'Stunning' Accomodations - What to make of them?

A friend sent me the AOL news article Catholic Church Makes 'Stunning' Move by James Graff (Oct. 20, 2009) and the note, "Thought you might find this interesting. What is your opinion on the topic?" The article covers the Vatican's announcement that it will allow former Anglicans who join the Catholic Church en masse to retain a collective identity, using many of their traditional prayers and hymns in their own specially designed dioceses.

There has been great commentary and discussion of this development at The Anchoress , Fr. Z , and this good Wall Street Journal summary by Francis X. Rocca, The Pope Lets a Thousand Liturgies Bloom.

My response:
I'd seen a headline this morning, but only read the story on your sending it. My favorite line because it made me chuckle - "Now you can be an Anglican and still be Catholic," says Jo Bailey Wells, director of Anglican Studies at Duke Divinity School. Huh?

Not sure what to think, though my gut says that this is a good thing, uniting for a change rather than the typical, persistent, dendritic branching into ever more denominations that we've seen from the Great Schism through today. If God can bring wandering individuals (like me) "home" to the Church, surely he can do the same here with open-minded/hearted faithful.

I've read about the Eastern Rite(s?) that allow married priests (something newly-Catholic Anglican priests will be allowed to be). Since the Eastern Rites are members of the Catholic Church already, maybe this accomodation for returning Anglicans isn't so different, and a good example of what my business partner & I call "management by exception" where there is a standard way of doing things, but enough flexibility to acknowledge special situations and deal with them constructively instead of kicking them out of the system altogether.

Many of these Angilcans may be more orthodox and obedient to the Church's teachings than some (many?) U.S. Catholics.

On the other hand, regarding married priests...Linda Poindexter (wife of Ret. Rear Admiral John Poindexter) who was an Anglican priestess before converting to Roman Catholicism argues convincingly that marriage and priests do not mix as a general rule (podcast interview here, begining at the 34 minute mark of the podcast).

"I believe in and support the all-male, celibate priesthood,...It’s tough to give your all to a parish and give your all to a spouse and family...Once you’ve taken marital vows you do have those obligations. It becomes most confusing. The way it seems to have worked out in the Episcopal church is that people are overly concerned now with their contracts and their benefits, their time off and all the rest of it, because that’s necessary if you’re going to be part of a family...If somebody dies on your day off, that’s too bad. It’s a very awkward situation. Granted everybody needs some free time, but it is just very difficult when you have a family...I see Episcopal priests taking off to pick up their kids from school, and they have this and that, and then I hear Catholics say we have to have married priests because we’re so short [of priests]. That’s just not a good reason. You don’t know what you’re asking for. For one thing, are you prepared to triple your parish budget?...It becomes a very different view of the priesthood. There’s just something very special about someone who has the gift of celibacy and is set apart for that reason. There again we get into the awe and mystery that I think contributes to that."

After hearing her points, she convinced me that the Roman Rite has it right with the policy of unmarried priests. Echoing the example of Christ and the Apostles (even those who were married are reported to have been celibate once becoming Apostles) seems a good model to replicate for those who work "in persona Christi".

What do you think of it? Feel free to chime in.

Bury the Hatchet

There's been lots in the news cycle today about racism which reminded me of Eric Holder's comment on Americans' lack of courage to have frank & honest discussion on race. “Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial, we have always been, and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, a nation of cowards...”

In a spirit of boldness, I'm ready to discuss current issues of race and to point out that racism seems to have found a repository in an unexpected place. Would Mr. Holder like to courageously address this? We'll get to that later...

Maureen Dowd calls Joe Wilson a racist for shouting "you lie" during Obama's recent address of Congress and Juan Williams says he's not convinced Wilson isn't. Dowd wrote, "some people just can't believe a black man is President and will never accept it."

I hate to break it to you Maureen, but the more accurate assessment is, "some people just can't believe a far-left liberal with little understanding of our Founders, their Principles and the Constitution snuck into the Presidency as a moderate, then began attempting to cram unread legislation down the Peoples' throats like we were so many DR Chipper/Shredders."

Never mind that only after that address was language put in place requiring verification of legal status prior to provision of medical care. So while the draft language didn't explicitly provide healthcare to illegals, there was no mechanism in place to prevent it. Did he lie? Applying the warped definition used by the left during Bush's terms, he did indeed lie. Not applying that silly, wrongheaded mis-usage, we'll say he wasn't forthright. That fact, and pointing it out, has nothing to do with density of melanin does it? Robert Gibbs doesn't think so.

In our bold conversation, shall we talk about Kanye West grabing the mic from Taylor Swift during her VMA acceptance speech to tout Beyonce's video as on of the best ever? Was this racist? I say it's just equal-opportunity stupidity, but by MoDo's logic, it is. If you don't think so, imagine this: Beyonce is receiving an award and Toby Keith grabs her mic to say Carrie Underwood made one of the best videos of all time. Hmmm...might be taken differently, no?

Shall we discuss the lone demographic group whose support of Obama is undiminshed since his inauguration and what one might infer from that about exactly whom is stuck on color of skin instead of content of character? Thoughts Mr. Holder?

We do need to have a conversation, but it is ironic that those playing racial identity politics for personal gain are the ones unwilling to have it.

What would it take to soothe the likes of Holder? What does he need to transpire between the great great great grandchildren of slaves, slaveholders, and of Irish, German, Italian, Polish, Hungarian, Nigerian, Jamaican and South African immigrants who were neither slaves nor slaveholders; who worked hard, and in deplorable conditions so that their progeny could proudly wear the title American instead of remaining in less free nations? What would be required to really bury the hatchet?

Reminds me of that Garth Brooks lyric, "when it comes to forgivin', baby there ain't no doubt. We bury the hatchet, but leave the handle stickin' out." To Holder, MoDo, Jimmy Carter et al...lets bury the whole thing and, as your side likes to say, "move on". The rest of us have.

Recuerdo (I Remember)

I remember September 11, 2001. Waking up to buildings burning, collapsing. People jumping - leaping scores of stories to their deaths rather than burn. Telephone lines jammed. I remember a nation that, for a short while, focused. Dropped the trivial, the egotism, the ideologue hats, and focused. Realizing that there is evil and that it must be confronted, we stood shoulder to shoulder, flew our flags, rescued the injured, buried the dead, prayed, and got real. For a little while.

Today, I remember Balewa Albert Blackman, from New York, New York. 26 years old when he died in the World Trade Center on the day we dropped the pettiness and focused on what matters. Reading about him today, I learned he was a brother to sister Susan, a son to Albert Sr. & Hyacinth, a great friend, upbeat, and made a lasting impression on those who knew him, from family, to friends at Cornell (where he earned his degree in degree in biochemical engineering), to co-workers at Cantor Fitzgerald where he was a Junior Equities Accountant (Cantor Fitzgerald memorial to Balewa here). He loved music, jazz especially, and created a recording studio in his room.

Balewa "B-Rock" as his friend Krishna from Cornell refers to him, was "a good man, loved life, and had a special kinetic vibe about him. He will be missed."

Victor LaValle remembers you, "Always funny, always smiling".

On May 7, 2002 your sister wrote "To my baby brother, not a day goes by that we do not think of you. We cry, we smile, and we miss you. September 11th did not take you from us. It brought you closer to us, through your friends, and kind words from strangers. You have touched so many people in your 26 years, and your are still touching so many more. You will always be the loving son, the beloved brother, the funny uncle, and dear friend. We Love You. "
~ Susan McMillian, Brooklyn, New York

In a New York Times piece, his sister recalled, "He liked the idea of not just doing the physical work, but also learning how to think like a Navy Seal person," she said. "He likes things that are conditioning for the body, but also conditioning for the mind.

You live on in the hearts, minds, and prayers of your family, friends and co-workers who knew you well. I will remember you as well. May God bless and keep you and your family.

Hidden Cost to Socialized Medicine - Personal Privacy

An e-mail, "Crazy - But Maybe Not" hit my in-box. The text following the link to an ACLU scare video warned, "This is funny, but the scary part about it is that it's probably not too far away from being reality."

A "simulation" follows of how troubling ordering your favorite pizza may become. We see a mock "Pizza Palace" call-center computer screen with the text, "Detecting phone number... Detecting National ID...Loading record.."

We learn (along with the hungry caller) that Pizza Palace has his health records, detail of subscriptions and family information because they "just hooked into the system". The caller wants a double-meat pie and is informed that, based on his history of high cholesterol and blood pressure, he'll have to ante-up for the $20 surcharge and sign a waiver for associated health risks at time of delivery. That can be waived if he orders the bean-sprout covered pizza facsimile.

If we rely on the Nanny State to take care of us, you can count on that same Nanny collecting lots of personal information and imposing certain non-negotiable requirements on "the children"- which is all of us according to framers of the Nanny State. Want evidence? Check out John Edwards' ideas about government mandated doctor visits. Edwards has such silky locks, how could he be Big Brother?

The ACLU wanted me scared - but the scenario sounds right to me. There will be costs to "free" health care, count on it. When it's time to vote, I'll be casting mine for personal privacy, personal accountability, and keeping the government out of "managing" my health, thanks.

If we're so thick as a nation that we should ever adopt taxpayer-funded "Universal Health Care", you can expect this kind of trampling of personal privacy, after all, how can the govermment manage health without any personal information?

If "everybody" is going to be granted carte blanche with our tax dollars, we'll need to know when, how long, and at what intensity-level they're on the treadmill, as well as what food they're eating, how much and how late at night. And they'll need health metrics for each of us, like regular cholesterol, blood pressure, body-mass index, and urinalysis.

If there's to be any hope of making this pot-and-pizza-fueled massive federal social program work, they'll have to implement accountability measures to keep the whole system from going bankrupt. If you want in on the health gravy-train (an oxymoron?), you're going to have to show that you're taking care of yourself. Only fair isn't it? There are only so many tax dollars in the budget and it wouldn't be fair to let Twinkie King's quadruple bypass eat up the town Eagle Scout's annual check-up allowance, would it? Read the article at the link above for an eye-opener about obesity causing health-care cost hikes even larger than those caused by smoking or problem drinking.

The bright-side is, we don't have to turn over our health decisions to a bloated, federal bureaucracy. We don't need to super-size medicine, we need Healthcare Unplugged. Just each of us and our doctor. Doc takes care of us and is paid by us which means he works for us; not an HMO geared to profit stockholders. Isn't the job of doctors keeping us, not an investment portfolio, healthy? The bonus? Our private, personal information remains just that.

Look around. As a general rule, bigger is not better. Not big government, not big business. The bigger administrative bodies get, the less personal and responsive they become. Do we really want to take one of the most personal things in our lives - our own health - and make a gigantic federal bureaucracy responsible for it? When we need responsiveness, do we want to turn to the feds or to small, efficient, local organizations? When were you last "very satisfied" with the service you received from a federal agency? A state agency? See my point?

If you've read this far and still get all misty thinking nationalized health care is "the answer"consider the opinion of Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winner in Economic Science, "We have a socialist-communist system of distributing medical care. Instead of letting people hire their own physicians and pay them, no one pays his or her own medical bills. Instead, there's a third party payment system. It is a communist system and it has a communist result...we've seen costs skyrocket. Nobody is happy: physicians don't like it, patients don't like it. Why? Because none of them are responsible for themselves. You no longer have a situation in which a patient chooses a physician, receives a service, gets charged, and pays for it. There is no direct relation between the patient and the physician. The physician is an employee of an insurance company or an employee of the government. Today, a third party pays the bills. As a result, no one who visits the doctor asks what the charge is going to be—somebody else is going to take care of that. The end result is third party payment and, worst of all, third party treatment.

Mr. Friedman's book Free To Choose is a must-read in understanding the economic choices we must make to preserve Freedom for ourselves and future generations.

God's SEAL: Mother Teresa

"...the body can take damn near anything. It's the mind that needs training. Can you handle injustice? Can you cope with unfairness and teremendous setbacks? Can you come back with your jaw set, determined, swearing to God you will never quit? That's what we're looking for." - Reno Alberto, Instructor, U.S. Navy / SEALS

In an August 24, 2007 New York Daily News article Mother Teresa was said to have"...spent her last 50 years secretly struggling with doubts about her faith", based on her letters. She requested that they be destroyed but they have been preserved by the Catholic Church and are published in a new book, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light .

A few quotes give a sense of the intensity of her struggle.

"If there be God - please forgive me. When I try to raise my thoughts to Heaven, there is such convicting emptiness that those very thoughts return like sharp knives and hurt my very soul,"

"There is such terrible darkness within me, as if everything was dead. It has been like this more or less from the time I started 'the work,'" she wrote in 1953.

She referred to Jesus as "the Absent One" as he seemingly disappeared after speaking to her in visions and conversations in 1946. She was 36 and a convent teacher riding on a train in India. Christ spoke to her directly, saying, "Come be My light."

To hang on doggedly through feelings of abandonment, doubt and emptiness, to complete her mission when it would have been understandable to give up is proof of a remarkable Faith and toughness. The SEALS are looking for this kind of toughness. So is someone else.

Doubts?

Talking with a friend, the subject of historical evidence outside the New Testament for Jesus' existence came up. She said that since the Romans kept meticulous records (and she was unaware of any documenting Him) He must not have existed. Rather Jesus was a mythical invention of a people who longed deeply for God among them.

There are historical references to Jesus outside the New Testament. A 1-minute Google search will tell you that. Some of the best by historian Flavius Josephus are recognized by scholars to have been corrupted in part over the centuries. There is consensus by experts of both Ancient and Biblical History that Josephus did write about Jesus. The likely corruption is the statement that Jesus "was the Christ" - something that Josephus, a Jewish historian, would not have said or he would be known as a Christian historian.

With modern perspective and most of the world familiar with Jesus and His teachings it seems unfathomable that the Romans wouldn't have documented His life more fully. But in proper historical context, a poor, Jewish carpenter's son in this forgotten corner of a sprawling empire; who was killed for His teachings at the demand not of Romans, but of His people (the local Jewish leaders) would not have drawn the attention of contemporary Roman historians.

There's also documentation of Christian martyrs who held to their belief in Christ and His teachings right up to death by crucifixion, being eaten by wild animals, burning, etc... Would any of us today so stubbornly uphold faith in a myth? If you answer no, why would they? What would have made them different?

Another point that intrigued me as I researched the historicity of Jesus is this. Some historians observe that while proof of Christ's existence in the form of historical writings is thin, we actually know more about His ideas that we do about those of Alexander the Great.

What stirred me as we talked was not a desire as a Christian to evangelize but alarm at the sheer untruth. When we begin to assume things on important questions without taking a single minute to educate ourselves, to discover that there are historical, non-biblical accounts of Him as a real person, we are in trouble.

Question all you like whether Jesus was who He said He was, whether or not He has been a positive influence on humanity or the value of His teachings. But don't say that he never existed without knocking the dust off of your mouse pad. That is a knowable fact.

Global Warming vs. "Death to America!!!"
by Thomas, contibutor

I was shopping for sunscreen for my little boy on a day trip to the mountains and the only open store was this little hippie giftshop next to a hotel. Purchasing sunscreen is something that my wife and I do even though we don't know the science behind why we do it or how good sunscreen actually is for the human body. Barbara the shopkeeper was a tarot card reader and intuitive healer, and the customer next to me in line happened to mention that she was from Anchorage.

Just making friendly conversation, I asked if it was as cold in Alaska as people in the continental U.S. might think. Her response was a compelling description about the reality of climate change over the past 35 years. She said, "you really see global warming more when you get closer to the poles. That is certainly true in Anchorage. In the early 1970s when I moved there, we had frequent winter temperature readings below negative 30, now it is rare to go below negative 15!"

Since it was my turn to pay for the sunscreen I missed the opportunity to ask her this question:

"Were you aware that in 1972 when you moved to Anchorage, Newsweek was running articles about the coming "Ice Age" due to lower than normal temperatures?" This point has been made by Conservative pundits in recent years and, even though it is true, it doesn't appear in Newsweek or any other mainstream or left-leaning news source.

Some thoughts to ponder:

- Global warming was seen as a gradual threat until after the Twin Towers and the Pentagon were attacked. The scientific data that supported the current climate change theory was around well before September 11th, 2001, so why the hysteria now? What is different after 9-11, George W. Bush's election and re-election and our country's "failure" to sign any kind of Kyoto-esque treaty since 2000? What has changed in the body of scientific data on global warming that supports the Left's oft-portrayed and widely accepted fantasy that a single, cataclysmic event is destined to destroy life on all continents if we don't change our carbon emitting ways.

- Hollywood has given us several movies where the new Godzilla is a 200 foot wall of water surging into our front yard or high-rise condo, and it is really being portrayed as a kind of self-inflicted nuclear doomsday. Remove the world leader pushing the red button from your Cold War mental video file and instead picture a soccer mom starting her SUV in the garage. After 39 million simultaneous events that produced carbon emissions, her action becomes the straw that breaks the camel's back or, as we would say in the 21st Century, the carbon emission that destroys the world's delicate ecological balance.

- Perhaps the reason for this nuclear holocaust approach to publicizing global warming is as much political as scientific. In spite of 9-11 being an embarassment to George W. Bush and western traditionalists, it gave the West a concrete, common enemy and it gave Bush & Company political leverage with the American voter who feared another terrorist attack. Conservatives are tougher on Islamic Jihad than liberals because liberals political messaging and position is fairly consistent from one generation to the next. Increase taxes for public services, limit the power of capitalism and promote racial harmony through multicultural tolerance - It doesn't exactly make you shake in your Hezbollah headband. This phenomenon is not limited to American politics either. The trans-atlantic brand of progressive socialism that clearly dominates journalistic reporting in all Western nations has no focal point as long as the voters in those nations have a common enemy more vile than successful capitalists.

- September 11th, the Madrid Train Bombings and other events around the world demonstrate the willingness of Jihadists to kill others and themselves. But are their objectives understood by the Left? Not if the Left believes that global warming is the eminent threat to civilization and that jihadis just need hugs, dialogue and understanding.

- If you subscribe to a news magazine or watch a news network that spends more than 50% of its doomsday coverage on climate change, there is a very good chance you've never heard of the movie, Obsession (for a preview, check out http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/). This is because Obsession is about the single greatest threat to America and the West...besides global warming. In spite of a significant consensus of scientists who agree that the Earth's temperatures are trending warmer due to human activities, there are dissenters who hold significant positions in the global scientific community, notably climatological experts.

-In contrast to those scientists, Jihadists who dress alike, cover their faces, stand in rows and chant "Death to America" repeatedly, their arms outstretched, are the guys who seem to agree with one another about where their movement is headed. Their disciples number in the tens of millions and their mission is very clear: Restore the Caliphate (strict Muslim rule by Sharia Law across all of the Islamic World), the end of the nation of Israel and death to America and the West.

-If you want to help the environment go ahead and follow the three R's: reduce, reuse and recycle. If you prefer to deal with the biggest threat to us and our children, watch the movie Obsession or at least the flim trailer. Here's the beauty: You can do both.