Mark P. Shea's Blog, page 1250

Fr. Pavone suspended from active ministry outside the Diocese of Amarillo

Looks like a turf war about money. Meh. I think Fr. Pavone is a good man who does good work and I hope they work things out and he's back in action soon.

Update: The Anchoress has a statement from his bishop and Fr. Pavone's response.

Still looks like a turf war to me, not a scandal. As is my custom, I assume the bishop knows what he's doing unless I have good reason to think otherwise. I am happy to see that Fr. Pavone is, above all, OBEYING HIS BISHOP unlike the BS Dawg. He is also taking things to Rome rather than ditching his vows, filing suit or otherwise acting like a crook. That's as it should be if he thinks he's in the right and it's why such avenues for redress exist in the Church. So I will continue to withhold judgment under the assumption that he and his bishop will work things out. Prayer seems to be the soundest course of action at this point.

How Bush/Cheney Commitment to Torture

...deprived us of good intelligence and got innocent people killed. This goes out to all the armchair interrogators out there who dutifully defended this criminal folly for most of the past decade because it was the GOP party line.

The People's Democratic National Security State of Heaven...

where the police are becoming militarized because treating citizens like citizens and not foreign enemies is a luxury our Ruling Classes cannot be bothered to afford us:

The problem with this mingling of domestic policing with military operations is that the two institutions have starkly different missions. The military's job is to annihilate a foreign enemy. Cops are charged with keeping the peace, and with protecting the constitutional rights of American citizens and residents. It's dangerous to conflate the two. As former Reagan administration official Lawrence Korb once put it, "Soldiers are trained to vaporize, not Mirandize." That distinction is why the U.S. passed the Posse Comitatus Act more than 130 years ago, a law that explicitly forbids the use of military troops in domestic policing.

The GOP: Bringing the Crazy

The other day it was a crowd of people cheering the big shot Evangelical without a conscience for all the vengeance killing (give or take a couple of innocents). (And yes, it's vengeance killing when people cheer.) Last evening, the bloodthirsty mob  was cheering for young adults dying because they couldn't afford health care.  The thing that used to be conservatism is officially insane.  The Wall Street Journal has its work cut out for it doing more damage control by explaining away that appalling display as Down Home Folk Showing Them Damn Libruls Whut Fer.

But, of course, that crowd was prolife as is the GOP, so feeling ill about that disgusting display is forbidden and means you secretly support abortion and are a Marxist and hate America--and God.

That cheer brings me a certain measure of clarity:  We have been without insurance due to insane Washington state laws for several years.  Should my wife or children become gravely ill and die (God forbid) I know now that that audience and the people on that stage sucking up to their vote would feel, not pity, but elation at their deaths.  No.  I won't be supporting those people for a good long time.  They are my enemies, wishing death on my family for the crime of not being able to afford insurance.  I pray for them and bless them as Jesus says to do.  But I will do nothing to strengthen their hands because they cheer for evil just as much as the most zealous abortion supporter.  Farewell to them for good.

Happily, on this Side of the Cascades, 40 Days for Life is Thriving

Hi Seattle 40 Days for Life Participants!

We are gearing up for our next fall campaign which begins on September 28th and runs until November 6th. Our vigil site this year is at the Planned Parenthood location downtown at 23rd and Madison.

Fr. Robert J. Spitzer, past president of Gonzaga University, will be joining us at our Kickoff Rally on Saturday, September 17th at 2pm at the Newman Center (4502 20th Ave NE) as our keynote speaker!

At the rally there will be plenty of information about 40 Days, opportunities to sign up for vigil hours, and lots of swag. I can't wait to see you all there!

Sincerely,

Kaelen Burton
Director, Seattle 40 Days for Life

Be there! Aloha!

Since Some of My Readers are Clergy

Troy Davis Has Been Scheduled for Execution Sept. 21, 2011
Mobilize Religious Leaders to Take Action Here
Deadline: 5 p.m., Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Despite grave doubts about the guilt of death row prisoner Troy Anthony Davis, Georgia has scheduled him for execution on September 21, 2011 at 7 p.m. People of Faith Against the Death Penalty and Amnesty International USA are partnering in offering this letter for religious leaders to endorse for clemency for Mr. Davis.

This execution is not inevitable. Mr. Davis has received three stays of execution amid doubts stemming from numerous witness recantations and new evidence against another suspect. If you are a religious leader or minister of any kind (e.g., rabbi, pastor, imam, nun, minister, deacon, priest, bishop, monsignor, brother, elder, reader, executive presbyter, lay parish council member or leader, etc.) please endorse the letter below urging the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles to grant clemency for Mr. Davis. Endorsements made after 5 p.m. Wed., Sept. 14, 2011 will not be included in the letter presented to the parole board the following morning.
Please note: This letter is intended for religious leaders only. Affiliations are for identification purposes only and do not imply organizational endorsement.
Please complete your endorsement below or scroll to bottom for more information.
Dear Chairman Donald and Members of the Board:
Please pray....

SaveTroyDavis@groups.facebook.com

We the undersigned represent clergy and leaders from various religious traditions. As leaders in our respective faith communities, we all find within our teachings a divine directive to support justice in the world and to uphold the sacredness of life. As such, we are united in our support of clemency for Mr. Troy Anthony Davis.

As people of faith, we wish to make a special appeal to you about this compelling case which we believe is worthy of your intervention. We are troubled by the crime that is at the heart of this case. In 1989, Savannah and the MacPhail family suffered a terrible loss when Police Officer Mark Alan MacPhail was shot to death while rushing to the aid of a beaten homeless man. The actual perpetrator must be held accountable so that justice can be served. We hold the MacPhail family and the Savannah community in our prayers as they have endured a difficult process.

We are also troubled that a man was sent to death row, largely on the basis of witness testimony, most of which has been contradicted since the trial. Troy Davis was given an unprecedented opportunity to present his claim of innocence at a federal district court hearing in June 2010. While the federal judge felt that Davis did not meet the "extraordinarily high" standard to "clearly establish innocence," Judge William T. Moore, Jr. acknowledged that the case against Davis "may not be ironclad." Ultimately, he did not trust the credibility of the witnesses; however, these are the very witnesses whose testimony was used to secure Davis' conviction. We know that four witnesses testified at this hearing that they had not told the truth in implicating Davis at trial and another eyewitness testified that he saw a relative of his commit the murder in question. These are very significant developments that cast serious doubt on Davis' guilt.

We commend the Board for its strong moral position in the Order Suspending the Execution of Sentence of Death issued on July 16, 2007. That statement read, "The members of the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles will not allow an execution to proceed in this State unless and until its members are convinced that there is no doubt as to the guilt of the accused." Gov. Ted Strickland of Ohio took a similar stand by granting clemency to Kevin Keith in September 2010. Gov. Strickland was not sure of Keith's innocence claim, but was not comfortable allowing an execution to be carried out with serious and persistent questions about his guilt. Keith is now serving a life sentence and Ohio is no longer at risk of killing what may be an innocent man.

Your role as the final fail-safe and check on the judicial system is extremely critical to preventing the state of Georgia from the possibility of making an irreversible and horrific error. Given these uncertainties, allowing the execution of Troy Davis would be a gamble that we believe is both unnecessary and unconscionable. We hold you each in our prayers as you fulfill your duty to review this case once again, and we urge you to grant clemency to Mr. Davis.

http://www.troyletter.org/

Prayer Request

A reader writes:

My father passed away peacefully in his sleep this evening. All glory to our Lord Jesus Christ, who will raise my father on the last day. Your prayers appreciated.

Father, hear our prayer for the repose of your servant's soul, and especially for the good son he leaves behind to mourn his passing. Grant that your light, peace, consolation and grace are given to them to endure their parting until that day when they meet again in the joy of your presence, never to part again. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Mother Mary, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

A reader writes

I'm wondering if you could steer me toward any helpful books on the Church's teaching on contraception. I struggled with this issue for years and even stopped taking communion as a result. Finally, a priest helped me put it into perspective by posing the broader question, "what do you make of the Church of Jesus Christ?" In general, I have found the Church a reliable teacher and guide. A related, but more important point is that I accept the authority of the magisterium. So I concur with the Church on sexual ethics, but only indirectly -- that is, because I accept the Church's authority in this area, as in others. (Incidentally, I am strongly pro-life and would be even if I were not a Catholic.)

Still, whenever the issue of sexual morality comes up -- e.g. this bloggingheads discussion between Ross Douthat and Dan Savage -- I become uneasy. It seems to me that, if social conservatives have difficulty defending their opposition to cohabitation, gay marriage divorce, and now "open" relationships, it is because they have rejected the only forceful argument against these innovations: which is that the purpose of sex is at once unitive and procreative. So it seems to me, in short, that we are faced with a stark choice between Paul VI or Dan Savage. With the following caveat: I think it is possible to argue from a sociological standpoint that the loosening of sexual mores is generally imprudent; just as it is possible from an ecological standpoint to argue that eating genetically modified tomatoes or using pesticides on crops is, while not intrinsically evil, generally not a great idea.

Here's where I get stuck. The Church and her defenders never seem to get around to arguing behalf of their central thesis -- which is that the purpose of sex is procreation. Of course, everyone understands that non-contraceptive sex results in procreation. But to say that, under certain circumstances, X results in Y is not to demonstrate that the purpose of X is Y. Part of the difficulty here is modernity's rejection of teleology. Even as an Aristotelian, however, I don't see how the argument holds. Suppose I argue that the purpose of a tree is to bear fruit and that it therefore follows that cutting down said tree for the purpose of building a table or chair contradicts that purpose and is therefore intrinsically evil. The obvious rebuttal is to point out that mankind's dominion over nature allows us to subject its purposes to our purposes -- provided that they reasonable purposes. (Another caveat: surely, it is important and necessary to set limits to this principle, whether with regard to sex or ecology.)

I read Elizabeth Anscombe's essay "Contraception and Chastity" last night, which made the case that contraception is wrong because it alters the nature of the sex act, rendering it infertile. Again, this is mere assertion. What needs to be shown is that it is wrong to alter the nature of the sex act. Yet this is altogether missing from the essay. With that said, I do tend to think this assertion can be defended. After all, if it is not wrong to deny the procreative aspect of sex, why not deny its unitive aspect? Why not, in other words, embrace the Dan Savage model in which monogamy is no longer a requirement for sexual partners? Most people (including me!) would reject Savage's thesis. And yet once you've denied an essential nature and purpose to sex, it becomes difficult to see why it must be unitive -- apart from the preference of partners, which even Savage wouldn't deny. The arrangement preferred under patriarchy (sex that is procreative without being unitive) also becomes available. My intuition is that, as with economics, this deregulated, laisse-faire model of sexuality is probably not the ticket to human flourishing. But how do we get from that observation to an absolute ban on contraception, or vice versa? That is what puzzles me.

I hope I don't come across as defiant or dismissive of Church teaching. Rather, I am inclined to believe that there is something I am just not seeing here. The question is, what?

Thank you in advance for any input you might have or books you might be able to recommend. God bless.

I'm not super well-read on this, largely because the Church's teaching on this, once I actually bothered to look at it, has always seemed to me to be intuitively obvious, for much the same reason that I have never found the moral intuition against a vomitorium to need further explanation. Beyond Anscombe's work, the only thing I happen to know about it Janet Smith's Humanae Vitae was Right. Also, I suspect the growing body of work about the Theology of the Body may have some thorough discussions of all this.

My own take is here, for what little it's worth. Good luck on your research of this matter. I think it comes down to the matter of cooperating with, rather than thwarting, God's purpose in creating nature. Grace builds on nature. Artificial contraception thwarts and destroys the purpose of God in nature. In a sacramental worldview, that make perfect sense. In a materialist worldview which regard nature as mere raw material to be manipulated by human will and technological cleverness, there is no purpose to cooperate with. Just us doing whatever we like because we can. When we apply that attitude toward the piece of nature we call homo sapiens it is indeed not the ticket to human flourishing since it reduces persons to things, which is a fine definition of sin.

A photo essay...

...on the famine in Somalia.

Go here to help.

Generation Narcissus to Their Kids...

Me! Me!! MEEEEEEEE!!!!!!