficult for many, let us make an effort to rediscover the great hope and joy brought to us by the coming of the Son of God into the world." 

In no way does this display bring joy and hope into the hearts of those who encounter it. In early November the pope also published an apostolic letter on the importance and meaning of the Nativity scene first introduced by St. Francis of Assisi. It's quite good and you can read a synopsis of this letter here: Admirabile signum.

 

One would hope the more sensible among the Church's Vatican hierarchy would perhaps decide this display should be discretely removed from public view and tucked away deeply in the Vatican's Secret Archives. Otherwise the children of Rome may be troubled by weeks of nightmares.

Empty Churches? If you've read this blog for a while, you'll know that Maddie and I take a twice-daily walk through the surrounding neighborhoods. Maddie's a remarkable dog and will often lead me to people in some need. One day, early last week, I had decided to go one way, but Maddie wouldn't budge. She finally turned toward the opposite direction and tugged at the leash. Accepting that her sixth sense probably had some purpose, I agreed. After walking perhaps 50 yards, she noticed a man coming towards us, so she sat down and waited for him to arrive. An older man, perhaps in his early 80s, he seemed vaguely familiar. 

As he approached us he smiled and said, "Deacon, can you help me?" Maddie, of course, simply displayed her standard Bichon smile as I said, "Sure, what's up?" 

"I have a new rosary that needs to be blessed. I'd take it to the Church, but my wife won't let me attend Mass. Too dangerous. Can you bless it for me?" Of course I agreed, so he said he'd bring it by the house and let me bless it. Then he added, "I really miss the Eucharist. Not being able to receive Jesus is the worst part of all this."

I didn't want to come between him and his wife, so I thought it best simply to suggest attending a daily Mass on occasion since weekday congregations are usually smaller, and he and his wife might feel more comfortable.

Anyway, he got me thinking, about the pandemic and our response to it. Not long ago I read a Real Clear Science article addressing the pandemic guidelines in the United States. Among their conclusions was this comment, focused particularly on Catholic churches in the U.S.: "For Catholic churches following these guidelines, no outbreaks of COVID-19 have been linked to church attendance." They also discovered no evidence of viral transmission even when tracing systems picked up examples of asymptomatic people who were infected, but didn't know it, and attended Mass. In other words, attending Mass at Catholic churches where appropriate measures have been taken, is probably the safest public activity in which one can engage.

The larger and more troubling issue, however, is the attempt by government officials to decide what kind of worship is permitted in their city or state. Any attempt by government to control religious worship, especially when the church involved takes special precautions to protect their congregations, is a direct violation of the United States Constitution. But apart from this, such actions also disregard basic human rights. 

In a recent interview, Fr. Thomas White, O.P., Director of the Thomistic Institute at the Angelicum in Rome, stated that we cannot separate a person's right to believe from his right to take part in public worship. He argued, correctly I believe, that public officials are attempting "to designate theologically what the Church's internal self-understanding should be with regards to worship, and that's an unsustainable approach with engagement to the Church." In other words, no secular government should decide how we worship. Fr. White goes on to stress that the state must not infringe on the most fundamental human rights; for example, the rights to marry, to work, or to worship. He calls such infringement, "an act of spiritual totalitarianism."

Too many bishops seem to have allowed city and state authorities to call the shots when it comes to worship. It would be nice for the faithful if they would say, "We are taking proper and reasonable precautions, but the decision to do so is reserved to the Church and will not be ceded to the state." No mayor or governor may control the Church's celebration of the sacraments, especially the Eucharist. We are a Eucharistic Church and must find ways to ensure the faithful can receive the graces the Holy Spirit extends to us through the sacraments. How did St. Paul put it? "Do not quench the Spirit."

My concern is that the fears that keep people from attending Mass will remain and alter their long-term concept of Mass attendance. Our faith is centered on the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist and the community worship of the Triune God. This simply does not happen with online Masses. Given the attitudes of state authorities, the legal precedents being set, and the acquiescence of the people and too many in the Church, I worry that the future Church in America may more closely resemble the underground Churches that struggle to survive in the world's totalitarian states.