Fr. Barron on Slumdog

It's a Beatiful Day

I am excited about the Spring season at our doorstep. I am looking forward to Easter.

FYI

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=2429

Followup

Good post Brendan. It's really scary. The language issue here is crucial. A lot of people still don't realize the difference between Stem Cells and Embryonic Stem Cells. How can you not know? It's insane.
Also, The Obama administration is now pushing to exterminate conscience protection laws so doctors would be forced to perform abortions. That is borderline fascism. Seriously.

This is sickening.

Culture of Death

Yesterday I took a group of students from my school to the UN in NYC to visit an exhibit, Deadly Medicine: Creating the Master Race. This is part of our week long summit on Genocide. The exhibit was about the Nazis and their use of sterilization and euthanasia. The Nazis tried to use science as a means to spread their racist agenda. I couldn’t help but think of the irony of the location of this exhibit; the UN being one of the champions of “reproductive rights”, aka contraception (sterilization) for developing countries. I also couldn’t help but think of the present day scenario going on in our country and around the globe and their similarities; with our new administration now lifting restrictions on federal funding for Embryonic stem cell research as well as funding abortions overseas. It is know that scientists in the Nazi party were familiar with Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, and her advocacy of eugenics. Sanger’s Negro Project had many similarities to the Nazi’s project of creating a master race. I mention this link because Sanger’s mission and spirit is still much alive in Planned Parenthood. African Americans only make up about 13% of our population but account for 35% of all abortions in the US. If we use an eyeball test, most abortion clinics are strategically placed in poor, typically African-American neighborhoods.

I’m also concerned with the uses of science in our present day situation with embryonic stem cell research. A lot of this comes back to the use of language to weasel one’s way around the facts. Look at a recent interview done with former President Clinton on “Larry King Live”, the interview was conducted by Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Dr. Gupta was sought after by Obama to be our nations Surgeon General but he declined. When asked about federal funding for embryonic research Clinton responded:

I think - the answer is I think that we’ll work it through. If - particularly if it’s done right. If it’s obvious that we’re not taking embryos that can - that under any conceivable scenario would be used for a process that would allow them to be fertilized and become little babies, and I think if it’s obvious that we’re not talking about some science fiction cloning of human beings, then I think the American people will support this….

Firstly, we know that an embryo IS a “little baby” but again here the definition of when life begins has been changed to implantation. Secondly, and more importantly, anyone who has taken biology knows that an embryo has already been fertilized. It’s fair to rule out that this was merely a slip of the tongue because he used the exact language further in the interview:

But there are values involved that we all ought to feel free to discuss in all scientific research. And that is the one thing that I think these committees need to make it clear that they’re not going to fool with any embryos where there’s any possibility, even if it’s somewhat remote, that they could be fertilized and become human beings.

Now, there are two possible conclusions: 1. That Clinton doesn’t know that an embryo is a fertilized egg or 2. That he’s using language to confuse/deceive the people watching. Also, I have to wonder about the good doctor who never corrected Clinton’s blatent mistake.

Another contradiction that needs to be pointed out happened with Obama during his March 9^th address defending his lift of the ban on federal funding for new embryonic stem cell lines. Obama states:

This Order is an important step in advancing the cause of science in America. But let’s be clear: promoting science isn’t just about providing resources — it is also about protecting free and open inquiry. It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient — especially when it’s inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda — and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology. By doing this, we will ensure America’s continued global leadership in scientific discoveries and technological breakthroughs. That is essential not only for our economic prosperity, but for the progress of all humanity.

Later in the speech he adds:

We will develop strict guidelines, which we will rigorously enforce, because we cannot ever tolerate misuse or abuse. And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society.

It seems to me that he is using some sort of ideology here when he states that “it is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society.” He fails to give any explanation why it’s wrong, or more specifically “facts”, it’s merely his ideology. One could ague that Obama’s position on “cloning for human reproduction” is quite arbitrary and not based in “scientific facts”. Also, many “scientific facts” today will not be considered “scientific facts” in the future.

Yesterday, I also read an very interesting email discussion between Robert P. George and Doug Kmiec. Kmiec is a staunch supporter of Obama and supposedly pro-life. Kmiec uses the same language game to weasel his way around the issue that George brings up with him. I would love to see a debate between these two, as George proposes.

Brendan

Patronage of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the US

As we celebrate the Annunciation this week.

There are some that I've never heard of: Our Lady of the Woods, Gulf, La Leche, the Milk and Happy Delivery, Prairie, Pines, Universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage_of_the_Blessed_Virgin_Mary

Immaculate Conception - USA
Immaculate Heart of Mary - Georgia, USA
Immaculate Mary - Colorado, USA
Feast of the Immaculate Conception - Soldiers of the USA
Patroness of the United States under her title of the Immaculate Conception
Mary of Nazareth - Iowa, USA
Mary, Queen of Angels - Kansas, USA
Mary the Virgin Mother - South Carolina, USA
Mary, Queen of Peace - North Dakota, USA
Mary, Queen of Peace - Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Mary, Star of the Sea - Hawaii, USA
Mother of God - Kentucky, USA
Notre Dame of Easton - Connecticut, USA
University of Notre Dame - Indiana, USA
Our Immaculate Queen - Washington, D.C., USA
Our Lady of America - USA; Rome City, Indiana - first canonically-approved apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the USA. Happened in The Our Lady Mother of Mercy Chapel on the campus of Sylvan Springs
Our Lady of the Annunciation - Texas, USA
Our Lady of Calvary - Missouri, USA
Our Lady of Consolation - Basilica and National Shrine in Carey, Ohio, USA
Our Lady of Good Help - Washington, USA
Our Lady of Grace - Vermont, USA
Our Lady of the Gulf - Alabama, USA
Our Lady of the Highways - Arizona, USA
Our Lady of the Holy Rosary, North Carolina, USA
Our Lady of the Holy Souls - Arkansas, USA
Our Lady of the Incarnation - Massachusetts, USA
Our Lady of the Kodiak and the Islands - Alaska, USA
Our Lady of Lebanon - Lewisville, Texas, USA
Our Lady of La Leche - Florida, USA
Our Lady of Mercy - Delaware,
Our Lady of the Milk and Happy Delivery, USA
Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal, Pennsylvania, USA
Our Lady of Mount Carmel - Rhode Island, USA
Our Lady of Peace - Maine, USA
Our Lady Help of Christians - New York, USA
Our Lady of Las Vegas - Nevada, USA
Our Lady of Peace - Maine, USA
Our Lady of Perpetual Help - New Hampshire, USA
Our Lady of Perpetual Help - Ewa Beach, Oahu, Hawaii, USA
Our Lady of the Pines - Montana, USA
Our Lady of the Prairie - South Dakota, USA
Our Lady of the Presentation - Nebraska, USA
Our Lady of Providence - Indiana, USA
Our Lady of Prompt Succor - Louisiana, USA
Our Lady of the Snows - Utah, USA
Our Lady of Sorrows - Mississippi, USA
Our Lady of the Universe - Illinois, USA
Our Lady of the Valley - Wyoming, USA
Our Lady of Victory - West Virginia, USA
Our Lady of the Wayside - California (cf. Madonna della Strada)
Our Lady of the Woods - Oregon, USA
Our Lady, Gate of Heaven - Michigan, USA
Our Lady, Mother of the Church - Minnesota, USA
Our Lady, Queen of All Saints - Oklahoma, USA
Our Lady, Queen of the Apostles - Virginia, USA
Our Lady, Queen of the Angels - As per its name, Los Angeles, California
La Conquistadora Our Lady the Conqueror, New Mexico, USA

Mary, Mother of the Word Incarnate...Pray for us!

Re: Brendan's Reviews

Thanks for the post Bren. Both the movie and the book look good, but you're right in suggesting that I would especially like a book that is "sober" and "grounded" when it is about that kind of subject. Your description does catch my interest.

Reviews

Two reviews:
1. The Island. A Russian foreign film about a Orthodox monk who lives an intense hermetical and pentitenial life in a remote monastery. He's gifted with many Charismatic gifts (healing, prophesy, exorcism, and discernment) and is a real prankster. It has a great ending (I was surprised and felt a sense of relief for the main character). The combination of the Charismatic and Orthodox spirituality was very intriguing to me.
If you have netflix you can watch in instantly online (depending of the type of subscription)
Objective: 7.75
Subjective: 8.5
MC: 9

2. Authenticity: A Biblical Theology of Discernment by Thomas Dubay. I've read some of his other stuff and he is one of the foremost experts in spiritual direction in the tradition of St. John of the Cross. Two words that I would use to describe his writings are "grounded" and "sober". His writings are very straight forward and deeply rooted in Scripture and Tradition. This book is not referring to "discerning a vocation" but to "discernment" in terms of knowing whether or not I'm making spiritual progress, whether or not I'm truly following/being lead by the Spirit. He addresses many of the cautions, including "illuminism", the word he uses to describe what we typically think of when someone thinks that they are receiving personal revelation. I found these quotes to be very valuable as a measuring stick for spiritual progress

St John of the Cross explains that "communications which are truly from God have this trait: they simultaneousy exault and humble the soul". One who is genuinely of God is gradually enriched with the divine abundance, and at the some time he grows in humility. He knows God better and is therefor exalted; he knows himself better and is consequently humbled.

Also:
Humility is both a preparation for the Spirit and a result of the Spirit. Not only does the Paraclete choose to enlighten those who are not inflated with their own importance, but it is his very light that enables one to be humble. When God beings to pour his dark contemplation into our mind and heart, we begin to perceive more and more clearly both his purity and our sinfulness, his limitlessness and our finitude.

Kenny, I think you'll like the book, I'll pass it on.

Objective: 8.5
Subjective: 7.75
MC: 9

Film and Book Review

A few of us mentioned this on occasions, and I want to suggest making it a Miles Caritas reality. I am suggesting we have a movie and book review. Anyone can reflect on a movie or book they watched/read recently.

To make this consistent, I say we create our own rating system. I suggest every book/film should have two ratings; one objective and one subjective. I think we should use ten stars 1 being the lowest, 10 the highest. A third rating could also indicate how others in Miles Caritas would like it.

Example 1:
Lives of Others
Sub Scale: 10*
Obj. Scale: 9*
MC Scale: 9*

Example 2:
Animal Collective
Sub Scale: 1*
Obj Scale: 4*
MC Scale: 7-9*

What does everyone think about this idea/and about this rating system?

ESC research

That quote about the scientists reminds me of Gil Bailie story of the scientists who decided they didn't need God any more since they could create the perfect human. They went to tell God this and God challenged them to a contest of who could make a better human. God picked up a handful of dirt and made a human. The scientist goes to do the same when God tells him he has to get his own dirt.

Miles Caritas Is:

Logical,
Reasonable,
Useful,
Thorough
Transcendant


Cephas

Now that we've gotten rid of ideology...

In announcing the federal funding of ESC research, Obama pledged to "make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology."

...while ignoring things like...

- More results, or rather, actual results from adult stem cell research
- The absence of any checks and balances on the judgment of the NIH
- That even scientists are susceptible to error, greed, partisanship and ideology

...but these don't count as facts because someone with a PhD in biochem didn't write them out on official Fact letterhead.

Disasterous Implications

Obama has already signed, by executive order, the reversal of the Mexico City Policy (international funding for abortion). Now, he is intending to reverse Bush's ban on Embryonic Stem Cell Research. I think this will be a common theme, there are many more devastating pro-death executive orders on the way...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/08/obama.stem.cells/index.html

Dr. Harold Varmus, president of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and co-chairman of Obama's science advisory council, said Sunday that Obama will "endorse the notion that public policy must be guided by sound, scientific advice."

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, told reporters that reversing the Bush ban would "once again say to the rest of the world that we will be the beacon for cures and for hope." She credited her support for federal funding in part for her 2006 election.

Today

"These are the days of miracle and wonder, this is the long-distance call"

-John Paul Simon II

Agree with the Cyrene

I knew about Double Effect but I couldn't explain it. Nicely put Simon. Intentional killing of a innocent human as an ends in of itself is never permissable. I like the 1908 version of the Catholic Encyclopedia much better, they gave it some great updates that year.

Findings...

I don't want to interrupt the discussion on abortion (let's hear what everyone else has to say), but I wanted to share some items:

A new article on Fr. Giussani in Chiesa Espresso:
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1337396?eng=y

An article on The Onion on China's One Child Policy. Has satire reached its fulfillment when it ceases being funny?
http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/son_its_time_we_have_a_talk?utm_source=onion_rss_daily

Double Effect

Catholic moral teaching allows for the death of the embryo/fetus in the attempt to save the life of the mother (eg. in the case of ectopic pregnancy where the embryo grows inside the Fallopian tube instead of implanting on the uterine wall-- a situation that results in hemorrhaging and the mother's death if not treated). This situation is covered by the Principle of Double Effect (a la Aquinas) which maintains that a good intention towards a good outcome can be permitted even if a bad outcome happens as a consequence (the precise definition can be found here).

The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1907 states:

If medical treatment or surgical operation, necessary to save a mother’s life, is applied to her organism (though the child’s death would, or at least might, follow as a regretted but unavoidable consequence), it should not be maintained that the fetal life is thereby directly attacked.

So that's something to keep in mind.

As far as the legal restrictions-- I think attempts to save the mother whose life is endangered by the pregnancy should be permitted and taught (though technically, this would not be abortion as the Church defines it, i.e. Intentional Killing). State funding for abortion or abortifacients of any sort outside of this scenario I oppose.

But a society where this is possible is one which recognizes the utterly special dignity of human persons, perceives that life is worth living, and experiences the companionship of the divine that eradicates fear and provides the strength to choose the more difficult path. The only time in history such a society existed was Christian Europe. It was the presence of the Church (Christian people) that lead Roman society to abandon its own abortion practices.

Tuff

I would have to think more about this.

I wanted to say this:
In all circumstances, terminating a pregnancy is strictly prohibited. Although in the case where the health of the mother is severely at risk (to the point of death of the mother) the parents can choose to terminate the pregnancy.

Although, regardless, it still seems to be intentional killing which is difficult. For thousands of years, people have died during child birth.


But, I think I have to say this:
Under federal law, it is never permissable to intentionally terminate a pregnancy.

Yikes.

Everyone else?

Ok, but what about in legal terms? Do you think it should be legal to abort if the mother's life is in serious danger? If you had to make the law restricting abortion right now, what would the restrictions be?

Interesting stuff

I liked the posted lecture, and FOCA article. Kenny, I like the quote you picked out from that article, it's funny. It's true the Catholic Church does so much but more important it simply is. It exists.

"the beauty of liturgy is it's unspontaneity"
Benedict XVI


To answer Kenny's question:

I believe it is always and everwhere evil to commit abortion although I am very conflicted/confused/undecided about the threat to the mothers life. There is a lot of "gray area" here because of technical medical situations. Very difficult decision, I hope I'm never in that situation.

"The Paradox of Choice" Talk

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html

we all know this but i think he gives a good talk

I liked the follow-up that Simon posted to the TIME article on FOCA:

"Some people may find it difficult to do two things at once, but the Church can and does simultaneously carry on pastoral care services, relief services, health care for one-sixth of the patients treated in hospitals each year, secondary and higher education for millions of children, evangelization, teaching, preaching, dispensing sacraments, and so much more. We can even manage to fit in an occasional postcard campaign. "

Out of curiosity, what does everyone think is the appopriate level of restriction to abortion?

completely outlawed in every case?
only lawful in teh case of saving the mother's life?
lawful in the case of rape and incest?
the abortion pill should be legal?
only legal in the first trimester?
etc.?

Thank You Bloom

I finally found someone who qualified the way I read. Harold Bloom in How to Read and Why states: You can read merely to pass the time, or you can read with an overt urgency".

Other Interseting qutoes:

"One of the uses of reading is to prepare ourselves for change, and the final change alas is universal".

"Self-trust is not an endowment, but is the Second Birth of the mind, which cannot come without years of deep reading".

"Since Ideology, particularly in its shallower versions, is peculiarly destructive of the capacity to apprehend and appreciate irony, I suggest that the recovery of the ironic might be a principle for the restoration of reading"

"We read, frequently if unknowingly, in quest of a mind more original than our own".

10-12 inches of snow predicted for tonight. I didn't know nor-easter was here.