More filthy perversion and embezzlement of over a million US dollars by a buddy of the chairman of Francis's Corrupt Nine. Francis, of course, hushed it up.
From Gloria.tv
The Honduran news-page ConfidencialHN.com(November 8) published more details of disgraced Bishop Juan José Pineda’s alleged misconduct. Pineda was a very close collaborator of Tegucigalpa Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga who, again, is one of the closest collaborators of Pope Francis charged with “Church reform”.
Pineda has already been accused of sexually abusing seminarians and having a string of homosexual lovers. He allegedly also engaged in financial misconduct.
Francis never published the findings of a May 2017 Apostolic Visit in Tegucigalpa, he himself had ordered. No sanctions against Pineda were ever pronounced.
Now ConfidencialHN reports how Pineda embezzled a $1.3 million grant from the government which totally disappeared. Pineda visited various parishes, asking priests to give him details of purported projects the funds could supposedly go to. None of the projects were executed.
One of Pineda’s alleged lovers, Erick Cravioto Fajardo, a Mexican layman whom Pineda dressed up as a priest to secure a tax exemption on a Toyota Yaris car he bought for him, drew up a “well written” document to secure the grant. The document was signed by Cardinal Rodríguez who never properly audited the funds.
The ConfidencialHN states that Pineda used the money “to pay for sexual favors, maintain a network of lovers, for whom he bought several real estate properties, cars, motorcycles, trips abroad with a paid lover, among others.”
Homosexual orgies allegedly often took place in Villa Iris, the cardinal’s residence. Cravioto lived in a spacious room adjacent to the cardinal’s quarters at the residence. Bishop Pineda also lived at the property.
When touring different municipalities, Bishop Pineda always stayed in a single room with his assistant, Oscarito.
He also used to bring altar boys, who were seminarians at the time, to help him celebrate Mass at a place called Valle de Angeles. In the house, there was only a room with a bed and a sofa, and Pineda was left with two children. It seems that he slept with the two of them in one bed, leaving the sofa untouched.
Later Pineda exchanged his lover Cravioto with Oscarito, and Cravioto became the lover of a certain Denis who was awarded a full-time scholarship at the Catholic University of Honduras.
29 November 2018
Are Christians a Bunch of Posers?
Mr Holdsworth brilliantly answers the accusation that Christians are LARPing.
A loose transcript:
Christians are often accused of being fake: acting holier and more pious then they actually are. Sometimes you’ll witness a friend or family member have a conversion experience to Christianity as though a switch was flipped and, as if overnight, they start acting in a way that isn’t synonymous with the person you know them to be. So the authenticity of the whole thing is drawn into question. I got the impression that people thought this of me when I became a Christian. Then there’s the familiar cliché that people offer for why they don’t go to Church. All the people there are judgmental hypocrites, they’ll say. The fact that they supposedly despise judgmental traits in others while simultaneously judging people for being hypocrites aside, maybe they have a point. The reality is, most, if not all Christians are hypocrites, myself among them. We’re pretenders. We’re acting as though we are better than we actually are. But we’re not the only ones who do this. In fact, anyone who wants to get better at anything, is guilty of this same thing. When I was about 12 years old, I started teaching myself to play the guitar. I would spend hours watching concert videos of my favourite bands to try to pick up what they were doing and when the inspiration became too much, I’d run up to my room, strap on my guitar and try to mimic what I saw them doing. I would close my eyes and imagine their persona washing over me as I became a guitarist. What actually happened was some pretty awful guitar playing but that didn’t matter to me. I was experiencing what it was like to become more like them. I was pretending to be them and in so doing, I was slowly becoming more like them. Growing in any kind of discipline follows a similar pattern. When you practice the thing you want to get better at, you’re attempting to do it as well as you can. You’re reaching for that excellence that you want to absorb and become but in reality, you’re not nearly as good as you’re attempting to be. If we remain consistent in that practice, we will eventually find ourselves actually becoming the thing we’ve been pretending and attempting to be all along. This is what it’s like to be a Christian. We are looking to the one who is the perfect human – Jesus. Someone who is wise, moral, faithful, witty, courageous, humble, and we’re trying to be like him by acting like him. As we do so, we strain the limits of our own self discipline and the cracks show pretty quick. We stumble along the way and fail to hit the mark. People looking in from the outside see this as being fake and it’s true. We’re trying to be something that we’re not… at least not yet, but the hope is that, as we continue to stretch ourselves in that direction, one day we will become like Jesus and all the things that we admire in him. This reveals what I think is a very important principle for us all to be aware of. The more you behave in a certain way and the more you surround yourself with certain people and things, the more you will become those things.
The more I played my guitar, the more I became an actual guitarist. The repetition of that behaviour transformed me from someone who wasn’t a guitarist into someone who was. So what are the things you are training yourself to be? Are they good things or are they bad things? Are you over drinking consistently while telling yourself that you’ll never become an alcoholic? Are you allowing yourself to consistently lose your temper while telling yourself that you’re actually a kind and patient person? If so, one day you will turn around and wonder how you became an addict or a notoriously abusive person as everyone who finds themselves in those shoes does. So give the Christians in your life a break. Stop judging them for trying to be something that they’re not. It’s a noble pursuit and it’s the only way to become better at anything. And if you’ve been turned off by Christianity because of what you perceived as a lack of authenticity, then I hope this understanding will help you release some of your bad feelings towards it. Jesus is someone that most of us can admire. For Christians, it’s just not enough to admire him from a far. We want to be more like him and share in the life that he offers.
A loose transcript:
Christians are often accused of being fake: acting holier and more pious then they actually are. Sometimes you’ll witness a friend or family member have a conversion experience to Christianity as though a switch was flipped and, as if overnight, they start acting in a way that isn’t synonymous with the person you know them to be. So the authenticity of the whole thing is drawn into question. I got the impression that people thought this of me when I became a Christian. Then there’s the familiar cliché that people offer for why they don’t go to Church. All the people there are judgmental hypocrites, they’ll say. The fact that they supposedly despise judgmental traits in others while simultaneously judging people for being hypocrites aside, maybe they have a point. The reality is, most, if not all Christians are hypocrites, myself among them. We’re pretenders. We’re acting as though we are better than we actually are. But we’re not the only ones who do this. In fact, anyone who wants to get better at anything, is guilty of this same thing. When I was about 12 years old, I started teaching myself to play the guitar. I would spend hours watching concert videos of my favourite bands to try to pick up what they were doing and when the inspiration became too much, I’d run up to my room, strap on my guitar and try to mimic what I saw them doing. I would close my eyes and imagine their persona washing over me as I became a guitarist. What actually happened was some pretty awful guitar playing but that didn’t matter to me. I was experiencing what it was like to become more like them. I was pretending to be them and in so doing, I was slowly becoming more like them. Growing in any kind of discipline follows a similar pattern. When you practice the thing you want to get better at, you’re attempting to do it as well as you can. You’re reaching for that excellence that you want to absorb and become but in reality, you’re not nearly as good as you’re attempting to be. If we remain consistent in that practice, we will eventually find ourselves actually becoming the thing we’ve been pretending and attempting to be all along. This is what it’s like to be a Christian. We are looking to the one who is the perfect human – Jesus. Someone who is wise, moral, faithful, witty, courageous, humble, and we’re trying to be like him by acting like him. As we do so, we strain the limits of our own self discipline and the cracks show pretty quick. We stumble along the way and fail to hit the mark. People looking in from the outside see this as being fake and it’s true. We’re trying to be something that we’re not… at least not yet, but the hope is that, as we continue to stretch ourselves in that direction, one day we will become like Jesus and all the things that we admire in him. This reveals what I think is a very important principle for us all to be aware of. The more you behave in a certain way and the more you surround yourself with certain people and things, the more you will become those things.
The more I played my guitar, the more I became an actual guitarist. The repetition of that behaviour transformed me from someone who wasn’t a guitarist into someone who was. So what are the things you are training yourself to be? Are they good things or are they bad things? Are you over drinking consistently while telling yourself that you’ll never become an alcoholic? Are you allowing yourself to consistently lose your temper while telling yourself that you’re actually a kind and patient person? If so, one day you will turn around and wonder how you became an addict or a notoriously abusive person as everyone who finds themselves in those shoes does. So give the Christians in your life a break. Stop judging them for trying to be something that they’re not. It’s a noble pursuit and it’s the only way to become better at anything. And if you’ve been turned off by Christianity because of what you perceived as a lack of authenticity, then I hope this understanding will help you release some of your bad feelings towards it. Jesus is someone that most of us can admire. For Christians, it’s just not enough to admire him from a far. We want to be more like him and share in the life that he offers.
Signum Magnum ...
Father H sees some 'signs' and draws comparisons between the Arian crisis and the current climate of heresy at the top.
From Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
Tuesday's celebration of the Miraculous Medal ... and the very tasty Mass formula, with its allusions to the Johannine theology of the semeia ['Signs'] of the Lord ... inspired me to ask our Supplex Omnipotentia, our blessed Lady of Cana, for a Sign to strengthen the afflicted Church of which she is herself such a beautiful and powerful Sign.
I must confess that when I opened my computer on Wednesday morning I felt that my prayer had been answered. Lifesitenews provided the reactions of orthodox prelates to the current homosexualist furore. I have to single out the magnificent disdain of the magnificent Cardinal Mueller ("... effusions of an academic nobody..."); in the next pontificate, whatever role that man has, he must surely be involved in cleaning out the Augean Stables which PF has chosen ... such a strange predilection ... to inhabit.
And my eye was particularly caught by the piece from Bishop Athanasius Schneider. Two points.
(1) He situates the homosexualist onslaught in terms of heresy. I think this is massively important. We should not let the machinations of a very nasty lobby obscure the fact that many people with a same-sex orientation live lives of heroic sanctity. By grace they triumph over temptation and are an example to ... to take just one example ... those heterosexuals who unchastely corrupt the marital act.
The current movement among some sick members of the Church to validate homosexual genital activity is far more evil in its conceptual roots than it is in particular disordered physical actions which, after all, are after repentance mercifully absolved. It is heretical because it overthrows the Natural Order and thus attempts to set individual autonomy above the Sovereign Rights of our Creator and Redeemer. Obvious stuff. Forgive me for labouring what readers will already know very well. Some of you will recall Archbishop Lefebvre's great cry They have uncrowned Him.
(2) Bishop Schneider writes "We have to notice an eclipse in the Papal exercise of this very task of strengthening the truth regarding homosexuality". Observe the words eclipse in the papal exercise ... . This is highly reminiscent of the phrase of Blessed John Henry Newman suspense of the function of the Ecclesia Docens. He used it in his analysis of the Arian Controversy, when most of the episcopate, including Pope Liberius, ceased to exercise their function of using their Teaching Authority. When complaints were made to Rome about his words, our great English Blessed made clear that he was not suggesting popes or bishops had lost their Magisterial authority, but observing, as a matter of historical fact, that for forty or more years they had chosen not to exercise it. Rome, wisely, did not intervene against him!
This is very close to where we are now. As Bishop Schneider is pointing out. No wonder they want to stop him travelling. Long live his airmiles!
And I liked Fr Fessio's suggestion that PhD means Philosophische Dumheit. These people need to be laughed at.
Exhilarating, Yes? A battle worth joining in, Yes? Nunc pede libero pulsanda tellus, Yes?
From Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
Tuesday's celebration of the Miraculous Medal ... and the very tasty Mass formula, with its allusions to the Johannine theology of the semeia ['Signs'] of the Lord ... inspired me to ask our Supplex Omnipotentia, our blessed Lady of Cana, for a Sign to strengthen the afflicted Church of which she is herself such a beautiful and powerful Sign.
I must confess that when I opened my computer on Wednesday morning I felt that my prayer had been answered. Lifesitenews provided the reactions of orthodox prelates to the current homosexualist furore. I have to single out the magnificent disdain of the magnificent Cardinal Mueller ("... effusions of an academic nobody..."); in the next pontificate, whatever role that man has, he must surely be involved in cleaning out the Augean Stables which PF has chosen ... such a strange predilection ... to inhabit.
And my eye was particularly caught by the piece from Bishop Athanasius Schneider. Two points.
(1) He situates the homosexualist onslaught in terms of heresy. I think this is massively important. We should not let the machinations of a very nasty lobby obscure the fact that many people with a same-sex orientation live lives of heroic sanctity. By grace they triumph over temptation and are an example to ... to take just one example ... those heterosexuals who unchastely corrupt the marital act.
The current movement among some sick members of the Church to validate homosexual genital activity is far more evil in its conceptual roots than it is in particular disordered physical actions which, after all, are after repentance mercifully absolved. It is heretical because it overthrows the Natural Order and thus attempts to set individual autonomy above the Sovereign Rights of our Creator and Redeemer. Obvious stuff. Forgive me for labouring what readers will already know very well. Some of you will recall Archbishop Lefebvre's great cry They have uncrowned Him.
(2) Bishop Schneider writes "We have to notice an eclipse in the Papal exercise of this very task of strengthening the truth regarding homosexuality". Observe the words eclipse in the papal exercise ... . This is highly reminiscent of the phrase of Blessed John Henry Newman suspense of the function of the Ecclesia Docens. He used it in his analysis of the Arian Controversy, when most of the episcopate, including Pope Liberius, ceased to exercise their function of using their Teaching Authority. When complaints were made to Rome about his words, our great English Blessed made clear that he was not suggesting popes or bishops had lost their Magisterial authority, but observing, as a matter of historical fact, that for forty or more years they had chosen not to exercise it. Rome, wisely, did not intervene against him!
This is very close to where we are now. As Bishop Schneider is pointing out. No wonder they want to stop him travelling. Long live his airmiles!
And I liked Fr Fessio's suggestion that PhD means Philosophische Dumheit. These people need to be laughed at.
Exhilarating, Yes? A battle worth joining in, Yes? Nunc pede libero pulsanda tellus, Yes?
Word of the Day: Buskins (Liturgical Stockings)
BUSKINS. Liturgical stockings, sometimes ornamented, worn on occasion by the celebrant of a pontifical Mass.
+++++
At least Father did not say 'former'. The 'on occasion' is today, usually only when a Bishop celebrates a Traditional Latin Mass pontifically.
Neither Statism nor Individualism
Communism/Naziism/Socialism/Fascism (statism) and usurious finance laissez-faire capitalism (individualism) are not the only economic models, as Thomas Storck shows in this essay.
From The ChesterBelloc Mandate
Among more than one set of Christians today, the government, particularly the U.S. federal government, is considered an enemy. I understand and sympathize with that judgment. The government protects abortionists and puts defenders of unborn life in prison; spends large sums abroad to corrupt other countries with birth control and sex education; funds agencies such as the National Endowment for the Arts, which gives money to blasphemers; frequently usurps the rights of parents; in short, today the actions of the federal government, and of many state governments, often seem designed to denigrate and destroy Christian life and exalt evil.
It is no wonder, then, that many Christians regard the state as an enemy and are ready converts to a libertarian philosophy that sees government as a barely necessary evil and seeks to minimize its functions almost to the vanishing point. Is not this the most effective way of protecting ourselves against state encroachment?
Attractive as this might be, I do not think we can accept a point of view that sees the state as an evil, even a necessary evil. In fact, no Catholic can, hold a true libertarian point of view and remain orthodox. There are a good many distinctions which must be drawn in this matter, but as a beginning we might look at quotations from two popes that indicate an attitude of great respect toward the institution of civil authority. First from Leo XIII's encyclical Sapientiae Christianae (1890): "Hallowed therefore in the minds of Christians is the very idea of public authority, in which they recognize some likeness and symbol as it were of the divine Majesty, even when it is exercised by one unworthy." Then from Pius XI's encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (1931): "The State ... should be the supreme arbiter, ruling in queenly fashion far above all party contention, intent only upon justice and the common good...."
These words should give us pause, for they embody an attitude toward public authority quite different from that held by the many Catholic critics of government. But, on the other hand, it would be too simplistic and equally false to embrace an expansionist view of the government, one that sees a new government program as the solution to every ill of mankind or that naively trusts the government never to do wrong. The modem state does overstep its bounds and does so quite often. But in considering government, we must be like St. Peter, who, though he was put to death by the Roman government for preaching the Gospel, had written, "Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right" (1 Pet. 2:13-14); or like St. Paul, likewise put to death for the Gospel, yet who wrote even more strongly, "For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good" (Rom. 13:3-4).
We must, then, begin with the conviction that for Christians "the very idea of public authority" is "hallowed" and is one "in which they recognize some likeness and symbol as it were of the divine Majesty." This is strong stuff, but it is traditional Catholic doctrine and a matter of public knowledge. What is necessary is that we understand the meaning of this teaching and see what its implications are in the real world of today.
God rules His created universe. He did not simply create a world, establish certain self-executing laws, and then step back to watch what would happen. And this mode of ruling is the "likeness and symbol" which human rulers ought to emulate. St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that even if mankind had never fallen, some sort of government would have been necessary. And, of course, since we did fall from our state of primitive happiness, government must not only co-ordinate diverse human actions but must also restrain and even punish human actions. Holy Scripture and sacred tradition, ratified by the Magisterium, make it clear that the authority to co-ordinate, restrain, and punish comes from God Himself. This is not to say that there is anything wrong with the leaders of nations being designated by popular vote. But however they may be chosen, whatever authority they have comes from God. Anyone may have power; only God has and can give authority.
This necessity for government is shown by our reactions to the daily difficulties of life. When we see disturbances of the peace and order of the community we expect government to do something about it. It is true that we can be unreasonable in expecting government to solve every one of our problems, but still our instinct is correct. The human community does need a directing faculty. We do need government. Just as a group of people with no structure is a mob, similarly a nation without a government would be an unstable mass, unable to establish the necessary organs and means to take care of the many matters that necessarily arise in human social existence.
Unfortunately, only sinful men are available to govern and punish the rest of us sinful men. And that is why governments have often overstepped their bounds. This is not anything new; King Henry VIII of England is as good an example of the public authority gone astray as anything in our century. But though there has always been this tendency on the part of the state to violate others' rights, there is a particular reason why the modem state seems to do this as a matter of course. The modem state has grown large and burdensome in part because the powerful mediating institutions which once existed have been destroyed. These mediating institutions once did much of the work that today we assign to the state. This is well described by Pius XI:
What is the Pontiff talking about? The "variety of prosperous and interdependent institutions" included, for example, the craft guilds, which had as one of their most important tasks the regulating of economic activity for the public good, as well as for their own material prosperity. After these were finally destroyed, by the early 19th century, powerful and rich men began to amass economic power that enabled them to exploit both their employees and the consumer. As a result of the activities of these huge corporations and trusts, at about the same time throughout Europe and North America, there were demands for something to be done. And by this time, the only entity that could possibly do something was the government. Thus, in the vacuum that was left after the destruction of the guilds, state power seemed the only thing able to resist and control the powerful economic forces that threatened to dominate the citizenry. This was unfortunate, because many of these functions were not the state's direct business, and because they gave the state a taste for power and for extending its influence wherever there was any sort of a need.
Thereafter, politics in many countries became a constant struggle over the size of the state. One side saw clearly the dangers of big government; the other side saw equally clearly the dangers of domination by private groups and looked to the government to protect the common good. As long as we think of state power as the only legitimate way of dealing with these things, we will continue to have this sterile conflict over how large the government ought to be. But both sides in this debate are wrong: One side defends what has been called the philosophy of a cancer, the bigger the better. The other side is busy outbidding itself to see how much of the government it can eliminate. But whichever of these sides triumphs, its triumph will always be temporary. For if the first side wins, the excesses committed by the state will bring about a reaction, while if the second group wins, the outrages committed by big business will create demands for new laws and regulations. As the French poet Paul Valdry is said to have remarked, "If the state is strong, it will crush us; if it is weak, we will perish."
The notion that the state is our enemy, then, is in large part a reaction to the state's overreaching itself, to the attempt on the part of the state to regulate every aspect of life and society. The state as described in papal social thought is clearly important, even majestic, but it is not competent to deal directly with everything. It has limited but real functions. And I should note that these functions are larger than those of the "law-and-order state," the state that does nothing else but guard the borders and suppress crime. Pius XI praises Leo XIII because that pontiff had "fearlessly proclaimed the doctrine that the civil power is more than the mere guardian of law and order" (Quadragesimo Anno). The whole of Catholic social thought presupposes and teaches that the proper concerns of the state go far beyond preserving law and order. As Leo XIII taught "rulers should anxiously safeguard the community and all its parts" (Rerum Novarum). Nor does John Paul II's Centesimus Annus teach otherwise, for in that encyclical there are many passages that speak of the same kind of role for the state. The law-and-order or libertarian state is concerned with only a small number of things. The liberal state is concerned with everything and seeks to regulate everything directly. The Catholic state is likewise concerned with "the community and all its parts, " but it does not seek directly to regulate and control everything. Very often, as we will see below, it simply fosters and watches over the efforts of intermediary bodies.
We have seen, then, that the tendency to regard the state as one of our chief enemies is not consonant with authoritative Catholic thought and further, that this tendency is chiefly caused by the state's overstepping its proper bounds, especially by the modem state's congenital propensity to try to control everything directly, because no other sufficiently powerful bodies exist that can share in the necessary regulation of society for the common good. And we have also seen that the impasse this has created is the cause of the endless squabbling about the proper size of the state - big, little, or in-between. But all these attempts to find exactly the right size are foolish, because they assume that the state and only the state has any important function in shaping society. If the state does not do it, then turn it over to the vagaries of the free market. This is the modern notion, but it is wrong.
Let me give some examples of how the Catholic theory of the state could be implemented and what this would mean for society. I will give examples of how the central government could be relieved of some of its burdensome duties - duties whose performance often provokes resentment because it is charged that the state is sticking its nose into matters that are none of its business and about which it knows nothing. The solution suggested by Catholic social thought does recognize that there are real evils that need eliminating or regulating, but approaches these things in a manner different from that of both liberals and conservatives in America.
My first example will be OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the federal government, created by Congress in 1970. The purpose of OSHA is to make and enforce rules for safety in the workplace. And there is no doubt that OSHA was created to address a real need. Workers are injured on the job, and business often has little economic incentive or ethical desire to make the workplace safe. In fact, there can be a temptation to regard workers as expendable parts of the production process.
But OSHA has also been criticized for imposing needless and silly rules and requirements that are difficult and expensive to implement. Bureaucrats in their Washington offices cannot regulate, it is said, work processes and workplaces of which they have no direct experience. Since they know little about the realities of the work environment they are supposed to regulate, they are apt to issue rules applicable to every workplace without taking account of differences, or to make rules that are so vague that no one can know whether or not he has satisfied them short of having an inspector come and look for violations. And it is charged that the cost of complying with OSHA rules and of the accompanying recordkeeping, particularly for small businesses, is prohibitive.
I expect that there is something to these criticisms. Some of OSHA's regulations doubtless are ridiculous and burdensome. But the inference that is intended to be drawn from this, namely, that OSHA should be abolished and things returned to the status quo ante, I reject. In ordinary circumstances the state should not be burdened with inspecting workplaces and writing detailed rules. This is an instance of its being "overwhelmed and submerged by endless affairs and responsibilities" as Pius XI said. And this is also an excellent opportunity to revive, in some measure, some of those "prosperous and interdependent institutions" the Pontiff spoke of. Specifically, joint unionand-management committees, with the right, if necessary, of appeal to the state, and of enforcement by state authority, ought to be entrusted with setting the rules for workplace safety currently done by OSHA. The members of such committees not only would be familiar with the actual work processes and environment, but would also have a direct interest in the prosperity of their industry. The equal presence of the union representatives would ensure that management's interest in profits could not overrule sensible safety requirements.
Whenever the parties directly involved with a process can assume more responsibility for making their own rules, then the government can be relieved of a burden it ought never to have had. The correct alternative to direct government regulation is not to do nothing and to give profit-making businesses a free rein. Very often there are alternatives that do not necessitate setting up a new government bureaucracy, but instead rely on those actually doing the work to take control of their own situation.
One of the federal agencies that has often been a target for elimination is the Department of Commerce. Now, Commerce does many and varied things, from forecasting the weather to taking the census to promoting American exports. To a great extent it was established to aid business. But if business truly finds these services important, then there is no reason why some of them could not be taken over by industry groups, preferably representing both organized labor and employer organizations. For example, such industry councils could promote U.S. exports by advertising abroad, by establishing funds to make start-up loans to firms wishing to export and by sponsoring trade shows and the like. Even much of the information-gathering and data-publishing work of Commerce could be done by such industry councils. Even now, private industry and trade associations collect and publish much reliable statistical data that is used even by the federal government.
One part of the Commerce Department is the National Institute of Standards and Technology (formerly the National Bureau of Standards). This agency "assists industry in developing technology to improve product quality, modernize manufacturing processes, ensure product reliability, and facilitate rapid commercialization of products based on new scientific discoveries" (U.S. Government Manual). Some people might call this corporate welfare, but aside from that, there is no reason why industry could not work to sponsor its own research programs and improve its processes and products. This is not an activity that needs to burden the central government and be supported by taxation. It is surely proper for government to encourage such activities, but they are primarily the responsibility of the companies involved and of the industry councils I mentioned above, which could be formed to deal with matters pertaining to a particular economic sector.
There have been a few attempts in this country to decentralize the institutions that regulate and promote our economic activity. In 1933 the Franklin Roosevelt administration attempted a system of self-regulation by industries called the National Recovery Administration. Although not perfect, the NRA could well have been a means of instituting a system of industrial self-government by owners and workers, very much like what Pius XI had called for in his encyclical Quadragesimo Anno just two years earlier. President Roosevelt even called the industrial entities created by the NRA "modem guilds" (a phrase often used by Catholic writers of the period) and Msgr. John A. Ryan, the great Catholic writer on social justice, was actually a member of the NRA's Industrial Appeals Board, established to rule on complaints brought by businessmen. During its brief life the NRA showed promise, but the U.S. Supreme Court in 1935 ruled the NRA unconstitutional on the grounds that governmental power had been delegated to non-governmental bodies. Thus Roosevelt was forced to create more agencies and bigger bureaucracies to regulate the economy directly. Had the NRA been allowed to work, it is possible that some of the vast expansion of the federal government would never have taken place.
The fact that so thoroughly practical a politician as Franklin Roosevelt was able to get the NRA approved by Congress shows that such an approach is not alien to American traditions. But the current hostility to the federal government's regulating effort is not based on an appreciation of the proper role of government so much as on a desire to allow private business free play. But Catholic thought, from the New Testament forward, has always been deeply aware that the economic appetite, the "love of money" as St. Paul calls it (1 Tim. 6:10), is responsible for a host of evils. And this is true not only for an individual but for a society also. There is no magic law of economics that allows individuals to indulge an unlimited desire for gain and that somehow channels all this activity toward the common good of society. I am aware', of course, that the tradition of economics descending from Adam Smith teaches otherwise. One should note, though, that Smith's view was framed in an age of Deism and presupposes a self-regulating sort of cosmos, with a God who stands back and watches and a government that does likewise. But such a view of things is deeply hostile to Catholic social thought, which has always held men responsible for the evils caused by their choices and actions, both when acting alone and in concert with others.
Another promising kind of economic entity whose role could be expanded in the United States is the cooperative. Co-operatives deserve an article to themselves, so here I will confine myself to speaking of only a small part of their possible functions. In the provision of basic services, such as water and power, co-operatives could well supplement or even replace utilities directly owned by local governments or those organized as private businesses. It is true that co-operatives do supply such services, especially electricity, but there are other areas in which government may be relieved of directly providing a service and allowing those directly concerned to make provision for their own needs.
In much of what I have written here I have been critical of the unfettered market. But to be cautious about capitalism is not to embrace socialism. It is only to recognize that the Fall of Man encompassed also his economic appetites. A realization that the government has grown too large should not be an occasion to embrace economic Deism. As I have suggested, there are many other ways of approaching economic regulation that do not rely on direct governmental intervention. The state can be our friend in helping to establish such forms of regulatory bodies and in seeing that, once established, they do not abuse their trust.
But a thoroughgoing rejection of economic Deism must come first. And for Catholics this can probably best be obtained by a deepening of our understanding of the Catholic vision of man. For just as socialism's fundamental error is anthropological in nature, so too is libertarianism's. Likewise, "from the Christian vision of the human person there necessarily follows a correct picture of society" (Centesimus Annus). The errors of socialism and the errors of Deistic economics rest on false images of man. We will probably make more progress toward accepting the Catholic conception of the economic order if we first accept its image of man.
If we are to subject all our being, our thinking, and our living to Christ and His Church, we cannot ignore the existence of Catholic social teaching. Whether we like it or not, it is part of our patrimony, and until we embrace it as unreservedly as we embrace the rest of Catholic teaching, we will hardly be able to call ourselves orthodox or faithful Catholics, and we will never be free of the tug-of-war between statism and individualism.
Thomas Storck, who writes from Greenbelt, Maryland, is a contributing Editor of The New Oxford Review and the author of The Catholic Milieu and Foundations of a Catholic Political Order. Also, with Dr Peter Kwasniewski he has written An Economics of Justice and Charity: Catholic Social Teaching, Its Development and Contemporary Relevance, and with Joseph Pearce, From Christendom to Americanism and Beyond: The Long, Jagged Trail to a Postmodern Void.
From The ChesterBelloc Mandate
Among more than one set of Christians today, the government, particularly the U.S. federal government, is considered an enemy. I understand and sympathize with that judgment. The government protects abortionists and puts defenders of unborn life in prison; spends large sums abroad to corrupt other countries with birth control and sex education; funds agencies such as the National Endowment for the Arts, which gives money to blasphemers; frequently usurps the rights of parents; in short, today the actions of the federal government, and of many state governments, often seem designed to denigrate and destroy Christian life and exalt evil.
It is no wonder, then, that many Christians regard the state as an enemy and are ready converts to a libertarian philosophy that sees government as a barely necessary evil and seeks to minimize its functions almost to the vanishing point. Is not this the most effective way of protecting ourselves against state encroachment?
Attractive as this might be, I do not think we can accept a point of view that sees the state as an evil, even a necessary evil. In fact, no Catholic can, hold a true libertarian point of view and remain orthodox. There are a good many distinctions which must be drawn in this matter, but as a beginning we might look at quotations from two popes that indicate an attitude of great respect toward the institution of civil authority. First from Leo XIII's encyclical Sapientiae Christianae (1890): "Hallowed therefore in the minds of Christians is the very idea of public authority, in which they recognize some likeness and symbol as it were of the divine Majesty, even when it is exercised by one unworthy." Then from Pius XI's encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (1931): "The State ... should be the supreme arbiter, ruling in queenly fashion far above all party contention, intent only upon justice and the common good...."
These words should give us pause, for they embody an attitude toward public authority quite different from that held by the many Catholic critics of government. But, on the other hand, it would be too simplistic and equally false to embrace an expansionist view of the government, one that sees a new government program as the solution to every ill of mankind or that naively trusts the government never to do wrong. The modem state does overstep its bounds and does so quite often. But in considering government, we must be like St. Peter, who, though he was put to death by the Roman government for preaching the Gospel, had written, "Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right" (1 Pet. 2:13-14); or like St. Paul, likewise put to death for the Gospel, yet who wrote even more strongly, "For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good" (Rom. 13:3-4).
We must, then, begin with the conviction that for Christians "the very idea of public authority" is "hallowed" and is one "in which they recognize some likeness and symbol as it were of the divine Majesty." This is strong stuff, but it is traditional Catholic doctrine and a matter of public knowledge. What is necessary is that we understand the meaning of this teaching and see what its implications are in the real world of today.
God rules His created universe. He did not simply create a world, establish certain self-executing laws, and then step back to watch what would happen. And this mode of ruling is the "likeness and symbol" which human rulers ought to emulate. St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that even if mankind had never fallen, some sort of government would have been necessary. And, of course, since we did fall from our state of primitive happiness, government must not only co-ordinate diverse human actions but must also restrain and even punish human actions. Holy Scripture and sacred tradition, ratified by the Magisterium, make it clear that the authority to co-ordinate, restrain, and punish comes from God Himself. This is not to say that there is anything wrong with the leaders of nations being designated by popular vote. But however they may be chosen, whatever authority they have comes from God. Anyone may have power; only God has and can give authority.
This necessity for government is shown by our reactions to the daily difficulties of life. When we see disturbances of the peace and order of the community we expect government to do something about it. It is true that we can be unreasonable in expecting government to solve every one of our problems, but still our instinct is correct. The human community does need a directing faculty. We do need government. Just as a group of people with no structure is a mob, similarly a nation without a government would be an unstable mass, unable to establish the necessary organs and means to take care of the many matters that necessarily arise in human social existence.
Unfortunately, only sinful men are available to govern and punish the rest of us sinful men. And that is why governments have often overstepped their bounds. This is not anything new; King Henry VIII of England is as good an example of the public authority gone astray as anything in our century. But though there has always been this tendency on the part of the state to violate others' rights, there is a particular reason why the modem state seems to do this as a matter of course. The modem state has grown large and burdensome in part because the powerful mediating institutions which once existed have been destroyed. These mediating institutions once did much of the work that today we assign to the state. This is well described by Pius XI:
On account of the evil of "individualism," as We called it, things have come to such a pass that the highly developed social life which once flourished in a variety of prosperous and interdependent institutions, has been damaged and all but ruined, leaving virtually only individuals and the State.... But the State, deprived of a supporting social structure, and now encumbered with all the burdens once borne by the disbanded associations, is in consequence overwhelmed and submerged by endless affairs and responsibilities (Quadragesimo Anno).
What is the Pontiff talking about? The "variety of prosperous and interdependent institutions" included, for example, the craft guilds, which had as one of their most important tasks the regulating of economic activity for the public good, as well as for their own material prosperity. After these were finally destroyed, by the early 19th century, powerful and rich men began to amass economic power that enabled them to exploit both their employees and the consumer. As a result of the activities of these huge corporations and trusts, at about the same time throughout Europe and North America, there were demands for something to be done. And by this time, the only entity that could possibly do something was the government. Thus, in the vacuum that was left after the destruction of the guilds, state power seemed the only thing able to resist and control the powerful economic forces that threatened to dominate the citizenry. This was unfortunate, because many of these functions were not the state's direct business, and because they gave the state a taste for power and for extending its influence wherever there was any sort of a need.
Thereafter, politics in many countries became a constant struggle over the size of the state. One side saw clearly the dangers of big government; the other side saw equally clearly the dangers of domination by private groups and looked to the government to protect the common good. As long as we think of state power as the only legitimate way of dealing with these things, we will continue to have this sterile conflict over how large the government ought to be. But both sides in this debate are wrong: One side defends what has been called the philosophy of a cancer, the bigger the better. The other side is busy outbidding itself to see how much of the government it can eliminate. But whichever of these sides triumphs, its triumph will always be temporary. For if the first side wins, the excesses committed by the state will bring about a reaction, while if the second group wins, the outrages committed by big business will create demands for new laws and regulations. As the French poet Paul Valdry is said to have remarked, "If the state is strong, it will crush us; if it is weak, we will perish."
The notion that the state is our enemy, then, is in large part a reaction to the state's overreaching itself, to the attempt on the part of the state to regulate every aspect of life and society. The state as described in papal social thought is clearly important, even majestic, but it is not competent to deal directly with everything. It has limited but real functions. And I should note that these functions are larger than those of the "law-and-order state," the state that does nothing else but guard the borders and suppress crime. Pius XI praises Leo XIII because that pontiff had "fearlessly proclaimed the doctrine that the civil power is more than the mere guardian of law and order" (Quadragesimo Anno). The whole of Catholic social thought presupposes and teaches that the proper concerns of the state go far beyond preserving law and order. As Leo XIII taught "rulers should anxiously safeguard the community and all its parts" (Rerum Novarum). Nor does John Paul II's Centesimus Annus teach otherwise, for in that encyclical there are many passages that speak of the same kind of role for the state. The law-and-order or libertarian state is concerned with only a small number of things. The liberal state is concerned with everything and seeks to regulate everything directly. The Catholic state is likewise concerned with "the community and all its parts, " but it does not seek directly to regulate and control everything. Very often, as we will see below, it simply fosters and watches over the efforts of intermediary bodies.
We have seen, then, that the tendency to regard the state as one of our chief enemies is not consonant with authoritative Catholic thought and further, that this tendency is chiefly caused by the state's overstepping its proper bounds, especially by the modem state's congenital propensity to try to control everything directly, because no other sufficiently powerful bodies exist that can share in the necessary regulation of society for the common good. And we have also seen that the impasse this has created is the cause of the endless squabbling about the proper size of the state - big, little, or in-between. But all these attempts to find exactly the right size are foolish, because they assume that the state and only the state has any important function in shaping society. If the state does not do it, then turn it over to the vagaries of the free market. This is the modern notion, but it is wrong.
Let me give some examples of how the Catholic theory of the state could be implemented and what this would mean for society. I will give examples of how the central government could be relieved of some of its burdensome duties - duties whose performance often provokes resentment because it is charged that the state is sticking its nose into matters that are none of its business and about which it knows nothing. The solution suggested by Catholic social thought does recognize that there are real evils that need eliminating or regulating, but approaches these things in a manner different from that of both liberals and conservatives in America.
My first example will be OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the federal government, created by Congress in 1970. The purpose of OSHA is to make and enforce rules for safety in the workplace. And there is no doubt that OSHA was created to address a real need. Workers are injured on the job, and business often has little economic incentive or ethical desire to make the workplace safe. In fact, there can be a temptation to regard workers as expendable parts of the production process.
But OSHA has also been criticized for imposing needless and silly rules and requirements that are difficult and expensive to implement. Bureaucrats in their Washington offices cannot regulate, it is said, work processes and workplaces of which they have no direct experience. Since they know little about the realities of the work environment they are supposed to regulate, they are apt to issue rules applicable to every workplace without taking account of differences, or to make rules that are so vague that no one can know whether or not he has satisfied them short of having an inspector come and look for violations. And it is charged that the cost of complying with OSHA rules and of the accompanying recordkeeping, particularly for small businesses, is prohibitive.
I expect that there is something to these criticisms. Some of OSHA's regulations doubtless are ridiculous and burdensome. But the inference that is intended to be drawn from this, namely, that OSHA should be abolished and things returned to the status quo ante, I reject. In ordinary circumstances the state should not be burdened with inspecting workplaces and writing detailed rules. This is an instance of its being "overwhelmed and submerged by endless affairs and responsibilities" as Pius XI said. And this is also an excellent opportunity to revive, in some measure, some of those "prosperous and interdependent institutions" the Pontiff spoke of. Specifically, joint unionand-management committees, with the right, if necessary, of appeal to the state, and of enforcement by state authority, ought to be entrusted with setting the rules for workplace safety currently done by OSHA. The members of such committees not only would be familiar with the actual work processes and environment, but would also have a direct interest in the prosperity of their industry. The equal presence of the union representatives would ensure that management's interest in profits could not overrule sensible safety requirements.
Whenever the parties directly involved with a process can assume more responsibility for making their own rules, then the government can be relieved of a burden it ought never to have had. The correct alternative to direct government regulation is not to do nothing and to give profit-making businesses a free rein. Very often there are alternatives that do not necessitate setting up a new government bureaucracy, but instead rely on those actually doing the work to take control of their own situation.
One of the federal agencies that has often been a target for elimination is the Department of Commerce. Now, Commerce does many and varied things, from forecasting the weather to taking the census to promoting American exports. To a great extent it was established to aid business. But if business truly finds these services important, then there is no reason why some of them could not be taken over by industry groups, preferably representing both organized labor and employer organizations. For example, such industry councils could promote U.S. exports by advertising abroad, by establishing funds to make start-up loans to firms wishing to export and by sponsoring trade shows and the like. Even much of the information-gathering and data-publishing work of Commerce could be done by such industry councils. Even now, private industry and trade associations collect and publish much reliable statistical data that is used even by the federal government.
One part of the Commerce Department is the National Institute of Standards and Technology (formerly the National Bureau of Standards). This agency "assists industry in developing technology to improve product quality, modernize manufacturing processes, ensure product reliability, and facilitate rapid commercialization of products based on new scientific discoveries" (U.S. Government Manual). Some people might call this corporate welfare, but aside from that, there is no reason why industry could not work to sponsor its own research programs and improve its processes and products. This is not an activity that needs to burden the central government and be supported by taxation. It is surely proper for government to encourage such activities, but they are primarily the responsibility of the companies involved and of the industry councils I mentioned above, which could be formed to deal with matters pertaining to a particular economic sector.
There have been a few attempts in this country to decentralize the institutions that regulate and promote our economic activity. In 1933 the Franklin Roosevelt administration attempted a system of self-regulation by industries called the National Recovery Administration. Although not perfect, the NRA could well have been a means of instituting a system of industrial self-government by owners and workers, very much like what Pius XI had called for in his encyclical Quadragesimo Anno just two years earlier. President Roosevelt even called the industrial entities created by the NRA "modem guilds" (a phrase often used by Catholic writers of the period) and Msgr. John A. Ryan, the great Catholic writer on social justice, was actually a member of the NRA's Industrial Appeals Board, established to rule on complaints brought by businessmen. During its brief life the NRA showed promise, but the U.S. Supreme Court in 1935 ruled the NRA unconstitutional on the grounds that governmental power had been delegated to non-governmental bodies. Thus Roosevelt was forced to create more agencies and bigger bureaucracies to regulate the economy directly. Had the NRA been allowed to work, it is possible that some of the vast expansion of the federal government would never have taken place.
The fact that so thoroughly practical a politician as Franklin Roosevelt was able to get the NRA approved by Congress shows that such an approach is not alien to American traditions. But the current hostility to the federal government's regulating effort is not based on an appreciation of the proper role of government so much as on a desire to allow private business free play. But Catholic thought, from the New Testament forward, has always been deeply aware that the economic appetite, the "love of money" as St. Paul calls it (1 Tim. 6:10), is responsible for a host of evils. And this is true not only for an individual but for a society also. There is no magic law of economics that allows individuals to indulge an unlimited desire for gain and that somehow channels all this activity toward the common good of society. I am aware', of course, that the tradition of economics descending from Adam Smith teaches otherwise. One should note, though, that Smith's view was framed in an age of Deism and presupposes a self-regulating sort of cosmos, with a God who stands back and watches and a government that does likewise. But such a view of things is deeply hostile to Catholic social thought, which has always held men responsible for the evils caused by their choices and actions, both when acting alone and in concert with others.
Another promising kind of economic entity whose role could be expanded in the United States is the cooperative. Co-operatives deserve an article to themselves, so here I will confine myself to speaking of only a small part of their possible functions. In the provision of basic services, such as water and power, co-operatives could well supplement or even replace utilities directly owned by local governments or those organized as private businesses. It is true that co-operatives do supply such services, especially electricity, but there are other areas in which government may be relieved of directly providing a service and allowing those directly concerned to make provision for their own needs.
In much of what I have written here I have been critical of the unfettered market. But to be cautious about capitalism is not to embrace socialism. It is only to recognize that the Fall of Man encompassed also his economic appetites. A realization that the government has grown too large should not be an occasion to embrace economic Deism. As I have suggested, there are many other ways of approaching economic regulation that do not rely on direct governmental intervention. The state can be our friend in helping to establish such forms of regulatory bodies and in seeing that, once established, they do not abuse their trust.
But a thoroughgoing rejection of economic Deism must come first. And for Catholics this can probably best be obtained by a deepening of our understanding of the Catholic vision of man. For just as socialism's fundamental error is anthropological in nature, so too is libertarianism's. Likewise, "from the Christian vision of the human person there necessarily follows a correct picture of society" (Centesimus Annus). The errors of socialism and the errors of Deistic economics rest on false images of man. We will probably make more progress toward accepting the Catholic conception of the economic order if we first accept its image of man.
If we are to subject all our being, our thinking, and our living to Christ and His Church, we cannot ignore the existence of Catholic social teaching. Whether we like it or not, it is part of our patrimony, and until we embrace it as unreservedly as we embrace the rest of Catholic teaching, we will hardly be able to call ourselves orthodox or faithful Catholics, and we will never be free of the tug-of-war between statism and individualism.
Thomas Storck, who writes from Greenbelt, Maryland, is a contributing Editor of The New Oxford Review and the author of The Catholic Milieu and Foundations of a Catholic Political Order. Also, with Dr Peter Kwasniewski he has written An Economics of Justice and Charity: Catholic Social Teaching, Its Development and Contemporary Relevance, and with Joseph Pearce, From Christendom to Americanism and Beyond: The Long, Jagged Trail to a Postmodern Void.
A Personal Rant!
I seldom rant on this blog. I figure that most people get enough ranting in their life from family members, acquaintances, and the news. I know I do.
However there is something happening in my personal family life that makes me (as my Grandmother used to say) so mad, I could spit! I can think of other terms, but they're NSFW or this blog.
Those who follow the blog on my personal Facebook page may have noticed that I shared a fundraiser from our Son, Zachary. It was titled, 'Help keep my family off of the streets'. And he explained,
Long story short, my job is killing me slowly I need back surgery to be able to go back to work. First doc can do the surgery ON dec 26 with 4 more weeks of recovery. I've been out of work since November 1. I have short term disability insurance but it had a waiting period and only pays 60% of pay. I am still waiting on doctors to send in paperwork for it as well. Also it does not pay all the bill's. My doc read me the report, severe stenosis and 3 herniated discs. Going to need back surgery. Behind on everything and unless a miracle happens soon I won't be able to pay rent let alone bills.
Actually, whilst both are back related, he needs two surgeries, one for the stenosis and one for the spinal problems. The first, a laser procedure, was originally scheduled for next week at Research Hospital in Kansas City, MO. He has insurance, Research is 'in network' with his insurance carrier, so no problem, right? Wrong!
His insurance carrier, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, has informed him that to be fully covered, the procedures must be performed in what they refer to as a 'Centre of Excellence' for back problems.
Oops! The nearest 'Centre of Excellence' is in Springfield, MO. It's a 350 mile round trip to Springfield (the next closest 'Centre of Excellence' is in Texas). Whilst he has a car, it's not exactly new. As anyone who has ever had non-emergency surgery knows, you don't just show up for the operation. There is an appointment to meet the surgeon, then there's usually a pre-op appointment. Then the surgery happens followed by at least one or two post-op appointments with the doctor. Whether or not his car would make it is a question, but there's also a matter of cost. Gasoline is not exactly cheap, and his older car doesn't get great mileage.
He can have it done at Research, but then the insurance will only pay 50%, leaving him with 10-15K due. Also, he would have to pay 20-30% of that upfront along with setting up a payment plan in advance. He's been off work for a month, he still has bills from his previous two hospital stays, he's about to lose his house and they expect him to come up with between $2,000 and $4,500 cash on the barrel head?
His mother and I would like to just say, 'Here, Son' and take care of the problem, but I'm retired on a fairly small fixed income. The Cuter and Shorter Half had to buy a new (used) car during the summer to drive to work, so she's not exactly rolling in dough. We've sent him what we can.
So there's the background and here's my rant. I've lived in both the US and Canada. Yes, there are problems with Canadian Medicare, but let me tell you a story.
When Tommy Douglas, who, by the way was Kiefer Sutherland's grandfather, introduced Medicare in Saskatchewan in 1961 whilst he was premier, he was denounced as a communist, and the doctors went on strike.
By 1981, Douglas had been inducted into the Order of Canada. In 2004, the CBC held a national poll to choose the 'Greatest Canadian' of all time. Douglas came in first, beating out statesman, humanitarians, Sir Frederick Banting, the discoverer of insulin, and Wayne Gretzky (who came in tenth), and had been awarded the Owen Adams Award of Honour, the highest honour the Canadian Medical Association can bestow on a non-physician!
Canadian Medicare works! Don't tell me how horrible 'socialised medicine' is, and how free market medical care is the greatest thing since sliced bread. I know better!
As a conclusion, let me say that I am not asking for help, but if someone were so moved, out of charity, leave a comment, and I'll try to get in touch.
However there is something happening in my personal family life that makes me (as my Grandmother used to say) so mad, I could spit! I can think of other terms, but they're NSFW or this blog.
Those who follow the blog on my personal Facebook page may have noticed that I shared a fundraiser from our Son, Zachary. It was titled, 'Help keep my family off of the streets'. And he explained,
Long story short, my job is killing me slowly I need back surgery to be able to go back to work. First doc can do the surgery ON dec 26 with 4 more weeks of recovery. I've been out of work since November 1. I have short term disability insurance but it had a waiting period and only pays 60% of pay. I am still waiting on doctors to send in paperwork for it as well. Also it does not pay all the bill's. My doc read me the report, severe stenosis and 3 herniated discs. Going to need back surgery. Behind on everything and unless a miracle happens soon I won't be able to pay rent let alone bills.
Actually, whilst both are back related, he needs two surgeries, one for the stenosis and one for the spinal problems. The first, a laser procedure, was originally scheduled for next week at Research Hospital in Kansas City, MO. He has insurance, Research is 'in network' with his insurance carrier, so no problem, right? Wrong!
His insurance carrier, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, has informed him that to be fully covered, the procedures must be performed in what they refer to as a 'Centre of Excellence' for back problems.
Oops! The nearest 'Centre of Excellence' is in Springfield, MO. It's a 350 mile round trip to Springfield (the next closest 'Centre of Excellence' is in Texas). Whilst he has a car, it's not exactly new. As anyone who has ever had non-emergency surgery knows, you don't just show up for the operation. There is an appointment to meet the surgeon, then there's usually a pre-op appointment. Then the surgery happens followed by at least one or two post-op appointments with the doctor. Whether or not his car would make it is a question, but there's also a matter of cost. Gasoline is not exactly cheap, and his older car doesn't get great mileage.
He can have it done at Research, but then the insurance will only pay 50%, leaving him with 10-15K due. Also, he would have to pay 20-30% of that upfront along with setting up a payment plan in advance. He's been off work for a month, he still has bills from his previous two hospital stays, he's about to lose his house and they expect him to come up with between $2,000 and $4,500 cash on the barrel head?
His mother and I would like to just say, 'Here, Son' and take care of the problem, but I'm retired on a fairly small fixed income. The Cuter and Shorter Half had to buy a new (used) car during the summer to drive to work, so she's not exactly rolling in dough. We've sent him what we can.
So there's the background and here's my rant. I've lived in both the US and Canada. Yes, there are problems with Canadian Medicare, but let me tell you a story.
When Tommy Douglas, who, by the way was Kiefer Sutherland's grandfather, introduced Medicare in Saskatchewan in 1961 whilst he was premier, he was denounced as a communist, and the doctors went on strike.
By 1981, Douglas had been inducted into the Order of Canada. In 2004, the CBC held a national poll to choose the 'Greatest Canadian' of all time. Douglas came in first, beating out statesman, humanitarians, Sir Frederick Banting, the discoverer of insulin, and Wayne Gretzky (who came in tenth), and had been awarded the Owen Adams Award of Honour, the highest honour the Canadian Medical Association can bestow on a non-physician!
Canadian Medicare works! Don't tell me how horrible 'socialised medicine' is, and how free market medical care is the greatest thing since sliced bread. I know better!
As a conclusion, let me say that I am not asking for help, but if someone were so moved, out of charity, leave a comment, and I'll try to get in touch.
29 November-Antonio, Cardinal Bacci: Meditations for Every Day
29th November
The Blessedness of the Merciful
1. Let us meditate now on the mercy of God, which is infinite even as His justice is infinite. "His mercy," says St. Thomas, "does not subtract from His justice, but is the fullness and the perfection of that justice." (S. Th., 1, q. 21, a. 3 ad 2) All the merits which we can acquire in the sight of God derive from His gratuitous gift of grace. God's mercy and justice, therefore, are fused together in a wonderful harmony which claims our gratitude and fidelity.
References to the mercy of God are numerous in Sacred Scripture. “You, Lord, are good and forgiving,” says the Psalmist, “abounding in kindness to all who call upon you.” (Ps. 85:5) “Blessed he the Lord,” we read elsewhere, “my rock, … my refuge and my fortress, my stronghold, my deliverer…” (Ps. 143:2) “Goodness and kindness follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord for years to come.” (Ps. 22:6)
When we leave the Old Testament and open the Gospel, we discover that it is a record of the goodness and mercy of God. We have only to recall Christ's forgiveness of the Magdalen when she wept at His feet for her faults; the merciful judgment which He passed on the poor adulteress; His loving glance in the direction of St. Peter, who had denied Him; the grace so miraculously granted to St. Paul on the road to Damascus; and the parables of the good Samaritan, the prodigal son, and the good shepherd who went to search for the lost sheep. Finally, there are the consoling words to the repentant thief: "This day thou shalt be with me in paradise." When we read this chronicle of infinite goodness and mercy, we should experience a boundless hope and confidence. It does not matter how great our sins or our ingratitude may have been. Once we have repented, God is ready to forgive us and to receive us with open arms.
2. Since God is so merciful to us, however, He requires us to be good and merciful to our neighbour. “Blessed are the merciful,” Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “for they shall obtain mercy.” (Mt. 5:7) St. James adds a stern warning. “Judgment,” he says, “is without mercy to him who has not shown mercy; but mercy triumphs over judgment.” (James 2:12) If we hope to receive God's mercy, we must show compassion to those who are poor or unfortunate in any way, even to the greatest sinners. In the presence of so much need and misfortune in the world, avarice, miserliness, selfishness or indifference cry out to God for retribution. If we are not prepared to give, nothing will be given to us. If we refuse to forgive, neither shall we be forgiven. If we do not love, neither shall we be loved.
3. Let us remember that we have often made ourselves God's enemies by our sins. We were often in need when we were deprived of divine grace. On these occasions God was merciful to us, for He granted us His forgiveness and His friendship. These gifts of God place an obligation on us to behave in the same way to those who are in need by assisting them willingly and generously, and to those who are unhappy by consoling them as far as possible.
Let us remember the great principle which Jesus Christ has given us. “Even as you wish men to do to you, so also do you to them… Do good to those who hate you… Do not judge, and you shall not be judged; do not condemn and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you shall be forgiven, give, and it shall be given to you…” (Cf. Luke 6:30-38) “With what judgment you judge, you shall be judged; and with what measure you measure, it shall be measured to you.” (Mt. 7:1) So it will be on the day of death when we shall have to appear before the Supreme Judge.
Let us be generous throughout life in giving help and consolation to others. It is more blessed to give than to receive, as the Gospel says. By giving we shall find a little happiness even in this world, and shall be certain that one day the most merciful Judge will pardon and embrace us.
IN LUMINE FIDEI: 29 NOVEMBER – SAINT SATURNIUS (Martyr)
IN LUMINE FIDEI: 29 NOVEMBER – SAINT SATURNIUS (Martyr): Dom Prosper Guéranger: Christmas begins to glimmer on the horizon. The last Sunday after Pentecost has given us the closing instruct...
29 November, A Chesterton Calendar
NOVEMBER 29th
There is a noble instinct for giving the right touch of beauty to common and necessary things, but the things that are so touched are the ancient things, the things that always, to some extent, commended themselves to the lover of beauty. The spirit of William Morris has not seized hold of the century and made its humblest necessities beautiful. And this was because, with all his healthiness and energy, he had not the supreme courage to face the ugliness of things; Beauty shrank from the Beast and the fairy tale had a different ending.
‘Twelve Types.’
Chesterton, G. K.. The G. K. Chesterton Collection [50 Books] (Kindle Locations 45361-45364). Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle Edition.
Chesterton, G. K.. The G. K. Chesterton Collection [50 Books] (Kindle Locations 45360-45361). Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle Edition.
There is a noble instinct for giving the right touch of beauty to common and necessary things, but the things that are so touched are the ancient things, the things that always, to some extent, commended themselves to the lover of beauty. The spirit of William Morris has not seized hold of the century and made its humblest necessities beautiful. And this was because, with all his healthiness and energy, he had not the supreme courage to face the ugliness of things; Beauty shrank from the Beast and the fairy tale had a different ending.
‘Twelve Types.’
Chesterton, G. K.. The G. K. Chesterton Collection [50 Books] (Kindle Locations 45361-45364). Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle Edition.
Chesterton, G. K.. The G. K. Chesterton Collection [50 Books] (Kindle Locations 45360-45361). Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle Edition.
30 November, The Roman Martyrology
Prídie Kaléndas Decémbris Luna vicesima secunda Anno 2018 Domini
November 30th anno Domini 2018 The 22nd Day of the Moon were born into the better life:
At Patrae, in the Peloponnesus, the holy Apostle Andrew. He preached the Gospel of Christ in Thrace and Scythia. He was arrested by the Proconsul Aegeas, and first imprisoned, then heavily flogged, and, lastly, crucified. He remained alive upon the cross through the second day, and taught the people. He besought the Lord not to suffer him to be taken down from the cross, and then a great light from heaven shone round about him, and when it faded away he gave up the ghost.
At Rome, the holy martyrs Castulus and Euprepis.
At Constantinople, the holy Virgin and martyr Maura.
Likewise, the holy Virgin and martyr Justina.
At Saintes, (in the sixth century,) holy Trojan, Bishop (of that see,) a man of great holiness, who, albeit he be buried in the earth, yet showeth by many works of power that he is alive in heaven.
At Rome, (in the fifth century,) the holy Confessor Constantius, who manfully withstood the Pelagians, and bore much at their hands, the which contendings have gained him a place among the holy Confessors.
In Palestine, (in the sixth century,) the holy Confessor Zosimus, who was eminent for holiness and miracles in the time of the Emperor Justin.
V. And elsewhere many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins.
R. Thanks be to God.
November 30th anno Domini 2018 The 22nd Day of the Moon were born into the better life:
At Patrae, in the Peloponnesus, the holy Apostle Andrew. He preached the Gospel of Christ in Thrace and Scythia. He was arrested by the Proconsul Aegeas, and first imprisoned, then heavily flogged, and, lastly, crucified. He remained alive upon the cross through the second day, and taught the people. He besought the Lord not to suffer him to be taken down from the cross, and then a great light from heaven shone round about him, and when it faded away he gave up the ghost.
At Rome, the holy martyrs Castulus and Euprepis.
At Constantinople, the holy Virgin and martyr Maura.
Likewise, the holy Virgin and martyr Justina.
At Saintes, (in the sixth century,) holy Trojan, Bishop (of that see,) a man of great holiness, who, albeit he be buried in the earth, yet showeth by many works of power that he is alive in heaven.
At Rome, (in the fifth century,) the holy Confessor Constantius, who manfully withstood the Pelagians, and bore much at their hands, the which contendings have gained him a place among the holy Confessors.
In Palestine, (in the sixth century,) the holy Confessor Zosimus, who was eminent for holiness and miracles in the time of the Emperor Justin.
V. And elsewhere many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins.
R. Thanks be to God.
28 November 2018
Cardinal Zen Says He Will Resign If Pope Appoints More Communist Bishops
Maike Hickson is quoted as saying that she was concerned that German-language media would "spread the wrong message" that Cardinal Zen withdrew into a monastery and pointed out that Zen has made only a conditional announcement. And that is exactly what happened. In fact, I've already shared an article that indicated that he had announced that he was retiring to a monastery.
From The Eponymous Flower
From The Eponymous Flower
Emeritus Archbishop of Hong Kong: 'I can not fight the Pope. But if he legitimizes the six bishops [of the Catholic Patriotic Association], I will retire to praying in a monastery'.
Hong Kong (kath.net) "I can not fight the pope. But if he legitimizes the six bishops [of the Catholic Patriotic Association], I will retire to praying in a monastery. And I will not talk to journalists anymore. I will remain silent.” Cardinal Joseph Zen, Archbishop Emeritus of Hong Kong and longtime critic of Pope Francis' China policy, announced this again. The cardinal said in an interview with the Catholic French portal La Croix that he had recently handed the Pope a seven-page letter between the Vatican and the Communist government of China about the provisional agreement of secret content. Zen had traveled to Rome specifically because he had not trusted in the reliability of the followers of Francis. This is what Maike Hickson reported on "LifeSiteNews".
He explained to La Croix that he considered this provisional agreement to be destructive to the faithful Catholic underground Church of China.
After the secret agreement, Pope Francis recognized eight bishops loyal to the government, who had originally been ordained Catholic bishops without the consent of the Vatican.
The American-German ecclesiastical journalist Maike Hickson criticized that German-language media would "spread the wrong message" that Cardinal Zen withdrew into a monastery and pointed out that Zen has made only a conditional announcement.
- Prof. Thomas Schirrmacher: "The red in Cardinal Zen's clothing truly stands for martyr's blood"
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG
The Oath: Every Bishops’ Aaron and Hur
Fr Zed shares the Oath of Fidelity every Bishop takes before his Consecration to the Episcopate. In reading it, I am appalled at the number of Bishops who do not seem to take it seriously!
Father suggests that,
From Fr Z's Blog
Father suggests that,
It would be a good exercise to take each of these paragraphs and, over time, bring them to Holy Mass and pray before the Blessed Sacrament precisely for the sake of your bishop.I intend to do just that.
From Fr Z's Blog
 |
| Moses, Aaron, and Hur |
Consider what is entrusted to a bishop.
Consider how he, like everyone else, struggles with the world, the flesh and the Devil.
Consider that, though fortified with the graces of the sacrament of orders and defended by the holy angels, a bishop is hated and pursued by the forces of hell with a persevering malice that we humans can only imagine with vague analogy.
Consider his judgment before the Just Judge when it is his time.
Consider his final reward, forever and ever, will be as a bishop in whatever state he will be his, heaven or hell.
Consider the weight of the burden that a diligent, faithful bishop feels, which the ever-harried Augustine of Hippo described as a sárcina, the massive backpack of the Roman solider.
Consider too the vineyard into which the bishop is sent to tend, with its obstinate vines, vagaries of “weather” and pressing foes.
Did you know that Bishops must make a special oath before they are consecrated?
Surely this oath, seriously considered, reflected upon by a man about to be consecrated, is intended to strengthen him in his ministry. When resolve flags, should he remember his oath, a bishop under siege might remember himself and stand up ready to do what must be done.
The oath is meant to uphold his tired arms, as Aaron and Hur did for Moses during the battle.
For your edification and contemplation.
FORMULA
Iurisiurandi fidelitatis ab Episcopis praestandi |
FORMULA
Of the oath of fidelity to be performed by Bishops |
| Ego, ___, ad sedem ___ promotus, catholicae Ecclesiae atque romano Pontifici, eius supremo pastori, Christi vicario beati Petri apostoli in primatu successori et collegii Episcoporum capiti, semper fidelis ero. | I, ___, promoted to the See of ___, will always be faithful to the Catholic Church and to the Roman Pontiff, her Supreme Pastor, Vicar of Christ, Successor in primacy of the blessed Apostle Peter and the Head of the College of Bishops. |
| Libero exercitio primatialis summi Pontificis potestatis in universa Ecclesia obsequar, Ipsiusque iura et auctoritatem mihi curae erit provehere ac defendere. Praerogativas quoque atque munera romani Pontificis Legatorum, quippe qui personam gerant supremi pastoris, agnoscam atque observabo. | I will submit to the free exercise of the primatial power of the Supreme Pontiff in the Universal Church, and I will take pains to advance and defend his rights and authority. I will also acknowledge and respect the prerogatives and duties of the legates of the Roman Pontiff, for they act in the person of the Supreme Pastor. |
| Apostolica munera Episcopis commissa, nempe populum Dei docendi, sanctificandi et regendi, in hierarchica communione cum collegii episcopalis capite atque membris, summa diligentia exsequenda curabo. | I will take with the greatest diligence that the apostolic duties committed to Bishops, namely of teaching, governing and sanctifying the people of God in hierarchical communion with the Head and the members of the College of Bishops, be carried out. |
| Universae Ecclesiae unitatem tuebor, ideoque studiose incumbam, ut depositum fidei inde ab Apostolis traditum purum et integrum servetur ac veritates tenendae et moribus applicandae, prouti ab Ecclesiae magisterio proponuntur, omnibus tradantur et illustrentur. Errantibus vero in fide paternum animum pandam atque omni ope adnitar, ut ad plenitudinem catholicae veritatis perveniant. | I will protect the unity of the universal Church, and, therefore, I will zealously see to it that the deposit of faith handed down through time by the Apostles will be preserved pure and undiminished and that the truths to be held and the moral teachings to be applied will be handed on and explained just as they are proposed by the teaching authority of the Church. I assuredly will extend a fatherly spirit to those who are straying in the faith and I will strive with every effort that they arrive at to the fullness of catholic truth. |
| Ad imaginem Christi, summi et aeterni sacerdotis, respiciens, pie sancteque agam ac ministerium mihi commissum ita adimplebo, ut, forma factus gregis ex animo, fideles in christiana perfectione adipiscenda confirmare valeam. | Carefully looking to the image of Christ, the High and Eternal Priest, I will behave dutifully and religiously and will fulfill the ministry entrusted to me in such a way that, having from my soul been made an example for the flock, I may be able to strengthen the faithful in the pursuit of Christian perfection. |
| Disciplinam cunctae Ecclesiae communem fovebo et observantiam omnium legum ecclesiasticarum, earum imprimis quae in Codice Iuris Canonici continentur, sollerter insistam, semper advigilans, ne mali usus irrepant praecipue circa ministerium verbi et sacramentorum celebrationem. | I will foster the common discipline of the whole Church and I will insist skillfully upon the observance of all ecclesiastical laws, first and foremost of those that are contained in the Code of Canon Law, always being vigilant lest any evil practices slither in, especially concerning the ministry of the Word and the celebration of sacraments. |
| Diligentem curam in temporalibus Ecclesiae bonis administrandis ponam, iis potissimum quae ad divini cultus exercitium, ad cleri aliorumque ministrorum honestam sustentationem, necnon ad sacri apostolatus et caritatis opera collata sunt. | I will put diligent care into the administration of the temporal goods of the Church, most especially those goods that are designated for the exercise of sacred worship, for the worthy support of the clergy and of other ministers, and for works of the sacred apostolate and of charity. |
| In explendo mandato mihi commisso omnes Presbyteros et Diaconos, ordinis episcopalis providos cooperatores, necnon Religiosos et Religiosas unius eiusdemque operis participes, peculiari dilectione prosequar. Itemque de sacris vocationibus provehendis maximam curam habebo, ut spiritualibus necessitatibus in tota Ecclesia convenienter consulatur. | To fulfill the mandate entrusted to me, I will with special affection attend to all of the Priests and Deacons, provided as coworkers of the episcopal order, as well as male and female religious, participants in one and the same work. Likewise, I will take the greatest care to promote sacred vocations, so that spiritual needs in the whole Church will be properly looked after. |
| Laicorum dignitatem propriamque ipsorum in Ecclesiae missione partem agnoscam et proveham. Opera vero missionalia ad gentium evangelizationem fovendam peculiari sollicitudine curabo. | I will acknowledge and promote the dignity of lay people and their own mission in the Church. I will, by all means, take care with particular solicitude to foster missionary works for the evangelization of the nations. |
| Ad Concilia ceterasque legitimas actiones collegiales vocatus, nisi impediar, ipse adero vel opportune respondebo. | Once called to Councils and other lawful collegial activities, I will personally attend or opportunely respond unless I am impeded. |
| Statutis temporibus vel occasione data Apostolicae Sedi rationem de pastorali meo officio reddam, eiusdemque mandata atque consilia simul obsequenter accipiam ac maximo studio perficiam. | At the appointed times or at a fitting moment, I will give an account of my pastoral office to the Apostolic See, and I will compliantly give careful attention to its mandates and measures, and, with great effort, will carry them out with the greatest application. |
| Sic me Deus adiuvet et haec santa Dei evangelia, quae manibus meis tango. | So help me God and these Holy Gospels of God, which I am touching with my hands. |
| (SUBSCRIPTIO ANTISTITIS) | (SIGNATURE OF THE BISHOP) |
| Ego infrascriptus testor praefatum Anstistitem iusiurandum ut supra in manibus meis dedisse hac die | I, the undersigned, testify that the aforementioned bishop above gave the oath (as written) above into my hands on this day |
____
____ ____ ____ |
____
____ ____ ____ |
So, there’s the text.
This forces the honest person to reflect deeply on our bishops. It might force the honest BISHOP to reflect deeply on his work.
It would be a good exercise to take each of these paragraphs and, over time, bring them to Holy Mass and pray before the Blessed Sacrament precisely for the sake of your bishop.
The other day my friend Kevin Phelan, who knew Bp. Morlino for some 40 years, told online a terrific story about Morlino on the night before he was to be consecrated bishop and this very oath. HERE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)