Heading for the Hawkeye State by MSW
My response:
Kerry's win was no surprise. The DNC decided he was going to win a lot sooner than Iowa. The reason no one is going after Romney is because they can count delegates and read fundraising reports. They want to have a chance at the VP nod. As for abortion, are you saying that Barack Obama is more pro-life in practice than is Mitt Romney? That is an interesting development.
On end of life, I doubt that removing a feeding tube from a child rises to gubernatorial decisionmaking. As for Schaivo, the Florida Catholic Conference originally sided with her husband, finding a feeding tube is an extraordinary measure. She is not like a declining cancer patient - she was incompletely resuccitated and efforts to revive her should have been ended sooner. Nowadays, using hypothermia as part of the process, she might have both lived and woken up. This issue should never have been demagogued by self-serving pro-lifers.
Newt was on a book tour until his wife got designs on the East Wing. He will be out of the race shortly.
Santorum made his career campaigning on policy positions outside the sphere of legislation. Abortion is in the realm of constitutional law and his partial birth abortion law was not designed to be enforced, but to try to change the status quo - something Bush appointees Alito and Roberts declined to do - which shows why abortion is not an electoral issue. The courts are about to make gay marriage a national right - and barring a constitutional convention to overturn it, will be settled law soon. Still, he has a shot of picking up Paul, Gingrich, Bachmann and Perry castoffs, though he will likely falter after South Carolina.
Ron Paul's doctrinaire supporters may alienate his casual supporters, causing them to flee to either Romney or Santorum. Perry won't attack Romney, since he can do the math on who Romney is most likely to pick to shore up his strength in the South - and its not Newt (who can't be counted on to behave) or the publicly Catholic Santorum.
I suspect football and parties will probably take up most people's time, although the Sunday morning news programs will likely focus on Iowa.
Friday, December 30, 2011
Friday, December 23, 2011
Bishop Aquila's Outrageous Statement
Bishop Aquila's Outrageous Statement by Michael Sean Winters.
My response:
Someone needs to inform the Bishop that Hitler considered himself a faithful Catholic. He was not an atheist. He delusionally believed he was the Great Catholic Monarch whose line would rule in Christ's name for a thousand years of peace. I suspect Rick Perry is laboring under the evangelical equivalent of this delusion.
Someone also needs to tell him that secularism and atheism are not the same thing. Secularism means that society is not subject to the dictates of Christendom, which allows the Church to veto the actions of Catholic kings and princes or declare them unfit to rule. Christendom is not compatible in a constitutional republic, where the divine right to rule comes from the free will of voters rather than the dictates of the Church.
Atheism should make the Bishop uncomfortable. Modern atheists justify their position in part from abuses of power by the hierarchy. All bishops should pay attention to what they say and change their behavior accordingly, especially before telling us how to vote.
My response:
Someone needs to inform the Bishop that Hitler considered himself a faithful Catholic. He was not an atheist. He delusionally believed he was the Great Catholic Monarch whose line would rule in Christ's name for a thousand years of peace. I suspect Rick Perry is laboring under the evangelical equivalent of this delusion.
Someone also needs to tell him that secularism and atheism are not the same thing. Secularism means that society is not subject to the dictates of Christendom, which allows the Church to veto the actions of Catholic kings and princes or declare them unfit to rule. Christendom is not compatible in a constitutional republic, where the divine right to rule comes from the free will of voters rather than the dictates of the Church.
Atheism should make the Bishop uncomfortable. Modern atheists justify their position in part from abuses of power by the hierarchy. All bishops should pay attention to what they say and change their behavior accordingly, especially before telling us how to vote.
The Event of Christmas
The Event of Christmas by Michael Sean Winters
My response:
To do the New Evangelization, the Bishops must first reestablish its teaching credibility, which requires new ventures in humility that I don't see some of them making. Even now, there is resistance to the Dallas norms and some bishops reject Faithful Citizenship as not binding on them, nor the determination not to use the Body of Christ as a political weapon. Seeking a conscience right not available to other employers is also not a move which inspires confidence in the messengers, unless you are seeking a New Evangelization based on the threat of Hell.
As to the signifance of the Infancy narrative, the key verse in the entire story is that Mary treasured all these things and saved them in her heart and how this relates to how Jesus understood his divinity and how this relates to the story of salvation. Understanding how Jesus experienced these events as a person, rather than as an icon, is key to an adult understanding of both these events and morality as a whole. I don't believe that the bishops are ready to take this step either.
Be that as it may, Happy Christmas! There is hope in the engagement over the New Evangelization - with the Spirit working in ways that the Bishops cannot contain, and should not try to.
My response:
To do the New Evangelization, the Bishops must first reestablish its teaching credibility, which requires new ventures in humility that I don't see some of them making. Even now, there is resistance to the Dallas norms and some bishops reject Faithful Citizenship as not binding on them, nor the determination not to use the Body of Christ as a political weapon. Seeking a conscience right not available to other employers is also not a move which inspires confidence in the messengers, unless you are seeking a New Evangelization based on the threat of Hell.
As to the signifance of the Infancy narrative, the key verse in the entire story is that Mary treasured all these things and saved them in her heart and how this relates to how Jesus understood his divinity and how this relates to the story of salvation. Understanding how Jesus experienced these events as a person, rather than as an icon, is key to an adult understanding of both these events and morality as a whole. I don't believe that the bishops are ready to take this step either.
Be that as it may, Happy Christmas! There is hope in the engagement over the New Evangelization - with the Spirit working in ways that the Bishops cannot contain, and should not try to.
Friday, December 9, 2011
New Data from Pew
New Data from Pew by Michael Sean Winters
It is amazing that Santorum, who is promoting his Catholicism, is still stuck at 2 percent. White evangelical/Tea Party voters have less influence in the nomination process than they did in 2010. What has changed is that there is no John McCain in the race. If Newt becomes the new Huckabee (and I don't think he is working hard enough to do that good), who get's the McCain cross-overs? I don't think it will be Newt.
That still leaves Mitt. He will keep his 2008 base and with the McCain voters, should clean up. He may need some Evangelical ticket balancing, which keeps Newt out when people start paying attention to his conversion. Its a long time until August. Primaries are not just about poll support. They are about mobiliizing party infrastructure. Getting the grass roots to give you money with a hot button fundraising letter is not the same thing as getting the support of state party elites.
It is amazing that Santorum, who is promoting his Catholicism, is still stuck at 2 percent. White evangelical/Tea Party voters have less influence in the nomination process than they did in 2010. What has changed is that there is no John McCain in the race. If Newt becomes the new Huckabee (and I don't think he is working hard enough to do that good), who get's the McCain cross-overs? I don't think it will be Newt.
That still leaves Mitt. He will keep his 2008 base and with the McCain voters, should clean up. He may need some Evangelical ticket balancing, which keeps Newt out when people start paying attention to his conversion. Its a long time until August. Primaries are not just about poll support. They are about mobiliizing party infrastructure. Getting the grass roots to give you money with a hot button fundraising letter is not the same thing as getting the support of state party elites.
HHS, Plan B & Scientism
HHS, Plan B & Scientism by Michael Sean Winters
My response: I don't see the FDA as promoting scientism so much as professionalism, however we have civilian control of the Uniformed Public Health Service for the same reason we have civilian control of the uniformed military services. Secretary Sebelius charge is the public health, not the public morals and it is OK with me that she brought her experience as a mother and a woman to her job. There are no other implications.
She was not swayed by some Catholic Illuminati nor by the need to even things up with the Church regarding their desire for conscience protections for the bishops but not Catholics doctors, employees, patients or students. If she had been, she would have been bowing to some impulse of Christendom, where direction from the hierarchy trumps her obligation to discharge the public good using her best judgment. If she had done this for a quid pro quo to go back to the communion rail, then she would have to resign and the Papal Nuncio would have to be expelled.
I can also see the other side. If Plan B would prevent an abortion (it is not the same thing as one - life begins at gastrulation, not fertilization), then it is better than putting a 13 year old in the position of getting one or in facing parents who may prove less than understanding. There is also the possibility a relative fathered the child and the trauma of revelation adds yet more pressure - adding a risk of suicide - or that the parent is the father. Sometimes, feminists speak in the best interest of the child.
Finally, any decision the under 17 child makes as a parent is their right, not the right of their child. Allowing Plan B follows that legality.
My response: I don't see the FDA as promoting scientism so much as professionalism, however we have civilian control of the Uniformed Public Health Service for the same reason we have civilian control of the uniformed military services. Secretary Sebelius charge is the public health, not the public morals and it is OK with me that she brought her experience as a mother and a woman to her job. There are no other implications.
She was not swayed by some Catholic Illuminati nor by the need to even things up with the Church regarding their desire for conscience protections for the bishops but not Catholics doctors, employees, patients or students. If she had been, she would have been bowing to some impulse of Christendom, where direction from the hierarchy trumps her obligation to discharge the public good using her best judgment. If she had done this for a quid pro quo to go back to the communion rail, then she would have to resign and the Papal Nuncio would have to be expelled.
I can also see the other side. If Plan B would prevent an abortion (it is not the same thing as one - life begins at gastrulation, not fertilization), then it is better than putting a 13 year old in the position of getting one or in facing parents who may prove less than understanding. There is also the possibility a relative fathered the child and the trauma of revelation adds yet more pressure - adding a risk of suicide - or that the parent is the father. Sometimes, feminists speak in the best interest of the child.
Finally, any decision the under 17 child makes as a parent is their right, not the right of their child. Allowing Plan B follows that legality.
Friday, December 2, 2011
Belgian Catholics issue reform manifesto
Belgian Catholics issue reform manifesto
My comments on their demands:
•Parish leadership be entrusted to trained laypeople;
I would still ordain the lead administrator as a Lay Deacon (no promise of celibacy), but I would entrust the parish council with more responsibility and strip the other clergy of all control of property
•Communion services be held even if no priest is available;
This goes without saying, although the lay deacon could lead it.
•Laypeople be allowed to preach;
See lay deacon above
•Divorced people be allowed to receive Communion;
They should be now - it is only remarriage without an annulment when receiving communion is discouraged - although this should be changed with divorce allowed with remarriage if one spouse either abused the other physically or sexually or was otherwise dangerous (for example, if the person was an addict or alcoholic) or if the partner committed adultery. It should be the wronged person's option to remain within the marriage or let it be dissolved - but the offending party who committed adultery should never be allowed to remarry, nor should the dangerous party unless they are in recovery.
•"As quickly as possible, both married men and women be admitted to the priesthood.
That makes sense too.
My comments on their demands:
•Parish leadership be entrusted to trained laypeople;
I would still ordain the lead administrator as a Lay Deacon (no promise of celibacy), but I would entrust the parish council with more responsibility and strip the other clergy of all control of property
•Communion services be held even if no priest is available;
This goes without saying, although the lay deacon could lead it.
•Laypeople be allowed to preach;
See lay deacon above
•Divorced people be allowed to receive Communion;
They should be now - it is only remarriage without an annulment when receiving communion is discouraged - although this should be changed with divorce allowed with remarriage if one spouse either abused the other physically or sexually or was otherwise dangerous (for example, if the person was an addict or alcoholic) or if the partner committed adultery. It should be the wronged person's option to remain within the marriage or let it be dissolved - but the offending party who committed adultery should never be allowed to remarry, nor should the dangerous party unless they are in recovery.
•"As quickly as possible, both married men and women be admitted to the priesthood.
That makes sense too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)