So if you had a country with 0.497 population growth what would you do?
Well if you were France you would you would have the government totally cover the cost of abortion (though not the moral cost). If you were France and already running a $13 billion dollar health-care system deficit you would also pay for it with a tax on retirees. Death and taxes together again.
Last month Fr Alexander Lucie-Smith wrote up a list of ten Church buzzwords he would like to eliminate. An interesting list and one I mostly agree with. Some of the buzzwords listed were not ones I had thought much about, but can see that they are indeed buzzwords.
So this got me thinking about my own list of buzzwords and phrases I could do without. Now I would admit that some of the ones I am going to list might just be perfectly acceptable and even be used correctly in faithful circles. I am going by mostly my own reactions to them and the negative connotations they have for me. So that should be enough of a disclaimer.
What are your least favorite Catholic buzzwords/phrases.
If Aristotle’s Kid Had an iPod: Ancient Wisdom for Modern Parents by Conor Gallagher is a new book from TAN Books that I believe has been released today.
This is kind of a cross between and introduction to Aristotle and a philosophy book for parents. He purposely calls it not a parenting book as he says he is not qualified to write one – I think otherwise though. As a philosophy book for parents I think it succeeds rather well as he takes the wisdom of Aristotle out of just the intellectual into the practical. Preparing your children for a life of virtue, true friendships, and happiness. As this book has a Aristotelian focus it doesn’t try to project Christian theology upon his thought. Though there is so much that integrates quite well as the Scholastics found. Human nature has not changed since Aristotle lived.
I quite enjoyed the format of the book and the way he presented philosophical ideas that are easily grasped. There is some humor in the writing which keeps it light while discussing serious philosophical ideas regarding human nature and living a life of virtue. The author also used various studies, statistics, and stories to support the underlying ideas. A summary at the end of each chapters goes over some of the main ideas. The theme of the iPod is used in these summaries which it calls a “Playlist” and overall I quite liked the layout of the book. “Aristotle’s Dictionary for Parents” at the end provides references to ideas in the book.
I thought this books succeeds quite well at what it sets out to do both as a introduction to Aristotelian thought and philosophy in general and what it means to our daily lives. If I every run across a time machine I will be sure to send a copy of this book back to my early self.
From an excellent interview by Mary Frances Boyle of the NCRegister with Sister Constance Veit of Little Sisters of the Poor regarding the HHS Mandate.
How will the Little Sisters of the Poor be affected by the HHS mandate?
For the time being, we are not directly affected by the mandate. We have until the end of this year to provide certification that we meet the criteria for the one-year exemption currently in place. So, most likely, if nothing changes in the law, we will have to face this concretely Jan. 1, 2014.
Cardinal [Timothy] Dolan blogged about the HHS mandate and its impact on Catholic organizations and services. He is very clear about the costs of the mandate. For example, if we were to stop offering health insurance rather than comply with the mandate, we would have to pay a $2,000 penalty per employee. This penalty aside, it just does not seem right to us to stop providing health insurance to our employees.
If we chose to offer insurance without the objectionable services, we would honor our consciences, but we’d have to pay $100 per day per employee. As the cardinal figures it, for an organization with 50 employees, that would mean almost $2 million per year.So if the mandate is still standing in 2014, all of our U.S. homes will be facing serious financial difficulties. To put this in perspective, we already have to make up at least half of our operating expenses through donations, because Medicaid reimbursements cover only about half of what it costs to care for the elderly in the way they deserve. So the potential fines or penalties we’re looking at just make it that much harder.
To put this in perspective the Little Sisters of the Poor with roughly 300 religious would need to pay 30,000 a day in fines. They could of course decide to only help the Catholic elderly so as to actually meet the requirements of the HHS mandate for a religious exemption. After all according to the HHS Mandate “For the gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to exemptions, and few are those who receive one (unless they are union donors).”
What actions have the Little Sisters of the Poor taken in order to combat the mandate?
At this point, we have not joined in any lawsuits. Our efforts have centered on praying and educating ourselves about the issue.
We issued our own statement back in March — which is highly unusual for us — because we felt that we wanted to support the bishops as much as possible.
As women religious who are grateful to be daughters of the Church, that is very important to us.
That’s why we issued a public statement and, later on, why we signed on to a joint letter sponsored by the bishops and the Lutheran Church.
During the Fortnight for Freedom, we had a lot of prayer initiatives in our homes, like daily Holy Hours with the elderly and speakers. And I was asked to speak about our mission and the need for religious liberty at a congressional reception sponsored by the bishops’ conference during the fortnight.
I have been a Little Sister for 25 years, and I have never seen our congregation so active on a public issue. So that is an indication of its importance. The only other time I have seen a response like this from our congregation was in the early 1990s, when euthanasia and assisted suicide were being debated in the European Parliament, and our superior general at that time took a public stand.
Normally, our lives are very hidden.
Funny how the media is full of stories of the Vatican cracking down on women religious who serve the poor and none about how the Obama Administration is cracking down on women religious who serve the poor. If the LCWR is reformed they will be more able to help the poor, if the President succeeds there will be less women religious able to help the poor.
This is the 34th volume of The Weekly Benedict ebook which is a compilation of the Holy Father’s writings, speeches, etc which I post at Jimmy Akin’s The Weekly Benedict. This volume covers material released during the last week for 3 October, 2012 – 11 October 2012.
The ebook contains a table of contents and the material is arranged in sections such as Angelus, Speeches, etc in date order. The full index is listed on Jimmy’s site.
The Weekly Benedict – Volume 34 – ePub (supports most readers)
The Weekly Benedict – Volume 34 – Kindle
There is an archive for all of The Weekly Benedict eBook volumes. This page is available via the header of this blog or from here.
This must be certainly the first time the USCCB has issued a statement correcting a false assertion in a Vice Presidential debate.
WASHINGTON—The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued the following statement, October 12. Full text follows:
Last night, the following statement was made during the Vice Presidential debate regarding the decision of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to force virtually all employers to include sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion, in the health insurance coverage they provide their employees:“With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact.”This is not a fact. The HHS mandate contains a narrow, four-part exemption for certain “religious employers.” That exemption was made final in February and does not extend to “Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital,” or any other religious charity that offers its services to all, regardless of the faith of those served.
HHS has proposed an additional “accommodation” for religious organizations like these, which HHS itself describes as “non-exempt.” That proposal does not even potentially relieve these organizations from the obligation “to pay for contraception” and “to be a vehicle to get contraception.” They will have to serve as a vehicle, because they will still be forced to provide their employees with health coverage, and that coverage will still have to include sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients. They will have to pay for these things, because the premiums that the organizations (and their employees) are required to pay will still be applied, along with other funds, to cover the cost of these drugs and surgeries.
USCCB continues to urge HHS, in the strongest possible terms, actually to eliminate the various infringements on religious freedom imposed by the mandate.
For more details, please see USCCB’s regulatory comments filed on May 15 regarding the proposed “accommodation”: www.usccb.org/about/general-counsel/rulemaking/upload/comments-on-advance-notice-of-proposed-rulemaking-on-preventive-services-12-05-15.pdf
I tuned in to the debates late, but did catch when Vice President Biden said:
My religion defines who I am, and I’ve been a practicing Catholic my whole life. And has particularly informed my social doctrine. The Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who — who can’t take care of themselves, people who need help. With regard to — with regard to abortion, I accept my church’s position on abortion as a — what we call a de fide doctrine. Life begins at conception in the church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life.
But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews, and I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the — the congressman. I — I do not believe that we have a right to tell other people that — women they can’t control their body. It’s a decision between them and their doctor. In my view and the Supreme Court, I’m not going to interfere with that.
First off I need some Listerine Mindwash to remove this statement. Now there is no surprise he would say something so morally incoherent; he is only following the bloody footsteps of those before him who used this morally vapid dodge. Even dumber he calls life beginning at conception as a “de fide doctrine” when it is no such thing. Though liberal often try to make something that is in the area of science as an area of theology so they can make it a matter of opinion. They do the same with issues involving the natural law so as to seem to restrict something to just one religious body.
I think the really sad thing besides his statement is that there are many that will swallow the argument about “imposing on others.” This argument is so shallow that even a laser measuring device won’t be able to measure any depth to it. The fact that he would use this excuse while at the same time the Obama administration is imposing directly on Catholics in many areas including the HHS Mandate makes this ironic in the extreme.
As for Rep Paul Ryan’s answer to the same question. I liked how he took it out of the area of theology to that of science and added a personal story to illustrate the humanity of the unborn. He then went on to say:
“The policy of a Romney administration will be to oppose abortions with the exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.”
Now many will defend him saying this since it is not politically pragmatic to oppose this area of abortion. After all the Executive Branch is not the Legislative Branch and it will take an overturning of Roe V. Wade before any legal movement against abortion will occur. Plus even if it is overturned it will then become a matter for the states and not the Federal government. So practically there really will not be an opportunity to oppose abortion in these circumstances.
So I understand the practical arguments and I thank God the saints were not so pragmatically practical. This viewpoint would say that St. Thomas More should have just gone along and signed away his conscience since it wasn’t politically practical for him to oppose his friend King Henry VIII. Instead we get a statement that an intrinsically evil act will not be opposed even generally. This also continues to enforce that opposing abortion for these exceptions is extreme when it is extreme to murder someone for the sin of their father. In some ways Ryan’s statement parallels Biden’s in that Ryan is personally opposed to these exceptions, but won’t impose it on others.
There has been a lot of media attention regarding VatiLeaks and the conviction of the “Pope’s Butler.” Just being able to use the words “Pope’s Butler” is a lot of fun for the media or really for everyone. Though I always wonder what he duties actually were and if his duties really came down to being the Pope’s Valet. But of course “Popes Valet” doesn’t have the same spin for use.
Now I also wonder does the Pope now have someone else filling the position? I ask this being a great fan of P.G. Wodehouse and the Bertie and Jeeves novels. What if Pope Benedict XVI hired a Jeeves type character? Though the Pope is pretty much the antithesis of a Bertie Wooster. Still I can imagine a semi Bertie-Jeeves conversation with Jeeves cast as a more progressive figure. A kind of Bertie-Jeeves reversal.
“Pardon me, sir, but are you proposing to enter Saint Peter Square in that mitre?”The start of “The Year of Faith” coincides purposely with the start of the Second Vatican Council 50 years ago. Much has been said about the false “Spirit of Vatican II” which was a purposeful misdirection to the texts of Vatican II. While I have read some of the documents and parts of others I haven’t read through all of them. So I figured this was an opportune time to correct that.
Today the Pope said “I have often insisted on the need to return, as it were, to the ‘letter’ of the Council — that is to its texts — also to draw from them its authentic spirit, and (it is) why I have repeated that the true legacy of Vatican II is to be found in them,”
So I have put together an ebook containing all the Councilar Documents which I will read this year and make available for others.
Reading these documents in context of the faith of the Church is a good way to inoculate yourself against the false spirit of Vatican II.
For this Year of Faith, Pope Benedict has encouraged you to study and reflect on the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Well, here’s an easy way to do it. Simply enter your email address and – starting October 11, 2012 – you’ll start getting a little bit of the Catechism emailed to you every morning. Read that little bit every day and you’ll read the whole catechism in a year. Cool, right?
Jimmy Akin has an update regarding the uses of modified Agnus Dei in the liturgy. He now has the bulletin from the USCCB himself and he posted (bolding is his):
This alteration is effective immediately, and affects all existing and future musical settings of the Lamb of God.
The relevant paragraph [of the bishops’ document Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship] now reads (new text in underline):
188. The supplicatory chant Agnus Dei accompanies the Fraction Rite. It is, “asa rule, sung by the choir or cantor with the congregation responding; or it is, at least, recited aloud. This invocation accompanies the fraction and, for this reason, may be repeated as many times as necessary until the rite has reached its conclusion, the last time ending woth the word dona nobis pacem (grant us peace)” (GIRM, no. 83). The Agnus Dei should not be prolonged unnecessarily (see GIRM, no. 83) nor may other texts be added to this chant.
In other liturgical news Rorate Caeli has a letter from the CDW in response to a question from the Philippines.
“The liturgical law of the Roman Rite does not foresee the use of dance or drama within the Sacred Liturgy, unless particular legislation has been enacted by the Bishops’ Conference and confirmed by the Holy See. Any other practice is to be considered an abuse.”
Hey another step to reducing the leotardation of the liturgy.
On the humorous side “Eye of the Tiber” strikes gold again with SSPX Acolyte Stumbles During Offertory; Mass Deemed Invalid.