Tuesday, May 31, 2005

The Education Post I'm Not Going to Do.

Feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary

I was originally planning to do a commentary on the state of education based on a couple of in depth analyses I'd read, but as I researched it further, I discovered that I really didn't have much new to add and the my creeping boredom with it showed in the writing. So I let it go.

I was plowing through my stuffed e-mail bag when I came across a positive story of parental involvement, linked in FEE's daily brief, where parents have successfully stopped (so far, anyway) the introduction of a new sex-ed program in Maryland.

Then I heard during a replay of Kresta in the Afternoon about the story where all the teachers in a California school district were named "Teacher of the Year" to protest Gov. Schwarzenegger's merit pay proposal. Yes, the local teachers association is refusing to cite a teacher for excellence because it sounds too similar to the idea of paying teachers based on performance in the classroom.

The juxtaposition of these two events speaks for itself in many ways in terms of the problems and the solutions. The thing is I can't get myself worked up about this stuff anymore. My wife and I were always going to send the Troglotykes to Catholic school. No matter what. Today, we can afford the tuition. And when we can, we give extra money for tuition assistance to the financially strapped. Should something ever happen to limit our ability to do these things, we would avail ourselves of any and all assistance provided by the Church to continue to send our kids to school; pride be damned. I would that everyone sent their children to Catholic school without one thin dime coming from the government (vouchers, or what have you)--there are always uncuttable strings attached to such money--but I don't see it happening anytime soon. But happen soon something must (a little Yoda-speak there), lest UC Riverside professor Marlene Zuk's vision of the future befall us:
Students have always deluded themselves, of course, and hope has always sprung eternal, or at least until final grades appear. And at least some in my classes really do eventually master the material. But confident placidity in the face of error seems to be on the rise.

Maybe it's all that self-esteem this generation of students was inculcated with as youngsters, or maybe it's the emphasis on respecting everyone else's opinion, to the point where no answer, even a mathematical one, can be truly wrong because that might offend the one who gave it. Maybe they think they should never let me see them sweat.

These explanations all seem too facile as I gaze into their smiling faces and feel like an academic Cassandra, predicting doom and disaster where they see only cheer. As graduation nears, I wonder whether they will become surgeons happily removing the wrong organs or just sales clerks unconcernedly giving incorrect change.

Be worried, I want to tell them. Then I realize they don't know the meaning of the word.

Monday, May 30, 2005

John Paul the Great on Truth and Freedom #3

Memorial Day Observed

The Gospel contains a fundamental paradox: to find life, one must lose life; to be born, one must die; to save oneself, one must take up the cross. This is the essential truth of the Gospel, which always and everywhere is bound to meet with man's protest.

Always and everywhere the Gospel will be a challenge to human weakness. But precisely in this challenge lies all its power. Man, perhaps subconsciously waits for such a challenge; indeed, man feels the inner need to transcend himself. Only in transcending himself does man become fully human... (emphasis in original)
Crossing the Threshold of Hope

Happy Birthday Troglotyke #7!

[Original posted 2:08 PM, Friday, May 27]

10 lbs. 1 oz. All doing well so far.

Update:

The Troglodytrix and Troglotyke #7 came home yesterday afternoon. Both are doing well. Thank you to all who offered prayers on their behalf for their health. And thank you to all who have sent warm wishes. We have been blessed truly with the stewardship of another precious (or does his size make that precocious?) person and also by knowing there are many with us lending support. God bless.

Friday, May 27, 2005

John Paul the Great on the Sanctity of Life #1

Memorial of St. Augustine of Canterbury

The life which God gives man is quite different from the life of all other living creatures, inasmuch as man... is a manifestation of God in the world, a sign of his presence, a trace of his glory. ... Man has been given a sublime identity, based on the intimate bond which unites him to his Creator: in man there shines forth a reflection of God himself. ... The life which God offers to man is a gift by which God shares something of himself with his creature.
Evangelium Vitae

Potpourri 2

To help weather the blogging advisory, I have cobbled together some recent links to interesting things off my list of regulars for your enjoyment. Pax.

PowerBlog
Those Progressive Conservatives
Of Mice and Men: What it Means to be Human
Celebrating Chimeras

Southern Appeal
What was that Easter Islander thinking?
Red Staters not so dumb
How is it possible to believe in God?
Economics for the citizen

Catholic Analysis
Great Introduction to Benedict XVI
What Happened?

Catholic Ragemonkey
A Good Day Off
Following the Design Protocol

Flit(tm)
French Bush Fans
Eternal Web Life

Roman Catholic Blog
Group Says Blessed Mother to Appear in Alabama

Hugh Hewitt
3:oo PM Pacific, Thursday, May 26, 2005

Mullings
Compromise! Drat.
Bad News from France & Germany. Good!

Updated Prayer Request and Intermittent Blogging Advisory

Even though there is still a week to go for full term, the Troglodytrix is tentatively scheduled to be induced this morning because the baby is large (already estimated to be ~9 lbs.) and "advanced maternal age" (over 35). In light of earlier complications during this pregnancy, there are still concerns about the planned standard delivery. Prayers for the health of mother and child have worked so far, and so I ask that you please keep 'em coming as we wait in joyful hope for our introduction to Troglotyke #7. Thank you and God bless.

Thursday, May 26, 2005

More Like Someone to Emulate, I Should Think

Memorial of St. Philip Neri

John Paul II
You are Pope John Paul II. You are a force to be
reckoned with.


Which Twentieth Century Pope Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

(cap tip: Jelly-Pinched Theatre)

No Mandate Exists for Expanding Federal Embryonic Stem Cell Research

A recent nationwide Gallup poll finds the nation is evenly split regarding federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. This is despite pollsters not providing a key context element that identifies how much federal money is already going toward adult stem cell research. Also, nearly 6 in 10 Republicans support the president's current policy.

A veto-proof margin by the Senate to fund embryonic stem cell research clearly would be out of step with the American public. Please, tell me about that "cooling saucer" bit again.

Red's Purple Reign Ends with Vikings Sale to Zygi Wilf Group Approved by NFL

Happy trails, Red. Don't let the saloon door spank you on the way out.

Judaism and Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Embryonic-stem-cell research is an area of remarkable moral and theological consensus among Jews (Reform and Orthodox). Given that Judaism is biased in favor medicine and there are no clear grounds in Jewish law for treating human embryos as inviolable, it then follows that potentially life-saving research trumps any moral concerns about the exploitation and destruction of human embryos in the laboratory. This ought to trouble any of us observing our "elder brothers in faith." Eric Cohen, of the EPPC, challenges his fellow Jews, particularly the Orthodox, on a couple of fronts including the celebration of God's majestic creation. His truffle quotes begin:
Human dignity does not depend on being wanted by others; and being doomed to death does not make human beings into things -- otherwise, the terminally ill would be in danger of being turned into ready sources of organs. In the end, the moral question hinges on the moral standing of human embryos themselves -- on what human embryos are and what we owe them. And it seems irresponsible for Judaism to seek the fruits of modern science without confronting the facts [of] modern biology -- which demonstrates, beyond reasonable doubt, that the embryo is a complete human organism from the moment of conception, with purposeful division and development from the very beginning, and with primordial limbs, organs, and beating heart tissue by age 40 days.
he goes on:
While acting positively to save life is a great Jewish good, so is preserving a society that welcomes the weak and never kills the innocent. Even if embryos are not our ontological or moral equals -- though the argument for such a position is hard to make on rational grounds -- there are good Jewish reasons not to promote the destruction of nascent human life, precisely because it will corrode the sensibilities that make us good people -- and good Jews. It is simply wrong to appeal to Jewish law on abortion, which privileges the life of the mother over the life of the unborn child, as a moral justification. Jewish law does so, after all, only in cases where the unborn child is a “pursuer” who threatens the mother’s life and health directly. With embryo research, by contrast, there is no direct conflict between an embryo and a patient, and we are not in the position of using particular embryos to save particular patients. Rather, we are proposing a speculative research project that requires the massive, ongoing destruction of human embryos. And this should make all Jews and all decent citizens shudder -- not only for what it is, but for where it might lead.
and concludes:
[A]s Jews, are we really so sure that medical progress justifies or requires the full-scale dehumanization of early human life? Have we forgotten not only the words but also the spirit of Ecclesiastes: “As thou knowest not what is the way of the wind, Nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child; Even so thou knowest not the work of God Who doeth all things”?

Bishops Evangelizing in the Blogosphere

Are there any American bishops blogging?

From Zenit:
Philippine bishops are using every tool at their disposal to reach the faithful, including the Internet and blogs. ...

Bishop Jose Manguiran of Dipolong manages The Meaning (bpmanguiran.blogspot.com), whose subtitle is "Life is meaningful only when it begins and ends with Christ."

For this, he focuses on how one can lead a Christian life in an ever-faster-paced society. He also develops arguments on various philosophical issues and lays out his personal thoughts for all to read, reported AsiaNews.

Viewpoints (ovc.blogspot.com) is the diary of Archbishop Oscar Cruz of Lingayen-Dagupan.

In it, the archbishop carries on his personal battles against what he calls society's cancers, namely gambling and illiteracy -- battles that have earned him death threats.

Then there is Tidbits (medroso.blogspot.com) by Bishop Leonardo Medroso of Borongan.

Unlike his fellow prelate bloggers, who focus on discussions and reflections, Bishop Medroso gives technical advice and spurs his readers to follow the right path. For instance, in one of the latest updates, he urged young people to go to Cologne, Germany, for the 2005 World Youth Day.

Reid Wants Swift Vote on Stem Cell Bill

[original posted at 7:52 AM, May 26, 2005]

This is also a test for mobile blogging.

So what happened to the whole "cooling saucer" thing? Also, Arlen Specter, a self-proclaimed poster boy for embryonic stem cell research, claims to have the votes to override a presidential veto.

Update:

The mobile test was partially successful. I've now added the title and the pertinent links.

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

Bishops' Aide Says House Vote Shows Ignorance, But Welcomes Support of a Bank for Cord-Blood Stem Cells

Memorial of St. Bede the Venerable
Memorial of St. Gregory VII
Memorial of St. Mary Magdalene de' Pazzi

No surprises here (thankfully). From Zenit:

A U.S. House vote in favor of federal funding for embryonic stem cell research shows "an appalling degree of ignorance … among those voting for this bill," says a bishops' aide.

On Tuesday the House of Representatives approved two bills on stem cell research. One bill would increase access to life-saving treatments by establishing a nationwide public bank for umbilical cord blood stem cells.

The other measure would force taxpayers to fund stem cell research which requires the destruction of human embryos.

President George Bush has promised to veto the embryo research bill. The House approved legislation on vote of 238-194, far less than the two-thirds support that would be needed to override a presidential veto.

"This was a David-and-Goliath story," said Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of the U.S. bishops' Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities.

"The pro-life movement and its allies in Congress went up against the combined resources of Hollywood celebrities, the research establishment, and a wealthy for-profit biotechnology industry, and fought them to a standstill," he said.

"The bill to promote killing of human embryos for their stem cells will not become law," Doerflinger said. "Yet the floor debate showed an appalling degree of ignorance
and confusion on the issue among those voting for this bill, indicating the educational challenge to be addressed before the House votes on this issue again.

"Some even said that embryonic stem cells have a proven ability to cure patients and that adult stem cells do not, whereas exactly the opposite is true," he said.

"The good news," said the bishops' aide, "is that the House of Representatives voted nearly unanimously to encourage the broader use of cord blood stem cells in research and treatment, an ethical and exceptionally promising field. This bill also has strong bipartisan support in the Senate and President Bush's strong support. It should be enacted into law without delay, so it can begin helping patients with devastating disease."

"It is always wrong for government to promote the destruction of innocent human life," said Doerflinger. "Society must focus its efforts on promoting medical research that all Americans can live with."

Complexity as an Excuse for Inaction

A Coalition for Darfur Post

A few weeks ago, PBS aired a made-for-HBO film about the 1994 genocide in Rwanda called "Sometimes in April." Following the presentation, journalist Jeff Greenfield held a panel discussion about world's last of response to Rwanda and the similarities to the current genocide in Darfur.

Former Deputy Secretary of State Paul Wolfowitz was among the panelists and during the discussion, made the following points

Wolfowitz: One of the things that bears thinking about from the Rwanda experience, and everyone of these cases is different, and I think one ought to recognize that. But it seems to me that the thing that stuck me as unique about the Rwanda experience, on the one hand the sheer horror of it, with the exception of the Holocaust and even then at a sort of per day rate, this was probably the worst genocide ever. But secondly, and we'll never know this for sure because you never know the course that wasn't taken, but it was seem as though a relatively modest military action aimed at eliminating that regime could have ended the genocide and ended it rather quickly.

What strikes me and seems to me is true in Rwanda, is true in Bosnia, is true in World War II, is true in Cambodia, this kind of systematic, one-sided elimination of a population is not done spontaneously by another ethnic group, it's organized by a criminal gang and if that criminal gang had been eliminated in Rwanda the genocide would have ended.

But that comes to my last point which is, then it depends on how do you conceive of the peacekeeping operation and nobody proposed, that I know of, going in and taking out the government.

Greenfield: Should they have?

Wolfowitz: I think so, yes.

[edit]

Wolfowitz: This is not a simple problem. The Rwanda case, I think, is striking because it at least it looks in hindsight to have been so simple to prevent something that was so horrible. But most of these cases are complicated ... In a way the Rwanda case is helpful for thinking about things but in some ways it's misleading because most cases are a little more difficult.

Wolfowitz openly argued that the world should have intervened in Rwanda, but them makes the strikingly disingenuous argument that Rwanda was somehow "simpler" than the current situation in Darfur.

Rwanda is only "simpler" because it is now over and hindsight allows us to see just how, where and why the world failed. But in 1994, with bodies filling the streets, Rwanda did not appear to be simple at all

U.S. Opposes Plan for U.N. Force in Rwanda
By PAUL LEWIS
12 May 1994
The New York Times

UNITED NATIONS, May 11 -- As
rebel forces of the Rwanda Patriotic Front pressed their attack today against the capital, Kigali, the United States criticized a new United Nations plan to send some 5,500 soldiers into the heart of the Rwandan civil war to protect refugees and assist relief workers, saying it is more than the organization can handle.

[edit]

While not excluding any course of action, Ms. Albright said it remains unclear whether African countries are ready or able to send forces for such a dangerous and complicated mission at the epicenter of a raging civil war.
Ten years later, it now appears as if a few relatively simple measures backed by the necessary political will could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. But in 1994, the genocide appeared massively complex and that complexity was routinely cited as a justification for not intervening.

And Wolfowitz is making exactly the same justification for not intervening in Darfur today.

Were there feasible solutions to Rwanda? In hindsight, the answer is obviously "yes." Are there feasible solutions to Darfur? It is hard to say because right now it seems so complex, but there certainly are if the world powers can muster the will to address them.

But unfortunately, it is far more likely that ten years from now, when perhaps another one million Africans have needlessly died, we'll wonder why we did not act when "it looks in hindsight to have been so simple to prevent something that was so horrible."

Brownback Condemns House Vote on Embryonic Stem Cell Research

The good senator is spot-on, as usual. Do I smell a filibuster (see emphasis below)? From Christian News Wire:

"The vote in the House to allow taxpayer-funded destruction of young human lives is deeply troubling," Brownback said. "We all have a duty to protect the innocent, and this vote represents a failure to recognize the scientific fact that stem cell research that destroys embryos kills young human children.

"We don't need destructive research when efficacious and ethical alternatives exist. In fact, after 20 years of work in mice, human embryonic stem cell research has not resulted in a single human application, and results in mice are, at best, very modest. On the other hand, ethical non-destructive research has resulted in at least 58 different types of treatments and cures for real people." ...

Brownback continued, "I have conveyed to Senate leadership that we must do everything we can procedurally to stop unethical embryonic stem cell research in the Senate and I will work to do just that. We simply should not go down the road of using taxpayer dollars to kill young humans. Destroying embryos for any reason remains unethical and unnecessary."

Looking for a Pro-life Party

American Life League president Judie Brown on the consequences of the cynical mores of getting elected:

"I said it then, and I must say it now, there is a huge difference between the truly pro-life politician and the many political figures, including some in the Republican Party, who will say whatever it takes to be elected." ...

This vote in the U.S. House approves the killing of innocent preborn babies for the sake of harvesting their body parts - their stem cells. The bill would not have passed without the support of numerous GOP members. "It is a perfect example of the hypocrisy that has slowly infected many in the Republican Party and particularly those claiming to be pro-life," said Brown. "Whether the innocent human being is a few hours old or nine months old, an act that intentionally kills him is always intrinsically evil. That this action is being taken for a perceived 'good' is irrelevant; evil can never be justified. Human embryonic stem cell research is inherently evil." ...

"The fact that such a bill has been approved by a legislative body in which the majority claims to be 'pro-life' would seem to offer certain proof that too may politicians excel at offering lip service, while doing nothing proactive to save innocent lives," said Brown. "Perhaps it is finally going to dawn on the entire pro-life community that there is no such thing as a genuinely pro-life political party in the United States."

So, shall we pack up and go home? I'm reminded of The West Wing (used to have the best writing on TV) episode "The Portland Trip," where Josh spars with a gay Republican who opposes a gay marriage bill. During the exchange the congressman tells Josh he doesn't understand why those who oppose the NRA don't join the organization, show up one day with 3 million people and call a vote. It's either that, or we take a Pat Robertson-like mushy approach for '08.

A Saintly Salmagundi Hangs Up the Blogging Spikes

Godspeed, Fr. Sibley. (cap tip: RCB)

House Resolution Honors U.S. Nun Slain in Brazil

For those losing confidence, the House did do something positive.

Tuesday, May 24, 2005

Stem Cell Votes Set for House Today

[original posted at 8:47 AM, May 24, 2005]

This is a pro-life culture check. One of the things we need to keep in mind is what the attraction is to embryonic stem cells. Per Leon Kass, chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics:

[H]uman embryonic stem cells hold great interest and present research opportunities of great moment and promise, primarily because of their pluripotency—their capacity to give rise to the various specialized cells of the body—and because of their self-renewing longevity, their ability to be propagated in this form for many generations in laboratory culture without losing this pluripotency.

Earlier this month the PCBE issued a white paper, Alternative Sources of Human Pluripotent Stem Cells, which highlighted that there are no readily available, ethical alternatives with these characteristics (Zenit has a good rundown on the paper). In addition to pushing research forward with adult stem cells and stem cells from umbilical cord blood, Congress ought to consider funding research for the one ethical option the council investigated, reprogramming somatic cells so as to restore to them the pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. That is, of course, if you reject the reasonable premise that the federal government should not be funding basic research in the first place.

Update:

Ignoring President Bush's veto threat, the House voted 238-194, well short of the two-thirds majority needed to override a veto, to loosen limits on embryonic stem cell research. The president again called the bill a mistake and said he would veto it.

Heritage Panel Doubts Returns on Embryonic Stem Cell Investments

The Heritage Foundation hosted a panel discussion May 10 in Washington, D.C., “Stem Cell Research: What Taxpayers Must Know,” to raise and discuss the issues embedded in our current national debate on stem cell research, not just ethical and religious views, but practical and scientific issues as well. The truffle quote comes from Dave Weldon, Florida congressman and physician, who is in turn quoting embryonic stem cell advocate William Haseltine, CEO of Human Genome Sciences, Inc., of Rockville, Maryland:
The routine utilization of human embryonic stem cells for medicine is 20 to 30 years hence. The timeline to commercialization is so long that I simply would not invest. You may notice that our company has not made such investments.

Weldon continues himself:

And what's going on in California with the taxpayers funding embryonic stem cell research is that the taxpayers are funding what the venture capitalists will not fund. And that's exactly what's going on in this city: People are trying to get the federal taxpayers to fund what the venture capitalists will not fund. (emphasis added)

Rich Galen is Outraged!

Senate Deal is Not a Good One

However, it's not clear whether this is a bad deal. Hewitt and Southern Appeal have more. The fallout is here are two guys for whom I will not campaign in the '08 primaries: Bill Frist and John McCain.

Sunday, May 22, 2005

HTML Color Quiz

Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity

you are khaki
#F0E68C

Your dominant hues are red and green, so you're definately not afraid to get in and stir things up. You have no time for most people's concerns, you'd rather analyze with your head than be held back by some random "gut feeling".

Your saturation level is lower than average - You don't stress out over things and don't understand people who do. Finishing projects may sometimes be a challenge, but you schedule time as you see fit and the important things all happen in the end, even if not everyone sees your grand master plan.

Your outlook on life is bright. You see good things in situations where others may not be able to, and it frustrates you to see them get down on everything.
the spacefem.com html color quiz

(cap tip: idle mendacity)

Reciprocity Round-up

In what I hope to have as a regular feature, I will provide a few links (usually five, or so) to recent posts that catch my eye from sites on my reciprocal blogroll (those who I know link to me, but are not on my "check daily" list)--sort of my own unsolicited carnival, I suppose. Enjoy.

Clairity's Place: Families in Movement
Flos Carmeli: A Quotation for the Day
Fructus Ventris: The Medium, The Message
Gathering Goat Eggs: The Beautiful Is the Good, Darn It
Hanging on to Nothing: Kill the public school
Happy Catholic: Joe Marshall, a Gentleman Who Defends the Whole Truth
Idle Mendacity: Loyola unfazed by church criticism

The Faltering Public Square Voice of Archbishop Flynn Redux (Letter to the Editor)

Here's the streamlined version of a previous post that I submitted to the StarTribune. One of the highlights of Archbishop Flynn's episcopal service now included, in addition to the surge in Perpetual Adoration sites in the Twin Cities, is the increase in vocations, a development which RCB has also noted.

In February, George Weigel argued that the most significant development in US Catholic life in 2004 was that several individual bishops vindicated Vatican II by rediscovering their voices as authentic teachers of the faith. While bemoaning the USCCB's bureaucratic response of forming a committee to address the "crisis" of a Catholic presidential nominee who long openly defied Catholic teaching, he was heartened by a new development:

With the archbishops of St. Louis and Denver in the lead, local bishops around the country decided that, rather than waiting on the conference's lethargic "process," they would reclaim the teaching authority Vatican II had taught was theirs.
Archbishops Burke and Chaput were joined by others soon after the election who recognized that participation in the political process is a moral obligation, including Archbishop Flynn and the Minnesota Catholic Conference. For 2005, in addition to testifying before the legislature, the MCC issued a 13-item priority list and pastoral letters and messages on educational choice, taxation and the state's budget, and marriage. Despite disagreeing with three MCC objectives, I welcome the addition of the episcopal voice to the public arena.

After his stepping into the political spotlight following 10 years in the relative shadows, the StarTribune published an interview with Archbishop Flynn, “Flynn takes on Pawlenty.” The topic that has gotten the most play is, of course, one of those on which I disagree, raising taxes.

First, I do agree that the budget is a moral statement, and it is easy to miss how decisions related to it affect those in need. But it does not follow that the proper action is to raise taxes. Did the MCC and the archbishop not consider that the current budget priorities may be misaligned, and that it may be more moral to redirect monies from illicit, or ineffective, programs rather than advocate extracting more funds from the populace?

Like Archbishop Flynn, we're not starving either, but given that Minnesotans are already among the most taxed in the nation, it is not clear why that must translate to higher taxes. Consider raising already high taxes always reduces the desired behavior and the corresponding revenue. And taxes collected for a given purpose never get close to going dollar for dollar to that purpose. And there are other ways.

The Eucharist is at the core of the Catholic mission. We are called to bring others in solidarity to Christ through His Church. Solidarity requires we pay taxes and fees to allow the state to administer to those in need, and we do. Solidarity also requires we act as individuals, using the gifts bestowed on us by the Holy Spirit, to the benefit of the common good.

My wife and I are growing the Church with seven children. We are evangelizing youth with four currently in Catholic school. And we raise money, volunteer services, and give thousands of dollars per year to Catholic organizations that do a far better job of stretching a dollar to help people than does the state. Higher taxes reduce our freedom to act in the way we ought and does not hold the state government to account for what it already has. As a result, I struggle with adopting the archbishop's view where he “would be happy to pay [more] if [he] knew a single mother was going to be assisted…"

We have been blessed to have Archbishop Flynn. Since he has come to the Twin Cities, there have been a substantial increases in two areas related to the Eucharist: Perpetual Adoration sites and vocations. Such a shepherd must have a unique insight he can share through a pastoral letter that serves us better than the MCC’s teaching on the need for higher taxes.

As misguided as I think he is on taxes, I do welcome the archbishop's voice in the public square and generally find his new assertiveness to the good. Unfortunately, some of the political positions he has emphasized that are not matters of Catholic dogma (specifics with which a faithful Catholic may disagree) have caused confusion regarding those things that are. Still, I pray His Excellency will better strengthen his voice from the foundation of the Eucharist through better considered teachings.

Saturday, May 21, 2005

The Faltering Public Square Voice of Archbishop Flynn

Memorial of St. Christopher Magallanes and his companions

In February George Weigel argued that the most significant development in US Catholic life in 2004 was that several individual bishops vindicated Vatican II by rediscovering their voices as authentic teachers of the faith. While bemoaning the USCCB's bureaucratic response of forming a committee, which would not take serious action until after the election, to address the "crisis" of a Catholic presidential nominee who openly defied Catholic teaching for decades, he was heartened by a new development:

With the archbishops of St. Louis and Denver in the lead, local bishops around the country decided that, rather than waiting on the conference's lethargic "process," they would reclaim the teaching authority Vatican II had taught was theirs. Thus, while the bishops' conference had nothing of consequence to say about "Catholics and politics" during the heat of the 2004 debate, Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver (to take but one example of the new trend) produced a magisterial of-ed essay for the New York Times, demolishing the notion of Catholic sectarianism and challenging the entire nation to bring conscience to bear in public life.
Not only did Archbishops Burke and Chaput not shrink from the public square, they were joined by others before and soon after the election who recognized that participation in the political process is a moral obligation, including the Minnesota Conference with Archbishop Flynn. In addition to testifying before the Minnesota Legislature, the MCC issued a priority list of 13 items and pastoral letters and messages on educational choice, taxation and the state's budget, and marriage. In general, even though I strongly disagree with three of the MCC's objectives, I welcome the addition of the episcopal voice to the public arena.

Recognizing that after 10 years of relative quiet, Archbishop Flynn has stepped into the political spotlight, and with the legislative year winding down, the StarTribune has published a recent interview (free reg. may be req'd, links usually good for 2 weeks) with him. The area that has gotten the most play is, of course, one of those topics on which I disagree. Here's an excerpt:

On his decision to speak out for higher taxes:

"It's so easy to make decisions on a budget without really knowing how that decision is going to affect a single mother, someone who needs assistance in health care, someone who needs child care. When I heard them [legislators] talking about cutbacks and no increase in taxes at all, I was compelled to do something. I pay taxes, you know, and my salary is about $2,200 a month plus room and board, so I'm not starving. I wouldn't mind a tax increase. I would be happy to pay it if I knew a single mother was going to be assisted, to put her child in a day care center so that she could go out and do her work and not worry about that child. I'm not going to let this go. I'm hosting a meeting of religious leaders at my residence within the next month, simply to keep revisiting this, so we don't let it get lost, this idea that the state budget is a moral statement."

First, I agree with the notions that the budget is a moral statement and it is easy to lose sight of how decisions related to it affect those in need directly. But it does not follow that the proper action is to raise taxes. Could it be that the current budget priorities are out of whack and that it is more moral to redirect monies from illicit, or ineffective, programs rather than advocate attempting to extract more funds from the populace at the point of a gun?

We're not starving either. We do quite well, thank you. But Minnesotans are already among the most taxed in the nation. And raising already high taxes always reduces the desired behavior and the corresponding revenue. And incremental monies collected for a given purpose never get close to going dollar for dollar to that purpose. And there are other ways.

The Eucharist is at the center of our mission as Catholics. We are called to bring others to Christ through His Church. Solidarity requires we pay taxes and fees to allow the state to administer to those in need, and we do. Solidarity also requires that we act as individuals and families, using the gifts bestowed on us by the Holy Spirit, to the benefit of the common good.

My wife and I have seven children (using the domestic church to build the Church Militant). We have four in Catholic school currently (a primary method for evangelizing youth). And we, as a family, help raise money, volunteer services, and give thousands of dollars per year to a list of Catholic organizations (including the archdiocese) that does a far better job of stretching a dollar to help people than does the state. Raising taxes beyond their already high rates reduces our freedom to act in the way we ought. So even if it were truly possible, I would have a tough time buying into the archbishop's idea that "I would be happy to pay [more taxes] if I knew a single mother was going to be assisted, to put her child in a day care center so that she could go out and do her work and not worry about that child."

I admit that this is a bit of an uncharitable rant. Nevertheless, I do welcome the archbishop's voice in the public square and think that his change this year, particularly compared to his previous general silence, is to the good. Unfortunately, some of the political positions he has emphasized that are not matters of Catholic dogma (things with which a faithful Catholic may disagree) have caused confusion regarding those things that are a matter of dogma. Still, I hope and pray His Excellency will better strengthen his voice from the foundation of the Blessed Sacrament, from which, as I have noted many times before, I am certain he has a special insight to draw.

No Sanctions for Minneapolis Church That Ignored Archbishop

[original posted 3:18 PM, May 19, 2005]

Confusion remains in the archdiocese:

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - A church that granted Holy Communion to members wearing rainbow sashes on Pentecost Sunday will not be reprimanded by Archbishop Harry Flynn, a spokesman for the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis said. A handful of St. Stephen's members wore the multicolored fabric bands, according to members of the south Minneapolis Roman Catholic church and Brian McNeill, organizer of the Rainbow Sash Alliance.

The alliance has been encouraging supporters to wear the multicolored fabric bands each Pentecost Sunday since 2001 to show support to gay Catholics, but Flynn had told the group this month that they would not receive Communion because the sashes appeared to have become a protest against church teaching.

Archdiocese spokesman Dennis McGrath said he had asked the archbishop if there would be repercussions for churches that granted communion to sash-wearing congregants. Flynn's reply was no, McGrath said.

I am convinced now, more than ever, that a pastoral teaching is needed from Archbishop Flynn.

Update:

Still more confusion, this time from the archbishop's recent interview (free reg. may be req'd, links usually good for 2 weeks) with the StarTribune:

On whether there will be any repercussions for St. Joan of Arc [another Minneapolis parish], where sash-wearers continue to receive communion:

"I'd rather not get into that today."

Friday, May 20, 2005

John Paul the Great on Solidarity and Human Relationships #1

Memorial of St. Bernardine of Siena

Solidarity is not a feeling of vague compassion or shallow distress at the misfortunes of so many people, both near and far. On the contrary, it is a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good; that is to say to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all. ...

The exercise of solidarity within each society is valid when its members recognize one another as persons. Those who are more influential, because they have a greater share of goods and common services, should feel responsible for the weaker and be ready to share with them all they possess. Those who are weaker, for their part, in the same spirit of solidarity, should not adopt a purely passive attitude or one that is destructive of the social fabric, but, while claiming their legitimate rights, should do what they can for the good of all. The intermediate groups, in their turn, should not selfishly insist on their particular interests, but respect the interests of others.
Sollicitudo Rei Socialis

Welcome to Readers from City Pages' Babelogue

I May Not Be Buying Pepsi for Awhile

Michelle Malkin has the round-up. Follow the links from Hewitt for some new twists on "the finger."

President Bush Threatens to Veto Stem Cell Bill

I pray it never reaches his desk, but I am thankful that the bill will stop there if it does. What is encouraging is to see alternate source legislation get promoted, such as the use of umbilical cord blood.

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush on Friday said he would veto legislation that would loosen restrictions on embryonic stem cell research and expressed deep concern about human cloning research in South Korea. ...

A measure by Reps. Mike Castle, R-Del., and Diana DeGette, D-Colo., would lift Bush's 2001 ban on the use of federal dollars for research using any new embryonic stem cell lines.

''I made very clear to Congress that the use of federal money, taxpayer's money, to promote science which destroys life in order to save life - I'm against that,'' Bush said. ''Therefore, if the bill does that, I would veto it.''

But Duffy said the administration looked favorably at a bill to encourage stem cell research that uses blood from umbilical cords. That measure is being pushed by House Republican leaders as an alternate to the Castle-DeGette bill. Duffy stopped short of endorsing the alternate legislation but said it has promise. (emphasis added)

The Misguided Solution to HIV/AIDS

Three weeks ago I highlighted that that there are many organizations, like CRS, who minister to those in crisis and refuse to deny the fully authentic human nature of those they serve. This is in contrast to many NGOs that distribute and promote the use of condoms to limit the spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa. Despite the good intentions, this practice serves what John Paul the Great called the "pulverization of the fundamental uniqueness of each human person" by preventing the self-giving in human sexual love, thereby denying it as an icon of the inner life of God as the Holy Trinity. Since my post, Oswald Sobrino at Catholic Analysis has put out (what I expect is) an ongoing series on the truth behind the error of promoting condoms. Here's the mushroom harvest:

The Anti-Catholic Obsession of Liberals
More on Church, AIDS, and Condoms
The Real Agenda in the AIDS/Condom Controversy
Crisis Editor on AIDS/Condom Issue

Thursday, May 19, 2005

Scientists Speed Creation of Stem Cells

As I read this, I keep hearing the voice of the mathematician in Jurassic Park saying that because we can do something doesn't mean we should do it. Not to mention the production line mentality that smacks of Huxley's horror.

South Korean scientists have dramatically sped up the creation of human embryonic stem cells, growing 11 new batches that for the first time were a genetic match for injured or sick patients.

It is a major advancement in the quest to grow patients' own replacement tissue to treat diseases.

The same scientists last year were the first to clone a human embryo. Now they have improved, by more than tenfold, their efficiency at culling these master cells, thus making pursuit of therapeutic cloning more practical.

"I didn't think they would be at this stage for decades, let alone within a year," said Dr. Gerald Schatten of the University of Pittsburgh. He acted as an adviser to the Korean lab in analyzing its data, which was being published Friday in the journal Science.

"This paper will be of major impact," said stem-cell researcher Dr. Rudolph Jaenisch of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass. "The argument that it will not work in humans will not be tenable after this."

This research is not cloning to make babies. Instead, scientists create test-tube embryos to supply stem cells - the building blocks which give rise to every tissue in the body - that are a genetic match for a particular patient and thus won't be rejected by the immune system.

The cloning isn't to make babies? Gee, isn't that comforting? Why is that we can export the false gospel of Prosperity, but we can't export our alleged ethical qualms on embryonic stem cell research?

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

Delays and Complications

Memorial of St. John I
A Coalition for Darfur Post

The genocide in Darfur began more than two years ago. Since then, more than 400,000 people have died and the international community has yet to take any concrete action toward stopping the violence or helping the nearly 2 million displaced return to their destroyed villages and resume semi-normal lives.

And the longer the world delays, the more complicated the situation seems to become.

Just last week, the UNHCR was forced to pull its staff out of four refugee camps in Chad after five of its workers were wounded in protests over food distribution. The same day, two refugees and two Chadian police officers were killed during a clash in another camp.

Also last week, two drivers for the World Food Program were killed and rebels abducted
but later released 17 members of the African Union ceasefire monitoring force.

The UN reported that militia attacks have intensified in the last month and there are now reports that rebels in the East have amassed along the border with Eritrea, potentially creating a Darfur-like conflict there as well.

All the while, the world makes symbolic gestures of concern and assistance. The AU has decided to expand its force in Darfur but lacks the troops, money and logistical resources necessary to fully do so. Help from NATO has been requested but has not yet materialized. For domestic political reasons of its own, Canada recently pledged to send 100 troops to Darfur but has since backed off because of objections from Sudan. Meanwhile, leaders from Egypt, Libya, Chad, Nigeria, Sudan, Gabon and Eritrea jointly announced their rejection of "any foreign intervention in the Darfur problem."

The crisis in Darfur is by no means simple and solutions are going to require serious thought and real political will. Unfortunately, Darfur has not yet been able to garner either. But the longer the world refuses to deal with this, the more complicated the situation is going to become.

Marking John Paul the Great's Birthday

Another opportunity to plug Fr. Tharp's prayer...

George Lucas: I Meant the OTHER Evil Empire

George Lucas at the world premiere for "Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith," commented on the saga's applicability to the war in Iraq:

"In terms of evil, one of the original concepts was how does a democracy turn itself into a dictatorship," Lucas told a news conference at Cannes, where his final episode had its world premiere.

"The parallels between what we did in Vietnam and what we're doing in Iraq now are unbelievable.

"On the personal level it was how does a good person turn into a bad person, and part of the observation of that is that most bad people think they are good people, they are doing it for the right reasons."


Arthur Chrenkoff says, "I'd like to be fitted for a black hat, please," but TM Lutas is not so willing to give up the white hat. I appreciate Chrenkoff's sentiment, but I'm going to side with Lutas here.

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

USCCB Poll Still Finds Opposition to Federal Funding of Embryonic Stem Cell Research

USCCB, citing a recent poll, claimed Monday that a majority of Americans oppose the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research:

A majority of Americans, 52 percent, oppose federal funding of embryonic stem cell research while just 36 percent support it, according to a new poll commissioned by the Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).

Such funding is being considered by the U.S. House of Representatives, which may soon vote on a bill (H.R. 810) to fund research requiring human embryos to be destroyed for their stem cells.

When respondents were told that scientists disagree on whether embryonic stem cells, or stem cells from adult tissues and umbilical cord blood, may end up being most successful in treating diseases, 60% favored funding only the research avenues that raise no moral problem, while 22% favored funding all stem cell research including the kind that involves destroying embryos.

“It is always wrong for government to promote the destruction of innocent human life,” said Richard M. Doerflinger, Deputy Director of the USCCB Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities. “To do so when a clear majority of the taxpayers themselves reject this approach would be especially irresponsible.”

(cap tip: Insight Scoop)

We can expect that if the MSM comments on this at all, it will be to dismiss it as partisan, and there is a kernel of truth to that charge. There is a weakness in the polls released by the USCCB, which was highlighted by Matthew Nisbet of Ohio State last year.

Nisbet cited polls conducted by the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF), which backs using embryonic stem cells, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), which opposes it.

The JDRF poll discusses using extra embryos "donated to research" and the question includes mention of possible cures that detractors say may never see the light of day. Meanwhile, the USCCB poll points out how unborn children are destroyed in their first days of life and mentions that advocates of the research want taxpayer funding for it.

The JDRF poll found that 65 percent of Americans backed embryonic stem cell research, but 70 percent opposed it when asked by the USCCB. "The fact that the public can be influenced so much by how the questions are worded tells me that Americans are susceptible to be influenced by groups on both sides. It depends on who crafts a message that appeals most to the public," Nisbet said.

Despite the mixed results, Nisbet said his analysis showed that public support overall was strongest for adult stem cell research or embryonic stem cell research only involving frozen embryos that would be destroyed otherwise.

In this light, the majority cited by this recent poll appears to be soft. While I understand the desire to put an encouraging face on our position, particularly when there is legislation pending, in the spirit of KUL agreement #4 (we can only be free in truth, and the measure of truth is reality), I hope that somebody at the USCCB's behest has been commissioning an unpublished poll question all along that includes a reference to embryos that will likely be destroyed anyway, so that at some point we can analyze the trend of Americans who support embryonic stem cell research when it is cast in a more favorable light and contrast it to the published questions from coherent sample populations. Then we will be in a better position to understand where hearts and minds are heading; where our arguments are working, and where they are not.

Inch by Inch the Rifts Will Heal

In a document released yesterday, Mary: Hope and Grace in Christ, the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, a non-authoritative joint church group that represents the primary Anglican-Catholic ecumenical dialogue, tells Anglicans it is time to backtrack on centuries of dissent about the Virgin:
We have agreed together that the teaching about Mary in the two definitions of
1854 and 1950, understood within the biblical pattern of the economy of grace
and hope outlined here, can be said to be consonant with the teaching of the
Scriptures and the ancient common traditions
but notes that Anglicans are not obligated to accept these doctrines as part of belief. As a commenter on jimmyakin.org noted, that is why they are Anglicans. Given that the document appears to be in line with Catholic Doctrine, I for one will take this as a positive development; it will be interesting to see how much fur will fly in the Anglican Communion.

(cap tips: Southern Appeal, Defensor Fidei)

Monday, May 16, 2005

Moral, Ethical Qualms Could Put Brakes on Embryonic Stem Cell Advances in America

I would that it were so.

Abortion Puts the Next Baby at Risk

Surpise, surprise, surprise! You mean there are temporal effects of sin? Oops. That's not very charitable. I'll try again...

Just more information that the usual suspects will not want included as part of making an informed "choice." As you'd expect, this story is getting some play in the Catholic blogosphere.

(cap tips: CRM, Flit(tm), RCB)

John Paul the Great on the Sacraments #1

Eucharistic worship is not so much worship of the inaccessible transcendence as worship of the divine condescension, and it is also the merciful and redeeming transformation of the world in the human heart.
Dominicae Cenae

Sorry Don't Feed the Bulldog, Newsweek

NEW YORK (AP) - Newsweek magazine has apologized for errors in a story alleging that interrogators at the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay desecrated the Quran, saying it would re-examine the accusations, which sparked outrage and deadly protests in Afghanistan.

Fifteen people died and scores were injured in violence between protesters and security forces, prompting U.S. promises to investigate the allegations. After Muslim leaders in several countries assailed the U.S. over the allegations, Pentagon officials blamed Newsweek for the flare-up and accused it of "irresponsible" reporting.

Two thoughts come to mind. The first is along the lines of Fr. Tharp's non-linear response. The second is that for all the progress made in Afghanistan, we can still see the amount of work that remains to be done if an old media outlet can incite such deadly outrage there.

Sunday, May 15, 2005

Sashayers Denied Communion at St. Paul Cathedral

Solemnity of Pentecost

Fortunately, this appears to not have been as disruptive as in the past.

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) - A Roman Catholic priest denied communion to more than 100 people Sunday, saying they could not receive the sacrament because they wore rainbow-colored sashes to church to show support for gay Catholics.

Before offering communion, the Rev. Michael Sklucazek told the congregation at the Cathedral of St. Paul that anyone wearing a sash could come forward for a blessing but would not receive wine and bread. [sic]

There is not much I can add that I have not covered already (here and here for those keeping score at home), but, of course, that won't stop me from trying.

I agree with Archbishop Harry Flynn's belief that the Eucharist is a source of healing and unity, and that it should not be an occasion for political scrutinizing and judgments. However, wearing the Rainbow Sash is an overtly political act itself and a statement of defiance of Church teaching. Whether "publicly [claimomg a] place at Christ's table, sacramentally expressing the truth in [their] lives, and calling the church to embrace a new day of integrity and freedom," "to show sympathy for the gay and lesbian community," or "to stand in solidarity with those that are being oppressed," doing so at the Communion table seems to me a public act at least contrary to the First Commandment in one of two ways (depending on the individual and beyond my ability to judge).

Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willfull refusal to assent to it. Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same... [Catechism of the Catholic Church #2089]

For most participating, this is a grave act committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent. Denying Communion under this condition is not oppression, but simply recognizing the public expression of an authentic, interior conflict with Grace.

As an observer, it is easy to have the opinion of Cathedral parishioner, Larry Pavlicek:
"If you're going to be a Catholic, either live with it, or call yourself something different," he said. "They're trying to change something that has been taught by the church for 2,000 years."
Our challenge is that, when facing the dictatorship of relativism in all its forms, the clarity with which we must always act requires charity for our part, even when we have difficulty accepting that responsibility. Also, I think that there is still a haze of confusion in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis that requires His Excellency to come forward very soon with a fuller teaching of the Eucharist based on his gifted understanding.

We continue to pray daily for Archbishop Flynn, the archdiocese, and for the conversion of the members and supporters of RSA.

Friday, May 13, 2005

John Paul the Great's Cause is Open for Business

Memorial of Our Lady of Fatima

Pope Benedict XVI announced today that he was allowing the immediate opening of Pope John Paul II's cause for sainthood, setting aside the five-year waiting period called for by church law. Pope Benedict made the announcement at the end of a speech to the priests of the Diocese of Rome gathered for a meeting and a dialogue with him at the Basilica of St. John Lateran.

Reading from a letter in Latin, the pope announced his decision "to dispense from the five-year period of waiting after the death of the servant of God, Pope John Paul II. ..."

Pope Benedict had to wait several minutes to finish the sentence -- saying he was authorizing the immediate opening of the "cause for beatification and canonization" -- because the priests broke into a loud and sustained standing ovation.

Let's keep on crankin' with Fr. Tharp's prayer.

John Paul the Great on Mary #3

Memorial of Our Lady of Fatima

Mater amabilis, Mother worthy of love! Mater pulchrae dilectionis, Mother of fair love, pray for us! Teach us to love God and our brothers, as you loved them: make our love for others to be always patient, kindly, respectful.

Causa nostrae laetitiae, Cause of our joy, pray for us! Teach us to be able to grasp, in faith, the paradox of Christian joy, which springs up and blooms from sorrow, renunciation, and union with your sacrificed Son: make our joy to be always genuine and full, in order to be able to communicate to all! Amen.
Prayer at Lourdes Grotto, Vatican Gardens, 1979

Prayer Request Updates

Don Cook:
We're still waiting on word whether Don has been able to start the next course of his regimen. He has had to hold off because of low white blood cell counts. That he can't resume treatment is a little disconcerting because of the mixed results of his last scans.

Troglodytrix:
She is in the final month of her confinement, as the saying used to go. Since her hospitalization, she has been progressing well, to the point that the doctors think she can go forward with a standard birth, although they will prepare in advance for complications.

Please keep those prayers coming, and on this anniversary of Fatima, consider invoking John Paul the Great using Fr. Tharp's prayer. Thank you.

King Tut's Face Reconstructed

Ever since I was a kid watching Quincy, ME, guide a team of students to create a full-size portrait of a murder victim, getting only the eye color wrong, based on a single leg bone, or betraying a long-dead man's "secret" as an albino black man, I found this kind of forensic analysis to be pretty cool. (NYT frr)

Potential Therapy Derived from Embryonic Stem Cells

Hans Keirstead and his colleagues in the Reeve-Irvine Research Center at UC Irvine (named after Christopher Reeve) have found that a human embryonic stem cell-derived treatment they developed was successful in restoring the insulation tissue for neurons in rats treated seven days after the initial injury, which led to a recovery of motor skills. But the same treatment did not work on rats that had been injured for 10 months. The findings point to the potential of using stem cell-derived therapies for treatment of spinal cord damage in humans during the very early stages of the injury. The study appears in the May 11 issue of The Journal of Neuroscience. (cap tip: Science Blog)

There were many (I was not one) who, as part of voicing their opposition to embryonic stem cell research, were quick to claim that there are no benefits in human trials from using embryonic human stem cells because their flexibility inherently leads to instability. I believe that it is only a matter of time before somebody trumpets a clinical success, and we need to prepare our arguments for this eventuality. To be free of the solipsism that is steamrolling the way for embryonic stem cell research, we must recognize that we can only be free in truth, the measure of which is reality; we can know the truth, and we must embrace accordingly the reality of such a result, should it come.

While Warning Frist, Byrd Gets "Hamanized" Himself

I had the admittedly twisted pleasure of hearing the comments of Sen. Byrd (D-WV) from the floor, first on Hewitt last night and then on C-SPAN (go to radioblogger.com for the audio). In a meandering tale from the Book of Esther, the senator is worried that re-intepreting the filibuster rule as to not apply to judicial appointments (the so-called nuclear option) would lead to the worm later turning on the Republicans. Here's an alternate reading: The worm is turning on the Democrats for Sen. Byrd's move twenty years ago to reduce the votes needed to end any filibuster from 67 to 60 votes.

Thursday, May 12, 2005

Mapping the Core and Gap with Layers--Like Ogres

Memorial of Ss. Nereus and Achilleus
Memorial of St. Pancras

TM Lutas digs deeper than his earlier post and demonstrates the near-irrelevance of Tom Barnett's analysis of the election of Benedict XVI by developing the notion of different map layers (of connectivity) including, particularly, the "spiritual" layer. This is useful, as far as it goes (and it goes quite a ways--which underscores the general power of Barnett's connectivity model). Lutas, however, undersells not just the interaction between layers, but the fact that there is a common plane of culture, really a system of cultures, where spiritual and politico-economic maps connect [interject the "culture is the engine of history" line here]. Nevertheless, unlike Barnett, his analysis, based on this innovation, shows a keen insight as to how the conventional wisdom will likely be demonstrated as wrong regarding this new pontificate.

It still amazes me how someone as sharp as Barnett gets John Paul the Great so wrong. Once anyone considers the axioms* from where John Paul the Great and the rest of the faculty at the Catholic University of Lublin (KUL) began working through the cultural consequences of applying an authentic Christian humanism, it becomes obvious that the economic determinism that goes with wearing politico-economic blinders will lead you astray in accurately analyzing the late pope's legacy. That Benedict XVI is operating from a better map, perhaps even one of his own, will explain why Dr. Barnett will be quite wrong here.

As for Pope Benedict's map, we may be able to get a glimpse of it from a 1985 speech, "Market Economy and Ethics." (cap tip: Acton) Here's the truffle quote:
"The economy is governed not only by economic laws, but is also determined by men...".5 Even if the market economy does rest on the ordering of the individual within a determinate network of rules, it cannot make man superfluous or exclude his moral freedom from the world of economics. It is becoming ever so clear that the development of the world economy has also to do with the development of the world community and with the universal family of man, and that the development of the spiritual powers of mankind is essential in the development of the world community. These spiritual powers are themselves a factor in the economy: the market rules function only when a moral consensus exists and sustains them.
* The four KUL agreements, as noted by George Weigel in Witness to Hope, are:
  1. Radical realism about the world and the human capacity to know it--we can only be free in truth, and the measure of truth is reality.
  2. Philosophy begins with a disciplined reflection on human experience, rather than cosmology, because humans are the only creatures aware of their being, as well as awed by it.
  3. Commitment to reason to illuminate what good men ought to do and avoid the "trap of reflection."
  4. Practice an ecumenism of time--the past is not made disposable by modernity.

Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Item That Ought to Signal the Apocalypse

It is one thing to hear an actual Eric Clapton tune during a beer commercial, but this takes the cake: Applebee's parodies the classic Johnny Paycheck tune with "Take This Steak and Top It."

The Attention It Deserves

A Coalition for Darfur Post

The Coalition for Darfur has two goals: to get bloggers writing about Darfur and to raise money for worthy organizations providing life-saving assistance to the people of Darfur.

So far, we are not doing particularly well on either count.

Outside of Instapundit, very few of the "big blogs" seem to be paying much attention to Darfur, which is why it was nice to see Kevin Drum finally address the issue a few days ago.

In his post on the topic, Drum made an important point about the genocide
But hope is not a plan, and right now it strikes me that the only realistic option for stopping the genocide is to be prepared for a full-scale invasion and long-term occupation of Sudan. I could probably be talked into that if someone presented a serious military plan showing where the troops would come from and how they'd get there, but I haven't seen it yet.
It is probably an oversimplification to say that full-scale invasion and occupation of Sudan is the "only realistic option" for dealing with the genocide, but the key point to be understood here is that nobody knows what it will take to stop this because almost nobody is even thinking about it.

Lt. General Romeo Dallaire, the head of the failed UN mission to Rwanda, estimates that it would take 44,000 troops to stop the violence and Brian Steidle, a former Marine who spent six months serving with the AU mission in Darfur, estimates that it will take anywhere from 25,000 - 50,000. There is also talk of imposing a no-fly zone and an arms embargo and expanding the AU mandate to allow it to protect civilians. But after more than 2 years of violence, these things still remain little more than talk.

As far as can be determined, nobody (not the US, the EU, NATO, or the UN) has even seriously contemplated what sort of military action might be necessary in order to stop the genocide. Foreign policy journals and think tanks have likewise been silent on the issue. The only people who appear to be seriously thinking about what needs to be done in Darfur are journalists like Bradford Plumer and activists like Eric Reeves.

For two years, rhetorically pressuring Sudan to disarm and reign in the Janjaweed and stop the genocide has not worked. Many hoped that the Security Council's referral of the crimes in Darfur to the International Criminal Court might force Khartoum to back down, but unfortunately that has not happened. If anything, the ICC referral may have made the situation on the ground worse - and open discussion of possible military intervention might make things worse still. It is impossible to say.

Nobody wants a large-scale invasion of Sudan, but more importantly, nobody wants to even think that such an invasion might be necessary and how it will need to be carried out. It is a sign of just how little serious concern the genocide in Darfur is generating that those who might theoretically be called upon in the future to intervene do not appear to even have begun examining the feasibility of such an intervention. Darfur might not require military intervention, but it certainly requires more than the few small steps currently being contemplated. And until those in power begin to give the genocide the attention and serious thought it deserves, there is little reason to believe that there will soon be an end to the violence.

This genocide will end in one of two ways: either the international community will begin to take its responsibility to protect the people of Darfur seriously and take whatever steps are necessary to ensure their survival or it will end when the Africans in Darfur have been completely eliminated.

The choice is ours.

Happy Birthday to the North Star State!



On May 11 in 1858

Minnesota becomes the thirty-second state. The enabling act for statehood had been passed on February 26, 1857, and the state's constitution was written that summer and ratified in October. Full statehood had been held up by southern senators who wanted Kansas to enter the Union as a slave state. Finally approved by Congress, the bill is signed by President James Buchanan. Word of statehood would not reach St. Paul until May 13.

(cap tip: Minnesota Historical Society)

Tuesday, May 10, 2005

Culture and Evolution

Memorial of Blessed Damien Joseph de Veuster of Moloka'i

That culture has a primacy in human history ought not to be a surprise to readers here. It now appears that with Not By Genes Alone : How Culture Transformed Human Evolution by Peter J. Richerson and Robert Boyd, there may be empirical, mathematical corroboration (NYT frr) of the personalism and phenomenology given fruitful witness by John Paul the Great.

Aside: Without yet reading the book, this strikes me as another compelling demonstration of microevolution. The giveaway that there may be no macroevolutionary assertion by the authors here is the gratuitious swipe at ID at the end of the interview.

Lawsuit Hampers California's Embryonic Stem Cell Funding

The Life Legal Defense Foundation continues to fight the good fight. Unfortunately, this probably is only of temporary benefit. Even if granted a favorable ruling, the lawsuit's allegation that the state agency's finances are not properly overseen by government officials in Sacramento can likely be remedied through a restructuring. In the near term, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine also may be able to secure funds from alternate sources.

Friday, May 06, 2005

What Archbishop Flynn's Letter Does and Does Not Say

The Rainbow Sashayers have made the full text of the Archbishop's letter available. (cap tips: Judd from Hanging On to Nothing, Tim Drake)

[T]he Catholic Church and of this Archdiocese is to be welcoming to baptized Catholics of all backgrounds, including those with same sex orientation. The criterion for reception of the Eucharist is the same for all - recipients must be in a state of Grace and free from Mortal sin. While the decision for that judgment rests with an individual Catholic's conscience, it has never been nor is it now acceptable for a communicant to use the reception of Communion as an act of protest. (emphasis added)
This, of course, has been the crux of the matter for even the most charitable among us. How does conspicuous, often disruptive behavior demonstrate a unity in reconciliation at the Communion table?

The Archbishop's letter meets its functional objective. However, I still would like to see him tie this into a fuller teaching about the Eucharist. Since Archbishop Flynn has come to the Twin Cities there has been a substantial increase, perhaps a surge, in two areas related to the Blessed Sacrament, Perpetual Adoration (the archdiocese has one of the, if not the, largest number of parishes in the country with Perpetual Adoration) and vocations (I think the number is something like 15 priests to be ordained this year). Surely such a shepherd has a unique insight he can share with us. Perhaps at the upcoming Feast of Corpus Christi...

Planned Parenthood Launches Campaign Against Pope Benedict XVI

Here is the full text (cap tip: Patrick Madrid):

With the recent death of deeply conservative Pope John Paul II, many Catholics hoped the Church would choose a new leader with more progressive views on sexual and reproductive health issues.

Unfortunately, the new Pope, Benedict XVI, is even more conservative about sexuality and reproductive freedom than his predecessor!

Despite his poor track record on these issues as a Cardinal, we are hopeful that the Pope will realize that his new responsibilities require him to take a more worldly view in order to bring about positive change in the modern world. We are encouraged by the fact that the new Pope recently talked about both modernizing the Church and beginning a better dialogue with Islam.

Please write a letter to the editor encouraging Pope Benedict XVI to reconsider his dangerously outdated stances on birth control, abortion and sexuality in order to help move the Catholic Church into the 21st century.

Click here to read our tips on writing an effective LTE before you get started.

Once you've read the tips, click here to visit our Letter to the Editor page to write and submit your letter.

To give you a bit more background, Pope Benedict XVI (a German Cardinal formerly known as Josef Ratzinger) is against all forms of contraception and opposes the use of condoms to prevent HIV/AIDS. During the 2004 Presidential election, he told Catholics in the U.S. it would be a sin to vote for pro-choice candidates like John Kerry, and urged bishops to deny Kerry Communion. He has also led the Catholic Church's campaign against same-sex marriage and other rights for same-sex couples, including the right to adopt children.

Whether or not you're a Catholic, the Church has tremendous influence over many governments, especially in Latin America, and plays a powerful role in shaping social and political norms around the world.

The new Pope's positions on these crucial issues pose a terrible danger to the health of millions of women and girls around the world and undermines efforts to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS. Please join us in encouraging him to reconsider these backward views with a well-written, timely letter to the editor of your paper.

Our Letter to the Editor tool makes it easy to choose the paper of your choice, and to write and submit your letter - all online. We've provided some talking points you can work from but we urge you to use your own words as they will be much more effective than our talking points.

Click here to write and submit your LTE now.

http://hq.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/ippfwhr/pickMedia.jsp?letter_KEY=22

Please let us know if your letter of advice and encouragement to the new Pope gets published. Send us an email at action@ippfwhr.org to let us know if youu make it into print. We'd love to feature your letter in our next FreeChoiceSavesLives.org enewsletter.

Thank you again for speaking out on behalf of women and girls everywhere,

Eve Fox
Campaign Manager
FreeChoiceSavesLives.orgInternational Planned Parenthood Federation/Western Hemisphere Region
Here are the talking points from the LTE generator, so you can recognize them:

Pope Benedict XVI opposes the use of condoms to combat HIV/AIDS which threatens 38 million people worldwide.

Pope Benedict XVI opposes family planning promoting abstinence and marital fidelity as the only options.

Every minute a woman dies in pregnancy or childbirth. Family planning could prevent at least 25% of these deaths.

Pope Benedict XVI told Catholics it was a sin to vote for pro-choice candidates like John Kerry leading up to election day 2004.

The Pope must reconsider his views for the sake of the millions of women and men who will suffer and may die as a result of his opposition to birth control and condom use, in particular.

So far no auto-letters on either the print, or the net, versions of the Strib. Here's the amazing statistic of the week. The percentatge of letters to the editor in print, or on the web, with respect to Pope Benedict XVI: 57% favorable, 43% unfavorable. Note: This does not apply to editorials, or op-eds.

Thursday, May 05, 2005

Rainbow (Sashes) on the Horizon

Solemnity of the Ascension of the Lord (traditional)

The USCCB has been advised by the "Rainbow Sashers," or perhaps more accurately based on their desire to be conspicuous, the "Rainbow Sashayers" (cap tip: Roman Catholic Blog):
Pentecost Sunday, May 15, 2004 is approaching. The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the Rainbow Sash Movement will be entering Cathedrals and Parishes across the nation on that date. We come as we always have come in prayerful dignity, to enter into one of the most joyous times in the Church, the birthday of the Church. As is our tradition we will be wearing Rainbow Sashes to designate that we are Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgender/Straight and Catholic...
St. Paul and Minneapolis Archbishop Flynn has been clear about his belief that the Eucharist is a source of healing and unity, and that it should not be an occasion for political scrutinizing and judgments. Accordingly he does not believe that it is his responsibility, or anyone else’s responsibility, to pass judgment on Catholics as they proceed to the Communion table. I agree as far as that goes, but in terms of what action to take, I respectfully disagree.

The thing is is that wearing the Rainbow Sash is an overtly political act itself and a statement of defiance of Church teaching. To pass out rainbow lapel pins before Mass, as has been done in the past, or to expect a tacit response from congregants during Mass, is a solicitation for remote cooperation, which seems scandalous to me. Denying Communion under this condition strikes me less as a political judgment, or "using the Body of Christ as a weapon" as some have called it, and more as simply recognizing the public expression of an authentic interior conflict with grace.

During every Mass we add to the Sacrifice made by Jesus Christ through the re-presentation. The Sacrifice needs no addition because it is complete, yet God accepts our addition much like a parent accepting "help" from a small child in sweeping the floor, building a bird feeder, or baking a cake, and it is critically important that we offer to help with the holy and living Sacrifice to praise and glorify the Lord. Likewise, the Eucharist does not need to be defended, even from scandal, but we ought to rise to defend it in a spirit of solidarity toward those who refuse to accommodate themselves to the truth.

With the reaffirmation last month from the Minnesota Catholic Conference that urges "the members of our Church and all men and women of good will to join... in protecting and promoting the authentic meaning of marriage in our society, by supporting the proposed amendment to the Minnesota State Constitution, defining marriage as only a union of one man and one woman with no legal equivalent" as an excuse, we can count on more folderal like last year in St. Paul and elsewhere. To act with charity requires clarity on the part of the faithful, and so we must pray for the conversion of hearts of those in error and for wisdom for our shepherd, the Archbishop.

Wednesday, May 04, 2005

I Guess I Won't Do THAT Again

I make one post critical of Hugh Hewitt and BAM! my template explodes, and my blog is down for an hour and a half during prime (lunch) time. I knew Mr. Hewitt was an influential denizen of the blogosphere , but he apparently has powers I can't even begin to comprehend. Perhaps it should be "Denizen Hewitt."

A Very Delicate Balance

A Coalition for Darfur Post

The United States has played a leading role in attempts to deal with the crisis in Darfur by donating hundreds of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid, providing logistical and financial support to the AU mission, and pushing for various resolutions and sanctions in the UN Security Council. In September, the Bush administration even took the unprecedented step of labeling the situation "genocide."

But now it appears as if the Bush administration is intentionally lessening its pressure on Sudan.

On a recent visit to Sudan, Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick backed away from the earlier genocide designation and offered an oddly low estimate of the death toll in Darfur. Shortly thereafter, the State Department released a fact sheet claiming that an estimated "63-146,000 'excess' deaths can be attributed to violence, disease, and malnutrition because of the conflict;" a figure that is less than half the commonly accepted estimate. Noted Sudan expert Eric Reeves wrote of the State Department's estimate "This is not epidemiology: this is propaganda" and claimed that it called into question "not only the motives of those who have compiled it, but the moral and intellectual integrity of those ... who would cite it."

And last week, Mark Leon Goldberg reported that the administration was working to kill the Darfur Accountability Act.

On the same day, the Los Angeles Times reported that Sudan had become a key source of intelligence information for the CIA and that Sudan's intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Salah Abdallah Gosh, a man widely thought to be responsible for directing military attacks against civilians in Darfur, had been brought to Washington for a meeting with intelligence officials aboard a CIA jet.

The LA Times report revealed that Sudan had provided valuable information regarding al Qaeda's operations, captured and handed over Islamic extremists operating in Sudan, and even detained militants moving through Sudan on their way to join forces with Iraqi insurgents.

There is no doubt that Sudan feels it deserves to be rewarded for this assistance and it remains to be seen what, if anything, the Bush administration intends to offer in return.

These new revelations raise complex questions about our priorities as a nation and serious questions about the future of Darfur. But what must not be ignored in this debate over realpolitik is that millions of people are still in desperate need of humanitarian aid. Thus, we ask you to join the Coalition for Darfur as we seek to raise money for organizations providing life saving assistance to the people of Darfur.

Thuggery in a Charitable Cause is Still Thuggery (Letter to the Editor)

Hugh Hewitt raised the issue of a young woman named Amanda and her battle with cancer. She has gone into remission twice only to have the cancer return. Sadly, now she is running out of options. There is a drug that Amanda and her father believe will help except for the mean old drug company who won't let her have it. Mr. Hewitt entreated his audience to take up the cause and contact the company directly on Amanda's behalf. My response follows.

I recognize that I'm late to the party on the story about Amanda and it looks like you may get the satisfaction you seek with the president of Medarex contacting Amanda's father [since the segment first aired].

I was shuttling kids to and from practice last night, so I missed a lot of the discussion, and it is possible I missed a couple of key details, but I heard you read the letters from SaveAmanda.com, urge your callers to contact Medarex directly, and put out a challenge to anyone who should think that the company should not just make the drug available to her. The gist of what I heard of your argument was that if what she says is true, then there was no reason to think something should be done otherwise. And apparently the reasons we should believe the letters were because a.) the way the website was done, and b.) the rhetorical question of why would her father publicize it this way if he didn't reasonably expect to be successful. Ummm, OK. Count me in the skeptical camp--even now.

The whole question of course is whether all the things claimed are completely true. Granted I may have missed it, but first, is Amanda real? Does she have cancer? Is her father real? etc. (The blogosphere is about trust you say. Yes, and the operative phrase is "Trust, but verify.") Assuming she is real, we then move on to is this really her last resort? She has had the stem cell transplant and reached the radiation limit, but has she exhausted the available chemo and bio-chemo regimens? Has she tried holistic medicine? How do we know that she knows whether CD30 is her last shot? How effective is CD30? Is it no more effective than other available options? Why has another trial been ordered? Is it because it's effective, or because there was something wrong with the first trial? Or does it simply address a patient's symptoms and is better suited as a complementary therapy? Or has it shown promise for a different condition altogether? How do we know she knows whether CD30 is effective? Can Medarex make the drug before the batch is made for the next round of trials? Will making it available for Amanda compromise the production for the next trial (anybody in early development for high tech knows this is never trivial)? How much will a special batch cost to make? Is a special batch needed? Are there really doctors who know how to administer CD30 safely and have demonstrated that? Who's going to pay for it? Is Medarex protected from litigation? Really? Is the FDA really ready to clear the way to allow the drug to be distributed to Amanda in a matter of days? What kind of precedent does this set? If this happens, how could any drug company ever deny supplying experimental drugs to desperate people again?

You see, these are a lot of questions. Questions for which I do not have answers, still. And based on their nature, there is very little point in playing the parlor game of assuming all these things are true and then asking whether someone ought to support allowing her to have the drug.

So, what do we know? We know your audience has crashed the website of interest with heavy traffic, SaveAmanda.com, thereby limiting, or eliminating, a key source for verification in a timely manner. And we know you have swamped a drug company's public relations department, distracted the president of the company from actually managing the company for a while, and at a minimum, likely distracted the entire senior staff as well, to respond to the demands of you and your audience.

This is markedly different from the senate filibuster case, for example, where you likewise urged action on the part of your listeners and readers, but had been cultivating the information over hours, days, and weeks, built an incredibly compelling case, and provided widespread, verifiable sources. In these days of Pope Benedict, I must offer my charity through my use of clarity. This whole Amanda thing smacks less of a swarm in net-centric warfare and more of the pitchforks and torches of mob rule. Frankly, Mr. Hewitt, I expect more from a blogfather.

Pax tecum

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Because Life is Life
and not just on election day