Our Fragile Religious Liberty

There has been a great deal made of the United States Department of Health and Human Service’s new policy mandating that artificial contraception, including those that can serve as an abortifacient, be covered in all employee health plans.  This policy covers all employee health plans, including those of religiously affiliated schools, hospitals and social service agencies.   The bishops have spoken out on it, especially Cardinal Designate Timothy Dolan.  On January 31 Senator Marco Rubio (R) of Florida introduced a bill to overturn the policy, which is connected to the so called “Obamacare” legislation that is being phased in over the next couple of years.  Admittedly there is heated rhetoric on both sides (one Catholic site I saw said that the administration is “at war” with the Church, while some left leaning sites are saying the Church is trying to “take away women’s reproductive freedom”).  I like to stay cool, calm and collected on these things, but it’s getting tougher and tougher.  It is hard for me to come to any other conclusion than that, while we may not be at war, we Catholics are the victims of a quiet persecution.  The beauty of it, from the persecutor’s stand point, is that they are starting with an issue they can easily gain public sympathy with, even among Catholics.

The sad truth is that most Catholics have gone right along with the popular culture when it comes to the Pill and other forms of artificial contraception.  Studies have shown that we contracept at the same rate as non-Catholics.   Pope Paul VI warned in 1968 that the widespread use of artificial contraception would increase the demand, availability and frequency of abortion, increase divorce rates and promote the objectification of women.  In spite of the fact that abortion in now the law of the land, protected as a constitutional right, the precipitous increase in the divorce rate since the 1960’s, the mainstreaming of pornography, along with the prevalence of “gentleman’s clubs,” and the rise of what has been dubbed the “sex trade,” we still refuse to see the folly of the contraceptive culture we have fostered.  While you may argue the Pill can’t be blamed for these social ills, it’s hard to say that the acceptance of artificial contraceptives prevented these phenomena as the Pope’s committee, whose recommendations he controversially rejected, claimed at the time.    

My point being that, while the bishops are doing the right thing in speaking out, are the faithful concerned?  We have gone along with the flow, and may not see that this policy is leading us down dangerous waters, both as citizens of earth as well as citizens of heaven.  Do we see that if they get away with this there will be other restrictions that they will try to impose upon us, and not just upon Catholics, but upon people of all faiths?   The state legislature in Connecticut already tried a couple of years back to seize control of Catholic parishes, by way of claiming authority over their finance counsels, and even tried claim the right to name pastors.  Thankfully that measure was defeated.  Local and state governments have long tried to force Catholic hospitals to make abortion available.  In 2006 Massachusetts mandated that all adoption agencies must cater to same sex couples, prompting Catholic Charities in the Commonwealth to end their adoption program.  Many dioceses are grappling with whether they should close their hospitals and other social service agencies if the civil authority forces them to go against Church teachings.  One bishop questioned if closing them was enough; should they be torn down so the buildings would not get into the hands of those who would use them for the evil sin of abortion.  Where does it end?  When do we say enough is enough?

One question we need to ask is; can the government prohibit Catholic schools from teaching religion?  It’s been that way in Canada for decades, for schools that participates in any type of government program.  Many of our Catholic schools here in the U.S. participate in textbook loan programs or school lunch programs.  We have programs that allow board of Ed staff to help assess and work with special needs students (if you’ve seen those trailers in the parish parking lot you know what I mean).  Can the government turn around and say that those programs are contingent upon not teaching religion, or that we must teach the glories of “alternate lifestyles” and make contraception available to students and staff?  Considering the present climate why not, and do we care?

There are signs of hope, though.  The Supreme Court recently handed down a unanimous decision defending religious institutions’ right to hire and fire ministers and employees, citing it as an internal church matter covered by the establishment clause of the Constitution, thus exempt from government regulation.  But we can’t always rely of the courts to do the right thing.  Remember; the Supreme Court has at various times upheld slavery, segregation and abortion as being constitutional.  It is a great institution, but far from infallible. It is for us as Catholics to be active citizens and stand up for our rights. But do we care enough to do that?

This is not the last I will write about this: more is coming soon.  And yes, I will keep it light this weekend and give my Super Bowl rundown.

Don Bosco Among Us Official Song: Celebrate!

This was a video put together to prepare for the Don Bosco Relic tour in 2010. The Song is by Fr. Steve Schenck, who also wrote Friend of the Young and the Poor, which has become at standard at Salesian events. While the tour has moved on, the spirit remains. Happy Feast of Don Bosco!

Don Bosco's Spiritual Path

We have come to the feast of St. John Bosco, which we celebrate tomorrow.  There is so much I could say about him; his childhood in Becchi spent struggling to get an education, his vocational path that led to the priesthood and later to dedicate his life for the salvation of the young.  We could talk about his struggles with both the government and the Church as he worked to get the Salesian Society off the ground and approved.  We could examine his dreams and other manifestations of the supernatural in his life.  But since Don Bosco was a practical man, I'll keep it short (or as short as I know how) and to the point, focusing on one aspect of his life: his spirituality.

Don Bosco adopted St. Francis de Sales (1567-1621) as the patron for his religious family, which is why we are called Salesians.  Some question how much Don Bosco really knew of the gentleman bishop and his spiritual doctrine; while he most probably read de Sales' Introduction to the Devout Life at some point in his formative experience, there's no proof he delved deeply into the saint's other writings.  But the move made sense; he was a popular saint in Piedmont, Don Bosco's home region, one of the priest's major promoters had a strong devotion to him, so it seemed very practical to choose him as patron.  All this may be so, but the Holy Spirit has reasons that practicality can't explain. 

Spiritual writers before the Counter Reformation period usually spoke of holiness as something achieved by escaping the temptations and distractions of the earthly city.  In other words the truly devout life was for monks and nuns living in monasteries and cloisters.  Francis de Sales was arguably the first to spell out a way of holiness designed specifically for lay people.  He also meant it, by extension, for diocesan clergy who did not live a monastic life, but were busy in the midst of the world.  His basic message was that holiness was possible for everyone, not just for a particular class of Christian.  Don Bosco knew that his Salesians, while religious with vows, would be so occupied with the mission for the young that the traditional prayer life of a monk or a friar would be next to impossible.  In Francis de Sales he saw a practical (there's that word again) way of achieving union with God.  This is why I would say that the Holy Spirit guided Don Bosco in his choice of a spiritual father, not simply human expediency.

This growth in holiness is achieved by prayer that is frequent, but short.  We may not have hours to spend in the chapel, but we can take a few minutes at various times through the day to lift our minds and hearts to God.  We can make a conscious effort to say morning prayers when we get up and night prayers before bed (Don Bosco recommended three Hail Marys before retiring). Maybe we can pray a decade of the rosary on the bus or read one of those minute meditation books on our lunch break.  There are CD's of religious music or of spiritual talks we can listen to in the car.  In these and other ways we can continually raise our minds to God throughout the day.

In a special way Don Bosco stressed three particular devotions: to the Pope, to the Blessed Mother and to the Eucharist.  If we stay close to the Church and faithful to Her teachings entrusted to the Holy Father, trust in the Virgin Mary, imitating her virtues and unite ourselves with Christ in the Blessed Sacrament we have a sure path to holiness.

Prayer is the first step, what follows is a growth in virtue that prompts "us to do the well carefully, diligently and promptly,"  as Francis de Sales put it.  Devotion is not just a matter of reciting prayers, but of becoming united with the One we worship and following His will in our lives by loving God and neighbor.  For Don Bosco this took concrete form in his mission to young people.  In that work the Salesian finds God, whose image the young are created in, and also His will for us.  God speaks to us in the chapel, yes, but also on the playground and in the classroom; wherever the young are found. 


In the end, Don Bosco would say that being a saint was easy.  All we have to do is the ordinary things in an extraordinary way.  If it's time to study, we study.  If we have to do our chores at home, we do them.  If we have to go to work, we work hard for the money we earn.  We do theses and all the everyday things with joy, especially when we don't feel like it.  In Don Bosco we see the things that are more traditionally thought of as spiritual (prayers, meditation, sacraments) and connects them to our everyday life.  Being holy can happen in the course of our busy lives if we are conscious of God's presence all around us and seek to live in His name in whatever situation of life we find ourselves in.

As we celebrate the the feast of our founder and father, St. John Bosco, may we grow in love of Christ and rededicate ourselves to a life of holiness.

Don Bosco's Dream at Nine

Don Bosco believed that his vocation was given to him in this dream when he was about nine years old. He had this dream several times during his life, each time it was a little different, adding details to what came before. Don Bosco didn't understand what the dream meant at first. In fact, he would say it wasn't until he was old that he fully understood what the Lord had asked of him, and that he had indeed been faithful. The narrative is taken from the Memoirs of the Oratory, Don Bosco's own account of the early days of his life and work, and the dream that started it all.

More on Joe Paterno

Joe Paterno was laid to rest this week, and yesterday there was a public memorial at the Penn State campus.  I was driving home, back from visiting my parents, and it was late afternoon before the New York radio stations came into range.  I tuned to the FAN, wanting to indulge in a little sports escapism, but all the host, Mike Francesa, seemed talked about was Paterno and his damaged reputation.  He was angry, in spite of his attempts to stay calm and objective.  His anger became apparent when callers tried to sympathize for the late coach.  His position was that until the story is told completely, and full knowledge of what Paterno knew and when comes to light all eulogizing must be put on hold.  These crimes against children are too great to pretend that he had no part in them, or so his reasoning goes.

I agree, to a large extent, with what Francesa had to say, including the charge that the University was trying to go on with this observance as if nothing had happened.  Personally it seemed odd that an institution that expelled  Paterno like a leper just two months ago now hosted what amounted to a pep rally for him at his passing.  A more muted public ceremony was called for, if there should have even been one at all.

Where I part ways with Francesa is the doggedness with which he pursued the issue yesterday.  We have had two months of scrutiny, and we will have years more of investigative reporting, depositions and trials.  I am not suggesting that we observe Joe Paterno's death in a sentimental vacuum.  All the same there is a time to put the sword down, even if it's just for a day.  It is probably to soon to praise Paterno, and its impossible to ignore the events that led to his fall from public grace.  Nonetheless there is a time for all things, including a time to take a pause and repect those who morn.

There is also a bigger issue of justice and its limits.  I believe in a God whose justice is greater than any on earth.  I believe that God's forgiveness and mercy are infinite, and informed by indisputable knowledge of hearts and minds.  I also believe that contrition opens us to purification, what we often call penance.  This penance can happen in this life, or in the life to come.  Eternal punishment, reserved for the unrepentant, we call hell.  Temporal punishment still exists for those who repentant, but who are somehow attached to their sins, or have not made sufficient reparation for their sins.  This we call purgatory.  Related to this is Sacrament of Penance, also known as Confession or Reconciliation, which is widely misunderstood.  In it we are absolved from guilt, but not from the obligation to make up for the wrong we have done.   It is where God's justice and mercy meets, and opens us to God's healing power.  So if Joe Paterno died with a clean conscience, as his son said, it is because God wiped it clean. 

Being so unrelenting in the pursuit of justice, as many seem in this and other cases, puts us in danger of losing sight of the bigger picture, and of actually being unjust our selves.  I fear that, in spite of our claims of being an open and nonjudgmental society, we can be terribly unforgiving and unmerciful.   

My words should not be misunderstood.  There is an earthly justice, and it shouldn't be denied.  There is also freedom of speech, which is at the heart of Mike Francesa's livelihood.  I'm not saying he shouldn't speak his mind, but waiting twenty-four hours in this case would have shown charity; which is greater than sacrifice, and covers a multitude of sins, not to mention, shows a world of class.

Super Bowl Preview I: Behind "Enemy Lines"

Since I didn't get the chance to get home at Christmas time I'm taking a couple of days to see my folks now.  By a strange happenstance this New York family now has their patriarchs retiring in Massachusetts, which causes a lot of confusion with people I know.  Some assume I grew up here, others that I'm a fan of the local teams (a big negative on both counts).  I have nothing against the Bay State: I've been coming up here for better than thirty years, and the people are just great.  My sister in law and three nieces certainly turned out more than OK after being raised up here.  But I will never warm to their sports teams, especially the Red Sox.  I really don't hate, as a rule, not even sports franchises, but the Saux are the exception that makes the rule.  I literally cringe when I see someone in a Bosox hat or t-shirt.  I have the urge to go up to the poor sot and asked what went wrong in their life that made them break bad like that. 

The Patriots, on the other hand, stir no particular emotion in my heart.  That's the New England team for Jets fans to hate.  Being a Yankee loyalist I can't resent an organization for simply being successful over a long period of time.  They're not in the Giants division, and so their winning or losing means nothing to me unless we play them head to head, which is happening in the Super Bowl yet again.  So yes, I want to beat the Pats, but no more than if we were playing the Steelers or the Ravens.

OK, that may not be 100% true. This is an historic match up, in some ways just as meaningful as the last one when New England was going for the perfect season and were denied.  Tom Brady, the best quarterback of his generation, is going for a fourth ring, which would put him in the same class with Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana and...no one else.  He's already a lock for the Hall of Fame, but if he leads the Patriots to victory on February 5, his head will be set in stone on the Mt. Rushmore of football.  On the other side if Eli Manning can secure a victory he will forever be out of his big brother Payton's shadow, and most probably reserve his spot in the Hall.  Plus, no matter what they're saying Brady and coach Bill Belichik want revenge.  Being turned back from the undefeated title run, and it being done in very a Patriots' kind of way, still sticks in their craw.  For the Giants organization it would be two championships in four years, both against the best franchise of this era.  Talk about solidifying a reputation.  So yeah, maybe I do want to beat these guys a little more than another team, but it's not out of animosity, but out of respect and how much more winning against such a successful coach and QB means.

My worry going into this week is that the New York press seems to take a Giant win as a give in.  The only consolation in all this is that from what I've heard on the radio driving in yesterday the Boston sports talk guys seem just as cocksure of a Patriot victory as their counter parts in New Yauk.  I think everybody needs to calm down a little.  I agree with many who see these two teams as pretty even, and that may be the G-Men should be given the three point edge instead of New England.  I'll give a prediction later on next week, but I see a close game with victory being left in doubt until late.  With so much at stake, nothing should be taken for granted by anyone

Respect Life and The Meaning of Mercy | Columbia Catholic Ministry #17

Giants vs 49ers-A Look Back, and a Look Ahead

The Giants continue their road show with a stop in San Francisco on Sunday to meet the Niners in the NFC Championship Game.  The Giant-49er rivalry is one of the greatest in football, but is often the last one mentioned.  The 49ers of the eighties and 90's were so good people forget that their was one big thorn that seemed to get under their skin from time to time:  The New York Football Giants.

There are a number of the match-ups that come to mind from that era, especially the two tight games they had over the 1990-'91 season and playoffs.   The game I remember the best though was a regular season game in December 1986.  The Giants were trying to make their first Super Bowl, and were doing well in the regular season, but most of their games had been close, often decided in the last minutes; for the most part they weren't blowing people away.  We knew they were good, but we weren't sure how good.  A question many asked was how would they do on the road against an elite team like the Niners?

Spot the 49ers 17 points in the first half, that's how they did. I was in college at the time, a big critic of QB Phil Simms, as many were; he simply wasn't as good as the elites of the league like Joe Montana, John Elway and Dam Morino.  He threw too many INTs and was injury prone.  The Giants would never go all the way with him, or so I thought.  I was watching the game at our dorm, in a friend's room.  After that first half showing I left in frustration, confirmed in my belief that Simms had to go.  Well, The Giants came out in the 3rd quarter and Simms drove them down the field on three touchdown drives to take the lead 21-17, a lead they never relinquished.  It was then I became a Phil Simms man.  That game is also remembered for tight end Mark Bavaro carrying seven Niners on his back for twenty yards before they were able to bring him down.  He became a symbol of how tough this team was.

A month later they met again in the divisional round of the playoffs, this time at Giants Stadium, with very different results.  The Giants won alright, but in a blowout 49-3. Montana suffered a concussion when his head became overly familiarized with the hard Meadowlands playing surface (concrete covered with a thin layer of AstroTurf) courtesy of Giant's center Jim Burt.  They beat the Skins the following week to take the NFC title, and overcame a first half deficit to rout the Broncos in the Super Bowl two weeks later.  Their first championship in the Super Bowl era.

Being  a Giants fan I've highlighted the big New York moments, but I haven't forgotten that the Niners were the team of the '80's, winning four Super Bowls as opposed the the Giants two.  The G-Men were usually the underdog in those match-ups, which made beating them those times so satisfying.

What about tomorrow's game?  Here in New York we're still a little tipsy from sending the heavily favored Packers home last Sunday.  The perception is that we're going to win easily, even though the Niners are favored by less than a field goal.  I hate it when people pick Big Blue.  I'm not superstitious, or anything, but it's a jinx I tell you! 

They played a close game, won by Frisco, earlier in the season.  The Giants are healthier now, but both teams are still pretty evenly matched; both have strong defenses, on offense the Giants have the better passing game, the 49ers are better at the run (a reversal from the old days).  The field will be muddy, and I've heard so many conflicting reports who that will favor my head hurts from it spinning around so much.  One thing I heard was that the muddy track favors the receivers over the d-backs, since they know where they're running and the defenders can lose their footing trying to react quickly, which would seem to favor New York.   On the other hand Troy Aikman said on the Mike Francesa Show yesterday that most QBs have a tough time throwing a wet football, which hurts Manning and the Giant's passing attack. 

The bottom line: if Manning can establish the pass game I don't see San Francisco stopping the Giants, not the way he, or the defense has been playing. 

Pick: Giants 24-49ers 17 

Why I Love Religion, And Love Jesus || Spoken Word

Many of you have seen the "Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus" video that's gone viral on YouTube. Fr. Barron has a response, which I'll link to later. For now, here's a rather clever come back, from the Catholic perspective.

American Sunset? Part I

 

 There have been a number of crisis points in the history of the Republic that led people to wonder if our union would endure as we know it.  The Antebellum-Civil War period is one such example that comes to mind right away.  But also during the Great Depression there were those who questioned, not only if capitalism had failed but, if the entire American Experiment had run its course.  The only countries that seemed to have any economic, as well as political, stability were the fascist and communist dictatorships that were emerging in Nazi Germany, Italy, Japan and Soviet Russia.  Organizations sympathetic with the Nazi regime popped up during the '30's, as well as communist associations.  One such group, the Nazi sympathizing American Bund, even held a rally in 1939 at Madison Square Garden that drew twenty thousand participants.  There was a real fear that the U.S. government would be overthrown by a totalitarian movement that would establish an oppressive government here.

When I was in grade school in the late 1970's the question wasn't whether the nation would endure, but if its best days were behind it.  The nation had endured a decade and a half of war, social unrest, assassinations, political scandal and economic recession.  Some even questioned if the job of chief executive wasn't too big for one man; if it wasn't better to have two men share the presidency (I don't know how the proponents of a multi-headed executive branch wanted to divide up the duties though).  The low point in my memory was the failed attempt to free the American hostages held in Iran in April 1980.

I remember it was a pleasant spring day, one of the first of the season, when the news broke of the aborted rescue and the eight dead marines, their charred bodies left in the Iranian desert.  While the weather spoke of hope, the people around me reflected despair.  I was in 7th grade, but our school building housed the grades from ours up to twelfth.  As I walked through the main hallway to my locker there was a group of upperclassmen huddled together, one peering into a newspaper, leaning against a wall shaking his head.  "We lost in Vietnam, we can't even get some helicopters out of a desert.  This country is done for," was the basic gist of their conversation, along with comments about the president, which weren't very complementary.

The country wasn't "done for," of course.  There was an economic and global political rebound in the following decade.  I often hear the 1980's maligned, much like the 1950's were and still are in some circles.  The '50's, like the '80's, followed two decades of economic troubles, war, and speculation over the nation's future.  I often wonder if these critics really consider great depressions, world wars and political instability preferable to peace and prosperity, as imperfect as they may have been.

We are once again at a cross roads.  People are wondering not only if the United States' time of world supremacy is past, but if the nation itself will survive.  Admittedly those predicting an all out apocalypse are out of the mainstream, but not as far out as it may seem.  Zbigniew Brzeninski, a national security adviser under Jimmy Carter, wrote an article recently in Foreign Policy where he envisions a more dangerous world dominated by unstable, shifting alliances, in which no power, including the Chinese, are prepared to take the lead roll relinquished by a weakened United States.  This is a far cry from the late '70's where a U.S. retreat meant a prolonged stalemate with the world's other superpower, the Soviet Union, and one car in every drive way instead of two.  This is the end of the world as we know it.

 

What does this have to do with our life of faith?  First of all it is to remind ourselves that nothing in this world is forever, including the supremacy of the United States.  As Paul wrote to the Corinthians, in a letter we will be hearing at this Sunday's Mass, "the world in it's present form is passing away."  Christ Jesus is our rock, our surety our life and salvation.  It is to Him we owe our first allegiance.  Governments rise and fall, but Christ is eternal.

This does not mean we should not love our country or be indifferent to its fate.  For the Christian love of country, or patriotism, is an important virtue.  Nationalism, or the exalting of the government, is not.  That is a hard distinction for us to make sometimes because we have had one form of government for almost all our history, and we connect the two things naturally in our minds.  But being American is bigger than who our congressperson or president is, it's even bigger than the Constitution itself.  America isn't a doctrine, its a spirit embodied in a set of core beliefs; personal liberty, mutual respect for the rights of others, equality of opportunity, the value of hard work, an over arching optimism about the future and the belief that these values are worth sacrificing for.  I don't claim this is an authoritative list, but I believe it covers the essentials.

If America is heading into the sunset it is because we don't really believe in our core beliefs any more, spare one; personal liberty.  The growing sentiment seems to be "my rights are very important, but I can't speak for yours."  I do worry about this, and the anti-spirit that takes our rights for granted, that no sacrifices are needed to preserve them.  In the second part of this reflection I will explore our loss of a sacrificial spirit and a core value that is often ignored; our spirit of community.