Bible + Aristotle = Science?

Of historical and philosophical interest in the development of material science in the West is the question: why didn't other highly developed civilizations make the scientific and technological advances that we have made and continue to make?

My answer: they were not Christian civilizations, or rather, they were not Catholic civilizations. More specifically, they were not and are not civilizations based on a Biblical understanding of creation taught with and through a uniquely Catholic understanding of Aristotelian natural philosophy. You might say that they were and are insufficiently Dominican! :-)

If you are insufficiently curious about the natural world, or if you see curiosity about the natural world as evil, then you will not venture out to observe and attempt to explain what lies outside the mind. If you see the material universe as a deeply flawed reflection of the True Form of the Universe, then you will come to believe that studying the reflection will only lead to error about the Form. In the same way, if you hold that material reality is not real at all and that only the mind matters in constructing what others call "real," then your study will be limited to the mind alone. Also, if you think that language alone determines reality, then you will see no use in trying to connect how you think about reality with any sort of "reality" beyond the way you chose to talk about it.

However, if you hold that the material universe is a creation of a Divine Mind, reflecting this Mind's desire for order and intelligibility, then you will venture out to discover and explain what lies outside the human mind. If you think that you can come to know the Divine Mind better by exploring its creation, then your scientific explorations become not only a professional duty but a religious one as well. Believing that creation participates in its Creator serves the highly innovative purposes of discovery and invention. Believing that you will be improved, enriched, and ultimately redeemed only fuels your natural curiosity.

Some will say that capitalism and democracy contributed to the growth of scientific knowledge in the west. This is certainly true. However, capitalism is a late comer to the world scene of science and democracy in its ancient form was little more than mob rule. Let's not forget that the scientific advances made during the Enlightenment were made possible by a medieval theology of creation. The idea that the medieval Church punished scientific research is nonsense. Almost every scientific discovery and innovation of the Enlightenment can be traced back to a priest or religious living during the middle ages. Conflicts between scientists and Church authority occurred when scientists played at being theologians.

In the modern age, atheistic communism and religious fundamentalism have been the true enemies of science. Need we review Mao's disastrous Great Leap Forward as an example? Or Stalin's collectivization of rural Russia? Or the sorry state of scientific research in Islamic countries? Christian fundamentalism has never held sway over a nation like fundamentalist Islam has and still does. The widely publicized battles over evolution in the US have not seriously damaged scientific research in this country. They have had no effect in predominately Catholic Europe. The danger to a truly advanced science in the west right now is fundamentalist secularism--science as technology without an objective morality. Combined with a "progressive" and materialist view of the human person, secularist science serves an elitist design for manipulating creation without its Creator, without reference to ultimate purpose or transcendent ideals. This means one thing: power. Potentially, unchecked power.

Thus the need for faithful Catholic scientists and theologians schooled in science. The Church has nothing to fear from a scientific method that works under the rubric that it is creation that's being studied. . .not just a physical universe without purpose or design.

Wounded Healer, Bearer of Mystery, Prophet

Bishop Greg O'Kelly, SJ of the Diocese of Port Pirie, Australia has written an excellent article on the nature and future of the Catholic priesthood. An excerpt:

Robert Barron [in an article titled, "Priest as Bearer of the Mystery’, Church, Summer 1994, pp. 10-13] states that ‘what could kill us as a Church is losing the sense of Mystery. What could contribute mightily to that loss is the weakening and dissipation of the priesthood. The time has come not for dismantling the priesthood but for building it up.’ He says that one of the greatest post-conciliar mistakes was to turn the priest into a psychologist, sociologist, social worker, counsellor – anything but a uniquely religious leader. He argues that we should look again at the notion of ontological change that occurs at ordination: priests are made different, while at the same time eschewing applications that make it elitist and exclusive. Situating the priesthood within the context of baptismal ministry helps lessen that danger.

Bishop O'Kelly goes on to condemn clericalism and then outlines three models of priesthood: Wounded Healer, Bearer of Mystery, and Prophet. These are not new models. In fact, they are Biblical in so far as they recall and duplicate the life of Christ, our High Priest. Each has its positives and negatives.

The one model that we need to be very, very careful with is priest as Wounded Healer. Why? In my experience with priests and religious, this model is often taken as a way to explain away rectifiable personal deficiencies. It is certainly true that priests are as "wounded" as anyone else. Ordination does not miraculously dissipate character flaws, bad habits, personality disorders, or psychological problems. In fact, ordination, or rather, being a priest in active ministry can lead a man to cultivate these deficiencies and come to see them as advantages. For example, a man who suffers from a narcissistic personality can be affirmed in his grandiose delusion by an adoring congregation. His grandiosity can be taken as a sign of charismatic leadership and lead him and his congregation into schism.

The Wounded Healer model of priesthood also tends to allow priests a great deal of leeway in dealing effectively with their character flaws. Instead of confronting common human frailties like simple laziness, etc., the Wounded Healer elevates his unwillingness to give 100% to the level of a "wound" and treats it as a symptom of some deeper conflict or trauma. This is not to say that there are no priests out there who have experienced legitimate conflicts and traumas that impede their living out the call of the priesthood. It is to say that not every scar, blemish, or stain is a wound worthy of constant treatment.

The image of the priest as Wounded Healer should be a personal one, a private image that reminds the priest of his deficiencies rather than an excuse to play victim. The same can be said of the other two images as well. The priest as Bearer of Mystery should not become an excuse for an esoteric lifestyle or muddled teaching. The priest as Prophet should not be an excuse to become a self-appointed haranguer for or against a personal agenda. All three models should serve the Church in imitation of Christ as servant-leader--a man, a priest who leads the Church as a servant of the Church.

Bishop O'Kelly rightly condemns clericalism. Priests who use their office to elevate themselves above the lay faithful and rule the roost as local potentates are deeply contrary to servant-leadership. However, clericalism takes two forms: priest as Boss and priest as Regular Guy. We are painfully familiar with the first sort of clericalism. The second is a recent development. In an effort to avoid the clericalism of priest as Boss, some priests have set aside their role as spiritual father and taken up a role akin to older brother or regular guy "Fr. Call Me Bob," in an effort to blend in and take himself off the pedestal, ends up using his priestly power covertly. How often have you met a "Fr. Call Me Bob" who regularly pushes illegitimate liturgical innovations as a way of being prophetic about a gender inclusive agenda for worship? How often have you met this priest in council meetings and found that his casual democratic attitude about parochial governance reaches it tolerance when confronted with traditional Catholics? How often does his personal politics inform his homilies and parish activities? Clericalism is alive and well in both forms and neither serves the Church. However, the priest as Boss has the advantage of being obvious and assertive. The priest as Regular Guy is passive and highly manipulative.

Give the whole article a read.

Way to go, sisters!

Great news from the center of religious life in the U.S.: Nashville, TN!

Most of the new sisters are in their 20s and want to be traditional nuns, wearing full habits and living in a convent. They say that life as a nun offers more than the secular world could ever give them.

The new sisters are a diverse group, including those right out of high school and from across the globe. One, a nurse of Vietnamese descent, came from Sydney, Australia. Another sister is from the Ivory Coast. Three were engineers before coming to the convent [so much for the prog meme that younger religious clamoring for tradition are a bunch of middle-class whites fleeing economic uncertainty!]

Now the question is: will the LCWR learn anything from this example?

Doh! Forget to link the article: CathNews.

Intrinscially unknowable facts?

"So far as I know there are no secular facts that do not challenge the intelligence and ask to be understood, and no forces, natural or moral, which are not better understood than unknown or misunderstood. And I am not convinced that it is otherwise with the facts of the religious life. We are told, of course, that there are facts which in their nature are unintelligible; not merely unknown up to the present time, but intrinsically unknowable, and religious facts hold high rank amongst these unintelligibles. But I doubt whether there can be anything unintelligible except that which is irrational, and I doubt if anything real is irrational except as misunderstood."

[. . .]

"So far from doubting the value of the plain and honest and earnest pursuit of truth in matters of religious faith, I believe that, like the pursuit of moral good, it never utterly fails. The process of enquiry, the very attempt to know, like the process of doing or trying to do what is right, is itself achievement, altogether apart from what comes afterwards. I know nothing better than to be engaged and immersed in the process of trying to know spiritual truths and of acting upon them. Mankind, when it comes of age, will be engaged in this spiritual business even when it is handling the so-called secular concerns of life. And it will handle these all the more securely. Religion will be the permanent background of life—as the love of his wife and bairns is for a good man. The very meaning and purpose of our “circumstances,” as we call the claims of the things and persons that stand around and press upon us, may be to induce and to sustain this double process of knowing the true and doing the right. It is the method—the only natural and successful method—by which men make themselves: and I understand that the final business of man is this of making himself. We must learn yet to estimate men by the fortune they take with them, not by the fortune they leave behind; that is, if religion is true, and if morality and its laws are not fictions of man's vanity."

Henry Jones, "A Faith That Enquires," The Gifford Lectures, 1919–1921

Questions

I asked for questions. . .and I got them:

1). Who are those fun Dominicans that are in your header picture?

Hanging my head in shame: I don't know. The pic is just a small piece of a much larger painting that hangs in the National Gallery in London. Each saint or blessed has an emblem that identifies him or her. I don't recognize any of these. Anyone know?

2). Pray tell us more about the ruckus you caused among our separate brethren because of your habit.

I meant "ruckus" in a good way, meaning that everyone was intrigued by the habit and asked lots of questions. I doubt many of them have ever seen a religious of any sort. . .except for maybe on TV and they usually just put their characters in some version of a Franciscan habit even when they mean for the character to be something other than a Franciscan! Wearing the habit in public always draws attention. I've yet to run into any negativity. . .except for the three Dominican sisters at my CPE site one summer. They harassed me--along with the other LibProts for 12 weeks.

3). TV masses: is appropriate to use as background noise while going about household tasks?

Well, I'm not sure it's OK to think of the Mass as "background noise," but I take your meaning well enough. I see no problem with this. Better the Mass than some silly game show or CNN.

4). So if I buy a copy of your book and send it to you with return postage will you sign it and send it back?

Of course! No problem at all.

5). What really happened with Bishop Martino?

I wish I knew. Apparently, his rather caustic governing style won him few friends and lots of enemies. He got the attention of the Vatican and now he's out. I really don't think he was asked to resign b/c of his pro-life stance or b/c of his other orthodox views. It really does seem to be the case that he was something of a "bull in the china shop." My experience with pastors and bishops is that they have enough to worry about w/o going out of their way to find controversy. Most avoid anything that's going to provoke letters and calls. Unfortunately, letters and calls are inevitable. Bishop Martino had no problem stepping out on a limb. I think he generated one too many complaints to the Vatican. I have to say here: this is just my read on the published reports. I have no inside info.

6). Can you conduct retreats in England?

I can. And I hope I will. Right now, I am planning on spending Sept 2010 at Blackfriars, Oxford. They have a great library and lots of exceedingly clever friars and lay profs there. My hope is to get a portion of my doctoral dissertation outlined and researched in that month. Maybe there will be time to conduct a retreat or two?

7). I know you are reading and writing a lot on the relationship between faith and science. What is the basic relationship?

The theologians who both take their faith seriously (i.e. remain orthodox) and practice good science argue that the essential relationship is located in the common pursuit of discovering and explaining "how the world really is and how it works." This is usually shorthanded by saying that both scientists and people of faith are seeking the Truth. There are a number of ways of pairing science and faith: as complements to one another; as ideological opponents; as utterly incommensurable methods studying irreconcilable objects, and a few others. I argue that they are complementary based on the common pursuit of knowing more about the truth of creation--both its physical structure and divine purpose. Ultimately, what we have is an intelligible universe. Science can help us know how the universe works. Faith can help us know why we are here in the first place.

Both in theology and philosophy of science the major debates have to do with the role of language in constructing theories about unobservable objects. In theology, the issue is how we can talk about an infinitely unknowable God. In science, the issue is the ontological status of theoretical objects (quarks, etc.). Both disciplines have their respective realists and instrumentalists (or anti-realists). Fortunately, in both disciplines, the instrumentalists are in the minority. I have to say though that the instrumentalists are far more interesting to read.

8). How's your book selling (despite the typos)?

At last count, we had sold about 1,000. They printed 2,500, so we have a few more to sell! I haven't seen any reviews yet. . .if there are any.

9). Would you ever celebrate Mass ad orientum ("toward the east," or the priest facing in the same direction as the people)?

Yes. Absolutely. It can be a delicate matter though since all liturgical gestures these days are packed with ideological meaning. Everyone is watching for some indication of abuse, traditionalism, innovation, etc. To just show up one morning and celebrate Mass ad orientum would be a no-no. I would have to take the time to prepare the parish first. That's just good pastoral practice. Of course, the sacramentaty (the big red book the priest reads from) assumes that the celebrant is praying ad orientum. A number of rubrics say things like, "Facing the people, the priest says. . ."

10). What's your recipe for fried chicken?

Easy, cheesy. Marinate parts (with the skin!) in a bowl of buttermilk with a raw scrambled egg. Dredge the parts in a combination of seasoned (salt, pepper, garlic salt) self-rising flour and corn meal (about 2 tbsps of meal to one cup of flour). Dip the floured parts back in the milk and repeat the flour/meal dredge. Get your oil hot but not smoking. If the oil is not hot enough, the breading with absorb the oil. Too hot and the outside will burn before the inside is cooked. Fry until golden brown. Yum. For gravy: pour off all but about three tbsps of the frying oil, leaving the brown bits. Add three tbsps of flour and cook the flour until it is brown. Turn off the heat and add hot water or milk while stirring. Continue adding liquid until the gravy is the right consistency. You might have to give it a little heat to get the right consistency. Season it with salt and pepper to taste.

The Return of Coffee Cup Browsing!

Having completed the Rite of Decaffeinated Exorcism, we now return to the holy pursuit of Coffee Cup Browsing!

Changes in the Roman Missal. . .most look fine to me. (thanks br. George!)

Nauseating: "I pledge to be a servant to our President!"

Fortunately, folks are waking up to what most of us have known all along: B.O. is just another politician.

Playing for keeps among the U.S. bishops; Bishop Martino "resigns"(?)

Gaia worship in a Catholic elementary school

Just after the "reform of the reform," this is our Holy Father's most important initiative

"Reform of the reform" thwarts liturgical protests at Mass

Catholics, community organizing, and playing with the Devil

Pro-wrestling + wildlife conservation = Pandemonium!

I'm going to show Mama Becky these pics next time she tells me I'm messy

A huge list of common misconceptions about just about everything

Scriptural evidence for the Catholic faith

Your one-stop spot for all things about St Catherine of Siena

Hilarious accident reports

What does your name mean in "Monster-ese"?

Books have arrived

Just got back from checking the mail at the New Priory. . .

Four books have arrived:

The Nature of Mind (Rosenthal): no invoice

The Scientific Image (van Fraassen): no invoice

The Many Faces of Realism (Putman): from one of my American Angels!

Scientific Representation (van Fraassen): from my English Angel!

These three books were ordered a long while ago, but I've not rec'd them yet:

The Two Wings of Catholic Thought: Essays on Fides Et Ratio (Foster)

Modern Physics and Ancient Faith (Barr)

Elementary Christian Metaphysics (Owens)

Could be they were sent to Rome. . .

Of squirrels, bees, and coffee

Had a great time with my family in Mississippi. . .

The Reading Squirrels made sure I kept my nose in a book the whole time. . .well, I sneaked out a couple of times for a movie and one visit to a really good Chinese buffet. . .

I cooked a few times--fried chicken, real mashed potatoes, purple-hull peas, cornbread. The ice cream industry in north MS will never be the same after my visit. . .

The nieces are growing up. Sigh. I remember when they were just big enough to play with but not big enough to think they know everything. Ha!

Several of my mom's Protestant co-workers bought copies of my prayer book. We had a signing at the bank. Needless to say, my Dominican habit caused quite a stir among the Baptists and Pentecostals!

Dad's bees thriving. I went with him to a bigger honey-producing operation in TN. I was amazed to learn that it takes eight bees a lifetime to produce one teaspoon of honey. The beekeeper we visited has about 500 hives. I realized right quick that I was not destined to be a beekeeper. . .you have to keep the honey-collection house very warm so the honey doesn't become too thick to strain. As I reminded my dad a few times, "These hands were made for chalices not calluses." Believe me: that got an eye-roll.

Now, I am in Houston for the next month. What to do? Well, there are a number of books sitting around waiting for my attention. The second volume of Treasures needs to be edited and bulked up a bit. There's the third book to start. I might have a preaching gig or two. Mostly, I will be pecking away on the thesis and biding my time until time to return to Rome.

Oh! When I have finished the de-caffeinated exorcism of the Old Priory I will start up Coffee Cup Browsing again. . .no browsing unless I am vibrating at the proper frequency.

Thanks again for the books, the prayers, the good wishes. Keep Mama Becky in your prayers. We're waiting for her colonoscopy results. All will be well, no doubt.

God bless, Fr. Philip, OP

P.S. I will have time to answer questions. . .send them on!

P.P.S. I've updated the WISH LIST. I haven't checked recent arrivals just yet. Thank You notes will go out ASAP!

Made it to Houston!

Made it to Houston about an hour ago. . .

I will post in the morning on my Mississippi adventure.

Thanks for all the prayers for fun and safety.

Thanks for the Browsing and Buying on the Wish List!

There are about 50 comments waiting in my in-box to be moderated. I'll post them in the morning.

I'm spending the next month in the Old Priory at Holy Rosary. The place is more or less abandoned since the New Priory went up in 2005. It felt kinda creepy when I walked in. I soon discovered why. . .the Prior told me that there is no coffee in this building!!!

I shall perform a formal Rite of Decaffeinated Coffee Exorcism first thing, including the Rite of the Sprinkling of Holy Coffee Beans around the property line.

Sancta Maria, ora pro nobis.

Ciao! (for now...)

Dear HancAquam Readers,

I am off for another adventure. . .the squirrels of Mississippi await my arrival.

Then off to Houston before returning to Rome for another exciting year of gelato, the Italian postal service, Catholic tourism, and heavy reading/writing.

Blogging will resume around Sept 4th.

While in Houston (Sept 3-Oct 3) I will be available for talks/retreats. . .frankly, any sort of work I can do to raise some $$$ for my thin student budget!

I've given talks/retreats on:

Faith and Science
Dominican Spirituality
Charity and Truth
Documents of Vatican Two
Pope Benedict's Encyclicals
Basic Catholic Moral Theology
Suffering and Death for Christians
Vocation Discernment
The Mass: Line by Line
Basics of Confession
Theology of Campus Ministry. . .

If you have a special interest, just let me know and maybe we can work something out!

God bless, Fr. Philip

Oh! Don't forget to get a copy of my prayer book, Treasures Old & New: Traditional Prayers for Today's Catholics, vol 1. The publisher wrote to me yesterday and reported that they have already have 680 pre-publications orders! It's not even in the bookstores yet.

Oh, oh! And visit the WISH LIST. . .of course!

Catholics and health-care reform

I'm asked rather frequently these days how faithful Catholics should be thinking about health-care reform. We seem to be in a tight bind between the Catholic imperative to care for others and the equally Catholic imperative to respect individual conscience and freedom.

Here's the very basic question I ask when evaluating any reform of the health-care system: what are the moral principles that stand under the proposed system and drive its inevitably tough choices?

Given the answer to this question, I ask another: what system of laws, regulations, incentives, etc. will be used to implement these moral principles?

In the current debate it seems to me that the proposals under review are based on a highly objectionable utilitarianism; that is, the reforms proposed rely on a variety of cost-benefit analyses that require those making medical decisions to commodify human life. If those making the decisions are not the ones who will suffer the consequences of the decisions made, then the utilitarianism in use becomes nothing short of immoral.

If, as a 95 year old Dominican friar, I decide to forego cancer treatment that will cost my province $150,000, that's my right as a person. However, having this decision made by a government accountant is simply wrong. I may use cost-benefit analysis to determine whether or not I will receive medical treatment. The government cannot. If the argument is made that the government will be paying for the treatment, therefore the government gets to decide on the treatment's value for my life, then I would retort: get the government out of the health-care business!

My fundamental worry is this: I simply do not trust the government to do the right thing, meaning I do think that the government is the proper body for deciding on the relative value of medical treatments. In order to be fair, such decisions would have to be made on objective criteria. We can't have the government deciding life and death issues based on circumstance and intention. This breeds injustice and inequality. Given this, it falls to bureaucrats to establish objective guidelines for decision-making, guidelines that ignore everything that makes me a person created in the image and likeness of God by placing a monetary value on my life. I am reduced to the value of my life expectancy and weighed against monetary costs of extending my life beyond a pre-determined point.

At some point between now (at 45 years old) and my expected age for death, I reach a tipping-point and become an potentially expensive liability to the public treasury. And the only thing that seems to matter is my age. Wholly ignored as irrevelant in the decision-making process is my potential to create something of value after a certain age; and worst of all, my inherent value as a person created by God to flourish is never even considered. Under a utilitarian cost-benefit analysis this inherent worth has no monetary value whatsoever.

So, do the proposals currently under debate respect the inherent worth of the individual person created and sustained by a loving God? Are the proposed medical decision-making processes grounded in the notion that patients have the freedom of conscience inherent to being persons? Will these processes reduce the person to a monetary value or treat persons as inherently valuable?

I don't think so.

Mocking the Obama-icon

This vid drew my attention as a literary theorist.

One staple of literary criticism is the process of digging out the symbols, signs, icons, and idols of an author/text and subjecting them to "a reading." In my time in grad school, the favored kinds of readings to do were Marxist, feminist, and deconstructive--all of these offered (and still do) perfectly legit methods of getting at an interpretation of a text. No one method is fool-proof or absolute (the $5 academic word is "totalizing"). We were encouraged and sometimes even required to mix it up a bit and produce Marxist-feminist, or feminist-deconstructive, etc. readings that revealed all sorts of literary goodness in the text, or rather, revealed the reader's meta-narrative assumptions about how literary texts are produced and consumed (ahem).

Anyway, this vid does an excellent job of deconstructing the (in)famous Obama-icon we see popping up on all sorts of government propaganda. The critic here makes a simple point: at no other time in American history have we seen a President of the U.S. "branded" in the way that Obama is being branded. He notes that the Obama-icon has replaced the presidential seal in many venues and has even been displayed overlaid on the presidential seal to suggest the dissolution of the presidency and the ascendenacy of The One.

This would be scary if Americans were not so marketing-savvy. We get it. Political icons only work if they manage to sublimate themselves as signs; that is, if they become part of the semiotic landscape, disappearing so as to stand up for something more substantial. Political icons as brand labels fail precisely because they mark out an impermanent personality, a changeable, compromising agenda, and the political ambitions of a narcissist.

The American flag, the presidential seal, the blind-folded statue of justice, "We the People. . ." all stand for enduring principles and ideals. The Obama-icon stands for nothing more than the political ambitions of a Chicago bureaucrat who happens to occupy the White House for a time. Obama is not America. Neither was Bush, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, or any of the others. All of these men served a larger agenda, a bigger principle. The Obama-icon and its attached ideology makes one wonder if The One serves the same ideals.

The critic in this vid correctly predicts that the Obama-icon will backfire on The One. Perpetual campaign mode is no way to run a country. Already the "O" icon is being lampooned. And the one thing a serious narcissist* cannot tolerate is ridicule.

*There's nothing special about Obama's narcissism. Anyone entering politics has to be something of a narcissist.

The red-herrings of the LCWR

Meeting recently in New Orleans, the LCWR issued a statement on the upcoming theological assessment by the CDF. Among the predictable "pearl clutching" exclamations of indignation are two charges against the Vatican's probe that are meant to serve as red herrings. Both these charges are made under the general charge of "lack of transparency":

1). Why can't we see the report itself?

2). Who's paying for this investigation?

The first charge sets up an ominous specter of secretive Vatican-doings. You can almost hear the dark, foreboding music in the background as the sisters furrow their collective brow. The second charge plants the idea that the investigation is being bankrolled by some nefarious right-wing group, implying that the investigation would not be taking place if this group had not paid the Vatican to do it.

Why are these charges red-herrings? How do they attempt to distract readers? The LCWR is either teaching with the Catholic Church, or it isn't. They are either leading their associated nuns and sisters in the apostolic faith, or they aren't. The investigation is set to determine whether or not these women religious--vowed to serve the Church--are, in fact, serving the Church honestly or using their vast resources and influence to undermine the Catholic faith. Having access to the reports will not change nearly forty-years of public statements supporting women's ordination, same-sex marriage, feminist political ideology, etc. Knowing who (if anyone) is paying for the investigation will not change these public statements either. Basically, these charges by the LCWR are analogous to a reckless driver charging the police officer who stops him with reckless driving himself. How else did you catch me, Officer? You must have been speeding too! The officer's speeding in no way mitigates the recklessness of the indignate driver.

Here's what the LCWR is really afraid of:

From the Instrumentum Laboris (this is not the CDF document but the working instrument for the assessment of the quality of life for the sisters, a separate investigation: "If any sister wishes to express her opinion about some aspect of her religious institute, she may do so freely and briefly, in writing and with signature, specifically identifying her institute by title and location. In order to respect each sister’s freedom of conscience, any sister may send her written comments directly and confidentially to Mother Mary Clare Millea at the Apostolic Visitation Office (PO Box 4328, Hamden, CT, 06514); or by fax: (203-287-5467) by November 1, 2009."

Why is this scary? The LCWR knows what many of us know about the "sisters in the convents." They do not support the neo-pagan/eco-feminist agenda of their leadership conference, but often find themselves intimidated into silence. By allowing individual sisters to write to Mother Clare (the lead investigator for this assessment), the Vatican is encouraging sisters to express themselves outside the tightly controlled, ideologically pure agenda of the LCWR. In other words, this move undermines the power of the LCWR to manage the message. The last thing the leadership of any self-proclaimed revolutionary movement wants is public criticism from those they claim to represent. How often do "people's revolutions" end up in the hands of elitist demagogues?

My own experience with nuns and sisters with regard to both assessments is telling. I've yet to run across a "sister in the convent" who understands the reasons for these assessments. When I describe the stated reasons, they are often shocked and saddened to hear what the LCWR has been spewing against the Church in their name. All they hear about the assessments comes from the LCWR.

It it vitally important for Catholics to understand that the CDF's theological assessement of the LCWR is NOT an investigation into the theological opinions of individual sisters or congregations. The leadership conference itself is being assessed; that is, the focus of the assessement is on the public statements of conference speakers, conference resolutions, and projects funded by the conference to determine whether or not these adhere to basic Church teaching. In its forty-year history, the LCWR has publicly supported women's ordination; overturning the Church's teaching on same-sex morality; and seriously questioned the unique and final role of Christ in salvation history (i.e., Christ may not be the only way to God, leading some to hold that other religions can lead to salvation on their own terms). These three areas of dissent have been marked for special attention by the CDF.

This bears repeating: any negative conclusion made by the CDF with regard to its investigation accures to the LCWR itself. . .NOT to individual sisters or congregations; meaning, if the CDF concludes that the LCWR has been deficient in teaching the Catholic faith, this should not be understood as a condemnation of any one sister or congregation. Investigations into the work of individual theologians is an entirely different process that sometimes takes up to ten years or more.

I am being so adamant about this distinction b/c I fear that faithful Catholics may conclude that a negative evaluation of the LCWR by the CDF means that all (or even most) American religious women are involved in dissident activity. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am confident that the overwhelming majority of our sisters are doing exactly what they vowed to do: serve the Church. The "non serviam" that the LCWR often proclaims to the Church should not be extended to most sisters.

Please offer prayers and fasts for the LCWR, the CDF, Mother Clare, and especially for the innocent sisters and nuns who are being subjected to this investigation through no fault of their own. Also, encourage individual sisters to write to Mother Clare and express themselves freely.

H/T: Ignatius Insight

Sample pages of my prayer book

WooHoo!!!

Liguori Publications has sample pages of my prayer book up for view.

Go here and then buy one!

By the way, all royalties from the sell of this book go to my province.

(Please link to the sample pages if you have a blog)

The joker behind the Joker

You really gotta love how politics produces the best ironies in the world!

Remember that Obama-Joker poster that popped up in L.A. with "socialism" as a caption?

Remember how the NYT, CNN, WaPo, LAT, and just about every other Old Media parrot machine assured us that whoever created the poster was obviously an angry, white, Republican racist?

Remember how the above mentioned parrots squawked about how denying the blatant racism of the poster is itself a form of racism?

Remember how you reacted when you discovered that the poster's creator is a left-liberal Palestinian-American Democrat?

I do! I laughed. Hard.