November 2003 Archives

When the number of things I want to chatter about are many, and the minutes with which I have to chatter are few, I try to pick a subject that hasn't received enough attention. Tonight, we ask, "Why isn't Bush going to the funerals of soldiers who died in Iraq?"

Of late, many left-wingers have been asking this question, and it is typical of the Left's off-the-rails hatred of President Bush. What they're really asking is,
"Why isn't Bush calling more attention to deaths in Iraq, which would hurt him politically and give Howard Dean some great footage to use in nasty campaign ads?"

There's a great answer to their question here, which prompted a slew of responses. Think about something else -- if the president went to a funeral, the focus of the event would no longer be on remembering the dead, paying respects to the family, and (if you're Catholic) praying for the repose of the departed. It would be about the president attending a funeral.

But for the Left, nothing is too sacred to be off-limits to politics, not even a funeral, because to the committed Leftist, politics is sacred: he does not believe in a final, divine justice to be meted out by the perfect Judge, so politics is the only way to achieve justice. Men must seize power and order the world for themselves -- or at least the correct men must do so. That this thinking must logically end in the Gulag or Dachau does not occur to today's man of the Left, any more than it did to yesterday's.

I read a piece the other day, I think it was in the Weekly Standard but it may have been in National Review, about the United States Marine Corp collecting toys to distribute to children in Iraq. Unfortunately, I think my mom threw out the magazine before I could go back and get the address. I'm familiar with the USMC's toys for (local) tots programme, but this is the first time I had come across their toys for Iraqi tots programme. This is something I would like to encourage all our readers to support. Could Eric or any of other Marines please post the details?

What goes around comes around: the immoral medical techniques vaunted as great breakthroughs create new opportunities for treating people as things.

UK authorities have banned a scheme that would, in effect, pay infertile women who seek in vitro fertilization. Under the proposal, women would undergo extra rounds of treatment to stimulate egg production and give all the eggs from those treatments away.

The payoff of about £2000 -- call it $3400 -- per cycle would come in the form of a price discount on the lady's own IVF procedures.

If we're willing to treat our own offspring -- our human embryos -- as the object of production techniques, including the selection of desired ones, freezing of surplus, and disposal of those rejected -- well, we can't be surprised if people try to treat the woman's body as an object, an egg factory that can be rented.

A friend of mine sometimes answers questions from non-Catholics over the Internet, and he recently got a puzzling e-mail from a man interested in the Faith. The gentleman and his Catholic wife were apparently married in a Protestant ceremony (presumably without a dispensation). His wife has been under the impression that if he becomes Catholic and they marry in the Church, the ceremony would "have to" be conducted at a side altar.

I'm not familiar with that practice, though according to what I find on the 'net, it apparently used to be customary for mixed marriages to be solemnized away from the main altar of a church. Does anyone know when this practice went away? Was it a matter of law?

In this couple's case, if he becomes Catholic, it won't be a mixed marriage, so even if the rule were still in place, it wouldn't seem to apply. All in all, the lady's concern may be unnecessary.

Mark Steyn weighs in with his usual pointed (and hilarious) commentary concerning the recent CAIR flap with Johnny Hart's B.C. cartoon:

Although I agreed of course that Islamophobic cartooning was the most pressing issue of the week, in my usual shallow way I'd become distracted by some of the day's more trivial stories - the 11 Hindus burnt alive by a Muslim gang in Bangladesh, the 13 Christian churches torched by Muslim rioters in the Nigerian town of Kazaure, and the 27 Turks and Britons murdered by Muslim terrorists in Istanbul.

No dead Jews in that particular day's headlines, but otherwise a good haul of Hindus, Christians and, of course, Muslims. Every society has its ugly side: in America, the problem is stone-age cartoons; in Nigeria, it's stone-age - or stoning age - reality. But one can't help noticing that polysemic cartooning seems a notably ineffective way of stirring up anti-Muslim feeling, at least when one looks at preliminary statistics for Muslims murdered in America this Ramadan, compared with Muslims murdered in, say, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

After joining Jim Antle over at Enter Stage Right as one of the few voices crying in the wilderness when it comes to Howard Dean, I was pleasantly surprised by the last few issues of The Weekly Standard. It seems that neo-conservatives are beginning to realize that Howard Dean could pose a serious threat to President Bush's 2004 re-election campaign. This is especially the case among libertarian voters, whose influence extends far beyond their actual numbers. (See Jim Antle's Conservative Crack-Up -- Will libertarians leave the Cold War coalition? in a recent issue of The American Conservative).

Anyway, the past couple of issues of The Weekly Standard have done a great job exposing Dean. First, they went after Dean's agricultural plan and showed how increased government regulation of minimum prices, rather than help the family farm, will kill it off. This is what happened to small mom-and-pop dairy farms in Vermont when Dean undertook to protect them through a multi-state dairy agreement in New England. The legislation enacted simply hastened their demise. Now try doing this nationally and in every area of agriculture, WS argues, and the results will be even more disastrous. Hopefully, libertarians will take note.

This was either followed up or preceded in another issue (I cannot recall which, since Florida mail has been out of whack these past couple of weeks) with an editorial speaking of how the economic recovery should help the President win re-election, but how he still remains politically vulnerable over the war should the right democrat be nominated. There was another piece recently discussing whether or not, if Dean got the nod, he would make a bee-line for the center. Regardless, it is good to see that the Weekly Standard, while supporting the President's re-election bid, is not taking it for granted. The Republicans need to remain on the offensive since the potential for a Democrat upset remains.

I'm sure everyone has seen the news. Bush's trip to Iraq made me glad for two reasons:
1. It proves that our government can still keep a secret under difficult circumstances
2. It's as strong a show of support as can be made for freedom in Iraq.

A little news from the moderate-trad front: it's finally happened: a celebration of Mass according to the 1962 Missal in St. Peter's, in connection with a meeting of Una Voce.

The Book of Divine Worship arrived the other day; it's a large and attractively designed volume for the Anglican-use liturgy, including propers for Sundays and Holy Days, formulas for the Daily Office, the Holy Eucharist, the rites of Holy Baptism, Holy Matrimony, and Burial of the Dead; and two versions of the Psalter. It's distributed by "Our Lady's Dowry" in San Antonio.

Look at this site to discover an apparently new and exciting way to pray. While you're there, you can sign up for their "Soaking Prayer" week-long training sessions!

(I wonder what one does after this mental marinating.)

A turkey is more occult and awful than all the angels and archangels. In so far as God has partly revealed to us an angelic world, He has partly told us what an angel means. But God has never told us what a turkey means. And if you go and stare at a live turkey for an hour or two, you will find by the end of it that the enigma has rather increased than diminished.

G.K. Chesterton

A friend of mine, who happens to be the Adjutant Judicial Vicar of his diocese, graciously allowed me to blog the following email which he sent over a canon law listserve. I have to say that my tribunal experience has not been much different than his own:

Our Judicial Vicar asked the tribunal
notaries to do a brief review of the 555 marriage cases between 1998
and mid-2003. The tribunal collected data regarding various types of
reported abuse (verbal and emotional, physical, drugs and alcohol,
and sexual), including who was the victim of the abuse, when the
abuse occurred (pre-marriage, marriage, or both), and who was the
perpetrator of the abuse. A brief summary and a 4-point summary
follows.

We are sure the results will come as no surprise to those of us who judge theses cases but thought that the results might be of interest
to the group.

BRIEF SUMMARY:

In 84% of our cases, some type of abuse occurred. In 91% of these cases, the person experienced abuse prior to the marriage, and in 58% of these cases, the person also married into an abusive relationship. In 86% of these cases, the person was abused in the
immediate or extended family, and in 52% of these cases, the person's spouse also experienced abuse prior to the marriage. Only 2.5% of the sexual abuse cases were reported, and of these, none of the abuse that had occurred in the immediate or extended family were reported to the proper authorities.

4-POINT SUMMARY:

1) In 84% of our annulment cases, some type of abuse occurred in the person's life - 465 cases involved some type of abuse (84% of the 555 cases).

2) In 91% of the abuse cases, at least one person had experienced abuse prior to the marriage, and in 58% of the abuse cases, at least one person in the marriage had experienced some type of abuse both prior to the marriage and in the marriage - 421 cases involved abuse prior to the marriage (91% of the 465 cases), 149 cases involved abuse prior to the marriage only (32% of the 465 cases), 43 cases involved abuse in the marriage only (9% of the 465 cases), 272 cases involved abuse both prior to and in the marriage (58% of the 465 cases).

3) In 86% of the cases where the person experienced abuse, the abuse occurred in the immediate or extended family, and in 52% of the cases where the person experienced abuse in the immediate family, he or she also married someone who had also experienced abuse prior to the marriage - 365 cases involved abuse in the immediate family (78% of the 465 cases), 36 cases involved abuse in the extended family (8% of the 465 cases), 401 cases involved abuse in the immediate or extended family (86% of the 465 cases), 189 cases involved abuse prior to the marriage by both parties (52% of the 365 cases).

4) In 19% of the cases where the person experienced some type of abuse prior to the marriage, the abuse was reported to be sexual abuse. Of these, only two of the eighty cases (2.5%) were reported to the authorities. No one reported the sexual abuse that had occurred in the immediate or extended family.

The following numbers represent that various types of abuse often accompanies other forms of abuse, e.g., alcohol abuse by a family member often accompanies verbal and/or physical abuse on others. Emotional/Verbal: 334 cases of the 421 cases with pre-marriage abuse Alcohol/Drugs: 289 cases of the 421 cases with pre-marriage abuse Physical: 168 cases of the 421 cases with pre-marriage abuse Sexual: 80 cases of the 421 cases with pre-marriage abuse General figures indicate that one of three (33%) women and one of four (25%) to seven (14%) men have experienced sexual abuse. Thus, the reported figure of 19% appears to be conservative. At the same time, it is striking that this large a number is reporting the sexual
abuse in the tribunal process.

Fraternally,

Fr. X,
Diocese of Y

Thanksgiving Day has an unusual position in the religious life of America: with its lore linked to the settlement in Massachusetts, it is basically a celebration of the country's founding and Protestant heritage. And it's nearly universally observed: the one high holy day of American Protestant communities. Even anti-liturgical fundamentalists who don't believe in holy days can be expected to have a morning service on the fourth Thursday in November. Americanism vincit omnia.

The hymns of Thanksgiving Day just beg to be sung by a confident congregation. Here are two:

(Note: Some of the pages at the following links have embedded music files.)

We gather together
Come, ye thankful people, come

Probably nobody is going to be checking CL on Thanksgiving -- I doubt I will -- so I suggest we start the annual litany of thanks a day early. Here are some of mine:

-- Being back in the United States after being in the Middle East most of the year.

-- That we have a military capable of inflicting grievous damage against our enemies, and the enemies of true peace, without doing any substantial damage to the innocent.

-- Despite the constant encroachments of (sometimes) well-meaning politicians, we still live in an empire of freedom.

-- My family worships in a faithful church with faithful priests, and many faithful fellow parishioners.

-- We have a new baby who is fat and healthy.

-- Our house is small but cozy and warm, and I love coming home to it every day.

What are yours?

Update, 3:42 p.m.:
-- How could I forget? A wife who loves me despite my flaws, and my other two kids who pour joy into my life.

-- The people at work whom I supervise, who also tolerate me and our often-surreal working conditions.

-- That I don't have to travel today!

An article circulating among traditionalists charges that the sanctuary at Fatima is "to become an interfaith shrine", according to statements at a recent conference:

Delegates attending the Vatican and United Nations (UN) inspired annual interfaith congress "The Future of God", held during October in Fátima, heard how the Shrine is to be developed into a centre where all the religions of the world will gather to pay homage to their various gods. The Congress was held in the Paul VI Pastoral Centre and presided over by the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon José de Cruz Policarpo.

It looks like the conference was indeed an opportunity for indifferentist talk by some participants, Catholic and otherwise, but fortunately, somebody has thought to ask the Vatican representative Abp. Fitzgerald about the rumors, and he confirms that while Fatima welcomes all people to come, talk of "an interfaith shrine" is 100% bunk.

A retired American guy named Rick Salbato lives in Fatima, putting together his web site about Catholic controversies; he's provided his own take on the affair too.

Hal Lindsay, call your office. Back in the '70s and '80s, Christians who worried about the use of technology for totalitarian purposes would speculate about nefarious plots with apocalyptic overtones, usually involving Euro-bureaucrats and a Big Scary-Sounding Supercomputer to be nicknamed "the Beast".

I guess it's time for such stories to start the rounds again, 'cause this technological proposal is enough to creep me out.

Where is everyone? The food coma can't have set in early.

I don't recall ever seeing a football post here.

Turns out it's open season on the Redskins.

Be careful not to speed in Washington D.C.; the police are handing out
Redskins tickets.

Q: What's the difference between the Redskins and a dollar bill?
A: You can still get four quarters out of a dollar.

Q: What do you call 47 people watching an NFL playoff game on TV?
A: The Washington Redskins.

Q: What's the difference between O.J. Simpson and the Redskins?
A: O.J. Simpson at least had a defense.

Announcement from public address system at FedEx Field:
"Will the parents who lost your eleven kids here at the stadium please
come get them? They are beating the Redskins 14-0."

Q: What do the Redskins and possums have in common?
A: Both play dead at home and get killed on the road.

Q: How do you keep the Redskins out of your yard?
A: Put up goal posts.

Q: What do you call a Redskin with a Super Bowl Ring?
A: A thief.

Q: Why was Steve Spurrier upset when the Redskins' playbook was stolen?
A: He wasn't finished coloring in it yet.

The world didn't notice his death the first time around either. Joseph Loconte remembers. (NYT, LRR)

...to the Catholic Campaign for Human Development. Here's what I wrote about it last year, and some comments from elsewhere on the net.

Thanks to Mark Shea for the reminder.

This week, something like 110,000 people marched through London, protesting for "peace," chanting "All we are saying is give Saddam a chance," and other nonsense. To put that into perspective, there were 400,000 pro-hunting protestors last year in central London -- the biggest demonstration in British history.

On the day of the demonstration, I happened to be in London on business, and the protestors marched near my hotel. They were an exceedingly polite crowd, as they were mainly rural folk who didn't want the lucrative sport of fox hunting banned (Mad Cow Disease had already impoverished the countryside). There were no childish demonstrations that I could see, and everyone was mostly dressed in traditional hunting tweeds, except for the three ladies who were topless except for strategically placed pro-hunting stickers and their open jackets. (No, I will not give you a link to the pictures.)

So while there are plenty of Britons who are in favor of a Saddamite restoration, it's worth remembering that fox hunting really gets their national blood moving.

From the Associated Press:

"Two other donkeys - one pulling a rocket launcher and another rigged to a bomb - were found within hours, one 30 yards from the Italian Embassy. U.S. officials said the targets were the headquarters of a Kurdish political party and a law school."

If Leno and Letterman don't make fun of these people for using ass-delivered missiles, they should be thrown in jail.

If it's your job to get offended, if you get more donations by fomenting angst about anything that could possibly be offensive to your constituency, if you find a conspiracy staring back at your from your bowl of corn flakes, then it does.

And for those people who say it's more than just a toilet joke, look what I have for you:

So let's get this all straight for you folks out there:
There's a good chance you'll see a cresent moon in the following places:
The night sky and the door of an outhouse. And outhouses stink. And the joke is, who would go into an outhouse not knowing that it stinks.

It's like me saying: Is it me, or does CAIR sometimes go out on a limb to make it seem like perfectly normal things are totally offensive to Islam?

You'd think the guy had written a sequel to the Satanic Verses or something...

Recently, we have received some comments about the tone of our articles. In response, I have prepared two versions of this post. Please tell me which one you prefer -- or if they both suck, then say so.

Every morning, I am pestered by an old man driving his enormous car. Right after an old lady says in a hectoring voice, "Don't come home without passing a prescription drug benefit!", my tormentor comes on the television and says in a grating voice, "When ya gonna get it duuun?"

The commercial is from some group promoting the giveaway of free medication to undeserving old people. "That's not fair!" I hear from the back. "We need those drugs to stay alive! You whippersnapers will be old someday! You'll need this!" We'll see about that.

Meanwhile, there's something a little unseemly about providing $400 billion of medication to any senior citizen on demand, though retirees making more than $80,000 a year have to pay a little more. So if you're a married couple in your late 60s, own your own home, have no kids in the house, and make $75k, you get drugs from the feds.

If you take nothing else away from this post, remember: the prescription-drug bill isn't for the truly indigent. The Church teaches that we should place the needs of the poor, sick, and vulnerable ahead of everyone else's. That's not what this bill will do. Medicare -- along with Social Security and student loans -- is middle-class welfare. And it's a lot worse than regular welfare: you at least have to prove you're poor to get that. To get Medicare, you only need to prove that you're over 65.

I'll let my 4-year-old son Charlie have the last word on the subject. Paige and I were talking about this subject at the breakfast table a few days ago, and Charlie heard me say "they're taking our money whether they need it or not." He looked shocked, and asked, "Who is taking our money?"

"Well, there are some people who want to get the government to take our money so they can buy stuff for themselves."

"But that's stealing!" he said indignantly. Yep.

Every day, I wake up and think, "God, is there any way you could make the government take more money from my paycheck? Because I'd probably squander it on food or clothing for my three young kids, or save it for our retirement." Luckily, there's a government program in the works that will give lots of free medication to cute, deserving old people. Whom we should cherish and love.

Still, I have just the teensiest, weensiest issue with one small, probably insignificant aspect of the Medicare prescription-drug benefit bill. It seems that not everyone -- and by "not everyone," I mean "probably three or four people" -- is unable to pay for his medication, and might -- and by "might," I mean "in all likelihood, I'm probably wrong" -- be able to contribute a tiny bit more money for their medicines. And by "tiny," I mean "five bucks or so."

Yet I know that taking money from us younger people is the will of God and His Servant, Ted Kennedy. I love this day. I shall now go outside and roll in the grass and think of fuzzy bunnies.

Denver's Archbishop Chaput gave a wide-ranging talk to a Catholic women's group last month:

The reason the secular world seeks to reinvent or reinterpret Mary is because she's dangerous. She's the model of mature human character -- a human being who co-creates a new world not through power, but through unselfish love, faith in God, and the rejection of power.

That kind of witness goes against the spirit that dominates our world -- the immaturity and selfishness in our personal consumption, our politics and our workplaces, and even within our families....
The struggle for power is what the modern world is all about.

The Tower: Nathan Nelson has been posting on-target comments around town for a while, and his own site deserves a visit.

In Ecumenical Insanity, "Athanasius" notices the genetics researchers' latest manifestation of hubris: synthetic viruses. (His hardlinks aren't working, so look in the archives for Sunday, Nov. 16, 2003.)

Make that three. An M.I.C. brother posts a link to a cool rap video by Fr. Stan Fortuna.

On the third day of the "surprising" criminal proceedings against Michael Jackson, I am officially tired of hearing about it. On the television news, on the radio, in the newspaper...enough. The guy isn't a head of state, and he isn't even an important celebrity anymore (is "important celebrity" an oxymoronic phrase?) If he's convicted for sex abuse, there will be no societal consequences.

Greedy retirees are poised to extort $40 billion a year from working American families, using the government as the muscle man. That's a story. Radical Islamist terrorists are murdering innocent people in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Iraq. That's a story. Yet what do the watchdogs in the press think is the most important story right now? A freakish pop star is going to be arrested for being a pervert.

If Jackson is innocent, I hope he goes free. If he's guilty, I hope he goes to jail and repents his sins. Either way, I don't want to hear about it.

I've been wondering where this guy was. He first attracted attention at churches in PA a few years ago, but now he's around Fayetteville.

One thing I like about the Orthodox Eastern Churches: they have bishops who don't fool around with being polite about the weird heresies that come from sexual confusion.

In October, after some Russian priest performed a wedding ceremony for two guys, not only did his bishop defrock him, he had the chapel razed. I'm not saying I approve of doing that, but it does demand respect.

After the Robinson consecration in November the Russian Orthodox Church told PECUSA officially there wasn't any point in talking any more.

the 'consecration' of a gay priest has made any communications with him and with those who consecrated him impossible. We shall not be able to cooperate with these people not only in the theological dialogue, but also in the humanitarian and religious and pubic spheres. We have no right to allow even a particle of agreement with their position, which we consider to be profoundly antiChritian and blasphemous.

The arrogant "progressives" don't hesitate to preach their false gospel even to venerable prelates, and sometimes the prelates give 'em a good smackdown. Hawk-eyed Lee Penn quotes Episcopalian bishop William Swing on his attempt to instruct the Ecumenical Patriarch:

I mentioned that I have ordained more women than any other bishop in the history of the Church and would be glad to talk about my experience. He said, 'I don't want to know your experience.' That was that.

The Oriental Orthodox Churches (Armenian Apostolic, Syrian Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox) have told the Episcopalians to go "reflect upon" the consecration of their gay bishop, and when the phone don't ring, you'll know it's us.

Who's left for the PECUSA to collaborate with? Just liberal Protestantism.

Thanks to Dom for posting Lee's article.

I saw the movie "Master and Commander" last Friday, and I give it my warm recommendation. The climax wasn't disappointing, exactly, but it was less than one might hope; still, watching Russell Crowe is always enjoyable. Despite his penchant for rough behavior and womanizing, I'll take his unapologetic masculinity over the Men Without Chests such as Keanu Reeves, Ethan Hawke, and the other vacant male leads who wander around movie sets in southern California.

One thing that stuck out was the music on the soundtrack. Of the recurring themes, two of them weren't contemporary to the time in which the movie was set (1805). The first was "Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallis," by Ralph Vaughn Williams. Normally, I require my composers to be dead prior to 1900 in order to give them a listen, but Vaughn Williams is one of the few moderns I can stomach. His "Fantasia" is a deeply profound interpretation of Tallis, and one of my favorite works ever -- but it's a 20th-century take on a turn-of-the-17th-century piece.

Likewise, the third movement of Corelli's Christmas Concerto in G minor gets a lot of eartime, and with good reason: it's got a sumptuous, rich emotional texture, but it is 1) a Christmas piece; and 2) composed well over a century before the fictional events in the movie. Which is like playing, say, ragtime in a modern-day movie: it's not wrong, but it is incongruous.

Nevertheless, the music did mesh well with the movie itself, and I seriously doubt very many people had a problem with the music.

(You can download an excerpt from the third movement of Corelli's concerto. I don't think I'm violating the Fair Use Doctrine by excerpting this wonderful CD by I Musici, especially when I'm telling everyone to hunt down this CD for Christmas -- it's a refreshing break from saccharine secular songs and wonderful but overplayed hymns.)

...is the end of legal marriage, argues Stanley Kurtz.

ScrappleFace is on the job.

The population of Massachusetts is half Catholic. Now they're the first significant state to legalize gay marriage. Granted, this is judge-imposed legislation, but I find it shameful that Catholics have succumbed to the Culture of Death to such an extent. What are Catholics doing up there? Or in the rest of the godless north, which is the one of the prime nurturers for the CoD? Seems like many, if not most of them are complicit.

I'm sure Richard is going to comment on this, so maybe he can chime in with some hopeful news.

The idea of a "Lord Of The Rings mass" over in Holland made Kathy Shaidle flinch and made Mark Shea's eyes roll back into his head, but fortunately De Telegraaf describes the place as a gereformeerde church -- that's Reformed, y'all. Whew: it's not one of ours.

I guess the combination of being Dutch and Reformed doesn't mean the same thing there as it does here, given that they also held a "Harry Potter service".

Sage words from the U.K. Loony Left:

[Mayor of London] Livingstone says Bush is 'greatest threat to life on planet'

ONE IN THREE BRITONS THINK BUSH IS STUPID - POLL

In other news, one in five Britons said Bush had "cooties," while one in eight called him "Mr. Poo-Poo Head."

The Left, on both sides of the Atlantic, has chosen screaming hyperbole as its normative mode of expression. Practically every leftist movement -- feminism, environmentalism, trade unionism, and the rest -- is shot through with Marxist historicism, the belief that History-with-a-capital-H is moving inevitably in the direction they intuited. In the last two decades, especially after the fall of the Berlin Wall, it has been harder to argue that state socialism is the wave of the future. Since Sept. 11, 2001, it has been rather more difficult to say we live in a world "beyond good and evil."

If you've been caught up in the fantasies of the Left for your whole life, as Red Ken Livingstone has, it must be a difficult existence. A rational mind would adjust his theories to fit reality, but the committed leftist drinks deeply from the wellspring of irrational faith: that lo stato can solve every problem without resorting to force, and that human ingenuity can father a perfect world without God's assistance. The first and foremost reason the Hard Left hates Bush is because he's a committed Christian who believes in God's providence. They thought his type was on the way out, what with modern science and all; it enrages them to think that not only do committed Christians still exist, but they seem to be making a comeback.

The same wounded roars come from Catholic liberals, too, as they watch their "Spirit of Vatican II" novelties dissipate like a puff of smoke in a strong breeze. Younger Catholics, and especially younger priests, aren't "progressing" in the way they had hoped. A faithful man who sees things going amiss can say o tempora! o mores!, but ultimately lay the matters in God's hands. The secular man cannot abide any setbacks, as the real, ultimate battleground is in the here-and-now; thus the impatience and rage when things don't go his way.

Howard Dean continues to strike me as probably the Dem. candidate most dangerous to the President in next year's election. Unlike the other Dem hopefuls, Dean recognizes that he cannot win the presidency with only the Dem's traditional constituencies. So he's going after a number of traditional Republican constitutencies as well. Last week I stated that one of these would be the Libertarian vote. I'm not the only conservative to make this prediction. In fact, I've mostly been following the lead of my friend and fellow Enter Stage Right writer James Antle.

Last night I happened to catch one of Howard Dean's ads on the television. He appeared to attack the President over the Patriot Act and the tightening of civil liberties. Dean was obviously aiming for the Libertarian vote by exploiting their discontent with the Bush administration. James Antle does an excellent job discussing the current troubled relationship between conservatives and Libertarians in this week's American Conservative.

That being said, at a time when we're making serious inroads into traditional Dem constituencies, what does the President need to do to protect his own? (Admittedly, if Dean were pro-life I would not be asking this question.) First, I think the President must continue to remain firm on abortion and other life issues. As a politician, W's main strength is his character. This is why I generally trust W, even if I don't always agree with his decisions. Secondly, I think W needs to dump his neo-con international policy wonks and put forward a good exit strategy for Iraq. Thirdly, I think he should ease up a little on the Patriot Act as well as the Drug War. This will go a long way toward blocking Dean from making further inroads into the Libertarian vote.

In this cynical, hardened world, it's kind of refreshing to see a movie that presents the most dreadful clichés without a hint of apology. A man proposes marriage to a woman with whom he has never held a conversation -- and she accepts, and the band conveniently behind her starts to play. Another man falls in love with a subordinate because she's cute and vulnerable, but they have absolutely nothing in common.

"Love Actually" has these tired motifs, and so many more. I kept expecting the filmmakers to wink at the audience, letting us know that they know we've seen this a thousand times. No wink was forthcoming. Either they didn't know they were recycling these plot points -- an improbability -- or they didn't care.

The cast includes all living, non-retired British film stars. A half-dozen plots are packed into this two-hour movie, and since many reviewers have commented on the hanging plot threads, unnecessary characters, and phony "love stories" that would never work in real life, I won't repeat it.

"Actually" is more proof that we are reverting to the pre-Shakespearean mode of storytelling where writers needn't provide any psychological motives for their characters. In "Erin Brockovich," we never learn why the Evil Corporation is poisoning the population of a small California town. They are a corporation, they are big, ergo evil. Similarly, in "Actually," the script juxtaposes several men and several women together. Like positive and negative ions, they are attracted to each other and they bond. No explanation necessary.

(Thankfully, they spared us the gay subplot that is becoming de rigeur these days. That's the only thing for which the scriptwriter needs to be thanked.)

Oh, the spirit of worldly compromise has reached Wheaton College in Illinois, that former bastion of Evangelical wholesomeness: they're not only allowing students to dance off-campus, they're letting them perform those bodily gyrations in the gymnasium of the college itself.

They probably got the idea from the late but still active radio preacher J. Vernon McGee, whose words expose him, I suppose, as a dreadful liberal:

There are lots of other preferences that are often stated as laws …
Some have said that those who dance are catering to lust. Now, I would agree that I've seen some dancing that seemed to be doing just that … but we must not say that all dancing is that way. We must not forget that many people danced for joy before the Lord.

The Weekly Standard has an article detailing the link between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Why this hasn't received more coverage this weekend, I do not understand -- it's not even on the Drudge Report -- but it certainly merits attention.

The information is based on an extremely detailed, careful memo from an undersecretary of defense to the heads of the Senate Intelligence Committee (including Sen. Rockefeller (D-Dogpatch), the inspiration for the Foghorn Leghorn cartoon character.) It details the extensive contact that Saddam and Osama had, and alludes to the strong possibility that they collaborated on the U.S.S. Cole attack.

The article sticks to the topic, not even mentioning the indisputable fact that Saddam sponsored the Palestinian suicide-murder bombings, and carried out terrorist attacks on his neighbors, particularly Iran, through groups he funded and/or founded.

Perhaps Sens. Rockefeller and Kennedy will stop their geriatric rages against the "misleading" Bush administration. Ha, ha! Sorry! Just a little Sunday afternoon humor.

Congratulations to Immaculate Heart of Mary parish in Concord, NH, which is going to have the bishop over to bless its new perpetual adoration chapel Sunday:

The St. Pio eucharistic chapel is intended to welcome Catholics throughout the Concord deanery. It's not very big (just the right end of the house), but it's still something beautiful for God.

I was at the parish today for a workshop on identifying one's gifts and callings for lay apostolate, presented by a Dominican-sponsored lay formation outfit called the "Catherine of Siena Institute". I recommend it.

I think I have a charism for insolence, but that wasn't on the list.

Got a card in the mail today from the Archdiocese:

"Dear Mr. Chonak,

Please accept my appreciation to that already extended to you by Bishop Lennon for your generous contribution to The Annual Catholic Appeal...."

Huh? Did the Development Office lay off its highly-paid proofreaders? Or is this some new technique in fund-raising mail: to keep a few solecisms and typos so that we will know the note was written by a bishop? (Exercise for the perfectionistic reader: identify them.)

[Oh, this is too cynical; I should post something more constructive than this.]

The vision of Steven Spielberg's Minority Report was prescient: the Washington Metrorail system is going to turn into an ad-saturated, visually overwhelming mess. Remember the scene where Tom Cruise goes on the Metro while he's being pursued by government agents? And the ads in the station are calling people by name? That's only a little short of what they've got planned for our beloved Metro.

If you've never been to D.C., the Metro is the only thing in the city that works, as everyone agrees. It's clean: drinks and food are banned. It's also fairly safe, although there is the occasional pickpocket. The cars' interiors are quieter than churches -- everyone is reading, napping, or perhaps talking quietly (except for some obnoxious mobile phone users). A fun fact: the producers of the movie "No Way Out" filmed Kevin Costner in the Baltimore subway, even though he was supposedly traveling on the Metro. They thought viewers would never believe that a subway train could be that clean.

Compared to driving the nasty streets of this area, the Metro is a refuge for sanity, a place where other riders and I can get 90 minutes of reading done instead of navigating through the dismal, traffic-clogged streets twice a day.

The Metro management has nurtured this genteel culture since its creation three decades ago, but now they are going to throw it out the window with great force. They aren't just going to have some advertising. Oh, no. We must have huge banner ads in the stations...and televisions blaring ads on the cars! Not only that,

...Transit officials also plan to drape advertising from the sides of parking garages, hang commercial banners from banisters inside the busiest stations, hoist advertising signs on light poles in station parking lots and sell ad space on bus shelters. "We want to leave no stone unturned," said Leona Agouridis, Metro's assistant general manager for communications.

Why is all this happening? Money! God forbid any public space not be turned over to Mammon, just because the Metro system is losing some money! Distilled to its essence, Metro wants to

Drive everybody crazy. No longer will we be able to relax on our way home. We have to be little captive rats for the ad agencies.

Raise the prices. They just hiked fares this year, and now they're going to do it again.

Screw their best customers. Aside from the increase in fares, they stopped giving 10% bonuses when riders put $20 or more on their farecards -- in other words, the very people who ride Metro frequently. Also, they used to have reserved parking for a monthly fee, with the parking fee included. Now you have to pay the reservation fee, and the regular $3 a day fee on top of it.

When music companies saw that CD sales slumped, they announced price cuts increase sales. Metro saw ridership decline, so they jacked up the price of their service. Does that make even a little bit of sense?

Economics aside, destroying what little peace there is in our public areas is unconscionable. No wonder Americans find self-reflection so difficult: no matter where they go, somebody is trying to sell them something.

A number of people have begun complaining about spam that is showing up in the comments' section of various blogs -- including this one. In fact, all the various StBlogs.org bloggers have been in communication by email behind the scenes and have agreed to simply delete any blog spam that shows up.

Just so that everyone has fair warning, in dealing with this problem I have opted out of the aforementioned agreement. Instead, I intend to abide by the Vere Protocol (which is a variation of the Welborn Protocol). The Vere Protocol states that all unsolicited blog spam that shows up in comments to my entries will be fair game for my-writing. Those who spam have been forwarned.

When people say that critics of our Iraqi policy are "aiding the enemy," it usually doesn't sit well with me. Disagreeing with a political action isn't treason. If you see a policy you think is unjust or unwise, you not only have the right to disagree, you have an obligation to speak against it and work against it.

But there is a right and wrong way to disagree, and today elected Democrats choose the latter route. Usually, they're histrionic, but sometimes they really do cross the line and aid the enemy, e.g.:

On Capitol Hill, Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota called on the CIA to brief Congress on "just what, if anything, can be done to change the deteriorating set of circumstances."

Daschle, and most of his Democrat colleagues, don't give a damn about American soldiers or innocent Iraqis. Iraqis can't vote for Democrats, and soldiers generally don't. Therefore, neither group has anything to do with the acquisition and use of political power, so to hell with them.

"Come on, Eric," you might be thinking. "You're saying that because you're a Republican and in the military." Maybe that's why I'm saying it, but it's still completely true. Here's what a loyal opposition, in the British sense, would look like: Democrats would criticize the president. They would also present their own plan of action in Iraq, one that is something a little more substantive than "U.N. in, U.S. out." They would issue press statements supporting Operation Iron Hammer, the current campaign against the insurgents. They would speak out against our French and German "allies" when they make obvious efforts to curtail U.S. power in the world. They would make it clear that when they speak against the president's policies, they do not think he is a malevolent moron, thus emboldening our enemies.

In short, men like Tom Daschle would remember that they were elected by Americans and are supposed to work on behalf of the American people.

CWN reports (subscription required) that the Pontifical Council for Health Care is conducting a conference on clinical depression today through November 15, and quotes the Council's president:

Cardinal [Javier] Lozano Barragan said that depression may result from an intense fear of death, which finds no relief in a culture that has lost spiritual moorings. The Mexican prelate said that the Vatican seminar would focus particularly on the spiritual dimensions of the problem.

Any shrinks out there want to sort this out?

Update: ZENIT reports on the first day of talks.

I suppose it would fair to say that the spiritual truths the Church presents to man -- in particular, the message of hope and God's love in the Gospel -- could be considered as helping a patient's "cognitive therapy" -- correcting the overly negative and self-critical thinking habits often experienced by depressed persons.

Another article brought to our attention by Ken Shepherd, whom we love: "Catholic Bishops Eye Possible Crackdown of Pro-Abortion Pols."

I'm not for driving off the confused and the under-catechized, but I am wholeheartedly in favor of contending in public for the Faith. Identify those who publicly oppose their own Church, lament their betrayal, and do penance on their behalf. In the end, though, if they do not repent, then recognize that they have cut themselves off from the living waters of the sacraments, and impose the proper penalty.

The time has long passed for convincing. The time has come for driving the wolves away from the sheep -- which is what the pointy end of the crozier is for, after all. Sure, the media will go nuts, but Jesus will love the bishops for it, and so (much less importantly) will faithful Catholics. Nobody ever died of embarrassment, and anyone ashamed to uphold the Gospel of Christ won't make it to heaven anyway. It's a couple of decades past due, but it's never too late to defend the faith. Do it!

Well, we survived our concert Saturday night, but it did provide a new "war story".

A few years ago, when I belonged to a 100-voice choir in Boston, the conductor told the group that we should know the piece we were singing well enough, and have a good enough sense of its rhythm, that if she were to fall off the stage, we should just keep going.

She'd even seem to test us sometimes during dress rehearsals by walking to the far end of the hall to check the sound while we continued the piece; and the group was often enough able to do so without a noticeable loss in the piece's execution.

I'm out in the suburbs now, in a different group with a different choral conductor, but finally it's happened for real. On Saturday, we were standing in the Episcopal parish's sanctuary -- and, by the way, have you noticed? they apparently still have altar rails, even in contemporary churches -- doing the last of four variations on Nun komm der Heiden Heiland, when all of a sudden our maestra tumbled off the two wooden boxes that comprised the podium. (The top one had suffered a partial structural failure.) She made a staggering one-foot landing as her music stand went over, and she bravely continued. Alas, the shock disrupted us too much, and she had to restart the movement.

The recording engineer said after the performance, "That one's going onto my blooper reel."

The church sign generator referred by Fr. Bryce is a hoot.

1950:
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100.
His cost of production is 4/5 of the price.
What is his profit?

1960:
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100.
His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80.
What is his profit?

1970:
A logger exchanges a set "L" of lumber for a set "M" of money. The cardinality of set "M" is 100. Each element is worth one dollar. Make 100 dots representing the elements of the set "M." The set "C", the cost of production, contains 20 fewer points than set "M." Represent the set "C" as the subset of set M and answer this question: What is the cardinality of the set "P" of profits?

1980:
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.

1990:
By cutting down beautiful forest trees, the logger makes $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the forest birds and squirrels "feel" as the logger cuts down the trees? There are no wrong answers.

2000:
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $120. How does Arthur Andersen determine that his profit margin is $60?

Some men become rich and try to improve the lives of those who aren't; others become drunk on their wealth and think themselves petty gods. One of these vile creatures is George Soros, who wants to depose the president.

Now, if you don't think President Bush has been doing a good job, and if you disagree with his policies, then by all means try to remove him. Politicians should be removed often -- for incompetence, foolishness, their hair color, whatever. No man is indispensible in a democracy, and a higher turnover rate would encourage politicians to look to the common good instead of self-promotion. Let them strive for peace and prosperity, and let that be their legacy instead of wielding power.

That being said, doesn't it seem a little anti-democratic for a plutocrat to use his billions of dollars to remove a democratically elected president? And what makes people like Soros, Ross Perot, and the Rockefellers think they are modern-day Gracchi, defending us little people against the predations of other powerful, influential people? At least the patrons of the Roman senatorial class doled out money and favors directly to the poor; they had contact with the demos that extended beyond having its members serve their food and wash their clothes.

Soros became rich through currency speculation: by betting that one species of money would advance or decline relative to other species. Say what you want about the robber barons of the 19th century, they at least built their vast wealth by creating industries that brought material improvements in people's lives. Men like Soros provide no useful service commensurate with their vast wealth.

In the Third World, he supports what could be called "hard" family-planning (how I hate that euphemism!), including sterilization and abortion. He has (supposedly) spent billions on democracy overseas, particularly in Russia, and has done such a good job that there are no more independent major news media left in that country, and the economy is based on the admirable model of the mob families portrayed in "The Sopranos."

All of this success has left Soros with a keen sense of what's best for the world. He complains that Bush is "leading the U.S. and the world toward a vicious circle of escalating violence." Leave aside the sheer banality of his insights for a moment -- weren't we already in a "circle" (he means "cycle") of violence before January 2001? The terrorists kept hitting us, beginning in Beruit in 1983, and we kept ineffectually responding. The difference now is that we have a president who is dismantling the terrorists' infrastructures and killing the terrorists themselves. You can't have a "circle" if one side of the circle disappears, and Bush seems committed to making that happen.

Capitalism is the greatest system for ensuring material prosperity. If only we could get rid of most capitalists, it would be darn near perfect.

I hadn't heard about this for a while, but Rome hasn't forgotten. During Monday's session of the USCCB meeting, Cdl. George mentioned that the Holy See had informed the bishops that it was going to run the upcoming apostolic visitation of the US seminaries. Maybe there had been some question about who was going to direct it.

Speaking of seminaries, Newsday took a look recently at the North American College.

For our DC readers: a group of students at the Pope John Paul II Institute will present a staged reading of the Pope's play "The Jeweler's Shop" at the John Paul II Cultural Center on Harewood Road in Washington, November 20 at 6:30 pm. Admission is free.

There is an interesting article in yesterday's Washington Times about the effects of too much praise on children.

In the past several decades, the effort to respect, protect and even puff up children's self-esteem has resulted in a generation of children who expect to win, whose feelings are never hurt and who believe they are the best.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is most commonly known as the Middle School Model, and it's ubiquitous in the public schools of this country. The idea is to find something good to say to each individual each day, even if it's something like, "That surely is a nice pair of eyebrow rings you've got, Maribeth!" in hopes of increasing students' self-esteem.

(There's nothing wrong with being civil (even pleasant, although I have yet to try it) to students, but it should not be mandated.)

I believe that self-esteem is raised through true accomplishment, don't you?

It's our first day or real cold here in DC (will be in the 20s tonight) so here's a winter picture of Teresa and our dog Eva to get you prepared for what comes next.

For those of you discouraged by the lack of orthodox content in so many homilies, here is a sign of hope: at a suburban parish today, the young priest celebrating Mass, ordained in 2000, dared to use this explicit terminology:

As we come in a little while to receive our Blessed Lord, let us remember to thank Him for the deposit of faith He has given us through His Church.

Well, there are now four Veres in our household. This past Wednesday, as the President signed the ban on partial-birth abortion into law, Angéla Zoë Vere weighed into the world at seven pounds, nine ounces. Both Sonya and the baby are doing well, and Jasmine is settling into her role as big sister. It was a wonderful culture of life moment all around. We were also blessed to be under the care of a pro-life ob-gyn who had come highly reccomended by some friends of ours (a doctor and a lawyer). This couple is quite active in the pro-life movement and only frequent pro-life doctors. While in the hospital, we were surprised to discover that the nurses consider him the best ob-gyn in the area and their favorite to work with when it comes to delivering babies.

Over the past year, Sonya and I have come to appreciate the blessing a pro-life doctor is throughout the childbirth process. Both Sonya and I found it really comforting to know that the doctor delivering our baby (the same doctor who worked with Sonya to get her system back up last winter) shares our view of life.

Scenario for discussion:

Family of 5.
The father is Catholic, the 3 children ranging from under 12 month to 6 years old have been baptized. The mother is a Protestant. She would like to become Catholic, but the RCIA program in the parish calls for 2 meetings per week for 2 hours each. Catechism for the oldest happens at a different time than the RCIA classes. The father works a full time job with some travel. No nanny or other support is around. So between father, mother and 3 small kids, it's very difficult to commit to the 12 month schedule of the RCIA program.

Question:
Should the structure/schedule of the RCIA program be flexible to accomodate the needs of a family such as this? Is it fair for a non-Catholic mom to have to attend several hours a week of RCIA classes and discussion sessions when the needs of the family are great? Should the RCIA program schedule and requirements be adjusted in order to get converts access to the sacraments sooner?

Discuss in the comments boxes, please.

Saint Gereon is praying for you! To learn more
about this Roman martyr go HERE


Which saint would you be?
brought to you by Quizilla

H'mm. He looks as well-fed as I do, and I haven't had a haircut since July, and the stubborn trait seems rather familiar.

(Thanks to Summa Mamas for the link.)

Ken Shepherd, who often frequents the comment boxes of Catholic Light, passes along this story about Howard Dean's pro-death views.

I do not use "pro-death" loosely. He favored -- no, favors -- the judicially sanctioned killing of Terri Schindler Schiavo, and mocked Governor Jeb Bush (R-Badass) for intervening to save her life. He also thinks killing isn't a public act, but a private one.

"I as a physician would not be comfortable administering lethal drugs," Dean explained, "but I think this a very private, personal decision, and I think individual physicians and patients have the right to make that private decision."

Fr. Sibley's Saintly Salmagundi has moved in to the "fine domain". Check out his cool clerical wear for All Souls' Day.

According to this article, there are many Democrats who are unhappy with the leadership of Terry McAuliffe as the head of the Democratic National Committee. He was installed by Bill Clinton and his lovely wife Bruno to ensure their continued dominance of the party. McAuliffe is a strident partisan and obnoxiously devoted to the party's least savory aspects, like homosexual activism, abortion (natch! This is the Abortion Party!), high taxes, etc., etc.

As the top political strategist for the Democrats, McAuliffe has lost the U.S. Senate, the California governorships, and as of this week, the state houses of Kentucky and Mississippi. Let me say that as a Republican, I am perfectly happy with the leadership of Terry McAuliffe, and I hope he keeps his job for the remainder of the decade.

Here's detailed info from the Catholic Encyclopedia.

I'm two days late blogging about All Souls - so what you are going to do, give me an F?

We sang the Stanford "Justorum Animae" and in spite of some pitch problems did a great job. We're having a heat wave here on the east coast, but that doesn't mean that the central heat gets turned off. Humans who are experiencing discomfort often have pitch problems, among other things.

The piece is part of the great British choral school of the 19th/20th century. It builds on the best of Tallis in terms of form but contains the harmonic drama of the best of Elgar or Vaughan Williams. In that respect it communicates a great deal to our modern sensibilities while still expressing the sacredness of the text and it's place in the liturgy.

The translation is as follows - it's take from the first reading on All Soul's:

The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God;
there shall no torment or malice touch them.
In the sight of the unwise they seem to die,
but they are in peace.

Next week we do the Bruckner "Locus Iste" - which is coming together nicely and is perfect for the Feast of the Dedication of the Lateran Basilica.

I'm grateful to the conservative Episcopalians at CaNN, who have been ably keeping tabs on news about the Anglican Communion as their D-Day approached over the weekend. Their site was inaccessible for part of Monday, apparently due to a DDoS attack. However, being devout souls, they turned to God in their adversity and prayed as follows:

Almighty God, who lovest mankind,
we ask you to pour down your blessings
upon the heads of our enemies and
and those who persecute us,
that our Saviour Christ may be glorified;
and according to your will, and the work of your faithful servants,
restore our website that we may once again
contend for the faith once delivered to the saints
and minister to your church and people in this time of need.
Amen.

Police Uncover Weapons Cache in Mecca.

The Boston Globe's look at the vast right-wing conspiracy within the AmChurch

(link from Amy)

Two years after Kennedy's election, Pope John XXIII called the Second Vatican Council. Vatican II is now a towering historical event, representing for some the ongoing spirit of reform in the church and for others a kind of theological breeder reactor, constantly on the edge of going out of control. While favoring the latter view, Pope John Paul II, who has led the Catholic Church since 1978, also has reinterpreted the events of the council in such a way that they support his traditionalist view of the church.

Over his lengthy pontificate, John Paul II has allied himself with the traditionalist side of every ongoing dispute within the church.

It strikes me that the media is unable to grasp what is that core of Catholicism - absolute and certain Truth that is unchanging. So when JP II preaches about the Truth, we're told he's supporting his "traditionalist" view of the Church. And because he's a "traditionalist" he put the kabosh on the Vatican II reforms, as though the council stopped just short of allowing women to be ordained and it just needed a little push to make sure we can pack our entire wish-list of western sociological hang-ups into how the Church teaches and preaches.

When the children of the 60's wax poetic about Vatican II, they get all glassy eyed and dreamy. When "traditionalists" remind them of the substance of Vatican II in the form of the actual documents they clamp their hands over their ears and run screaming into night.

Am I wrong about this?

And here's another nugget of wisdom from one of the brightest stars of Catholic acaedmia:

"But what will they do," wonders Notre Dame's [Rev.] Richard McBrien, contemplating the post-John Paul II church, "without their great patron?"

You know what we'll do? We'll have another Pope who by the grace of God preaches and teaches Truth in a holy and uncomprising fashion. Is your brain too full of postmodern theology that you don't remember the Gospel of Matthew and 2000 years of Catholicism?

It quite sad that you often manage to reinforce the media's mistaken idea that the Church is just a big club and if you get "your man" in power everything will change over night.

So to Richard McBrien: how about praying a Rosary before answering your phone next time? That may prevent the floor in Hell being paved with the skulls of priests. And I'll do the same because God knows I need the prayers.

And only 30 until St. Nicholas Day, if you like to give presents then!

Here's a cute item: the Nuns Having Fun calendar.