Al Kresta's Blog, page 342

New Egyptian prime minister meets with Christians after recent attack

After a Coptic Christian church was set on fire on the outskirts of Cairo, Egypt's new prime minister, Essam Sharaf, took the unprecedented step of meeting with local Christians protesting the attack.

The meeting – which comes at a time of intense political turmoil in the country – is reportedly the first time an Egyptian prime minister has acknowledged and met with demonstrators.

On March 4, witnesses say a Coptic church in the town of Soul, on the outskirts of Cairo, was set on fire by a mob after a skirmish between a Christian man and a Muslim woman. The mob allegedly prevented the local fire brigade from entering the village. The priest of the small parish, and three deacons have been reported missing.

"Some of the Muslim mobs in the area took the land … and put a sign that it's now a mosque," Michael Meunier, President of the U.S. Copts Association, told Vatican Radio on March 8.

Prime Minister Sharaf told the Coptic community that he would speak to the country's military council about taking back the land and rebuilding the church. However, no action has been taken at this point, largely due to the Prime Minister's need to negotiate with the military council.

"That's a first time a seated prime minister has addressed any protesters in Egypt," Meunier said. "He's trying – the problem is he's not fully authorized. It's still the military council that holds all the cards."

Meunier is currently in Egypt and has met with the prime minister on two occasions to discuss the issue.

About 90 percent of Egypt's population is Muslim. Catholics make up a tiny minority of about 500,000, with the majority of the nation's Christians being members of the Coptic Orthodox Church.

The country was rocked by a wave of anti-Christian persecution at the start of the year, including the killing of 21 Coptic Orthodox worshipers by a Muslim extremist suicide bomber outside a church in Alexandria, Egypt.

The Catholic Near East Welfare Association reported that Egypt's Copts and other Christians have been an endangered minority in the country, with Islamic radicals regularly attacking Christians and their property. Under former President Hosni Mubarak, employment and education discrimination against Christians was common and the government placed restrictions on the construction or repair of churches that did not apply to mosques.

Although Muslim-Christian relations have been rife with tension in Egypt throughout the decades, Church leaders have expressed cautious optimism about the unity between both religious groups during the recent political protests in the country.

Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, the Vatican nuncio to Egypt, told EWTN News in a phone interview from Cairo on Feb. 1. that the demonstrations have been remarkably free from religious overtones and that there are many signs of Christians and Muslims working together.

"There isn't a religious distinction," he said. "They are not dividing themselves into Christians and Muslims, they're just the Egyptian citizens."

Archbishop Fitzgerald said that in the first days of unrest, Muslims and Christians spontaneously formed neighborhood committees to provide security when police forces abruptly fled the area.

Catholic Coptic Patriarch Cardinal Antonios Naguib, head of the country's Catholic Church, agreed that the protests have brought out "really wonderful" displays of Christian-Muslim unity.

However, Patriarch Naguib told EWTN News in a Feb. 4 e-mail that much depends on the future leadership of Egypt as to whether or not Christians will continue to encounter religious persecution.

"If the State is a civil state, based on equality, citizenship and law, as many are asking for, it will be an historic success," he said.

"If, on the other hand, it is transformed into a religious state, we will have lost all of the past acquisitions, and the entire population will suffer – Christians and Muslims."

GOP 2012 Hopefuls On What They Are Giving Up For Lent

By Chris Moody - The Daily Caller

The 40-day period of sacrifice before Easter began Wednesday, and some Republican presidential hopefuls plan to whip their way around Iowa and New Hampshire without some of the things they love most.

Catholics, Southern Baptists, Mormons, Born-again Christians and a Lutheran have floated the possibility that they'll run against President Obama this year. Although Lent is typically a tradition for observing Catholics, The Daily Caller asked if they're planning to give anything up. Here's what some of them said:

Fmr. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (Non-denominational born-again Christian): "I do observe Lent, and my family and I have traditionally sacrificed something during these weeks leading up to Easter Sunday. When I was growing up, my Irish Catholic grandfather would remind me that sacrifices offered up during Lent are to be like tithing — if you advertise your 'sacrifice' and tithe then you negate any spiritual gains. (Or maybe he'd say that because he didn't want us to know what he gave up!)"

Palin is a protestant, but she told TheDC that her "Catholic baptism and Catechism classes have stuck with me internally."

Fmr. Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (Southern Baptist): "I think as Baptists we find it hard to give up anything, I'm trying to be a little more health-conscious, I have been less so than I should have been. So that is my primary project right now. "

Fmr. Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum (Catholic): "I have a regular routine for Lent of attending mass at least 3 times a week plus stations of the cross on Fridays. I also refrain from eating the foods I enjoy the most – all types of breads and sweets."

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (Catholic): "Dessert," Gingrich spokesman Rick Tyler told TheDC.

Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson (Raised Lutheran) : "Mr. Johnson will not be observing Lent," a spokesman said.

On Beijing Topic List: One-Child Policy's Future .

China's controversial "one-child" policy has once again come up for discussion during the annual meeting of the country's legislature and its top political advisory body, according to local media reports.

Demographers and economists have used the simultaneous meetings for several years to submit proposals for reviewing or relaxing the policy, which was introduced in 1980 to try to control China's population growth.

Critics say the policy—which limits most, though not all, couples to one child—has created a severe gender imbalance, because of a traditional preference for male offspring, and a rapidly aging population which threatens China's long-term economic growth.

The government had originally said the policy would only last three decades, and many observers had expected it to be reviewed around the time of its 30th anniversary last year.

However, the National Population and Family Planning Commission said in December it planned to keep the policy largely the same for the next five years, and has not indicated what might happen after that. Some officials still see the restrictions as key to holding down population growth, and therefore unemployment and strains on resources.

The policy has long allowed exemptions for significant portions of China's population, including many rural families, ethnic minorities and couples where both people are only children themselves.

But most families in urban areas still have to pay fines if they have more than one child. Those who dodge the fines cannot register their children for public services, including state education and health care.

One proposal under consideration is to introduce a "two-child" policy nationwide, according to a report on the web site of the People's Daily, the Communist Party newspaper.

It quoted Wang Yuqing, a member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, or CPPCC—a powerless advisory body that is meeting this week alongside the annual session of China's legislature, the National People's Congress—as saying he thought there would be such a change by 2015.

Mr. Wang, who is a deputy director of the CPPCC's National Committee of Population, Resources and Environment, also said he didn't think such a move would lead to rapid population growth, according to the report.

Mr. Wang couldn't be reached directly for comment Tuesday, and the Family Planning Commission did not respond to a request for comment.

However, other Chinese experts have said they expect a clearer picture could emerge after further discussion over the course of this week. The legislative session ends Monday.

Holy See at UN: don't confuse economic growth, human development

Citing Pope Benedict's encyclical Caritas in Veritate, the Holy See's chief representative at the United Nations urged members of a UN committee not to confuse economic growth with the higher goal of integral human development.

"Economic growth, whether it is driven by markets or driven by States, will not necessarily promote the kind of development that is worthy of humans," said Archbishop Francis Chullikatt, apostolic nuncio to the United Nations. "Promoting economic development should not be at the expense of the poor and marginalized or of future generations, which is often qualified as 'inter-generational engagement and justice.'"

"The well-being of all, and especially those who live with the pains of hunger and who are excluded from contributing to and benefiting from the economic, social and political life of their communities, requires that both markets and government policies be directed towards the higher goal of integral human development, grounded in the principle of the fundamental human dignity of each person," he added. "With them, it is our solemn obligation to remain in solidarity. We all must work together to ensure that this is incorporated into the goal of sustainable development and the concept of the "green economy."

US, Illinois bishops' conferences laud death penalty ban

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is praising Gov. Pat Quinn for signing a bill abolishing the use of capital punishment in Illinois. Sixteen states have now banned the use of the death penalty

"We applaud Governor Quinn for his courageous decision to abolish the use of the death penalty in Illinois," the USCCB's department of justice, peace, and human development said in a statement. "We stand in solidarity with all those who work for a just and safe society that protects its citizens and upholds the sanctity and dignity of all human life."

"No longer will there be a risk in Illinois that an innocent person will be convicted and sentenced to death," the Catholic Conference of Illinois noted in a separate statement. "The end of the use of the death penalty advances the development of a culture of life in our state. Furthermore, society will continue to be protected and those who commit crimes will still be held accountable through alternatives to the death penalty, including life without parole."

Gov. Quinn, a Catholic who supports legalized abortion and has signed a bill legalizing homosexual civil unions, says that he sought counsel from the Bible and the writings of the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin.

Court won't hear challenge to 'In God We Trust'

The Supreme Court won't hear an atheist's latest challenge to the U.S. government's references to God.

The court refused to hear an appeal from Michael Newdow, who says government references to God are unconstitutional and infringe on his religious beliefs.

This appeal dealt with the inscription of the national motto "In God We Trust" on U.S. coins and currency. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco says the phrase is ceremonial and patriotic and "has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion."
The court refused to hear Newdow's appeal of that decision.

"In God We Trust" was first put on U.S. coins in the 1860s and on paper currency in the 1950s.

The case is Newdow v. Lefevre, 10-893.

Outrageous Statement of the Day

On Wednesday's Andrea Mitchell Reports on MSNBC, Mitchell stuck up for NPR as she declared: "Nobody is suggesting that their journalism has been at all biased."

Today on Kresta - March 10, 2011

Talking about the "things that matter most" on March 10

4:00 – In Philadelphia, Fears That Abusive Priests Still Active
Three weeks after a scathing grand jury report said the Archdiocese of Philadelphia had provided safe haven to as many as 37 priests who were credibly accused of sexual abuse or inappropriate behavior toward minors, most of those priests remain active in the ministry. Matthew Bunson , co-author of Pope Benedict XVI and the Sexual Abuse Crisis: Working for Reform and Renewal, joins us for analysis.

4:20 – Christians Are Hate-Filled Hypocrites...and Other Lies You've Been Told
According to the media, the church is rapidly shrinking, both in numbers and in effectiveness. But the good news is, much of the bad news is wrong. Sociologist Bradley Wright uncovers what's really happening in the church: Christians are more respected by secular culture now than they were ten years ago; divorce rates of Christians are lower than those of nonbelievers; Christians give more to charity than others do. Wright reveals to readers why and how statistics are distorted, and shows that God is still effectively working through his people today.

5:00 – Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem To The Resurrection
Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God, and no myth, revolutionary, or misunderstood prophet, insists Benedict XVI. He thinks that the best of historical scholarship, while it can't "prove" Jesus is the Son of God, certainly doesn't disprove it. Indeed, Benedict maintains that the evidence, fairly considered, brings us face-to-face with the challenge of Jesus-a real man who taught and acted in ways that were tantamount to claims of divine authority, claims not easily dismissed as lunacy or deception. Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem To The Resurrection is Pope Benedict XVI's follow-up to Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordon to the Transfiguration. Fr. Joseph Fessio joins us today as the book is released in Rome.

5:40 – In Philadelphia, Fears That Abusive Priests Still Active
Three weeks after a scathing grand jury report said the Archdiocese of Philadelphia had provided safe haven to as many as 37 priests who were credibly accused of sexual abuse or inappropriate behavior toward minors, most of those priests remain active in the ministry. Matthew Bunson , co-author of Pope Benedict XVI and the Sexual Abuse Crisis: Working for Reform and Renewal, joins us for analysis.

Cartoon of the Day - Guantanamo and Obama

The "Dos" and "Don'ts" for Building a Culture of Life

Feb. 25, 2011 (Fargo, ND)

Archbishop Chaput addressed laypeople of the Diocese of Fargo, with a presentation titled "Building a Culture of Life." Archbishop offers a few "dos" and "don'ts" for building a culture of life, based on what he has seen in the American prolife experience throughout the past 38 years.

As I was gathering my thoughts for today, a line from Psalm 89 came back to me again and again: [Lord,] make us know the shortness of our life that we may gain wisdom of heart. That's an odd way to begin a prolife discussion, isn't it – reminding everybody in the room that we don't have a lot of time.

But I think it's exactly the right place to start. The time we have in this world is brief. God is good, and the life he gives us is filled not just with problems and sorrow, but with beauty and joy and love and hope and nobility – and these things are worth fighting for. What we do in the world matters. How we use our time matters. And therefore the choices we make matter – precisely because we come this way only once, and the world will be better or worse for our passing.

So our presence here together today has a meaning much larger than a nice meal and a good conversation about shared values. It's an opportunity to remember that God put us here for a purpose. He's asking us to turn our hearts to building the kind of world that embodies his love and honors the sanctity of the human children he created.

Our theme today is "building a culture of life." All of us here this afternoon know that U.S. Supreme Court struck down restrictive American abortion laws in 1973. That effectively legalized abortion on demand. Since then, abortion has killed more than 50 million unborn American children. It's also damaged the lives of millions of women and men. The sheer size of this tragedy has had a very curious effect on the American mind, because Americans have always been a religious people – and we still are by the standards of most developed countries. In practice, Americans now have a kind of schizophrenia about the abortion issue. Most of us believe abortion is wrong. But many people – many otherwise good people -- also want it to be legal under some limited circumstances.

This split in the American mind has two results. Here's the first consequence. The United States has a large and well-funded abortion industry. The industry has very shrewd political lobbyists. It also has a public relations machine that would make George Orwell's Ministry of Truth look like a gang of amateurs. In practice, the industry runs on an engine of persuasive-sounding lies.

You know some of the lies. I'm sure you've heard them a thousand times. There's the lie that an unborn child isn't "fully human." The lie that abortion is a purely private decision without public consequences. The lie that we can be "pro-choice," and yet not be implicated in where our choices lead -- to the killing of an unborn child.

Here's the second consequence. Right alongside the abortion industry, our country also has a very vigorous prolife movement. American prolifers have had many setbacks. They never have enough money. They get treated brutally by the media. Too many of their leaders argue with each other too much of the time. But they just won't give up or die. And so they've won quite a few modest but important legal victories. And meanwhile they continue to work toward the strategic goal of overturning the 1973 Supreme Court decision.

Based on what I've seen in the American prolife experience over the past 38 years, I'd like to offer a few "dos" and "don'ts" for building a culture of life. And perhaps we can talk about them more deeply in our question and answer session. I'll begin with six "don'ts."

First, don't let yourselves be tricked into an inferiority complex.

Critics like to say that religion is divisive, or intellectually backward, or that it has no proper place in the public square. This kind of defective thinking is now so common that any religiously grounded political engagement can be portrayed as crossing the border between Church and state affairs.

But this is nonsense. Democracy depends on people of conviction carrying their beliefs into public debate -- respectfully, legally and non-violently, but vigorously and without apology. If we're uncomfortable being Christians in a public debate, then we've already lost the war. In America the word "pluralism" is often conjured up like a kind of voodoo to get religious people to stop talking about right and wrong. In reality, our moral beliefs always shape social policy. Real pluralism actually demands that people with different beliefs should pursue their beliefs energetically in the public square. This is the only way a public debate can be honest and fruitful. We should never apologize for being Catholics, or for advancing our beliefs in private or in public.

Here's the second don't. Don't let divisions take root.

Unity is a sign of the Holy Spirit. Division is the sign of someone very different. As St. Augustine said, we need to be united in the essentials, free in the debatables, and charitable in all things. Diverse prolife opinion is part of the movement's richness. Nonetheless, as a bishop, I've been baffled by how much energy is wasted on internal prolife bickering. We can never allow our differences to become personal. Acrimony within the prolife movement is a gift to our opponents. It's also a form of theft from the unborn children who will suffer the consequences of our division.

Here's the third don't. Don't get trapped by partisan politics. But also don't undervalue the importance of politics.

Politics is an arena where prolife action can have very practical results. Pope John Paul II said in his apostolic exhortation Christifideles laici, "The charges of careerism, idolatry of power, egoism and corruption that [are] directed at persons in government, parliaments [or] political parties," are often unwarranted. So is "the common opinion that participating in politics is an absolute moral danger – [on the contrary, these things do not] in the least justify either skepticism or absence on the part of Christians in public life" (42). Or to put it another way: Public office and political activism are not just acceptable for Christians; they can also have real nobility when pursued in the service of truth.

But the fast pace of party politics, and the illusion that politics rules the "commanding heights" of our society and can satisfy our Christian social obligations, makes political life very addictive. And this illusion gets dangerous when defending the unborn child is too closely identified with any particular political leader or, even worse, one specific party. The more prolifers tie themselves to a single political party, the less they can speak to society at large. Here in the United States, Catholics -- both on the left and the right -- have too often made the mistake of becoming cheerleaders for a specific candidate.

Here's the fourth don't. Don't create or accept false oppositions.

Dialectical thinking, and by that I mean the idea that most of our options involve "either/or" choices, is usually un-Christian. During the 2008 presidential election, we saw the emergence of so-called "prolife" organizations that argued we should de-emphasize the legal struggle over abortion. Instead we should join with "pro-choice" supporters to seek "common ground."

Their argument was simple: Why should we fight a losing battle on the legal, cultural and moral front since – according to them -- we haven't yet made serious progress in ending legalized abortion? Let's drop the "divisive" political battle, they said, and instead let's all work together to tackle the economic and health issues that might eventually reduce abortions.

But as we look at recent American history, did Americans take a gradual, social-improvement road to "reducing" racism? No. We passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Nor have I ever heard anyone suggest that the best way to deal with murder, rape or domestic abuse is to improve the availability of health care and job training. We make sexual assault illegal -- even though we know it will still sometimes tragically occur -- because it's gravely evil. It's an act of violence, and the law should proscribe it. Of course, we also have a duty to improve the social conditions that can breed domestic and sexual violence. But that doesn't change the need for the law.

Likewise, if we really believe that abortion is an intimate act of violence, then we can't aim at anything less than ending abortion. It doesn't matter that some abortions have always occurred, or that some abortions will always occur. If we really believe that abortion kills a developing, unborn human life, then we can never be satisfied with mere "reductions" in the body count.

The U.S. Catholic bishops have argued for nearly 40 years that government needs to improve the economic conditions that can lead some women to abortion. But good programs for economic justice don't ever absolve Catholics from the legal struggle to end abortion. Protecting the unborn child is not an "either/or" choice. It's "both/and." We need to help women facing problem pregnancies with good health care and economic support; and we need to pass laws that will end legal abortion. We need to do both.

Here's the fifth don't. Don't hate the adversary.

Continue reading here...