Words We All Need to Hear

Did Paul VI ACTUALLY approve contraceptive use?

Thanks to Fr. Z for doing this legwork.  Click here to read his article.  Spoiler alert - the answer is no, he did not

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2016/02/its-not-an-urban-legend-its-a-lie-paul-vi-did-not-give-permission-to-nuns-to-use-contraceptives/

Planned Parenthood's Catch 22

When the Center for Medical Progress first began releasing their videos showing Planned Parenthood executives salivating over baby organs that would allow them to purchase Lamborghini's and so forth, Planned Parenthood took a stance: Nothing on the videos is illegal, nor is anything shown on the videos even unethical.


Then, as the onslaught of videos continued, and executive after executive continued to be implicated as more and more videos were released, Planned Parenthood changed course by saying the videos were deceptively edited.



Both can't be true at the same time.

Planned Parenthood needs to state clearly whether they believe

a) The videos don't show anything unethical being done or
b) The videos DO show something unethical being done BUT were edited and manipulated to show this


The only way out of this is for Planned Parenthood to say "The videos were deceptively edited and manipulated, but the videos, even after their editing and so forth, still don't show anything unethical or illegal" - but of course they would never say that because people are so outraged at the videos they've seen and the videos DO SHOW illegal activity.

So Planned Parenthood really is in a Catch 22

Did she not actually say this?  Was it manipulated to make it SEEM like she said "Lamboughini" when in fact she didn't?

Perhaps this conversation was worked up by a movie studio?

Courtesy of George Lucas' ILM special effects team?

Not actual baby body parts for sale?  Just clever editing?  More special effects?

IU Basketball Attendance and Catholicism

A few days ago I was driving around and listening, as I usually do, to sports talk radio.  (I love Catholic radio, and listen to it as well, but there's only so many times you can listen to a priest explain purgatory to a non-Catholic)


Anyway, Don Fischer, the voice of the Indiana Hoosiers, made some very interesting and relevant comments about Indiana basketball and their attendance.

The Indiana Hoosiers are in the midst of a tremendous season and are at or near the top of the Big Ten standings.  The state of Indiana (if you hadn't heard) worships basketball.


All these factors SHOULD point to one thing - gigantic home basketball crowds.  But Fischer was lamenting that the opposite is happening.


Despite the:
1) tremendous team performance
2) a state that worships the sport and the IU team

LESS and LESS people are coming to the games.

IU, despite success, has seen a significant drop in attendance

Now, what does that have to do with Catholicism?  I submit that it has a TON of relevance for us.


To me it is quite simple why less and less people are coming.  It isn't the BEST and most stimulating thing people can do with their time anymore.  Netflix, Amazon Prime, computer and video games and the internet in general allow a person to customize and tailor ALL their entertainment to EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT.  With the opportunity to be entertained however I dang well please always being one click away whilst sitting on my couch for 9 dollars a month...why on God's green Earth would I:

1) Get in my car
2) Drive to IU
3) Pay to park
4) Pay to get in the game
5) Pay for concessions
6) Watch over the course of 2 hours for what may or may not be an exciting and climactic finish
7) Drive home

Cost: $150 or so
Cost in time: a large part of a day


I can get 90% of the experience of being at the game by watching on TV, and I'm not wasting my time or money getting there.



My brother Matt took me to a Colts game about 10 years ago.  We went back to the rectory downtown to watch the 2nd half of the game.  We both agreed it was WAY MORE enjoyable watching the game from our couch!



When everything is about the emotional pleasure that I get out of something, when all I concern myself with is entertainment, then the first thing to fall off my radar is prayer/religion/Mass etc.

Mass is boring in that it is nearly the opposite of Netflix.  Mass is other people, it is driving there, it is making time for it, it is doing a bunch of things I wouldn't do on my own, it is music that I don't normally sing, it is silence which I don't normally prefer...


So this is why Don Fischer's comments made me smile: other cultural communal experiences, which were until very recently the best way for people to experience all the pleasurable emotions and feelings that they desired...communal sporting events are now falling off the map and taking a back seat as well, and so it is good, in my mind, to watch the "attend a sports game" crash and burn as well.

Why?

Because it puts more sharply into contrast the two approaches - in a few years either I am going to sit in a bubble of entertainment and pleasure and stimulation on my couch or I am going to try God's way and go outside myself and not make my own pleasure the only reason I exist.  I will choose the cocoon of "pleasure" or I will choose to be a human being.


The sooner the middle ground between these two alternatives melts away and vanishes, the better!

Hyperactively Slothful?

Today, some are hyperactively slothful

Sloth does not imply sitting still.  In fact, sitting still in prayer can be one of the most difficult and arduous activities we can undertake.

A person can never truly rest a moment of their lives and yet still be guilty of sloth.  Sloth is not a lack of activity, it is a lack of the right KIND of activity

Is this slothful?  No.  If you've ever tried contemplative prayer, you know better

Fighting Bishops, Heresies, Today's Solemnity, and YOU!

Notes from my homily today that I preached off of:

Some brief history

Ecumenical council – a council working on the unity of the entire Church throughout the world

325 we had our first ecumenical council – the council of Nicea.  A priest named Arius had a teaching that had spread far and wide –

Christ was NOT God in the fullest sense – Christ was CREATED…a DEIFIED human being

OVER HALF the bishops of the world are believed to have been following Arius teaching in 325

St. Nicolas, at the council, after Arius presented his side, walked over and slapped Arius

Arius is eventually condemned and exiled.  It took many years for the people following Arius to return to the Church.  Some still hold to his teaching.  Hardly anyone has heard of his Church today.  It is insignificant.

So, there was debate, violent at times, but eventually, the Church came out and said on this question – “You are either in bounds or out of bounds, that there are things you can think and believe that are OUTSIDE the realm of the Church, things that can NOT be believed by Catholics”

Third ecumenical council involved today’s Solemnity of Mary, the Mother of God

431 in Ephesus

Nestorius vs. Cyril of Alexandria

Again there was fighting

Nestorius – we can’t really say Mary is the Mother of God…we can say she’s the Mother of CHRIST, but not the Mother of God

Cyril – If Mary is the Mother of Christ, she’s the Mother of God

Fracture again as some held to Nestorius view.   It took a long time, decades, for unity to return to the Church.  Today, some people still follow Nestorius’ teaching, but no one has hardly heard of them

Takeaways

1)      We can laugh at the violence – but do we care that much?

2)      Do we think there is an “in bounds” and an “out of bounds”? 

Do we know all the teachings of our Faith, particularly those things that the Church has definitively said “These are in bounds, and these things over here are distinctly out of bounds and not up for discussion?

The Church does allow for debate, discussion, collaboration, etc.  That’s what all the Ecumenical Councils have been – but when the Church rules definitively, are we on board?  Do we know what all those teachings are? 

3)      May 2016 be a year where we learn about those teachings, and learn the “why’s” – Formed, RCIA, etc.

Rejoicing in Simplicity

A Reflection on Crucifixes

As Catholics, we know Christ has risen from the dead.

We have crucifixes because WE haven't risen from the dead.

So while we suffer in this valley of tears it helps a great deal to be reminded that Christ CHOSE suffering when he walked this earth, even though He could have saved us without being crucified and tortured.

The ancient prophecies could have said "The Christ will die in child birth" and we'd still be saved. He CHOSE the cross. If that doesn't help you in the midst of suffering, then don't have crucifixes around.

But what I want to know when I'm suffering is not "hey, just think about Easter"...I want to hear God say "I'm with you in the midst of this. I bled too. Your suffering has meaning in this moment, not just a future reward."

5 Quick Points Made by "The Mockingjay Part 2"

1) War sucks.

The first Hunger Games book (and the movie) are written in such a way that some people might secretly think about it all in a sugary way..."Sure the games are a terrible idea...but it all is kind of romantic"

However, the final installment is the whole point - look at what war does - so many people die - it's horrible - there's nothing romantic at all about war.  Collins delivers an intentionally violent and deadly punch in the gut with the final book because war is a violent and deadly punch in the gut




2) We are the capital

Gale has a line in the film when they spend a night hiding in a capital home.  He eats some of the food, which is way better than anything he's ever tasted, and says something to the effect of "I'm starting to understand why the people who live in the capital are the way they are.  If I had food like this, I'd go along with whatever else was happening too."

We ARE the capital.  The money we spend on hair and makeup and fashion would literally feed the rest of the world

this add from cover girl makes the point perfectly

3) The ends do not justify the means

The only place that says this is ALWAYS the case is the Catholic Church.  The Hunger Games reinforce that.  There is a scene where lots of innocent civilians are killed, and it is done, by the rebels, under the pretense that it will save lives in the long run.  The beautiful and Catholic point is made in the book and the film - that under that type of logic anyone could kill anyone else whenever they wanted if they just came up with a good explanation for what MIGHT happen in the future




4)  There are evil people on both sides of any war

So often people forget this.  The Hunger Games reminds us of this very perfectly.




5) We humans have VERY short memories

Toward the end of the film, as peace is being established, the following dialogue says it nicely


“Are you preparing for another war, Plutarch?" I ask.

"Oh, not now. Now we're in a sweet period where everyone agrees that our recent horrors should never be repeated," he says. "But collective thinking is usually short-lived. We're fickle, stupid beings with poor memories and a great gift for self-destruction. Although who knows? Maybe this will be it.”

St Meinrad and the Paris Attacks

St. Meinrad was a hermit who lived and prayed in the woods.

He had a vision that some men were going to come and visit him and then kill him.

When they came, he still welcomed them, fed them, and treated them as Christ would have.

The men killed St. Meinrad.

St. Meinrad is considered a martyr of hospitality.

We talk all the time as the "pro-life" movement that we're not running out of room in our country and that the whole world would fit inside Texas...and rightly so...but some stop short of saying that when people are trying to flee war? 

Women who have abortions are scared about what MIGHT happen?

And we shut our doors because we're scared of what MIGHT happen?

I get it...we have to bring people in responsibly...and that's something to continue to work at... be vigilant about it and hash out how to do it.  Get a lot of smart people in the same room and figure out how to make it happen in the right way.

But ..but what are the radical Muslims REALLY afraid of? I think the radicals are afraid that moderate Muslims will see who we really are...what Christianity really is...I think that's what they're afraid of.

Why else would they send people to attack Paris through France's refugee program...it isn't because its the only way into France...come on...let's be honest...as it stands right now if radicals want into France they're going to get in.

If you're the radicals, you send attackers in through the refugee program because you want it to stop...you want America to stop taking in the tired, the poor, the immigrant...because then your prophecy about America as the Devil looks true.

Here's my point - the only thing more RADICAL than radical Islam is LOVE. And I think LOVE welcomes the stranger, the poor, and the dying.  We can do it in a prudent way...we don't have to simply tear down our borders, but the only way to out radical the radicals is through love

...and if I die because of it...if someone kills me because I was too loving, too welcoming, too hospitable...then, well, there's not many better ways to go than being a martyr for being too hospitable.

I'd rather error on the side of hospitality and love then on the side of not letting Christ in the door

Postpartum Depression and Priesthood

------------------------------------------------
NOTE: Postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis are medical conditions and need immediate medical assistance.  What I describe below is often referred to as "the baby blues" and is a short term situation that occurs in almost all mothers who give birth, just as the "pastor blues" is short term and occurs in almost all priests who are given new and larger assignments

Priests can also fall into depression, particularly when getting new and overwhelming assignments.  They too should seek professional help.
-------------------------------------------------



I've been mulling over a thought for a while and wanted to express it here:

I don't know the ins and outs of postpartum depression, but I've certainly talked with and worked with moms who battle the post-birth blues.  Often times, in the wake of giving birth to a new child, partly due to physical exhaustion, partly due to hormones, partly due to real fears, there can be a depression that sets in for a time.

Most of the fear surrounding postpartum depression comes from a belief that "There is NO way I can actually care for this child - it will be too much."

I'm not saying I know what it is like to have postpartum depression, but I do think that for priests as well, particularly young priests, this same thing may take hold for varying lengths of time.

It basically arises out of getting physically run down (or allowing this to happen) but also out of a realization that "there's no way I'll be able to handle all of this!"

I think it is one reason that we see alcoholism and other addictive behaviors among percentages of our priests - when any person feels like things are spinning out of control, addictive behaviors seem to provide an element of "control" in the sense of providing some sort of "routine" or "coping mechanism" for stress.

I say this for a couple of reasons:

1) pray for priests, moms, and dads, particularly new pastors, and new moms and dads, and see what you can do to help with the work load.  There are two types of people who volunteer at parishes and who offer to help new parents:

a. "Father (or new mom), I want to help, and this is how I'm going to do it"
and
b. "Father (or new mom), I want to help, what can I do to help?" 

PLEASE NOTE: a. isn't actually much help

2) As for moms, dads, and priests in this situation, we need to:

a. get the proper amount of sleep

b. admit that things are, in a sense, ALWAYS out of control

c. be okay with the unpredictable nature of things

d. realize that putting up with the insanity of shepherding hundreds of families is PART OF the sacrifice we're called to

e. get some healthy exercise 4-5 days a week, and pray 7 days a week

f. realize that we figure things out on the fly and we DO start to get better as we go forward.  We never figure everything out about being a priest (just as mom's never figure it all out) but we learn how to do it well as we move forward in time

g. stop comparing ourselves to other moms, dads, or priests.  We all know moms, dads, or priests that we think "have it all together".  STOP comparing yourselves to them.  You don't know them as well as you think, and they carry crosses, suffer, and sometimes fall into sin as well.  The Devil LOVES when we look at others and try to compare ourselves based on information WE DON'T HAVE!  We can be inspired by others, but it has to be healthy, and we have to realize we DON'T know what others are dealing with.

As Archbishop Tobin said: "If we see what we are doing as a mission given to us by Christ, we will never get overwhelmed".  That might be one of the best things I've ever heard.  We have to realize that Christ has invited us into motherhood, fatherhood, or the priesthood, and he knows we don't have it all figured out and Christ is okay with that!

A quick story from my teaching days before the seminary: As my first year of teaching went on, I think I was just constantly stressed and overwhelmed, so much so that I didn't even have time to recognize that I was stressed and overwhelmed!  I was teaching 6 classes and then coaching football, and then I got a week off from football and then started coaching track.  My hair fell out.  I lost a lot of weight.  I suffered terribly, and I constantly thought that I probably was a fraud.  I was always about 90 seconds ahead of the students and I crafted my lesson plans on napkins during lunch!

Well...my second year of teaching WAS SO RADICALLY MUCH EASIER THAT I CAN'T HARDLY DESCRIBE IT!  I remember being so happy on the first day of my second year that I cried!  I suddenly realized that I knew a little bit about what I was doing.  I remember telling a colleague, with tears of joy in my eyes, "I wish someone would have told me how much easier this second year is."

New moms, priests, dads, etc. - it gets better.  Keep going forward.  Be okay with the craziness.  Of course you don't know what you're doing in every area but press forward and you'll figure it out in time.  

To parishioners and those that support new moms, new priests, new dads, etc., pray for them regularly.

Some times, although rarely, I hear people say, particularly about new priests, "IT'S OUR JOB TO BREAK IN NEW PRIESTS".  That's just absolutely dumb and wrong.  It is the job of the Body of Christ to affirm and support new parents and new priests....it is the job of bullies to show people "how we do things around here"

Here's to all you new moms and dads and priests - we're all with you.  Let's all hold each other in prayer and journey together through the craziness!

A Simple Fix to the Annulment Issue

I'm not a canon lawyer, so I just want to throw this out and see if I'm missing something




I recently had someone come to me who is totally on fire for the Catholic Faith, wants to join the Church, is devouring Catholic videos and homilies and cd's etc.

And she's been married four times.  None of those marriages was in the Church.  I recently got word that it looks like three different annulment cases.


You know what would fix all this?  If we, as a Church, said "If you aren't married in a Catholic Church, it wasn't a marriage in the first place."


That might upset the ecumenical movement a little bit, but we already talk about some of their other 'sacraments' being invalid, and, in all honesty, most protestant aren't going to care one bit if the Catholic Church says that the Catholic Church doesn't recognize their marriages as valid.



If we said the only time you need an annulment is if you were actually married in the Catholic Church, that would free up about (I'm guessing) 75% of our marriage cases.


And let's think about it - what protestant denomination does marriage preparation like we do?  If two people get married at a Baptist Church, do we really think they were taught and had, going into the marriage, the Catholic Church's understanding of what they were doing when they made their vows?



If you were married in the Catholic Church, you need an annulment.
If you weren't married in the Catholic Church, but now want to join, welcome to the Catholic Church!

When NFL players shy away from masculinity...watch out

Quick back story for non-football fans


Jim Harbaugh is Catholic
Jim Harbaugh was a gritty, tough, scrappy football player in college and the NFL
Jim Harbaugh started coaching
His first head coaching job: San Diego State.  When he arrived they were terrible
Jim Harbaugh turned them around year 1 and went 7-4.  The next two years he went 11-1 twice
Jim Harbaugh went to Stanford.  Took them from mediocre to national title contenders
Jim Harbaugh went to the NFL and SanFrancisco 49ers.  He turned them into a team that was two plays away from playing for two superbowls
Jim Harbaugh took over this year as the head coach of Michigan.  They were terrible when he got there, and in a matter of a few months, they are one of the best teams in the country


The point here: Jim Harbaugh is the type of coach that, in sports terms, is a miracle worker.  The results above are UNHEARD OF!!!

If a good coach takes over a program, it ALWAYS takes a couple of YEARS to get good and Jim Harbaugh does it in a few weeks.


It's also important to know that Jim Harbaugh is known for his intensity.  The Onion had a hysterical fake newspaper story on Harbaugh the other day -

The "headline" is funny because in real life:
Jim Harbaugh is intense
Jim Harbaugh wants to win
Jim Harbaugh is a man of faith
Jim Harbaugh talks about toughness, intensity, masculinity, etc.




Here's why I mention all this - last year, when Harbaugh was coaching the 49ers, reports began to surface that players didn't like playing for Harbaugh because he was too intense, too into it, etc.

Your one job, in the NFL, is to WIN GAMES, and Jim Harbaugh does that for you, and you COMPLAIN that the guy is too intense?


Fast-forward to this year.  I sat down the other night and watched 10 minutes of the 49ers and it was an absolute disgrace to the game of football.  They were awful in every conceivable way, and it made it really easy to turn off.  That night the 49ers, when I stopped watching, were having one of the worst games in the history of the NFL


The 49ers were a great team under Harbaugh, one of the best, but the players were complaining that Harbaugh was too masculine.  And once the players got their wish, and Harbaugh was let go, the 49ers instantly became irrelevant and a joke, just like they were before he arrived.


Masculinity is mocked in a culture that thinks of gender lines as blurry (or at least wants them to be blurry).  When NFL players, who are supposed to want to win, and who are supposed to be hard-nosed and tough, when they start complaining that a guy is too masculine, we should probably start to prepare for the end of the world, or at least the invasion of our country by men who DO want to fight


Authentic masculinity is something that should be praised.  Intensity, hard work, discipline, etc. - these are helpful traits in our world, and we should celebrate them and hold them up when they are lived well.


I worry that cultures start to get soft and squishy and afraid of masculinity when things are plush, no one is invading, and everything is comfortable.  The day may soon come where we will once again look around and hope real men will step forward.  If that happens, I hope there are a few left in our country.  Evidence suggests that the 49ers locker room would not be a good place to start looking.

A Ridiculous Marriage Flow Chart Graphic

This has been around for a while, but I thought we'd take a look at it.


It is wrong on so many levels.  I'm not even going to get into anything in the chart because the question at the top is wrong on so many levels, the rest of the graphic doesn't even merit our time


Here's the graphic:

If someone shows you this and asks you want to think of it as a Catholic you can say the following:

1) No, I don't think homosexuality is sinful, if by homosexuality you mean a person that is attracted to people of the same sex.  

2) Even if you mean by "homosexuality" you mean people having same sex sex, which I do think is sinful, the sinfulness of same sex sex is NOT WHY I'M OPPOSED TO GAY MARRIAGE.  I'm opposed to gay marriage simply on secular grounds - I believe that marriage between a man and a woman is a first principle that any society has to be founded on.  I believe that children have a right to a mother and a father.  Lots of atheists are against same sex marriage - so no, my opposition to gay marriage is NOT based on my Christianity, but thanks for asking.

Rarely can one statement get as much wrong as the statement used at the beginning of this chart.

What is God's Mercy? What does it say about US?

Mercy doesn't just wipe away past sins, it also propels us forward.  We don't have to keep sinning.  We don't have to remain slaves

Tips on Keeping the Sabbath Rest

You shalt rest and relax and enjoy life

And the people shouted "NO!!!"

Synod Document Based on Evangelii Gaudium?

I've followed the Synod as closely as time permits, which is to say I've no doubt missed a lot.


One of the things that seems odd to me is the proposal by the more progressive groups to structure the final document of the Synod on the Pope's letter from a couple of years ago - Evangelii Gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel).


If the Synod were on the new evangelization, this proposal would make sense to me.


But "family" is only mentioned 11 times throughout the 288 paragraphs of Evangelii Gaudium.


Aren't there a lot of good things written EXPLICITLY ABOUT THE FAMILY over the past few years that this Synod could utilize as a framework, vs. a letter on evangelization?


But perhaps those making the suggestion that the Synod's final document be based on a letter the Pope wrote two years ago about evangelization are actually not wanting to structure the Synod document around anything the Church has ever taught before?

Caption this!

Here's mine: "Phillip, when you get a weak-side blitz, throw the hot route!  Ever since I had you in second grade, you've tried to over do it!  Your hot read on these blitzes is the four yard out, your tight end was open, just throw him the ball, get your four yards and a first down and keep the drive alive!!!!"

Homily: "Father, should I go sledding?" - on the virtue of prudence

Synod Transparency

My one issue with way the Synod on the Family is going down is transparency

Whatever happened to this idea?

I'm all for the theological experimentation and I recognize that a Synod is a good time to look at controversial issues, be open to the Spirit, etc.   I also recognize that you want to keep the vast majority of the Church safe from confusion

But locking the doors and keeping the Synod under wraps does NOT PROTECT THE PEOPLE OF GOD, it EXACERBATES the confusion!


What happened to St. John XXIII's request to "Throw open the windows of the Church...so the people can see in."???



Yeah, ideally, all the cardinals and archbishops could go hide somewhere, have theological discussions, even yell and scream at each other, and then come back with a nice and neat Synod wrap-up press conference...but nothing is ever ideal on this side of Heaven.


So we're left with a couple of alternatives
1) close the doors, and let the media spin the Synod into whatever they want it to be

2) throw open the doors, and let people listen in on every word of the Synod and draw their own conclusions.



"BUT...the People of God will be confused/scandalized/not able to handle the messiness of these things if we open the doors and let people listen in on everything" some might say.


NEWSFLASH - this confusion/scandal/messiness is being conveyed despite the doors being closed.  Not only that, the people that want to explain the messiness/scandal/confusion CAN'T because we don't have anything definitive to point to and say "Be calm.  Take heart.  This is what is ACTUALLY happening."



These meetings used to happen behind closed doors.  That's impossible now.  Open doors then beat the disastrous alternative that is currently being employed.



If you want to know how to fight against confusion and let the truth speak for itself, we need look no further than what Bishop Coyne and his staff at the USCCB communications department did with the Pope Francis visit.  Read Bishop Coyne's blog post (Click HERE to read it) about how they covered the visit, engaged people, got the word out, etc.  It was a SMASHING SUCCESS.

The team from the USCCB working around the clock to get every word  of the
Holy Father's visit out to the world.  The Vatican should be doing this too.  If we
don't let the Truth tell the story of the Synod, the media will tell our story for us

There should be a TEAM of people at the Vatican broadcasting this Synod, getting every speech out there in text, video, etc.  LET IT ALL OUT, OPEN WIDE THE WINDOWS!




Implied in fearing to get the word out is the idea that the laity can't handle the messiness of what actually happens.  I think that is selling our lay people WAY short.  Our people understand that the process by which these things get pulled together is messy at times.  They can handle it.

"Open wide the windows of the Church so that we can see out and the people can see in."

Or are we only going to do this SOME of the time?