Catholicism and Immigration

As was expected, the Pope, while in the US, weighed in on the debate of immigration as it has direct connection to the Church.  Many illegal immigrants are Catholics, so wherever they are, their plight is recognized by the Catholic Church.  Whether or not it’s a plight is another condition altogether.  Michelle Malkin has been on top of the Pope’s recent comments, and I can’t say I’m too pleased with the Catholic leadership on this issue either.  What’s worse is they practice what the anti-amnesty crowd preaches.

There are two methods to becoming Catholic– being baptized a Catholic when young(being a naturally-born citizen of Catholicism, so to speak), and being baptized a Catholic as an “adult” (or, “immigrating” to the Catholic faith).

When people decide to become a Catholic, they just don’t walk into Church and start taking Eucharist, singing in the choir, and serving as a lay minister.  In fact, to even take Eucharist, they have to go through a formation process that typically runs from the fall all the way up to Easter Vigil, where they are Baptized and Confirmed and welcomed to the faith as converts.  It’s a relatively painless process, where a sponsor helps the initiate along their way, and there’s not much in the way of monetary demands.  It’s like becoming a citizen of the Church– you have to apply, wait, and then go through the acceptance ceremony.

But the Church is now criticizing the US– especially those opposed to open-borders– because we’re asking people to do the same thing the Church does in welcoming new citizens.  The legal process is longer, and it involves paying money, usually a lot of it, to the US and/or an attorney for assistance.  However, these prerequisites are not an excuse for breaking the law, nor is it something that denies human rights, so I don’t see why the Church objects to the US policing of its borders and immigration policy.

In fact, I don’t see the Church objecting to any other country’s immigration laws.  Why pick on the US?  I think the Vatican has a big blind spot here, and it’s a policy that needs to be changed.  Enforcement of border laws is either such a grave violation of basic human rights that every country should be hammered by the Pope on not having open borders laws, or the Church should recognize that every country has a right to police the acceptance of citizens applying for entrance into the country.  I don’t see how stopping people from entering the US illegally is a sin.  Why doesn’t the Pope lay into Mexico for creating the conditions that encourage the emigration of people from their country?  Surely, if people are seeking better livable conditions, it shouldn’t be solely incumbent upon the US to provide for their needs?

The Church needs to take the blinders off and realize the harm they’re doing to the US if they continue to undermine naturalization processes.

What’s Wrong With Catholic Socialism

With the arrival of the Pope in the US this weekend, I’ve turned a little pensive.

I am concerned with America’s Catholics, in particular, the 60+% who don’t think it’s important to attend Mass. Given our (or at least, my) particular beliefs in our dogma, skipping out on Mass is skipping out on communing with the Creator. Effectively, it’s like saying, “Hey, Jesus, thanks for all you’ve done, but hey, I was up last night drinking, so I can’t come to hang out.” Hey, we’ve all missed Church for various reasons, and I can understand that our educated, prideful culture doesn’t like getting “preached to”, but if you’re going to call yourself a Catholic, at least go to Church.

I know many, many Catholics of various stripes. I’ve know priests and nuns from various orders, and my Confirmation sponsor is currently the Bishop of Utah (I can’t wait until he’s Pope). And I have noticed a definitive leaning towards a socialist government that provides basic needs for everyone in society, be it welfare, education, or health care. Many of the priests and nuns are products of the 60s and 70s, so it’s not surprising their influence is usually heavy into more liberal interpretations of Vatican II and the faith in general. However, many of the Catholic clergy are educated and, for the most part, familiar with the tenets of the catechism of Catholicism. But what’s clear is that the laity have no idea what that dogma is. I remember having an argument with my high school religion teacher over New Testament scripture and having to correct her because she mixed up two scripture passages. I also lose patience with Catholics who somehow think it’s OK to disagree with the Church on abortion & stem cell research. At that point you really have to stop calling yourself Catholic, folks.

But the big gripe I have now is a row with well-meaning but short-sighted members of the faith who want to see more government involvement in our lives to better assist those in need. Catholics need to stop voting with Democrats because they feel the Democratic social agenda is better aligned with the teachings of the Church. In fact, nothing can be further from the truth. I’m not saying Republicans are Popes-in-disguise, either. Both need to totally reevaluate their platforms, and Catholics need to disassociate themselves with the notion that Government is somehow responsible for taking care of its citizens.

John F. Kennedy, the first Catholic president, a Democrat, acted more like a Republican than a Democrat, and he had a great grasp on how the citizenry should respond to their government. “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country,” is a call to service from the citizenry. It’s a call for smaller government and greater participation in Democracy by the individual. Since the 60’s, our government has gotten far larger, our politicians gain popularity with government handouts, and our citizenry demands more and more “freebies” from the government. In the meantime, many expect a large government role as a caretaker of its citizens. Catholics, especially those who want to participate in the faith, should flee from this idea.

St. James (James 2:14-17) talks of faith and works in his letter, and this particular letter should be recognized as a call against socialism:

What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

Catholics who trust in government to deliver what’s needed to their neighbor are just like the man who does not give charity to those in need. A government is not a body of God, but a body of man, as it has no call to anything greater than itself, it is prone to corruption. However, the individual is responsible, especially the Catholic individual, to God and to Jesus. If the person puts his faith into institutions of man to deliver charity, then it is completely misguided. “Give unto God what is Gods, and give unto Caesar what is Caesar” was not talking about revamping the tax code, but instead a call to separate manly institutions from Godly institutions. The individual needs to be charitable, and alone give of their time, treasure and talent to those in need.

Our government allows for tax deductions to charitable organizations, which I find to be complete folly because it contradicts the nature of charity. Charity is selfless giving of oneself. If you give and then turn and expect reward from the government, it is not “charitable giving” and should not be deducted from any tax because nothing was truly given by the individual. In addition, many “charities” receive money from the government for their mission. Charities such as Planned Parenthood are antithetical to the dogma of Catholic faith, and trusting in a government to correctly deliver those funds to Catholic-approved charities is foolishness on the part of the taxpayer. Socialist constructs do not differentiate between non-profit organizations, except for some of those that have relgious connections! While many people feel good about the government providing assistance to those who are needy, the truth of the matter is the government is far more likely to deliver those monies to organizations that are secular or antithetical to the mission of the Catholic Church!

In addition, when the government takes your money (read: taxes), it is by force. By requesting the government to increase its spending amongst the population, there has to be rise in revenue of the government as well, and that is through taxes. Effectively, to make sure the need for “charity” is met by well-meaning Catholics, they are demanding all people, even those who may oppose such giving, to give to the government to accomplish the goals of their religious beliefs. Charity isn’t a vehicle of force, it’s a vehicle of will to assist others. Let there be no intermediary between the Catholic and those in need, for that is the nature of charity.

Social programs provided by the government at the cost of our tax dollars is not what Catholicism is about. JFK didn’t think so, St. James didn’t think so, and I don’t think Christ even thought so. What’s clear to me is that the Catholic faith is about the rallying of the individual to something greater. Voting for candidate who promise more social programs saps Catholicism of its strength in charity and delivers that muscle to the government, an amoral body run by the amoral.

Let the people dictate to the government. Let us as communities focus our efforts on Charity to those in need in our communities. How can a bureaucrat in D.C. possibly understand the needs of the people in your neighborhood? Stop waiting on the welfare check, and take help from your neighbors. Who better to help you and your family?

Why are Catholics Less Devout?

An interesting poll shows that Catholics are less devout than others. Or does it? Let’s look at some of the statistics:

Of the dozen faith-oriented behaviors tested, Catholics strayed from the norm in relation to eight of the 12 items. Specifically, the typical Catholic person donated about 17% less money to churches; was 38% less likely than the average American to read the Bible; 67% less likely to attend a Sunday school class; 20% less likely to share their faith in Christ with someone who had different beliefs; 24% less likely to say their religious faith has greatly transformed their life; and were 36% less likely to have an “active faith,” which Barna defined as reading the Bible, praying and attending a church service during the prior week. However, Catholics were 16% more likely than the norm to attend a church service and 8% more likely to have prayed to God during the prior week.

As for donations to Churches, many Catholics are poor, and it’s a significant deviation from the other mainstream American religions, mainly because of the demographics. More Catholics are Hispanic (or Chicano, or Central American). And many of the immigrant class are poorer than other classes. In fact, most immigrants coming to the US from Europe or Mexico, and especially the poor, give less than Protestant denominations, and mainly because those denominations have more built-in wealth.

Catholics do not read the Bible as much as others. I know why it is. The Bible is part of the Catholic faith, but it is the beginning of faith, not the all-encompassing pillar of faith. Many Catholics read Catholic authors, or biographies of saints. Many explore the Catechism or other works. As we do not devote ourselves to Sola Scriptora, we have other vehicles by which to express our beliefs. Interestingly, this blows up the “active faith” question of the poll.

Those who do not preach the Bible prefer to do works of charity and convert through example rather than preaching. I share my faith when asked, but I primarily “preach” through good works, a sense of justice and a respect for morality. I do not carry a Bible around and thump people on the head with it.

Also, many Catholics are life-long Catholics, so to say faith “transformed” their lives is an odd question. I would say faith hasn’t transformed my life because I believe faith has always been an integral part of my life. The semantics of the question give misleading results, which are revealed in the last two questions.

But, as a Catholic, there’s something I’m noticing– the priests are getting older and sparser, especially those from Western populations. I’ve met a few younger priests, and I feel sorry for them, simply because of the enormous workload they are being presented with. Why do we have less Catholics going to mass and going to the priesthood?

I think the answer lies in the nature of Catholicism. Since Vatican II, the Church has become very “familiar”. Masses are conducted in local languages. The laity has a greater role in the Church. Even women are involved in Masses. But the biggest change is the intellectualization of the Catholic populace.

Many Catholics are better educated in America. We’ve gone to better schools and we’ve gone to college. Our call has been to various industries, and we examine our religion with the eyes of a scholar rather than the eyes of the faithful. This sea change gives two groups– the intellectually faithful, and those who are not.

Take Mark Shea, for example. Or Scott Hahn. Or the Anchoress. All three are Catholic scholars (although Mark and the Anchoress might argue with me about that). All three have taken the time to examine their faith, deeply, and gather it about them in an intellectual sense that helps shape their thinking, living, and communicating. I’d like to think I’m a Catholic scholar as well as I find a perfect harmony between Catholicism and science. Visit Cartago del Est or even One Cosmos.

And now, find the other Catholics who have not taken the time to study. They find conflicts with their religion and what they believe. There’s an inner conflict, but they’ve been overtaken with other concerns and haven’t had the time to sit back, relax, pray, and enjoy their faith. When I put the pieces of science together and saw God’s hand in it all, it was a beautiful revelation. People who think that the religious must believe in a literal Creation don’t understand what the Creation story is actually conveying. Everything is literal, which is a folly in how religion is presented. It doesn’t take much to stop, shut yourself down for a moment, stop running to event B from event A, and just be. Let God in, find peace, and rediscover your faith.

The big problem with intellectualism and faith is that modern intellectuals believe that faith is for the stupid. Many subscribe to the Marxian idea that religion in the opiate of the masses. I know many intellectuals who are atheists, agnostics, or non-practicing religious, and frankly I find them angry and misdirected. Many put their faith into politics (right, bobak?). They put their faith into man instead of God and they are disappointed again and again.

I remember when Clinton was doing his “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” thing. You could just see the fear, the disappointment in the faces of the people. They had so much riding on this great man that they were literally shattered when they discovered he was a weak human prone to vices, lying, and political wheeling and dealing, just like everyone else.

Intellectuals who believe in the ideals of men instead of higher ideals often become jaded. What’s worse is the gloating when someone of ideals is found to have vices. How often do we hear the cry of hypocrite? But for those who lose their faith in the political system they are left without something to believe in other than their family, so they focus on their family. Many rediscover their faith when they get older, something that comes when the children leave the house. (I guess it’s from praying for the funds to pay for college.)

The intellectualizing of the Church is also something heralded by the Vatican. John Paul II wrote many documents on religion. Pope Benedict was an instructor on religion and has been involved in the dogma of the Catholic faith to a huge degree. (You wouldn’t know it to read the press releases, however, as the labored points of Benedict are reduced to a sound byte devoid of any of the information of the statement.) Many local priests are scholars, and their sermons involve history, faith, and religious orientation. What they have to battle, however, is the misinformation and moral relativism of the current culture which relies on shoddy intellectual principles. For those who do not attend Church or study religious works, the Catholic Church is archaic. They think the Church is about No Sex & No Fun, when in reality it’s something that is quite fun. How can people think the Church thinks sex is a sin when Catholic families are have 8 or 9 children?!

Most of the problem is the laziness of the current Catholic. No questions are asked. No books are examined. No Bible studies are attended. Instead it’s what they think Catholicism is about instead of actually learning what Catholicism is about. As a result they apply faulty reasoning and assumptions to Catholic doctrine and get caught up in the erroneous perceptions with which the media paints the Catholic faith.

Will this change in the future? Perhaps. Young people today are having a very quiet revolution. Less are having sex, more are having protected sex, and more are rebelling against the culture of liberal idealism of their parents. Does that mean they are more open to religion? Are they more open to exploring Catholicism? Perhaps. Only time will tell.

The Pope Goes Green

The Vatican is installing solar panels.

Hypocrisy, They Name Is.. Everybody?

The Anchoress is in Full-Tilt Lenten Reflection Mode, so it’s a good time to make it a daily read if you aren’t already a daily reader.

Today she’s got an excellent reflection on Hypocrisy, considering all that’s been on the news lately. Here’s a bit I found worth repeating here:

When I was a little girl we Catholics were taught to spend some time before bed each night in an “examination of conscience,” which may be plainly thought of as a review of our day in light of the Ten Commandments, but of course can go much deeper than that. People talk of “Catholic guilt,” but I think of it as “Catholic consciousness” - of a way for us to remain “in balance,” and to maintain our grasp, however lightly we may, on the fact that we all have moments when we are complete asshats.

That self-awareness may be the thing that can keep us humble, so that we don’t fall so easily into the scandalous sin of hypocrisy, which never helps any cause.

When I was single, I used to spend time in Adoration before the Blessed Sacrament. I used to take the late-night shifts, usually from 1-2 AM or 2-3 AM, as I was coming back from work around those times (the rigors of a graduate student). Those are the tough hours (and I completely sympathize with Peter, James & John falling asleep at Gethsemane) and it was a constant struggle to stay awake for the full hour. But I could always last a half-hour before the struggle, and the reflection on life, religion, faith and virtue was always worthwhile. I think that’s why I had such a hard time the second half of the hour– finding truth in meditation brings peace and calm, and that’s when we sleep the best.

Unfortunately I am now in a different phase of life. I have two young children and everything now circles around work and raising them. The time for personal reflection is often overridden by the overwhelming need for sleep (which is in short supply lately). I find I miss those hours of dedicated reflection. If you’re a young single Catholic I’d highly recommend signing up for one or two hours a week.

One lesson I learned in my meditations was on charity (which was stirred by the Anchoress‘ post). Charity is giving of yourself to others, be it time, talent, or treasure. When I give, I don’t expect anything in return. If I start getting materials in return, especially if I expect such rewards, then I am no longer participating in charity, but business. Recently I received the notice from my local parish about our giving. Evidently, you can deduct this from your taxes. Unfortunately, doing so completely invalidates your act of charity, because there is no sacrifice.

When we give, the gift has to be a sacrifice. If we give of excess, it is not a sacrifice. If we give of ourselves, but expect repayment, then it is a loan, not a sacrifice. Reporting charitable donations as tax deductions means you are expecting those monies back in the form of a tax-break. I don’t think that’s what the Lord had in mind when he said “give to the poor.”

Charity is giving of self. And if we do so willingly, happily, and generously, then our reward is grace, and that is far more valuable than a deduction on your 1040.

It’s been a while in coming

Senior bishops of both the Anglican Church and the Catholic Church have recommended that the more conservative dioceses of the Anglican Church move back under the fold of Vatican.

The prodigal sons return.

Happy Valentine’s Day

Did you know that the saint this holiday is named for was beheaded by Claudius II?

Now that’s romance!

Seriously, though, there’s plenty to do as a couple on Valentine’s Day. The Catholicland Blog has a good list of stuff you can do with your loved one on Valentine’s Day that is more than a romantic evening by the blizzard.

1. Donate blood at your local Red Cross.
2. Take yourself to the doctor to check the health of your heart.
3. Distribute valentines to people not expecting it: the gas attendant, the lunch lady, or the flight attendant. Acknowledge the people who serve you on a daily basis.
4. Take your best friend to dinner instead of complaining about being single.
5. Visit a nursing home; bring roses.
6. Bring cookies to a soup kitchen.
7. Pray an hour before the Blessed Sacrament and tell God how much you love Him.

I strongly suggest #1, as blood supplies are very low. Anyone with O positive or O negative blood type, you’re in great need. I’m getting over a cold, but I’ll be donating at the end of this month. What better way to show your love than to lie on two tables, hold hands, and give blood to those in need?

Catholics in the News

A Polish priest who had been elevated to the position of Archbishop of Warsaw has resigned after admitting collaboration with the communist secret police.

But Wielgus admitted to deeper involvement on Friday after documents from secret police files were published in Polish newspapers that suggested he had informed on fellow clerics for decades, beginning in the late 1960s.

Wielgus has maintained that his collaboration with the SB, as the Sluzba Bezpieczenstwa is known, did not involve spying on anyone and did not hurt anyone. Nonetheless, any cooperation between the Polish clergy and the SB is troubling to Poles, as it is to people all over the former Soviet bloc, because the church under John Paul II, the Polish- born pope, was a beacon of hope and encouragement to people fighting for freedom from communist oppression.

It’s terrible when someone betrays their faith. I truly feel for him, though. In such a difficult position, you try to do what is right, and it looks like he is biting the bullet.

On the flip side, there’s Nancy Pelosi embracing her Catholicism.

Quite a makeover for newly sworn House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as her national image morphed from leader of the San Francisco liberal elite to Italian Catholic mom from Baltimore.

There was her photo-op return to the Little Italy neighborhood where she grew up as Nancy D’Alesandro, the mayor’s daughter. There was the visit to St. Leo the Great Catholic Church, where they still recite Mass in Italian several times a year.

Of course, tacitly endorsing practices which are antithetical to your belief structure, such as abortion, birth control, stem cell research, divorce, and gay marriage, all for political power– well, that’s a betrayal of the faith as well. If she wants to be the “Catholic Mom from Baltimore”, so be it. But if she wants that title, she’s going to have to explain all of her policy issues in a Catholic context. No more being the San Francisco Liberal. At least everyone understood her positions in that context. But if she wants conservative Catholic cred– she’ll have to do some changing.

China not persecuting underground Catholics!

Well, that’s what they say. I’ll point out this particular glaring passage:

“It would be impossible for our association to crack down on illegal or underground churches,” Liu [Bainian, vice-chairman of the Catholic Patriotic Association] said. “China has always provided education and assistance for underground priests.”

“All we do is send them to facilities (prisons) where they can fully appreciate the assistance (torture) and education (brainwashing) the CPA offers. How can you argue with that?”

Angela Bonavoglia: How dare they!

PuffingTons Host contributor Angela Bonavolgia is all bent out of shape about the “mass excommunication” in the Lincoln Diocese. The excommunication is aimed at Catholics who are members of Call to Action, a “progressive” organization dedicated to “Church reform”.

First, you need a little background on the story. Bishop Bruskewitz said that membership in an organization like Call to Action (and that includes support of Planned Parenthood, Catholics for a Free Choice, the Hemlock society, among others) is anathema to the faith and shows a conflict of the soul– one cannot believe in abortion and that life starts at conception, for example. So he did what he’s supposed to do– excommunicate those who introduce dangerous views to Church teachings.

Your initial reaction might be, “Hey, that’s unfair! Those people were just expressing an opinion! The Church should listen to what they have to say….” After all, that’s Angela’s position.

I think it’s healthy to question your faith. However, I don’t think Call to Action is a healthy organization. Not so long ago, somebody else had an idea about changing the Church and he nailed 95 Theses to the door of his chapel.

Call to Action is similar in its contradiction of dogma. Angela highlights it in her piece, although she means to present it as some of the organization’s good points:

Independent of the church today, CTA supports a broad range of issues, many favored by the majority of U.S. Catholics, like ending clerical celibacy, ordaining women, greater lay power in church affairs, and lifting the illogical and indefensible ban on birth control.

Angela unwittingly highlights the major flaw in her thinking and the thinking of the leadership of CTA. “Independent of the church today…” starts her paragraph. Angela, if you want an organization that’s independent of the Church and supports married priests, women priests, homosexuals, birth control, and even abortion (because we know Angela’s big into “reproductive rights”), then here’s an idea: join the Anglicans. Don’t try and change the Church to suit your short-sighted social agenda.

Celibacy I understand. It’s not a big deal, and you can even find married Catholic Priests. I don’t think it’s what’s causing the excommunication. Female ordination? Again, another minor quibble. Same with “greater lay power”, although some laity think they can “exorcise” people. The last one is a huge deal-breaker. Ban on birth control? These people don’t understand the fundamentals of why the Church is opposed to birth control.

Let me explain it this way. Man and woman have sex and that creates a new life. Who’s the Creator? God. So if you and the missus decided to have a child, you have to involve the Creator. If you interfere with that process, you’re effectively thumbing your nose at God. It’s a crime of hubris and it’s a crime of lust, two of the Seven Deadly No-Nos.

If you want to know who’s backed by CTA, just look at their webpage. Guess who’s on the front? That’s right. Mama Moonbat herself, Cindy Sheehan. Divorced. Abandoned her children. Chillin‘ with Dictators Cindy freakin‘ Sheehan.

So, who are these people, you ask? Why is CTA getting singled out?

Let’s look at their mission statement and history from their web page:

Then in 1971 Pope Paul VI emphasized that it is the laity who have received the primary “Call To Action” to create a more just world. That same year the international synod of the bishops issued an unusually brief and clear document. It declared that “action on behalf of justice and participation in the transformation of the world appears to us as a constitutive dimension of the preaching of the gospel.” And, cautioned the synod, “The church recognizes that anyone who ventures to speak to people about justice must first be just in their eyes; hence, we must undertake an examination of the modes of action, of the possessions, and of the lifestyle found within the church itself.”

I don’t have a problem with a “more just” laity. Fine. More power to them. But where does priestly celibacy, female ordination, anti-birth control, and other such programs come into the important scope of justice? They don’t. But they are the major rallying cries for CTA, and that leads me to believe that CTA has been hijacked by people who want to impose their liberal beliefs upon the Church.

Look at the topics on the “ChurchWatch” portion of the CTA website. With such topics as “Speaking out against a dictatorial Vatican”, we can only surmise the leadership of the CTA is interested in imposing their own social views upon the Vatican, and they have taken a rather antagonistic stance towards the Vatican.

The major issue I have with Angela and her CTA buddies is that their social beliefs are driving their religious beliefs, not the other way around. Under particular assault is the sacrament of Marriage. CTA wants to allow divorce and remarriage in the Church. They also want to allow contraception. Many Catholic scholars have clearly explained why both of these practices would be devastating to the Church.

CTA is no longer an institution which seeks justice. It’s an organization which seeks change, unjust or just, but change which conforms to beliefs that are not rooted in Catholic dogma or Tradition. It’s no surprise that CTA members were excommunicated in Lincoln. IMHO, I think such an organization, especially one that’s lost its way like CTA, should be excommunicated, not just in Lincoln, but everywhere they attempt to imprint their wayward views upon centuries of solid Catholic teaching.