+ + + Sign of the Crossing + + +

The First Sunday of Advent, 2016 “Be sure of this: if the master of the house had known the hour of night when the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and not let his house be broken into. So too, you also must be prepared, for at an hour you do not expect, the Son of Man will come.” (Mt 24: 43-44) Today’s Gospel is somber, a warning. It’s part of a long discourse on the end of time. In some ways, that’s a very strange way to start the Advent season: we prepare to celebrate the birth of the Lord by focusing on the end of time. Is this a happy event, or a calamity? What’s up? The “coming of the Lord” refers to at least three different things. First, of course it refers to Christmas – 2,000 years ago in Bethlehem and also this year in our lives. Second, more obvious in today’s reading, it refers to the coming of the Son of Man at the end of time, when we will be judged. The approach of the end should sober us up a bit, but it’s not necessarily a calamity. Read C. S. L...

Three things you can never repay: the love of a woman, the loyalty of a warrior, the generosity of the poor.

Dear Lord, what will happen if this new xenophobia really flourishes? If you decide that sex is a toy and babies are a totally separate event, the outcome of a choice, what happens? Suppose you just get a quick little snip, a simple vasectomy. Maybe God gets really annoyed and piles fire and brimstone on you. But I think it’s simpler: if you get a vasectomy, you don’t have any babies. Sterility is a curse. The “punishment” for this curse is … well, this curse. If you choose abortion, then you have a dead baby. I can’t imagine trying to figure out how to punish a woman for having an abortion. Abortion is mind-boggling and wrapped in fuzz, but it seems clear to me that the outcome of an abortion is a dead child. What lunatic wants to pile on more pain? For years, it has seemed to me that the mark of an immigrant is hope, innocent and unquenchable hope – or sometimes just a child-like naivety, a transparent and unshakable belief that things will get better if you work. It’s a...

Cardinal Burke has nailed his five arrogant dubia to the door of St. Peter’s. Answer, Francis, he demands, or the Cardinals will have to correct you. ( Dubia is plural for dubium . A dubium is an item of doubt, something you're dubious about; it's jack-Latin for a question that you intend to use as a trap.) Wow. It seems obvious to me that the key change that Pope Francis made was a change in tone. It is pretty odd that experts in Rome would gather to examine the entrails of a broken marriage, and think that they have something valuable to offer. The Pope apparently thinks so too, and so he made a strenuous effort to change the tone. Marriage is about joy. It is not a contagion that must be scrutinized and tamed; it’s a joy. The bottom line in the dubia is simple. Pope Francis has said things that different people interpret different ways. Cardinal Burke insists that the job of the Pope is to unify -- meaning draw into uniformity. So different interpretations are a th...

Burke’s Rebellion Cardinal Burke demands that Pope Francis accept Card. Burke’s ideas about marriage, and prioritize life and marriage. DEMANDS! The Cardinal demands that the Pope re-arrange his ideas about subsidiarity (Card. Burke wants power concentrated in Rome), about the authority of bishops (limit the local bishop’s power, and concentrate power in Rome, says Card. Burke), about the role of the Curia (to correct the errant Pope when necessary – the power concentrated in Rome belongs to the Curia, not the silly pope). What lit Card. Burke’s fire? Divorce and re-marriage and receiving Communion. Burke’s Rebellion goes hand in hand with another Card. Burke split. The bishops of the United States are solidly – unanimously, as far as I know – protective of immigrants’ rights. Oops! The bishops in American dioceses are unanimous, as far as I know – but there is an American bishop now serving in Rome, without an American diocese, who challenges this unanimity. Burke sides with T...

As Jesus drew near Jerusalem, he saw the city and wept over it, saying, “If this day you only knew what makes for peace–but now it is hidden from your eyes.” Jesus prophesied that Jerusalem would be destroyed “because you did not recognize the time of your visitation.” (Lk 19:41-44, reading at Mass on 11/17/16) The way to peace is indeed hidden from our eyes! The time of your visitation: what is that? There was a moment in history, when the Lord came among us: “he has come to his people and set them free,” the dawn from on high breaking upon us, to shine on those who dwell in darkness, to guide our feet into the way of peace. We celebrate this Incarnation at Christmas; but the Word was made flesh in the womb of Mary nine months before Christmas. It was a tiny event, and it took some time, historically speaking, for this moment to be made manifest. But we continue to celebrate “the time of your visitation” today, not only looking back two thousand years, but looking at even...

The Orthodox Churches have been permitted couples to receive Communion after divorce and re-marriage. Perhaps this is because they have drawn more from the Fathers like St. Jerome. Consider Jerome's remark about his friend -- divorced and re-married. Jerome’s remark The Catholic Church is split, left against right. The most visible manifestation of the split: immigration versus abortion. Most pro-lifers oppose the Church’s teaching on immigration, and most pro-immigration activists oppose the Church’s teaching on abortion. This weird split in the Church, setting justice against morality, is new, going back perhaps two generations. But there are some hints of it in the past. In about 400 AD, the story of St. Fabiola extracted a tantalizing remark from St. Jerome: “… after repudiating her husband she did not continue unmarried … I readily admit this to have been a fault, but at the same time declare that it may have been a case of necessity. It is better, the apostle [Paul] te...

“You are my portion and cup.” Letter LII, To Nepotian In this letter, St. Jerome writes that the role of the clergy is to serve the Lord. What does that look like? Hospitality to strangers. He pleads and admonishes: understand the difference between the military and the wealthy on one hand, and the clergy on the other hand. Specifically, welcome strangers as Christ. (In our time, of course, Catholics pay much more attention to the “priesthood of the laity.” All of us, not just the clergy, are called to share to some degree in this precious portion and cup.) In 394, Jerome wrote to a man who had left a military life and become a priest. He begins with a brief meditation on what is means: “You are my portion and lot.” After Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt, the House of Israel was divided into 13 tribes, the descendants of the 12 sons of Israel with Joseph getting a double portion. The tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are the descendants of Joseph’s two sons. But then the...

The first reading at Mass today is from the third letter of John. It includes a reference to strangers that can cause confusion. So a quick note. “Beloved,’ writes John, “you are faithful in all you do for the brothers, especially for strangers; they have testified to your love before the church. Please help them in a way worthy of God to continue their journey.” (3 John 1:5-6) It’s fair and proper to read the passage trying to figure out what John thought about strangers. However, this specific passage is not about the proper attitude toward strangers in general; it’s about a pretty specific group – about traveling missionaries. Help them, he says. People who want to use Scripture to justify protecting Christian refugees in Syria while rejecting Muslim refugees can use (abuse) this passage. John says, help these particular people, because they are ours. That implies that there are other strangers whom we won’t help because they aren’t ours. The passage can be used (abused...

Compassion Fatigue [2054 words – talk about fatigue] Why is the nation divided angrily, setting people who want to protect unborn children from abortion against people who are determined to defend refugees from barrel bombs? One puzzle piece, not a complete answer but a piece: unquestionably, millions of Americans suffer from compassion fatigue. We see more problems than we can solve, encounter more suffering than we can endure. We are indeed overwhelmed. And so we prioritize, triage – we will serve some, and then slam the doors of minds and hearts and imaginations to others. Can we do more? Should we try to open our hearts, and learn to weep again? That way, we fear, madness lies. I think it’s worthwhile exploring the way out of compassion fatigue. It’s not complicated: we cooperate. I can’t help every refugee, but UNHCR and churches united can. I can’t help girls raped by Boko Haram, but the African Union can. I can’t help Tibetans facing genocide, but the Dalai Lama knows w...

[posted on FB 10/15] Many thanks, Tim Brophy, for your thoughtful response. I depend on it. There was never any chance I would support Trump. So when the Republican Party walked away from any kind of serious effort to protect children and women, and nominated a violent fool, the decision was between a third-party vote or other protest vote, or Hillary Clinton. For months, I was planning to vote for my wife. What changed me included: (1) Trump’s continuing slow-motion train wreck, of course; plus (2) a growing unease about not seeing how to horse-whip the arrogant bully; plus (3) Nate Silver’s gender gap map ( http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-women-are-defeating-donald-trump/ ); plus Father Pavone’s response to sexual assault. Trump. I have previously tried to list the problems he has, each one of which I judge to be disqualifying, including approach to: immigration, Muslims, women, fraud, the military, the world economy, identifying allies, internat...

[posted on FB 10/14/2016] I’m a pro-lifer, and I’m voting for Hillary Clinton. If there were a pro-lifer on the ballot, I’d vote for that person. There’s not. What now? I’m a devout Catholic, committed to the teaching of the Church – all of it, not cherry-picked items on the left or the right. The nuanced teaching from Pope Benedict matters to me: a faithful Catholic cannot vote to permit the killing of our brothers and sisters. BUT in circumstances where all ballot options look bad, a person can vote in good conscience for the less destructive option. I am convinced that Trump, if he were elected, would damage the nation and the world in a long list of ways, including that he would increase abortion – by giving permission for thugs to abuse women, by insulting people with disabilities, and by refusing to help pregnant refugees. Hillary’s record on abortion is unambiguous, but not as bad as a Trump eruption. There is no pro-life option on the ballot. What now? I do...

I worked for National Right to Life News in 1980-81, with Dave Gaetano, when Reagan won and Republicans took control of the Senate. I spoke with David Stockman after the election; he was a Reagan aide, and became Reagan’s Director of Office and Management and Budget. Stockman told me (and NRL News reported) that Reagan would not do much about the social issues any time soon, because he was going to focus on budget issues. So the work of pro-lifers to put Reagan in office was set aside, to make way for serious issues. I covered (and fought) the nomination of Sandra Day O’Connor, who was “personally opposed” to abortion. Henry Hyde told NRL staff – not for publication, but I think that hold on the news has probably expired – that he had met with Reagan before Reagan formally announced the appointment, and had argued against it. Reagan said she was personally opposed. Hyde asked, “Did you ask about Roe v. Wade?” Reagan responded, “Roe v. Wade? What’s that?” So the opportunity to chang...

The following is an Afterword from Emmanuel, Solidarity: God's Act, Our Response, published in 2000. I post the Afterword now because a pro-life organization launched a couple of ads including a child's body in the last couple of days of the election campaign. The ad caused an uproar. Blood ... (6,222 words) Afterword: Nonviolence and the Image of Blood Nonviolence is most interesting and valuable and valid in situations where it is the alternative to an endless cycle of violence. Like war, a campaign of nonviolence can be a bloody business at times, not because the practitioners spill blood, but because they are needed amidst bloodshed, and often because theirs is spilled. In Poland and in the Philippines, there was bloodshed. It may have been limited, but it was crucial to the final outcome. The Filipino Revolution was sparked by the unjust killing—the martyrdom—of many people, including especially Benigno Aquino. And in Poland, Fr. Jerzy Popieluszko’s martyrdom lit...