First Amendment Wins!

As expected, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC (10-553) today. in Hosanna-Tabor the Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the defendant, Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Church and School, recognizing that there is a "ministerial exception" to anti-discrimination laws based on both religion clauses in the First Amendment.

While the central issue of the case concerned a minister who was relieved of her duties due to illness and then later fired when she sued to be reinstated against the rules of her church, Court-watchers have been nervous about the outcome because a decision in the plaintiff's favor could have opened the doors to further government intrusion in Church affairs ... for instance, forcing the Church to ordain women or homosexuals.  However, in his opinion for the Court, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that while there is often some tension between the establishment and free-exercise clauses, one of the reasons both clauses exist is to keep the government from meddling in the internal affairs of churches.  The "wall of separation" is not a one-way barrier.

Ask Tony: What does "infallible" mean?

Some people have butchered the definition of “torture” and twisted it up like a pretzel in order to fit the politically correct culture of today. This even departs from Church Tradition. Since the Catholic Church is infallible and it has sanctioned torture in the past how can it possibly be an intrinsic evil? If the Church committed an intrinsic evil that would mean that the Church is fallible and that is impossible.

This question occurs in the last paragraph of Teresa Rice's post on Catholibertarian, "The Tortured Definition of Torture".  The question is meant to be rhetorical; and yet, it involves a highly mistaken and misleading understanding of infallibility and how it applies to the Catholic Church.  I do have thoughts on torture, but the topic of infallibility seems better suited for this forum; look for a post on torture on The Other Blog within the next day or so.

Perhaps we should start first with what infallibility is not.  It does not mean that the Pope and bishops are right about everything.  It does not mean the Pope and bishops have never committed sins or made mistakes of prudential judgment (that would be impeccability, not infallibility).  It does not mean that every passing comment coming out of B16's mouth or pen should be treated as magisterial pronouncements or changes in Church teaching, as happened with the controversial "condom" passage in Light of the World: The Pope, the Church, and the Signs of the Times (with Peter Seewald); in fact, the Pope has written his books on the life and ministry of Jesus under his secular name, Joseph Ratzinger, in order to separate them from the Petrine authority of the Papacy.  It is most certainly not a claim that the Church possesses every little detail of God's plan for the universe.

Sunday Snippets—A Catholic Carnival (1/8/12)

Welcome back to Sunday Snippets!  Sunday Snippets is a circle of traded posts hosted by RAnn at This That and the Other Thing.  For some fine Catholic reading, please follow this link!

This was an odd week for me.  Since I'm an independent, I normally stay back from the nomination process.  However, the question this year is, Who is the alternative to Obama?  So I've not only picked a candidate to back, I've found myself writing on political issues a lot more than I ordinarily do.

On Outside the Asylum, I wrote two posts in response to a hysterical screed posted on CNN by comedian Dean Obeidallah, who accused Rick Santorum of wanting to impose a "Judeo-Christian Sharia".  While the first simply looked at Obeidallah's vision of horrible dhimmitude and found it somewhat less oppressive than Nazi Germany, the second post looked at Sharia and the Western concept of human rights.  I also threw a nutty about David Clohessy's claim that SNAP should be held to a "different standard of transparency" than should the Catholic Church.

Rick a homophobe? Not according to gay former aide!

Thanks to Tom Peters the American Papist for pointing everyone to this segment on Hardball with Chris Matthews, where former Santorum aide Robert Traynham (who is both gay and black ... a double whammy!) defends his quondam boss' character and beliefs.  You get the impression that Matthews invited Traynham onto the show expecting the man to diss on Santorum, and wasn't happy when Traynham refused to oblige him in the slightest.

The fact is, many gay people are not happy with the Dan Savages and Andrew Sullivans of the LGBT lobby, with their temper tantrums, their incessant name-calling and their juvenile stunts (like the Santorum Google Bomb).  My kind of social conservative willingly admits, and even posits as a fact, that there are plenty of gay people who are good, responsible, contributing citizens; we simply hold that same-sex attraction is a cross to be carried, not a gift (or "difference") to be celebrated.  [In fact, I was pleased to see that Cdl. Francis George retracted his ill-considered comment comparing the gay lobby to the KKK; while various apologists for gay rights are quite skilled at verbal bullying and intimidation tactics, I don't think terms like "Gay Brownshirts" advance the cause or make reasonable discussion possible.  Just sayin'.]  And people like Traynham know this and respect it, even if they don't agree.  Mister Traynham, I tip my hat to you, sir!

New York City sees red

I don't own the copyright.

Cardinal red.

It was bound to happen.  Although NYC is no longer the largest metropolitan area in the US, the Big Apple is still "America's first city" in a way that neither Washington nor LA can be; it's the iconic American city (sorry, Chicago!).  And when its Ordinary is also the president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, you have double cause to expect that guy to get the red hat.

But Archbishop Tim Dolan is more than that.  He manages to combine straightforward leadership with coalition-building, straight talk with humor.  He takes his role and responsibilities seriously, but he doesn't take himself too seriously.  He's an attractive, charismatic figure whom many inside and outside the New York archdiocese love even when they disagree with him.  (In some ways, he reminds me of Gen. H. Norman Schwartzkopf ... not just in size, but in stature and appeal as well.)

Also appearing on Pope Benedict's list is Abp. Edwin O'Brien, the Grand Master of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre.  According to Wikipedia, the Order's principal mission is "to reinforce the practice of Christian life by its members in absolute fidelity to the Popes; to sustain and assist the religious, spiritual, charitable and social works of the Catholic Church in the Holy Land; and to conserve and propagate the faith in the Holy Land and the rights of the Catholic Church there."  (Alas, as is all too common, the article doesn't cite near enough sources.)  Abp. O'Brien's career includes stints as an auxiliary of New York, Archbishop for Military Services and Archbishop of Baltimore (of which see he is still apostolic administrator). He was an outspoken critic of the Legionaries of Christ even before the predations of its founder, Rev. Marcial Maciel, became public knowledge.

Ask Tony: What is a fundamentalist?

Gee, could you be a little less subtle?

First of all, I want you to read Pat Archbold's excellent post in the National Catholic Register on "Generation Porno" ... first of all, because it is an excellent post; second, because it provides context.

The first line is, "Liberal intelligentsia circa 1990:  'You know, you fundamentalist types are all hung up on sex.'"  Later on, Pat writes, "So were the fundamentalists right?  What is a fundamentalist anyway other than someone who says something unpleasant that you know to be true?"

Rover Serton, an atheist, commented: "Unless you are talking about some other kind of Fundy, I suspect you don't believe the flat earth, 6000 year old, ID stuff is true."  Since Pat is a well-educated Catholic, it follows that he doesn't believe the "6,000-year-old flat earth" stuff (ID, however, is a different animal that goes well beyond the scope of this post) to be true.

But then, neither do many Christian fundamentalists.

Your right and your obligation

Did you know the word "idiot" comes from idiōtēs, a term the ancient Athenians used to deride a person who didn't take part in public affairs?

I'm amazed by the number of people who spend hundreds of dollars a year on lotteries at odds of 100,000,000+:1 against, yet won't take an hour out of their day to drop their votes (for free!) for a political candidate they like because "s/he has no chance of winning" and "my vote won't count".

Last night's Iowa caucus showed the difference just a handful of people can make — eight votes between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, with Ron Paul trailing them by a mere 3,788, in one of the most nail-biting finishes seen in American politics.  Santorum has every right to be pleased with his strong placement.  Yet I know in my heart that there are people who, regardless of whom the GOP candidate turns out to be, will sit the election out because "my vote won't count".

My dad (God be good to him) had only one thing to say about elections: "If you don't vote, you don't have a right to bitch about the government."  Qui tacet consentire videtur ubi loqui debuit ac potuit: "He who is silent, when he ought to have spoken and was able, is taken to agree."  Your vote is your voice; it's the most effective thing you will say to any politician.  To not cast it in any direction is to consent by default to whomever the rest of the people elect.

Occupy the News Roundup

How to Embarrass Friends and Alienate Potential Allies

I started out with a simple clip I found on Michelle Malkin's site: Three days after four men were arrested after allegedly setting fire to two American flags that had flanked the information desk at the Old City hall where they are camping, members of Occupy Charlotte have broken off and formed a splinter group, the People’s Coalition of the Carolinas.  (The title of the YouTube clip is good: "Occupy Charlotte breaks up with itself".  That's the ultimate rejection — when your hand just wants to be friends.) [H/T Doug Powers!]

Just for the heck of it, I checked three MSM sites to see if any of them were paying attention to any of the "Occupy" groups any more.  Come to find out, FoxNews had a report on a song supposedly written by third-grade students at Woodbrook Elementary in Albemarle Co., Va., which shows signs of political indoctrination through its references to "1" and "99 percent".  (“We really don’t censor the topics that students come up with,” school spokesman Phil Giaramita told Fox News, which caused one wag to crack: "Oh really? Let's just put 'Jesus' and 'God' in there and see what happens!")

And the winner is ...

ARCHBISHOP JOHN C. NIENSTEDT OF ST. PAUL-MINNEAPOLIS!

Here's the original nomination post:

Ecclesial Backbone: Standing up for religion and families

The angel of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, Abp. John C. Nienstedt, is having a heckuva month.

First, he puts out an action alert to his archdiocese in reference to the Department of Health and Human Services' regulation amendment requiring most religious employers to include contraceptives and sterilization coverage in any health plan under the new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. ... That in itself would be commendable.

Sunday Snippets—A Catholic Carnival (Week 19)

Sunday Snippets is a circle of traded posts hosted by RAnn at This That and the Other Thing.  Please follow this link to find a very interesting and Bohemian a clutch of fellow Catholic bloggers!

Actually, now that I think about it ... "Catholic Carnival" is almost redundant, as "carnival" stems from Carnevale, the "farewell to meat" celebrations that culminate on Shrove Tuesday (Mardi Gras).

A-a-a-anyway .... HAPPY 2012, EVERYBODY!

I didn't participate last Sunday, as I'd taken Christmas Eve and Christmas Day off from blogging.  Also, this last week I haven't written anything for Lisa Graas.  So I have both more and less to choose from this Sunday: