Thursday, April 18, 2024
Indulge me for a moment
Thursday, March 14, 2024
Choosing right
Come November, it looks like we will be choosing between a doddering old man and an immature egotistical narcissist. In a population of some 332 million people, is this the best we can do? Surely there are American men and women better suited to lead our nation in the twenty-first century.
I place great emphasis on choosing candidates who are pro-life. If a person thinks it is okay to dismember defenseless babies in the womb, how can they be trusted to care for those of us outside the womb? Showing such disregard for even the most basic human life forms says so much about a person’s moral character, or lack of it. That being said, the egotistical narcissist is the only viable choice between the two even though I question the strength of his moral backbone.
The Alabama Supreme Court recently ruled that frozen embryos qualify as children under state law and are subject to legislation dealing with the wrongful death of a minor. Therein lies the problem with in vitro fertilization. Seems like there are always multiple embryos collected and frozen. What happens to the ones that are not used? That is one reason the Church forbids IVF. It also separates the unitive action from the procreative action of the marital embrace.
The Alabama Republican House and Senate almost immediately passed a bill to protect providers and patients from prosecution for damage to frozen embryos. So, the court says embryos are children, but the legislature says there is no penalty for destroying them. The logical solution is to say they cannot be created in the first place, but that probably won’t happen. Once again, the Catholic Church in her infinite wisdom had it right from the beginning.
Now, I thought the people on the left would be happy about protecting those who damage frozen embryos. Not so fast. A personal injury lawyer from Minneapolis who has represented IVF clients who lost frozen embryos due to faulty equipment is concerned he will not be able to collect damages for his clients. It seems the only losers in this whole situation are the frozen embryos themselves even though they qualify as children under Alabama state law. Apparently, it is okay to kill them, just not by accident.
Here in Indiana, the legalization of cannabis is a topic of conversation among candidates in the upcoming election. Personally, I have no objection to cannabis for medicinal purposes if it proves beneficial to people who are suffering. For such individuals, I believe it should be prescribed by a doctor and dispensed at a pharmacy like any other drug.
I am against recreational cannabis. Why do we need to go there? What good can possibly come from it aside from a source of revenue? Why do we need more ways to numb our brains?So many vices that were taboo just a few years ago are now flourishing in the mainstream. From drugs to gambling to artificial intelligence, we continue to look for ways to escape reality. Will we eventually consider legalizing recreational meth or cocaine? Stay tuned.
Sunday, February 18, 2024
Managing side effects
Our most recent parish Synod presentation was on the Mass. Unbeknownst to anyone, our pastor decided to show a two hour-long DVD at an evening meeting that most parishioners expected to last an about an hour. He seemed amused at how many in attendance actually fell asleep at their tables. What positive effects, if any, came from this experience? These were all older Catholics who had already been attending Mass for many years. At the end of a long day, any lengthy presentation must be interesting to hold attention. Once that inevitable fatigue line is crossed, there is no going back.
The fact that most in attendance were likely wishing they had not come will make them less inclined to attend in the future. The length and quality of previous meetings had already affected me personally as I elected not to attend this one. It was the first Synod monthly meeting I had missed in the three years we have been doing this.
These programs for faith formation are beneficial if done properly. When they become a boring chore, they are counter-productive. We sometimes fall into a trap where we know we need to do something to help people grow in faith but we simply phone in the effort. Yes, the parish put on a two-hour presentation on the Mass. It looks good on the record when we report to the diocese, but have we really connected with anyone? Have we turned people off?
I appreciate the effort. Is it better than nothing? I suppose so. Maybe someone is inspired to do better. The problem is we are not reaching those in most need of spiritual help. It’s always the same old parishioners that come. Somehow, we need to do better. Our guests should leave wanting more, not wishing they had not come.
Homilists should take note. How often I have heard a priest make a great point in a homily only to have it lost by dragging his talk on forever. I think we all prefer quality over quantity. Some speakers may not realize that excessive quantity can destroy quality. Always try to leave your audience looking for more instead of their watches.
In a time when Mass attendance is sporadic for some, the homily takes on special significance. The homily may determine whether a person desires to come back regularly or maybe never again. This is especially important now that we are into Lent when some lapsed Catholics may be drawn back to the Church. A priest who likes to use his homily as a public rant on the status of civilization will not gain favor with his audience even among those who may commiserate with him. Extending the rant beyond twenty minutes seals the exasperation. If a person decided to attend that day looking for hope or comfort, he will leave feeling worse than when he came.
I am not saying a priest needs to tell us everything is peaches and cream. A priest can use the same tough words with a tone of empathy and an occasional smile. Try a friendly voice. We can hear you without yelling. He is more likely to get a positive response if people do not feel like they are being chastised for everything wrong in the world. Some people take criticism very personally even if it was not directed at them. Quality, length and tone are all critical elements of any effective presentation. Homilists should ask themselves, is your message getting through if your demeanor turns people off or drives them away?
Tuesday, January 16, 2024
Class update
Leading an OCIA group can be a challenge. Our class began with only six attendees. Sounds simple enough, but all have varying Christian backgrounds. Ages range from 20 to 80. We have a lapsed Catholic and her Lutheran husband, a baptized Catholic who was never catechized in the faith, a grandmother who resents the strict Apostolic Christian household in which she was raised, a fundamentalist Baptist with some anti-Catholic ideas, and a young woman with no Christian upbringing at all. Designing a lesson plan that meets the needs of everyone can be somewhat difficult when those needs vary from person to person. A few are well versed in the Bible and others completely unfamiliar. It’s a bit like teaching arithmetic and calculus in the same class.
Complicating matters is the fact that we are now meeting two in our group remotely, not by Zoom or Facetime, but rather by cell phone on speaker audio. They are wintering some 1500 miles away for the next two months. Travel, foot surgery, and even a heart attack has limited attendance of others at times. Only the young woman with no Christian background has been faithfully present every class. She has been a blessing with her new-found enthusiasm for the Catholic faith.
Despite everything, our group has been doing great, or so I thought. Today, our fundamentalist woman sent me a text message right before class time saying she was dropping out. Her attendance has been spotty and I sensed she had reservations about the whole process. She said after reading the book on Catholicism, she could not bring herself to join. I assume she was referring to Trent Horn’s book, Why We’re Catholic, which we had given each participant on the first day.
I responded to her text, thanking her for her honesty. I also asked if she would mind listing a few of her objections to the Catholic faith to help me prepare my classes in the future. She gave me two main objections, those being praying to dead saints and confessing sins to a priest. Now we had covered both topics in our sessions, but she was not always present for those discussions. Both topics were also covered in Trent Horn’s book, which she either didn’t read or didn’t understand. Her response indicated she believed the priest determined the “wages or punishment” for sins by the amount of penance he assigned. She said, “Only God can forgive/punish not man.” Obviously, she has misconceptions about the sacrament.
Wanting to answer her objections in a friendly brief text, I sent her a link to an article by Father Mitch Pacwa titled The Bible supports praying to saints. Any hope of convincing her of Catholic belief would have to come from the Bible which she claims to read every day. I also asked her how she interprets John 20:23 where Jesus gives his apostles the authority to forgive and retain sins. She replied, “What john 20:23 says to me is that we are given the holy spirit from Jesus, and because we have the holy spirit, Jesus forgives us of our sins. We don't need a man of any cloth we only need Jesus.”
I am encouraged that we have a little discussion going now. I answered by saying, “But in speaking to his apostles, and this is after his resurrection, he says whose sins YOU forgive are forgiven, and whose sins YOU retain are retained. Jesus has given this ministry to his earthly representatives (or men of the cloth!). How would they know what those sins are if they were not told? And how would anyone know whether his sin was forgiven or retained unless his sin was absolved by a minister acting under the authority of Jesus?”
It has been a couple of days, and I have not received another response from her. I am hoping she will give it some thought. Some folks are so ingrained with their beliefs that any challenges to those beliefs are blindly rejected. No evidence is convincing enough to change minds when those minds are not open to change. If I were in her position, I might act the same way. She at least had the courage to approach a Catholic Church and begin an exploration. I will keep praying for her and allow the Holy Spirit to take the lead.