As the World Turns

Once again, my continual refrain that Scranton is the center of the universe proves true.

As I noted before, during the recent Presidential election, almost all of the candidates visited the Electric City or touted their ties to Scranton, from Hillary Clinton to Joe Biden. Even Obama enlisted hometown boy, Senator Bob Casey, to his side early in the campaign and made several stops there with Casey by his side.

Now that the election has receded, Scranton has still managed to stay in the news for one thing or another. The latest newsworthy item is former Bishop Joseph Martino, who recently resigned after an 8 year reign of terror in the town, as I noted the other day. See Exit, Stage Right.

One of the LLWL gang returned today from a Cape Cod vacation and mentioned that she heard the news of Martino's giving up his throne while she was at the Cape. The news traveled far and wide.

Likewise, Time Magazine has also featured the story of Martino's sudden departure from the diocese of Scranton in its latest issue. They have an interesting take on what caused Martino to suddenly step down, Bishop Martino: Too Outspoken on Abortion for Vatican?:

For suddenly departing politicians and CEOs, the standard line is to "spend time with family." Now the Catholic Church may have its own version of this unconvincing, stock answer. On Aug. 31, Joseph Martino, the controversial bishop from Scranton, Pa., stunned longtime church watchers by announcing that he was resigning his post because of problems with insomnia and fatigue.

The Catholic leader, who has gained national prominence for his outspoken pro-life advocacy and aggressive criticism of pro-choice Democratic politicians, is still more than a decade away from reaching the church's automatic retirement age of 75. Martino's abrupt resignation, along with the fact that he was not reassigned to another position within the church, has some church insiders suggesting that the highly unusual move was far from voluntary — and quite possibly the work of a Vatican that has been decidedly less openly critical of the Obama Administration.

Whether Martino is leaving willingly or not, his departure means that one very vocal critic of the Administration has lost his bully pulpit.

Time suggests that Martino's constant castigation of pro-life Scrantonian Senator Casey may have been the deciding factor in the Vatican ditching Martino, particularly since the jabs were related to Casey's support of President Obama. As the piece observes:

Building bridges has also been the public posture of the Vatican when it comes to the Obama Administration. The Vatican remained silent on Notre Dame's decision to invite Obama to speak. And although Pope Benedict XVI expressed his disappointment with Obama's support for abortion rights when the two met in July, a Vatican spokesman went out of his way to state that the Holy Father was "very impressed" by the Democratic President.

With the substantial shortage of priests in the Church these days, it has to be pretty extreme for the Vatican to permit a priest to step aside for other than a very good reason. Of course, I'm glad he's gone, whatever the reason. Friends & family have long reported that the Bishop was deeply dividing the membership within the diocese. At least now the parishioners in Scranton can now begin the healing process.

Exit, Stage Right

Shrouded by the same mystery that has surrounded his tenure, Bishop Joseph Martino has resigned as Bishop of the Diocese of Scranton after a 6 year reign of terror. See Scranton's Bishop Martino stepping down.

Rumors of his departure have been rampant for some time, but the official word from Rome came this morning. Vatican accepts Bishop Martino's resignation. As the Scranton Times reported over the week-end:

Bishop Martino's resignation at the age of 63 is unusual – it comes more than a decade before the age, 75, at which bishops must submit their resignations under canon law – and caps six years of a tumultuous tenure as head of the 11-county diocese.

Sources in the diocese say the bishop stepped down because of health reasons.

Today, Martino cited his reasons for his early retirement -- by quoting from the lyrics of Kenny Rogers' song, The Gambler, “You have to know when to hold them, know when to fold them." he then aptly added, "And I think it's time to move on." In other words, as noted by Whispers in the Loggia, Calming the Waves:

Bishop Joseph Martino admitted to the assembled media that 'there has not been a clear consensus regarding [his] pastoral initiatives or way of governance' of the 350,000-member diocese following parish and school closings which, however necessary due to changing demographics, caused considerable controversy in the 11-county church.

The 63 year-old prelate said that the difficulties led to bouts of insomnia and a weakened immune system which, having taken a toll on his physical vigor, led him to submit his resignation to Pope Benedict in June, nearly a year after he first mentioned to his metropolitan that 'moving on' might be the best plan for himself and the diocese.

Of course, his critics (and there are legions of those) believe that "health reasons" is just a cover for the fact that he got the boot by the pontiff for his heavy-handed administration of the diocese. With the reign of Martino, who knows what the truth is. And with the closed world of the Catholic Church, who knows if we'll ever find out. Turns out that he tendered his resignation in June, which was accepted by the Pope in July. However, it was only disclosed after the rumors started when Martino was seen moving out of the Scranton rectory that is the home to the Bishop of Scranton.

Yet, one thing is for sure -- the resignation is very unusual. In fact, according to Clerical Whispers, "The Vatican statement it noted that the pope had accepted the resignation under a provision of church law in which a bishop due to illness or "some other grave reason, has become unsuited" to carry out his duties." So much so that, as Rocco Palmo of Whispers in the Loggia notes, Sede Vacante: "Today's move is just the third time this decade that a Stateside red-hat has been called in to oversee a local church amid emergency circumstances."

I've written about Martino many times, observing his antagonistic, combative, hostile style. Some of the highlights are chronicled in In Scranton, the Curtain Falls:

At the helm of one of the nation's most staunch, reliable bastions of Catholicism, while the kind, bookish cleric's fierce advocacy for the pro-life cause has won him fervent admiration from church conservatives nationwide, the quarter-million member Scranton church has been roiled since Martino's 2003 arrival by swaths of contentious parish and school closings, strained relations with the presbyterate, a perceived indifference to the media, clashes over the diocese's de-recognition of the local union for Catholic high school teachers (a move upheld by the Vatican) and, most famously, a steady stream of statements on politics, parades and public officials which served to draw lines in the sand in the socially conservative, heavily-Democratic area, home to both the revered Casey clan and, in his boyhood, Vice-President Joe Biden.

No doubt, Martino was brought to Scranton to handle a difficult job, to oversee the consolidation and closure of various schools and Churches in this diocese with a dwindling number of parishioners and priests. No one would have been loved after implementing those difficult changes, especially in a city as traditional as Scranton and its surrounding towns. While Martino was brought to town to be the henchman, to chop the excess, he just didn't need to be such an aloof, dictatorial in his carrying out his mandate. A bit of compassion -- need I say, empathy, would have perhaps made parishioners feel that the Church understood their pain, instead of looking like they frankly didn't give a damn.

In an excellent essay on the reign & departure of Martino, David Gibson of Politics Daily observes, Scranton Bishop Joseph Martino, Biden's Nemesis, Resigns Under Cloud:

But church insiders say Martino had also worn out his welcome with his brother bishops and the Vatican. So his resignation may be further evidence that the U.S. hierarchy is divided between moderate voices and a more strident conservative minority that is struggling in the wake of Obama's success with Catholic voters.

* * * *

The chief cause of Martino's local problems was his controversial plan in 2007 to close and consolidate Catholic schools in the diocese, which have been struggling with declining attendance, and declining donations. Closing schools is never popular, yet the need to do something is a harsh fact of life for many bishops, especially in the Northeast. But Martino's peremptory style did not help matters, and growing protests were followed by still steeper declines in church attendance and donations, a dropoff clearly exacerbated by the recession, which has ravaged the Scranton area. Then in February of this year, Martino announced that he was closing 91 of the diocese's 209 parishes, cutting the number of Catholic churches in this storied Catholic community by almost half.

But it was the presidential campaign last year that brought Martino to national prominence, and seemed to bring out the more volatile aspects of his personality.

In September, as Biden was barnstorming Pennsylvania -- the vice-president was born and baptized Catholic in Scranton before moving to Delaware later in life -- Martino declared that Biden would be denied communion if he tried to receive at a church in the Scranton diocese. "I will be truly vigilant on this point," Martino said. It was a step not even Biden's own bishop in Delaware would take.

Then in October, Martino had priests read a letter during all Sunday masses in the diocese telling Catholics that voting for a pro-choice politician was equivalent to endorsing "homicide."

* * * *

But it was an event in late October last year, on the eve of the presidential vote, as religious rhetoric was growing white-hot, that may have pushed Martino over the line in the eyes of many.

A parish was holding a regular voter-education forum on the election, featuring discussion of a document, "Faithful Citizenship," the election guide endorsed almost unanimously by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, or USCCB. Martino showed up at the parish hall unannounced, causing a stir. Then he took the microphone and proceeded to critique the organizers for not using his own letter on abortion as the basis of the discussion.

When a nun at the forum reminded Martino about the document of the enitre bishops conference Martino responded, "No USCCB document is relevant in this diocese. The USCCB doesn't speak for me," Martino declared. "The only relevant document ... is my letter. There is one teacher in this diocese, and these points are not debatable."

It was a bizarre episode and one that not only capped Martino's reputation as a divisive figure, but also seemed to set him against his other bishops -- a stance that may have been the ultimate cause of his downfall.

As Gibson concludes:

Whatever the ins and outs of the internal church maneuvering, the upshot is that a leading voice in the anti-Obama wing of the church hierarchy has been silenced while both Obama and Biden continue to take center stage.

And I can certainly say Amen to that.

Oh, blasphemy!

One of the LLWL Gang is heading off to a vacation in Ireland today. Good thing for her, she's not one who needs to be concerned about the latest law passed there.

As reported at TPM, Ireland revisits blasphemy:

Blasphemy is one of those old issues that Westerners assume has passed into the realm of sketch-comedy or articles about Muslims losing their tongues. But now Irish atheists and religious alike are wary of Justice Minister Dermot Ahern's new Defamation Act, which revives awareness that blasphemy has been, and still is, a crime in the traditionally Catholic country. Although the new penalties may be less severe than in the 1961 version, fines of up to 25,000 euros may still be levied for the crime of blasphemy against religion - and now against any religion.

Yes, it's true. Luckily, I've already been to Ireland, so I can cross it off my list of vacation spots. Lord knows that I've been known to criticize religion (especially the Catholic Church), knows that I'd be in trouble if I were to step foot in Ireland.

Staks Rosch notes, Ireland passes blasphemy law:

On Friday July 11th, 2009, Ireland passed the Defamation Bill by one vote. One of the aspects of this bill would make it illegal to criticize religion… any religion under penalty of fines up to 25,000 Euros. That is the equivalent to nearly $35,000.

* * * *
[A]ny religious criticism is a crime, because many Christians are critical of differing religions. Atheists are not the only ones being targeted here. Simply claiming that the Pope is not infallible might be considered blasphemous to many Catholics. Claiming that the prophet Joseph Smith was not really visited by angels and given magic golden plates would be blasphemous to Mormons. Mentioning the prophet Mohammad without adding the phrase “peace be upon him” would be considered blasphemous to Muslims. And claiming that Scientology is a sham and that Tom Cruise is crazy would obviously be blasphemous to Scientologists.

What if a Christian claimed that if someone was not saved through Jesus Christ, he or she would spend eternity in Hell? An argument could be made that such a statement and even the Bible itself might be considered blasphemous to other religions. In fact, most religious are blasphemous to other religions. Maybe the Irish police will fine everyone.

Atheist Ireland plans to test the new law by publishing a deliberately blasphemous statement. See Trees, worshippers and Ireland’s new blasphemy law. Now, blaspheme -- that's something to praise!

(Via onegoodmove)

Time to Commence

Today's the day for President Obama's commencement speech at Notre Dame's graduation, amid the protests of the small, but vocal anti-abortion activists.

Despite the media attention given to the "controversy" over his commencement, the reality is that the student body and a majority of Catholics do not oppose Obama's appearance at the university. Media Matters highlights the hypocrisy in Barack Obama, Notre Dame, and the Casey myth:

President Obama is scheduled to speak at Notre Dame's graduation ceremony this weekend, after more than a month of complaints from a small number of anti-abortion rights activists who have received media attention far disproportionate to their numbers.

Since the announcement on March 20 that Obama would speak, The Washington Post alone has addressed the controversy in 11 articles and columns. The New York Times has dealt with it in eight columns and articles. And as for television news segments, there have been too many to count.

Notre Dame's class valedictorian also dismissed the so-called controversy, noting in a Huffington Post piece, Obama Practices Catholic Values:

"This issue has not divided the campus by any means," says the Catholic, pro-life biology major who will be attending Harvard Medical School after graduation.

. . . Bollman stressed that her peers do not view the president's overall values as inconsistent with Catholicism. In fact, Bollman says Obama is practicing Catholic values in his administration. Like Jesus, Bollman says, Obama is trying to invite "everyone to the table."

A group of esteemed liberal Catholics have taken out a full page ad in the local South Bend paper welcoming the President. And, in what can only be seen as a show of support to the President of Notre Dame for asking Obama to be commencement speaker, the Class of 2009 chose him as Senior Class Fellow:

The University of Notre Dame’s Class of 2009 has selected Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., the University’s president, as the Senior Class Fellow.

Voted on by seniors, the award is an “accolade traditionally given to a member of the Notre Dame community who has had a significant impact on the graduating class,” according to W. Joseph Brown, senior class president.

Media Matters also focuses on the irony of the protests, since Democrats have been criticized for years about former PA Governor Bob Casey:

For nearly 17 years, the media have told us that the Democrats' refusal to allow Casey to speak at their 1992 national convention because of his opposition to abortion was an exclusionary, closed-minded stunt that drove away potential supporters.

Adding to the irony is the fact that Casey's son, PA Senator Robert Casey Jr is the commencement speaker at King's College today as well and his appearance there has drawn the ire from Scranton Bishop Martino. King’s College’s invitation draws Martino’s anger. Casey, like his father, is a strong anti-abortion advocate. His real sin (besides being a Democrat) is the fact that he has supported President Obama.

The Catholic Church has always been against contraceptives and other forms of birth control (other than the mommy-inducing rhythm method), as well as abortion. Yet, it is only in the past few years that it has become the Church of the Anti-Abortion Faithful. It has an all-defining and all-consuming issue for the Church, overwhelming any other creed or article of faith that was once part of the Church's teachings.

This can be seen in the clergy's reaction to Obama's selection at Notre Dame. As the Rude Pundit notes, Why Is This Pro-Choice Commencement Guest Different Than the Others?:

As bullshit protests begin to build over President Barack Obama's upcoming speech at the graduation ceremonies of the University of Notre Dame, as the froth is whipped into a rich, thick foam by self-aggrandizing pro-life activists and desperate-for-relevance Catholic bishops, perhaps a bit of history of graduation activities at Notre Dame is in order:

In 1980, the commencement speaker was Carter administration Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti, a supporter of abortion rights.

In 1987, an honorary degrees were given to the pro-choice Coretta Scott King, Alan Simpson, and Rosalyn Carter.

In 1991, an honorary degree was given to Jane Pauley, a pro-choice supporter.

In 1992, protesters lined up as pro-choice Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan was given the university's Laetare Medal, "the oldest and most prestigious honor awarded an American Catholic," according to the Washington Post. President George H.W. Bush, giving the commencement keynote, went out of his way to praise Moynihan.

In 1993, an honorary degree was given to pro-choice judge Alan C. Page.

In 2000, the commencement speaker was then-U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who supports all kinds of family planning programs, including those where abortion is allowed.

You get the idea here? The Catholic Church: stinking with rank hypocrisy since Peter stood on a rock. And Catholics: the group that really puts the sheep in the flock.

I think that William Lindsey of Bilgrimage explains the real problem that underlies the Church's stance, in Notre Dame, Anti-Abortion Extremists, and the Pastoral Failure of the U.S. Catholic Bishops:

I read about the activities of the “pro-life” extremists seeking to embarrass Notre Dame University for inviting President Obama to its commencement, and I am more than ever convinced that those staging such protests have little interest in cherishing life at all. That's not their game. That is not what this is about, the baby carriages filled with dolls covered in stage blood delivered to Fr. Jenkins’s door, the life-sized images of twelve-week fetuses placed at strategic locations around campus, the airplanes streaming giant photos of an aborted fetus.

This is about intimidation, about seeking to use fear, awe, shock as a technique to control others. It is about control, about a clearly identifiable sociological group who want to represent themselves as the voice of conscience for everyone, who sense that their control of others is waning, and who are willing to use fear as a way of reasserting their control. It is about a minority seeking to impose their will on the majority. It is about those who have for centuries claimed the right to write scripture and interpret scripture for the rest of us, continuing to assert that right in the face of claims that undermine the right.

As always with these things, it's about power & control. Or, as I've said before "Pay, Pray, Obey."

________

The commencement address will be live at 2 PM (EST) on the University of Notre Dame website.

Quote of the Day

One of the constantly bewildering aspects of living on planet Earth is the assumption that most human beings seem to make that faith (usually, but not necessarily, the religious variety) is a virtue. This bizarre attitude — just to add insult to injury — often comes coupled with the equally strange idea that somehow too much reason is bad for you. Why?

From Rationally Speaking.

(Via onegoodmove)

From Sea to Holy See

Luckily, the Pope didn't demand that the annual White House Easter Egg Roll be canceled because President Obama invited gay families to attend.

On the other hand, it appears that the pontiff may be getting involved in the appointment process of Ambassador to the Vatican. The Telegraph first reported the story, Vatican blocks Caroline Kennedy appointment as US ambassador:

Vatican sources told Il Giornale that their support for abortion disqualified Ms Kennedy and other Roman Catholics President Barack Obama had been seeking to appoint.

Mr Obama was reportedly seeking to reward John F Kennedy's daughter, who publicly gave her support to his election bid. She had been poised to replace Hillary Clinton as New York senator, but dropped out amid criticism that she lacked enough experience for the job.

The Italian paper said that the Vatican strongly disapproved of Mr Obama's support for abortion and stem cell research. The impasse over the ambassadorial appointment threatens to cloud his meeting with the Pope during a G8 summit in Itay in July.

Of course, this little tidbit has brought tears of joy to the zealot wing of the GOP. For example, the conservative Washington ("Moonie") Times gleefully reports on the controversy, Vatican frowns on envoy prospects:

The Obama administration is having difficulty finding an ambassador to the Vatican, which has informally vetoed the appointment of Caroline Kennedy and other Roman Catholics who have supported President Obama, an Italian newspaper and Vatican specialists said Thursday.

'A trial of strength between Barack Obama and the U.S. church that involves the Holy See is under way,' the conservative Milan newspaper Il Giornale said Thursday in a report by Vatican correspondent Andrea Tornielli.

'The tenant of the White House is very criticized indeed for his choices in favor of abortion and use of stem [cell] embryos, while the impasse for the designation of the new U.S. ambassador in the Vatican continues,' Mr. Tornielli wrote. 'At least three names — but there are some that say more — of candidates … have been 'burned' even before the proposal of nomination could be made formally, because they were unwelcome to the church.'

The newspaper said those informally rejected include Ms. Kennedy and Douglas Kmiec, a professor of constitutional law at Pepperdine University and former head of the Office of Legal Counsel for Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Both candidates gave prominent endorsements to Mr. Obama during the presidential campaign.

I was just about ready to diss the pontiff when I read Amy Sullivan of Time's Swampland, who says it's not so. Responding to similar reports by Newmax, she notes, Obama’s Vatican Ambassador Rejected? No.:

You'll be shocked to learn this is not true. But oh how perfect it must have sounded to the Newsmax crew when they put out the story. Everyone knows Democrats aren't pro-life. And now Obama can't even get a Vatican ambassador approved--because there's not a single pro-life Catholic in the Democratic Party!

Unfortunately for them, John Thavis at Catholic News Service actually called over to the Vatican to ask about the rumors. Here's what he found:

Vatican sources said not only was the report inaccurate, but that its premise was faulty. The Vatican has not been in the habit of vetting the personal beliefs or ideas of candidates before accepting them as ambassadors, they said.

There have been occasions in the last two years when the Vatican has objected to ambassadorial candidates -- from Argentina, in the case of a divorced Catholic with a live-in partner, and from France, where the candidate was an openly gay Catholic in a union with another man.

"For Catholic ambassadors, there is the question of their matrimonial situation. But outside of that, I don't think there are other criteria," said one Vatican source.

Despite this denial, the media still claims that the Vatican has nixed the appointment. Perhaps this is all just based upon the ruminations of Raymond Flynn, himself a former Ambassador & Boston mayor, who is a strident pro-lifer. As the Boston Herald reports, Raymond Flynn says Caroline Kennedy no good for Vatican post:

Former U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican Raymond L. Flynn is giving a thumbs down to Caroline Kennedy as a potential pick for his former diplomatic post, saying the pro-choice values of JFK’s daughter would make the nod “a mistake.”

“It’s imperative, it’s essential that the person who represents us to the Holy See be a person who has a pro-life values. I hope the president doesn’t make that mistake,” Flynn told the Herald yesterday. “She said she was pro-choice. I don’t assume she’s going to change that, which is problematic.”

While I certainly wouldn't be surprised if the Vatican did try to interfere with the selection of Kennedy, I can't believe that it would have also black-balled Doug Kmiec, as was reported by the Moonie Times. Kmiec may have supported Obama, but he is otherwise a conservative Republican who is pro-life. There is no way the Pope would have objected to Kmiec.

However, if this is truly coming from the Vatican, then I agree with Steven Reynolds of All Spin Zone, who says that the Vatican shouldn't get involved in how our government operates, since we're still (mostly) a nation that doesn't have a state religion. See Vatican Running US Foreign Policy?.

If it is true, then I say we do as Michael Stickings of The Reaction suggests, Vatican rejects Caroline Kennedy as U.S. ambassador:

So the Vatican won't accept Caroline Kennedy as U.S. ambassador -- or anyone else who is pro-choice (and pro-stem-cell research)?

Tough, I say.

It won't happen -- not least because there are so many Catholic voters at home to placate -- but Obama ought simply to refuse to appoint an ambassador to the so-called Holy See. Why give in? Why appoint a pro-choicer just because that's what the Vatican wants? Why implicitly approve of the Roman Catholic Church's absolutist authoritarian positions on such issues -- that is, its moral extremism -- by appointing someone who approves of the Church's positions and of whom the Church approves?

That's right. Leave the spot vacant. Jacob of Contextual Criticism: Vatican is afraid of Caroline Kennedy expresses my thoughts best when he says:

Enter the pious prelates from Rome's heavenly realm. No, no, no, they said. She's pro-choice. We can't have anyone here who believes women should have the right to choose with regard to what they can do with their bodies! Furthermore, we can't have anyone within these holy precincts who favors stem cell research (even if those stem cells come from fetuses tossed in the garbage).

Now, the Roman Catholic Church is free to believe and promote whatever religious nonsense it so desires. Ironically, however, the majority of Catholics in the U.S. do not agree with nor follow the lead of the Vatican when it comes to issues such as abortion and contraception.

Nevertheless, it wouldn't make sense to appoint someone to the Holy See who is not wanted by the pompous papists in Vatican City.

An empty seat at the table would be just the thing.

Freedom From Thought

It's that time of year again. That is, it's time for the Easter Bunny to announce the death & resurrection of Jesus.

It's also time for the annual Blog Against Theocracy, promoting the Separation of Church & State.

This year, my essay focuses on a topic that I have been writing about quite a bit recently -- the "Pay, Pray & Obey" conservative contingent of the Catholic Church.

Most of my musings have been about the deistic doings of Bishop Martino of (my hometown) Scranton, who has single-handedly tried to make the Church a Division of the GOP by refusing communion to Scranton native VP Joe Biden and chastising Senator Bob Casey for paling around with Obama & Biden. He also threatened to lock the doors of the Catheral on St. Patrick's day if a pro-lifer (read that: Biden) was part of the parade, which is a huge event in the Electic City. And then, of course, he challenged a local Catholic college because it dared allow a gay man to speak at a forum (sponsored by the Diversity Institute, of all things) as part of its Black History celebration. See Diversity Defined and The Intolerance Institute.

Martino's views are not just a plague on the city of Scranton, but they speak to the issue of separation of Church & State. When religion requires strict adherence to its beliefs, how can members of a religion govern without conflicts between faith & law? Speaking of Martino's objections to Senator Casey, I observed in The Evil Lurks Within:

I also suppose Martino forgets that the main opposition to JFK as the first Catholic to run for President was that he would put his religious beliefs ahead of those duly enacted laws of the land. Notwithstanding his personal/religious beliefs, abortion is still legal in this country and as a Senator, Casey is obligated to respect those laws.

And as for the Bishop, if Martino was so concerned about "life," where was he on the issue of the unjust war in Iraq? Is he working to end it? How about the death penalty? Nothing extinguishes life like the death penalty. And, let's not forget he is the Bishop in the Scranton Diocese, an area rife with gun lovers. Where does he stand on gun control? Does he preach to his flock to put down the guns? And finally, this is the Catholic Church we're talking about. How did he respond to the pedophiles in the ministry? I'm sure I don't need to answer these hypothetical questions, since the answers are obvious.

Conservative Catholics like Bishop Martino are more prevelant within the Church than at any other time in recent history. As such, the hierarchy of the Catholic Church personifies the importance of the Separation of Church & State.

Of course, the most recent example on a national level is the recent "controversy" over Notre Dame's invitation to President Obama's to speak at its commencement. As I noted last week:

Religious extremism is flourishing and the inability to think critically seems to be a requirement for those religions.

The controversy over President Obama's upcoming commencement address at Notre Dame University is a perfect example of this. Obama Notre Dame Speech: Cardinal George Rips Invitation As An 'Extreme Embarrassment' To Catholics. That is, the right wing faction of the Catholic Church fiercely objects to the idea that Obama will even be permitted to speak at a Catholic institution on any topic, because he does not adhere to all of the tenets of the Church, as promulgated by the Cardinal Newman Society (and he's a Democrat). See Obama and Notre Dame and The Politicization of American Catholicism.

In other words, according to this conservative Catholic contingent, no voice that does not comport with the orthodoxy of the Church should be permitted to be heard at all. Debate? Dissent? Not permitted. Rather, they dictate and the flock obeys. To hear other opinions might cause the faithful to question the rules. For this reason, thinking -- never mind critical thinking -- is heresy.

Pat Buchanan & Lawrence O'Donnell discuss (or, should I say scream about) the issue on Hardball:



Like evangelical Christians, the views of the Catholic Church have become intolerant to ideas that are not part of the dogma of the Church. On the one hand, I respect another's right to believe (even if I believe it is wrong). However, I do object to the insistence that I must abide by those opinions. And that is why religion needs to be kept out of the state. Unless, of course, I'm required to eat chocolate bunnies.

(Poster via coffee messiah)

Lenten Sacrifices

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Faith the Nation
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes

Good Friday. Thoughts of religion.

The Resurrection is Coming

In anticipation of Easter, the sermon on the 5th Sunday of Lent (which this year, was March 29, 2009), focuses on the gospel of John 11:25:

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Those who believe in me, even though they die, will live, and everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

I may have long ago left the Catholic Church, but obviously the Church hasn't left me. After years of drilling, the liturgy and bible passages still remain buried somewhere in the recesses of the mind. This passage popped into my head when I read about the Ramkissoon case.

The remains of Javon Thompson, a 21 month old baby boy, was found stuffed in a suitcase in South Philly last year. The child's mother and four others were charged with his death. As the Huffington Post reports, Resurrected Child And Ria Ramkissoon: Plea Withdrawn If Son Rises From Dead:

A former religious cult member who helped starve her son to death believes he will be resurrected, but legal experts say her extreme faith doesn't make her criminally insane. The mother made an extraordinary deal with prosecutors Monday that her guilty plea to child abuse resulting in death will be withdrawn if her 1-year-old son, Javon Thompson, comes back to life. Law experts and psychiatrists said there was no problem with the agreement because Ria Ramkissoon, 22, was mentally competent and freely entered into the deal, and extreme religious beliefs aren't deemed insane by law.

The story itself is terribly sad. A mother, who was a member of a religious cult, 1 Mind Ministries, allowed her son to be starved to death, because he refused to say "Amen" before meals. The Inquirer reports, Mother of boy who starved admits guilt - on condition:

According to a statement of facts, the cult members stopped feeding the boy when he refused to say "Amen" after a meal. After Javon died, Ramkissoon sat next to his decomposing body and prayed for his resurrection.

Ramkissoon's attorney, Steven D. Silverman, said Ramkissoon believed the resurrection would occur. She agreed to plead guilty only after prosecutors said they would drop the charges if the child comes back to life, Silverman said.

* * * *

After the boy died, the cult members left his body inside the apartment where they lived until it began to decompose, according to police documents and the statement of facts. In early 2007, they stuffed the body inside a suitcase and filled it with mothballs and fabric-softener sheets to mask the odor.

The cult members relocated to Philadelphia, where they befriended an elderly man and stored the suitcase in a shed behind his home on the 700 block of South 13th Street. It remained there for more than a year before police found it, the documents say.

What is fascinating -- and equally disturbing -- is the aspect of the case that focuses on the beliefs of the religious cult. As the Washington Post notes, Death Opens Doors on Group:

Psychiatrists who evaluated Ramkissoon at the request of a judge concluded that she was not criminally insane. Her attorney, Steven Silverman, said the doctors found that her beliefs were indistinguishable from religious beliefs, in part because they were shared by those around her.

'She wasn't delusional, because she was following a religion,' Silverman said, describing the findings of the doctors' psychiatric evaluation.

* * * *

Silverman said he and prosecutors think Ramkissoon was brainwashed and should have been found not criminally responsible; prosecutors declined to comment. Although an inability to think critically can be a sign of brainwashing, experts said, the line between that and some religious beliefs can be difficult to discern.

"At times there can be an overlap between extreme religious conviction and delusion," said Robert Jay Lifton, a cult expert and psychiatrist who lectures at Harvard Medical School. "It's a difficult area for psychiatry and the legal system."(Emphasis added).

Religious extremism is flourishing and the inability to think critically seems to be a requirement for those religions.

The controversy over President Obama's upcoming commencement address at Notre Dame University is a perfect example of this. Obama Notre Dame Speech: Cardinal George Rips Invitation As An 'Extreme Embarrassment' To Catholics. That is, the right wing faction of the Catholic Church fiercely objects to the idea that Obama will even be permitted to speak at a Catholic insitution on any topic, because he does not adhere to all of the tenets of the Society, as promulgated by the Cardinal Newman Society (and he's a Democrat). See Obama and Notre Dame and The Politicization of American Catholicism.

In other words, according to this conservative Catholic contingent, no voice that does not comport with the orthodoxy of the Church should be permitted to be heard at all. Debate? Dissent? Not permitted. Rather, they dictate and the flock obeys. To hear other opinions might cause the faithful to question the rules. For this reason, thinking -- never mind critical thinking -- is heresy.

And the line between religous belief and madness is sometimes difficult to discern.

Doctor No

With all of the shunning of (Democratic) politicians who don't tow the line of official Catholic orthodoxy by the Catholic Church, it won't be long before the Church turns on the medical profession.

After the Pope condemned the use of condoms, as fostering the spread of HIV/AIDS, the medical journal The Lancet strongly objected, Medical journal says Pope distorting condom facts:

A prestigious medical journal on Friday accused Pope Benedict of distorting scientific evidence to promote Catholic doctrine by saying that condoms increase the spread of AIDS.

The Lancet in an editorial called on the Pope to retract the comments made last week, saying anything less would be an immense disservice to the public and health advocates fighting to contain the disease.

"When any influential person, be it a religious or political leader, makes a false scientific statement that could be devastating to the health of millions of people, they should retract or correct the public record," the editorial said.

"By saying that condoms exacerbate the problem of HIV/AIDS, the Pope has publicly distorted scientific evidence to promote Catholic doctrine on the issue."

During his first visit to Africa, the Pope told reporters that AIDS is a problem that "cannot be overcome by the distribution of condoms; on the contrary, they increase it."

The comment ignited a firestorm of criticism from health officials, activists and politicians who criticized that view as unrealistic, unscientific and dangerous.

Why pick on just the politicians who support these positions? Why not go to the source of the problem? In addition to being responsible for the sins of contraception and abortion, medicine and doctors are responsible for all kinds of medical treatments. After all, doctors and medical professionals are the same people who cure the sick, which obviously interferes with God's plans. That is, if prayer can't save you, it clearly means it's your time to go. So, I think its time for doctors to be added to the list of the verboten.

In other words, I think the Church needs to take a stand here. No good Catholic, at the risk of ex-communication, should be permitted to see a doctor or other medical professional. To do otherwise would certainly be, as that keeper of the faith Scranton Bishop Martino would say, “cooperating with ... evil.”

(Picture via Mirth, Musings, & More)

Quote of the Day

So true. And, imagine that -- I finally found something I could agree with the Pope about:

Instead of men kneeling in confessionals admitting to lust, maybe they should be encouraged to regard greed...as a more devastating and destructive sin. In this respect, it is interesting to note that Pope Benedict has recently suggested that there is a close connection between original sin and the greed that has created the current economic crisis. It is also notable that the credit crunch has been created by a profession that is almost exclusively male. In the line-up of failed bankers, not a single woman's name has appeared. Male greed has proven to be a murderous sin, destroying the livelihoods of millions, bringing down economies and social institutions and threatening starvation to the most vulnerable people on earth. Recent research at Cambridge University has revealed a connection between men's behaviour on the trading floors and their testosterone levels. Men with high testosterone levels are more willing to take financial risks, and that risk-taking boosts their testosterone levels even higher. The global economic crisis may be the result of a testosterone tornado sweeping through the banking world. There is also mounting evidence that business productivity and efficiency increase when women are involved in management and decision-making, and it has long been recognised by aid agencies that women invest money more responsibly, implement development projects more effectively and are more likely to yield a return on the investment than men. Many surveys have also shown that women in all societies tend to work longer hours than men, which is perhaps why "sloth" is not high on the list of women's sins. (Emphasis added).

Sunday Sermonette: James Wolcott

(Via onegoodmove)

Pro Whose Life?

For a change, I'm not writing about antics of the Bishop of Scranton, Joseph Martino.

This time the outrageous news about the Catholic Church emanates from Brazil. The regional archbishop excommunicated the mother of a 9 year old rape victim and the doctors who performed an abortion on her. Not surprisingly, the Vatican approved the action of the archbishop, Vatican defends Brazil excommunication:

A senior Vatican cleric has defended the excommunication of the mother and doctors of a nine-year-old girl who had an abortion in Brazil after being raped.

Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, head of the Catholic church's Congregation for Bishops, told the daily La Stampa on Saturday that the twins the girl had been carrying had a right to live.

"It is a sad case but the real problem is that the twins conceived were two innocent persons, who had the right to live and could not be eliminated," he said.

Re, who also heads the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, added: "Life must always be protected, the attack on the Brazilian church is unjustified."

The row was triggered by the termination on Wednesday of twin foetuses carried by a nine-year-old allegedly raped by her stepfather in the Brazilian state of Pernambuco.

However, the abortion was performed because the doctors were concerned that the 9 year old could not survive the pregancy:

The regional archbishop, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, pronounced excommunication for the mother for authorising the operation and doctors who carried it out for fear that the slim girl would not survive carrying the foetuses to term.

"God's law is above any human law. So when a human law ... is contrary to God's law, this human law has no value," Cardoso had said.

The Church has apparently evolved to to a single issue religion, the religion of the anti-abortion creed. As the Church see its, it's OK if the mother and twins had died during the course of the pregnancy or delivery, so long as there was no interference by abortion.

And for the stepfather, who had been abusing the girl since she was 6? And abusing her physically handicapped older sister?

[The archbishop] also said the accused stepfather would not be expelled from the church. Although the man allegedly committed "a heinous crime ... the abortion - the elimination of an innocent life - was more serious".

Battista Re agreed, saying: "Excommunication for those who carried out the abortion is just" as a pregnancy termination always meant ending an innocent life.

Natch, the Church has always sided with the child-abusers, so why would they change now?

If only the Church could be a little more "Pro-life" after life begins.

(Via Oliver Willis)

Diversity Defined

Diversity has no place in the Catholic Church, or its institutions of higher learning, announced Scranton Bishop Martino. Acknowledging that the "advancement of tolerance, understanding and harmony between people of different races and cultures" are worthy goals, the Bishop clarified that such teachings have no place in a Catholic Institution, since they conflict with Catholic values.

In his latest quest for the limelight in the Electric City, the Bishop of the Diocese of Scranton has defined the word "Diversity," at least for those Catholics who don't have a dictionary handy. As the Times-Tribune explains, Bishop Martino defines role of 'diversity':

Bishop Joseph F. Martino called on area Catholics to see a difference between 'authentic tolerance' and an 'anything-goes mindset,' in a public statement Tuesday.

* * * *

The statement describes a school’s responsibility to teach Catholic values. It says while diversity is a worthy goal, a Catholic institution may not compromise on the “objective, moral truth” of Catholic teaching.

“For example, would the Diversity Institute be justified in hosting a speaker who believes the Holocaust is a myth? Or one who believes slavery is OK because certain people are inferior? Or one who believes women can be exploited because they are the “weaker sex”?” the bishop asked.

“Their views are certainly ‘diverse,’ but does that qualify them to be given a platform in the name of tolerance?" Bishop Martino wrote. “As Catholics, we believe there is an objective, moral truth — given to us by Jesus Christ. This truth is timeless, and it cannot be altered by the shifting tides of popular culture.”

See also, Bishop, Misericordia trade statements on diversity institute.

Banning Holocaust deniers (sorry Bishop Williamson, you aren't welcome in Scranton), gays and people who know people who may be pro-Choice is the latest edict defining the limits of diversity, instructs Martino.

Of course, I'm speaking of the man who runs the Catholic Church in Scranton, Joseph Martino, who has taken time from closing churches in the Diocese to targeting colleges who foolishly believe learning means listening to views that may not be your own. As I've written (many times) before, Martino has attacked a local college because it dared allow a gay man to speak at a forum (sponsored by the Diversity Institute, of all things) as part of its Black History celebration. Santimonious: In Praise of Moron.

For more of the sad saga of sinful doings in Scranton, see The Intolerance Institute, Sinful in Scranton.

In his latest statement, Martino issues a final word to his critics and naysayers:

Bishop Martino concluded his statement by offering a “postscript” to people who criticize him for “taking public stances that may not be popular or ‘politically correct,’ or may not agree with their own personal notions of what ‘progressive’ Catholic doctrine should be.”

“My job as a bishop is to promulgate the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church to all the faithful,” he wrote. “I will continue to do so.”

I'm just sorry that I left the Church long ago, so I can't make a big scene & leave now!

Santimonious: In Praise of Moron

Good thing I'm not a practicing Catholic any more, or I'd be in trouble with the Church (yes, in many ways). I had promised to give up Martino for Lent, but it's obvious that I haven't been able to keep that pledge, since this is the second time I'm writing about him this week. See The Intolerance Institute.

In addition, I usually reserve my religious rants for Sundays, in honor of that being the day set aside for worship, but the combination of agita in the Church & Scranton has caused me to make an exception.

As I wrote earlier this week, Joseph Martino (which I believe is Italian for Moron), the Bishop of Scranton, is apparently on a mission from God to seek out & eliminate any discourse within the Church. For example, he has attacked a local college because it dared allow a gay man to speak at a forum (sponsored by the Diversity Institute, of all things). See also, Sinful in Scranton. There have even been suggestions that he may punish the school by removing its Catholic affiliation, which he has the power to do. Bishop Martino could take church affiliation from Misericordia.

He has also targeted anyone whom he does not consider sufficiently "pro-life," The Evil Lurks Within, and he has anointed himself as the Decider-In-Chief of what is appropriate (sound familiar?). Maybe we need to rename the Church as the Church of the Lemmings.

In Rick Santorum's (remember him? the former Senator from PA) weekly column in the Inky, Mr. Sanctimonious is downright gleeful about Martino's attacks against Democrats (including Bob Casey, who beat him for his Senate seat), In praise of Catholic priests who dare to teach and enforce:

That's why Scranton Bishop Joseph Martino got so much national attention last fall. Martino, formerly the auxiliary bishop of Philadelphia, made the welcome decision to publicly bar then Sen. Joe Biden and other abortion advocates from receiving Communion in the Scranton Diocese. Then, after the November election, he admonished his brother bishops for their reluctance to deal with the issue faithfully.

Last month, Martino took on the most influential family in his diocese, the Caseys. He excoriated Sen. Bob Casey, who claims to be pro-life, for voting to give taxpayer dollars to overseas organizations that perform abortions. He warned that Casey was "formally cooperating with evil."

Martino was not done. Two weeks ago, the Philadelphia native and St. Joseph's Prep graduate issued a strong statement of disapproval to a local, nominally Catholic college, Misericordia University, that had scheduled a speech on campus by someone advocating same-sex marriage. "The faithful of the Diocese of Scranton should be in no doubt," Martino said, "that Misericordia University in this instance is seriously failing in maintaining its Catholic identity."

Then, last week, Martino took on some more of the biggest guns in the diocese: the Irish clubs that organize the largest public Catholic event of the year, the St. Patrick's Day festivities. Through a letter from his Irish auxiliary bishop, Martino warned that if any of these groups went ahead with plans that in any way honor politicians who are not pro-life, he would close the cathedral where Mass is usually held prior to the parade, as well as other diocesan churches. He said he would not countenance anything that created confusion about the teachings of the church.

The reason for the letter: Scranton's St. Patrick's Day parade last year featured Hillary Clinton.

Not satisfied with the bad press & controversy he's created so far this week, Martino has issued a new salvo, by publishing a new letter against Senator Casey & ordering priests to deny Communion to any politician who does not tow the line. Bishop Martino counseling Eucharistic ministers to deny Holy Communion. As Catholic Culture explains, Scranton's Bishop Martino orders priests: no Communion for public sinners:

The official notice does not mention any individual by name. However it is impossible to overlook the fact that on the same day, February 26, the Scranton diocese also posted an open letter from Bishop Martino of Pennsylvania Senator Robert Casey, in which the bishop-- for the second time-- reminded the Catholic lawmaker of his moral obligation 'to oppose abortion and other clear evils.'

Martino's position, of course, is ridiculous. Senator Casey is definitely not pro-Choice. In fact, he had a very difficult time during the election (where he beat Santorum) because of his position. I can attest to the fact that many of my friends and colleagues did not want to vote for him because of his strong pro-life views. See Green is the Color of Money. Yet, Martino doesn't want to be bothered by the facts -- he "says his interpretation of the matter is 'in no way mistaken.'”

Truthfully, I'm beginning to think that what's going on here is Martino's political views are coloring his religious beliefs. I'm willing to bet that the man is a Republican, who is bent on doing whatever he can to sway voters in this traditionally conservative, but Democratic area. Clearly, the sole focus of his wrath are politicians of the Democratic persuasion. That is, the only issues he promotes as "evil" are those that Democrats hold. How about the Death penalty? Or the unjust war in Iraq? Those all impact "life" as well. Yet they are Republican issues, so he stays away from them. This theory is espoused by Bilgrimage in Collusion of the Catholic and Political Right: The Martino Story Continues and I truly believe he is correct in this. It's all part of the hard shift to the right and the elimination of the teachings of Vatican II.

And Martino's views (as well as those of the man formerly known as Ratzinger) are having an adverse impact on the Church. Despite the fact that the Catholic Church is still the largest ecclesial ministry in the US, the Church is starting to look like the economy -- in free fall. As noted by Catholic Culture: "Between the beginning and the end of 2007, the number of Catholics in the United States declined by nearly 400,000 to 67.1 million, according to the newly published 2009 Yearbook of American & Canadian Churches." I'm sure the numbers of Catholics who have fled the Church in Scranton in the last year or so are also phenomenal (but we'll never know, because Martino will never release that information).

So, you may ask: why do I care? Although I have not been a member of the Church for many (many) years, I consider having been born & raised Catholic a bit like being Jewish -- for me, it's more a cultural thing than religious. In other words, I'm a secular Catholic, if that's possible. So I don't appreciate my cultural background being defiled this way. Contrary to the pontifications of this Bishop of the flock in Scranton, I am sure that the teachings of the Catholic Church are not intended to be grounded in bigotry, intolerance and harsh judgments of others.

And other people may be afraid of speaking out, but I can -- because I have nothing to lose.

The Intolerance Institute

Thankfully, I left the Catholic Church many years ago, so I don't have to witness first hand the sadness that is emanating from the destruction of the Church wroth by the likes of Bishop Martino of Scranton.

Having been born & raised in Scranton (accompanied by a Catholic School education from Kindergarten through Law School), I did think that there was one major advantage to my education. The benefit of spending grade school with the sisters would permit me to tell funny stories of having been taught by the nuns -- and Lord knows, there are many of those to tell. No More Patent Leather Shoes. In fact, my colleagues in the LLWL Gang, who are religiously diverse, got to hear the Catholic girls explain Pagan Babies at lunch the other day.

Yet, the Church of today, ruled by scolding dictators with vanity, intolerance and charity for none has superseded those fond memories, leaving a vile taste behind.

Once again, the Bishop of Scranton, Joseph Martino, has reared his ugly head to cause dissension, anger & pain among his flock. I have written of him many times of late, chronicling his dastardly deeds "in God's name." One of those dealt with his displeasure with a local Catholic University who permitted a civil rights activist, who happens to be gay, to speak at it's annual Black History event. See Sinful in Scranton. As the Scranton Times reports, Bishop Martino targets Misericordia University Diversity Institute:

Bishop Joseph F. Martino is calling on Misericordia University to “seriously consider discontinuing its Diversity Institute,” which hosted a gay-rights speaker earlier this month.

The bishop has publicly criticized the appearance of Keith Boykin, a best-selling author, television commentator and founder of the National Black Justice Coalition. Now Bishop Martino wants to ensure other speakers like Mr. Boykin do not receive a platform at Misericordia again.

Boykin, who is black as well as gay, was there as part of the school's Black History Month celebration and his focus was on black history, not on gay rights.

Lest there be any misunderstanding about Martino's intention, he wants it to be clear that he does not believe in diversity, if it does not comport with his view of the Church's teachings:

In a statement released by the Diocese of Scranton on Tuesday, the bishop conveyed that students should learn respect for all races and cultures, but viewpoints in opposition to Catholic teaching should not be presented “under the guise of ‘diversity.’ ”

“Doing so within a formal structure sanctioned by the institution gives the impression that these viewpoints are acceptable, or that all morality is relative,” the statement read.

The bishop is “asking Misericordia to seriously consider discontinuing its Diversity Institute” and also wants the school to prove its efforts in teaching Catholic morality regarding sexuality and homosexuality — including naming courses, content and catalog numbers.

Let the Inquisition begin! Martino also chose to issue his edict to the school by means of a press release, rather than by notifying the college first:

In a statement released by Misericordia on Tuesday afternoon, the university said it has “been committed deeply to its Catholic mission and the teachings of the Catholic Church for 85 years” and that it “welcomes the opportunity to discuss these matters with the bishop and his delegates at their convenience.” No further public comment was made.

Misericordia, located in Dallas, is a Catholic-affiliated school founded in 1924 by the Religious Sisters of Mercy. It is funded independently and not run by the diocese.

I have it on good authority (unlike me, I come from a religious family) that Martino never discussed any of his concerns with Misericordia or the Institute before he issued his attack through the media. Not a meeting. Not a letter. Not a call. No need, since Martino doesn't believe in discussion. He speaks, others obey.

And what about this radical Institute that obviously needs to be reigned in, according to the Bishop? What incendiary things has this organization done in the past? The Wilkes Barre paper describes the mission, Institute has long track record of promoting diversity:

Since 1993, the Diversity Institute at Misericordia University has provided programming and seminars for institutions in Northeastern Pennsylvania to encourage people in the region to be educated about diversity issues.

Its director, Linda Trompetter, Ph.D., had no comment Tuesday about the Diversity Institute at Misericordia University or Bishop Joseph F. Martino’s call to shut down the program. Through the years, though, the Diversity Institute has spurred larger initiatives that have addressed diversity issues throughout Northeastern Pennsylvania.

The Diversity Institute has presented at area businesses, government agencies, schools, universities and hospitals on issues ranging from sexual harassment, prejudice reduction and culture competence.

They’ve also presented programs on gender, religion, sexual orientation and class.

Each summer, the Diversity Institute hosts a multicultural summer camp for kids who live in and out of the area. The camp always ends with a picnic co-sponsored by the Wilkes-Barre chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

I have mentioned before that my hometown, and the surrounding area, was not exactly a beacon for harmonious racial relations. See, e.g., Oh, Dear Me and Can't Be Topped. So, one would think that an Institute that works to overcome those sentiments might be just what the region could use.

Yet Martino wants to do away with it? I guess his credo is a faith based upon Intolerance. Which Commandment was that?

Sinful in Scranton

I think Martino must be Italian for Moron. The Bishop from Scranton must sit around, looking for issues to stir up controversy and dissension in the Diocese. Based on the press he generates and the number of parishioners who are fleeing the Church, he's doing an excellent job.

Of course, this is the man who has elevated the abortion issue as the only important issue facing the world today. Forget unjust wars like in Iraq and genocide in Darfur. He doesn't have time for that. Forget hunger and rising homelessness. Forget about the death penalty. And let's not even talk about the problem of pedophiles in the Catholic Church.

During the election he ordered a letter be read during every mass in the Diocese, forbidding Catholics from voting for a pro-Choice candidate. See Say It Ain't So, Joe. More recently, he publicly rebuked Senator Bob Casey, from Scranton, for paling around with people who are pro-Choice. The Evil Lurks Within. A marvelous response to Martino on this particular issue can be found at Scranton Catholic Bishop Wants to Protect Children, Fails to See Irony.

Last week, he blasted a college for sponsoring a civil rights activist (who happens to be gay) as a speaker for its annual dinner of the Diversity Institute as part of Black History Month. As the Scranton paper reported, Bishop Martino rips college for gay-rights speaker:

The Diocese of Scranton is publicly criticizing the appearance of a gay-rights advocate who will speak at Misericordia University today.

Bishop Joseph F. Martino voiced “absolute disapproval” of the university providing a “platform” for Keith Boykin, a best-selling author, television commentator and founder of the National Black Justice Coalition.

In a statement issued by the diocese Monday, Bishop Martino called Mr. Boykin’s beliefs “disturbingly opposed” and “antithetical” to Catholic teaching.

This is the Catholic Church after all. Openness to Diversity is what's truly antithetical to small-minded, power-mongers like Martino. I'm sure he wasn't happy that the school held the lecture anyway, to a standing room only crowd. Disruption-free talk at Misericordia.

Moving on to new targets, Martino issued a pronouncement that no elected officials who hold pro abortion positions can be permitted to have any involvement in the city's upcoming St. Patrick's Day events. As the Times reported, Bishop warns Irish planners in Scranton:

In a letter to the heads of three local Irish-American organizations, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Scranton has threatened to close St. Peter’s Cathedral during St. Patrick’s Day celebrations if the groups feature elected officials who support abortion rights at their annual events.

The letter, which was signed by Auxiliary Bishop John M. Dougherty, reports that Bishop Joseph F. Martino is “determined to prevent scandal,” which would be caused if the organizations “in any way” should “honor pro-abortion officials” by giving them parade or dais positions or opportunities to speak and “the Catholic Church is seen to be involved in this honoring.”

In direct terms, the letter reiterates the bishop’s publicly stated position that elected officials who vote to support abortion rights will be denied Holy Communion if they attempt to receive the sacrament in the diocese, including at St. Patrick’s Day Masses. The closing of St. Peter’s Cathedral is offered as an additional measure to prevent the honoring of such officials.

See also, Bishop of Scranton bars pro-abortion officials from St. Patrick’s Day Masses.

Of course, his position makes perfect sense. A closed mind matches the closed doors. On the other hand, this is a big deal in Scranton, with its large Irish population. As the Times notes:

The annual St. Patrick’s Parade through downtown Scranton is one of the largest in the country, and the dinners hosted by the Friendly Sons and the Society of Irish Women often have featured prominent national and international figures. Last year, President Barack Obama, then a senator, spoke at the Irish Women’s dinner; Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern spoke at the Friendly Sons’ dinner and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then a senator, marched in the parade.

Although bishops of the diocese have historically attended the Friendly Sons’ dinner, Bishop Martino has never participated.

As Whispers in the Loggia explains: "Bottom line: no Biden."

The final irony about Martino is that he may be getting a lot of press on his pontifications, but he isn't just shutting doors to the Church to keep people out -- the doors to many parishes are being closed due to falling numbers of attendees. As Whispers in the Loggia observed:

Late last month, the Scranton diocese announced that, due to falling numbers of priests and fewer resources to go around, almost half its 209 parishes will be closed or consolidated.

(Cartoon via John Cole, TheTimes-Tribune)

They're Back

I suppose I'm showing my age, because I remember them. Yes, for those of us who were raised Catholic, of a certain age, indulgences were a staple of the crazy patchwork of silly stuff the nuns taught us, which we then giggled about in later life.

Yet, for some, they are obvious serious enough to redeem from the dustbin of hazy memories. Especially for a Catholic Church intent upon eradicating the reforms of Vatican II, it is just one more way to move the Church back in time.

According to the NYTimes, Indulgences Return, and Heaven Moves a Step Closer for Catholics:

The announcement in church bulletins and on Web sites has been greeted with enthusiasm by some and wariness by others. But mainly, it has gone over the heads of a vast generation of Roman Catholics who have no idea what it means: “Bishop Announces Plenary Indulgences.”

In recent months, dioceses around the world have been offering Catholics a spiritual benefit that fell out of favor decades ago — the indulgence, a sort of amnesty from punishment in the afterlife — and reminding them of the church’s clout in mitigating the wages of sin.

The fact that many Catholics under 50 have never sought one, and never heard of indulgences except in high school European history (Martin Luther denounced the selling of them in 1517 while igniting the Protestant Reformation), simply makes their reintroduction more urgent among church leaders bent on restoring fading traditions of penance in what they see as a self-satisfied world.

“Why are we bringing it back?” asked Bishop Nicholas A. DiMarzio of Brooklyn, who has embraced the move. “Because there is sin in the world.”

Like the Latin Mass and meatless Fridays, the indulgence was one of the traditions decoupled from mainstream Catholic practice in the 1960s by the Second Vatican Council, the gathering of bishops that set a new tone of simplicity and informality for the church. Its revival has been viewed as part of a conservative resurgence that has brought some quiet changes and some highly controversial ones, like Pope Benedict XVI’s recent decision to lift the excommunications of four schismatic bishops who reject the council’s reforms.

So, for the uninitiated, what's an indulgence, other than an "excuse me"?

According to church teaching, even after sinners are absolved in the confessional and say their Our Fathers or Hail Marys as penance, they still face punishment after death, in Purgatory, before they can enter heaven. In exchange for certain prayers, devotions or pilgrimages in special years, a Catholic can receive an indulgence, which reduces or erases that punishment instantly, with no formal ceremony or sacrament.

There are partial indulgences, which reduce purgatorial time by a certain number of days or years, and plenary indulgences, which eliminate all of it, until another sin is committed. You can get one for yourself, or for someone who is dead. You cannot buy one — the church outlawed the sale of indulgences in 1567 — but charitable contributions, combined with other acts, can help you earn one. There is a limit of one plenary indulgence per sinner per day.

I have just one question. So, what's next? Pagan babies anyone?

(Via Pharyngula)

The Evil Lurks Within

Sunday. The time to turn to thoughts of religion.

Apparently, the Catholic Church is vying with the Evangelicals to see who wins the Christian Less Christ Award. The Catholic Church is beginning to remind me of the GOP, a bunch of old (mostly white) guys who are totally removed from reality, baying at the moon.

The Pope (formerly known as Joseph Ratzinger, who served in his previous Vatican job as Pope John Paul’s Dick Cheney) is a hard-lined conservative who is intent on repealing most of, if not all, of the ecumenical teachings of the Second Vatican Council. Pope Benedict's decision to remove the excommunication of traditionalist bishops (including a Holocaust denier) has caused a storm of criticism from Jewish groups and other political leaders.

It's not just the reprehensible views of Bishop Williamson, however, that's the problem (although that is a major problem). It's the overall ultra-conservative turn of the Church itself that's so troubling. As noted by Clerical Whispers, Pope's Controversial Move Gives Hope to Shunned Traditionalists:

These ultra-traditional Catholics want the Vatican to declare that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, want a return to old liturgies in which Mass is said in Latin, and say Vatican II, which met in the early 1960s, violates true Catholicism and is the reason why many have left the faith."

* * * *

Experts say some of the most controversial aspects of the group are more prominent in Europe, particularly in France. Those include anti-Semitic comments by society leaders and calls for governments to favor Catholicism.

"Lefebvrists want a much closer alliance between the church and the state than is permissible or possible in the post-Enlightenment world," said the Rev. James Massa, who heads ecumenical and interreligious outreach for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

And nowhere is that more true than in little ole Scranton. My brother alerted me to the latest travesty from the Catholic Church in Scranton, courtesy of the Bishop there, who apparently runs the Church like his own little Fiefdom. As the Scranton paper reports, Bishop Martino accuses Sen. Bob Casey of “cooperating with … evil”:

Diocese of Scranton Bishop Joseph F. Martino accuses Sen. Bob Casey of “cooperating with … evil” by refusing to back legislation to block U.S. tax dollars from flowing to foreign family planning groups that refuse to renounce abortion.

In a Jan. 30 letter to the senator, the bishop also calls on Mr. Casey to live up to his Catholic faith and “oppose abortion and other clear evils, including contraception.”

* * * *

The letter was prompted by Mr. Casey’s vote against an amendment to the state Children’s Health Insurance Program, which the Senate adopted last week. The amendment, authored by Sen. Mel Martinez, a Florida Republican, would have required family planning groups abroad to agree, before they receive U.S. aid, that they would not perform or promote abortions.

I've known the Casey family from my days in Scranton. I went to school with one of the Caseys (they are a big family, so who didn't?) and I knew the former Governor Casey. The family is very religious and they personally toe the Church line, including Senator Casey. He espouses his views, even though it has meant that, like his father, he has had a difficult time in the Democratic Party because of his stanch pro-life views. Casey certainly does not deserve this treatment by the Church. Yet, in Martino's letter, he chides Casey for his position:

Quoting church doctrine, the bishop contends Catholics are required to oppose “any law that attacks human life” and some Catholics “are given a particular title to this task … including those who hold economic and political power.”

Bishop Martino said Mr. Casey should reverse his vote because his “responsibilities as a Catholic … exceed even those of your office.”

See also, Bishop Admonishes Sen. Casey. Martino also made news during the primary for his stance on abortion as the single issue in the campaign for Catholics. See Say It Ain't So, Joe. Like the Pope he emulates, this is a man with major power & control issues, as they say.

I also suppose Martino forgets that the main opposition to JFK as the first Catholic to run for President was that he would put his religious beliefs ahead of those duly enacted laws of the land. Notwithstanding his personal/religious beliefs, abortion is still legal in this country and as a Senator, Casey is obligated to respect those laws.

And as for the Bishop, if Martino was so concerned about "life," where was he on the issue of the unjust war in Iraq? Is he working to end it? How about the death penalty? Nothing extinguishes life like the death penalty. And, let's not forget he is the Bishop in the Scranton Diocese, an area rife with gun lovers. Where does he stand on gun control? Does he preach to his flock to put down the guns? And finally, this is the Catholic Church we're talking about. How did he respond to the pedophiles in the ministry? I'm sure I don't need to answer these hypothetical questions, since the answers are obvious.

Quote of the Day

Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around -- (laughter) -- when yellow will be mellow -- (laughter) -- when the red man can get ahead, man -- (laughter) -- and when white will embrace what is right.

Let all those who do justice and love mercy say amen.

Reverend Joeseph Lowery


________________

This little song that I'm singin' about
People you know it's true
If you're black and gotta work for a living
This is what they will say to you

They says if you was white, should be all right
If you was brown, stick around
But as you's black, m-mm brother, git back git back git back

From Black, Brown And White (B. B. Broonzy)

The Alternative Invocation

As part of the Inaugural services today for the swearing in of President Obama, Rick Warren will deliver the invocation. Warren is a conservative mega-minister who spreads a message of God that is too often unforgiving and hateful. Of course, he is not alone in his religious belief and vision that is mean-spirited. These clergy preach a version of faith for the soulless.

Quaker Dave at The Quaker Agitator has set up a blog for The Alternative Invocation, asking bloggers:

We ask that you post a message of compassion, empathy, tolerance, diversity, and true Christian (or other) love to America. Post a message that stands in opposition to the messages that Rick Warren and those of his particular political persuasion use to divide our country.

Truly, the best Alternative Invocation is that of the Prayer delivered by Reverend Gene Robinson at the Lincoln Memorial.

And then there is this:



As we all know, the times, they are a changin'. Thanks to Blue Gal.

______________________

Anyone who knows me, knows that I'm not very religious. With that caveat in mind, here are my thoughts:

Hope & Change.

Those were the words upon which President Obama premised his campaign. Hope and change is what he promised us if we entrusted him with our faith in him to lead us going forward. Hope for the future and change in our ways.

Of course, many of the grave problems that we face today are the result of us having lost our way. Greed, power and self-interest became the mantra by which we lived. It has led to war, economic distress and a national depression in spirit and in deed. As we now know, that is not the way.

My prayer today is one of hope and change for the country, its people and its faith in God.

As the country has lost its way, so have many of its Churches. Religion has all too often become a microcosm of Wall Street, with a cross replacing the dollar sign. Greed, power and self-interest have replaced charity, mercy and love of fellow man.

Sermons of priests and ministers preaching that we judge our fellow man is not what God -- or Jesus -- asked of us. Forgiveness requires mercy, not condemnation. Dogmatism in the name of religion has fostered divisiveness and hatred. Christianity is no longer Christ-like.

I hope that we once again separate Church and state. As the country has been divided politically, so has the Christian religion. The Church has become as partisan as the nation. Politics is God, according to the sermons. We need change in our Churches and hope in our hearts and souls instead.

What is religion if not a belief and hope that we have the power to change -- for the better? Let us remember the true foundation of faith in God.

Love thy neighbor as thyself. Turn the other cheek. The meek shall inherit the earth.

Let us hope, and pray, for change.