Descriptive

A local laundry operator was held up at knifepoint, and the local paper gives the usual details:

The man walked into the business, asked for a piece of paper and wrote a demand for money. He left without further incident and no injuries were reported.

The man was described as being about 40 years old, about 6-feet tall, about 225 to 250 pounds and with a light mustache.

Wow, the description avoids any racial description, but offends other gender, age, and physical attribute groups.

Describing the suspect as male is sexist, as the perp could be a woman trapped in a man's body. The facial hair trait is also sexist. So, we better scratch the descriptors "man" and "with a light mustache".

Giving an age range is patently offensive, as age shouldn't be a factor in assigning blame for a crime. So, scratch the "about 40 years old".

By announcing his height, you've disparaged people of moderate stature. So, you'd better lose the "about 6 feet tall" as well.

The overweight are constantly discriminated against, and would be insulted by a weight bias in the paper's report. Better to eliminate the derogatory "about 225 to 250 pounds" as well.

That leaves us with a more socially just description of the unfortunate offender:

The suspect was described as being.

Everyone happy now?

Blogger Credentialed as Newsweek Reporter

Jeff Miller has a vocation, though one not recognised by the editorial staff of Newsweek. In a secret ceremony, and in defiance of the editorial staff, Jeff Miller was credentialed as a Newsweek reporter. "I am taking this step forward so that others in the future will have the opportunity to be a Newsweek reporter without having to face their discriminatory hiring practice of only hiring those with a journalism degree and having the ability to write and to act as a reporter," Miller wrote, about his calling to credentials.

Some accuse Newsweek of credentialism, paying for and publishing work only a select few reporters that conform to Newsweek's dogmas. St. Jimbob of the Apokalypse, chairman of We Are Magazine, claims that Newsweeks denials of Miller's credentials are futile. "When will the editors wake up and realize that, credentialed or not, it's the reporters that are Newsweek? The editors only have the power we allow them, so we're pressing for a more horizontal model of the magazine." Apokalypse went on to note "we are striving to write into our calling to be Magazine, and it's really for the good of Newsweek to be inclusive enough to recognise us."

Future clandestine credentialing ceremonies are planned, but details are being kept secret.

Mowing and Musing

I’ve had a lot on my mind, recently, and it’s been swirling around without any focus. Until last night, when I was mowing my lawn, when it came to me:

“Santino, come're. Whattsa matter with you? I think your brain is going soft from all that comedy your playing with that young girl.

Never tell anybody outside the family what you're thinking again!”

Yes, words of wisdom from Vito Corleone.

America’s brain has gone soft. Soft from all the comedy it’s playing with it’s culture of consumption and gratification. From the overweight kids playing their Playstations, to the parents over-leveraged with consumer debt (spent on stuff that the debt will outlast) to the politicians who pander to the self-indulgent.

Thanks to our Incontinental Congress, and their Media enablers, everyone in the world knows what we’re thinking (or that we’re not), and knows the limits of our fortitude.

Everyone now knows that 2.500 dead troops will make our people squeamish and our politicians start looking for something white to wave. Everyone now knows that if a force can keep us tied up for more than a year or two, we’ll throw in the towel. Everyone now knows that if they can bloody our nose, they can expect an apology FROM US for making them angry.

What’s now to stop China from taking Taiwan?! Or is Chuck Hagel (or any in the Yellow GOP) thinking beyond the next election? Don’t pander to the American people, as they’ve become too soft-headed from a couple generations of affluence without sacrifice.

Fairness v. Bias

From WorldNetDaily:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is "looking at" bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, a controversial policy designed to ensure equal time for all political viewpoints on radio, but criticized by many as resulting in the opposite result.

Peeved by conservative proliferation in talk radio forums, she's hoping to try and rein in the archconservatives rockin' on the mic:

"Well, I'm looking at it, as a matter of fact... because I think there ought to be an opportunity to present the other side. And unfortunately, talk radio is overwhelmingly one way."

Oh, so shall we then apply the same scrutiny to PBS and NPR? Hell no, the senator says:

"The Corporation for Public Broadcasting exists – to ensure independence and freedom from political influence. Its mission is to protect public broadcasting from political persuasions of either side."

So if the CPB is free from bias, then why excoriate those who would verify the claim to impartiality? Feinstein was one of several Democrats to howl for the resignation of Ken Tomlinson, CEO of the CPB, as he dared to study bias in the broadcasts of PBS and NPR.

But for all her support of 'Fairness', the senator admits that it's all in the eye of the beholder:

" We all know that what is needed to create balance is subjective. "

And her unspoken ultimatum: Those in power decide what the balance is.

I'm Not Gay

Inspired by Ted Haggard's stunning confession that he's not gay, and the media's fascination with the gay lobby...

GAY LOBBY : Bring out your gay!
GAY LOBBY : Bring out your gay!

MEDIA: Here's one.
GAY LOBBY: Ninepence.
TED HAGGARD: I'm not gay!

GAY LOBBY: What?
MEDIA: Nothing. Here's your ninepence.

TED HAGGARD: I'm not gay!!

GAY LOBBY: 'Ere. He says he's not gay!
MEDIA: Yes, he is.
TED HAGGARD: I'm not!

GAY LOBBY: He isn't?
MEDIA: Well, he will be soon. He's very poofy.
TED HAGGARD: I'm getting better!

MEDIA: No, you're not. You'll be flaming queer in a moment.
GAY LOBBY: Oh, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
TED HAGGARD: I don't want to go on the cart!

MEDIA: Oh, don't be such a baby.
GAY LOBBY: I can't take him.
TED HAGGARD: I feel straight!

MEDIA: Well, do us a favour.
GAY LOBBY: I can't.
MEDIA: Well, can you hang around a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
GAY LOBBY: No, I've got to go to South Beach. They've outed nine today.

MEDIA: Well, when's your next round?
GAY LOBBY: Thursday.
TED HAGGARD: I think I'll read a Playboy.

MEDIA: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Look. Isn't there something you can do?
TED HAGGARD: [singing]
Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to..
[whop]

MEDIA: Ah, thanks very much.
GAY LOBBY: Not at all. See you on Thursday.

[apologies to Monty Python]

Better Bread Needed

Headline:

Nun still hungry for experiences

'I want the church to be relevant,' the skydiving, bungee jumping and 88-year-old former NASA employee says

Why doesn’t sister think that the Church is relevant? Let’s look at her career:

Lolich is a nun with the Community of the Holy Spirit, a Catholic order she and 15 other sisters created when they left the more restrictive Dominican Sisters of Mission San Jose in 1970.

It was within this new community that she was able to do something unusual for a nun — work outside of the order. For years she was employed by NASA and broke the stereotype of what people typically associate with nuns. In her 70s, she bungee-jumped, and skydived on her 80th birthday — her third time.

Okay, so she helped form a looser religious life, and worked in the world for a scientific organization. So she’s really not so different from us lay-folk, right? What drove her quest for a different religious order?

"The rules were anachronistic," said Lolich, of the order that had very strict rules requiring them to wear wool habits, travel in pairs and not have any money with them.

In 1970, after Vatican II — when the Pope decreed to renew the church, and to lessen the restrictions set on nuns — Lolich and 15 others decided to form the Community of the Holy Spirit, knowing the Dominican Sisters would resist change.

Ahh, yes, the Spirit of Vatican II™, vent of all discontent and dissatisfaction with all things Catholic. Not that the Second Vatican Council was at all bad, but it gave many folks enough rope, like poor Sister here, and now they’re spiritually dangling in the wind.

"We were searching for a way to be authentically religious women, but have the opportunities to develop and grow according to our God-given talents," she said. "That was an innovative thing to do at the time — creating the community from the ground up, and making sure we were well founded."

Faith is not built from the ground up, but centers on Christ, and builds outward. The order may have been well founded, but well formed would have been better. The article leads on to believe that this nun's order was more about personal fulfillment with the veneer of religious life.

And it was within that community where Lolich was able to find her niche in aerospace education.

In 1976, she became an education specialist for NASA at the Ames Research Center, Moffett Field in Mountain View. For six years, Lolich traveled alone in a white work van filled with moon rocks, space suits and models of spacecraft, visiting school assemblies and classroom programs.
After that, she visited inner city schools for NASA's headquarters in Washington, D.C., for another six years.

I wonder if it ever occurred to Sister that instead of evangelizing for NASA, she could have rode around in a van proclaiming Christ to children and adults, or even teaching in a nearby catholic school.

Here’s the whole hook of the story, now that they’ve painted a saintly, albeit secular as possible, portrait of our nun:

She also wants to see change in the Catholic Church.
"I want the church to be relevant," said Lolich who still has close ties with the Dominican Sisters of Mission San Jose. "I want priests to be allowed to marry if they wish, I want women priests, and bishops selected by the people. I may not see those happen, but I think it will be possible that you will.

Going back to the headline, let’s see if there’s an answer for Sister’s hunger:

John 6:32-36
Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven.
"For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world."
Then they said to Him, "Lord, always give us this bread."
Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.
"But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe.”

h/t CWNews

Pertinent Scripture for Last Week's News

Romans 7:14-25

"For we know that the law is spiritual. But I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I work, I understand not. For I do not that good which I will: but the evil which I hate, that I do. If then I do that which I will not, I consent to the law, that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it: but sin that dwelleth in me.

"For I know that there dwelleth not in me, that is to say, in my flesh, that which is good. For to will is present with me: but to accomplish that which is good, I find not. For the good which I will, I do not: but the evil which I will not, that I do. Now if I do that which I will not, it is no more I that do it: but sin that dwelleth in me.

"I find then a law, that when I have a will to do good, evil is present with me. For I am delighted with the law of God, according to the inward man: But I see another law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind and captivating me in the law of sin that is in my members.

"Unhappy man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death? The grace of God, by Jesus Christ our Lord. Therefore, I myself, with the mind serve the law of God: but with the flesh, the law of sin."

This is for all the unhappy sinners out there, who's sins were public entertainment this past week.

More Media Dhimmitude

Again, from Time magazine:

Did a Critic of Islam Go Too Far?

A teacher in France is the latest to face death threats for daring to criticize the religion and its prophet's emphasis on violence

Do critics of Christianity or Judaism ever get questioned as going "too far?" Not really, as there is no criticism of the Catholic Church that is beyond the pale, as far as the western media is concerned. What if we measure our hate group criteria against Islam, and see what we find?

Or is that going to far?

Only Time magazine can tell.

They Still Don't Get It

CNN's headline:

Possible pope link to nun's death

You cannot possibly link the nun's death to Islamic radicals in a headline, can you? @#(*&ing western journalists.

Gunmen shot and killed an Italian nun at a children's hospital in Mogadishu on Sunday in an attack that drew immediate speculation of links to Muslim anger over the pope's recent remarks on Islam.

Muslim anger. Anger is over at DailyKos. Insane rage is what these disciples of the Religion of Peace are displaying. And Somalia is a hotbed of that peace:

The assassinations were a blow to Mogadishu's new Islamist rulers' attempt to prove they have pacified one of the world's most lawless cities since chasing out warlords in June.
...
Borne out of local courts practicing strict sharia law, the Islamist movement in June seized Mogadishu from U.S.-backed warlords who had run it for the past 15 years.

The Islamists have brought some order to the capital, which was awash with guns and where assassinations were common. But the nun's death -- and the June killing of a Swedish cameraman -- will damage their claim Mogadishu is now safe for foreigners.

Critics of the Islamists say they harbor al Qaeda-linked extremists in their ranks. The top Islamist leader, hardline cleric Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, is on U.S. and U.N. lists of people accused of links to terrorism.

The Islamists deny that, saying the West does not understand them and is succumbing to U.S. propaganda.

Oh no, my peaceful friends, we understand you quite well at this juncture. The problem is, now, how to deal with you and the peace that you bring to the world. At least, that's what our western journalists tell us. And if we do not understand you and your peace, it is the fault of the Pope.

Complicit Media

Headline from Time Magazine's website:

The First Casualty of the Pope's Islam Speech

Not to let the mullahs have all the fun of gun-jumping, Time's headline posits the following:

A) The Pope's speech was about Islam
B) The Pope is to blame for Islamic reactions to his talk at a university.

Now, I can excuse religious zealots in developing nations for going mad. The educational standards in those places are low, they don't have access to the entire transcript of the Pope's lecture, and their religious leaders have everything to gain by getting their people amped up and outraged.

I cannot excuse journalists in the West, as we teach reading (at least used to) and some degree of logic in our universities, we have access to everything the Pope's ever uttered in public, and we pride ourselves on being literate and civilised.

I will try to be charitable, and say that, in the interest of saving headline space, poor word choices were the result. I'd hate to think that Western journalists are actually trying to foment more Muslim outrage, as a way to tear down the Catholic Church, the advocate of a theology that is anathema to Western Liberals.

Headline

Pope 'deeply sorry' for Muslim fury

Of course, I'm thinking the headline should read:

Muslim fury at Pope sorry

Feel free to suggest your own.

Loose lips?

Headline: Report: X-ray machines don't detect explosives in shoes

Oh ok, so we'll just let every Abdul, Osama, and Mohammed know that, so they can plot their next move. Real good. One wonders who the threat to security is some times.

The government's new order that all airline passengers put their shoes through X-ray machines won't help screeners find a liquid or gel that can be used as a bomb.

The machines are unable to detect explosives, according to a Homeland Security report on aviation screening recently obtained by The Associated Press.

Right, and so the AP thinks, "oh great, this will sell newspapers!" Yes, it will, to every radical bomb maker on the planet. Playing poker with the AP must be an easy and rewarding game.

Clerical Silence and Moral Babbling

Via Pro Eccclesia, an op-ed by Kenneth C. Daniel, TV producer and armchair theologian:

A few years ago, there was a popular bumper sticker and bracelet. It was the essence of simplicity; four letters, followed by a question mark — WWJD? What Would Jesus Do? Most of the stickers have either faded into oblivion or have been replaced by other causes, such as Support Our Troops or God Bless America.

Frankly, because most people don't care what Jesus would do in ALL situations, they prefer to cherrypick issues that irk them, and leave their favourite vices unquestioned. Hey, you asked.

As the WWJD bumper stickers disappeared, did the message vanish as well? The idea began to haunt me. The more I mulled it over, the darker and more foreboding the tempest swirled, until a single question emerged from this maelstrom of thoughts and emotions: Where is the voice of our spiritual leaders? Where are the sentinels of our souls, raising their voices, asking the tough questions, protesting injustice, condemning corruption?
So, I ask you, clergy, where is your voice?

They're all around you, Kenneth, but because they're busy praying the Rosary in front of abortion clinics, you never get their perspective. There are plenty of shepherds, but many of the sheep aren't interested in being led that way. Something tells me you'd fall into that category, as you're expressing bewilderment at the silence of the stray sheep's backside in front of you.

• WWJD about a war initiated on deception in which, every day, men and women — American, Iraqi, Afghani and others — are dying?

First of all, Jesus wouldn't call someone a liar unless there was some proof. Second of all, violence didn't solve those problems, did it.

• WWJD about so many of our leaders who loudly proclaim their Christian faith and devotion to God to gain our vote, then, once elected, lie and cheat and deceive?

Back to my comment above, for starters. Jesus would call these sinners to repentance, like He did with ALL sinners He encountered. Including you.

• WWJD about a government that places more importance on corporate profit than on the environment or the welfare of its citizens?

You know, corporations are made up of people, all who like to have employment and earn money to feed their families. Funny that. They also like to spend their money on homes, home repairs, cars, clothes, golf, etcetera. Employed carpenters, car salesmen and auto workers, retail workers, and greens keepers, we salute you.

• WWJD about a government that closes its eyes to so many countries where every day thousands of men, women and children die from diseases that can be easily prevented with affordable, accessible medicines? Or a government that protects the obscene profiteering of its medical and pharmaceutical corporations while hundreds of thousands of its own citizens are unable to afford medical insurance and treatment and die needlessly?

Hmm, the American government is only one outlet of aid to the poor of the entire world. The american people are another, donating billions of dollars that you so callusly disregard. Unless you want the government to be in charge of all that. But, given recent examples of mismanagement in the government, who would want that?

• WWJD with those of us who cry "traitor" and "un-American" at anyone who even so slightly questions our motives in the Middle East, even a mother whose son died there?

Hey, oil is a big part of national security, including yours. You drive a car? If the answer is yes, you're part of the problem.

Where is the logic in fighting a war on terrorism with every terrifying weapon available to us, just short of nuclear bombs? I'm fairly certain Jesus had a clear position on this.

Yes, I agree. We may slay our enemy, but we cannot quell the cycle of resentment and hatred with continued violence. We must convert our enemies through love, not fear of our sword. Sure, they can kill us, but what better way to reach Heaven than with a martyr's crown?

And we wonder why so many people all over the world hate us. We continually claim that it is because they are envious of our prosperity, when the real reason is our insistence that everyone must submit to our rules. We wave the flag, puff out our chests and proclaim, "God is on our side." And, of course, our God is male, white and conservative Christian.

Way to beat that straw man down, kenneth. You have no problem hating the prosperous, why not let everyone else have a turn? Iran insists that we follow their rules, as does China, France, and Russia. We just have enough capital to have our way, for a little while longer, anyway.

I ask you, when did the God of compassion, inclusion, tolerance and forgiveness become the God of retribution, condemnation and punishment? Is your silence prompted by a fear that your congregation might be offended and reduce their offerings? Or that the government will reassess your tax status? Or perhaps you have convinced yourself that politics and religion should be kept separate?

Jesus ALWAYS told sinners to repent, or do you only have the DNC's version of the bible? Too many preachers don't touch hot-button issues for the reasons you mention, else we'd be hearing more from the ambo about the evils of abortion, contraception, and homosexuality, and how we should welcome the alien. You wouldn't want that, would you?

So, I ask again, where is your voice? How much more can you tolerate before you speak out? Perhaps the question now should not be, WWJD? Perhaps the more appropriate question should be, WWYD? What will you do?

I'm just going to keep plugging on, working out my salvation in fear and trembling, and hope that my fidelity to ALL the teachings of Jesus, and the Church that HE founded, will inspire others to do so.

You saw this coming, right?

The DaVinci Code was just the beginning. From the pen of Kathleen McGowan comes The Expected One:

Maureen’s extraordinary journey takes her from the dusty streets of Jerusalem to the cathedrals of Paris, and ultimately to the scrolls themselves. She must unravel clues that link history’s great artistic masters including Botticelli and Jean Cocteau; the Medici, Bourbon, and Borgia dynasties; and great scientific minds like Leonardo da Vinci and Isaac Newton. Ultimately, she, and the reader, come face to face with Jesus Christ, Mary Magdalene, John the Baptist, Judas, and Salome in the pages of a deeply moving and powerful new gospel, the life of Jesus told by Mary Magdalene.

She apparently had trouble getting traction to publish this dreck until The DaVinci Code broke the barrier for her. USA Today goes on to gush a bit:

Is the world ready for a book and an author more controversial than Dan Brown and The Da Vinci Code?

Meet Kathleen McGowan, novelist and self-proclaimed descendant of a union between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. McGowan, who says she is from the "sacred bloodline" Brown made famous in his mega-selling novel, says she's ready to cope with people who think she's crazy or a heretic.

I'm sure it'll be a hit on the Call to Action reading list. The gullible are already there:

"It's an interesting back story, but we're marketing this fabulous novel," says Trish Todd, editor in chief at Touchstone, a division of Simon & Schuster.

Todd says she has no problem believing McGowan's claim that she descends from a marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. "Yes, I believe her. Her passion and her mission are so strong, how can she not be?"

Gumbleton's new Gospel

Apparently, retired bishop Gumbleton thinks that "Hitler's Pope" is gospel truth, and is parroting those accusations for his own ends. I don't have much to say about that...but I do have a picture!



h/t Dad29 and Gerald Augustinius

News must be slow..

.if CNN is restating the obvious:

For late-night hosts, it's open season on Bush

NEW YORK (AP) -- Perhaps sensing vulnerability, the late-night comics have been piling on President Bush.

Where's this reporter been the last 6 years? Has he or she, perhaps, been busy re-reading Curious George in search of the elusive 'H. A. Rey Code'?

Canadian Sniper Identified, Still At large

Rev. Ronald Trojcak is a Roman Catholic priest in London, Ontario, but was compelled to publicly condemn the actions of a fellow Catholic, Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska. April 25th, In a comment on the online version of the Lincoln Journal Star's coverage of Bruskewitz, Trojcak left this remark:

"I suggest that this bishop's stance, not only on this matter, but on several, provides plausible justification for abandoning the Roman church, in which I have been an active priest in the 43 years since my ordination."

A request for a clarification from Rev. Trojcak has so far been unanswered. So, the next best thing would be to take other public musings from Rev. Trojcak to find the source of his discontent. Maybe he's a Rad Trad, and is unhappy with Bruskewitz' latae sententiae excommunication of SSPXers.

On his personal website, Rev Trojcak has links to several National Catholic Reporter stories, The Tablet's online edition, and (drum roll, please)
"Voice of the Faithful (VOTF). Indicate Your Support by Sharing your Email".

Under his "Great Books" banner, Rev. Trojcak has these gems:

Sacred Silence: Denial and Crisis in the Church by Donald B. Cozzens
The Changing Face of the Priesthood: A Reflections on the Priest's Crisis of Soul by Donald B. Cozzens
She Who Is:The Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse. by Elizabeth A. Johnson

Okay, I guess that since the 1964 Missal is not on his list, he's not an SSPX booster. From the pages of the Purple Pew (just guess), Rev. Trojcak can be found commenting on this article:

“By virtue of being intrinsically disordered, homosexuality is not a human act, but is a depravity and an abomination as Sacred Scripture, the Church and the Catechism all state so clearly,” Rev. Jeffrey T. Robideau of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Lansing, Mich.

Trojcak's respose to the article:

"I am a Roman Catholic priest, engaged in university teaching for 35 years, and in university chaplaincy for 28 years. I am appalled by the inept, uninformed, and anything but Christian remarks of this priest. I have been teaching the Jewish-Christian scriptures, and unhappily, it seems that the priest has not read recent scholarship on the Bible and homosexuality. Unhappily, he seems also to have missed the all-inclusive ministry of Jesus.
Comment by Rev. Ronald Trojcak, Ph.D. — November 2, 2005 @ 9:34 pm"

I'm sensing a pattern here, and am perceiving Rev. Trojcak's objections to Bruskewitz's strident orthodoxy. But what gives a priest permission to snipe at a bishop in another country?

In a review on Amazon.com for Cozzen's Sacred Silence: Denial and the Crisis in the Church, Trojcak goes on so:

I am a Roman Catholic priest, ordained 40 years, and I am more grateful than I can say, for Donald Cozzen's latest book. It is the most plain-spoken, insightful, exhaustive, profound, and above all, honest book on the Church and its current parlous state, than any of the many I've read. I hesitate to call it courageous, though it surely is that. For this book followed his earlier book on the priesthood, and he was pilloried by many for that. But, fatuously, I'm afraid, I would like to think that anyone, cleric or lay, would have been, if not able, at least willing to say what Cozzens has said here. Unhappily, this is far from the truth. Now, if a bishop would be willing.......

So, Rev. Ron find Cozzens inspirational and Bruskewitz abhorrent. Let's see what Trojcak thinks about the late pope, JP II. In a Google cached page of PressEtc, a post was written called "Pope to saint: Seven sins of John Paul II" and listed these accusations (mostly pertaining to upholding Catholic Doctrine):
Sin 1: HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa
Sin 2: Genocide in Rwanda
Sin 3: Beatification of Mother Teresa
Sin 4: Over population and poverty
(And continued onto a non-cached page)
To which this reply is appended:

rev. ronald trojcak, ph.d. (a roman cat
Written by Guest on 2005-06-05 21:06:55
I appreciate this statement about the late pope.

Ahh, things are coming into a sharper focus...let's see what else we can find. In a review of John Cornwell's book A Pontiff in Winter, Trojcak concurs with his subject:

I say all this in order to provide the basis for Cornwell's central assessment of John Paul's papacy: namely its intolerance for pluralism. Here, pluralism extends to almost every element of the church: the authority of local bishops; the integrity of episcopal synods; the liturgy and liturgical texts, and perhaps most consequentially, theological diversity. Recall John Paul's treatment of a number of prominent theologians: Charles Curran, Leonardo Boff, Jacques Dupuis, and Hans Kung, among many others.

But strictures on diversity ignore the massive historical developments in the church's life and thought which have constituted the church. Such developments have been the hallmark of the history of the church from its very beginning. Moreover, much intolerance enforces a stultifying uniformity in a world whose cultural diversity we know now more clearly than ever before.

I believe that the greatest merit of Cornwell's book is its implicit demystification of the papacy.

By this time, it's clear to see why Rev. Trojcak felt compelled to assail Bruskewitz as he did: Bruskewitz is against those practices that really get people to leave the Catholic Church. And make no mistake, Rev. Trojcak, just because they may warm a pew on Sunday doesn't mean they're Catholic, and physically taking the Eucharist isn't a guarantee of Communion with the Church.

Bishop Bruskewitz, and his orthodox example, has given "plausible justification" for men and women to take Holy Orders, not "abandoning the Roman Church", as Trojcak suggests.

Fabian's Local Paper Finally Catches Up with The Story

The Lincoln Journal Star, hometown rag for the Diocese of Lincoln, has finally caught the story about Bishop Bruskewitz's dismissal of the National Review Board.

What took so long, you ask? Maybe it took a while to get Call to Action, too busy with the national press, to return the Journal Star's calls:

Linda Pieczynski, media spokesperson for national Call to Action, said Bruskewitz “has defiantly refused even to self-report for the audit process with no consequences at all.” Ewers’ urging fraternal correction against Bruskewitz, she said, was “an absolutely useless gesture. It is time to ask whether the Charter for the protection of Children and Youth is living up to its promises in the real world, and not just in a report.”

Or maybe it took considerable time to find some local Call to Action people:

“It is unsettling to see a Christian bishop claim that he and his diocese is above correction because he is in keeping with the letter of the civil and ecclesiastical law,” said Jim McShane, a local member of Call to Action.

McShane agreed that the National Review Board and bishops have “no canonical authority to compel anything,” but they do have moral authority. The bishops set up the review board to restore confidence in their care for young people after the sex abuse scandal, he said. For Bruskewitz to reject the process “can only undermine further the confidence the bishops are so anxious to restore,” McShane said.

Getting Call to Action's comments on this story is like polling Iranians on U.S. immigration policy: certainly hostile, and almost entirely irrelevant.

The delay in publishing the story, most likely, was caused by the Bishop's general reluctance to speak with the press. But, nonetheless, Fabian get's his $ 0.02 in:

In response to a question by the Journal Star, Bruskewitz explained the policies and procedures in the Lincoln Diocese to protect children and respond to any allegations of abuse by clergy, teachers, other staff or volunteers.

“The Diocese of Lincoln has in place a very strong program of instruction and training for all priests, religious and lay people in the diocese who are in any way, directly or indirectly, connected with children and youth. There are very careful and thorough background checks done for all people who are employed by the diocese, or by institutions, parishes or agencies which have any connection whatever with the diocese. All people, including all children and youth, are regularly instructed to report any incidents of abuse immediately to law enforcement authorities.”

In addition, any credible allegations of abuse will be presented to the diocese’s own lay review board “and then appropriately acted upon in accordance with the canon law of the Catholic Church,” he said.

Whatever the reason, the story got out. On the on-line edition, a solitary comment was appended to the story:

Viewer Comments:
Rev. Ronald Trojcak, Ph. D. wrote on April 25, 2006 7:54 PM:"I suggest that this bishop's stance, not only on this matter, but on several, provides plausible justification for abandoning the Roman church, in which I have been an active priest in the 43 years since my ordination."

Of course, one cannot add any more comments to the thread, thus leaving the errant priest's comments as the last word on the story. I'm attempting to follow up with Rev. Trojcak for an explanation.

Miserere nobis