Mahoney's tough choice - how to evict nuns

The Santa Barbara Independent: Priests Prey, Sisters Pay: Nuns to Be Evicted: It’s “wrong,” Sister Angela believes, for the small Eastside convent where she’s lived since 1964 to be sold to help pay for the sins of priests accused of molesting children. Sisters of Bethany have been serving the low-income neighborhood since the 1950s, but now must leave due to church scandals within the L.A. Archdiocese. “What hurts so much is what they want to use [the sale proceeds] for,” Sister Superior Angela, 69, told me. “In conscience, I can’t say that’s right.” Cardinal Mahoney makes it hard to be a good Catholic. As good Catholics we want to follow the lead of our bishops. But why does he do so many decisions that appear so wrong? How do you sell a convent when you have that prison styled "cathedral" that cost about $190,000,000? And do you know what the diocesan paper "The Tidings" headlined with this week? Celebrating 5 years of the Rog Mahal. They called the "Cathedral" an awe-filled space. Awful space is more like it. What an absolutely horrible, horrible steward. He has closed the beautiful old Cathedral. Closed two seminaries. Has protected pedophiles (and his own legal behind). Given us a monstrosity, and then has the gall to sing its praises while he evicts nuns who actually do real ministry. Is there anyone else who finds this sickening? As followers of Christ we are to act with justice and mercy. Cardinal, how are you doing this? How is this just? How is this merciful? You have stained and sullied the long and honorable history of the diocese of Los Angeles. Sell the monstrosity of a Cathedral. Move into one of the local parishes (maybe one that needs a priest), and save these nuns! In the meantime, if anyone knows where I can make a contribution to help these nuns, please leave it in my com box!

Shutting Out The Silence

Silence is an endangered commodity in the modern world. And we may be the worse off for it. Where has all the silence gone? Do you remember when cell phones first started appearing? I recall feeling sorry for this busy professional in the early ‘80s answer a phone in a grocery store because of their electronic leash. I did not realize I was looking at myself and everyone else that I know. Now we have text messaging and wireless email access, with 1000s of minutes and people talking on the phone constantly. I remember the time before Ipods, a time even before Walkmans. Remember that time? Sure there were portable radios, but nothing like what we have today. Anyone ride a subway in the past few years? Everyone is tuned in, with noise continuously pouring through little white earbuds. I remember when there where 7 VHF TV channels and a few on UHF that no one ever really watched. Now we have hundreds of channels and no time to watch any of it. I remember the time before the Internet, and before computers. This was a time without email or instant messages or message boards or blogs. When someone wanted to get a hold of you, they had to call (and there weren’t answering machines either) or write you a letter, or come over to see you. All of the technology over the past 25 years has had a dramatic impact on our lives and culture. A lot of it has been very good. Some of it has not. Perhaps the greatest damage has been to silence. In the silence we could ponder the world and our place in it. We did not need to constantly react. We could reflect, at least a little, and then act. We could attend to God. God is found in the whispering wind and the silence of our hearts. If we do not allow silence, we cannot hear Him. It is a symptom of our society that we shut out the silence. We do not want to hear what is in that silence. It is calling us, but we drown the silence with our activity, with our noise. We fear that it is calling us to change; to repent. But we don't want to. So we plug in, and turn up the volume. We keep moving, and talking, and reacting; never just being and listening. Take time today to create some silence. And listen.

Modern Ezra & Nehemiah

This week I read Ezra and Nehemiah. And something struck me about the parallel between these two biblical figures and Pope Benedict. Ezra restored right worship of the Lord, and rebuilt the temple in Jerusalem. Nehemiah rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem so the City could be re-established after it had been destroyed. Both books were about restoring God's law in his city and in the hearts of his people. The release of the Moto Proprio, Summorum Pontificum strikes me as directly parallel to Ezra re-establishing worship and rebuilding the temple. The Holy Father is seeking to restore the right worship to the Church - not by requiring that all return to the Extraordinary form of the right, but by setting in place an influence to control the rampant liturgical abuses and the lack of the sacred found so often in the current ordinary form of the Latin Rite. As with Ezra, there are some who do not want this. But restoration of the sacred is what we need, and what many who feel exiled within our own Church need. The document released by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith "Regarding Certain Aspects of Church Doctrine" is akin to Nehemiah rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem. Nehemiah re-established the borders of the City of God. He strengthened its defenses so that it could again be inhabited and defended by His chosen people. The Pope, through this document, clearly establishes the border of the Church. He is re-stating, and strengthening the defenses against those would see the boundaries erased and relativism installed as god. Of course those outside of the Church take offense - just as Sanballat and Tobiah grew angry. There were even those among the Jewish people who conspired with those outside to stop Nehemiah, as Shemaiah conspired with Sanballat and Tobiah. Similarly, today we see those who are nominally within the Church trying to undermine the work of the Pope on this and other issues. In these old testament cases we see opposition to rebuilding Jerusalem. Today, we have something similar, as Pope Benedict, building on the work of Pope John Paul, calls the people back from the error of their ways so the Church can be strengthened. The question is where do you stand. Do you stand with those seeking to keep the Church weak, or will you give your efforts to building Christ's own Church? I, for one, will serve the Lord by offering my labor in the service of building and strengthening his Church.

No return?

Dale at Dyspeptic Mutterings had a post titled "Past the point of no return": It is about the rift between the liberal and orthodox Catholics. Here is an excerpt: "Allen is right that there's a canyon between the tribes, and the problem is at its root one of trust. But, sadly, he's wrong to think that any amount of discussion and building of 'safe spaces' is going to heal the fissure. Only time can do that now." I like Dale's blog and am a regular reader. I think that this article is worth a read and a thought. I think that Dale is right and wrong. He is right that adopting a kumbaya, hold hands, create a safe place won't do squat. But waiting and doing nothing doesn't strike me as the correct or Christian response either. How are we to follow the Pope's dictate to evangelize when we cannot reconcile within our Church. Btw, in my mind, there are three groups liberals, orthodox, and then radical traditionalists forming a third group. There is heresy on the left and schism on the right - there are rifts on both sides of the path. What can we do? At the least, there is prayer. And there is standing up and speaking out. There is being leaven in the dough. Perhaps it is not enough, but it seems to me we need to continue regardless. Would listening work? I don't know. I do know that those on the left could use some hard headed thinking and the guidance of the Church to provide structure and grounding. And admittedly, some of us in the more orthodox camp could use a touch more compassion. The left needs to learn to not compromise values with a culture of death, the right needs to learn to reach out to those living in a complex world. What do you think?

Birth Stories - Grace

Here is part three of three (so far) for my birth stories. Part one (Maggie) can be found here. Part two (Mike) can be found here. This one is fresh in the memory being less than a year ago. I tell you Lynn has become a pro at this thing, and God blessed us with an uneventful pregnancy. The worst part was arguing with the doctor for all of the "tests" as we are in our late 30's. We kept telling him that it didn't matter to our decision so what was the point of extensive (and expensive) testing. That frustrated him some, but we figured it was our baby. We ended up going for screening (nothing more invasive than a blood test of Lynn's blood and family background interview), even then we thought it was a waste of time. It came back that our odds were much lower than average. But he still wanted to do an amnio and some other tests. We said no thanks. At the end, Lynn had a week of low level labor, but it seemed this little one didn't want to come out. Well on the night, I had my bowling league. Lynn called about half way through our third game. She asked how much longer I would be. I said about 20 minutes. She said she thought it was time and that I should not dally on my way home. Well, at that moment I was not as dumb as I can sometimes be, and I figured it was a bad idea to finish the game (this is a lot different than the Maggie story). Oh, for those who care, I was rockin' on the lanes that night. Well it was a good that I left when I did. It took 5 minutes to get home, and 15 to get to the hospital. This was late on the night of the 12th and we were really hoping to beat the 13th. Well, the doctor (who lives very close to the hospital) barely made it. We were in the hospital for about 30 minutes when Gracie showed up. The doctor rushed in as the baby was crowning (just in time to catch and handle post birth issues). It took Gracie a while to finally decide it was time, but once she was on the way, there was no stopping her.

Religious "tolerance" on display

OC Register - Religious tolerance on display: "Participants held hands to the strains of the Beatles' "All You Need is Love" while 20 white doves were released." Yikes! Anyone else concerned that the Baby Boomer generation has left us with a "theology of the Beatles?" Perhaps the UCI Academic Senate is pining for a bygone era. I guess the message is - forget what you think God says, you just need the Beatles and everything will be groovy.

On The Clergy

I read a post on Stephen Bainbridge's site about Cardinal Mahoney and a report by the LA Times. This article is about how Cardinal Mahoney should resign because, according to an LA Times article, Cardinal Mahoney had allegedly said two different things in regards to an abuse case. As one of the commenters pointed out, the issue may not be as straightforward as reported. This is only one example of the priest/bishop bashing that goes on in the allegedly Catholic Blogosphere. Now in terms of how we see the Church, Cardinal Mahoney is nowhere near where I stand on a lot of issues. There are many things Cardinal Mahoney has done that I am not pleased with - handling of the abuse cases, closing the minor and college seminaries, a reduction in support for Catholic education, tolerance of liturgical abuses, the albatross of a Cathedral we are stuck with, and the list can go on. I do miss Cardinal Manning who was the previous shepherd for the Los Angeles Archdiocese. All of that is insufficient for public displays of division. Publicly calling for the resignation of a bishop smacks of protestantism. We do not hire and fire our pastors - they are appointed to us. In the end, Cardinal Mahoney is the properly appointed head of the Church in Los Angeles. I do wish some of his fellow Cardinals would correct him as a brother, but it is not the place of the laity or even priests to publicly call for the ouster of a Cardinal of the Church. I am a relatively new Knight of Columbus , but one of the things that I like about the Knights is our loyalty to the Pope, our priests and the hierarchy of the Church. In fact, I have a button right next to my computer screen that says "In Solidarity With Our Priests." I agree wholeheartedly, EVEN WHEN IT IS HARD (especially when it is hard). I wish more of those who see themselves as faithful would hold their tongues in public instead of joining the mainstream media in publicly attacking our Church.

More sacred than human life...

In Idle speculations: Hybrid embryos: fait accompli?, Terry discusses a rather depressing article: Scientists triumph in battle over ban on hybrid embryos. Here they discuss creating clones by injecting human DNA into animal eggs (so they can get fetal stem cells). It looks to me like the remote possibility of curing Alzheimer's is more sacred in our society than human life itself. What does that say about Western culture? We will sacrifice our young in the attempt to cure the old (and Michael J. Fox).

John Edwards - How wishy washy can you get?

Edwards apologizes for 2002 war vote - Yahoo! News So Edwards wants to do a mea culpa on the war vote. How wishy washy is this man? Why did he support it in the first place? There was no evidence at the time that justified it, remember - it was part of that wrong-headed preemptive war strategy. But it was popular then, so I guess it was OK. Now the war is not popular, so he is against it. Clearly a man of conviction. I have a different position. Going into this war was wrong. I have always thought this. However, once we entered we committed ourselves. We must follow through on our commitments. We must do what is right by the people whose society we have destabilized. We must do what is right, not what is popular, or less costly, or safe, or politically expeditious - what is right. As for Edwards, he has already shown he doesn't understand doing what is right versus popular (heck, look at how he handled the anti-Catholic pro-death bloggers he refused to fire).

When do we get to see the REAL candidates?

The upcoming presidential race is already looking unfortunate. The leading candidates on the Democratic side are woefully inadequate when it comes to pro-life and gay agenda issues - no surprise there. In fact, Edwards hired anti-Catholics and refuses to fire them. Obama is dangerous because he wants to talk like he has values, but wants to sell us a left wing agenda. Kind of like Bush's compassionate conservatism where there really wasn't any compassion - same thing, but from a liberal side. And Hillary is just Hillary - she is so pro-abortion it isn't funny. But be careful, she learned to dance around the truth from an absolute expert. I have no idea what I am going to do for the primary - write myself in I guess. On the Republican side, Giuliani is basically a Democrat on life and gay agenda issues. Voting for him would be about as bad as voting for Hillary. Here is a something I got from ontheissues.org: “I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights,” Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. “No, I have not supported that, and I don’t see my position on that changing,” he responded. Why would any pro-lifer vote for this joker. You get the worst of both parties - a culture of death social policy, with Republican disdain for the downtrodden. Sorry, this is the WORST of both worlds. With McCain and Romney, at least they are saying the right things, but both are flip-floppers. We may end up with one of these as the Republican candidate. Brownback? He is right on all the life and gay agenda issues! For everything else, he is terrible: environment, helping the downtrodden, etc. Unless you are a big corporation, Sam won't be there for your. Sorry, my pro-life agenda doesn't end at birth. Basically, before it even starts I know there is no candidate that represents me. Gee, another election among people that I don't want. Great.

Nightline Feb-22 2007

I just watched Nightline (2/22/07), and there was a report of an organization that exemplifies the culture of death and the extreme selfishness in our culture. The company, ironically, is called Abraham Center for Life. This unethical company gets select (PhD) sperm donors, matches them to attractive egg donors and sends the donated eggs and sperm for in vitro fertilization. These are then sold to infertile couples. Aside from the fact that in vitro fertilization results in the deaths and freezing of countless embryos (i.e., human life), this procedure amounts to creating designer babies. This logical conclusion from the current system is abhorrent, and represent another step in the cheapening of human life. This is not about providing needed homes for unwanted children, this is about creating life for selfish ends. The couple interviewed in the piece demonstrate how such a despicable organization can survive. This couple decided to not have kids because of career (read selfish), then found out they couldn’t have them. In the report, when asked why they want children, it came down to that it was expected, that it would be “nice to breastfeed and bond with a baby.” How can our society accept this? How are there people who would do this? Lord, have mercy, for we are unworthy.

UN presses Colombia on abortion access

Catholic World News : UN presses Colombia on abortion access: "While commending Colombia for the recent court decision that decriminalized abortion in cases of rape, fetal malformation, or the endangerment of the health of the mother, CEDAW committee members were quick to ask the delegation what the Colombian government’s plans were to ensure compliance with the new constitutional decision; they asked about further loosening of abortion restrictions. " My perspective: The UN needs to focus on solving real issues - not spreading the concept of murder. They can't seem to be relevant anywhere else, so they'll just aim at propogating evil. Hmmm.

December 7th & Pearl Harbor

Today is the day that the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941. It marked the entry of the US into World War II - one of the most trying times in world history. If ever there was a just war, this was it. Multitudes lost their lives, but when the cause is just, we must stand firm. Let's remember those lessons from the past today. You can click here to listen to FDR's speech to congress on December 8, 1941. One of the most famous in history. Hat tip to Shirley Buxton. Tags: World War II, Pearl Harbor

Eliminating Christ

The effort to eliminate Christ from the public square is not just a U.S. thing. Because we live in a free country, it is our right to stand up and shout out that this is wrong. Because we are Christian, it is our duty and our privelege to shout our belief from the mountain tops for all to hear. Tags: Christianity, Politics

Hi Mom

When I was a teen/twenty-something, I used to wonder why everyone always said "Hi Mom" when they were on TV. Oh you would get the occasional "Hi Dad" or "Hi Mom & Dad" or a random smattering of others. But "Hi Mom" is the standard. Now, never having the opportunity to become a Mom, I felt cheated. But that just goes to show that I did not know better. After seeing my three children delivered. I can begin to understand. Boy, I am glad I don't "get" to experience that. After reeking havoc to your body for 9 months, with everyone wanting to touch your stomach, with getting kicked and pummeled from the inside, and not having any room for your lungs - you get to go through labor. Geez. Then, when the baby wakes up, Mom's get to take the lead here, at least for moms that breastfeed (dad's just don't have what it takes). Sure there is some sharing, but Mom's do take the lion's share here. All of this starts a pattern. There is a primary caregiver, and it is usually the mom. And from the time before birth, we see how nature reinforces and guides this pattern, but it is so much more than mere biology. The dyanamic between the mom and her child forms the basis for all future relationships. Here children learn that they are lovable and that they can trust. Wow. Sure we dads play a role, a large and important role, but not the one that moms play. The mom role is special - a role like no other. A nurse at my wife's Ob/Gyn was talking about how we dads had it lucky (not having labor and pregnancy). I reminded her that there were benefits too that we dads don't get. I asked if she had ever noticed that people always say "Hi Mom" on TV. Just a few thought from a third time new dad on the eve of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, the Mother of our Lord - and spiritual mother to us all. Tags: Moms

Al Qaida Denounces Pope

News Flash: Al Qaida doesn't like pope and they don't like him visiting Turkey. No surprise here. That whole needing to have reason with your faith just doesn't work for fanatics. I have noticed a pattern with the use of the term "Crusader." This is used derogatorily here and elsewhere when referring to the actions of "Western" countries that Al Qaida and other Muslims militants don't like. Remember when Bush changed the name of the operation when we invaded Afghanistan? In case any don't know, the Crusades saved Western civilization from being completely over-run by the Muslims when they invaded the Eastern Roman Empire. There were sins on both sides of that war, but the purpose of the Crusade was noble - and it did save "Western" civilization. A definite good thing. Tags: Pope, Al Qaida, Turkey, Crusades

In The Weeds

Click on picture to see a larger image. "In the weeds" is a term I learned in the corporate world. It is a term that means "so deep into the details that the big picture is missed." It is often a term derogatorily used in reference to a discussion or person in a meeting that is so focused on the details that they just don't get it. The image attached to this post shows what being lost in the weeds (or at least brush) looks like. That is my boy near the front making his way through the brush on one of our weekend adventures. His mom and his grandpa are in the background. With the brush so high, it is hard to see the boy – the brush is much bigger than he is. On this particular adventure, we had been wandering the paths around the Newport Back Bay. It was a beautiful November day (sunny, mid 70's), but as we kept trekking, we realized that we had gotten off the loop trail and were getting too far away from the car. With my wife pregnant and due at any moment (the baby was born the next day), we couldn’t afford to be far from transportation. But we could not see the fork in the trail that would get us back. We were so close to the brush, we just couldn’t see how to get where we wanted to go. Not being one for inaction, I led the way in search of the path. We first hit a dead-end, and had to reroute. We got up on a hill and I could see what looked like a line snaking through the brush. We had found the path! All it took was a bit of perseverance and a little perspective. When out and about in the world, we can find ourselves in some pretty thick vegetation. It can feel lonely or hopeless. But there is always a way through it. It takes perseverance and perspective to find the path, but it is there. You just have to have faith that you will find it. Tags: Perseverance, Faith, Being Lost

El Camino Real

Click on picture to see a larger image. I live near El Camino Real which connects all of the California missions. In Spanish, camino means road or way and real means royal or splendid. But real also means real (just like it is spelled in English). Typically, people translate it as the royal road, but I like the more poetic interpretation of the real way, or (if you will) the true path. Given my understanding of history, I know that my interpretation is not the most likely - but I suspect the padres may have enjoyed the play on words. The talk of paths gets to a topic I have thought about for years: the path that people are on (especially me). Being trained as a personality psychologist and raised a Catholic, I often thought about the concept of free will, a concept that most behavioral scientists flatly reject. The faith that most psychologists/scientists hold is that if they only knew all of the right variables, they could perfectly predict human behavior - it is completely determined. A corollary of this is that given all of the variables in play at any given time, a person can do no other than he or she does - there is no such thing as free will. Now, as a Catholic, this was a concept I rejected. Thankfully, I had an advisor who was very philosophically minded. We had many debates on philosophy of science, the existence of God, and free will - though I think I frustrated him on this particular issue. During those conversations I developed my perspective that combines both the idea that behavior can be determined AND can be chosen freely. People typically go through life on auto-pilot. Life happens to them. They react, largely automatically, from a repertory of learned responses. Their goals and ambitions are prescribed to them more than they are chosen, and they plod away at life - much like sheep. They may have free will, but it doesn't often manifest itself. They float through life, tossed about by the currents of society governed by the automatic short-cut responses built into each person's psychology. Life is more accidental than intentional. The road they are on, is a road provided by the world around them. People CAN choose to act, if they really want to. They just usually do not really want to. They can do the difficult things. They can choose to not let their past guide their actions. They can choose to buck what society tells them. In my mind, that is how you can account for saints or other extraordinary people (including the bad ones). You see, while the materialist empiricist has faith that they will eventually be able to explain everything, they can't now. I believe that they will never be able to completely predict human behavior, and can partially predict behavior only because people go with the flow, and let the currents guide them. They can choose differently, but don't typically do so. Now this may not always be a bad thing. Sometimes, we need to attend to only some areas where we must choose, and others are put on auto-pilot. This can be a sane strategy. But if we live our lives without consciously making choices, what kind of road are we on? El Camino Real, or the primrose path? If you don't choose, the choice gets made for you. Tags: choice, Catholic,Christian, free will

C. S. Lewis Quotes and Election Perspective

Perhaps I am an optimist. Perhaps I am just delusional. While I am disappointed in some of the election results, I am not as upset as others I have read online. Maybe it is because I am not enamored with either party, and would be disappointed no matter what the result in one way or another. Regardless, it is what it is. Life goes on. I have been reading C. S. Lewis lately, and a couple of quotes in Mere Christianity may be worth thinking about regarding society and the recent elections. "You cannot make men good by law: and without good men you cannot have a good society." "If individuals live only 70 years, then a state, or a nation, or a civilisation, which may last for a thousand years is more important than an individual. But if Christianity is true, then the individual is not only more important but incomparably more important, for he is everlasting and the life of a state or a civilisation, compared with his, is only a moment." I take two points here. One, let's stop worrying about the state quite as much as we do - it is far less important than individuals. The state is important only to the degree that it can help or hurt individuals on their eternal journey. We need to do what we can here, and move on to the more important focus. Second, we should focus more on developing the kind of person that can create a good society. Elections are good, politics are fine, but the values we care about should be important every day. We have to live them, convince others that these values are true, and help others to live them - not through law or coersion, but by convincing them of their veracity. Making laws is not the best way to change hearts. But changing hearts is a good way to change laws. Maybe we need to do more to change hearts. Tags: Politics, Catholic, Christian, Quotes

Back Online & Thoughts About Elections

I have been without internet connection since mid-day Monday. It is tough being disconnected, especially when you rely on the Internet so heavily. Working at home, being without it makes doing business that much harder. We also do not have any news on the arrival of the baby. We are waiting for her to decide to come - it is any day now. I'll keep all posted when she finally arrives. It looks like we all had a bit of bad news yesterday with the elections. I was disappointed that the three pro-life measures lost. The one in CA got 47% of the vote, and while that is a loss - it is not as bad as one might expect for liberal leaning California. It is also no surprise given how much money spent by Planned Parenthood trying to scare voters. I wish that the pro-life side was more sophisticated in marketing and convincing people. Grass roots is good, but a professional marketing can make a huge difference. As for the elections, I don't know what to think. I am a voter without a party. I am a registered Democrat, but I am pro-Life. That means, I can actually vote for very few Democrats. But it is hard to vote for Republicans. They get the pre-birth life issues and gay marriage correct, but are wrong on most of the rest of their platform. Aside from these issues, the Republican party is the party of big business and the rich. And the values of these two groups do not align with my values. But the ultra-left values of San Franciscan Nancy Pelosi don't align with my values either. In terms of why people voted the way they did, I am confused. I get the corruption issue, but I think most Americans are wrong about the war. People supported the war at the start, and now they don't. I am the opposite. I thought it was wrong to get into the war, but I also think that we have to clean up the mess we made - no matter how difficult. We may all agree that the current strategy is wrong, but a cut and run strategy would be rather irresponsible and (IMO) cowardly. It was wrong to start the war in Iraq, but it also would be wrong to leave the mess we created without a solution. Just my thoughts.

Equality & Worth

Adoro Te Devote had an interesting post on equality. I have posted on that topic as well, but something she said triggered a thought in me. Let me start by saying that I am so inadequate compared to so many men AND women on so many different things. Adoro reminded me of something my dad taught me - at any given task there will always be somebody better than me and somebody worse than me. So why are people hung up on insisting we are all equal? Here is what we are doing. We have in our mind scores on an each ability or attribute. We also have a certain value/importance for that attribute. We have these unspoken scores on lots of attributes, each with it’s on importance weight. Well if I add up all of my scores weighted by the attribute importance I get my “value” as a person. This conception of determining value is exactly what goes on implicitly in society. This implicit equation is wrong from a modern relativist perspective. You will get one of two arguments here. One is that there are no real differences - that all differences are made-up to enhance or repress a particular class. There is not really a denial in the equation. There is wishful thinking that there are no differences - because then we would all be interchangable, the same, equal. You will hear others argue that we can't place "value" on different attributes. Sure there are differences, but who gets to say what "value" each should have. When it comes to particular task, this is nonsense. I want really strong firefighters to rescue me, and really smart doctors, and very compassionate and experienced nurses (I would be terrible at all three jobs). The implicit equation is also wrong from a Christian perspective. From the Christian perspective the separation comes, not in discussing the value of an individual for a given task our purpose - but in believing that it implies the value of a person. The value of a person is NOT determined by what he or she can do. Value comes in being beloved of God, and it is inherent and infinite. If we can accept that our worth is not tied to what we can or cannot do, but because we are children of God - then we are liberated. Then we can say it is OK that certain people are better suited to different tasks. We no longer need to "prove" our worth. But believing this is not easy, because we keep trying to "prove" ourselves. We have nothing to prove. All we have to do is accept. You are beloved of God. Nothing that you can do will add to or subtract from this. Tags: equality, God, love, Christianity

What color hat do you wear?

Click on picture to see a larger image. I am back from Atlanta, and things went well there. It was good to see a couple of old friends, and the presentations went very well. Finishing the work needed for this trip has been a definite weight off of my shoulders. I have been thinking about some issues and would love your perspective. I want to state something that I see as a plain fact. All people are not equal. I think that the concept of equality before the law (i.e., the law treats all as equal) is a good concept for running a justice system, but in terms of the rest of life...I don't think it is a good concept. Not everyone is smart. Not everyone is athletic. Not everyone is good looking. Not everyone is creative. Not everyone is good with numbers. Not everyone is insightful. Not everyone is good natured. Not everyone is right. Because of our relativistic approach in society, we end up acting as if anything and everything is AOK. All people are equal, all ideas are equal, all perspectives are equal. I say bologna! I wish I was more artistic than I am. I am just not. Some people just can't get up in front of a group to speak - I am pretty good at it. In some circumstances or for some purposes, creativity is what is required. Other times, certain leadership skills may be the right trick. It is good that people are not the same. You know what else, pretending that everyone is the same is silly. The same is true for ideas, If one person says the sun rises in the East and another the West, there is not compromise to be had. If one person says Christ rose from the dead, and another says he did not - there is no equality of perspective. There is a phenomenon in education where people are overly concerned about self-esteem. They won't give spelling tests because it makes kids who can't spell feel bad. You see, some kids actually have an easier time with spelling, but calling this out defeats the perspective of equality and may make some kids feel bad because they struggle with spelling. This would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous. Self esteem isn't something you need to protect so it doesn't get damaged - it is something that you earn through success. We should be giving children opportunities to develop their talents not fragile egos propped up with delusional self-esteem. Have you ever noticed that everyone says they are a "good person." Look at our world, heck just look at our society. How can we claim to all be good and have the homeless we do, or the high percentage of people in jail, or the uninsured, or all the people below the poverty line, or prejudice, etc. If we were all good, we would solve these problems - heck we would really care about them. Instead, when it comes to elections, what do we hear about? When is the last time anyone asked what we are going to do about the homeless in politics? Good people? Hmpf. Here is my opinion - we are not all good. I don't think there are a lot of evil people out there either, if by evil we mean those who seek to intentionally do harm. But there are too many who will not do anything for someone else if it requires any effort or sacrifice. Good is not the absence of evil - it is a positive manifestation of love that requires effort and sacrifice. If most people aren't good and aren't evil, what are they? Just selfish. Think about the old westerns. The good guys wore white hats and the bad guys wore black hats. I think most people wear grey hats. They are neither good nor bad - merely selfish. What color hat do you wear? Tags: relativism, equality

Pope: faith AND reason - that's the point!

The events this past week are somewhat frustrating. The Muslim world is up in arms because the Pope quotes a Byzantine emperor. I read the speech. The point the Pope was making was about the West and that reason cannot be divorced from Faith. The Emperor's point was that violence as part of religion is a violation or reason, and thus why he rejects Islam. The emperor's point is that faith that is counter to reason is false. The Pope was scolding the west because reason without faith is false . His point ... we need both! Where is that in the news? It's not? Hmmm. Now, one can take the quote of the emperor as saying that violence has no place as official doctrine and dogma in faith beacause it is counter to reason. And the Muslim world, in their violent reaction, is acting unreasonably. Did Catholics burn buildings at the Last Temptation of Christ movie? Was there revolt at the Da Vinci Code? Are we revolting now as Muslims burn the Pope in effigy? Are we calling for "Holy War" as nuns are gunned down and churches are burned? No. There is a lot of reaction and condemnation by the Muslim world of things they don't like from the Western world (Catholic and otherwise). This condemnation is loud, clear, and violent. However, there is only quiet (if any) condemnation of the uncivilized, violent, and godless behavior done in the name of their very religion. How can anyone beleive this is reasonable? Of course, I find it equally interesting that the amoral (often atheistic) Western media delights in fostering (even hosting) these battles. Why the coverage here? Why the search for that which will divide and undermine? They miss the point of the Pope's speech (his whole trip, in fact), but delight in controversy. Read the Pope's speech. You will find that it is not a message of hate as the media and Muslim world would have you believe. It is a message of hope and a challenge to Western thinkers that they need faith as well as reason. The Muslim world, perhaps, should also listen. Perhaps more reason is a good idea with their faith. I read the speech here http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=46474