Posted 11:07 AM by John
For major league baseball teams and fans, the long season's home stretch begins on Labor Day. With only a few weeks remaining, most teams do not have a realistic chance of advancing to the playoffs that determine who will play in the World Series. The best outlook that such teams can take was expressed by Washington Senators Manager Van Buren in the 1955 hit musical Damn Yankees: "You gotta have hope/Mustn't sit around and mope/Nothin's half as better as it may appear/Wait'll next year/And hope."

The start of September is a time for renewal of purpose in other areas of life as well, as the days of summer wind down and the vacation season ends. The traditional school year is beginning at all levels. Agricultural harvesting that will last into the fall is underway. Governmental officials are returning to their posts, where they will be called upon to deal with the many critical issues that have become part of human existence in an age of terrorism.

Those who value, and hence seek to foster, personal and social morality have additional reasons to rededicate themselves to their mission. Sinister forces in positions of influence in government, academia, and the communications/entertainment industry continue to propagate, by words and actions, a militant agenda that is antithetical to the basic truths about God and man. And the situation is made worse by the personal failings of those who should be leading the cultural counteroffensive, including members of the clergy.

One aspect of an effective remedy for all of these troubles, as Manager Van Buren wisely counsels, is hope. The Australian moralist Austin Woodbury defines hope as the "supernatural virtue by which we look forward to our eternal happiness and the means thereunto, on account of God's omnipotence helping us." No matter how strong the adherents of a culture of death seems to be, they will never be more powerful than the Almighty. Not only can God be confidently relied upon to aid those who seek him as their ultimate goal, he is also their sure help throughout earthly life: "Everyone who has this hope based on him keeps himself pure, as he is pure" (1 John 3:3).

Another part of the spiritual solution is "Heart," the title of Van Buren's locker room lyrics in Damn Yankees: "You gotta have heart/All you really need is heart/When the odds are sayin'/You'll never win/That's when a grin/Should start." Perseverance, which is related to the cardinal virtue of fortitude, is defined by Fr. Woodbury as the "virtue restraining the inclination to desist from a work because of the length of time involved in it."

The Chicago White Sox, who have not been in the World Series since 1959, and who have not won the Series since 1917 (two years before the bribery-tainted "Black Sox" scandal of 1919), have not desisted from trying to get back to the Fall Classic for the past 44 years. In the sports world, this certainly qualifies as perseverance. In the more important world of spiritual reality, one readily thinks of St. Monica, who wept and prayed for 26 years that her child, St. Augustine, would convert to Catholicism. As Augustine later wrote, "the son of such tears could not be lost."

"Where there is despair, let me bring hope." This petition in the prayer of St. Francis of Assisi can be fruitfully voiced by all as we labor this September in a world that desparately needs heavenly peace and consolation. Hope springs eternal. This is next year.

Posted 9:12 PM by John
The United States of America has now traversed forty years -- a biblical generation -- since the electrifying oratory of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., in his immortal "I Have a Dream" speech, was delivered on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC on August 28, 1963.

As should ever be remembered, the immediate context for the speech was the march on Washington in support of federal civil rights for African-Americans. With King's speech and the assassination of President John F. Kennedy a few months later as key contributing factors, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 became law the following year.

Prophets, both religious and social, often address broader issues and future ages, over and above the particular cause that impels them to speak. Dr. King's speech contains several indicia of such prophecy, quoted below. But, as Jesus Christ himself testified and exemplified, prophets are not always heeded despite their clarion calls of truth. Sometimes, in fact, their counsel is ignored at great cost.

"When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned." Would not Dr. King have stood in the breach -- as his follower, Jesse Jackson, did early in his political career -- to decry the usurpation of the right to life of unborn humans of all races and colors, in the destructive wake of Roe v. Wade?

"We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. we must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. ... No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." Could it have even been wildly contemplated that the creative protest of souls in the South forty years later would involve an attempt by a state official to retain a monument to the natural moral law upon which the nation's justice has been built -- the Ten Commandments?

"I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." While all persons of good will can comprehend the philosophical rationale for affirmative action as a remedy for historical inequality, are such policies as racial preferences in employment and education consistent with Dr. King's dream in 21st Century America?

"I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together. ... With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day." Such racial minorities not prominent in the 1960s, such as Asian and Arab Americans, are certainly included in this dream. But would Dr. King have been comfortable with the invocation of his holy hopes by such groups as the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, one of the organizers of this year's anniversary march?

"When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, 'Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!'" Isn't it time for all citizens who love authentic freedom and true moral liberty to rededicate themselves to the lofty goals that Dr. King has set?

Posted 10:18 AM by John
Pope Paul VI’s prophetic encyclical letter Humanae Vitae, which was promulgated 35 years ago this week, includes the following insight: "In relation to the tendencies of instinct or passion, responsible parenthood means that necessary dominion which reason and will must exercise over them."

Although this counsel was given by the Holy Father in the context of providing moral guidance to husbands and wives on the issue of contraception, the importance of its foundational wisdom is no less important today. It would hardly be surprising to hear Pope John Paul II, in harmony with his personalist philosophy, declare that acts of "responsible personhood" require that each person’s human reason and will must rule over his or her emotional tendencies.

Although the internalization and application of this principle is certainly the work of a lifetime, lived out day by day, the formula for responsible personhood is readily understandable by all. The human faculty of reason enables persons, created in the divine image, to understand the order of things established by God, while the faculty of free will enables persons to direct themselves to what is true and good (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1704).

In fact, human freedom is the power, grounded in reason and will, to either act or not act in particular situations. Aided by God’s grace to regain our natural freedom, which was lost through original sin, we can always choose to do good and to refrain from doing evil. The "passions" alluded to by Pope Paul are feelings or emotions, such as love, that are natural components of the human psyche, and that as such interact with the faculties of reason and will (cf. Catechism, nn. 1763-1766).

A Christian’s goal is to be motivated towards good by the whole being of his or her humanity, the passions as well as the will. A key objective, then, is to so orient one’s being that passions can be informed and influenced in the freedom enjoyed by those liberated by the spirit of the Lord (cf. 2 Cor. 3:17), using right reason and holy will. The continual and consistent use of this approach will enable all married, single, and religious men and women to avoid the contemporary whirlpool of sexual fixation that can destroy all who are either unaware of its presence or too spiritually weak to resist its pull.

With freedom empowered by God, husbands and wives can choose to be faithful to each other for life and to be open to children consistent with truly responsible parenthood, in which abortion and artificial contraception are rejected. If this means sexual abstinence for even lengthy periods within marriage -- as attested by the heroic witness which many spouses throughout the Christian centuries have given -- all necessary graces will be provided.

In that same power, those in religious life can live in celibacy as responsible persons, notwithstanding the shrill voices clamoring for changes in light of the current scandals. Those who are attracted to unmarried or same-sex partners can exercise their reason and will consistent with the knowledge that they may not engage in sexual activity; the same Creator who made them will provide the way to live His truth as responsible persons.

Of course, responsible personhood can also be practiced in all other areas of life. We can learn to exercise dominion over our passions -- without necessarily sacrificing justice -- by living with a fuller understanding of God’s plan for our service and a greater desire to seek the good in all that we say and do. The formula is applicable across the entire spectrum of human experience, in all human vocations and in every country and culture.

A recruiting slogan of the United States Army for many years was "be all that you can be." In the Christian life, this can be best accomplished by providing reason and will with the necessary dominion, in the Lord, to act always as responsible persons.

Posted 9:56 PM by John
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary lists two meanings for the word victim: (1) "a living being sacrificed to a deity or in the performance of a religious rite," and (2) "one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent." It is the second, secular definition that receives more usage in contemporary discourse.

Those affected by natural disasters such as earthquakes or hurricanes are unarguably victims in this second sense. By the same reasoning, innocent people who are killed or injured by the wrongful actions of humans are referred to as victims. A definition of "victim" in the United States criminal code (18 U.S.C. sec. 3663) is "a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of an offense."

However, societal forces seem to be at work in a constant effort to expand the scope of victimhood ever wider. Whether driven by social equality or base greed, the promise of better, or even favored treatment provides an impetus for nearly everyone to claim that he or she is a "victim" who must be compensated in some way as a matter of justice.

It is thus not surprising to hear some claim that successful entrepreneur Martha Stewart is a "victim" whose business dealings would not have been held to the same level of governmental scrutiny if she were not a woman. Media pundits can speculate whether the bizarre antics of entertainer Michael Jackson are somehow explainable because he is a "victim." Even Mandy Block, the woman inside the Italian sausage costume who was knocked down, but not seriously hurt, by Pittsburgh Pirate Randall Simon as the famous Milwaukee Brewers sandwich racers ran past the Pirates' dugout earlier this week, wanted something for her trouble -- the bat that Simon slugged her with.

Lest Christians be swept away in accepting this false sense of what it means to be a victim, we need only turn our gaze to Christ. Before Jesus became one of us, the acceptable sacrifice to the Lord was an animal, but only one that was perfect: "You shall not offer one that has any defect, for such a one would not be acceptable for you" (Lv 22:20).

But as St. Peter notes, "you were delivered from the futile ways of life your fathers handed on to you ... by Christ’s blood beyond all price: the blood of a spotless, unblemished lamb" (1 Pt 1:18-19). Indeed, "for our sakes God made him who did not know sin to be sin, so that in him we might become the very holiness of God" (2 Cor 5:21). And the love that comes from God "is not self-seeking ... neither does it brood over injuries. ... There is no limit to love's forbearance" (1 Cor 13:5, 7). Those who desire to claim the empty prize of a false victimhood would do well to recall that it only by sharing the Cross of Jesus that the satisfaction of real joy can be attained.

In seeking union with Christ our Sacrifice, the song of the Benediction hymn should always be ours: "O Saving Victim, op’ning wide the gate of heaven to men below! Our foes press on from every side: Thine aid supply, thy strength bestow."

Posted 8:27 PM by John
Liberty presumes an autonomy of self that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct. The instant case involves liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions. Lawrence v. Texas, introduction of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion

Confirm thy soul in self-control, thy liberty in law. "America The Beautiful"

On the day after the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Lawrence v. Texas that a state law criminalizing sodomy was unconstitutional, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement on June 27 reaffirming the teaching of the Church that "sexual activity belongs to the marital relationship between one man and one woman in fidelity to each other," and observing more fundamentally that "sexual activity has profound social consequences which are not limited to those immediately engaged in sexual acts." It should be greatly encouraging to faithful Catholics that notwithstanding the recent scandals involving some members of the clergy, their shepherds have grasped the potential devastating impact that the Supreme Court’s decision could have on society.

There have been other incidents reported in the media since the decision was rendered that are instructive of the cultural battles in prospect from attacking forces who are even now cresting the horizon:

* In Rockford, Illinois, the firing of a Catholic parish’s music director who refused to accede to a request that he live a chaste life with his male companion has split the congregation. Some in the parish say that the fact that the director was gay "just wasn’t an issue," and the music director indicated that his dismissal was contrary to gospel teaching of "compassion, love, forgiveness and charity."

* A Presbyterian church in the Richmond, Virginia area has promulgated a "Statement on Welcoming," which affirms that all privileges of membership in the church are open to all people, regardless of criteria including sexual orientation.

* A letter published in the July 2003 American Bar Association’s monthly magazine, the ABA Journal, argues that instead of including heterosexual domestic partnerships in the same legal category as marriages as part of a legal reform proposal, advocates for legal change should instead push for recognition of same-sex marriages in all states and allow "everyone [to have] the choice to live within, or outside, the legal framework of marriage."

These developments, both inside and outside of church circles, are clear harbingers that the cultural onslaught on the centrality of marriage and family has now begun in earnest in the United States. In other countries, the fight has already begun. The example of Canada is highly instructive. As William F. Buckley observed in his column this week, within a span of three years (1996-1999), a majority of Canadians favored "same-sex marriage," including an astounding 69 percent of women age 18 to 34. This shift in public opinion came even before the recent announcement by the Canadian national government that it would enact into law an appellate court decision that homosexual unions should be accorded the same legal recognition as authentic marriages.

Will the people of the United States react with the same "dull acquiescence" noted by Buckley that the citizens of Canada have exhibited towards the de-institutionalization of marriage? Will the traditional family, and those who try to teach and live its values with the help of matrimonial graces, become a casualty to the culture of death on its march to establishing a society bereft of any opportunity for the formation of fully human persons in conformity with the natural plan of God? We can – we must – speak the truth in love on this vital issue, by actions as well as by words, in season and out of season. For any hope of a successful outcome in this world, we must be faithful to who we are as men and women in Christ. Holy Family, pray for us.

Posted 8:50 PM by John
St. Peter’s ultimate sacrifice for his faith was to be crucified like his Lord, but upside-down. St. Paul, according to tradition, was beheaded. According to a new report issued recently by Aid to the Church in Need, more than 900 Christians were killed because of their religious beliefs last year throughout the world, and over 100,000 were arrested. The situation was the worst in Nigeria, Sudan, China and Cuba (where 86 persons have been imprisoned for the “crime” of being witnesses for Christ).

In the United States, the free exercise of religion is protected under the First Amendment to the Federal Constitution. Nevertheless, there have been instances in the history of the country where individuals have been called upon to demonstrate the courage of their religious convictions in opposition to policies that were sanctioned by at least a significant portion of society. Harriet Tubman and the “conductors” of the Underground Railroad that liberated slaves from the South come to mind, as do the members of the civil-rights movement for racial equality, including as Martin Luther King, and the members of the more recent civil-rights movement for unborn children, including Joan Andrews Bell.

These intrepid souls were willing to put themselves at risk for a cause greater than themselves, even at the risk of legal sanctions. This is what Christian martyrs do as well in the totality of their witness.

Two hundred years ago, the United States Supreme Court established itself as the final governmental arbiter in Marbury v. Madison, epitomized by the court’s statement that “it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” Thirty years ago, the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, where -- in one of the most reprehensible rulings since the court’s pre-Civil War upholding of slavery in the Dred Scott case -- the court held that it “need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins” to find that a “right of privacy,” although not mentioned in the text of the Constitution, was “broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”

This past week, the Supreme Court ominously extended the illogic of Roe in a decision that will reverberate through American society until it is either overruled or rendered irrelevant. In Lawrence v. Texas, the majority of the court held that a state law which prohibited sodomy was unconstitutional on the ground that the “right to liberty [of consenting adults engaging in homosexual activity] under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government.” As Justice Scalia noted in his dissent, every single state law against “bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity” will now be called into question by the court’s ruling in the Lawrence case. How must Christian and moral America respond to this outrage? And what will happen if it does not? [To be continued]

Posted 12:12 PM by John
"Let there be peace on earth/And let it begin with me." The mere sight of these words from the popular song written by Jill Jackson and Sy Miller for a California teen retreat in 1955 almost automatically starts the musical accompaniment in the heads of most readers. The song has continued to enjoy wide circulation in both religious and secular settings for decades, notwithstanding its original "non-inclusive" language ("With God as our Father/Brothers all are we"; not to fear, sanitized versions are available for the politically-correct set).

The opening phrase of another poetic invocation of peace, composed by St. Francis of Assisi, is centuries older: "Lord, make me an instrument of Your peace." In both the Peace Prayer and the 1950’s song, peace is the desired outcome. Yet the artists’ views as to the means to achieve peace, and the reality of peace itself, are very different in the two works.

These differences have been ably indicated by Father William Maestri. In a column written for the Clarion Herald, the official newspaper of the Archdiocese of New Orleans, in December 2001, Fr. Maestri observes that "if history teaches us anything, it is that peace cannot begin with me. For if peace is to begin with me or with some utopian program for peace, failure is the sure outcome. Because of sin, peace cannot begin with me. Because of my alienation from God, the peace that begins with me is tainted by egoism and pride." Rather, he says, "true peace comes through the One who comes as peace," whose instruments we should seek to be.

It is in the Lord alone that we can sow love where there is hatred, pardon where there is injury, faith where there is doubt, hope where there is despair, light where there is darkness, and joy where there is sadness. Only God’s peace can bring about such radical, spiritual transformation. Those who seek to become a means of such peace must willingly accept and embrace the responsibility of doing so.

Fr. Maestri also points out that peace in the larger context of human society should not be confused with the absence of conflict. "What is often called peace is, in reality, quietism and oppression. The establishment of such a 'peace' comes in the end through tanks in a square." The renowned "Pax Romana" of the Roman Empire, established by force of arms, was an uneasy peace which ultimately did not endure. Any similar "Pax Americana" in terror-plagued areas of the modern world, without the supernatural qualities of authentic peace, will also come to a natural end.

The graces necessary to bring Christ’s peace to the world come to us as members of His Body, the Church, fortified by the life-giving sacrament of the Eucharist. The feast of Corpus Christi has historically been marked by public processions with the Blessed Sacrament, so that believers may manifest to the world their devotion to the Redeemer who dwells within them. As Pope John Paul II proclaimed in his homily on Thursday, during the European celebration of the feast, "we are not alone in our pilgrimage: Christ, bread of life, walks with us."

Let peace begin with Christ in me/Let this be the moment now. "May our worship of this sacrament of your body and blood help us to experience the salvation you won for us and the peace of the kingdom where you live with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God, forever and ever." (Opening Prayer for Corpus Christi)

Posted 7:04 PM by John
This Sunday, June 15, is the Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity, a feast which veteran Catholics perhaps know better by its popular title, Trinity Sunday. Even for the vast majority of the faithful who are not experts in theology, the benefits from sincere and open reflection on the centrality of the Holy Trinity to the Christian life, with whatever intellectual capacity one can bring to the exercise, are enough for an eternity of Sundays.

One of the first known use of the term “trinity” (in its Greek form of trias) as a theological concept was by Theophilus of Antioch (c. 180 A.D.), who spoke of “the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom.” Interestingly, the early Church saw no need for the institution of a separate feast honoring the Holy Trinity. The first liturgical prayers composed especially for the Holy Trinity were written in the fourth century to combat the spread of the heresy of Arianism, which in its central tenet denied that Jesus, the Son of God, was consubstantial with the Father. It was not until the fourteenth century, however, that the feast of the Holy Trinity was established for the entire Church as the first Sunday after Pentecost.

The article in the classic 1908 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia (now online, and soon on CD) on The Blessed Trinity provides an excellent summary on the development of Trinitarian doctrine through the centuries. It should not be surprising that even so fundamental a Christian belief as the Holy Trinity has been the subject of dynamic understanding over time. It has only been a few years now since Divine Mercy Sunday was established as a feast of the universal Church on the first Sunday after Easter, based on revelations to St. Faustina that were themselves once the subject of controversy.

As should be expected, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (nn. 232-267) is the reliable source for an authentic, yet concise understanding of dogma with respect to the Holy Trinity. Of course, the term “understanding” here refers to one of the great mysteries of faith. In fact, “the Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God.” From such revelation, as imparted through the Incarnation of God’s Son and the sending thereafter of the Holy Spirit, we do know that (1) the three divine persons do not share one divinity, but each of them is God completely and entirely (n. 253); (2) the Father (who generates), the Son (who is begotten), and Holy Spirit (who proceeds) are really distinct from one another (n. 254); and (3) the real distinction of the three persons from each other is in their relations to one another, yet everything in them is of one nature (n. 255). In the Gospel for Trinity Sunday, we hear Jesus exhort the disciples to baptize all in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Mt. 28:19), and we rededicate ourselves to the Triune God each time that we make the Sign of the Cross.

Trinity Sunday 2002 found Pope John Paul II in Bulgaria for a beatification Mass. In his homily, the Holy Father emphasized the supreme importance of the Holy Trinity: “In a special way the Mass, ‘the center of all Christian life,’ is characterized by the remembrance of the Divine Persons: the Father to whom the offering is made; the Son, priest and victim of the sacrifice; the Holy Spirit, invoked to change the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ and to make those who partake of them one body and one spirit. The life of Christians is completely directed towards this mystery. The success of our journey here below depends on our faithful response to the love of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.”

As Father Paul A. Duffner, O.P. points out in an article on The Divine Trinity, “if we live by our faith and trust in the Holy Trinity, we will remember that God permits only what is for our ultimate good.” Since God has permitted you to read this column, you may agree that learning more about His divine nature and personhood can be a soul-satisfying enterprise. We are not only more than conquerors, we are more than Jedi Knights in a Star Wars universe: we do not invoke an impersonal Force, but a Triune, all-powerful God who loves us through time and into eternity as His own children.

Posted 1:17 PM by John
Paul found some disciples in Ephesus. "He said to them, 'Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you became believers?' But they said to him, 'We have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.'" (Acts 19:2)

With the annual Christian celebration of Pentecost Sunday -- the Church’s birthday -- now here, it seems appropriate that believers, who sometimes act as if they also have not heard of Him, take advantage of the great opportunity to receive a “second wind” of revitalization in all that the Holy Spirit has to offer us.

This is important, because we are living in the “last days.” The meaning of such phrase is not the same as what is conveyed by the apocalyptic front pages of the latest supermarket tabloids, with pictures of mushroom clouds and quotations from Nostradamus (pick one up soon, since next week’s papers will probably switch to pictures of Martha Stewart in prison garb and quotations from Sammy Sosa).

Instead, “by His coming, which never ceases, the Holy Spirit causes the world to enter into the ‘last days,’ the time of the Church, the Kingdom already inherited though not yet consummated.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 732)

“Last days,” however, are last days. However many days the world itself has left, even the youngest and healthiest persons among us have somewhat less than 40,000 days of mortal life remaining (with eternal life, of course, our ultimate goal). Most of us have considerably fewer days until we die -- and each day brings the last day closer. How then should we live?

The venerable Baltimore Catechism, used in the United States in the 19th and 20th Centuries asks, in Question 100, “Why did Christ send the Holy Ghost?” Attentive students knew the answer: “Christ sent the Holy Ghost to sanctify His Church, to enlighten and strengthen the Apostles, and to enable them to preach the Gospel.” The current Catechism (n. 737), amplifying the traditional teaching, speaks of a “joint mission” of Christ and the Holy Spirit, part of which involves the Holy Spirit’s making present the mystery of Christ, supremely in the Eucharist, to bring us into communion with God so that we can bear much fruit.

There are both gifts and fruits of the Holy Spirit. The gifts -- wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety and fear of the Lord -- are dispositions which enable us to follow the Spirit’s promptings. The fruits -- traditionally charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, generosity, gentleness, faithfulness, modesty, self-control, and chastity -- are perfections that the Holy Spirit forms in us. We may call upon the Spirit’s gifts to bring about our spiritual fruitfulness. (Catechism, nn. 1831, 1832)

There’s nothing like celebrating Pentecost to help you prepare or revise your own spiritual game plan to solidify your strengths and weed out your weaknesses. A deeper union with the Lord, through worthy reception of Holy Communion (and God stands always ready, through the Sacrament of Reconciliation, to make us more worthy), leads to greater openness to the Holy Spirit’s gifts, which in turn enables us to manifest His fruits. So, understanding can bring about more patience and kindness in our homes. Wisdom and fortitude can help us make entertainment choices that are modest and chaste. The infinite power of God is at our disposal; will we make the best use of it? If we needed more motivation, fear of the Lord should remind us that we will all need to make an accounting at our own last day.

Come, Holy Spirit -- yes, we will remember you more often now -- fill the hearts of your faithful and enkindle in them the fire of your love. Send forth your spirit and they shall be created, and you shall renew the face of the earth.

Posted 9:43 PM by John
In the view of Professor Raphael Waters of Niagara University, the universe of philosophical inquiry can be boiled down to two fundamental questions: is there a God, and what is man. Two of the most popular movies now in theatres -- one a comedy, and the other a drama -- suggest flawed views of how these questions should be answered, albeit in the name of entertainment.

First, a disclaimer. I have not seen, nor do I plan to see, either of these films. My information about them comes from the web site of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Office of Film and Broadcasting, at http://www.usccb.org/movies/weekly.htm. Moviegoers who are concerned about possible moral content issues, or who just want to check reviews of current films, may find this site to be useful.

In Bruce Almighty, a disgruntled TV reporter (played by Jim Carrey) who complained that God was purposely hindering his career success is confronted by God Himself, portrayed in human likeness by Morgan Freeman. In order to teach the reporter a lesson, God bestows His own infinite power on the reporter and challenges him to improve on God’s record. (The USCCB review notes that when He meets the reporter, God is wearing a New York Yankees baseball cap -- in my view, as a Chicago White Sox fan of multi-generational standing, this by itself is reason not to see this movie.)

The reporter then begins to use his gift of divine omnipotence for his own selfish purposes, but he discovers that even with such ability, he cannot force his estranged girlfriend to reconcile with him. At one point, he even asks the real God, “How do you make someone love you without affecting their free will?” The subject of prayer also is given favorable consideration in the movie. Such cinematic treatment of theological issues is uncommon, but still the powers-that-be who are responsible for the screenplay cannot resist adding gratuitous profanity and an implicit sexual encounter so as to ruin any moral message that they were trying to send.

Surely there is a way, even in the context of Hollywood fare, to shed true light on God’s almighty power, which is the only divine attribute that is stated explicitly in the Apostles’ Creed, by showing that such power is universal, loving and mysterious (Catechism of the Catholic Church, nn. 268-274).

The setting for Matrix Reloaded, a science-fiction film that is the second installment of a trilogy, is the 22nd Century. In nearly every part of the world, human beings have become subservient to the technology that they created, and humans are kept alive by machines to serve as cheap neural energy sources. In order to make the humans complacent, they are plugged into a virtual reality known as the “Matrix.” But one human, Neo (Keanu Reeves), is a savior-like character who has figured out what the Matrix is, and who leads a band of rebels from the last remaining human stronghold, Zion, to battle the machines.

Apparently, it is not the plot that is intended to be the main audience attraction in this movie. Instead, the drawing power is supplied by the special effects and violence depicted in the interplay between the virtual and real worlds. Like Bruce Almighty, the admixture of Matrix Reloaded includes profanities and a sexual encounter, in addition to the violence.

As has been ably pointed out by Father Stanley Jaki in his seminal work, Brain, Mind and Computers, all of the futuristic agitation about the advent of artificial intelligence rests upon decidedly shaky scientific ground. None of the speculative claims of such experts as Ray Kurzweil and Hans Moravec to the effect that the ascendancy of machines is imminent can get past the facts that (1) significant contributors to the development and theory of modern computers were unanimous in their refusal to attribute thinking and consciousness to machines; (2) the scientific research conducted on the human brain to date has failed to reduce thought to the physiology alone; (3) efforts to explain psychological activity in the brain in quantitative terms have been successful only where investigation has been restricted to a single psychological function; and (4) philosophers who have justified the understanding of the mind in purely scientific have done so only by conveniently ignoring some of the mind’s outstandingly creative and basic procedures.

Man is more than a machine, even as he is more than an animal. To suggest otherwise is to indulge in fantasy, and so the “realm-of-the-possible” underpinnings of the Matrix are swept away. “God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. ... Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1730). We will never need Neo, since we already have the “New Adam” (n. 411).

Whatever redeeming social value films like these two have, I will happily forfeit. I prefer my movies where everyone knows Who is Who. As Yul Brynner’s Pharaoh acknowledged in reference to Charlton Heston’s Moses in The Ten Commandments, “His God is God.”

Posted 3:31 PM by John
“You, who are on the road/Must have a code that you can live by.” So sang Crosby, Stills and Nash in their classic hit Teach Your Children. One code that all Americans are living by these days is the Homeland Security Advisory System. Earlier this week, the Department of Homeland Security raised the national threat level to orange, the second highest level, after monitored intelligence indicated that the Al Qaida network was entering a period of active worldwide operations.

“The past is just a good bye/Teach your children well.” It has been nearly three decades since Teach Your Children was a featured selection on nearly every pop music station. Back in 1974, what is now commonly considered to be terrorism -- violent, unprovoked and politically-motivated attacks, generally against civilians -- was something that happened in the Middle East or other faraway places. Not in Fortress America.

But on April 19, 1995, the citizens of Oklahoma City felt most directly the tragic helplessness of domestic terrorism. On September 11, 2001, after three of the four hijacked jets reached their intended targets, the world seemingly stopped turning.

“You, of tender years/Can’t know the fears that your elders grew by.” Those who came of age during World War II are famously known as the “Greatest Generation,” and with good reason. Those of baby-boomer age and younger can only comprehend vicariously, through the understanding of history from personal and media sources, what it must have been like to experience the monumental events of the rise and fall of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Moreover, every American then living had a role to play in turning the tide against the “Axis of Evil” of that day -- political officials, spiritual leaders, business owners, G.I. Joe, Rosie the Riveter, and even the kids who made do with less to support the war effort.

But what about the generation now coming of age? Todd Beamer, 32, Jeremy Glick, 31, and Thomas E. Burnett Jr., 38 -- and perhaps others as well -- rushed the captors of United Flight 93 on 9/11 and prevented the fourth hijacked plane from reaching its intended target in Washington. There have also been many stories of valorous conduct by the all-volunteer military forces that were engaged in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

“They seek the truth before they can die/Teach your parents well.” Heroes who are willing to give up their lives for their friends arise in every era. The annual tradition of Memorial Day was originally celebrated as Decoration Day, an occasion to honor the soldiers who died during the American Civil War by decorating their graves and recalling their sacrifices. Those who gave the last full measure of their devotion for the cause of freedom have been justly lauded by presidents from Abraham Lincoln to George W. Bush, and are especially remembered this weekend. Since 9/11, there has also been a renewed appreciation for the police, firefighters, and all who dedicate their lives to the protection and service of others.

With a culture of death fostered by sin now forcefully present both in the geopolitical situation and in domestic social issues such as abortion and euthanasia, the need for living heroically as holy examples to others could not be greater. This will be the case even if the national threat level for terrorism is dramatically lowered. Jesus’ words of caution about His second coming, at the hour known only to the Father, are as urgent now as they were to His disciples during his public ministry: “What I say to you, I say to all: Be on guard!” (Mk. 13:37)

In uncertain times, our dear ones and friends should be treasured all the more, and color codes should not be necessary to bring this truth home to us. As Graham Nash would say, “just look at them and sigh and know they love you.”

Posted 7:33 PM by John
[NOTE: There will be no post to Consider This next weekend, May 17-18, in view of the momentous event that is the subject of today's post. The next commentary will be posted during the weekend of May 24-25.]

May 10, 2003

Dear Monica:

Your mother has reminded me that letter-writing is becoming a lost art. She has been doing her part lately to keep the practice alive. Generally, I prefer e-mail as a written communication vehicle -- it’s less formal, it’s certainly faster, and the price is right. But some occasions still call for a letter, and one such occasion is almost upon us.

All across the United States this month, as has been the case for many years, thousands of young adults will be experiencing one of the most significant events of their lives -- graduation from college. But it’s different this year -- special for both you and your parents. Next Sunday, you will be one of those graduates. We will be watching as our oldest child receives her university diploma.

I’m sure that to some extent, my thoughts and emotions as you attain this goal after four years of dedicated study will be similar to those that other fathers have experienced -- tremendous pride that a member of my family has reached an important personal milestone, with at least a touch of nostalgia as the realization deepens that you have forever passed the marker designated “little girl.” But like the other fathers, I have been blessed as well with particular memories of your travels.

For one thing, you and God arranged it so that you were born on your mother’s birthday. Since you were followed into the family by five siblings, I can certainly appreciate having one less birthdate to keep track of.

We gave you your name because St. Monica is the patron saint of mothers, and motherhood is a very important vocation to the pro-lifers who cooperated in giving you life. It’s also true that the name “Monica” is related to the Latin verb moneo, meaning "to advise or warn." On your journey to this point in your life, you have been able to give good counsel to many, including your brothers and sisters (as the child who had the most seniority in the family dynamic), and it’s not surprising to me that you have chosen psychology, a discipline that values an understanding of the mind, as your career field.

You have been able to make and retain lasting friendships along the way, even as you have moved on to different schools. This tells me that you continue to offer something of value to these friends despite being a long distance away from them. Since our family had to move to another state after you had already enrolled at college, of necessity we also have known your love and concern from afar since our visits together have become less frequent.

It has been your strength of character that has enabled you to undertake several responsibilities concurrently -- involvement in campus lay ministry, intercollegiate athetics, academic leadership positions, and part-time employment -- and execute all of them well. You have definitely not buried the talents that the Lord has given you to invest, and may you ever continue to invest them.

Most importantly to me, it is abundantly clear that the seeds of faith which your mother and I have planted in you by the grace of God have taken root, and that you have now grown to maturity and prepared for your own vocation as a Catholic adult. What greater satisfaction can a parent have than this?

Thank you so much for the blessings that you have brought, and continue to bring, to all of us. To Mom and Dad, you will always be our child, but you are now also our sister in Christ. May our circle be unbroken in this life and in the greater family circle of eternity!

In our Father’s Love,

Dad

Posted 3:28 PM by John
“The thrill of victory and the agony of defeat.” Most sports fans of at least baby-boomer vintage know the source of this cultural catchphrase -- the voice-over by host Jim McKay for the opening theme of ABC’s long-running Wide World of Sports program. The next phrase in McKay’s famous introduction suggests a rationale at a deeper level, beyond mere winning and losing a particular contest, for interest in sports -- “the human drama of athletic competition.” Although not everyone is able to participate in sports for reasons of health or age, all are necessarily engaged in the “human drama.”

There is a meaningful connection between sports and the life of grace, as Pope John Paul II has noted on several occasions. For example, the Jubilee for Athletes in 2000 was solemnly concluded with a Mass at St. Peter’s Basilica, followed by an exhibition soccer game at Rome’s Olympic Stadium which the pope attended. In his homily, the Holy Father observed that involvement in sports was important because it required the practice of virtues such as loyalty, teamwork and perseverance.

St. Paul’s writings make several allusions to the relationship between athletics and life in Christ. In a passage in First Corinthians (1 Cor. 9:24-27), Paul refers to both running (“in a race, all indeed run, but one receives the prize”) and boxing (“I so fight as not beating the air”). And even in the Old Testament, Isaiah gives counsel by reminding God’s people that “they that hope in the Lord will renew their strength, they will soar as with eagles’ wings; they will run and not grow weary, walk and not grow faint” (Is. 40:31).

Properly understood and integrated into the lifestyle of those who aspire to sanctity, sports can play a significant positive role. Of course, just as with any other aspect of life, an inordinate amount of time and attention can be given to athletic events both as a participant and as a sports fan. So, appropriate and desirable recreational activity for the Lord’s Day each week should not consist of watching three football games on TV (even during the playoffs). Quality and quantity time with family members, or in service to others, is certainly worthy of inclusion and prioritization on the authentic sports lover’s agenda.

On the other hand, those whose vocations include the arena of athletics cannot claim that their activities off the field or court are completely segregable from their involvement in sports and thus should have no bearing on how they are viewed by society in general and the consumers of sports entertainment in particular. Major League Baseball is therefore correct in demanding that Pete Rose admit to having wrongfully bet on baseball games as a condition of lifting his current ban from the sport. And the University of Alabama was correct this week in firing Mike Price, who was hired as head football coach last December, after it was learned that Price had spent large sums of money at a topless bar and allowed a woman not his wife to run up substantial charges on his credit card the following morning.

Character does matter. Formation of good habits, and cessation of bad ones, are critical to successful performance in any situation. Perhaps the most important virtue of successful athletes is perseverance, which is defined by the great Australian moralist Austin Woodbury as the “virtue restraining the inclination to desist from a work because of the length of time involved in it.” One of the most well-known athletes in America is also one of the best exemplars of this virtue. Cyclist Lance Armstrong overcame testicular cancer to become a four-time winner of the Tour de France.

As another example, the May 12 issue of ESPN Magazine carries a story about the amazing career of Dewayne White, hauntingly told in the first person in the voice of Dewayne’s father, who died of hemophilia at the age of 19. Born to unmarried parents in a small Alabama town, Dewayne survived the deaths of both his father and substance-abusing mother, and a torn ACL during high school, to star at defensive end for the University of Louisville. Watch for Dewayne this fall as a member of the world-champion Tampa Bay Buccaneers. As his father says in the story, “the next step in his life is gonna be a breeze compared to what he’s come through. A breeze.”

We also can pray and await a sustaining breeze from the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who also brings us the graces necessary for virtuous living as we run our race and strive for an imperishable crown (cf. 1 Cor. 9:25). After our human drama on earth, the thrill of that victory will be everlasting.

Posted 3:41 PM by John
Toleration of a gradually increasing threat can lead to tragedy. Consider a frog’s experience with two different pots of water on a stove. If the frog is brought near the first pot, where the water is at a rolling boil, the frog will make every effort to avoid contact with what it perceives can bring it great harm. In the second pot, where the water is at room temperature, the frog may find its surroundings quite comfortable. If the heat is turned up to 212 degrees slowly enough, the frog will not notice that it is becoming a soup ingredient until it is too late.

The frog’s reaction to the second pot is similar to how Christian believers have responded to sexual morality issues for the past generation. Many turning-point events that precipitated changes for the worse in society are manifestly clear in retrospect, but for those with eyes to see and ears to hear, the significance of these events should have been no less obvious at the time that they occurred.

Once the sweeping scope of the United States Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, invalidating the existing abortion laws of all states, became apparent, every discerning Christian should have realized immediately that a new civil war over the sanctity of the human person had been joined. Some leaders did grasp the significance of Roe, but the critical mass of Christians and others holding the pro-life position -- who could have brought their considerable influence to bear in holding the line at Roe and then pushing back in all affected aspects of society as hard and as loudly as they could -- did not act as was necessary. Now thirty years later, the political fighting for even the most minimal inroads on Roe’s abortion-on-demand hegemony, such as a ban on the grotesque procedure known as “partial-birth abortion,” is exceedingly fierce.

Even Roe v. Wade should have been foreseen. In 1965, the Supreme Court ruled in Griswold v. Connecticut that a state law which made the distribution of contraceptives a criminal offense was unconstitutional. The case arose when a Planned Parenthood clinic prescribed contraceptives for married patients. Justice William O. Douglas’ majority opinion infamously found a protected “right of privacy” not in any specific constitutional provision, but rather in “penumbras” from the right of association and other specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights. It was this same right of privacy that Justice Harry A. Blackmun in Roe found “broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”

The failure to recognize how far the proponents of a culture of death are willing to go when provided with opportunities to affect radical change, coupled with the ennui of those who know the truth but do not proclaim it boldly in actions as well as in words, leads inevitably to an inability to hold even the smallest moral ground. An instructive example played out this past week at James Madison University in Virginia when student activists (whom the Washington Post in its coverage took pains to describe as “polite” and “by-the-book”) rapidly collected more than 2,700 signatures in an effort to force the university trustees to reverse their decision barring the on-campus distribution of the contraceptive levonorgestrel, widely known as the “morning-after” pill and sold under the trade name “Plan B”. JMU’s move to halt distribution of the drug had come after concerns were expressed by a state legislative delegate. The response to the petition drive was sufficient to force the student government to a vote, and by a margin of 55 to 6, the proposal was approved and the trustees will reconsider their decision at the next board meeting in June.

The authors of a study published in the Annals of Pharmacotherapy (Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 465-470) in 2000 conclude that levonorgestrel likely acts at times by causing a “postfertilization effect” -- it can act to prevent pregnancy by reducing the probability of implantation of a fertilized egg, that is, a developing human person. Thus, from the initial effort to legitimize contraception, ostensibly to protect marital privacy, in the space of forty years the point has now been reached where unmarried students can demand continued access to products that facilitate fornication and that can literally kill any unwanted results of their actions. “Plan B” isn’t just for switching majors any more. At JMU and the other state-supported colleges in Virginia where it can be prescribed, “Plan B” could mean not having to say you’re sorry -- but only if major physical, spiritual and emotional consequences are ignored.

We can no longer afford the luxury of the frog’s ever-warming bath. It’s time to get out and turn off the burner. It is true that we will need an infusion of courage to stand up to those who prefer their water hot (for those who like it, there is an alternative, everlasting media available), but we have been offered such courage and more from the One who extends to us -- particularly this Sunday -- His eternal Divine Mercy. Our fidelity to His Truth, and the willingness to act and speak accordingly, can be our return in humble gratitude to the Risen Lord.

Posted 9:08 AM by John
Pope John Paul II has issued his 14th encyclical letter, Ecclesia de Eucharistia. Instead of his customary Letter to Priests for Holy Thursday, this year the Holy Father has written to all Catholics on the subject of the Eucharist in its relationship to the Church. The encyclical provides John Paul’s insights on the sacrament itself; its role in building the Church, particularly including the aspect of its apostolicity; ecumenism; liturgical practice; and the guidance afforded by the Blessed Virgin Mary in understanding the relationship between the Church and the Eucharist. The Holy Father also shares some of his personal reflections on the subject (notably written in the first person) on the celebration of Masses throughout his priesthood and Eucharistic devotion. Ecclesia de Eucharistia is certain to be one of the most cherished documents of John Paul’s pontificate.

Among the points made by the Holy Father in discussing the sacrificial aspects of the Eucharist are these:

When the Church celebrates the Eucharist, the memorial of her Lord's death and resurrection, this central event of salvation becomes really present and “the work of our redemption is carried out”.This sacrifice is so decisive for the salvation of the human race that Jesus Christ offered it and returned to the Father only after he had left us a means of sharing in it as if we had been present there.

The Church constantly draws her life from the redeeming sacrifice; she approaches it not only through faith-filled remembrance, but also through a real contact, since this sacrifice is made present ever anew, sacramentally perpetuated, in every community which offers it at the hands of the consecrated minister.

The Mass makes present the sacrifice of the Cross; it does not add to that sacrifice nor does it multiply it. What is repeated is its memorial celebration, its “commemorative representation” (memorialis demonstratio), which makes Christ's one, definitive redemptive sacrifice always present in time. The sacrificial nature of the Eucharistic mystery cannot therefore be understood as something separate, independent of the Cross or only indirectly referring to the sacrifice of Calvary.

Thus, at every Mass, the assembled community is miraculously able to penetrate the barriers of time and space, so as to be in actual contact with the realities of the Passion as Jesus experienced them on the first Good Friday. The Church has contemplated these realities throughout its existence. Additional understanding from the scientific disciplines has been made available in the modern age. For example, in 1986, the Journal of the American Medical Association published an article entitled On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ. The article’s authors hypothesize that Jesus, suffering from shock due to diminished blood volume after His scourging, then died from exhaustion asphyxia on the cross.

One of the references used for the article was the classic study by Dr. Pierre Barbet, a French surgeon who researched the physical aspects of the Passion for 15 years. The results of Dr. Barbet’s work were published in his book A Doctor at Calvary. Published 50 years ago, Dr. Barbet’s narrative -- excerpted below -- combines his deep faith with his scientific observations, and the result has enhanced many believers’ appreciation for Christ’s salvific sacrifice:

There are two executioners, one on each side of Him, of unequal height (all this may be deduced from the direction of the marks on the shroud). They alternate their strokes, with great zest. At first, the strokes leave long livid marks, long blue bruises beneath the skin. Remember that the skin has already been affected; that it is sore owing to the millions of little intra-dermic hæmorrhages brought about by the sweat of blood. Further marks are made by the balls of lead. Then the skin, into which the blood has crept, becomes tender and breaks under fresh blows. The blood pours out; shreds of skin become detached and hang down. The whole of the back is now no more than a red surface, on which great furrows stand out like marble; and, here and there, everywhere, there are deeper wounds caused by the balls of lead. These wounds, shaped like a halter (the two balls and the thong between them), will make their marks on the shroud.

The thorns dig into the scalp and it bleeds. (We surgeons know how much a scalp can bleed.) The top of the head is already clotted with blood; long streams of blood have flown down to the forehead, under the band of rushes, have soaked into the tangled hair and into the beard. The comedy of adoration has begun. Each in turn comes forward and bows the knee before Him, with a horrible grimace, followed by a great blow: ``Hail, King of the Jews!'' But He answers nothing. His poor face, so ravaged and pale, displays no movement. It really is not funny! In their exasperation His faithful subjects spit in His face. ``You don't know how to hold the sceptre, give it here!'' There, a blow on the crown of thorns, which makes it sink further in, and then fresh blows.... But I can see that a blow from a stick delivered from the side has made a horrible bruise on His face, and that His fine well-shaped nose has been disfigured owing to the septum being broken. The blood is flowing from His nostrils. Oh, my God, this is enough! ...

One single blow with the great hammer, and the nail is already fixed in the wood, in which a few vigorous taps fix it firmly. Jesus has not cried out, but His face has contracted in a way terrible to see. But above all I saw at the same moment that His thumb, with a violent gesture, is striking against the palm of His hand: His median nerve has been touched. I realise what He had been through: an inexpressible pain darts like lightning through his fingers and then like a trail of fire right up His shoulder, and bursts in His brain. The most unbearable pain that a man can experience is that caused by wounding the great nervous centres. It nearly always causes a fainting fit, and it is fortunate that it does. Jesus has not willed that He should lose consciousness. Now, it is not as if the nerve were cut right across. But no, I know how it is, it is only partially destroyed; the raw place on the nervous centre remains in contact with the nail; and later on, when the body sags, it will be stretched against this like a violin-string against the bridge, and it will vibrate with each shaking or movement, reviving the horrible pain--This goes on for three hours. ...

Why is He making all this effort? It is in order to speak to us: "Father, forgive them, they do not know what they do." Yes, may He indeed forgive us, we who are His executioners. But a moment later His body begins to sink down once more . . . and the tetanisation will come on again. And each time that He speaks (we have anyway preserved seven of His words), and each time that He wishes to breathe, it will be necessary for Him to straighten Himself, to get back His breath, holding Himself upright on the nail through His feet. And each movement has its echo, so to speak, in His hands, in inexpressible pain (those median nerves once again!). It is a question of periodical asphyxiation of the poor unfortunate Who is being strangled and then allowed to come back to life, to be choked once more several times over. He can only escape from this asphyxiation for a moment at a time and at the cost of terrible suffering, and by an effort of the will. And this is going to last three hours. O my God, may You be able to die! ...

He now knows that He is going. He cries out "It is finished" The cup is drained, the work is complete. Then, drawing Himself up once more and as if to make us understand that He is dying of His own free will, "again crying with a loud voice.''``Father, into Thy hands I commend My Spirit''. He died when He willed to do so.

Filming of a new motion picture directed by Mel Gibson on “The Passion” (based on the writings of Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich) has recently been completed. Scheduled for release in 2004, the film seeks to accurately and graphically depict the last 12 hours of Jesus’ life. The general public will be further enabled by this work to comprehend the magnitude of what was done for humanity on its most historic day.

We adore you, O Christ, and we praise you, because by your Holy Cross you have redeemed the world.

Posted 8:34 AM by John
“Why can’t a woman be more like a man?” Such was Professor Henry Higgins’ exasperated lament in My Fair Lady about Eliza Doolittle, the Cockney linguistics pupil who balked at the professor’s condescending treatment of her. In the chauvinistic outlook of Higgins, a smug bachelor of long standing, “Men are so honest, so thoroughly square; Eternally noble, historically fair; Who when you win will always give your back a pat. Why can’t a woman be like that?” He admits that “Now and then there’s one with slight defects. One perhaps whose truthfulness you doubt a bit. But by and large we are a marvelous sex!”

It is an interesting coincidence that 1964, the year that My Fair Lady won the Oscar for Best Picture, was also the year that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed. The key provisions of Title VII of that act prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of race, religion, national origin, and sex. As history shows, “sex” was included as a classification in the bill that became Title VII only after a disheartened segregationist from Virginia amended the bill in an attempt to preclude its passage.

Eight years after the legal framework of Title VII was in place nationwide, Congress enacted the Education Amendments of 1972. The most notable new provision, Title IX, bars discrimination on the basis of sex in educational programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance.

The combined reach of Title VII and Title IX, with their civil rights enforcement mechanisms, has had a decided impact on American society. With equality of treatment for men and women in employment and educational programs, significantly including athletic programs at most colleges and universities, a matter of federal mandate, there has been a sea change during the past several decades of which Professor Higgins would presumably approve: in these two major areas of life, a woman can now be -- indeed, she must be treated -- more like a man. (This shift has occurred despite the fact that the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the United States Constitution, which would have prohibited any federal or state law that was deemed to deny or abridge rights “on account of sex,” ultimately failed in 1982 because the amendment was ratified by only 30 states, eight short of the required number of 38.)

The importance of the cultural gender roles as they have developed to this point literally hits home for me as the father of four daughters, the oldest of whom is graduating from college next month. On the one hand, the existence of Title IX ensures that my daughters will have more opportunity to realize the benefits of intercollegiate athletics (as one of them already has), and Title VII offers legal safeguards to them if they choose to enter the workforce (with the career flexibility now available allowing them to do this in a manner consistent with their vocation, even if this includes being a wife and mother). On the other hand, it would not benefit my four daughters, or my two sons for that matter, to mature and live in a society that has obliterated all of the innate distinctions between men and women in a pretense that these do not exist.

The questions that are raised with respect to striking the appropriate balance between equality of treatment and recognition of sexual differences are many, and of varying importance. For example, the issue of whether women should be admitted as members to Augusta National, the site of this week’s Masters golf tournament, is of decidedly lesser moment than the issue of whether women in military service like Jessica Lynch (who survived capture in Iraq) and Lori Piestewa (who did not) should be close enough to a battle zone to be taken as prisoners of war. Questions such as whether women or girls in academic institutions should be allowed to compel their own participation in highly aggressive sports, such as wrestling or boxing, are somewhere in the middle -- not life-and-death matters, but also not insignificant to authentic gender identity.

In the Judeo-Christian tradition, a woman is more like a man, in the sense that both men and women have been created in the image of God (cf. Gen. 1:27), and both thus have equal dignity in God’s sight. It is also sadly true, as Professor Higgins might acknowledge on sober reflection, that women as well as men are susceptible to defects both slight and great. However, as documented in Stephen B. Clark’s landmark work Man and Woman in Christ (1980), “social scientific data indicates clearly and decisively that men and women are not identical and interchangeable units,” and anthropological and historical studies “show that men and women consistently differ, not only in individual traits and trait-patterning, but also in the structure of their social relations.” In recognition of this reality, men and women must continue to offer the gifts with which they have been endowed in furtherance of their individually-discerned vocations and in service to all. This will best be done in conformity to, and with the divine assistance of, the Son of Man, who is also Son of Mary.

Posted 8:30 PM by John
In contemporary American culture, fame is an ultimate goal for many. Over 10,000 would-be singing stars have auditioned for each of two seasons of the Fox TV show American Idol. The goal of each young adult contestant is to emerge from the various elimination rounds with a recording contract that will propel them to a Hollywood career which their defeated rivals can only dream about.

Thanks to the popularity of American Idol, millions of viewers know all about Kelly Clarkson, the winner of the first season’s contest. The commercialization of Kelly and the other contestants is immense and intense. The show’s official website -- intentionally not linked here -- offers a smorgasbord of corporate tie-ins and product spin-offs. But it all seems so vacuous and shallow to anyone with a hunger for a life that is worth living. (I wonder what Archbishop Fulton Sheen would have thought of having American Idol, rather than Milton Berle, on TV opposite him?)

Pat Tillman is so not Kelly Clarkson. Their careers are parallel, but they vector in opposite directions. Whereas Kelly traveled a glitzy path from obscurity to pop icon, Pat began his adult life as a star seen by millions, first at Arizona State University and then as a strong safety for the National Football League’s Arizona Cardinals. But the terrorist attacks of 9/11 affected him deeply. His desire to “pay something back” for his comfortable life as a professional athlete led Pat to enlist in the United States Army, at an annual salary of $18,000. He and his brother Kevin signed up for the elite Army Rangers and completed training in December. Pat’s regiment has been deployed for assignment to the Middle East, and so Pat may see action in the war for Iraqi liberation. Pat chose to make no public statement at the time that he enlisted to serve his country.

An "idol" is defined as “an image used as an object of worship ... one that is adored, often blindly or excessively ... something visible but without substance.” A “hero,” on the other hand, is “a person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life.” Pat Tillman satisfies this definition by anyone’s standard. We can be justifiably proud of him and the other men and women who are even now freeing the citizens of Iraq from dictatorial idolatry.

Posted 2:45 PM by John
It has now been a half-century since one of the most significant scientific breakthroughs in the history of humanity -- the discovery of the double helix structure of DNA molecules by James Watson and Francis Crick at Cambridge in 1953. But the eminent scientists who made this finding are at pains not to thank the Author of Life for providing them with the intellectual gifts necessary to achieve their discovery. To the contrary, Watson and Crick see their pioneering DNA research as a furtherance of their atheistic beliefs.

In a recent statement, Crick offered the view that “the god hypothesis is rather discredited,” and that it was “astonishing to [him] that people continue to accept religious claims.” Watson made the equally broad assertion that “every time you understand something, religion becomes less likely.”

But religion and science, faith and reason, are not mutually contradictory -- correctly understood, these human faculties are completely complementary. Some of the greatest minds of the modern era have no trouble in reconciling the two disciplines. For example, Dr. Francis Collins, who succeeded Watson as head of the Human Genome Project at the National Institutes of Health, is a devout Christian, as well as a holder of doctoral degrees in medicine and chemistry. Fr. Stanley L. Jaki, a Templeton Prize winner with doctorates in theology and physics, is a Benedictine priest who has been internationally recognized for his work in bridging the gap between science and religion.

Even such eminent non-Christian physicists as Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking have realized that science can take one’s fundamental understanding only so far. In his view of cosmology -- the existence of the universe -- Einstein accepted “the necessity for a beginning” and “the presence of a superior reasoning power.” For Hawking, “the actual point of creation lies outside the scope of presently known laws of physics.”

So how can brilliant men such as Watson and Crick fail to see the hand of God in creation? Personal observations, and the conclusions drawn from them, may have had something to do with it. Watson finds fault with various claims by individual religious persons throughout history that science has disproven, such as the assertion by Irish archbishop James Ussher (1581-1656) that the world was created in 4004 B.C. Crick concluded as a child during World War II that “the [Catholic] church was just a bunch of fascists that supported Franco.” By precluding faith as a contributing resource to their overall understanding of existence, based on the incorrect beliefs and actions of some, Watson and Crick may have deprived the world of even greater insights that their more balanced view of creation could have provided.

Watson claims to have started a revolution by helping to provide “grounds for thinking that the powers held traditionally to be the exclusive property of the gods might one day be ours.” To call this wishful thinking would be charitable; it is arrogant thinking. Joyce Kilmer’s most famous work, "Trees," concludes, “Poems are made by fools like me, but only God can make a tree.” Those who can only observe the world and its wonders, but who had no part in creating it, are necessarily limited in understanding (and hence overvaluing) the importance of what may prove to be, once human history has completely unfurled, mere baby steps forward in human knowledge. But in another sense, baby steps are good, if taken in childlike trust and emulation of the God who became like one of us and died on a Tree, so that we might live forever -- glorified DNA included.

Posted 3:27 PM by John
“Shock and awe” has become the catchphrase that describes the strategy that the United States and other coalition forces are now employing to liberate the people of Iraq from the grotesque regime of Saddam Hussein. The phrase is meant to succinctly describe the concept whereby a campaign of psychological propaganda, followed by the overwhelming, yet precise use of military force, engenders so much fear in the leadership and power structure that the dissolution of the government will soon follow. Thus far, the strategy appears to be meeting with early limited success.

Could this approach, with its origins in ancient Chinese philosophy, be successfully employed in spiritual warfare as well as physical warfare? There is much to recommend its use, first on ourselves, and thereafter on our culture and our world.

Although it has obtained a pejorative connotation in popular usage, “propaganda,” the systematic propagation of information, is a good thing. In the free societies of the world (this does not include Iraq -- yet), men and women have a natural moral duty, compatible with their states in life, to seek information with respect to universal norms and truths for humanity, as well as information as to how such norms and truths should be applied to authentic living in their own cultures. In the current “Information Age,” some information sources will be found to be more trustworthy than others, but this has always been the case. The goal of this continual formative process is for all persons who participate in it to eventually become active systems of propagating the truth as lived in reality -- and the joy that comes from living the truth.

Anyone who is thus enlighted is then ready to administer a personal “shock” to the contemporary culture of death. Like propaganda, shock is sometimes a good thing. The medical device known as a defibrillator acts by administering a shock to a person’s heart. Such devices can be implanted internally, to regulate needed electronic impulses, as well as externally -- in fact, there have been steps taken in recent years to made automated external defibrillators more available in public places, such as federal buildings. So, when necessary, those who have the power of truth should not be afraid to supply an external shock to hearts that have turned stone-cold (cf. Ezekiel 11:19).

A deepening reflection on the power supply for this truth is where the “awe” part of the “shock and awe” strategy is implemented. The power for living itself is given by God. It is He who sustains all -- certainly including President Bush as well as Saddam, if he is still alive -- and it is the Prince of Peace who offers the grace of conversion and growth in holiness to all, even adversaries in war. To every individual in the world, God extends an invitation to respond to the natural law written in each heart, to be united with Him, even as He chose to be united with us in all things but sin. In even a lifetime of contemplation, we can never fully comprehend that he willingly would have done this for each one of us individually. Holy fear of the Lord is a very good thing. Our God is an awesome God -- all-powerful, but also all-merciful. May His strategy succeed with us.

Posted 7:27 AM by John
On a recent broadcast, talk show host Glenn Beck -- whose pro-America rallies are drawing thousands in cities across the United States -- made some thought-provoking observations on how the symbiotic link between media programming and advertising is contributing to the degradation of human culture.

As Beck sees it, the dependency relationship between programming and advertising is the reverse of what is commonly understood. Beck claims that the primary function of every television and radio show, including his own, is to motivate viewers and listeners to patronize the show’s advertisers, rather than to provide popular programming which then exposes the advertisers’ message to the collective audience. Unquestionably, apart from government-subsidized public broadcasting (which has not been free from criticism regarding some of its program selections), radio and TV shows would not exist except for advertising.

A second, related point expounded upon by Beck is that maintenance of the consumers’ status quo does not serve the interest of media advertisers. To the contrary, advertisers seek to artificially create needs in their potential customers, and then capitalize on such needs. What they are telling us, says Beck, is that “you’re not complete unless you have this [product of theirs],” although “the truth is, you’re born complete.” Beck’s commentary during the recent broadcast had included discussion of a number of incidents involving teenagers whose actions indicated departures from this natural personal integrity -- throwing smoke bombs in a crowded school cafeteria, engaging in oral sex on a school bus.

The realization that the modern communications media can be culturally and commercially subverted by those with a vested interest in doing so is not new. As early as 1951, pioneering media critic Marshall McLuhan (“the medium is the message”) pointed out that the objective of advertisers was the manipulation, exploitation and control of individuals. In 1964, McLuhan could already see that man was translating his life “into the spiritual form of information.” Although he was a Christian and hence shared the belief that humans have free will to choose good or evil, McLuhan nevertheless also appreciated that because the social influence of the media had become so pervasive, “we become what we behold.”

Heeding the warnings of McLuhan’s prophetic voice, organizations like the Rev. Donald Wildmon’s American Family Association have served for years as advocates for traditional values in the media. The AFA, formerly the National Federation for Decency, has taken the initiative in alerting concerned citizens to the immoral nature of specific programs, providing lists of the advertisers for such programs, and on occasion organized successful consumer boycotts of national advertisers who were leading sponsors of sex, violence and profanity on TV.

In a world of increasing tension and uncertainty, it becomes all the more important to hold the solid ground. There needs to be a greater understanding that those who would seek to manipulate the behavior of all, particularly the young and the socially impressionable, have objectives in mind which may be in conflict with the best interests of peaceful moral living. Passively internalizing each day’s commercial bombardment without critical reflection is not an option. Adopting strategies to reduce the risk of danger from media influence, and even selectively attacking the sources of harm as the AFA does, are better choices. Spiritual warfare should be treated as such. If we become what we behold, let us put on the armor of God, seek His face, and live victoriously in His will.

Posted 4:57 AM by John
Seventy years ago this past week, in his first inaugural address, President Franklin D. Roosevelt assured a nation in the throes of the Great Depression that “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself -- nameless, unreasoning unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.” Current events in the world and in my personal life have led me to think about these famous words, even as the Christian church begins the reflective and penitential season of Lent.

On the international front, the collective attention is riveted on events in Iraq. Since the events of September 11, 2001, the primary focus of Roosevelt’s successor, George W. Bush, has been the global confrontation of terrorists. The war on terror impelled President Bush to conduct the military campaign in Afganistan against the Taliban government and the operatives of al Qaeda who took refuge there. Now in imminent prospect is the disarmament of Iraq’s dictatorial regime under Saddam Hussein, which for over a decade has not complied with the United Nations-brokered peace terms following the 1991 Gulf War.

The president has emphasized repeatedly that if Saddam does not voluntarily rid his government of known weapons of mass destruction, the United States and a coalition of willing nations will disarm him by force. There are now about a quarter million military personnel standing by in the region, awaiting orders to execute Saddam’s involuntary “option.” While there are various scenarios for how the resulting war would play out, almost certainly there will be American casualties -- sons, daughters, husbands, wives, brothers and sisters of those who are stateside.

But even the homefront is no longer completely safe. In the aftermath of 9/11, acts of terrorism are now deemed probable within the United States as well, and the government’s initial strategy for coping with the new reality includes five color-coded threat levels. With open suggestions by high officials that it might be prudent for households to prepare emergency kits that should contain duct tape and plastic in the event of a biological or chemical incident, and disclosures of attack plans such as those apparently being communicated by captured al Qaeda leader Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the combined effect has been to raise the national tension to heights similar to those experienced in the early days of World War II or the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.

As my family does its best to cope with these national dangers, I have also had to face the possibility of unemployment. My current position with my employer has been terminated, and I now have less than a week to either secure another position with the employer or find employment elsewhere. In this, too, I know that I am sharing an experience that thousands of Americans are facing in this period of economic downturn. But I still wonder how things are going to turn out, and how long it might take me to find another job to support my wife and children.

My faith tells me that “fear is useless, what is needed is trust” (Luke 8:50), and “perfect love casts out fear” (1 John 4:18). I also know that family and friends are praying for me. Nevertheless, for the last week or so, I have experienced the physical symptoms of stress. My reaction must not be unusual, since in every Catholic Mass, the priest implores God to “protect us from all anxiety.” My reactions to life’s current pressures must be a universal tendency. I do realize that I have relatively little to be anxious about, compared to many in the world who do not have even life’s necessities, but even this knowledge has not removed my burden. (Nor, on a less somber note, does the fact that some people even seek to experience fear as entertainment -- witness the TV reality show “Fear Factor” -- provide me with any consolation.)

In the same Mass prayer, the invocation for protection from anxiety is made “as we wait in joyful hope for the coming of our Savior.” For the Christian, the antidote to paralyzing fear is certainly here. And FDR was also correct -- we must convert retreat into advance. What is needed is an act of the will that can surmount sensate fear. When such act is personally done, the soul will have more room for the joy of authentic living in whatever circumstances ensue. When fear itself is conquered in solidarity, as a community and a nation, all will be more fully alive -- and the terrorists who would deal death will be defeated.

Posted 7:22 PM by John
Their commitment to the cause cannot be doubted. In the knowledge that an overwhelming use of lethal force may be imminent, these men and women still choose to be where they are, secure in their mission even though those whom they are attempting to protect are total strangers. They are perfectly willing to risk ridicule, ostracism and even hostility, because they are convinced that their cause is just. By offering their own bodies as human shields, it is their hope that even at such a late hour, the threatened violence can somehow be averted.

These brave souls are ordinary citizens, “ordinary Joes.” In fact, one of them is named Joe -- Joe Scheidler. But you won’t find this Joe protecting any of Saddam Hussein’s military targets in Iraq. Instead, Joe Scheidler is busy planning strategy for more pro-life activism in the wake of this week’s victory in the United States Supreme Court. On February 26, the Supreme Court held in an 8-to-1 decision in Scheidler v. National Organization for Women that the federal statute known as the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) did not apply to actions by Scheidler and other members of the Pro-Life Action League that disrupted business at abortion clinics, since such actions do not constitute extortion, one of the elements necessary to constitute a violation of RICO.

Although the scope of the victory for the pro-life movement in the Scheidler case is not expansive, particularly since other laws -- including another federal statute, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994 (FACE) -- can still be invoked against those who would be human shields for the unborn in America, pro-lifers have learned to appreciate any legal tool, no matter how small, that is useful in chipping away the colossus of Roe v. Wade, now in its fourth decade of holding sway as the law of the land according to a majority of the Surpreme Court.

Anyone who has been involved with counseling and other nonviolent direct action at abortion clinics realizes that the apostolic work done there can be infinitely fruitful. Many have been blessed to personally know individuals whose lives were spared because of such dedicated action.

The human shields now on the ground in Iraq, giving them the benefit of the doubt, may have similar high aspirations for their efforts. But they are collaborating with the regime of a ruthless, genocidal dictator who continues to flout international law, rather than entering common cause with the Author of Life. And if the end result of their choice to voluntarily leave the ranks of noncombatants is “Western body parts [flying] around with Iraqi ones,” as one of their leaders has put it, what purpose will be served?

Posted 7:45 AM by John
One of the guests on Bill O’Reilly’s Radio Factor show this week expressed her displeasure at President Bush’s continued invocation of religion in his speeches. The guest conceded that it is acceptable for a president to hold personally whatever religious view he chooses, but she argued that it is unacceptable -- indeed, violative of church/state constitutional concerns -- if the president then expresses this view in the exercise of his office.

Such criticism is not new. In 2001, ABC News ran a feature story which questioned the propriety of President Bush’s Christian words and actions, such as praying with foreign officials, in his public life.

But how principled are these contentions? There are certainly no prohibitions of religious expression in Article II of the United States Constitution, which covers the executive branch of the federal government. The oath of office, as set forth in Article II, requires that each new president swear or affirm that he will “faithfully execute the office,” and that, to the best of his ability, he will “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.” Interestingly, George Washington, and almost every president, have seen fit to add the words “so help me God” at the end of their oaths (Washington also kissed the Bible upon completing his oath).

Some of the greatest presidents, and some of the most recent, have indicated in their public pronouncements that the free exercise of religion, as guaranteed by the First Amendment, is not incompatible with political expression. To cite but a few examples:

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men & citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man ought to respect & to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private & public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the Oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure--reason & experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
George Washington, Farewell Address

"The proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right. ... All men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and... the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."
Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom

"Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said, 'The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.' With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."
Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address

"This nation has placed its destiny in the hands, heads and hearts of its millions of free men and women, and its faith in freedom under the guidance of God. Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere."
Franklin D. Roosevelt, “Four Freedoms” Speech

"Let us let our own children know that we will stand against the forces of fear. When there is talk of hatred, let us stand up and talk against it. When there is talk of violence, let us stand up and talk against it. In the face of death, let us honor life. As St. Paul admonished us, let us not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."
Bill Clinton, Oklahoma City Speech

"The course of this conflict is not known, yet its outcome is certain. Freedom and fear, justice and cruelty, have always been at war, and we know that God is not neutral between them. Fellow citizens, we'll meet violence with patient justice -- assured of the rightness of our cause, and confident of the victories to come. In all that lies before us, may God grant us wisdom, and may He watch over the United States of America."
George W. Bush, Address to Congress, September 20, 2001

In view of the domestic and international situation now faced by Americans, why should the leader of the government relinquish the divine assistance so readily sought and welcomed by George Washington and many of his successors? Are those who say that President Bush should not “mix” religion and politics the same people who would deprive United States citizens of continuing to pledge their allegiance as one nation “under God”? At an hour of supreme need, why would any of us ever want to publicly abandon the “protection of divine Providence,” upon whom our Founders based the mutual pledge of their “sacred honor”?