Journeys of a Catholic Poster Girl

This is going to be a quick bookshlef b/c I’m tired (looong week at work) and it’s Emily’s bedtime. But the masses (re: friend in Germany :)) have been clamoring for something new, so here it is.

Just finished Catholic Matters Fr. Neuhaus’ (aka the Corner’s unofficial chaplain) new book. It’s basically a review of Catholicism post Vatican II and an evaluation of certain Church positions, politics, his conversion story from Lutheranism to Catholicism and then to the priesthood, some of the theological arguments between Catholicism and ‘old line’ Protestantism…things like that. It also includes his “Rome diary” from last year’s conclave and other events during the Death of JP II and election of B XVI. So that’s very interesting.

Fr. Neuhaus writes in a clear, engaging style as he covers all these various and sundry poitns, and each chapter could very well stand on its own as a short essay. very engaging and though-provoking, he looks at the Church today and sees promise, not just the endless defeatism so many others have expressed. As he calls JP II “John Paul The Great” throughout the book, you can guess why I like him. But it’s a well-written, engaging, and intelligent work about what it means to be a “Catholic American.” Be sure to get your hands on a copy–makes good ‘end of Lent’ reading.

I’m also working on St. Therese’s Story of a Soul . I bought the “study copy”, which includes all three manuscripts (the one she wrote to her sister, Pauline (Mother Agnes), which is more of a true autobiography; the second, to her sister Marie, also a Carmelite, focusing on her “Little Way”, and the third to Mother Mary Gonzaga, which is more theological reflection). Very good, very emotional (lots of italics–reminds me a lot of the writings of Queen Victoria) and a fantastic window into the mind of this very popular saint. As she was my Confirmation saint, I thought it was very odd that I hadn’t read more about her other than the two books I had. So I’ve started (almost finished) this one, and then I’m reading Fr. Bro’s St. Therese , from my favorite, Ignatius Press, which looks really interesting. Anne Catherine Emmerich’s book is also almost completed.

All right, that’s it for now. More coming when I’ve caught up on my sleep…promise!

I gotta tell you, I’m torn on the illegal immigration argument that’s going on in the States. One part of me says, “hey, my relatives got here the legal way, and our family was split up for awhile, but we got through it and nobody broke any laws” (except maybe the mafia relations, but that’s another story). But then I see websites like “Justice for Immigrants”, which is, apparently, the “official” bishops’ website for immigration policy. And I read it and I think, OK, so I know we’re supposed to love our neighbor and welcome the stranger and all that, but why have laws otherwise? Is it a sin to tell people they’ve got to come here legally? That they can just wander across the border and expect us to throw them a parade?

I don’t know. Any thoughts?

I probably shouldn’t be surprised that the Sierra Club is nutty (since i am a Republican) but as Catholic, I find some of their statements just morally horrible. Besides their support of the Cairo Conference’s intiatives in the 1990s, which John Paul the Great and the Church vehemently opposed, these statements from their website make my blood run cold:

Under Population :

“Families should not have more than 2 natural children and adoption should be encouraged”;

“…that state and federal laws should be changed to encourage small families and to discourage large families”;

“that laws, policies and attitudes that foster population growth or big families, or that restrict abortion and contraception, or that attempt to contrict the roles of men and women, should be abandoned.”

HOWEVER, later in the website…

“our work is not about controlling women’s lives.”

Huh? Well according to the Gospel of the Sierra Club, my family is really screwed. There are three of us.. my dad has two sisters…my mother is one of eight, and has a brother with seven kids (that must really get the Sierra Club going) and two of her sisters have three children (the others are OK, because they only have two, you know). My married cousins are a mixed bag; one has apparently reached her child limit, since she’s got a stepdaughter and a toddler, and the other has three kids, so that’s just unacceptable So who are we supposed to get rid of here? Because kids are horrible! (BTW, do these statements remind anyone else of the witches in the Dahl book The Witches ?)

This is, quite simply, the kind of stuff you just can’t make up.

I’m sure we’ve all heard about the debacle in Boston where Catholic Charities has decided to stop its adoption service since the state requires them to consider placing children with “same-sex couples” as well, which as we know is against Church teaching, since, um, we don’t believe there are “same-sex couples” and if they are, then they’re not living in a way the Church feels children should be raised.

No one forces anyone to go to Catholic Charities for adoption. If you are a same-sex couple and you want to adopt, then just don’t go there. this is really easy. But because of the crazy world we live in, Catholic Charities has decided to pull out of the whole thing b/c they don’t want to get slapped with a lawsuit, which the Church in Boston, as we know, does not need . So the institution that placede some of the hardest-to-place kids in the Boston area isn’t around to do that anymore. How close to the line of Church and State can we come without the State dictating to the Church what it can and cannot do, even when it goes against the Church’s convictions? It’s like telling Catholic hospitals they must give out birth control, even when the Church is strongly against the practice.

Not a good precedent, kids. Not a good precedent.

OK so I have real internet now and don’t have to use Panera’s anymore, which was good for surfing but not so much for posting. So let’s get a few things going on….

From yesterday’s Dayton Daily News , a letter to the editor about something we’ve covered a million times, but should probably do again because apparently no everyone got the message.

This letter writer thinks that if we let women and married men into the priesthood, we would not have any more problems with sexual abuse in the church and everything would just fan-tastic.

(Banging my head against the wall)

OK, let’s review: first of all, someone show me a denomination that hasn’t had a minister abuse a child. You can’t do it. Child abuse, as abhorrent as it is, happens across all religious lines, all marital lines, all gender lines. It can happen anywhere and the perpetrator can be anyone. you’re telling me that women and married men have never abused a child? Not to be really rude, but have you been living under a rock? You can’t tell me that if we added married men and women the problem would magically vanish.

As for married men–that is a choice made by the Western Church. Men in the Eastern churches are allowed to get married. If, however, the U.S. decided to lift the ban on celibacy, that doesn’t mean that all priests would get married. They would have to choose if they wanted to get married while in seminary, and if they chose to get married, they would not be eligible for positions in the hierarchy (meaning that those who were bishops, cardinals, and, bien sur , the Pope, would remain celibate). Read Catholicism for Dummies for more on this–a great book. But with priests still been killed and tortured and found “missing” in many parts of the world, celibate priests are a good thing to hold onto, since they don’t have to worry about their wives or children been taken hostage with them, or worry about their families welfare if they are killed. It’s dangerous to be a priest in many, many parts of the world today.

And women? Never gonna happen. Stop wishing for it. Jesus did not pick any female Apostles. He could have but He didn’t. If women wish to serve God in a consecrated way, become a nun. Besides which, the sacramental character of the church forbids women to be priests. The priest stands in persona Christie (a fancy way of saying ‘in the place of Christ’ or ‘in the person of Christ’) in the Mass. A woman can’t do that. it’s not a question of qualification or worthiness or whatever. It’s just the way it is. And if you really wanted to be a priest, which requires obedience to the Church, then you’re not being obedient right here, are you?

But enough on this…let’s just hope that some people get this stuff…eventually…

I am beginning the process of moving (YAY!!) tomorrow, and I will not have internet for who knows how long once I’m in…hopefully we can get the software up and running ASAP. Back to dial-up….sigh. Oh well. It’s something. And there’s wi-fi at the Panera nearby, so we’re all good. Be sure to peruse the site and read some new stuff, like my Passion review and the Dems’ new game plan for the 2006 midterms…we’re going to be Catholic now!!

Also be sure to read NR’s the Corner (www.nationalreview.com) for good stuff every day…always new and very, very amusing.

Hopefully I’ll be able to blog intermittently until Saturday when I move the computer over there…we’ll see.

Hah! I found it! Here it is… note: this is totally unedited and unrevised…I didn’t even read it before I posted it here, so it is my comments unvarnished from the first time I saw it.

February 26, 2004

OK, I am just going to write whatever comes to mind…but here are some of the impressions I have, fresh out of seeing this incredible work by Mr. Gibson and crew:

1) The violence is not, as you may have been led to believe, in surmountable and over-the-top. The violence is there, to be sure, but it doesn’t really hit you until you see it through the eyes of Mary, or John, or the apostles. The violence serves to show us how much He loved us. The scourging is not twenty minutes of constant pain…there are flashbacks to happier times, and the focus switches from Jesus to Mary, and back again. Whenever the pain seems to be too much, Gibson gives us a flashback to better times. There is even humor in the movie…though very little. (Jesus is building a table, and Mary says it’s too high. Jesus says that there’ll be tall chairs to go with it. To this, Mary says “it’ll never catch on.” The other “funny” part is when Barabas is released to the crowd, and you see that he’s a few marbles short of a bag. That’s kind of funny…but not really.)
2) The message is superb. It should be required viewing for the entire human race. It is just superb. Jesus’ love overflows every scene, and the message of love and forgiveness permeates the entire film. You cannot leave this film without being staggered by the sheer weight and enormity of God’s love for us, His children. It is overwhelming. You want to run to a church and thank God for sending His Son to us. You are overcome with gratitude.
3) It brings the entire Passion and Jesus’ message to life. You see everything in vivid detail—not gory detail, but vivid detail. You really understand the sacrifice of Jesus. I have never seen the Stations of the Cross as vividly as I did tonight. You feel like you are there, with Jesus and His Mother, watching everything unfold. It is a tremendous feeling.
4) You want to be a better person after watching this film. You want to pray, and live better, and be better, just to thank God for doing this for us. It is an amazing thing. I left the theater feeling lightheaded and like I was going to faint. The weight of God’s goodness and glory is overwhelming.
5) As for the finer points of cinema, it is a wonderfully done movie in its own right. The music is so powerful and fits perfectly, a mixture of orchestral strings and a full adult chorus, with strong voices that heighten the emotion to an unimaginable pitch. The acting is stupendous. Maia Morgenstern as Mary is masterful in every scene, but especially when she runs to Jesus as He falls under the weight of the cross and says, “I’m here.” She is the perfect Mother of God. James Caviezel, as Jesus, is nothing short of amazing. He is just beyond words. He is the perfect Jesus. While you’re watching it, you’re thinking, that’s Him. The actors who play Pilate, his wife, Claudia, Mary Magadelene, and the apostles are also so tuned-in to their roles that you hardly notice they are acting. The scene between John, Mary, Mary Magadalene, and Claudia during Jesus’ flogging is so well-balanced and so highly charged with energy that it will make you weep. Wonderful acting, just wonderful. The scenery is beautiful, the costumes are accurate, the characterizations and screenplay are beyond wonderful. All of this, as well as Gibson’s magnificent directing, make this a truly wonderful film that is well worth the viewing and moments of discomfort, just for the true beauty and luminous qualities of the film.
6) No one can come out of this movie hating anyone. The idea of anti-semitism is ridiculous. If anything, this movie makes you want to stand up and say, “I love every single person in this theater as my brother or sister in Christ, and I will pray for all of you every day for the rest of my life.” This movie makes you realize how much Christ loved us, that he was willing to undergo that horrible death that you just watched for us. To save us—all of us.
7) As a Catholic, I watched this movie somewhat differently. I noticed that each of the stations of the Cross was done in loving detail, bringing them gloriously to life. I saw saints and a Pope of the church brought to life, including Veronica and Simon of Cyrene. The movie, I think, presents Catholic Marian doctrine in clearly enunciated terms: this is what true holiness is. Mary always leads us to her Son, and the movie shows how she does, indeed, bring all believers to His feet. All of the apostles in the film call her “Mother”, as we all should do. She is the mother of all believers. The movie is also intensely biblical, even beginning with one of my favorite Bible quotes, from Isiah 53, the text that is read on Good Friday.
Watching the film makes you see the real humanity of Jesus and His mother. You see Jesus as a man who has gone through everything a human can go through: abandonment, pain, betrayal, anguish, total desolation, even close to despair in the garden. He is tempted by Satan, who is always present. He wants to get out, but He knows that God’s will is the greater goal. He is the perfect model for us. Mary is seen as a woman who has lost her husband, who watches her innocent son be beaten, tortured, reviled, and eventually killed, all for the sake of others. Her pain is tangible and so painful. She has endured everything a person can endure…they both have. The film brings out their humanity and their pain so beautifully. This is what makes you weep. Mary is a mother, first and last. Jesus is her son, and she watches Him die so that others may live. The scenes between Mary and Jesus, especially while Jesus is carrying the cross, and He says, ‘see, I make all things new,” is especially wrenching…it was here that I really cried, tears running down my face. You can’t help but cry. It is such a powerful moment.
9) The languages and subtitles add to the reality, and you actually learn something…I learned that the word “gubernatorial” (as in, the election of a governor) is actually derived from Latin, which I didn’t know before. Who says Latin is a dead language?

Overall, this is a tremendous film. The violence is not as bad as you imagine. It can’t be. Everyone has it so built up in their heads that it can’t possibly be as bad as you imagine. Run and see it. You will feel so overwhelmed with the love of God, and His mercy and justice, and you will love everyone you meet. The movie is intensely powerful. What a wonderful tool for conversion. This, my friends, is what Christianity is all about.

Go watch it. Seep in its message. I hope that it makes you a better person, and I hope, if you are not religious, that it makes you be so. It is a profound message it is sending…a message of forgiveness, love, and mercy. It is a film of hope…the movie ends with the Resurrection, Jesus sitting, alive, clean, free of blood, in the tomb, and then He rises and you see the nail mark that goes through his hand, and the film ends. It ends with hope and redemption. That alone is a thrilling moment. This is a film about love and mercy. May its message reach you, and I hope that you find its message as comforting and profound as I did.

(I went on to see it three more times in the theater, since most of my friends were wimps and wouldn’t see it alone. It is much, much better if you can watch this movie in a nice, quiet, dark room as to totally absorb the atmosphere)

For Lent, I’m deviating a bit from the usual, and I’m reading

– The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ by Anne Catherine Emmerick. Fans of The Passion (of which I am a loud and enthusiastic one) will recognize this book as a major source for that film. Barnes and Noble published its own edition (that’s the one I’m reading) so it’s much easier to find now.

–still Letter and Spirit …it’s coming…

–some more of B XVI, including his way of the Cross reflections from last Good Friday.

Also, you must watch The Passion preferrably several times. It is, simply, one of the best films ever and demands being watched, especially during Lent. I’ve waxed poetic about this before, and if I can find my original review I’ll be sure to post it here. But it is fantastic. Watch it. Learn from it. Don’t be afraid of the violence because it’s really not that bad, and we all know that Crucifixion was not a garden party. James Caviezel is incredible. Go buy it so that you can always have it on hand whenever you’re having a bad day and need to be reminded that Christ went through a heck of a lot for all of us.

And they speak clearly!

Readers of the below post will have read about 55 House Dems trying to assert their Catholicity while at the same time being pro-choice and holding on to their right to disagree on certain issues, namely abortion, with the church. But the Bishops have said, ‘nuh-uh.’

Cardinals Keeler of Baltimore, McCarrick of D.C., and DiMarzio of Brooklyn have said that there is no wiggle room and that they are “duty-bound to work against ‘the destruction of unborn human life.’” They added that they will work with them on other issues affecting the “poor and vulnerable” but that abortion is “gravely immoral” and they’re not movin’.

Woohoo! Thumbs-up for the bishops. About time.

(material from the Washington Post 3/11 edition is used above)

Once again, the Democratic Catholics ( cringe ) in Congress have decided that, since it’s an Election Year (it’s always an election year, anymore), it’s the right to to re-establish their Catholic credentials. 55 House Democrats issued the “Statement of Principles”, which, in part, talks about their pride in being “part of the living Catholic tradition–a tradition that promotes the common good.” Hmmm. While this might have flown in the days of Cardinal Bernadin, who tried to elevate matters such as economics, war and poverty to the same moral level as euthanasia and abortion (which isn’t done), it’s a tougher job now. Not as hard as it should be, but harder.

The document talks about “work [ing] everyday to advance respect for life and the dignity of every human being. We believe that government has a moral purpose.” Of course they’re not talking about saving babies fromt he abortionist’s forceps, or stopping Oregon’s assisted suicide law; they’re talking about more touchy feely stuff, like “helping the poor and disadvantaged…and making sure that all Americans of every faith are given meaningful opportunities to share in the blessings of this great country.” OK, yes, that’s part of Catholicism, nay, all Christianity, too. But it’s not the big fish.

On the big fish? They write that they do not “celebrate the practice of abortion”. Instead, they envisions a world where “every child belongs to a loving family.” Well that’s great. We’d all like that. So let’s just kill them before they’re born if a “loving family” isn’t going to happen? And how do you know that, anyway? So while saying that they dont’ “celebrate” the practice, they “acknowledge and accept the tension that comes with being in disagreement with the Church in some areas.” So they’re going to talk to American Catholics about them being good Catholics while acknowledging that they’re not good Catholics? In speaking about the “primacy of the conscience”, it makes me think that someone along the line failed to instruct them on how conscience is formed. The Church doesn’t hand out “suggestions”. It tells you what is right and what is wrong. failure to follow the Church on what constituents “grave sin” doesn’t make you a cool forward thinker. It makes you wrong. Abortion is a “grave sin”. Economic injustice is not. While it is not condoned, at all, economic injustice, such as a minimum wage that you may feel is too low, is not the same as killing a baby. It’s not the same as condoning euthanasia. Unless you’re willing to adopt the essential tenets of Catholicism, you’re not Catholic. You’re just someone who shares a lot of Catholic beliefs but not the big ones. It would be like being Jewish and saying, “well I keep kosher and I go synangogue, but you know I think the ‘Jesus is the Messiah’ idea might have some merit.”