Oddments

Ok, I'm going to ignore the dead elephant in the room for a bit, as there's much more interesting things going on. At least I tell myself that.

The USCCB is getting together for some collective ... um, whatever it is that they do when they get together. Apparently, there's an issue that's not on the agenda, and it bothers Thomas J. Reese S.J.(though I think he prefers not to be so titled, Father, but the S.J. at the end is very revealing)

Reese notes that "the biggest thing about next week is what is not on the agenda — Iraq."

The late Pope John Paul II opposed the war, and the U.S. bishops spoke against it earlier. But, Reese says, "It's a message they need to be repeating. It's clearly the most important and visible moral issue in the minds of the voters, and the bishops are taking a pass on it."

Fr. Reese, you should be satisfied with the silence. Were the bishops expounding on the moral teaching they should, before the election, we'd have heard about Abortion, Embrionic Stem Cell research, and the position of the Magisterium on those issues. If the Iraq war was the leading thing on Catholics' minds this election, the bishops failed their charges miserably.

In other news about the heft of the USCCB's teaching authority, the Manchester, NH diocese is dumping the USCCB's vaunted Liability Avoidance Program, otherwise known as 'Talking about Touching'.

The diocese wanted something that incorporated parents into the program and was rooted in the Catholic faith.

So-called safe environment programs, designed to help children identify and resist potential abusers, have come under fire by some parents for the graphic nature of instruction and the fact that they place the burden on children to resist abuse.

Rather than cede to the USCCB's LAP dance, the diocese has come up with an alternative program.

Then, incorporating the writings of Catholic school children and the ideas of Manchester Bishop John McCormack — including the idea that parents are the best resource for teaching their children to become aware of both their right and responsibility to safeguard their own bodies, and for teaching their children that they will support them when they say “No”

Whoa, there's a concept, letting parents do some of the teaching instead of Planned Parenthood proxies. It's pretty sad when a group of Catholic bishops cannot come up with a program that sufficiently infuses Catholic teaching into it. Somehow, I don't think that Rev. Thomas Reese is really broken up about this lapse, in this instance. Let's just stick with the fuzzy areas.

Humanae Vitae just cannot get any traction in some places. Like San Francisco, for example:

Pope Paul VI, who wrote that encyclical, was merely reaffirming the church's standard teaching on artificial birth control with his absolute no-never. But many Catholics were surprised by his absoluteness because, well, it was the 1960s for one thing, but it was also public knowledge that Paul's handpicked papal birth control commission had just recommended a relaxation of the contraception rules, though not unanimously.

Why would San Francisco care if the Vatican relaxed rules on condoms in Africa, unless to use it as an ever-expanding exception rule, and undermine the entirety of the Church's theology of the body.

However, no matter how narrowly focused, any relaxation of the rules about condoms will have far-reaching consequences.
It is difficult, and one has to be precise, to cite nature as an argument against any natural human endeavor.
Paul VI praised man's "stupendous progress in the domination and rational organization of the forces of nature." Condoms and contraceptives, like dams and appendectomies, seem like a good way to fulfill this duty.

So there's their theory: Man is Animal is Nature, and so the Church imposes it's morality against Nature. Perpetual chastity is impossible, as Man was created to satify his penis. I don't buy it, and I'm starting to think that the institution of Circumcision as the sign of the first Covenant was apt, as it was a strike against the sexual nature of Man. Just me thinking out loud.

I imagine that we'll hear less about this from the USCCB as well.

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