Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog

The Yad Vashem - Pius XII Discussions

As reported by Inside the Vatican magazine:

The news that Yad Yashem, the Holocaust Memorial in Jerusalem, recently began serious discussions that might lead to revision of its exhibit against Eugenio Pacelli (Pope Pius XII), was cautiously welcomed by Pius' defenders, and those involved in interfaith affairs.

Yad Vashem's notorious exhibit, erected in 2005, has provoked strong protests from many Catholics and others from around the world. The exhibit claims that Pius was silent and indifferent toward the evils of Nazism, and did nothing to assist persecuted Jews during the Holocaust. (Photo: a visitor reads the caption on the poster in the Yad Vashem museum.)

 

This offends both historical truth and Catholicism. It contradicts the best historical scholarship and the effusive praise Pius XII received from the Jewish community and Jewish scholars. It also attacks the person and the institution credited with doing more to save Jewish victims of Hitler than any other single individual or institution.

 

Yad Vashem can do this only by misinterpreting or ignoring a wide range of witnesses and documents.

And this, from further down, in a section titled, "A Primer for Understanding the Current Pius XII Debate":

Then we present the dramatic testimony of Dietrich von Hildebrand, an eminent Catholic philosopher, who had been marked for death by Hitler because of his outspoken opposition to anti-Semitism and Nazism, and who knew Pacelli when he served as papal nuncio in Germany. (For more on von Hildebrand's struggle against Nazism, and his admiration for Pacelli, see The Soul of a Lion [Ignatius Press, 2000] by his wife, Alice von Hildebrand.) Von Hildebrand's testimony is striking, since he often criticized fellow Catholics whom he thought "soft" toward anti-Semitism and Nazism.

Following von Hildebrand's tribute are contemprary newspaper accounts that establish how the Church, under Pius XII, did indeed "speak out" against anti-Semitism and Hitler's policies--and how this fact was clearly understood at the time, even if it is denied by certain uninformed critics today. The news accounts also document how Pius XII personally intervened to save Jews during the War, by instructing the Catholic clergy and religious to shelter them; and by opening up his own summer residence at Castel Gandolfo, during the German occupation of Rome (1943-1944). No one but Pius had the authority to do this.

Read the entire piece, which was appeared today. Read more about The Soul of a Lion, published in 2000 by Ignatius Press.

Benedict XVI is "a knuckle-headed pope who can’t keep his mouth shut."

So claims Michael Wolff of "Off the Grid." In his March 19th column titled, "The Pope Talks and the Church Falls", the Wolff who cries, "Boy, I sure is ignorant!', writes:

• "Popes have traditionally looked doctrinaire and absolute. That’s how they’ve gotten away with having a point of view at odds with reality and popular opinion—because they look like popes." Get it? Popes are popes because they look and act like popes. Brilliant! Why hasn't anyone ever said so before? Probably for the same reason that most people don't say, "Water is water because it looks, tastes, and pours like water."

• Wolff claims Benedict has been looking by a fool of late, and for evidence he links to one of the most irrational and angry anti-papal rants of the year, which is like Tim LaHaye appealing to the writings of Alexander Hislop for validation of his belief that the Catholic Church killed 40 million people during the "Dark Ages."

• "The Vatican, and the Catholic church, is facing a situation potentially more transformative than the death of God: a knuckle-headed pope who can’t keep his mouth shut." There isn't any need for a sarcastic retort here: just take a moment to marvel at the unadulterated hostility, hatred, and stupidity of the remark.

• "Infallibility can only survive so many gaffes." And yet stupidity lives on, despite the diligent labors and stunning intellect of writers like Wolff! He apparently thinks that when l'Osservatore Romano publishes an article about washing machines, it marks the end of papal infallibility, which most people realize has some rather specific guidelines, none of them having to do with newspaper articles or technological advances. But, of course, if you want to score cheap points with semi-literate, historically-challenged, theologically-clueless readers, this is probably an effective tactic.

• "From a media perspective, it’s really stunning that the popes have, collectively, made it this far." This sentence actually says it all, doesn't it? But think of it: the media has been around for 2,000 years, while the papacy has only been around for about 400 years. Wait, perhaps I have that backwards...

• "From the beginning, Benedict's had a certain un-pope-like swagger, suggesting that he was going to make his mark, a reformer taking the Church back to its roots." For evidence, he links to an article about Benedict speaking out against abortion. Uh, yeah, I can't ever recall John Paul II ever saying anything about abortion. Can you? Why, even an atheist, Austin Cline, has written: "It is arguable that one of the most consistent themes running throughout John Paul II's papacy was his concern with sexual morality: contraception, abortion, divorce, homosexuality, and all of the things that make up what he regularly refers to as the 'culture of death.'" But Cline probably only wrote that because he read something written by John Paul II.

• "The problem, of course, is that, having spent his career inside the Vatican, a sort of magic kingdom career, he’s not exactly prepared to take on the world." In addition to failing basic history, theology, and logic, Wolff fails at math. Joseph Ratzinger was born on April 16, 1927. He didn't have a position in the Vatican until he was made prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith by John Paul II on November 25, 1981, when he was 54 years old. Which means that over thirty years of his "career" had been spent outside the Vatican, as a priest, theologian, priest, and bishop. Why, he even wrote a book about those years, for those who read such things.

As Wikipedia correctly notes, "In addition to his native German, Benedict XVI fluently speaks Italian, French, English, Latin, and also has a knowledge of Portuguese. He can read Ancient Greek and biblical Hebrew. He has stated that his first foreign language is French. He is a member of a large number of academies, such as the French Académie des sciences morales et politiques." Not to mention books and articles about theology, philosophy, political history and theory, Church history, secular history, Scripture, Judaism, atheism, Buddhism, and so forth and so on. Yep, the guy is completely clueless about anything outside of the Vatican (well, not really), unlike Mr. Wolff, who is clueless about both what is outside and inside the Vatican (well, maybe really).

Dr. Ralph McInerny: By inviting Pres. Obama to give the commencement...

... the University of Notre Dame has completely abandoned "any pretense at being a Catholic university." Dr. McInerny has taught at Notre Dame for over fifty years, and will be retiring this June. But his essay, "Is Obama Worth a Mass?", published today on The Catholic Thing, is anything but retiring (ht: Francis Beckwith).

Visit NotreDameScandal.com for further information about the situation with Pres. Obama and Notre Dame

Learning the Liturgy From the Saints

Learning the Liturgy From the Saints: An Interview with Fr. Thomas Crean, O.P., author of The Mass and the Saints | Ignatius Insight | March 24, 2009

Father Thomas Crean's new book, The Mass and the Saints, is a collection of carefully selected passages from saints and other great spiritual writers from throughout the ages, about the Mass, the Eucharist, and the liturgical worship of the Church. Most of the authors are canonized saints of the Church, and many are doctors of the Church, including Church Fathers such as St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and St. Gregory the Great; great scholars of the Middle Ages such as St. Anselm, St. Albert the Great and St. Thomas Aquinas; and more modern figures such as Prosper Gueranger and Pope John XXIII.

Father Crean was recently interviewed by Carl E. Olson, editor of Ignatius Insight, about The Mass and the Saints.

Ignatius Insight: What inspired you to write this book, a compilation of quotes by saints (and near saints) about the Mass?

  Fr. Crean: It started off as a translation of St Albert the Great's commentary on the Mass, a long work called De Sacrificio Missae, which as far as I know has never been translated into English. Part way through I realised that St Albert's style was too prolix for modern tastes and that a simple translation was unlikely to appeal to a wide authorship.

Nevertheless, I had discovered many passages which I found striking or beautiful, and which I did want to make available in English. At the same time I had been thinking of putting together a compendium of Eucharistic quotations from St Thomas Aquinas' writings, illustrated with pictures. The two projects merged, and then I realised that there was no reason to stop with St. Albert and St. Thomas, but that I could try to find as many different "voices" as possible, to produce something like a symphony in words. My inspiration was the Catena Aurea: the commentary on the four gospels which St Thomas put together out of the works of the Fathers and some slightly later writers such as Alcuin of York. I say this was my inspiration: it would be presumptuous to say that it was my model.

More generally, I wanted to offer my own contribution to the "liturgical debate" which is prominent in the Church today; it seemed to me that those who had participated in the sacred liturgy with the greatest love—the saints—were best able to teach us how to think about it.

Read the entire interview...

"You don’t have to be a political scientist to know...

.. that when a politician talks about taking the politics out of a scientific issue, there is apt to be—dare one repeat the word yet again—something political going on."

That's the excellent opening line to an excellent article, "Politics and Science," written by James Stoner for Public Discourse. He also writes:

Whether tobacco harms human health is a scientific question, but whether government should ban its use, ban its advertisement in certain venues, or merely warn the public of its dangers is not a question that can be answered scientifically, only politically. The risks of air or water pollution might be scientifically calculated, but how much risk is acceptable and who should have to bear it are political issues. It is not a political question whether a scientific instrument measures what it is supposed to or executes the operation for which it is designed, but the use to which it should be put and whether its cost is worth its benefit can only be answered by politics. Here the temptations to compromise scientific integrity may be great, but they can in principle be resisted by scientifically literate administrators and an informed public, able to distinguish judgments of fact from judgments of value. When the question involves the social sciences, fact and value are inevitably tangled, requiring even more vigilance to distinguish empirical findings from political interpretations; perhaps the best that can be expected is that scientific results be kept in perspective and not be asserted by political figures to prove more than the researchers who discover them can scientifically claim.

Read the entire piece.

The Prologue to "A Postcard From the Volcano"

The Prologue to A Postcard From the Volcano: A Novel of Pre-War Germany | Lucy Beckett | Ignatius Insight

Prologue

In the winter of 1961 Max Hofinann was dying. No one said so, not even the doctor, who seemed to think that the promise of improvement, however empty, was kinder than the truth. But Max knew. At least from time to time, he was quite certain he was dying.

On some days, if he stayed downstairs and sat upright at his desk instead of in a comfortable chair out of which it would be difficult to get, or walked for a few minutes in the garden, he could persuade himself that he was getting better, that ordinary years lay ahead. The leafless garden with its pinched grass and dirty London brick walls: would he see spring arrive there? The purple crocuses? The brash yellow flowers of the forsythia, the brash pink flowers of the cherry? He didn't like town gardens, especially town gardens planted with English enthusiasm for colour, any colour, the brighter the better. He didn't think he would see the cherry blossom or the crocuses again. Actually, he knew that he wouldn't. And that was fine.

His wife fussed in the daytime, and in the evening, as if to hold him back from death, hugged him before he went by himself to bed. His clever, careful son and his high-spirited daughter stopped bickering when he came into the kitchen and from the narrow hall watched him with embarrassed anxiety when he stopped on the stairs to gather a little breath to go up another step.

His favourite pupil came on Thursday at six o'clock, as she used to come for her violin lesson. She was seventeen. She knew. To realism he had accustomed her.

"Where is your fiddle?"

By now he was in bed, sitting upright against four pillows.

"I didn't bring it."

"I see. A bad decision. Fetch mine."

She found it downstairs, tuned it downstairs, carried it up slowly as if it were heavy.

"Play a little."

"Are you sure? What shall I play?"

"The Bach."

She was learning one of the solo parts in the double violin concerto. Two weeks ago he played the other part with her, stopping every so often to growl objections to her playing. "Stay on the beat. Most of all when the beat is slow." "Ach! The top F was sharp." "Listen for me. So, you will not race ahead."

Read the entire Prologue...

Wonderful little essay...

... by Rev. George W. Rutler about Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J., over on Inside Catholic:

His literature of 23 books and about 800 essays exercised the critical faculties of disparate theological camps, but they all add up in sum: "Sentire cum ecclesia." As the Church is the Body of Christ, he took its pulse, confident that something stronger than the gates of hell is not to be measured by pressure systolic and diastolic. When Pope Benedict XVI was elected, it was as if Cardinal Dulles had conjured something wonderful with the Holy Spirit, for Joseph Ratzinger's "hermeneutic of continuity" was his own ballast against sophistry and pedantry alike. One example was his polite perplexity when a prudential opinion about capital punishment appeared in the new Catechism. Dulles feared that the impression of an abolitionist position against capital punishment, as with just war theory, even motivated by "wise and good" pastoral instincts, would seriously confuse the meaning of intrinsic evil. He predicted that, when the heat of the cultural day cools, the traditional doctrines on these matters will be appreciated better. A close friend of mine who shared quarters with the cardinal at Catholic University watched Dulles, not given to demonstrative piety, praying the rosary up and down the corridor before and after he wrote.

Read the entire piece.

• Cure D'Ars Today: St. John Vianney, by Fr. George Rutler
• A History of Apologetics, by Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J.
• Magisterium: Teacher and Guardian of the Faith, by Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J.

Hey, what's so bad about the 13th century?

Or: Why is Jack Cafferty and CNN so obsessed with condoms?

What is the biggest threat to Catholic hospitals?

Ann Carey, in a just posted article for Our Sunday Visitor (March 29, 2009, edition), reports:

But what does all this mean for Catholic hospitals and health care workers? Is conscience protection in immediate danger? Experts consulted by OSV agree that the threats are real and alarming, and FOCA is a terrible bill, but conscience protection is more likely to be eroded through backdoor means rather than by FOCA or revoking HHS regulations.

Francis Manion, senior counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, is involved in a legal defense of the HHS regulations, but he said their rescission would not be an immediate threat to Catholic hospitals and workers, because the federal conscience laws would remain intact. However, rescission would be a strong signal of a bigger threat that is looming with the Obama administration.

"There is no question that President Obama himself campaigned on a 110 percent pro-abortion platform," Manion said. "What scares me, as somebody who defends peoples' rights of conscience all the time, is the people he's put in the Justice Department and at HHS: They do not like conscience protection ... and consider conscience laws to be obstacles to free access to what they call 'needed health care.'"

Read the entire piece.

St. Joseph and true manliness

From "The Good Father," an article by Joseph R. Fornieri for the March 2009 issue of Touchstone:

The contemporary decline of manliness in our society parallels the decline of the family. Our reverence for St. Joseph once served as an important reminder of the connection between true manliness and fatherhood and family, a connection that today is increasingly broken. The feminist crusade to replace masculinity with gender neutrality has stripped boys of positive male role models that would inform their moral imaginations and inspire them to fulfill honorably their responsibilities as husbands, fathers, and patriotic citizens.

At one time the absence of a father was viewed as tragic; today it is accepted as a legitimate alternative way to raise children. In some circles, fatherlessness is even planned and welcomed. Our commercial and popular culture ridicules fathers as bloated buffoons, epitomized by the cartoon character Homer Simpson. The “father figure” of our time is no longer an authoritative sage, as he may have been in times gone by. Consider the following versions of masculinity sold to us by today’s mass culture: the haughty CEO, the emasculated wimp, the charming gangster, the prima donna athlete, the psychopathic warrior, the postmodern cynic, and the playboy for whom sex has become sport. Each path descends to the lowest common denominator of vulgarity.

Read the entire article.

Related Articles from Ignatius Insight:

• Priests of the Domestic Church | Deacon Harold Burke-Sivers
• Discovering the Fatherhood of God in a Gender-Neutral Society | Mary Anastasia
• Atheism and Fatherlessness | A Review of Paul Vitz's Faith of the Fatherless | Father Brian Van Hove, S.J.
• The Priest as Man, Husband, and Father | Fr. John Cihak, S.T.D.
• Behold the Man! | An interview with Deacon Harold Burke-Sivers
• The Meaning and Necessity of Spiritual Fatherhood | Harold Burke-Sivers

Pope Benedict XVI reflects on St. Joseph and fatherhood

From Vatican Information Service:

ST. JOSEPH REMINDS US OF VALUE AND MEANING OF PRIESTLY VOWS

VATICAN CITY, 18 MAR 2009 (VIS) - This evening, in the minor basilica of Marie Reine des Apotres, in Yaounde, Cameroon, Benedict XVI presided at the first Vespers of the Solemnity of St. Joseph. Bishops, priests and religious, seminarians and deacons all participated in the ceremony, as did various ecclesial movements and members of other Christian confessions in Cameroon.

 "Speaking to the crowd and to His disciples, Jesus declared: 'You have only one Father'", said the Pope in his homily. "There is but one fatherhood, that of God the Father, the one Creator of the world, 'of all that is seen and unseen'. Yet man, created in the image of God, has been granted a share in this one paternity of God. St. Joseph is a striking case of this. ... He is not the biological father of Jesus, Whose Father is God alone, and yet he lives his fatherhood fully and completely.

Bishop Joseph F. Martino: "Practicing Chastity in an Unchaste Age"

Practicing Chastity in an Unchaste Age | Bishop Joseph F. Martino

Editor's note: This pastoral letter was originally released on December 8, 2004: the 150th anniversary of the proclamation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception; it is reprinted here with permission.

---

My dear brothers and sisters in Christ: I write as your bishop and spiritual father on a matter of great importance and great good news: chastity.

Why chastity? That is really two questions wrapped up in one.

First, why do I write on this subject just now? Violations of chastity in our Church and our diocese have made some people skeptical when the Church speaks on sexual morality. But for just that reason it is more necessary, not less, to speak the truth about sexual morality. Sin and confusion cry out for honest, truthful speech.

The Church has always taught–and I teach here–that we need to find our happiness and holiness in a commitment to the chastity lived out in marital love or the chastity of celibacy lived out either in the consecrated life or the life of a single layperson in the world. These are the two paths to happiness and eternal life. There are no others.

Second, why is chastity so important? Is this really a virtue for our times? Don’t other subjects take priority?

In fact, chastity is a virtue for our times, and it does take priority. That should be clear, for instance, in the wake of the scandalous events in our own Church as well as those in secular society.

Read the entire pastoral letter...

The Holy See responds to criticisms of the Church's rejection...

... of prophylactics as a (or "the") proper way to address the serious and deadly problem of AIDS. The Saint Louis Catholic blog has an unofficial translation of the statement.

I'm sorry, but "I am a Catholic" is not a good excuse...

... for stating, among other things:

• "Amid all the justified outrage we all feel at Bernie Madoff and the AIG bandits, let us save some intense outrage for Pope Benedict XVI."
• That "the idea that such a man is God's spokesperson on earth is absurd to me."
• That "the cardinal sin of the Catholic Church -- a literally deadly sin, if ever there was one -- is its opposition to birth control."
• " The use of condoms is a pro-life position."
• "Misogyny may not be 'the Church's one foundation,' but it is a major part of the base on which it was constructed."
• "Let's start a movement within the Catholic Church to impeach Pope Benedict XVI and remove him from office. While we're at it, let's replace him with a woman."

Of course, this sort of stuff can be found on the internet if you scour enough blogs and obscure website. But, wait, this was written by an academic and published by The Washington Post on its "On Faith" blog. I don't have the time to engage with his arguments, although it's not clear at all if any arguments are proffered. Lot of ranting and emoting, but not much by way of syllogism, fact, or logic.

I simply want to make this point: if you say, as he does, that you despise an organization because it is rooted in misogyny, it allegedly supports the death and destruction of human lives (and refuses to admit so or change its stance on the matter), and its head is despicable and deserves to be kicked out of office—and then say, "But I remain a member of that organization," then I think you are a hypocrite.

That is especially true because it's not as though Pope Benedict XVI has been instituting new and radical teachings about the priesthood, the laity, sexual mortality, and contraceptives. No, he has simply been articulating Church doctrine about those and other issues. So why does this author remain Catholic? There are likely several reasons, both private and public, but I'm guessing that one is the author knows that if he were an Episcopalian or progressive Baptist or Unitarian, people would not care nearly as much about his opinion. After all, the MSM tends to love certain types of subversives (or angry malcontents, if you prefer), especially dissident Catholics. This seems bountifully evidenced by virtue of this piece of, uh, opinionated tripe being posted by one of the most prominent newspapers in the U.S.

Pope Benedict and the Church are regularly condemned as out of touch and clueless about human nature, which apparently is in a state of continual flux and change. For example, Jon O’Brien, President of Catholics for Choice, recently said: “We know that for many people, abstinence does not work." O'Brien is right: abstinence doesn't work for those who don't abstain from sex; however, it does work perfectly for those who do abstain from sex. Can abstinence be difficult? Of course! I'd suggest that living a moral and holy life is indeed quite a struggle. But not only is it unreasonable to think people cannot abstain from sex, it is spiritually and emotionally damaging to say otherwise, never mind the possible physical effects.

It is a strange and surreal fact of 21st-century life that we are told continually, by an assortment of experts and bureaucrats and talking heads, often in the most hysterical, pompous, and moralistic of tones, that we must abstain from certain foods and drinks, MSG, trans-isomer fatty acids, smoking, illicit drugs, steroids, dog fighting, cell phones while driving, using too much gasoline and oil, producing too much carbon dioxide, Wal-Mart, listening to Rush Limbaugh, and homophobic language. And yet humans are assumed to be incapable to abstaining from sex, even in situations where it might lead to an early, horrible death.What's wrong with this picture?

Some may say (scream!) that the Pope should be mocked and impeached. I say the Pope should be praised and imitated.

UPDATE: Canon lawyer Dr. Ed Peters is quite (and rightly) upset by the Washington Post column and strongly urges that canonical penal process be undertaken against the author.

Related IgnatiusInsight.com Articles and Book Excerpts:

• Practicing Chastity in an Unchaste Age | Bishop Joseph F. Martino
• Focus Groups and Marriage: A Match Made for Heartache | Mary Beth Bonacci
• Parents Love the Chastity Girl | Mary Beth Bonacci
• The Challenge of Marriage Preparation | Dr. Janet E. Smith
• Entering Marriage with Eyes Wide Open | Edward Peters
• Human Sexuality and the Catholic Church | Donald P. Asci | Introduction to The Conjugal Act as a Personal Act
• Who Is Married? | Edward Peters
• Marriage and the Family in Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae | Reverend Michael Hull, S.T.D.
• Male and Female He Created Them | Cardinal Estevez
• The Meaning and Necessity of Spiritual Fatherhood | Deacon Harold Burke-Sivers, MTS
• The Truth About Conscience | John F. Kippley | An excerpt from Sex and the Marriage Covenant

Benedict XVI answers questions on way to Cameroon

From Vatican Information Service:

 POPE REPLIES TO QUESTIONS FROM JOURNALISTS

VATICAN CITY, 17 MAR 2009 (VIS) - This morning, during his flight to Cameroon, the Holy Father responded to a number of questions put to him by journalists accompanying him on the papal plane.

 "For some time, and in particular since your Letter to Catholic bishops concerning the remission of excommunication on the four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre", asked one journalist, "many newspapers speak of the 'solitude' of the Pope. What is your view on this? Do you really fell alone?"

 "To tell the truth I cannot help laughing a little about this myth of my solitude. I do not feel alone at all. Every day I hold meetings with my closest collaborators, first among them the secretary of State. ... Truly, I am surrounded by friends in a marvellous collaboration with bishops, with my collaborators, and with lay people, and I am grateful for this".

 Asked about the impact of the world economic crisis on poor countries, and whether he would examine this theme in his forthcoming Encyclical, the Holy Father said: "A fundamental element of the crisis is precisely a lack of ethics in financial structures; it has been understood that ethics are not something 'outside' the economy but 'inside' it, and the economy does not work if it does not contain the ethical component".

 Referring then to his next Encyclical on social themes, the Holy Father said: "It was on the point of being published when this crisis broke out and we held the text back in order to respond more adequately; within the ambit of our competencies, within the ambit of the Church's Social Doctrine, but with reference to the real facts of the current crisis. Thus I hope that the Encyclical may also become an element, a force to help overcome the current difficult moment".

 The Pope also replied to a question concerning the specific relevance for Africa of the Catholic Church's position on sects.

 "We, unlike some of them, do not announce a Gospel of prosperity, but Christian realism. We do not announce miracles, as some do, but the sobriety of Christian life. We are convinced that all this sobriety and realism which announce a God Who became man (therefore a profoundly human God a God Who also suffers with us) give meaning to our own suffering. In this way, announcement has a broader horizon and a greater future. We also know that these sects are not very stable. ... The announcement of prosperity, of miraculous healing, etc., may do good in the short term, but we soon see that life is difficult, that a human God, a God Who suffers with us, is more convincing, truer, and offers greater help for life".

 Answering a question on the Catholic Church's approach to HIV/AIDS, considered by some as unrealistic and ineffective, the Pope said:

 "It is my belief believe that the most effective presence on the front in the battle against HIV/AIDS is in fact the Catholic Church and her institutions. ... The problem of HIV/AIDS cannot be overcome with mere slogans. If the soul is lacking, if Africans do not help one another, the scourge cannot be resolved by distributing condoms; quite the contrary, we risk worsening the problem. The solution can only come through a twofold commitment: firstly, the humanisation of sexuality, in other words a spiritual and human renewal bringing a new way of behaving towards one another; and secondly, true friendship, above all with the suffering, a readiness - even through personal sacrifice - to stand by those who suffer".

Melanne Verveer, Ambassador-at-Large for Women's Issues

Some important background information from Jack Smith on the The Catholic Key Blog, including the fact that Verveer is a well-connected Catholic whose "political contributions have been to a 'who's who' of pro-abortion politicians, including original FOCA co-sponsor Louise Slaughter."

Busy-ness. And a call for conversation.

This week is, as they say, one of those weeks. Lots of projects and deadlines, so blogging will probably be a bit lighter than usual.

But, before I go and try to meet some pressing deadlines (that is, "due two days ago"), two things:

First, a question that has come up, both in the comments section and in e-mails, is, "Why bother following what Douglas Kmiec is saying?" One reason is that Kmiec is influential, as a recent article, "A Gay-Marriage Solution: End Marriage?", in TIME magazine, indicates.

Secondly, one issue that has been of interest to me of late is the ongoing or impending demise of several newspapers, and the debate over the value and place of print newspapers. Rather than play my hand (which is not really formed yet), I'll simply point to a couple of articles out of many possible choices that take different stances on the issue:

• "Not worried about print media's collapse? Think again" by Russell Shaw (Our Sunday Visitor, March 6, 2009)
• "Journalism evolving, not dying: science author" on Breitbart.com (March 14, 2009)

And, just for kicks, a piece by a columnist who blames (at least in part) the desperate situation of many newspapers on right-wing talk radio:

• "Frayed Thread in a Free Society" by Kathleen Parker (Washington Post, March 15, 2009)

Are newspapers yesterday's news? Is it tragic that some of them are on the cusp of disappearing? Or is it a good thing? Or rather, is it simply the way things go in an increasingly digitized, cyber-focused world? Please share your thoughts!

"Humility, true humility, is crucial to the conversion process."

Former atheist Jennifer Fulwiler tells National Catholic Register why she entered the Catholic Church in 2007:

What caused you to consider the question more seriously?

I have always been a truth-seeker, which is why I was an atheist. But I had a prideful, arrogant way of approaching questions about life and meaning. I now realize that pride is the most effective way to block out God so that one doesn’t see him at all. Certainly, I didn’t.

The birth of our first child motivated me to seek the truth with humility. I can’t emphasize this point enough: Humility, true humility, is crucial to the conversion process.

Most atheists are unchanged after their children’s births. Why were you so affected?

First, I had already begun thinking about the possibility of God’s existence. After our son’s birth, I wanted to know the truth about life’s great questions — for his sake. For the first time, I was motivated to seek truth with true humility. For example, I began reading, studying, and thinking about the great minds. Most, if not the majority, believed in some other world, some higher power, a god or gods — something. Even the great pre-Christian thinkers like Plato, Aristotle and Socrates believed.

Another avenue of exploration: I always revered the great scientists, including the founders of the significant branches of science. Very few were atheists. Indeed, some of the greatest were profoundly believing Christians.

Read the entire interview.

Whereupon I am chastised by an apt teacher of the Word!

I recently received an anonymous e-mail: "You are a very confused young man. Sincere yes, but sincerely wrong. If you will stay in the book I think you will come to the knowledge of the truth. Eph.2:8-9"

I replied: "Dear ... ? Wow. Sounds like something I would have said years ago. No, sounds like something I did say many times when I was still cluelessly anti-Catholic. How sad."

I then received this (again, anonymous) response:

Have you tried Former?? There is only one simple gospel that Martin Luther discovered.  There is only one final authority. The Bible not the pope. The bible is God's final word to His church. You spoke many things in error about what we  believe and did not back your word with scripture. Jesus said,  'Set them apart by truth and my WORD IS TRUTH' John 17:17 

Gal. 1:6-10 If Jesus is your Lord And Savior you are my brother in Christ. When Paul rebuked Peter for teaching error they remained brothers in Christ.

Hmmm. Wha---? I wrote:

You write: "There is only one simple gospel that Martin Luther discovered." But if the true gospel was proclaimed 1500 years before Luther, and was handed on and entrusted to the apostles (cf., Matt 16:16-20; 28:18-20; Jn 20:21-23, etc.), who in turn entrusted to others (cf., 2 Tim 2:2), why would Luther need to "discover" it? Why did God wait so long to reveal it to Luther? It makes no sense.

Yes, there is one final authority, and He is God. Jesus Christ, who is God incarnate, granted authority to his disciples and apostles (cf., Lk 9:1; 10:19; Jn 16:13; 2 Cor 13:10; Tit 2:15; etc.). They in turn passed on that authority. Would it make sense for God to grant said authority and then toss it out the window a few years later?

I agree that the Bible is not the Pope. Who said it was? Have you actually read any works of Catholic doctrine or theology? If so, please name them. (Keep in mind that I've read many works of Fundamentalist and Evangelical theology. Not bragging--just pointing it out.)

You write, "The bible is God's final word to His church." It is true that Scripture is the Word of God—that is something I wholeheartedly believe as a Catholic—but the Final Word is The Word (Logos), Jesus Christ: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (Jn 1:1). It doesn't get any more final than God! But where does the Bible itself say it is the final authority? In addition, how do you know which books belong in the Bible (hint: the Catholic Church, by virtue of her authority from Christ, recognized which books were meant to be in the Bible)?

The Church, the Body of Christ (cf., 1 Cor 12:27, etc.), is the "household of God" and "the pillar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15). Christ promised that hell would not prevail over the Church (Matt 16:18), yet you seem to believe that until Martin Luther, hell did prevail over the Church. On what basis?

Here is your predicament: you claim that the Catholic Church preaches a false gospel and you suggest (by referencing Gal 1:6ff) that it happened very early, within the first years of the Church. And yet you accept the 27 books of the New Testament, but have no basis for doing so other than the authority of the Catholic Church, which recognized and formalized the canon of the New Testament during the fourth and fifth centuries. But if the Catholic Church is apostate and teaches a false gospel, why do you obey her authority when it comes to the books of the Bible? Just wondering.

Which elicited this final e-mail:

Grace and truth comes through Christ. In  past times God spoke through prophets in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. Heb.1:1-2 Luther in the dark age days when people did not have access to the scripture. Read the bible for himself and believed what the apostles and the early church taught. The Holy Catholic church not The Roman Catholic church. There is a great difference between the two. You surely know many early believers would not accept the authority of Rome. Never have never will.'The just shall live by faith' The gospel has been preached from the days of the apostles, and will be preached till Jesus comes. Traditions have lead many astray. Gal.1:6-9, 2Peter2:18-22,  1John4:1-3

Traditions change. God never changes. Nothing is from God that cannot be proved by HIS WORD. 'All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work'.  2Tim3:6 AMEN    'SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES'   Rev.2:18-21 This will be my last note because of the word in 1Tim.2:24

I won't keep you in suspense any longer: I am still a Catholic. Hard to believe, I know. But true. I remain a mindless, biblically-illiterate, Tradition-hugging, Luther-renouncing, Mary-worshipping, Papist-clinging Romanist.

By the way, this is what 1 Tim. 2:24 says: " ". I think he meant 2 Tim. 2:24: "And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to every one, an apt teacher, forbearing..." Which means, I guess, that when he wrote—anonymously and without provocation: "You are a very confused young man," he was not being quarrelsome. Just kindly, as any apt teacher would be.

A World Without Charity

A World Without Charity | James V. Schall, S.J. | Catholic World Report Web Exclusive

Aiming for perfect justice, our laws gussy up old sins as new rights.

Grace and charity have no place in a socialist world, the kind our current leaders seem to be partial to, even when they deny it. As Heather Higgins points out, charitable giving institutions, those unique instruments that do not exist in every culture, are suddenly under political fire. The Christian world and the socialist world are built on entirely different principles. Benedict XVI in Deus Caritas Est took pains to make clear that no actual world could exist in which, by right, everything was automatically taken care of through the public mechanisms of the state.

Bruce Fingerhut, the good director of St. Augustine’s Press, sent me the other day the following amusing, but provocative citation: “Bertrand Russell, who, when asked why he did not give to charity, replied: ‘I’m afraid you’ve got it all wrong. We are Socialists. We don’t pretend to be Christians.’” Needless to say, that witty retort contains a whole theology and a philosophy that deserve to be spelled out. The logic of classic socialism makes Christianity not only superfluous—everyone has everything by rights—but impossible—no one has anything to give.

Russell is right, of course. In a socialist world, no charity can exist because there can be no need that is unfulfilled by the commonality’s duty. It is a world in which there can be no gratitude. I can thank someone for giving me what is really his. I cannot thank him for giving me what is by rights already mine. And if everything belongs to the community, how can I give it away? Or if I do give it away, how can it be anything but stealing from the commons on my part and receiving illicit booty on the receiver’s part?

Read the entire piece...