August 2010 Archives

This little pink shoes were next to the $300 Italian loafers on the counter. In the shoe repair shop, two other men and a bored looking woman were picking up fancy leather handbags or resoled dress shoes. I was picking up the Hatchbacks with the Velcro on the sides.

"Those are mine." I said as I picked them up, the other people in the foyer smiling that I was picking up the little pink shoes. I was sure those were the only shoes for a four year old girl in the whole place.

See most moms and dads just get a new pair. But Teresa and I - well these are special shoes, and if we can get them repaired, that's another thing we don't need to spend top dollar on for my girl.

I didn't know this before I had a daughter who needed special shoes. Anything "medical" costs extra. The stroller with the harness so she won't double over and fall out - extra. The bed with the rails so she won't roll out - extra. Her wheel chair with the fancy tray, seat that can be set to recline, and shock absorbers - that was made in Germany and had the decimal point moved to the right to prove it.

"No charge" the clerk said, after consulting with Mario - the owner and the guy who told me to come get them after lunch today. I had dropped them off this morning, knowing Mario could fix them and I wouldn't have to spend $80 on another pair of shoes.

And Mario, he must have seen those little shoes, designed to fit around the little plastic ankle braces (called DAFOS) and thought I could use a break. I didn't *need* the break. I just appreciated that he appreciated it. A few minutes on the sewing machine would normally be $18. But maybe he looked at those little shoes and thought, special shoes for a special girl - I'll do my part.

So I'll be back to Mario's place, to get my loafers resoled or a leather bag fixed. Because that's the kind of guy I want to do business with. When you have a big heart, it's not always about the cash. Sometimes you just need to fix a pair of little pink shoes. The little girl who will wear them can't walk on her own now, but someday she will, and it will be partly because she had the right shoes on today.

That's the kind of thing you always remember, and appreciate.

The magazine Consumer Reports has done good service for a long time, and I've been willing to support them by subscribing to their print edition and also their on-line service. Like most organizations in the field of consumer activism, they have a somewhat left-wing image, and occasionally, they endorse or lobby for legislation I don't agree with, but I haven't been bothered much. Until now.

This year, they bought the blog consumerist.com, formerly owned by Gawker; it has a flock of writers spewing out several short pieces a day, some of them on legitimate consumer issues, and some on irrelevancies. Since the writers at Consumerist tend to be a snarky opinionated bunch, I figured their style might eventually become a problem, in comparison with the restrained, generally fair and factual approach of the magazine.

In recent weeks, they've given a lot of coverage to some gay group's protest against Target stores after Target gave a donation to a political cause in Minnesota. The donation was ostensibly given because the cause agreed with Target's business interests, but it benefited a conservative politician who's against same-sex marriage. Since then, Consumerist has published several pieces about protests:

• July 28: "Target Angering Gay Customers..."
• August 5: "Target CEO Explains Support of Anti-Gay Politician..."
• August 8: "Target and Best Buy's Support of Bigots Is Going To Change The Way You Shop"

(Yeah, actually it will change the way I shop: I like Target more now. Their foundation used to support Planned Parenthood, but they stopped. God bless 'em.)

I figure the first story was reasonable; the second understandable; but the third insulting.

Does Consumers Union, the parent organization of Consumerist.com, endorse that sentiment: that opposition to same-sex marriage makes you a "bigot"? I don't want my subscription money going to pay for a blog that's going to spread incivility like that.

So I called Consumers Union, spoke with the customer relations department, and explained my concern a week ago. I haven't heard any response yet, so I cancelled the magazine subscription. I'll give 'em another chance this week; I'll call again and ask if they have taken a stand to disassociate themselves from the offensive message from the blog. And if not, I'll cancel the on-line subscription.

Anybody else feel the same?

(Hat tip to Fr. Sibley.)

Here's a reminder of the oldest serving bishop-ordinaries in the US. According to canon law, bishops offer their resignation to the Pope after they reach the age of 75, so eventually we can look forward to news of their successors.

Already over 75:

• Seattle: Abp. Alexander Burnett


• Oklahoma City: Abp. Eusebius Beltran


• Philadelphia: Justin Cardinal Rigali


• Savannah: Bp. John Boland


• Trenton: Bp. John Mortimer Smith (Coadjutor Bp. David O'Connell is in place.)


• Yakima: Bp. Carlos Sevilla, SJ

Reading 75 soon:

• Manchester: Bp. John McCormick (August 12)


• Altoona: Bp. Joseph Adamec (August 13)


• Lincoln: Bp. Fabian Bruskewitz (September 6)


• St. Augustine: Bp. Victor Galeone (September 13)

For readers in the Boston archdiocese, the new weblog Boston Catholic Insider is certain to be of interest: it's got a skeptical perspective on the diocesan bureaucracy's inner circle and its public and private maneuverings.

At the moment, the top issue of various questionable dealings is the proposed sale of the Catholic hospital system Caritas Christi to a for-profit company. The institutions' Catholic identity and medical ethics would have slim protection in the transaction: after a waiting period, the buyer could turn around and absolve himself of any Catholic obligations by merely paying an extra fee (estimated at 3% of the capital amount), at any time of the buyer's choosing.

Wade St. Onge has been reading about the alleged Medjugorje apparition for some time, and has written a seven-part series about the case for his theology blog.

He reviews commonly posed arguments for and against the phenomenon and makes distinctions among the stronger and weaker elements in each case. St. Onge does not always put emphasis where I would, but is trying to be balanced. For readers not familiar with the controversy, I think his article will be a good introduction to the subject.

Whoops!

The graphics department at EWTN stuck the "Gospa" of Medjugorje on their highlights flyer for the summer. Are they back to promoting the would-be apparition, or was it just an inadvertence?

Oh, well, it's no big deal: maybe they'll give it up if and when the Vatican finally rules the case false.

For now, I call this: putting the "Ew!" in EWTN. :-)

(h/t: semperficatholic)