November 2007 Archives

A woman miscarried and, being suspicious, had her blood tested where they found abortion drug RU-486. She alerted the sheriff who arrested her boyfriend. She doesn't know when she might have ingested it so I'd argue they might not have a case but it's an interesting case nonetheless.

This is just a naked form (if you'll pardon the pun) of what men often do when their girlfriends get pregnant — i.e., force them to have abortions, whether covertly or openly, using threats. A side of abortion the pro-choice people don't want you to see, the seedy underbelly, as it were.

Gotta love that photo though of the accused. A trance-like, faraway look. Does not improve his looks, that's for sure. (I wonder if there is a rule against smiling for your mug shot, or if it's merely custom [and foul mood] that binds nearly everyone to avoid it.)

According to the missive that alerted me to this, but not stated in the above article, the man faces multiple felonies, including first-degree intentional homicide of an unborn child.

A while back I was worked up about some gross wrong which got me thinking about whether it was legitimate to rejoice in the thought of wrongdoers suffering in Hell. Not specific individuals, to be sure, but classes of individuals, say, Islamic terrorists. Of course we are asked to pray for our enemies, and Jesus wills that all men be saved, and forgiveness is essential to Christianity. There is a sense in which we (or, at least, I) get so fixated on the mercy and lovingkindness of God that I feel guilty to get angry with the wicked. But let's face it, those condemned to Hell are justly condemned. Scripture says not to take vengeance not because vengeance is not merited but because God is the only one who can mete it out justly, so when all is said and done and the mercy is exhausted and the graces are spurned, if God does it, can we not rejoice in it? We see the martyrs in Revelation crying out for vengeance, after all.

What I didn't know until more recently is that some saints claim by private revelation (if I am not mistaken) that the angels and saints actually do rejoice when a soul goes to Hell on account of the justice being done. I had never heard this before but I find it intriguing. Naturally being private revelation we can't put too much stock in it but maybe I shouldn't feel quite so guilty when my sense of indignation and justice overflows and I want God to execute vengeance if the persons do not repent (which of course is my first prayer).

This reminds me of the classic question, can we be happy in heaven if our loved ones are not there? I know I have loved ones who have died I was very close to but who seem to have a doubtful destiny. One answer I've come up with is that we will have such a clear appreciation for the true nature of sin and what these people have done (however trifling it seemed while we were on earth) that our affection will turn to repugnance and we will actually want them to be condemned and we will agree with the judgment. (Of course, wanting someone to be condemned then, with perfect knowledge and pure intentions, is very different from wanting on earth someone to be condemned. We should not cultivate here on earth a desire for individuals to be condemned.)

Perhaps it's OK to rejoice in the condemnation of the wicked as long as it remains in the abstract and not in singling out individuals. Any thoughts?

Sorry that it's been so long since a post, I was out most of last week on vacation to a friend's house (a most gracious host) and had no opportunity to blog.

The latest news this week is that Iran may bring the pope into the conflict with the U.S.. They know the pope is opposed to war, and they've enjoyed somewhat warm relations with the Holy See for quite some time. It's a political ploy, of course, but it may work. The Holy See would act as mediator.

Should be interesting to see what position the Holy See takes vis a vis nuclear weapons.

The pope is releasing a new encyclical on hope soon. Also he is going to release another one further out on social issues. (No word whether the theme will be centered on "faith".)

"Monsignor Valentin Miserachs Grau, the director of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music, believes the entire church should return to Gregorian chance."

Is that, er, an ancient game that was played by the great pope?

The context was an article on Gregorian chants, or really, chant, and the revival the Pope is launching of it. Makes one wonder if they submitted the article over the phone.

Boy I'd like to hear the reaction of people who thought John Paul was conservative (I never did). This is just another sign Benedict has clearly made his rightward mark on the church. Anyway the traditionalists (among whom I definitely do not count myself) are rejoicing I am sure.

The scientist who created the "theraputic cloning" technique used to clone Dolly the sheep and who is the de facto leader of the embryonic stem cell research crowd has abandoned the technique of cloning because a much more efficient and "socially acceptable" (read: ethical) approach has been discovered in Japan. The new approach uses skin cells to create adult stem cells.

This is wonderful news and will send shockwaves throughout the scientific community. The ocean liner has been headed in the embryonic stem cell direction, but now it may very well turn around and embrace adult stem cells (which are more promising anyway).

I went today with my church and St. Nicholas Orthodox Church to the Museum of Russian Icons in Clinton, MA which was just fascinating. It's a private collection of around 200 icons owned by a Congregationalist entrepreneur, who opened the museum specifically to exhibit his collection. There are small icons and large icons from 1450 to 2006. I saw a 2006 icon portraying the life of Andre Rublev (writer of what may be the most famous icon in history, the Holy Trinity) that was in my opinion the most beautiful icon I've ever seen, very vibrant in colors and fine in detail. It cost $6,000 (but of course it was not for sale). I fell in love with it! But it was not meant to be. I am low on cash right now anyway. :-) Anyway they have some of the icons on their website, so check them out.

[Following Greg's suggestion I'm promoting this from a comment; thanks, Greg.]

In a post not too long ago I expressed frustration at the lack of an official term for the Latin/Tridentine Mass, and RC had pointed out that the motu proprio does refer to the 1962 Roman Missal as the "Missal of Bl. John XXIII", used in celebrations of the "extraordinary form of the Roman Rite". I am aware of such language (at least insofar as the "extraordinary form" is concerned) but I consider it too circumlocutory and awkward. If it suffices to call it the Mass of John XXIII that would be adequate. But getting into the "extraordinary form of the Roman Rite" gets a bit dicey in my book; you can't just say, "I'm going to the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite this morning, how about you?" or worse, "I'm going to the Mass according to the Missal of Blessed John XXIII of the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite this morning." It just doesn't work. No one is going to ditch "Latin Mass" (three syllables) for a 23-syllable monstrosity.

I have the same complaint about the new title for EMEs, "Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion of the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Altar". Ok so that's not exactly it but it feels like it. Fourteen syllables to articulate who those people are administering communion. I think I've ranted about this before; I think perhaps we should call them emhcs (EHM-hicks) if we must use that term. Mbjtefrr doesn't have quite the same ring.

After years of dialogue and no doubt lots of money, a join theological commission has concluded that Catholics and Orthodox agree on the primacy of the pope but disagree on its significance.

In other startling news, the pope is Catholic.

Sheesh, what did these folks do all this time? Was it just all bickering? Is this all they have to show for their time? So sad ...

It's official: The Pope is coming to the U.S., specifically New York (ground zero, U.N.) and Washington D.C. from April 15-20. This is like deja vu to me; I saw John Paul in New York in 1995 or 1996. And the folks I stayed with who were such generous hosts have since left and returned to the area. Things come almost full circle.

Of course, I got 20 feet away from Pope Benedict when I was in Rome, whereas I couldn't even make out John Paul's face with binoculars when I saw him in Central Park, so maybe I'll pass this time.

The New York times is conceding that the Latin (Tridentine) Mass is drawing interest — even from people too young to have experienced the Mass in the old days. Liturgies are drawing hundreds of people, they say. But it won't become a flood of people; nor will everything shift to the old Mass. In a way it is nice to hear that from them, because when Benedict instituted the greater freedom for the Latin Mass, some were acting as if everything was going to reverse itself and the old Mass would become the new norm. Such talk was absurd but it is good to hear it from a source they'd presumably be likely to believe.

I liked one girl's comment. She said she thought it was "prettier". Indeed as I was at Mass today looking at a felt banner spanning the altar that reminded me of an elementary school art project, I fantasized about replacing it with a silk banner woven with gold thread. Or at least, one that was a reasonable facsimile of gold. (Too much time in the Byzantine rite.)

This of course is in a sense my problem with the Latin Mass: There is no reason why the Ordo Mass (the current one) can't be celebrated with equal reverence and splendor. It's just that — nobody does (or, few do).

Well, that's the way things go, I guess.

One more thing I'd like to have from Rome: An elegant official term for this Mass so we can refer to it without any inaccuracies.

Relax, it's not so bad. Apparently someone discovered a hidden musical score in The Last Supper.

Pro-life pharmacists in Washington State won a victory when a judge ruled that they do not need to be forced to fill prescriptions for drugs they have moral objections to provided they refer patients to another pharmacist or pharmacy if no pharmacist is available.

This of course is good news. Of course you still have to refer people, and I'm wondering how that plays into the moral aspect. Once can certainly argue that referring people is as bad as filling the prescription yourself. Or one can argue that it's under compulsion so you're not culpable. But isn't it more meritorious to disobey an unjust law (one that compels you to do what is wrong) than to obey it? See this is why I think that pro-life people should stay out or get out of the pharmacy business.

Here is an unlikely pair: Pope Benedict XVI and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, probably one of the most oppressive regimes towards Christians in the whole world (the first ever meeting of a pope with a reigning Saudi king). Top on the agenda is working on softening the kingdom's treatment of Christians. It is illegal to practice Christianity publicly in the kingdom, to bring any Christian symbols into it, or for a Christian to set foot near the holy sites of Medina and Mecca or to serve in the government.

The meeting was warm.

UPDATE: I neglected to mention that the good king gave the Pope a gold sword as a gift. How thoughtful. Not sure if this was technically a threat or not. (Actually it's their standard gift, but that doesn't mean it isn't a threat.) Maybe it was a good faith effort to allow him to defend himself. (Yeah, with a soft metal weapon.)

Newsweek had an article this week about knocking yourself up — that is, independent-minded women who decide that fathers are a trifling thing and instead of finding a husband (or even just a partner) and settling down, they will break out the turkey baster and proudly (or is that shamelessly?) inseminate themselves. There is even a book: "Knock Yourself Up: A Tell-All Guide to Becoming a Single Mom."

Single motherhood by choice. According to the article, "Unwed births among 30- to 44-year-olds rose 20 percent from 1991 to 2006, and last year alone, four in 10 U.S. babies were born outside of marriage even though teen pregnancies hit their lowest point in 65 years. Fairfax Cryobank, one of the biggest sperm banks in the United States, says its single-female clientele jumped 20 percent in the last decade and now accounts for 60 percent of its customer base."

So feminism, after having achieved its goal of equality, now intends to eliminate the need for the opposite sex as best as it can. As I suspected the goal was never merely equality. Feminism has turned men into enemies or at least optional extras rather than equal partners.

Fact is children do a lot better with a mother and a father than otherwise, though they try to wave their hands over this one claiming that once you adjust studies on single parents for economic factors, the gap narrows. (I suppose a lot hinges on what you mean by "do better" and how you measure it.)

It does shock me still that we've come to this point in society where women willingly choose single motherhood with a turkey baster. It seems so selfish, so brash. Well soon enough we'll have women conceiving daughters by parthenogenesis. Then Jesus may not be the only virgin birth.

Today is the Feast of All Saints in the Catholic Church. It gives us many things to reflect on. First of all, what is a saint? Simply put, a saint is a holy one -- a holy person, or even a holy angel. By this definition we all are saints, all of us following the Lord, and the Catechism says as much (#823). In fact this is expressed in the Creed when it refers to the "communion of saints". The communion of saints means that there is a sort of mystical fellowship and connection among all the saints, such that when "one part suffers, every part [of the Body of Christ] suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it" (1 Cor 12:26).

So we are all saints, and we have a connection with one another which we call the communion of saints. Traditionally this extends to those who are asleep in Christ, which is why we ask them for their intercession. Not that we seek to "communicate" with them or engage in divination, which has to with receiving information from the dead; we seek merely to submit requests for prayer, and do not at all expect communication from them in return. As it says in Revelation 5, the saints in heaven are carrying our prayers to the throne of God.

The feast today focuses on those saints who have completed their race and are in their full glory in heaven. It is the feast day for saints not recognized on the calendar, who have not been canonized. It's a feast day for our faithful relatives who have reposed and all those millions of unknown saints who have died and reached eternal rest. Glory to God! They have fought the good fight; they have finished the race; they have kept the faith. May they encourage us now in the race we run (Hebrews 12).