for later reading
Time to End the St. Patrick’s Day Parade and the Al Smith Dinner?
By: Msgr. Charles Pope
The time for happy-clappy, lighthearted engagement of our culture may be nearing an end. Sometimes it takes a while to understand that what used to work no longer works. Let me get more specific.
Decades ago the “Al Smith Dinner” was a time for Republicans and Democrats to bury the hatchet (even if only temporarily) and come together to raise money for the poor and to emphasize what unites us rather than what divides us. But in the old days the death of 50 million infants was not what divided us. We were divided about lesser things such as how much of the budget should go to defense and how much to social spending. Reasonable men might differ over that.
But now we are being asked to raise toasts and to enjoy a night of frivolity with those who think it is acceptable to abort children by the millions each year, with those who think anal sex is to be celebrated as an expression of love and that LGBTQIA… (I=intersexual, A= Asexual) is actually a form of sanity to which we should tip our hat, and with those who stand four-square against us over religious liberty.
Now the St. Patrick’s Parade is becoming of parade of disorder, chaos, and fake unity. Let’s be honest: St. Patrick’s Day nationally has become a disgraceful display of drunkenness and foolishness in the middle of Lent that more often embarrasses the memory of Patrick than honors it.
In New York City in particular, the “parade” is devolving into a farcical and hateful ridicule of the faith that St. Patrick preached.
It’s time to cancel the St. Patrick’s Day Parade and the Al Smith Dinner and all the other “Catholic” traditions that have been hijacked by the world. Better for Catholics to enter their churches and get down on their knees on St. Patrick’s Day to pray in reparation for the foolishness, and to pray for this confused world to return to its senses. Let’s do adoration and pray the rosary and the Divine Mercy Chaplet unceasingly for this poor old world.
But don’t go to the parade; stay away from the Al Smith Dinner and all that “old school” stuff that hangs on in a darkened world. And as for St Patrick’s Day, it’s time to stop wearin’ the green and instead take up the purple of Lent and mean it. Enough of the celebration of stupidity, frivolity, and drunkenness that St Paddy’s day has become. We need penance now, not foolishness. We don’t need parades and dinner with people who scoff at our teachings, insist we compromise, use us for publicity, and make money off of us. We’re being played for (and are?) fools.
End the St Patrick’s parade. End the Al Smith Dinner and all other such compromised events. Enough now, back to Church! Wear the purple of Lent and if there is going to be a procession, let it be Eucharistic and penitential for the sins of this age.
For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world!
How say you?
All are welcome aboard the Cruise Ship of Peter -- they even have a song about it that they sing at the beginning of Mass! -- all, that is, except anyone who might rock the boat. What might the Cruise Ship do, one is tempted to wonder, with a Francis of Assisi, or a Dominic de Guzman, or a Catherine of Siena, or an Alphonsus Liguori, or a Fulton Sheen? Would they have to walk the plank?... Can one picture Father Augustine Tolton on board, his soul blazing like a beacon from the crumbling lighthouse of his overworked body, his trembling hands raised amid the mellow strains of "On Eagle's Wings"?
Sister Schreck spoke also of sisters putting away the former concepts of religious institutions in order to journey into “Holy Mystery Time”—reflecting the theme of the LCWR 2014 assembly—and becoming “exiles.” “We will sell our souls if we stay in the place of wanting be part of the mainstream, thus becoming something other than we were intended to be,” she said.
The keynoter also claimed that LCWR sisters have a “clarity of identity and purpose which we cannot expect those who have not taken the journey and done the work ever to be able to understand.” Conversely, she spoke of sisters being in a “middle space,” a state of “both creativity and disorientation” in which “much of what was is gone, and what is coming is not yet clear.”
This does not sound like clarity of identity and purpose
Sr. Joan and Sr. Mary Lou think that the LCWR sisters should cry out!
Dearest SistersThey want the assembled sisters to be prophetic. , you have done nothing wrong. It is your obligation as religious to ask the questions that need to be voiced. It is the holy responsibility of religious to stand with those who are most bereft. Be proud of the questions you have asked, the speakers you invited to your assemblies, the statements you issued, the liturgies you celebrated. Go to the microphone and say: We believe in feminist theology and in women’s ordination; we believe in the rights of gay, lesbian and transgender population and we will continue to speak aloud on these issues.
Our "house" here in the Philippines would probably be worth that much if it was in Manila inner city or in Boston. But we house two families, our offices, a rice packing area, a large meeting room, and several staff, plus visitor rooms to sleep overnight.
If you know anything about real estate prices and about the number of archdiocesan residences built in the day when American Catholics expected their leaders to live like VIPs, as well as about the number of archbishops’ residences that also house offices, reception areas, chapels, and rooms for other priests—well, then, you might be surprised that CNN’s Belief Blog found only ten of 34 archbishops so shamefully lodged. Certainly I was. And I suspect CNN was also. This was one of those stories that has its headline before it was even begun. CNN makes a big deal of its “investigation”—confirming addresses, checking public records, and even hiring appraisers. But suppose that not ten but only eight or even five residences were found to be worth more than $1 million. Wouldn’t the headline still have read “The Lavish Homes of American Archbishops”? What is the likelihood that it would read “Despite Stereotypes, Most Archbishops Don’t Live in Luxury”? Even the present story indicates that over two-thirds of the archbishops’ residences fell below that damning million-dollar mark.
The denial of conscience has significant implications beyond birth control, and raises the question of whether medical professionals may be required one day to kill.
That’s the subject of my biweekly First Things column. First, I set up the problem.From, “Will Doctors be Forced to Kill?”The wailing and gnashing of teeth in some quarters over the modest Hobby Lobby decision has me worried. Apparently, many on the political port side of the country believe that once a favored public policy has been enacted, it immediately becomes a “right” that can never be altered or denied. More, once such a “right” is established for the individual, others should have the duty to ensure access—even at the cost of violating their own religious consciences.
If such thinking prevails, medical professionals could be forced to participate in the taking of human life, for example in abortion, assisted suicide, and (given the research trends in regenerative medicine) providing treatments derived from the intentional destruction of human embryos or fetuses.
I get into the ACLU trolling for clients to (I believe) bring suit against religious institutions or individuals that have denied the right to interventions and transactions–even those like abortion and assisted suicide that involve killing.
I point out that the RFRA does not protect these conscientious objections from state laws that allow medicalized killing and that the religious left is not about to cooperate in creating any more state laws in this regard because of its potential impact on issues such as gay rights.
And I note that much of the medical establishment is hostile toward medical conscience. I conclude that forcing medical professionals to be complicit in killing could result in a professional culling:
"For 123 years, our housing policy has been to house students by their anatomy..."“I think the fact that Jayce is choosing to stay at George Fox shows the university community has been supportive of him during his whole experience here,” [said Rob Felton, a university spokesman.] “We may have a difference of opinion on appropriate housing, but all indications are he has been treated well by his peers, professors and our student life staff.”...
“I want other transgender and L.G.B.T.Q. people to see that they can have a place in faith-based education,” [Jaycen] said. “The fact that I’m here is proof of that.”...
So, one question is whether Title IX should determine what policy schools can have and another is whether there should be religion-based exemptions.
But the federal government's position says it's sex discrimination in violation of Title IX not to accede to the student's self-identification.
Labels: culture of death