Quick hits

Lots of interesting stuff I just don’t have the time to get to: 1) Belief in the “Second Coming” of Jesus significantly reduces support for government action to tackle climate change (necessary controls, of course). 2) My hometown of Cary, NC switched over to blinking yellow from solid green for a yield left turn in the past few years.  I don’t feel any safer, but supposedly I am.  Apparently, though, pedestrians are now more at risk. 3) A disproportionate number of the world’s best students are Americans.  Are averages are always getting pulled down due to our inequality and poverty, but at the top, we still rock. 4) Being told that a CFL light bulb is good for the planet makes conservatives less likely to buy it.  How depressing.  Kevin Drum with a nice take on how actually caring about the environment has become an extension of the culture wars. 5) Really enjoyed this piece on how to talk to your child about sexual assault, sexting, etc.  This part especially:

I understand that reluctance: I haven’t talked to my 13-year-old son about Steubenville or the other cases because parties and alcohol aren’t on his radar yet. I don’t want to rob him of his innocence. “I understand that feeling,” Wiseman said. “But that always means the moment of losing their innocence doesn’t happen with you, and they have to deal with it in the moment, and they’re completely unprepared for what to do.” She said I could wait until my son is 14, but probably not much beyond that.

Got it.  David’s 13.  I’m going to get on this. 6) Mother and daughter both injured in Boston marathon bombing.  Good story. 7) Great take on the morons in Congress trying to eliminate NSF social science funding.  Great conclusion:

I have no doubt that Messrs Duncan and Webster’s motivations in offering this bill are not venial or self-serving. I have every faith that they are motivated by a sincere devotion to ignorance, a value they both preach and practice.

8) Cool analysis of age and gender effects on the nature of status updates.  Handy graphical summary from Andrew Sullivan. 9) I think it is great that Bill Gates is funding efforts to make a more pleasurable condom and I agree with this author that the backlash is ridiculous.  It is a simple biological fact that condoms reduce sensation and a socio-cultural fact that many men refuse to use them as a result.  You may not like that last fact, but it’s a reality.  If there can be real progress on the first fact, it might make a real impact on the second.  And that would be great for public health in many places. 10) NPR series of stories on Buried in Grain from back in March.  I got most of these on the radio– they were great.

The night is dark and full of terrors

So, you probably don’t watch HBO’s Game of Thrones, but you should.  The series (based on a series of novels, which I have not read because they are too long), is basically an alternate Medieval Europe, but with some magical/mystical elements thrown-in– primarily zombie-esque White Walkers and the classic fire-breathing dragons.  I’d actually prefer the show without these elements, but I’m fine enough with them in there as long as they don’t take the focus away from the realism of the human characters.  The show also has its own religious firmament of which most characters clearly believe in “the gods” who don’t seem to do much but be used in stock phrases, but there’s a small minority who believe in “The Lord of Light,” who’s catchphrase is the title of this post.

Okay, all well and good.  Thing is, last season, the Lord of Light seemed to show some pretty special power to directly interact in human affairs through a character who is a sort of priestess.  Not a fan of that.  Too magical and too easy.  Alright, not that big a problem, though.  In this week’s episode, though, the Lord of Light clearly demonstrated extreme supernatural interference into human affairs.  Alright, fair enough.  But the thing is the Lord of Light seems to be worshiped by just a fringe sect.  Yet he can have amazing supernatural influence (don’t want to spoil it, actually) in human affairs.  Meanwhile, the other gods are little more than “may the gods watch over you on your journey” phrases and that’s about it.  Now, this fails the test of realism.  If there was one god with totally awesome supernatural powers who actually used them and a bunch of other gods– real or not– who never seemed to do much of anything directly for his/her followers, those gods would get completely dominated in a real-world competition between religions.  Everybody in Westeros should be worshiping the Lord of Light– he actually does stuff.

Short version: either the Lord of Light should be the same essentially meaningless figurehead as the other gods or who should be the dominant god in Westeros; that he should be the only god to show genuine power yet be the object of worship of just a small fringe movement make no logical sense.  I don’t know whether to blame the show or George RR Martin, but either way I don’t like it.

Belated papal thoughts

A former students emailed to say she was surprised that I had not had anything to say about the new Pope here.  I’m surprised to.  Just been lazy, I guess.  Here’s what I told her…

I’m quite ambivalent.  I love the humility and the seeming commitment to poverty and social justice (and the implications of choosing to be named after St. Francis), but I don’t like that he’s so outspoken against gays. I don’t expect him not to follow the party line, but I don’t like that he’s so emphatic about it.  I’m somewhat with-holding judgement to see where his emphasis is in office. I was fully aware that there would be significant disagreement between myself and any possible new pope, but what I really want is a commitment to Catholic Social Teaching and fighting poverty. As long as there’s that, I’m willing to forgive a lot. But, we’ll see.   As for the domestic Argentina angle, unless I hear evidence a lot more compelling than I have so far, I’m withholding judgement. Considering the possible range of people who could have been named pope, I think I’m reasonably pleased.  Considering the type of pope I’d really like to see (unrealistic) I’d have to be considered disappointed.

What Jesus said about homosexuality

Friend linked to this on FB and I knew exactly what it was going to show.  Love it anyway:

Of course, you could do a similar pamphlet on abortion, too.

“Christianity is not a religion; it’s a philosophy”

Oh, my.  Yes, direct quote from Bill O’Reilly.  Damn that man says the stupidest things.  In this case, calling Christianity a philosophy, not a religion, helps him make his absurdist case for the “War on Christmas.”  Naturally, Jon Stewart does not let him get away with it:

Religion in America

Presumably you are already aware that America is a much more religious nation than most all other modern Democracies.  Here’s a nice summary from Gallup on some of the key correlates of religiosity:

• Religiousness increases with age, albeit not in a smooth path but rather in stages. Americans are least religious at age 23 and most religious at age 80.
• Women are significantly more religious than men, at all ages and within all race and ethnic groups. This is not an American anomaly; women are more religious than men in all but a small number of the more than 100 countries around the world in which Gallup has measured religion.
• Blacks are more religious than any other race or ethnic group in America.
• Mormons are the most religious of any specific religious group in America; Jews are the least.
• Religiousness is highest in Southern states, including Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana.
• Religiousness is lowest in states located in the two northern corners of the country, including Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Oregon, Washington, and Alaska.
• Upscale Americans are less religious than those with lower levels of education and income, but better-off Americans attend religious services just as often.
• There are substantial political differences in religiousness. Republicans are significantly more likely to say that religion is important in their daily lives and more likely to attend religious services regularly than either independents or Democrats.
• Blacks are a major exception to the significant correlation between religiousness and Republicanism. They are at the same time the most religious and the most Democratic race and ethnic group in America.

I find the age one interesting.  So, you get away from your parents and decide that religion is not so great.  You get more religious when you have kids, presumably, and then when death seems not far away, that’s really the time for God.  I’d also love to know more about the universal gender gap in religiosity– what’s going on there?  The political one– that’s well-trod territory.

The best argument for priestly celibacy

Enjoyed this interesting first-person essay in the Atlantic about how tough it is to be a good rabbi for your congregation and still be a good husband/father for your family:

I am a rabbi with a wife and a toddler. Not only am I in the office typically from nine to five, four out of every five weekdays, but since I have a pulpit position I also work every Friday evening and Saturday morning. I also work often on Saturday afternoons, maybe even evenings. Also Sunday mornings and sometimes afternoons as well. That’s a prime time for families to meet for bar mitzvah lessons, Hebrew school programs, and youth group activities. And that doesn’t include all the times when I’m on-call for a death or emergency in the congregation, which could happen at any time. I recall one moment when I was called away from a Friday night Shabbat (Sabbath) dinner with friends and family to visit someone dying in the hospital. I recall a similar story of a friend whose father is also a rabbi, who got called away from most of Thanksgiving activities with his family to care for a family that had just experienced a suicide. And I speak regularly with a friend and colleague in a small congregation who is frequently stressed out, exhausted and neglectful of his own personal life because his solo pulpit demands so much of his time. (By the way, none of these stories are new for pulpit rabbis.)…

Yet given the responsibilities of the modern pulpit rabbinate there is not so much that allows for focused time with the family. In school I heard two difficult statements made by different teachers. One claimed that the pulpit was “toxic” to family life. Another said, “You can be a great father and husband, or you can be a great rabbi, but you can’t be both.” I’m trying to challenge both those assumptions but I’m finding it very tough.

If I don’t stay long enough after services to meet and greet congregants, I’m not seen as friendly or outgoing. And if I don’t make it to a bedside or funeral I’m seen as not caring for my congregants. Forget about the fact that some of those times are moments I could be spending with my own family. Assistant rabbis usually have additional clergy with whom they share responsibilities. Can you imagine what this is like for a solo rabbi who doesn’t have anyone to share their responsibilities with?

I find the idea that a priest should remain celibate because this represents a higher / more pure moral existence to be pretty absurd.  What does make sense to me, though, is that a priest without a family can wholeheartedly devote himself to his congregation.  Reading the above, you can certainly see the logic in that.

The Bishops

Damn would I love to see the IRS remove the tax-exempt status for the Catholic Church.  There is absolutely no doubt that this bishop is clearly advocating for a particular political candidate (the idea that one should have to use the words “vote for” or “vote against” is beyond ludicrous).  From the Post:

A number of Roman Catholic bishops are making forceful last-minute appeals to their flock to vote on Election Day, and their exhortations are increasingly sounding like calls to support Republican challenger Mitt Romney over President Obama.

The most recent example: a letter from Illinois Bishop Daniel Jenky accusing the administration of an unprecedented “assault upon our religious freedom” and implying that Catholics who pull the lever for Democrats who support abortion rights are like those who condemned Jesus to death.

“Since the foundation of the American Republic and the adoption of the Bill of Rights, I do not think there has ever been a time more threatening to our religious liberty than the present,” Jenky writes in the letter, which he ordered priests in his Peoria diocese to read at all Masses on Sunday (Nov. 4).

In the letter, Jenky blames Obama and the Democratic majority in the Senate for trampling on the Catholic Church’s rights and moral convictions by requiring health insurers to provide contraception coverage. Jenky also compares abortion rights supporters to the Jewish crowd in Jerusalem that pledged loyalty to the Roman Empire and demanded that Pontius Pilate crucify Jesus.

“For those who hope for salvation, no political loyalty can ever take precedence over loyalty to the Lord Jesus Christ and to his Gospel of Life,” Jenky writes.

Jenky’s broadside is especially powerful and — to his critics — partisan. But it is not an isolated case.

On Thursday, the bishops of Pennsylvania — a crucial battleground state where most Catholics are currently supporting Obama — released a letter to voters declaring that policies on contraception, abortion and gay rights backed by the White House and Democrats meant the nation was “losing its soul by little steps.”

Oh, there’s something losing its sole here by little steps.  The hierarchy of the Catholic Church.  Heck, just for arguments sake, I’ll give ‘em abortion, but the idea that we should be more concerned about banning contraception and preventing gays from marrying each other takes precedence over how we care for poor people is just completely offensive.  I only remember Jesus talking about one of these topics.  And he talked about it a lot.

Jesus’ wife

So, this is interesting:

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — A historian of early Christianity at Harvard Divinity School has identified a scrap of papyrus that she says was written in Coptic in the fourth century and contains a phrase never seen in any piece of Scripture: “Jesus said to them, ‘My wife …’”

The faded papyrus fragment is smaller than a business card, with eight lines on one side, in black ink legible under a magnifying glass. Just below the line about Jesus having a wife, the papyrus includes a second provocative clause that purportedly says, “she will be able to be my disciple.”

The finding is being made public in Rome on Tuesday at an international meeting of Coptic scholars by the historian Karen L. King, who has published several books about new Gospel discoveries and is the first woman to hold the nation’s oldest endowed chair, the Hollis professor of divinity.

Well, that does it.  If Jesus had a wife I don’t know how I can be expected to continue to be a Christian.

Democrats and Catholicism

Read this Op-Ed this weekend about how liberal Catholics needs to make their voices heard more loudly from a distinctly Catholic-Christian perspective.  Here’s the conclusion:

If the Democratic Party is not listening to liberal Catholics, it is partly because they are not in a position to speak very loudly. They are dodging the sights of a Roman hierarchy more preoccupied with smoking out left-leaning nuns than nurturing critical thinking. “Is liberal Catholicism dead?” Time wondered a few years back. The answer is no: in some regards, liberal Catholic intellectuals are flourishing. They are writing and teaching, running social justice initiatives at the church’s great universities, ensconced in professorships around the Ivy League. Yet a cozy academic subculture can be as isolating as it is empowering. The handful of nationally known Catholic political thinkers who might be called progressive, or at least compassionate and cosmopolitan — like the journalist-scholars Garry Wills and E. J. Dionne Jr., blogmeister Andrew Sullivan, or the feminist nun and blogger Sister Joan Chittister — are far outnumbered by the ranks of prominent Catholic conservatives in the trenches of activism and policy making.

Progressive Catholicism may not lend itself to punditry or mobilization. Reconciling religious tradition with modernity is a more nuanced endeavor than defending orthodoxy from any murmur of compromise, and allying with the poor is not a recipe for easy fund-raising. But if liberal Catholic ideas are not great fodder for culture-war sloganeering, they do offer a path to secular Democrats who, at the moment, are failing to address the basic questions of the human predicament.

Earlier in the piece, there’s this, which I just don’t buy:

Allowing Republicans to claim the mantle of Catholicism might cost the Democrats the election. As commentators have noted, Catholics may be the nation’s most numerous swing voters. Over the past few decades, Democratic leaders have alienated voters in one of the party’s historically strong constituencies. Through a series of ideological moves and cultural misjudgments, they have also cut themselves off from a rich tradition of liberal Catholic thought at a time when American culture requires politicians to articulate a mission that inspires religious and secular voters alike.

Republicans are claiming the mantle of Catholicism because that’s what the damn Church hierarchy is doing.  To wit, this NRO interview with Archbishop Charles Chaput:

Do you believe a Catholic in good faith can vote for Obama?

I can only speak in terms of my own personal views. I certainly can’t vote for somebody who’s either pro-choice or pro-abortion.

I’m not a Republican and I’m not a Democrat. I’m registered as an independent, because I don’t think the church should be identified with one party or another. As an individual and voter I have deep personal concerns about any party that supports changing the definition of marriage, supports abortion in all circumstances, wants to restrict the traditional understanding of religious freedom. Those kinds of issues cause me a great deal of uneasiness.

But he’s “independent.”  Riiiiight.  And, on the Ryan budget:

What about the wing of the church that says a party that supports the Ryan budget also ought to cause concern?

Jesus tells us very clearly that if we don’t help the poor, we’re going to go to hell. Period. There’s just no doubt about it. That has to be a foundational concern of Catholics and of all Christians. But Jesus didn’t say the government has to take care of them, or that we have to pay taxes to take care of them. Those are prudential judgments. Anybody who would condemn someone because of their position on taxes is making a leap that I can’t make as a Catholic

To turn this around (all too easily), how about Democrats don’t say women have to have abortions or that gays have to marry each other, etc., just that the secular state government should allow these things.  Or how about given the fact that we live in a community known as the United States of America, how do you justify arguing that this community should not do what it can economically to support the poor, hungry, etc.  That’s a leap  I cannot take as a Catholic.

I’ve raised him right

So, yesterday in Church was the (in)famous reading from Paul’s letter to the Ephesians (5:21-32):

Brothers and sisters:
Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord.
For the husband is head of his wife
just as Christ is head of the church,
he himself the savior of the body.
As the church is subordinate to Christ,
so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything.
Husbands, love your wives,
even as Christ loved the church
and handed himself over for her to sanctify her,
cleansing her by the bath of water with the word,
that he might present to himself the church in splendor,
without spot or wrinkle or any such thing,
that she might be holy and without blemish.

The first sentence brought me out of daydreaming on how to improve David’s U13 soccer team and I looked over at him and watched him listen in shocked disbelief.  When the reading was over, he looked at me and said, “wow, that’s outdated.”  Such fatherly pride.

After mass he asked me why they don’t change it.  Great question!  Now, the Catholic Church isn’t about to re-write Ephesians, but given that the readings are but a small portion of the New Testament, this one seems ripe for jettisoning.  Seems like they should.  Then again, I have no idea how often, if ever, they revisit this issue.

I should also mention, that during his sermon, the priest, like most decent priests, basically wrote this off as a product of the historical context in which it was written.  ”We’re not fundamentalists” he said.  He also happened to be visiting from Grenada where he devotes his life to helping out the desperately poor, rather than worrying about what homosexuals are up to.  It’s priests like him that are the reason I’m still Catholic.

Faith Fortnight

“And then Jesus said, and truly I say to you, the one who uses contraception is a murderer as if he had killed his own child.  That person is an abomination before God.”

Of course, Jesus never said any such thing– over even close– but you’d think he had the way the Catholic Bishops are freaking out over the requirement for Catholic Hospitals to have health insurance plans that cover contraception for their employees.  They have called for a “faith fortnight” to fight back against this obviously massive affront to religious liberty.  And with such subtle, and nuanced rhetoric:

Radio spots and videos produced by the bishops conference accuse the Obama administration of taking “the first step to deny religious liberty.”

Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore, who is heading the campaign, says the bishops have a simple goal. “We’re trying to protect our institutions and our fundamental freedoms as individuals,” he says, “and so this seemed to be the moment that we have to draw the line in the sand.”

Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore, shown speaking at the state Capitol in Hartford, Conn., in 2009, is the head of the U.S. bishops’ Fortnight for Freedom campaign.

The rhetoric is pretty strong. Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, who leads the bishops conference, says the White House is “strangling” the church. The bishop of Oakland warns of “despotism.”

And, if that’s not enough:

And then there was an April sermon by the bishop of Peoria, Ill., Daniel Jenky.

“Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open,” Jenky says in the video, adding that the dictators would not allow the church to compete in education, social services or health care.

“President Obama with his radical pro-abortion and extreme secularist agenda now seems intent on following a similar path,” he says.

Lori says the times call for blunt language.

“Sometimes prophets are thought to be unduly alarmist, and sometimes their speech is a little bit strong,” the archbishop says. “But that’s what prophetic speech always has been.”

Well, nice to know Jenky is a prophet.  If this contraception ruling is allowed to stand, I’m sure it’s really just a short step until the Catholic Church is outlawed completely!

On another note, I was very pleased that my parish made absolutely no mention of this “Faith Fortnight” on Sunday (I’ve switched parishes since all the anti-gay sermons now that the one I had been attending has re-opened their nursery).  I think the fact that it is run by Franciscan Friars, rather than ordinary parish priests, has something to do with that.

Just once, it would be nice to see the American Catholic Church man the battlements for the poor (or heck, the millions and millions of prisoners, that would take some real courage) instead of faux issues like this.  I think we all know what Jesus would do.