Beauty in the Conversion of Dorothy Day

I posted on the role of beauty in the conversion of Dorothy Day on the Arrival: The Parousian Weblog. Check it out if you have the time!

Stupidity - as Contagious as HIV

First Things has a great article AIDS and the Churches: Getting the Story Right. Edward C. Green and Allison Herling Ruark explore the implications of the evidence available on the fight against the AIDS epidemic.

Many times I have heard that the only practical solution to slowing down the spread of HIV is to provide an unlimited supply of condoms. The implication is that the poor and sex hungry will be unable to change their sexual behavior so we must accommodate a solution within their current sexual practices. My common sense response has always been that people need to exert self-control. Currently evidence is showing that emphasizing sexual responsibility actually has positive effects in reducing infections whereas condom usage has failed to render any visible results that this method is working.

Consider this fact: In every African country in which HIV infections have declined, this decline has been associated with a decrease in the proportion of men and women reporting more than one sex partner over the course of a year—which is exactly what fidelity programs promote. The same association with HIV decline cannot be said for condom use, coverage of HIV testing, treatment for curable sexually transmitted infections, provision of antiretroviral drugs, or any other intervention or behavior. The other behavior that has often been associated with a decline in HIV prevalence is a decrease in premarital sex among young people.

If AIDS prevention is to be based on evidence rather than ideology or bias, then fidelity and abstinence programs need to be at the center of programs for general populations. Outside Uganda, we have few good models of how to promote fidelity, since attempts to advocate deep changes in behavior have been almost entirely absent from programs supported by the major Western donors and by AIDS celebrities. Yet Christian churches—indeed, most faith communities—have a comparative advantage in promoting the needed types of behavior change, since these behaviors conform to their moral, ethical, and scriptural teachings. What the churches are inclined to do anyway turns out to be what works best in AIDS prevention.

This article also challenges many of the conclusions made by the report from the Berkley Center at Georgetown University called Faith Communities Engage the HIV/AIDS Crisis. This report tends to downplay programs that “emphasize sexual responsibility, behavior change, and moral messages.” In other words, the report praises faith community efforts to nurse people with AIDS while denouncing their attempts to change sexual behaviors.

…A UNAIDS-commissioned 2004 review of evidence for condom use concluded, “There are no definite examples yet of generalized epidemics that have been turned back by prevention programs based primarily on ­condom promotion.” A 2000 article in The Lancet similarly stated, “Massive increases in condom use world-wide have not translated into demonstrably improved HIV control in the great majority of countries where they have occurred.”…

Thus far, research has produced no evidence that condom promotion—or indeed any of the range of risk-reduction interventions popular with donors—has had the desired impact on HIV-infection rates at a population level in high-prevalence generalized epidemics. This is true for treatment of sexually ­transmitted infections, voluntary counseling and ­testing, diaphragm use, use of experimental vaginal microbicides, safer-sex counseling, and even income-­generation projects. The interventions relying on these measures have failed to decrease HIV-infection rates, whether implemented singly or as a package. One recent randomized, controlled trial in Zimbabwe found that even possible synergies that might be achieved through “integrated implementation” of “control strategies” had no impact in slowing new infections at the population level. In fact, in this trial there was a somewhat higher rate of new infections in the intervention group compared to the control group.

The real issue involves our ideology of sexual ethics. Evidence shows that emphasizing abstinence outside of marriage and fidelity within marriage reduces the spread of HIV. “One must ask whether they are more concerned with upholding a Western notion of sexual freedom or with saving lives.” I think this statement identifies the fundamental issue. If encouraging sexual responsibility saves lives, is not this in itself worth the sacrifice of sexual gratification and striving for the virtue of self-control? If people realize that their actions cause people to die, then should not those people reconsider their sexual behavior? In America we are still having our own AIDS epidemic. Self-control and chastity is often treated as religious rhetoric that seeks to control and impede on people’s freedom. However, self-control is a virtue inherent to any healthy lifestyle. Society often teaches its members to forestall immediate satisfaction to become successful in intellectual and worldly matter. Educational, athletic, material, and spiritual goals all involve processes that entail rigorous discipline and self-sacrifice. Why does this emphasis on self-control become a faux pas when we apply this virtue to sexual matters? Why should we value pleasure, wealth, and fame over the well-being of other humans?

Conventional wisdom has blamed “poverty, gender inequality, powerlessness, and social instability for the spread of AIDS.” The implication is that if we solve these problems then AIDS will not be a problem. Yet to truly help fight against gender inequality, “women must be empowered to refuse unwanted sex, not simply to ‘negotiate condom use.’” Statistics show that the wealthy are more likely to have AIDS in Africa than the poor. Areas of social instability may have more people that are ‘prone’ to HIV but that does not mean sexual responsibility programs will not be effective as they has been in areas like Uganda were the reduction in the number of sexual partners helped greatly.

The time has come to question the established wisdom of our day about HIV prevention. We must undercut cosmetic solutions of putting a rubber on it and get to the spiritual problem that undermines our greatest attempts at helping. To change a society you must change its perspective. By default, to change a culture’s sexual problems you need to address its perspective on sex. Despite the evidence and common-sense approach of many faith Communities, popular opinion seems to still frown upon faith initiatives that emphasis sexual chastity to prevent HIV. Hopefully this new evidence will revive and encourage more people to be open to the idea that encouraging sexual chastity might be the way to go. Especially since evangelizing these areas requires nothing less than bringing the truth of the Gospel message and emphasizing the transforming power of love.

The Responsibility of Bloggers

Reverend Michael P. Orsi in an article called Calumny in the Blogosphere reflects how our words can affect the spiritual well-being of others. The anonymity of blogging can create an impersonal distance from the issues and people about which one is commenting. A blogger can produce a harsh judgment of another based off of little or no evidence and remain largely unaccountable for accusations.

Calumny is defined by the American Heritage Dictionary (1992) as a “false statement maliciously made to injure another’s reputation.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) places calumny as a serious sin under the Eighth Commandment, “Thou shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.” The Catechism states, “He becomes guilty of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them” (2447). The Catechism notes that calumny offends “against the virtues of justice and charity” (2479).

The internet has become a new forum for the age-old vices including derogatory gossip. With the easy steps of creating a blog, every person with internet access can have a free method of global communication. Although there is the opportunity for evangelization, temptation always looms around the corner to use blogs in an unholy manner. As the article comments:

The essential problem with anonymous blogging is that masked comments can easily turn malicious, intentionally or otherwise. Growing concern about online threats and character assassination among teenagers using social networking services like MySpace and Facebook has spawned the terms “cyber-bullying” and “cyber-stalking.” There have been cases of violence—even suicide—attributed to blog campaigns launched against targeted individuals. The walking wounded are showing up in hospitals, psychiatrists’ offices and high school drop-out statistics.

Calumny does not exist apart from the other realities of life. Like all sin, it is nurtured by social conditions and the particular circumstances in which individuals find themselves, circumstances that can provide the rationalizations and self-deception that blind us to the seriousness of our words and actions. For instance, we live in a society that puts a high premium on winning. It’s easy to convince ourselves that anything goes, as long as we achieve the results we want and don’t get caught doing what we know in our hearts we shouldn’t do.

Concrete example of calumny among Christian bloggers:

Sad to say, Christian circles are not free of such machinations. A recent occurrence in my own diocese serves as an example. Allegations of moral lapses on the part of a brother priest were circulated by interlinked blogs, magnifying the actual facts of the case being investigated, and layering on multiple rumors that featured a colorful variety of imagined illicit behaviors—all before anything was proven. While a ministry was seriously (perhaps fatally) compromised, no allowance was given for the political conflicts existing within the parish or the motives of those who spread the stories. What were little more than assumptions took on a life of their own when a chain of bloggers spread them within minutes throughout the diocese and well beyond.

Challenge to Bloggers:

Bloggers of such a mindset ignore a basic precept of morality: evil means may never be employed to achieve a good end (perhaps their skewed thinking can be compared to that of people who believe it’s moral to kill abortion doctors in order to end the horror of abortion). They forget that the standards of the world—or of law courts—don’t apply when we’re judged in the highest court: at the throne of God. Jesus warned the Pharisees against legal dodges and contrived justifications. God sees the heart.

I offer the following recommendations about points that should be made regarding blogging:

• Pastors should speak on the Eighth Commandment and its corollary injunctions against calumny and detraction.
• People should be warned that what they read on blogs is not necessarily true.
• Any anonymous blog or unsigned response has the weight of an unsigned letter and so should be quickly dismissed.
• A blog that is particularly vicious toward persons can be indicative of psychological illness, or simply an evil person, and is therefore suspect.
• Any blog that is unedifying and demeaning to another person should not be read. It is the equivalent of pornography.
• Responding to these calumnious blogs, even for defense of the individual or for clarification, only encourages the offender and prolongs the life of the calumny.
• Those who suffer calumny on anonymous blogs are, for the most part, better off enduring it. Seeking to correct misrepresentations usually has the effect of keeping controversy alive and adding to its interest value.
• While reading such blogs is damaging to its target (since it causes unwarranted negative speculation about another’s character), it also hurts the reader since it causes scandal, sowing pessimism and despondency.
• Calumnious blogging is a serious offense against God’s law. Those who engage
  in it are jeopardizing their immortal souls and the souls of others.
• For anyone to make a judgment concerning a person’s character based on what is read on a negative blog is to be a formal cooperator in the evil perpetrated by the blogger.

Those involved in blogging would do well to keep in mind the words of Isaiah 33:15, which says of the good person: “He who acts with integrity, who speaks sincerely …, shuts suggestion of murder out of his ears, and closes his eyes against crime, this man will dwell in the heights.”

Devastation in Myanmar

Keep Myanmar in your prayers.

Over 20,000 dead in Cyclone Nargis’ wake. On May 6th 2008 the Vatican issued forth this message to the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Myanmar.

Deeply saddened by news of the tragic aftermath of the recent cyclone, the Holy Father expresses his heartfelt sympathy. With prayers for the victims and their families, he invokes God's peace upon the dead and divine strength and comfort upon the homeless and all who are suffering. Confident that the international community will respond with generous and effective relief to the needs of your countrymen, His Holiness asks you to convey his solidarity and concern to the civil authorities and to all the beloved people of Myanmar.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone
Secretary of State

For those capable of monetary support, Catholic Relief Services are helping those devastated by Cyclone Nargis.

On May 7th Benedict ended the general audience with this appeal:

I make my own the cry of pain and the call for assistance of the dear people of Myanmar, who without warning saw so many lives, and so much property and means of sustenance destroyed by the terrifying violence of the cyclone Nargis. As I already said in the message of solidarity I sent to the President of the Episcopal Conference, I remain spiritually close to the people affected. I would also like to repeat to everyone my call to open their hearts to pity and generosity so that, thanks to the collaboration of people who can and wish to bring help, the suffering caused by such an immense tragedy may be relieved.

Catholic League vs. Obama's Catholic National Advisory Council

An interesting dialogue is ensuing between the Catholic League and Obama’s Catholic National Advisory Council. The problem with Obama’s council is that all the Catholics participating have records of being in public dissent with key Catholic issues like abortion and embryonic stem cell research. Bill Donohue is advising Obama to dissolve this council because it does not represent the voice of faithful Catholics. If Obama wants to hear the voice of faithful practicing Catholics, he should rethink whom he appoints to his council. Of course, if he is just after votes of Catholics that ignore the Church’s position on important moral issues, his political maneuvering may pan out to be successful.

The Catholic National Advisory Council has sent a response to Bill Donohue: (on the link is included a list of all those who are represented by the letter)

Dear Mr. Donohue:

We write in our individual capacities and not on behalf of the campaign. Last week you labeled many of our friends, and some of us, as "Catholic dissidents" because we support Senator Obama.

Unlike the Catholic League, the U.S. Catholic Bishops advise careful consideration of candidates’ positions on a broad set of issues. While abortion and other life issue are of fundamental concern, the bishops teach that particular issues must not be misused "as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity" such as "racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture, war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health. care or an unjust immigration policy" (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, #29). Our bishops go on to point out that "these are not optional concerns which can be dismissed."

Across these issues Senator Obama offers much to the well-formed Catholic conscience, which helps to explain why many Catholics are supporting him.

As Catholics, we view abortion as a profound moral issue. But what have nearly three decades of Republican promises to end abortion accomplished? Other aspects of the conservative

Republican agenda have been carried out with fervor, such as weakening of the social-safety net, privatization, deregulation, destruction of labor unions, and belligerent and aggressive foreign policy. But ending abortion remains the perennial promise, one that is too often hijacked by partisan operatives who seek only to divide votes. Many Catholics are fed up with the divisive tactics and empty promises around this issue.

Senator Obama recognizes that abortion presents a profound moral challenge, tied in part to a loss of the sense of the sacredness of sex and lack of parental involvement:. On the campaign trail he regularly calls on parents to turn off the television and has called on fathers to meet their family responsibilities. Regrettably, these clips are not included in your press releases.

Senator Obama has also reached out to Americans on both sides of this issue and embraces practical proposals designed to reduce the number of abortions in this country, including comprehensive health and sex education, better health care, economic support for women, and promoting alternatives like adoption.

Like other Americans, we have watched as many candidates brought to office on a so-called prolife platform insisted on policies that have left the lives of millions more of our brothers and sisters at risk from war, uncontrolled pollution, deeper poverty, and growing economic inequality.

Not this year.

This year, there are many Catholics - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents - who won’t let that happen again.

We are proud to be counted among Senator Obama's Catholic advisors. Collectively our experience spans decades of scholarship and service working for and with the Catholic Church on the broad set of issues under the "consistent ethic of life."

We were drawn into the campaign by Senator Obama's vision for the common good, his profound message of hope, and his ability to unite citizens across class, race, and even party lines. We are excited about his promise as president, and we commend him to our fellow Catholics.

Mr. Donahue, your work to fight legitimate cases of anti-Catholic bigotry in this country should be applauded. But when you smear other Catholics with whom you disagree, you betray your own cause. Our measure of what it means to be a “good” Catholic is not defined by the narrow pronouncements of partisan operatives; but rather by the rich teachings of our Church and our informed consciences.

Now time for a few of my own comments. Donohue seemed to be calling them dissidents because of the public evidence of their public position on key social justice issues, not because they support Obama. The letter correctly states that life issues like abortion should not be used to ignore other life issues like unjust discrimination, the death penalty, unjust war, torture, unjust immigration policies, and a failure to respond to the needs of the poor and sick. However, this statement goes both ways. Those other life issues should not be used to overshadow and ignore issues like abortion. We must have a holistic and consistent life ethic rooted in the dignity of the human person. If the basic right to life cannot be insured for the unborn than it is hard to imagine how we can consistently stress the importance of other social justice issues.

I do think they are correct to point out that blind Republican partisanship has not resolved the abortion issue. Our catholic conscience should not be hijacked by partisan propaganda. We must allow our faith to inform our conscience about social justice issues and vote for individual politicians accordingly. Personally, I distrust both major political parties. A while back, I wrote on the political rift in the Church and that we should fight for truth regardless of which side of the political spectrum it happens to fall.

I also happen to think that self-professed Catholic politicians that do not standing up for a holistic approach to social justice issues are just as divisive and just as much of a perpetuator of empty promises as this letter is suggesting of those in the Republican Party.

Some candidates do make it to office on a pitiful so-called pro-life platform. The solution is not to start ignoring life issues, but we must start emphasizing the need to be holistic on all life issues. What surprises me about this letter is how these Catholics on this council fail to realize that a critique of the other side does not exempt them from having to personally witness to the culture of life congruity with the social doctrine of the Church. They make many good points about why to be cautious of others dividing issues, but they have failed to provide the justification of what gives them the right to be divided on these life issues.

*Update: A recent comment pointed out that the Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, whom has been recently reprimanded by the Archbishop of Kansas City, is a member of Obama's Catholic National Advisory Council. Archbishop Naumann cites his past conversations, recommendations, and the Governor's current veto against the Comprehension Abortion Reform Act as reasons for his action. Here is an excerpt:

The governor has spoken to me on more than one occasion about her obligation to uphold state and federal laws and court decisions. I have asked her to show a similar sense of obligation to honor divine law and the laws, teaching and legitimate authority within the church.

I have not made lightly this request of Governor Sebelius, but only after much prayer and reflection. The spiritually lethal message, communicated by our governor, as well as many other high profile Catholics in public life, has been in effect: “The church’s teaching on abortion is optional!”

I reissue my request of the faithful of the archdiocese to pray for Governor Sebelius. I hope that my request of the governor, not to present herself for holy Communion, will provoke her to reconsider the serious spiritual and moral consequences of her past and present actions. At the same time, I pray this pastoral action on my part will help alert other Catholics to the moral gravity of participating in and/or cooperating with the performance of abortions.

Summa Theologica: Prima Pars: Question 1: Article 1

One of my goals is to improve my comprehensive understanding of the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas. In order to satisfy this desire, I am currently reading the Summa Theologica and trying to summarize each section. One of the best ways to understand is to articulate insights into one’s own words. This requires the mind to process, interpret, assimilate the insights available in the data, and express the concepts in familiar vocabulary. I will provide my personal summaries of this foundational theological work as a wade through the text in my free time.

One of the beautiful things about the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas is the consistency of his systematic theology. Each part of this work interrelates to the whole constructing a holistic worldview. One of the main dangers of splitting up the Summa Theologica into many different posts over a long period of time is that I fragment the cohesiveness of this work in the process. Nevertheless, I think this is a feat worth struggling to accomplish.

To those few or non-existent readers that may stumble upon these entries, realize that I am an amateur in these matters. I do this out of love of God and my spiritual father, Saint Thomas Aquinas, the angelic doctor. I cannot ignore competing philosophical systems and worldviews that have developed since the time of Aquinas. These actually create the case for why we need to translate Aquinas into the modern context. Therefore, my summaries may also try to address possible modern objections that I have experienced in my own thought and against the Thomistic tradition. If I fail in some grave or obvious way, I hope that I will humbly accept the correction of others.

Prima Pars (First Part)
Sacred Doctrine
Question 1: The nature and extent of Sacred Doctrine
Article 1: Whether, besides philosophy, any further doctrine is required?

Philosophy seeks to understand reality by using practical and speculative reason to interpret the evidence available through the senses. On one hand, it would seem that philosophical science contains all possible knowledge. Many people rule out the possibility of theological knowledge in principle because such knowledge does not to lend itself to be justified according to rational reflection on sense data. Namely, sacred doctrine as theology refers to knowledge directly revealed by God and this type of knowledge is beyond the physical world and grasp of reason.

The Greek philosopher Aristotle identified a type of divine science, which the power of reason encompasses. Using experiences of causality and motion Aristotle concluded that a prime mover or uncaused cause accounted for the temporal sequence of events. At best this type of divine science identifies some kind of impersonal deity but this does not begin describe the God of Christianity or refer to knowledge only known by a revelation from God.

Philosophy studies all that has existence, also known as being. It would seem that if God exists, philosophy would have to deal with God as a part of philosophic science thus making theology another branch of science subsumed under philosophy. However, the philosophic science can only deal with insights of natural reason and cannot take into account any truth beyond the immediate grasp of reason. Sacred doctrine is primarily concerned with what God has revealed to humanity and not merely the efforts of human reason alone. “All Scripture, inspired by God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice” (2 Timothy 3:16). If the truth of man’s end is beyond the grasp of reason then some other knowledge besides that of philosophic science must aid man in understanding this end.

It was necessary for man’s salvation that there should be a knowledge revealed by God besides philosophical science built up by human reason. Firstly, indeed, because man is directed to God as to an end that surpasses the grasp of his reason (ST; Prima Pars; Question 1; Article 1).

All things act towards a particular end. Similarly, humans are acting towards an end as well. Even though knowledge of this end exceeds the capacity of reason to grasp, humans must know this end in order to direct their activity towards it. Within this context some kind of knowledge revealed by God becomes necessary for salvation. Without divine revelation, humans have no possibility of knowing what they ought to do. In this way, sacred doctrine becomes very practical. It is important that all humans understand their proper end and divine revelation insures that errors do not occur by distortions of faulty reasoning. Sacred doctrine is for the sake of salvation. The discussion so far only speaks to the need of sacred doctrine and not its validity as a science.

Beautiful Silence

I have been reflecting on the “holiness of the ordinary,” a phrase used by Walker Percy. At a two-day silent retreat from which I recently returned, I ventured to reflect on the beauty and sacredness of everyday things. I was more or less successful in this endeavor at different times.

For me, I tend to have a forgetfulness of everydayness. I can become entranced with philosophical and theological ideas and muse at the complexity and beauty of thought. My thinking becomes abstract and I become like a ghost circumnavigating the cosmos. I still realize and hold constant the truths of God’s continual presence and grace dynamically and lovingly sustaining all creation, but usually this type of insight becomes an intellectual musing rather than a concrete experience. My personal task for the retreat was to use my senses to become more aware of concrete existing things as the focal point of my reflection on beauty, simultaneously to sense both the physical and spiritual dimension of things.

During the silence, I became more grateful for everyday things. The retreat center lent itself to such reflection for it was constructed with beautiful fountains and gardens of flowers on top of a hillside that overlooked the city in the distance and forest below. It wasn’t exactly a miracle that I was able to experience beauty in such an environment. I think the challenge is to be aware of such beauty in the fast-paced throngs of everyday living. Yet all of nature still has a majestic quality that makes one wonder, and staring at a flower can truly hint to something mysterious. Why does something so small and simple attract and please me? This was one of those rare moments where I felt gratitude for everyday things.

In the beauty of silence, there was something beautiful about those silent. Literally, I distinctly remember that many of the people I knew seemed more beautiful when they were not talking. Maybe this judgment was because they became more mysterious or less obnoxious, it really is hard to tell. Either way I certainly was more receptive. All of us dined, walked around, and prayed in silence. There was a peaceful harmonious quality to our actions. The point is that the silence allowed me to be more receptive to those people and things around me and experience their sacredness in a way that I usually neglect.

In the end, I admit that the reason I cannot always see the beauty in things and other people is a lacking on my part. I need to quiet myself more often. I also realized that I, who have very few things going for me in terms of good looks, maybe should try practicing silence more often.

Catholic Bishops of Louisiana Comment on Immigration

I came across these documents over at Opinionated Catholic and I figured it would not hurt to continue their publicity. The Bishops of Louisiana addressed the Louisiana State legislature on Immigration Reform and the Church’s view on Immigration. These documents have great informative power to help understand the complexity of the Church’s stance and aides in Catholics having a properly formed conscience in these matters.

A STATEMENT ON IMMIGRATION REFORM
BY THE
CATHOLIC BISHOPS OF LOUISIANA

We, the Catholic Bishops of Louisiana, wish to address the issue of immigration reform in light of certain bills that have been proposed in the Louisiana Legislature's 2008 Regular Session.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "The equality of men rests essentially on their dignity as persons and the rights that flow from it: Every form of social or cultural discrimination in fundamental personal rights on the grounds of sex, race, color, social conditions, language, or religion must be curbed and eradicated as incompatible with God’s desire."

The Catholic Church has a rich history of involvement in the immigration issue. This has taken the form of both assisting with assimilation of many immigrants and refugees as well as advocacy. This experience, backed by the true belief that all individuals possess inherent human dignity and worth, compels us to speak out on the issue of immigration reform. This is indeed a moral issue which directly affects and impacts the rights, well being, and life of human beings. The alien has always been a protected figure, as the Old Testament proclaims: "So, you, too, must befriend the alien, for you were once aliens yourselves" (Deut. 10:17-19). Jesus speaks of the migrant as one who is on the margins of society and instructs those who come in contact with the migrant to remember his words: "I was a stranger and you welcomed me" (Mt. 25:35).

The Church recognizes the responsibility of a government to develop policies and procedures to protect its citizenship from dangerous persons and to regulate the flow of immigration. The Catholic Church supports an earned path to citizenship as an integral part of comprehensive immigration reform. We do not support legislation that takes the form of enforcement-only policies which neither uphold the dignity of each individual nor address the inadequacies of our immigration policies. We need to be realistic about our need for workers and the need to have adequate protection of their safety and rights.

We urge Governor Jindal and the Louisiana Legislature to reject any immigration legislation that is enforcement-only. We are convinced that this issue can best be resolved on the federal level. Hence, we ask both the governor and the legislature to encourage the federal government to address the need for comprehensive immigration reform. Comprehensive immigration reform includes: (1) an earned legalization program; (2) a worker program that protects foreign-born
workers and safeguards against the displacement of U.S. workers; (3) family-based reform that reduces waiting times for family reunification and bears in mind the devastating effects of separation on a family; (4) restoration of due process protections for immigrants; and (5) policies that address the root causes of migration. We oppose any attempts at state legislation that focus on enforcement-only policies. True immigration reform should ensure that the dignity and inherent rights of each individual are upheld, and that the common good is achieved.

Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops
April 2008

IMMIGRATION: THE CATHOLIC CHURCH’S VIEW

* The Catholic Church believes that ALL immigrants have inherent dignity and worth as human beings regardless of immigration status.

Catholics denounce anti-immigration bigotry, stereotypes, and xenophobia as immoral and un-American

* The Catholic Church is NOT anti-enforcement and does NOT support “open borders.”

The Catholic Church does believe that enforcement-only policies that focus on closing the borders and deportation, without reforming the immigration system, would cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars and have a devastating impact on vast sectors of the US economy.

Therefore, the Catholic Church believes that enforcement of immigration policies should be:

1. Targeted – US enforcement resources should be focused to ensure that those who are dangerous or more easily identified and apprehended. Enforcement policies should be tailored and nor overly broad so that the basic rights of all immigrants are not abridged. Ethnic or racial profiling should be avoided. Improvements in intelligence and information sharing and technological improvements in border security would help ensure that those who are most dangerous – smugglers, human traffickers, and terrorists – are intercepted.

2. Proportional – Enforcement of immigration laws should not feature unnecessary force. Immigration control officers and border patrol agents should receive intensive training on appropriate enforcement tactics and the appropriate use of force. Border enforcement policies should not drive immigrants into more remote regions of the desert, risking their lives. State and local law enforcement should not be authorized to enforce immigration laws.

3. Humane – The human rights and dignity of the person should be preserved and respected to the greatest extent possible. Families should not be divided and should receive special consideration. Undocumented immigrants should not be detained for lengthy periods of time or intermingled with violent offenders. Asylum-seekers should receive appropriate screening by a qualified adjudicator. Children should be accommodated within a child welfare context.

* The Catholic Church advocates for comprehensive immigration reform.

A comprehensive immigration reform plan would include:

1. An earned legalization program – allows undocumented workers to earn permanent residency.

2. Worker program – protects foreign-born workers and safeguards against displacement of US workers.

3. Family-based immigration reform – reduces waiting times for family reunification.

4. Restoration of due process protections for immigrants and policies addressing root causes of migration.

* The Catholic Church supports an earned path to citizenship, NOT a handout.

This includes:

1. Undocumented immigrants to pay a fine and application fee.

2. Go through criminal background checks and security screenings.

3. Demonstrate that they have paid taxes.

4. Are learning English.

5. Obtain a visa that could lead to permanent residency.

Working for the Common Good

I have recently endeavored to read many writings of Dorothy Day. I was particularly challenged by the following passage taken from one of her journals written in December of 1948 in a work titled On Pilgrimage.

The love of humanity of Our Lord is the love of our brother. I have meditated on this fact during the past month. The only way we have to show our love for God is by the love we have for our brother. And as Father Hugo likes to say, “You love God as much as the one you love the least.”

Love of brother means voluntary poverty, stripping one’s self, putting off the old man, denying one’s self. It also means non-participation in those comforts and luxuries which have been manufactured by the exploitation of others. While our brothers suffer, we must suffer with them. While our brothers suffer from lack of necessities, we will refuse to enjoy comforts. These resolutions, no matter how hard they are to live up to, no matter how often we fail and have to begin over again, are part of the long-range view which Peter Maurin has been trying to give us these past years.

And we must keep this vision in mind, recognize the truth of it, the necessity for it, even though we do not, cannot, live up to it. Live perfection. We are ordered to be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect, and we aim at it, in our intention, though in our execution we may fall short of the mark over and over. As St. Paul says, it is little and by little that we proceed.

If our jobs do not contribute to the common good, we pray God for the grace to give it up. Have they to do with shelter, food, clothing? Have they to do with the Works of Mercy? Everyone should be able to place his job in the category of the Works of Mercy.

This would exclude jobs in advertising, which only increases people’s useless desires, and in insurance companies and banks, which are known to exploit the poor of this country and of others. Whatever has contributed to the misery and degradation of the poor may be considered a bad job, and not to be worked at.

If we examined our consciences in this way we would soon be driven into manual labor, into humble work, and so would become more like Our Lord and Blessed Mother.

By Works of Mercy Dorothy Day would include both the Corporeal and Spiritual Works of Mercy.

Corporeal Works of Mercy:
*To feed the hungry;
*To give drink to the thirsty;
*To cloth the naked;
*To harbor the harborless;
*To visit the sick;
*To ransom the captive;
*To bury the dead.

Spiritual Works of Mercy:
*To instruct the ignorant;
*To counsel the doubtful;
*To admonish sinners;
*To bear wrongs patienty;
*To forgive offences willingly;
*To comfort the afflicted;
*To pray for the living and the dead.

I wonder how right she is on this matter. Do we have an obligation to seek employment that contributes to the Common Good especially if we are able? The Social Doctrine of the Church speaks plenty about the dignity of work which entails a human’s ability and obligation to contribute meaningfully to the community and hence the Common Good.

I don’t know how committed Dorothy Day is claiming that the work that merits a payment (which could probably be money, goods, or services for Dorothy) for services has to be specifically manual in nature or if onside of what we do for basic goods we need to make sure that somewhere in our activities we are engaged in manual work as well. I would bet on the latter. In several other writings she emphasizes the importance of other work and vocations that do not intrinsically consist of manual labor like educators, clergy, writers, etc.(pretty much any that contributes to the good of society). However having any of these jobs does not excuse the person from having some kind of humble physical practice by which he participates in manual labor that disciplines the body. I think she would say that a person’s job should encompass some Work of Mercy by which they contribute to the common good. And such a person would include some kind of manual labor in their daily discipline. At least that is my take on it.

We do what we can, and the whole field of all the Works of Mercy is open to us. There is a saying, "Do what you are doing." If you are a student, study, prepare, in order to give to others, and keep alive in yourself the vision of a new social order. All work, whether building, increasing food production, running credit unions, working in factories which produce for true human needs, working the smallest of industries, the handicrafts--all these things can come under the heading of the Works of Mercy, which are the opposite of the works of war. -Penance, Dororthy Day

Globalizing the Common Good

Recently the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences meet to discuss a future assembly directed to how to reverse the negative effect of Globalization in the pursuit of the common good. This session will look at the social changes around the social principles: dignity of the human person, common good, subsidiarity, solidarity. This assembly will focus on how to increase the recognition of the dignity of the person and common good by seriously considering how Globalization should be guided by subsidiarity and solidarity. The goal of the assembly “is to give new meaning and application to the concept of common good in this age of globalization, which in certain fields is leading to growing inequalities and social injustice, laceration and fragmentation of the social fabric, in short, to the destruction of common goods throughout the world."

While Globalization allows for a network of communication between different areas of the world and can increase awareness and solidarity, the danger lies in using this network only for commercial advantage and economic efficiency. Subsidiarity and solidarity must work together and be guidelines to help realize how to act towards the common good, which is more important than financial gain. The social cohesion of a society will always be rooted in the family. Poor economic conditions that exploit individuals and forces people to emigrate and split the family have harmful effects on society. In his recent address to the United Nations Pope Benedict XVI made some comments about globalization and solidarity:

Indeed, questions of security, development goals, reduction of local and global inequalities, protection of the environment, of resources and of the climate, require all international leaders to act jointly and to show a readiness to work in good faith, respecting the law, and promoting solidarity with the weakest regions of the planet. I am thinking especially of those countries in Africa and other parts of the world which remain on the margins of authentic integral development, and are therefore at risk of experiencing only the negative effects of globalization. In the context of international relations, it is necessary to recognize the higher role played by rules and structures that are intrinsically ordered to promote the common good, and therefore to safeguard human freedom.

Unless we join and subsume the pursuit of globalizing the economy under the pursuit of justice and peace, inevitably some parts of the world will suffer, as has been the case. Even in the structure of international relations there needs to be a preferential option for the poor, weak, and marginalized areas that are unequipped to meet the economic demands placed upon it by the growing market and globalization.

Solidarity means that we must consider the dignity of other as a fundamental part of our own interest. Any action that seeks primarily to exploit another group or has the direct consequence of exploiting other people, regardless of their proximity, is in contradiction with solidarity. The implication is simple: we must have a greater social awareness as to the effects of our actions and actively seek ways to prevent this social evil. We must live socially responsible in hopes to safeguard the dignity of our neighbors.

Subsidiarity promotes social responsibility by those participating in society. Attached to the dignity of a person is the ability to work and participate in family, local government, and society. Subsidiarity insures that individuals can express ownership within their community by working for the common good. Our solidarity should not seek to unearth this dignity of family and community but to support it. Solidarity and subsidiarity are not two opposing principles but two irreducible principles that are interrelated. We cannot be united to the interest of others and insure their dignity unless we are united to their ability to participate meaningfully in society by encouraging them to bring their own gifts, talents, and individuality to the table. True solidarity encourages subsidiarity.

Once we acknowledge that the great deficit of modernity, which is nevertheless responsible for many social conquests, has been and still is social solidarity -- at all levels, from local to global -- it is a matter of seeing whether and how this deficit can be overcome by a new way of intending and practicing subsidiarity as a proactive, promotional principle, not only as a defensive, protective one.

The hope is to work towards a vision that can reverse the negative effects of globalization. We cannot only seek to defend our own interest but must work with others so that we do not ignorantly promote the economic destruction of other areas by participating in structures that unjustly exploit the resources and labor of found there. How we live has consequences on how others live.

In short the challenge is for a new combination of subsidiarity and solidarity to become the key to activate those social circuits on which common goods depend, the key to turn globalization into a 'civilization of the common good.'

Down Under Bishops Address Internet Concerns

The Australian Catholic Bishop Conference takes new approach to addressing the benefits and dangers of the internet. Along with a pastoral letter on proper and improper internet use that was issued on World Communications Day (April 27, 2008), they provided a youtube video that is addressed specifically to the youth.

Bishop Peter Ingham of Wollongong Diocese in Australia appears in the youtube video admitting how much more internet savvy most young people are compared to adults and even bishops. He says internet use can be like visiting the best theme park in the world and stumbling upon a toxic waste dump while inside. After citing many great things for which the internet can be used, Bishop Ingham warns against stranger danger, giving out intimate information and personal details, cyber bullying, and financial exploitation as serious dangers. The purpose of the video is to encourage people to think about internet dangers and “avoid those things that hurt our human dignity and the dignity of others.”

The “Pastoral Letter from the Catholic Bishops of Australia” is directed to parents and the Church community as a whole. The letter highlights how the internet can be used for the New Evangelization and a source of great good. But on a more somber note, this letter seeks to make the community more aware of the Church’s concern by citing Papal letters, studies, statistics, and internet safety resources. The document cites the following quote from John Paul II’s letter Internet: A New Forum for Proclaiming the Gospel.

The internet offers extensive knowledge, but it does not teach values; and when values are disregarded, our very humanity is demeaned and man easily loses sight of his transcendent dignity. Despite its enormous potential for good, some of the degrading and damaging ways in which the Internet can be used are already obvious to all, and public authorities surely have a responsibility to guarantee that this marvelous instrument serves the common good and does not become a source of harm.

Recognizing the lack of regulation on the internet, the bishops are lobbying for internet filters that will help control distribution of pornography and limit child exposure. They officially endorse the Federal Government taking steps to make internet service providers filter out offensive material before such material would make it to the home computer.

The following is the conclusion of the pastoral letter:

The internet is the pervasive cultural influence of our time. It will continue to grow and evolve at a dizzying rate and the possibilities which this evolution will bring to us, as individuals, families and Church are as yet undreamt of. We should not be afraid to embrace those opportunities wholeheartedly. But there are dangers on the Internet which can affect the physical, spiritual and emotional safety and well-being of both children and adults. This Pastoral Letter has sought to highlight just some of those dangers and to view some of these issues through the prism of our faith in Jesus Christ.

We pray that in spending time getting to know some of the dangers of the Internet and in reflecting on how those dangers can impact on safety, human dignity and relationships, we can all be better prepared to avoid those dangers and to focus on the many positive attributes of the Internet. We hope that parents and grandparents who feel out of touch with the lives their children lead on the Internet will be encouraged by this letter to become more involved and more educated. Spending time together on the Internet and keeping the lines of communication open is the best way to stop problems from developing. Creating appropriate boundaries, rules and expectations regarding Internet use are also good practical steps.

Pro-Abortion Catholic Candidates

Pro-abortion candidates taking communion seems to be a roller coaster as an issue. Although it is not one that I worry much about, I have heard some people argue that it would be ridiculous and outrageous for the Church to deny someone communion over their political leanings and position on abortion. On the other hand I have heard others argue the other extreme that Bishops are neglecting their duties by not immediately excommunicating high profile pro-abortion Catholics that receive communion. The recent Papal masses attended by the likes of pro-abortion Catholic politicians like Rudolph Giuliani, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Christopher Dodd, and Edward Kennedy has once again created a spark of gossip among media sources and Catholic circles. I however, would like to take some moments to address what I believe the issue really is and reasonable expectations of implementing a course of action.

The Church's teaching against abortion is based on the dignity and sacredness of human life. God designated the process of procreation by which a man and woman unite in a sexual union to bring new life into the world. This very process and the new life created are sacred. Furthermore the Church's approach to life is holistic. Life from the womb to the grave should be respected and honored. The pro-life ethic is a hermeneutic by which Catholics should view all issues. There is a dignity to all human life whether unborn, impoverished, enslaved, imprisoned, sick, elderly, dying, homeless, foreign, etc. As Catholics we should be holistic in our approach to life and not pick and choose which life issues we happen to think are worth supporting.

Whatever is hostile to life itself, such as any kind of homicide, genocide, abortion, euthanasia and voluntary suicide; whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, physical and mental torture and attempts to coerce the spirit; whatever is offensive to human dignity such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution and trafficking of women and children; degrading conditions of work which treat laborers as instruments of profit, and not free responsible persons: All these and the like are a disgrace, and so long as they infect human civilization they contaminate those who inflict them more than those who suffer injustice, and they are a negation of the honor due the Creator. - Second Vatican Council Gaudium et Spes, 27

There are principals under which bishops can deny communion to politicians who support abortion with obstinate persistence. This obstinate persistence is demonstrated by consistently campaigning and voting for abortion laws or participating in an abortion. It turns out that killing an innocent child is incompatible with the Gospel message and receiving communion. Those who support abortion create scandal in the Church. Those who are in the public eye create public scandal in the Church. To actively promote an intrinsic evil, killing innocent human life, is to formally cooperate in an evil and exclude oneself from the Church community. Bishops should make sure that Catholic politicians and all Catholics are fully aware that they should not receive communion if they actively support abortion or any other social evil that violates the integrity of the human person. If a Catholic politician refuses to comply with this guideline, a public excommunication would just be a formal recognition of the scandal and separation that the pro-abortion candidate already accomplished in his actions. The Church has a responsibility to speak out publicly against the inequities of society and the false teachings of those who claim the identity of Catholic. The Church has a responsibility to deny communion to those who publicly deny the teachings of the Church. The Eucharist is a gift, not a right. It is a physical sign of the spiritual unity of all Catholics. If some people want to publicly dissent from the Church community, they have distanced themselves from the Church community via their actions. However, the bishops are not required to act strictly on this guideline and can opt for a more pastoral approach given the complex question of prudential judgment in each case. The pastor of the parish and bishop of the diocese should try to persuade a Catholic politician to bring an end to supporting abortion and the objective situation of sin. Nevertheless, threats to excommunicate pro-abortion catholic political leaders is consistent with the social justice ethic put forth by Christ and his Church.

My hope is that bishops will continue to address this issue in a manner that shows charity but does not compromise truth. Cardinal Egan’s rebuke of Giuliani seems to employ such an approach. Cardinal Egan warned Giuliani in the past about the Church’s position on supporting abortion and receiving communion, and the two seemed to have an agreement that Giuliani blatantly broke when he received communion during the Papal mass. Currently Cardinal Egan is requesting another meeting with Giuliani to clarify the position of the Church. The Cardinal’s actions show his concern for both Giuliani and Church. He has attempted to prevent the Church from undergoing further public scandal by reprimanding Giuliani for promoting abortion and receiving communion with an objectively unworthy disposition.

Whether this issue should receive as much media attention as it has is secondary to the fact that the media will continue to second-guess bishops and pro-abortion Catholic candidates and pivot one against the other. The media asking pro-abortion candidates before the papal mass if they were going to receive communion shows their desire for controversy. But the fact remains that there is a real public scandal involved. For bishops to remain completely silent is to send inconsistent messages about this grave moral issue in the public arena. I believe that most bishops have made the Church’s position on abortion clear and that the main responsibility rest on pro-abortion Catholic candidates to refrain from receiving communion. To receive communion after having heard the Church’s position for so many years is an act of defiance on part of the politician that seems to serve a selfish political agenda. My concern is what will bishops do with those pro-abortion Catholic politicians that act as rebellious and disobedient children.

You are not going to hear me calling for the excommunication of any pro-abortion candidates, I’ll leave that task to the bishops. But I do wish to hear from those bishops from the candidate’s local diocese in this matter so that I and other Catholics know that the candidates are being properly formed about their duty as a Catholic in the public sphere. The reality is that all Catholics need to know that if they are co-opting in an intrinsic evil, like the taking of innocent life, they need to reconcile their actions to God and repent before receiving communion. Otherwise people may get the idea that the Church’s teaching on the dignity of life doesn’t matter in the lives of practicing Catholics and that actively pursuing evil causes has no negative consequences on the community.

United Nations and Natural Law

My comments on Pope Benedict XVI's address to the United Nations General Assembly can be found on the Arrival: The Parousian Weblog.

Apostolic Journey to the United States

Here is a link to the Vatican website that includes all the addresses Pope Benedict XVI gave while in the United States.

I find the number and types of groups Benedict addressed with his message of "Christ our Hope" interesting. These groups included: our nations leaders, the bishops, Catholics, Catholic educators, Catholic seminarians, Jewish leaders, other religious leaders, the Jewish community, the United Nations, young people, religious men and women, disabled youth, rescuers and families at ground zero, as well as the rest of the nation.

I like the advice of Richard John Neuhaus in his article "Benedict and the Human Face of God" at First things:

As some of us have been repeating incessantly, the important thing is to listen carefully to what he is saying. And then to download all the addresses and read them carefully, and then read them again. During his visit, he laid out an astonishingly comprehensive program for the renewal of the Church and the Church’s witness to the world. Consider, too, that his arguments—and he is always making arguments—must be understood within the context of more than four decades of scholarship intimately tied to devotional and pastoral reflection.

How blessed we are to have a wonderful wealth of wise words directed at our American society to reflect upon!