Deacon Dan Wright

Catholic Charities Caught Procuring Abortion

Just when I thought that I had heard it all, and just when I had decided that I might leave the news and opinions to someone else and concentrate on spirituality instead at my blog, the news breaks that Commonwealth Catholic Charities (Virginia) has allegedly helped a 16-year-old illegal immigrant to procure an abortion.  You can get the story here; however, since it's on AP I won't bother to copy and paste anything.  Hopefully they won't mind the link too much.

Not only has Commonwealth Catholic Charities gotten itself into a predicament, according to the story it also has involved the USCCB overall, which reportedly receives 7.6 million a year to place unaccompanied illegal immigrant children in foster care. Furthermore, federal law prevents the use of its funding for abortions except in cases of incest and rape or when the life of the mother is in danger should the pregnancy continue.  Evidently none of these were part of the case involved.

Still, we don't expect to hear of this from any organization that has "Catholic" as a part of it name--especially not from Catholic Charities, which over the years I have personally grown to respect a great deal.  Needless to say, the story is a great disappointment.

Indeed the only way I can describe learning of this news is say that I am completely shocked, but somehow not too surprised.  For me it's an indication of a mindset that I have frequently encountered in social services (even in Catholic circles) that leans toward replacing traditional values with those of the current relativistic world view.  Sadly, you can find it just about anywhere that you care to look deep enough.

If there's a lesson it has to do with those things we have been taught to value as a part of our tradition.  Get tough, dig your heels in, and say *no* (explicative optional) to the attitude that says everything is okay with our world (and its values) and that we just need to have a positive outlook.  Quite the contrary, our world is in need of the gospel message more now than any time in history--the battle rages all around.  It may be the Irish in me, but I'm feeling a little scrappy.

Autistic Student Voted Out of Class

Here's another one--must be the season.  I believe that as Christians we have a moral responsibility to promote justice, which means advocating and taking a stand where and when we find injustices.  Part of that is working to create awareness also, and to point out injustices where they occur.

Often we must accept the difficult task of being pushed far out of our comfort zone to protect the rights and human dignity of the weakest members of our society.  When it comes down to where I want to stand on the day of judgment, I'd rather have it said that I opted to take the side of the poor little ones--whatever the cost.

Officials say they've reassigned a kindergarten teacher whose Port St. Lucie, Fla., class "voted out" a 5-year-old boy who is being tested for a form of autism.

After the boy misbehaved last week, teacher Wendy Portillo "decided to bring him in front of the class and let the other kids tell him what they didn't like about him, kind of ridiculed him," Michelle Steele, a police spokeswoman, tells the Palm Beach Post.

The newspaper says students then voted 14-2 in favor of having the boy removed from Portillo's classroom.

"He was incredibly upset," Melissa Barton, the boy's mother, says in an interview with the Port St. Lucie News. "The only friend he has ever made in his life was forced to do this."

A school spokeswoman says Portillo has been removed from the classroom pending the outcome of an internal review.

Source

Well, it Says it in the Bible on Page 453

When I saw the story I'm featuring today I couldn't really resist it.  Not to pick on Italy--I know that I have regular readers in Italy, one of whom comments from time to time.  The fact is this piece speaks more to me of things I've experienced closer to home.  Anyhow, here's the story excerpt:

Italy professes to be a Catholic nation - but a majority of Italians do not know "even the most basic facts" about the Bible, according to a survey.

The international poll, conducted by Eurisko for the Catholic Biblical Federation, showed that in Italy only 14 per cent of those questioned were able to answer a series of questions about the Bible correctly. They included whether Moses or St Paul featured in the Old Testament, whether Jesus had written any of the Gospels, and whether the Gospels form part of the Bible. Another question which defeated most Italians was: which of the following - Luke, John, Peter and Paul - wrote the Gospels?

Among the respondents 88 per cent of Italians described themselves as Roman Catholics, three quarters said they kept a Bible in their home, and 79 per cent said they felt their lives were "protected by God". But only 32 per cent described themselves as "regular churchgoers", and only 28 per cent thought the Bible should be taught in schools.

Whereas in the US 75 per cent of Americans claim to have read a Bible passage recently, in Italy the figure is 27 per cent. Vatican officials said the survey, co-ordinated by Luca Diotallevi, a Rome University sociologist, offered "food for thought" for the Synod Bishops in Rome this autumn on the Word Of God, where its implications would be discussed.

Continue

It was just this past weekend that I was invited to attend a parish youth religious education event with my older son who will start high school in August.  Overall I was impressed because I have been searching--even praying--for something to get my kid interested.  "These kids are really excited," I thought to myself. The excitement was truly evident, and the program is obviously a fantastic success.

My son has gone to Catholic school his whole life and he's gotten a lot of positive things out of it; nevertheless, it hasn't been all that long ago that he asked me, "Hey dad, are we Catholic or Christian?"  As a parent I sometimes blame myself but there are some gaps in his theological understanding.  However, let's give him a break--he's a typical 13 year old, right?  My hopes are that the parish program will get him into his faith.  Still, he's not alone in the world of not knowing much about what his Church teaches.

Some of the kids at the event on Sunday had made a home movie and showed it as a closing thing for the evening.  I got the feeling while watching that the adults in charge may not have previewed what we were watching--nothing really bad, just some teenage horsing around.  However, what caught my interest was that they were interviewing fellow teens about biblical topics.  They were asking those whom they were interviewing "Who was St. Lucifer?" When they asked the question I about fell down.  "Okay, it's only a joke," but some things can't be faked and these kids were stumped by the question.  Another kid was asked "Who was Moses?" She replied, "Wasn't he one of the disciples?"

Unawareness of the faith isn't all that uncommon, but we should expect folks who have had religious education and Catholic school not to be entirely ignorant.  I am reminded of years ago hearing a forthright young lady explain that God was against sin and that it said so right on page 453 of the bible.  This was before my conversion so I can't blame it on Catholic school or the shared praxis model of religious education (These days to utter the words "direct teach" is pure profanity in some circles--with the possible exception of special education).

Each year my mother-in-law invites family members to her home for major religious holidays.  In our celebrations the children of the family are always invited to read scripture.  I have been amused on several occasions to hear the highlighted chapter titles and footnotes of the NAB read as though they too were part of the sacred text.  Coming from children it's one thing, but let's face it there are adults too who don't know that page numbers differ from bible to bible or that the sacred authors were not John, Paul, and George, and that the footnotes and NAB headings were not written by the hand of Jesus.

At first I was going to classify this post under religion and culture, but really it belongs in my rants category.  I deserve a rant occasionally, but complaints should always be accompanied with suggestions for improvement.

So what's needed?  How about adult religious education on a wide scale--forgive me but it's a harp I've been playing for years.  Some direct instruction would be good too. Question and answer catechisms were mostly before my time, that is with the exception of Fr. John Hardon's notable work.  Maybe it's time to bring back something like that. 

Certainly a well planned approach to adult religious education is something that will go far.  What's keeping it from happening is often the trouble of logistics and dealing with committee differences (I'm really not thinking about anyone in particular--Well, okay, maybe I am).  Then there's the issue of training catechists.  Too often we feel that a catechist should have a degree--not true.  Forget it.  And the folks who say that you can't give answers but you have to allow people to find the answers on their own?  That's great, they should have their own bible study--maybe in their Small Christian Community.

The biggest success I ever had in teaching religious education was a class on the Catechism of the Catholic Church that I did before my ordination back in 1998.  We read through the Catechism in nine months and I stood in front of a chalk board and lectured for an hour and a half every Wednesday morning.  No one dropped out in the whole nine months and it changed several lives, including mine.  Perhaps it's time to do something like that again...Okay, now that I've presented the action, allowed for critical reflection, dialog, story, and vision--modeled the praxis--please go to page 453 for the answer.

McCain, Hagee, and "the Apostate Church"

SEDONA, Ariz. (AP) — Endorsed by an influential Texas televangelist, Republican John McCain endeared himself to one group of voters but risked alienating another with the pastor's anti-Catholic views.

The controversy has been mild so far, but still, every vote counts in a presidential election that is expected to be closely contested.

Evangelical or born-again Christian voters were key to George W. Bush's victories, but so were Roman Catholics, who chose Bush over their fellow Catholic John Kerry in 2004 and over Al Gore in 2000.

The televangelist, San Antonio megachurch leader John Hagee, has referred to the Roman Catholic Church as "the great whore" and called it a "false cult system" and "the apostate church"; the word "apostate" means someone who has forsaken his religion.

He also has linked Adolf Hitler to the Catholic church, suggesting it helped shape his anti-Semitism.

McCain said he does not agree with some of Hagee's past comments. "It's simply not accurate to say that because someone endorses me that I therefore embrace their views," McCain told reporters at a news conference Monday in Phoenix.

Catholic groups are pressuring McCain to go further and reject the endorsement, which he announced at a news conference with Hagee last week. The Democratic National Committee also is publicizing Hagee's views.

"Indeed, for the past few decades, he has waged an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church," said Catholic League President Bill Donohue.

"Senator Obama has repudiated the endorsement of Louis Farrakhan, another bigot," Donohue said. "McCain should follow suit and retract his embrace of Hagee."

He was referring to Barack Obama, who said he would "reject and denounce" any help from Farrakhan when pressed in last week's Democratic presidential debate.

It remains to be seen how much Hagee's views may hurt McCain's standing among Catholics, a group that can hardly be considered monolithic. Though they lean Republican, their views span the political spectrum and split nearly evenly along party lines.

Despite the recent publicity, Hagee is not well-known outside his sphere of influence, which includes a congregation in the tens of thousands and an even wider television audience.

"What he holds about Catholicism in my mind is despicable," said the Rev. James Heft, religion professor at the University of Southern California. "I totally reject Hagee's view of Catholicism, but I don't know how widely known it is."

If Hagee's views become well-known, the endorsement could hurt McCain among some Catholics.

"If you offend even a small percentage, that could make the difference in an election," Donohue said in an interview Sunday.

Democrats are doing their best to keep the fracas alive, with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean raising it Sunday on CNN's "Late Edition."

"What about a guy who is a vicious anti-Catholic, who is supporting John McCain, and John McCain does not denounce or reject him?" Dean said.

So far, McCain has enjoyed strong support from Catholics, who make up about a quarter of the electorate.

Continue reading

When I commented last week on the Hagee endorsement of McCain, I was unaware of Hagee's being a religious bigot when it comes to the Catholic Church.  I simply trusted my gut feeling in the comments I made.

While in my part of the world John Hagee is perhaps better known, being based in nearby San Antonio, I doubt that his views on Catholicism have thus far been all that widespread.  However, I have often found such extremism--and even hatred--in regard to the Catholic Church to be a common view among certain so-called evangelical groups.  It only surprises me a little to find out that Hagee has such views.

However, keep in mind that Hagee is the fellow of whom McCain said that he is "very proud" to have his support.  Emphatically I believe that the thing for McCain to do is to rescind his acceptance of Hagee's support.

The evangelicalism that I recall of my pre-Catholic youth did not include such narrow-minded ignorance, though I do recall it among some groups.  I was quick to disassociate myself with what didn't feel right, and for me the rejection and hatred of Catholicism never felt right.  Moreover, I rejoice that I came to embrace the faith. 

Our Catholic understanding of the Church as the Body of Christ should make something clear: those who reject the Church also reject the lordship--and perhaps even the person--of Jesus Christ.  Indeed John McCain should take note of what Catholic groups are saying in regard to his continued acceptance of Hagee's support.   

Want controversy? Look no further...

When I saw the article below, I knew I would have to file it in my infrequently used "Rants" category--this time because I knew that it was going to give a lot of people plenty to...discuss.  Also, I have to wonder, has Archbishop Zollitsch been collaborating closely with Dr. Rowan Williams?  After all, concerning his statement on the state-sanctioned establishment of Islam in Europe, he seems to have similar ideas in mind:

Berlin, Feb. 18, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The newly elected president of the German bishops' conference has called for reconsideration of clerical celibacy and distanced himself from a Vatican pronouncement that Protestant communities cannot be regarded as churches.

In an interview with Der Spiegel, Archbishop Robert Zollitsch of Freiburg observed that priestly celibacy is "not necessary, theologically." He said that a shift away from that discipline would lead to "a revolution, in which a part of the Church might not join." But he said the option should be considered.

Questioned about relations with Protestant groups in Germany, the archbishop said that he hoped to improve ecumenical ties. He said that a statement released last year by the Vatican-- saying that Protestant groups do not qualify as "churches" in the full sense of that word, since they have not preserved the apostolic priesthood and the Eucharist-- was harmful to ecumenical relations. The Protestant community, Archbishop Zollitsch announced, "is a church; I cannot deny it."

In his Spiegel interview Archbishop Zollitsch was critical of the Christian Democratic Party in Germany, saying that the group's historic ties to the Catholic Church have been weakened. He said that the Christian Democrats were too heavily influenced by "neoliberal" economic theories, and suggested that Church leaders are becoming more sympathetic toward the economic views of the Socialist and Green parties in Germany.

The archbishop told Spiegel that Muslims should have the right to build mosques in European countries, and have training in the Islamic faith provided by German schools.

Do you suppose that the Islamic faith training that he is advocating in German schools would be required of all students?  I hope that I'm wrong in my feeling about all of this--that the news media is simply following their nature to be sensationalistic.  Undoubtedly the views expressed in the story above and others like it seem rather extreme.  Extremism breeds extremism, and extremism of any kind leads to division.  It runs the risk of becoming schism.

If Zollitsch's views on celibacy and the nature of ecumenical relations with Islam are not enough, there is his reported insistence on identifying non-Catholic Christian ecclesial communities as churches (and I assume that he means "church" in the same sense of of the word used in the unnamed document to which the story refers), it would do well to consider what then Cardinal Ratzinger said in a year 2000 interview:

That all the existing ecclesial communities should appeal to the same concept of Church seems to me to be contrary to their self-awareness. Luther claimed that the Church, in a theological and spiritual sense, could not be embodied in the great institutional structure of the Catholic Church, which he regarded instead as an instrument of the Antichrist. In his view, the Church was present wherever the Word was proclaimed correctly and the sacraments administered in the right way. Luther himself held that it was impossible to consider the local Churches subject to the princes as the Church; they were external institutions for assistance and were certainly necessary, but not the Church in the theological sense.

Around the time of the interview above I recall a conversation I had with a Baptist minister who told me that including Protestants in the Catholic definition of Church is rather presumptuous.  At least my Baptist friend understood the historical implications involved in the development of the Protestant ecclesiology and that the fact that it differs sharply from the Catholic position.

The problem I see clearly in the Zollitsch story is the degree of division that it reveals.  Frankly, I do not see the Church headed at all in the direction of liberalizing priestly celibacy or in loosly formulated ecumenism.

If anything, wrongheaded notions only serve to separate further.  The Holy Spirit indeed speaks to our hearts of being one with one another.  However, our unity is achieved through our acceptance of the Church's guidance and our willingness to come to an understanding of its teachings.  Dissent is self-serving only.  We are called, perhaps more in our times now than at other times in the recent past, to stand up and claim--or proclaim--the truths given to us in the Deposit of Faith.

We are also called in our times to be as gentle as lambs; to turn the other cheek; to forgive our persecutors; to be longsuffering; to carry our Cross--our Lord's Cross.  We are called to love all people regardless of their creed; we are even called to love those who hate us and take our lives.  If we as Catholics are separated from one another, or separated into ideological camps, we cannot stand and we cannot witness to the world.  If we do not witness, another witness may come to stand--and it may be one that does know Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Much Contradiction, Much Doubt, Much Faith

"There is so much contradiction in my soul. Such deep longing for God -- so deep that it is painful -- a suffering continual -- and yet not wanted by God -- repulsed -- empty -- no faith -- no love -- no zeal. Souls hold no attraction. Heaven means nothing -- to me it looks like an empty place."

I wanted to write earlier in the week, but there was much holding me back.  The new school year began Monday here in Texas.  As always things were hectic, and really the entirety of last week had been equally fast-paced, and equally demanding.  Much was expected of me.  So much, in fact, that I scarcely had time to reflect--or so it seemed.  Yet somehow my mode of reflecting also seemed to be working overtime.  It was just that my focus was aimed almost entirely at the students whom I serve in my work as a special educator.  Nevertheless, I have many thoughts and opinions on the recent news of Blessed Teresa's doubt.  I have many feelings stirring deeply within on the matter.

It is not that doubt is wrong or somehow sinful, or even that it is an admission of weakness or of ultimate untruth.  Doubt is a human characteristic.  Each of us in our honesty have experienced doubt--if we say we have not we make ourselves liars, and perhaps take company with the Pharisees whose prayer was "I thank you that I am not a sinner."

I have written on doubt in the past, and I have also written on Blessed Teresa and how she, for me, has become the icon of faith in times of great doubt.  To learn of her doubt has only served to strengthen my resolve and my determination.  Now, I may place trust in her prayers when I experience difficulty in matters of faith.  I may turn my prayers to her prayers--it's the way that the Communion of Saints works--holy people sharing holy things, not, of course, to make a claim to holiness myself.  I am merely a servant, a waiter of tables if you will allow.

Christopher Hitchens's rant in Newsweek did catch my attention, and while I found nothing clever I did find the expected lapses in logic that one habitually finds in the faith of an atheist--one who believes there is no God criticizing the purported lack of faith in another...Hitchens also claims, "I tend to believe that the absence of evidence is the evidence of absence."  Really, we shouldn't be swayed at all by spurious argumentation that has more to do with opinion than sound reasoning.  Absence of evidence is not evidence of anything.  Any quick-minded freshman knows that we cannot argue from what we do not know.  Hutchins's position ultimately is a matter of what he believes; it reflects his faith as an atheist only.  As an atheist, his faith appears as the mirror image of faith in God: it cannot admit to doubt.  Yet I have to wonder if Hitchens has ever had his doubts, such would be much more a crushing blow than the doubts of one of the faithful immersed in the steam of sorrows.

It is true that the experience of the absence of God can be the sign of greatness in faith.  I don't say this simply from the examples of many great saints and their dark nights, but from my understanding that if faith is to be measured it is often proportional to absence of certainty.  Recall that the writer of Hebrews teaches us that faith is evidence of things not seen.  When we believe in spite of everything in the world that challenges us and cries out for cosmic justice, we then might say that we truly have great faith.

I look to Blessed Teresa with great love and admiration.  She serves as an example who lifted me up out of my own time of doubt.  Great and efficacious are her prayers in heaven.  If I find myself in this life, or in what lies beyond, chastised only a little, then I also count it a great blessing that God gave me the knowledge to realize that my doubts and sufferings are signs of love, for he desires that I enter heaven purified.

Blessed Teresa is the icon, even the miracle, in my life.  It was she who years ago pointed the way of selfless service to those who are in need of mercy.  She demanded of my soul that I serve those who need God's mercy most.  Indeed I found a spiritual connection to her.  Now, years later, I find great joy in a work different but similar to hers.  In every suffering human that I encounter or touch as a part of my daily work, or even in each child or young person who expresses joy in being educated, I realize and see that God has given me the opportunity to gaze upon my Lord in their eyes.  Each and every hard or demanding day I receive as a gift from God. 

Every moment that I sense my own personal hardship I have the opportunity to join it to the suffering of Christ, both for my own sake and the sake of the whole world.  I often have doubts, really more often than you might think. Doubt is part of the Cross: it is the cry "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me."  To doubt but to move forward in a passionate manner and serve Christ in others is indeed the sign of sainthood, yet for me I take my doubt, as well as my daily hardships, as penitential--seeing as how I am yet far from being saintly--and even in penance it is a great spiritual gift.

Doubt yes, but, Mr. Hitchens, we do have evidence.  It is not the evidence that you would accept, it will never be found in the certainty and objectivity that you would like, and it is evidence that will always be denied to the eyes of the enemy.  But still someday you might see it too--there is always that chance.  It is the evidence that gives itself to us in places that you would not count as evidence. We find it in our determination to love and serve others in spite of our greatest doubts.  It is the evidence of unknowing; the mirror image of not-faith.  Perhaps Blessed Teresa will be named a saint not in spite of her doubts, but because of them.

Damage Done

NEW YORK (CNA) – The second of two bloggers hired by the John Edwards U.S. presidential campaign resigned Feb. 13, following continued pressure from the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights over anti-Catholic comments posted on the Internet.

Catholic League for Civil and Religious Rights President Bill Donohue told the Associated Press Feb. 13 that in his mind the issue is now closed.

Blogger Melissa McEwan, in making the announcement on her personal Weblog, Shakespeare's Sister, said that she left the campaign because she was becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the level of attention focused on her and her family.

The blogger, who was hired as a consultant for the Edwards’ campaign Web effort did not address her previous comments on Christianity and Catholicism, but apologized to her fellow “progressive bloggers.”

Read more

I don't see anything progressive about being a religious bigot.  If Edwards had discovered that one of his staff had written inflammatory racial material, there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that he would have fired such a person on the spot.  It strikes me as strange that when it comes to Catholicism, or even religion in general, intolerance is not only acceptable--it's somehow viewed as being "tolerance."

On Seeking a Sign: The Reality of Sin Among Us

Why does this generation seek a sign?
Amen, I say to you, no sign will be given…” Mk. 8:12

For the pastoral theologian, or even the casual observer making comment, sin is the most difficult topic to approach. Typically people don’t want to hear about sin; we don’t want to have our faults pointed out. In this, I am no different from anyone else. Yet I have learned that growth can come most easily when I am made aware of my failings.

In most situations I am not one who likes to form a rash judgment of others—especially where what we ordinarily consider to be sin is concerned. I am one to forebear, and to forgive easily when it comes to the social sins of our generation. However, on a deeper level I see a greater and more troubling reality at work, and the rejection of traditional moral values is only a symptom of a greater darkness at work among us. In the case of the greatest sin we are identical to the generation whom Jesus rebuked for seeking a sign. Even if a sign were given, we would deny it outright. The greatest sin is our blindness to the reality of God’s love, and that which blinds us is our own sense of being right.

The psalmist asks

“Why do you recite my statutes,
and profess my covenant with your mouth
Though you hate discipline
and cast my words behind you?”

His question, it appears, is addressed to those who make the claim to righteousness; that is, it is addressed to those who recite the statutes of God and profess his covenant. Could it be that the greatest sinners are not those whose lifestyles we find repugnant because they reject our values concerning marriage or sexuality, but rather those who have become so blind to the presence of God that they demand a sign from the creator standing in their midst?

Years ago I remember a young divinity student who questioned a professor in regard to sin. “What is sin?” he asked, “I find it difficult to find and precisely name sin in our day and age.” At the time I failed to realize the depth of his question, which was taken to be rhetorical by the professor. Many years later now, I have not forgotten it. I still ponder the question “What is sin in our day and age.” Certainly I cannot easily nod to the setting up of one’s own morals against the biblical and magisterial teachings, nor can I pretend that the materialism of the world today is innocent. Sin is a reality among us and undoubtedly we live amid a generation that has accepted the temptation of godlessness wholeheartedly. However, we must ask what it is that opened the door to the great culmination of evil in our day.

Although God continues to call prophets to preach among us, rather than meet their words with joyful repentance and prayer, we reject them outright. They offend our sensibilities and our allegiances. We hear them only as a din of offensive proclamations against our will to determine our own direction, while Christ, in contrast, calls his disciples to follow rather than to state that they are righteous already. We seek a sign but we find nothing offered.

Often repentance may consist only in a shift in our attitude: I am resolved to stand for true righteousness regardless of what it may cost me; however, I still am not disturbed that an entire generation is rejecting the values of historical Christianity. It is only for me a challenge to find meaning in it, for my faith tells me that God will never forsake us nor will he leave us. True righteousness is peacemaking and healing. Righteousness loves even when love is rejected and called “shameful” because it demands that we make peace and offer healing to a broken and war-torn world. There is no need for a sign when the greatest sign has already been given. Our response, our correct attitude, is to look deep and root out the source of sin.

My Very First (Official) Rant

A friend recently commented to me that she feels that I have wrongly included “Rants” in the subtitle of my blog—she says that she can’t foresee me ranting about anything. Well, this post may in fact be my first rant. I’ve seen enough in the news and in certain quarters of the Catholic blogosphere this weekend to inspire a good rant. Let me explain.

As you might have guessed already the topic lurking in the back of my mind has to do with the recent uproar over the remarks the Pope made in his lecture at Regensburg. Sorry, but I’m not able to sympathize with those—whether Muslim or other—who have taken offense at what Benedict said. How could I? I have at least read the address, which is something that the offended parties obviously have not taken the time to do. Perhaps they lack the mental acuity to focus on an academic address. One that I might add is rather brief and to the point as far as academic addresses go.

Interestingly, a great furor didn’t arise over yet something else within the Pope’s lecture, not a quote but just as good: he reported that a colleague had once said there was something odd about their university; namely, that "it had two faculties devoted to something that did not exist: God." There you have it. In the same address the Pope says that nothing new, only the evil and inhuman, came from Mohammed, and that God does not exist. Why am I not furious? Maybe I’m guilty of reading intelligently, and expecting others who read it to do so with a spirit of open-minded tolerance. As an editorial at the Times of Malta expresses:

What the Catholic Church and all Christians expect is that Muslim countries show the same degree of tolerance which members of the Muslim faith are generally shown in the West. This is what the Pope's message is all about: violence goes against the very essence of religion.

Something I said in a comment at a Catholic blog holds true and is worth repeating: the Pope was addressing intelligent people, academics who would understand that in his quote he was no more taking a jab at Islam than he was denying the existence of God in the other reference. Benedict’s lecture wasn’t being addressed to an unreflective, politically motivated audience. Neither was it addressed to yokels and philistines as a source of fueling their hate.

Nevertheless, along comes the press, always looking to incite something else that may sell more news or attract additional web traffic. When it comes to the media anything goes, be it left, right, or in between. Attracting readers is the motivating force—the more sensational the story, the better. Greed is the motivator, even at the cost of humanity.

Now here’s where it turns into a real rant for me. It’s not that an offense was taken by the Islamic world at the Pope’s words. Neither is it that his apology isn’t good enough in many Muslim quarters or that senseless attacks have occurred. Unfortunately there’s nothing surprising in any of that. However, what really sets me off is the reaction that I see among many of the so-called faithful-to-the-magisterium in the blogosphere. Some bloggers devoted much of their entire Sunday to it, sometimes resorting to profanity, and even ending up disagreeing with the Pope on the matter of his apology. It's the same phenomenon seen in the press: fuel the flames; incite the rage.

All weekend visceral comments poured freely on the topic. I thought about quoting a few, but you can read them for yourself, just don't get sucked into fighting. It's a losing proposition at arguing with these folks; you'd fare better wearing a crucifix in Mecca. Sadly, on some blogs there were even comments that bordered on racism—certainly religious bigotry—and others that proposed violent reprisals. The problem with hate is that it is a weapon one wields by the blade. If you're not careful you might find that you're no different from your opponent.  So while the bloggers who tout themselves as truly orthodox Catholics were busy running pictures of the ugly, wild-eyed, hate-mongering protesters they and their commenters were busy being the same ugly, wild-eyed, hate-mongering bunch they were busy accusing.

Christian people, what is going on? Are you so easily manipulated by the real evil at work? Can you not see the spirit of divisiveness? Whatever happened to “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us?” Inciting further hatred in the hearts of the faithful is hardly listening to what the Spirit says.

So what are we to do? I’ve seen it suggested on more than one blog that we pray, and I’m all for that. However, it’s going to take a little bit more. For starters, a good deal of repentance for trying to stir up hatred and violence is due. This is a real opportunity to dialogue with members of the Muslim faithful, especially in regard to why the offense was taken in the first place.

We have to remember that our faith is about healing and reconciliation. The Crusades are long over. Maybe it's time to talk about getting over it, especially on our part, but don't count on changing any radical opinions. There's more going on in radical Islam than just religious concerns. It's about the economics of oppression and decades of imperialism and puppet governments.  People in the third world are pissed off with good reason. Unfortunately the powers that want change have seized upon the religion of the masses and turned it into an instrument for violence.

We have a better chance to dialogue with our fellow Catholic brothers and sisters who have swallowed the bait of joining in on the fighting. Please, this is exactly what the Pope was talking about in his address at Regensburg. There can be no room for irrational violence—faith and reason are inseparable. The law of God is established, heaven obeys, and thus it shall be for all time.

I can’t let myself get upset by people who are falsely representing the faith any more than I can let myself be upset at the press telling its lies to the world. However, honestly, I have been upset this weekend, and I’m not alone in that. Though I'm doing what it takes to reconcile myself to God. I, for one, am choosing to listen to the voice of reason. If reason is in you, join with me—let it show in your actions as James teaches in this Sunday’s epistle. The time is ripe to follow the true religion of peace.