Punditry

SEATTLE, Jan. 3 /PRNewswire/ — Senator John Edwards, 2004 Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate and former North Carolina Senator, will speak at the Gonzaga University School of Law annual Luvera Lecture Series Luncheon on January 10, 2006 at 12:00 p.m. in Seattle at The Columbia Tower Club.

Established in 1990, the Luvera Lecture Series is an annual event that features the nation’s brightest minds, designed to inspire students and alumni of Gonzaga University School of Law. The series is underwritten by Seattle attorneys Paul and Lita Luvera, both Gonzaga Law School graduates and partners in The Luvera Law Firm. Lita Luvera also serves on the Gonzaga University Board of Regents.

While the event is sold out to Gonzaga students and alumni, Senator Edwards’ presentation will broadcast in its entirety on TVW, a Washington state public affairs broadcaster. The broadcast time is still to be determined, but it will be available on most Washington cable systems, and on the Web at www.tvw.org.

Senator Edwards’ presentation on "America, The Land of Opportunity" will illustrate his belief that opportunity is the birthright of every American. He will also discuss the importance of providing quality education to children, combating poverty, and strengthening national security. Senator Edwards believes that it is our responsibility as a society to offer options that will help every man, woman, and child attain the American Dream. [Source]

Unless of course you’re an unborn child in the womb. Nice going Gonzaga for a school "informed by our humanistic, Jesuit, and Catholic traditions and values."

Professors Ellen Kennedy and Leigh Lawton had traveled together before for the University of St. Thomas. Where they slept was never an issue.

But last month, as they prepared for a long-planned trip with students to Australia, they got a call from a St. Thomas official asking about their "living" arrangements for the trip.

Kennedy, 57, and Lawton, 61, live together as unmarried, heterosexual partners. The university decided they could go to Australia only if they took separate rooms. They refused, considering it deceitful.

The flight left Friday with other faculty on board. The controversy won’t be leaving any time soon.

Kennedy and Lawton’s story is the talk among faculty and staff at the Catholic university. It comes months after St. Thomas told a lesbian choral director she couldn’t officially bring her partner along on a trip to France with a university choir.

That story, playing out the past few weeks in the campus newspaper, and the emerging account of Kennedy and Lawton have spawned a complex campus debate over Catholic doctrine, the teachings of Jesus and the university’s legal reach.

There’s no doubt where the church stands on homosexuality and unmarried couples living together. Others ask how far the university intends to go to enforce Catholic values.

"If sin and vice become disqualifying factors for university employees, then students might have to start teaching themselves," theology professor David Landry wrote in a recent faculty newsletter. [Source]

First off bravo for the university for not turning the blind eye that is so prevalent in Catholic education now.

Why am I not surprised that a theology professor could say something so stupid? What silliness for a associate theology professor at a university named after St. Thomas Aquinas. This is an argument you might expect from a teenager, or someone who has no understanding of the impact of sin both on both an individual and the Mystical Body of Christ. A view where scandal means nothing and Jesus’ words of "go and sin no more" get left out. Mark Shea says "Sin makes you stupid" and the corollary to that is that "Excusal of sin also makes you stupid."

Though no surprise that he links to the Jesus Seminar and also in an article where he for the most part debunks the Da Vinci Code says:

It is especially true, in my judgment, that the role of Mary Magdalene (and Jesus’ other female followers) was probably much more important than the canonical gospels allow, and that turning to other sources (such as noncanonical gospels) and utilizing feminist criticism of the gospels is one way to begin rectifying this injustice. Here is a case where good revisionist history would be both true and helpful. But I think it does not serve the cause of either Christian women’s liberation or the “feminine divine” to manufacture evidence, especially when that phony evidence only serves to turn Mary Magdalene into Jesus’ sex partner and wife, and the repository of his seed.

Just what we need "good revisionist history."

Update: Clayton has information related to Canon 810 on this subject.

From a promotion for ABC’s Primetime.

“Diane Sawyer takes you on the trail of a passionate mystery. Just as intriguing as The Da Vinci Code. Chasing down centuries-old clues hidden even inside the Vatican. Could a woman disguised as a man have been Pope? Thursday night. One astonishing Primetime.”
[Via NewsBusters]

And next week Primetime brings you in depth reporting on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Of course there is something comforting in the media’s constant attack on the Catholic Church and Christianity in general. You don’t see blistering reports on the Raileans since they are not credible in the first place. The credibility of Christianity must be made to appear incredulous. When Cardinal O’Connor rhetorically asked Fr. Groechel why Act Up had targeted St. Patrick’s Cathedral he replied "They have come to the right place." The attacks on the Church are a left-handed compliment.

Of course NBC now has the new series "The Book of Daniel" written by a homosexual who describes himself as a as being "in Catholic recovery." Wow I would never have guess that. The Waffling Anglican makes a similar point to mine when he says.

One of the reasons I came to believe that Christianity is true is the astonishing level of hatred, animosity, and mockery it generates. No one would go this far out of his way to diss Hindus or Buddhists – only Christians are considered both fair game and worth the effort.

Hey to fit in with the Da Vinci Code craze and all the biased shows how about USA network do a new series called "Maria Monk" about a 19th century nun with OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive disorder not Order Carmelite Discalced) who investigates the strange goings on in her convent. Each week the nun detective could investigate murders such as infants born to nuns and then strangled, disloyal nuns kept in dungeons, and all kinds of sexual perversion.

People always talk about Hollywood doing more Christian friendly shows, but maybe it would just be better for them to ignore us. Too often their attempts are like an Amish person writing for Slashdot.

In a post on some very nasty comments on the Pope’s Christmas message in the HuffPost Amy Welborn ask’s "Why should this bigotry be allowed to stand?" Simply because it is approved bigotry. Prejudices that match your own prejudices are simply not seen. Religious bigotry against Christianity is the color blindness of the MSM – they simply can’t see it.

* Title taken from Patrick Madrid’s book. He also has an article on the subject here.

Update: Inevitably the Catholic League weighs in. Jimmy Akin also blogs on the historical silliness of pope Joan.

Shana Rose enjoys a communion wafer with her tea in Montreal on Christmas Eve. Communion wafers and their cuttings are standard and popular snack foods in French Quebec.

"They melt in your mouth, and they’re not fattening, so it’s better than junk food," said Françoise Laporte, a white-haired grandmother of 71 who buys packages of Host Pieces at her local IGA in east-end Montreal. "I’m Catholic. This reminds us of mass."

"My son can eat a whole bag while he’s watching TV," Paul Saumure, a manager at another IGA store, said of his 22-year-old. "He’s had more of them outside of church than he ever did inside one."

Unfortunately not a parody but appears in this article. While not exactly a sacriligious snack but a barometer of religious decline.

Hosts with the most "Now without Jesus!" No worries about a sacrilegious Communion with this non-sacramental snack. Confection without confession and for the health conscience you are free to intinct with Diet Coke!

[Via Sed Contra via The Sheepcat]

Update: I think Fr. Dowd in my comments has the right take on this.

Being from Montreal, I feel compelled to comment on this.

First of all, the use of the round wafer in the photo seems staged. Most of the time the "retaille d’hostie" is the trimming around the cut-out wafers, and are not in a round shape, or are hosts that got shattered somehow.

Next, while this is an old custom here in Quebec, today most of the RdH that you can get here is actually not from manufacturers of hosts, but from bakeries. They are artificially sweetened, for example, and so would not be valid matter. Often this extra sugar colours the bread in an odd way, as the sugar caramelizes in the heat of the oven.

So it doesn’t usually look like a host, and doesn’t usually taste like a host. It strike me then that the problem, then, is with the reporting, not with the actual practice. It seems designed to delight in a "sacrilegious" practice that really isn’t that bad in itself.

I should not be surprised if the article was played up to make it seem disrespectful. Tom’s take was also on point.

What fresh outrage is next? People drinking wine?

Though there is the question that Rich Leonardi raised before about the use of unconsecrated hosts outside of Mass stated in Remdemptoris Sacramentum.

Dawn Eden sent me a link to a post from a frustrated mother currently going to graduate school.

Dear Pro-Lifers who Hate Babies,
Your position does not make sense. If women do not have abortions they will have….BABIES!!!! Yes, BABIES! I am aware that babies make loud noises and sometimes even distracting smells. But, alas, they are the product of NOT HAVING ABORTIONS. Let me outline a few things that you might have to change now that you have begun to understand that spreading the anti-abortion message means that there will be more babies around:
1) You can no longer condemn parents of crying babies, either by making *tsking* sounds, shaking your heads, or muttering under your breath.
2) If you happen to be a conservative theology professor, you can no longer forbid the presence of an infant in your office hours. Guess what? Your student didn’t have an abortion. Now she has a baby whose daycare is over before your office hours. Throw a blanket on the floor and shut up about it!
3) Catholic universities (such as the one I attend) cannot forbid babies from entering buildings because they are crying. Babies cry. It’s cold out. Babies need to be warm. Deal with with.
Thank you for attention,

Ironically in a latter post she visits Planned Parenthood clinic to have a breast lump checked to find out that they also don’t allow infants to accompany them. She considered this odd, but I consider it consistent – they don’t want women with actual babies walking around their clinics. Now as for a Catholic university with policies such as these they should be changed. I am also against cry rooms in Church. Sure crying babies are distracting, but they can also be distracting in a good way. Jesus said, "Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven." In a pro-life society we should make every accommodations where possible to make it easier for parents and not be annoyed by the signs of life. Parents of course also have a responsibility to try to calm their children and others have the responsibility of not treating parents with little children as second class citizens to be disdained. Especially during the Christmas season when we welcome the Christ child, we shouldn’t at the same time be banishing crying babies to the outer darkness or cry rooms.

Interestingly Reuters notices the America Magazine Virgin Mary covered in a condom dust up. They even mention one of St. Blog’s bloggers. This part of the article really cracked my up.

Another issue may be Catholic priests’ unfamiliarity with what condoms look like.

"VEIL OF LATEX"

"We’re Jesuits," Martin said. "I don’t think you could have found anyone in the editors’ room who has seen a condom." The mention of a "veil of latex" failed to register, he said.

We’re Jesuits – vale of tears or veil of latex who can tell the difference!

The artist, British-based Steve Rosenthal, said in a media e-mail on Thursday, "The primary aim of the work is to highlight the Vatican’s continuance of non-advocation regarding the use of condoms and I conceived America magazine to be the most suitable place to contextualise the work outside of the gallery space and produce a dialogue."

Now I think that is a pretty interesting piece of commentary. If you are an artist who wants to make a piece of blasphemous art to protest the Church’s teaching on contraception then what is the most suitable magazine that pops into your mind – why America Magazine. Even if the editors truly gaffed in an oversight this is an indictment on what the magazine has come to stand for. Also funny is the juxtaposition of the words "the use of condoms and I conceived." See once again even when using condoms someone conceived.

Again the NCR passes the Democratic Turing test. If an article was read to you where the source could be a Democratic Party operative or the NCR you would be hard pressed to tell the difference. They have called those who have opposed Catholic Charities from honoring Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino extremists. His overt support of abortion – the murdering of the innocent- can be excused because.

For Menino is also, apparently, an outstanding (and increasingly rare these days) advocate for the poor and the downtrodden.

Sorry no Kewpie doll as a reward for this one. You can not be an advocate for the poor and downtrodden when you advocate the murder of the most poor and downtrodden. This is almost a "but the trains run on time" argument. Everybody even those who advocate the most insidious evils have redeeming qualities. But this does not give a blank pass to any evil they might advocate. Both praise the good and denounce the evil.

In the end, Catholic Charities, headed by Fr. J. Bryan Hehir, stood firm and honored Menino. On the matter of adoptions by gay couples, Hehir explained that Catholic Charities, a faith-based organization that uses government money, must abide by state laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. Boston Archbishop Sean O’Malley stayed away from the dinner, basing his decision on a policy of the U.S. bishops prohibiting Catholic organizations from honoring those in public life who oppose church teaching. Of course, as we all know from other matters, bishops are autonomous and can interpret and apply such directives as they see fit — or simply ignore them.

Yes every time you dissent you are standing firm, but if you stand with the Church you are an extremist with a flock mentality. It is rather strange that they accept the argument that Catholic Charities must abide by state law then a paragraph later talk against the death penalty. So I guess if a state law says that you must violate Church teaching and a somewhat recent document by the CDF that is okay, but if a state law approves the death penalty then this must be opposed. I guess it is too much though to expect any kid of consistency from the NCReporter. To be consistent you have to be faithful to the Church. Dissent from truth obviously causes problems with consistency.

If this were merely a little Boston politics, it would be easy to overlook. It is, however, indicative of the kind of befuddled approach to the public arena that has become the Catholic hallmark in too many places.

Church leaders are being pushed and bullied by bands of extreme zealots who may refer to themselves as “authentic” Catholics but who have no bona fides beyond their small circles of discontent. One Boston area extremist who fomented opposition to the Catholic Charities dinner had this to say about Hehir on her Web site: “This man is pure unadulterated evil. He literally sends shivers up my spine. … If he and his cronies think we’re going to tolerate he [sic] and the archbishops’ material cooperation in abortions — we’ll chase them out of town faster than you can say Voice of the Faithful.”

Of course the one (unaccredited) example they provide of the extreme zealot is one that is pretty much ignored by Catholic bloggers and has made a habit of attacking other Catholic bloggers. Sure you can find fanatics in any bunch, but to use one that is pretty much discredited by Catholics who also opposed Catholic Charities for the invite is the typical tactic of the NCReporter.

We can become the absolutists, the literalists who keep cutting off limbs and poking out eyes to fend off that which we find disagreeable. Or we can rediscover the robustness of true Catholicism. We can recognize that politics is not religion. We can rejoin the fray, making our points by persuasion and example, not by ultimatums, sulking and walking away. [Source]

Of course if Catholic Charities has invited Arnold Swartzenegger or other pro-death penalties type they would have promoted a walk out. At least once we would have something to agree on.

AMDG posts on a chapter of Voice of the Faithful in St Louis being in solidarity with the Rev. Bozek and the board of St. Stanislaus which has recently been declared to be in schism by Archbishop Burke. VOTF’s mask of fidelity to the Church was never fastened very securely, but it now seems to be slipping even more. They say that their mission is to support priests of integrity and then support a priest who has just been excommunicated. I guess my definition of integrity doesn’t match theirs. Obviously they support lay investiture even when it is a schismatic act.

They end their letter of support by saying.

We hope that all Catholics in the archdiocese will honor Rev. Bozek and his new parish by joining them for 10 p.m. Mass on Christmas Eve.

Oh great come on down and commit a mortal sin for Christmas Eve. That surely we please our savior. As Archbishop Burke said:

The faithful who approach a schismatic priest for the reception of the sacraments, except in the case of danger of death, commit a mortal sin.

Being that this is Christmas here is the hymn Adeste Infidelis I wrote for them before.

O Come, Voice of the Faithful,
Boastful and defiant,
O come ye dissidents to Boston, Mass
Come now and scold him
Scorn the resigned Cardinal

O come, let us exploit it,
O come, let us exploit it,
O come, let us exploit it,
the situation

Sing, litigation,
All ye choirs of attorneys;
O sing, lay investiture that old heresy
Glory to the Globe-
For their many stories!

O come, let us exploit it,
O come, let us exploit it,
O come, let us exploit it,
the situation

Attacking celibacy
We give you this warning
Married or priestesses is our solution,
Begone now father
Schisms fresh appearing

O come, let us exploit it,
O come, let us exploit it,
O come, let us exploit it,
the situation

ATLANTA — Grand Theft Auto" has been impounded in the Gardner household. So have 1,000 other video games filled with debauchery, decadence and carnage.

Today this family’s interactive entertainment is far more divine.

Electronic Bible games loaded with tests and trivia. Digital duels between David and Goliath. Adventures and challenges with pious themes where any violence appears virtuous.

Hallelujah! At last!

"It wasn’t easy, but [my children] realize the violence and the things they saw wouldn’t help them in life," said Janice Gardner, mother of three boys and two girls ranging in age from 25 to 11. "We’re down to Christian games. They’re a lot of fun to play."

Video games, long berated for explicit content and nihilistic themes, are gaining popularity in an unexpected arena: the Christian marketplace. A whole new genre of Christian-themed video games are converting many who once viewed such entertainment as corrupting.

Now? It’s a cash cow.

While claiming only 1 percent of the video game marketplace, that equates to a $200 million-a-year industry, according to Ralph Bagley , spokesman for the Oregon-based Christian Game Developers Foundation. Slowly, Christian game titles are appearing at retailers such as Circuit City, Best Buy and CompUSA, in addition to the aisles of Christian bookstores, such as the Family Christian Store chain.

"They’re selling pretty well," said Larry Finch, manager of Family Christian Stores in Kennesaw, Ga.

And the conversion has only begun.

Video games are just the latest form of media in which Christian themes are stirring interest — and income.

…"Word of mouth was instrumental in spreading Christianity and is driving Christians to the cash register in mass quantities," said Pete Snyder , CEO of Arlington, Va.-based New Media Strategies, an online intelligence company that tracks message board and forum response online.

Snyder cited the "Left Behind" books, "The Passion of the Christ" movie and the Christian music scene as successful examples.

I can almost imagine a Left Behind video game. Whey your player disappears, unlike other video games, it means you won. You increase in righteousness by reading crappy Christian fiction.

Let those who believe that Christian games are as dull as a staid Sunday sermon grab a copy of N’Lightning’s "Catechumen."

The game works like a traditional first-person shooter, but instead of firing lead and lasers into soldiers or aliens, players use a variety of spiritual weapons, such as balls of holy energy, to slay Satan’s minions and free possessed members of a Christian flock in ancient Rome. Instead of "fragging" — video game lexicon for a kill — a player basically smites. [Source]

The game’s Web site offers the challenge: "Show them nothing can overcome the power of the Holy Spirit."

I guess a game where you visit the sick, those in prison, and praying for the conversion of others won’t get much traction. Not much chance of a First Person prayer coming out any time soon. Or one where we we treat other players badly an image of Jesus weeps. Whatever you do to the least you do to him.

A reader of mine noticed that the USCCB film review for Brokeback Mountain is now rated O ( morally offensive) and wondered if that had been a change. Yes indeed, they updated the rating from L (limited adult audience, films whose problematic content many adults would find troubling.) At least the new rating is better, but the sympathetic review is still the same.

Update: Jimmy Akin guest posts on Mark Shea’s blog about the review and the ratings change and what Jimmy call their non-retraction retraction as noted below.

"Originally rated L (limited adult audience, films whose problematic content many adults would find troubling), ‘Brokeback Mountain’ has been reclassified O — morally offensive — by the USCCB Office for Film & Broadcasting. This has been done because the serious weight of the L rating — which restricts films in that category to those who can assess, from a Catholic perspective, the moral issues raised by a movie — is, unfortunately, misunderstood by many. Because there are some in this instance who are using the L rating to make it appear the church’s — or the USCCB’s — position on homosexuality is ambiguous, the classification has been revised specifically to address its moral content."

So we only misunderstood the review and it is our fault that they had to change the rating. This unfortunately is about par for the course when it comes the the Unites States Catholic Conference of Bureaucrats – oh I mean Bishops.