Jul 2010
From the Pastor
July/30/2010
An interesting part of our experience in Guatemala most recently was the opportunity to speak with clergy and laity who are active in the Church there, and ask why that country was witnessing a sharp decline in the Catholic population and a rise in the non-mainline Christian denominations in the last twenty years. It was almost like a repeat of lessons in Church History that I had studied for four years in the seminary; I could see it coming!
The long experience of the Catholic Church has included many seasons of decline and renewal. Throughout the centuries, the Church has striven by preaching and exhortation to help individual Christians reform their lives. The universal Church likewise has undertaken major institutional reforms, for example: the Gregorian reform of the 11th century, which imposed stricter discipline on the clergy and secured the independence of the Church from secular control.
At many times in her history, the Church has been threatened by false reforms, which, if accepted, would have denatured her. Such reforms were attempted by the Donatists in the 4th century, the Waldensians in the 12th, the so-called “Spiritual Franciscans” in the 13th, John Wycliffe in the 14th, and John Hus in the 15th. The Conciliar Movement [also] in the 15th century brought forth some good fruits, but came to a bad end at the Council of Basel. Attempting to convert the Church into a kind of constitutional monarchy, it ran afoul of the Catholic doctrine of papal primacy.
By the beginning of the 16th century, the necessity of a thoroughgoing reform was generally recognized. After the failure if the 5th Lateran Council to achieve this objective, the whole Church teemed with reform movements, notably among Christian humanists such as Erasmus, John Colet and St. Thomas More. Catholic cardinals, such as James Sadoleto, Reginald Pole and John P. Caraffa, proposed timely reforms some years before the Council of Trent.
Luther and some of his colleagues also took up the theme of reform, but in the name of “correcting abuses,” they attacked the essentials of the Catholic Faith and became totally separated from the Church. To counteract this negative movement, reform decrees of the Council of Trent targeted some of the real abuses and continued to bear excellent fruits long after the Council. But in the next few centuries, the term “reform” became suspect among Catholics because it seemed to have a Protestant ring.
The First Vatican Council ran counter to certain reform movements of the 19th century. It successfully eliminated the remnants of the Conciliar Movement and, in the form of Gallicanism, crushed ecclesiastical nationalism and its counterparts in several nations. As a result, the papacy maintained uncontested control of the Catholic Church through the middle of the 20th century. It was only with the advent of the Second Vatican Council, a dream of Pope Pius XII, but not fulfilled until
the reigns of Pope John XXIII and Paul VI, that a true and updated reform of the Church began to take hold. Some have maintained (and continue to do so) that Vatican II was the beginning of a downfall of the Church (actor Mel Gibson and his father seem to be among them), but that’s most likely because they have not read the documents of the Council in their fullness, nor understood what the leading Fathers of the Church in this age were saying to strengthen the Church.
Some “changes” that quickly followed the Council were not always authentic, nor based on a true reading or understanding of the Council documents, so that much chaos began to erupt in the Church under the guise of “conciliar reform.” What was often looked upon as “change” in the Church was really not substantive in any way, and people began to look at the results of that Council with a jaundiced eye or skepticism that continues until today. Fortunately, with the mass media of communication that we have at our disposal, we can go back to examine all that the Church has tried to teach us and hopefully begin to understand just what are the real needs of the People of God and how could they come to be addressed properly.
Next weekend, we will be honored to have as our guest at Mass, Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski, of the Vatican, President of the Pontifical Council for Health Care Workers. He will speak to us, and then he will take up a second collection for the Good Samaritan Foundation, which was instituted by the late Pope John Paul II to assist the most needy sick people, especially in Africa. I pray that during these difficult economic times, we may still be able to reach deep enough into our treasure to help others who really have nothing.
Very Rev. Canon Tom
The long experience of the Catholic Church has included many seasons of decline and renewal. Throughout the centuries, the Church has striven by preaching and exhortation to help individual Christians reform their lives. The universal Church likewise has undertaken major institutional reforms, for example: the Gregorian reform of the 11th century, which imposed stricter discipline on the clergy and secured the independence of the Church from secular control.
At many times in her history, the Church has been threatened by false reforms, which, if accepted, would have denatured her. Such reforms were attempted by the Donatists in the 4th century, the Waldensians in the 12th, the so-called “Spiritual Franciscans” in the 13th, John Wycliffe in the 14th, and John Hus in the 15th. The Conciliar Movement [also] in the 15th century brought forth some good fruits, but came to a bad end at the Council of Basel. Attempting to convert the Church into a kind of constitutional monarchy, it ran afoul of the Catholic doctrine of papal primacy.
By the beginning of the 16th century, the necessity of a thoroughgoing reform was generally recognized. After the failure if the 5th Lateran Council to achieve this objective, the whole Church teemed with reform movements, notably among Christian humanists such as Erasmus, John Colet and St. Thomas More. Catholic cardinals, such as James Sadoleto, Reginald Pole and John P. Caraffa, proposed timely reforms some years before the Council of Trent.
Luther and some of his colleagues also took up the theme of reform, but in the name of “correcting abuses,” they attacked the essentials of the Catholic Faith and became totally separated from the Church. To counteract this negative movement, reform decrees of the Council of Trent targeted some of the real abuses and continued to bear excellent fruits long after the Council. But in the next few centuries, the term “reform” became suspect among Catholics because it seemed to have a Protestant ring.
The First Vatican Council ran counter to certain reform movements of the 19th century. It successfully eliminated the remnants of the Conciliar Movement and, in the form of Gallicanism, crushed ecclesiastical nationalism and its counterparts in several nations. As a result, the papacy maintained uncontested control of the Catholic Church through the middle of the 20th century. It was only with the advent of the Second Vatican Council, a dream of Pope Pius XII, but not fulfilled until
the reigns of Pope John XXIII and Paul VI, that a true and updated reform of the Church began to take hold. Some have maintained (and continue to do so) that Vatican II was the beginning of a downfall of the Church (actor Mel Gibson and his father seem to be among them), but that’s most likely because they have not read the documents of the Council in their fullness, nor understood what the leading Fathers of the Church in this age were saying to strengthen the Church.
Some “changes” that quickly followed the Council were not always authentic, nor based on a true reading or understanding of the Council documents, so that much chaos began to erupt in the Church under the guise of “conciliar reform.” What was often looked upon as “change” in the Church was really not substantive in any way, and people began to look at the results of that Council with a jaundiced eye or skepticism that continues until today. Fortunately, with the mass media of communication that we have at our disposal, we can go back to examine all that the Church has tried to teach us and hopefully begin to understand just what are the real needs of the People of God and how could they come to be addressed properly.
Next weekend, we will be honored to have as our guest at Mass, Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski, of the Vatican, President of the Pontifical Council for Health Care Workers. He will speak to us, and then he will take up a second collection for the Good Samaritan Foundation, which was instituted by the late Pope John Paul II to assist the most needy sick people, especially in Africa. I pray that during these difficult economic times, we may still be able to reach deep enough into our treasure to help others who really have nothing.
Very Rev. Canon Tom
From the Pastor
July/27/2010
Our Knights have been busy in Guatemala, constructing table and benches for the new library (we made the foundation for the library on our trip last summer, and the locals constructed the basic structure during the year on what we thought was going to be just a basketball court). The students are proud of the progress that has taken place in their school over the past few years.
The enrollment has quadrupled in seven years, and the government is now seeking to use our Father Tom Moran Educational Center as a model for more programs to go up throughout the country. In this way, the local population will be educating more and more people locally, and they will become the
future leaders of their communities, without necessarily having to leave their country to seek opportunities for work and a decent living standard.
In the meantime, I learned that the oil well in the Gulf of Mexico was capped (we flew over it on our way to Guatemala last Saturday). I sure hope it is the beginning of the end of the BP problem. Likewise, I read that the U.S. Senate was ready to confirm the newest nominee for our highest court in the land. You can be sure I’m among the many who are not happy or impressed with her credentials, as she moves closer to that exalted position on the judiciary.
Nonetheless, her ability to rise that rapidly has been quite a clever move on the part of some to alter the
high court’s centrist leaning, and to try to impose a new type of “national morality,” as it seeks to modify the ethical standards of our great nation. If you don’t think so, consider the following:
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan reportedly “considers abortion rights to be settled law” (USA Today, May 21, p. 5A). You can bet that during her confirmation process you will have heard a number of Senators echo that assertion.
Yet, America’s courts and legislatures have a proud history of changing “settled law.” We have, on various occasions, recovered our senses and recognized the equal dignity of those who were deprived of their rights and even suffered violence (which was given legal cover under a different name; this legal cover was mistakenly recognized by the Supreme Court for a while, but then such decisions were overturned). The Dred Scott v. Sandford (1856) case is the most commonly cited instance. In it, the slaveholder's right to property eclipsed and subsumed the slave's right to freedom. But our Constitution was eventually amended to correct the error, though it took a little time to undo that decision.
Decisions like Lochner v. New York (1905) show us another error: employers' right to contract eclipsed and subsumed the workers' rights to humane conditions and hours. These abuses were corrected by subsequent Supreme Court decisions like Muller v. Oregon and Bunting v. Oregon. Then the "Separate but equal" doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) sanctioning segregation was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education some 58 years later. Also, erroneous decisions like Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) institutionalized child labor. But this was overturned 23 years later by United States v. Darby. A new development -- a "pedagogical moment" -- occurred here in Constitutional law.
The question was whether constitutional rights applied to children, too. The answer was “yes.” Many reversals of Supreme Court cases came about when new evidence was brought forward that made it clear
that someone's rights, not previously recognized, were being violated. Thus, Justice Louis Brandeis brought forward the facts about how workers were being harmed.
We are now witnessing the same trend regarding the children in the womb. Evidence that has been around for quite some time demonstrating their humanity is finding its way into legislatures and courts. One of the most striking instances comes out of South Dakota. Federal courts have upheld South Dakota’s law requiring that abortion providers tell women that the procedure destroys a “whole, separate, unique, living human being.” This came about because of the evidence presented to the court regarding the humanity of the unborn child.
With hundreds of embryological studies, and massive evidence of the harm abortion does to women, such evidence, combined with new legal concepts, can challenge Roe vs. Wade in the same way its erroneous ancestral decisions were challenged. Interestingly enough, the very day after Roe v. Wade was decided, the front page of The New York Times said, “Supreme Court Settles Abortion.” Yet, it has remained the most unsettled issue on our national landscape.
The facts above should shape the way that senators, Supreme Court nominees, and all the rest of us speak about Roe v. Wade and the so-called “right” to choose an abortion. History should shape our language, and should strengthen our hope that the abortion policy can change again, just as radically as it did in 1973. May we pray fervently and work hard for that change!
Very Rev. Canon Tom
The enrollment has quadrupled in seven years, and the government is now seeking to use our Father Tom Moran Educational Center as a model for more programs to go up throughout the country. In this way, the local population will be educating more and more people locally, and they will become the
future leaders of their communities, without necessarily having to leave their country to seek opportunities for work and a decent living standard.
In the meantime, I learned that the oil well in the Gulf of Mexico was capped (we flew over it on our way to Guatemala last Saturday). I sure hope it is the beginning of the end of the BP problem. Likewise, I read that the U.S. Senate was ready to confirm the newest nominee for our highest court in the land. You can be sure I’m among the many who are not happy or impressed with her credentials, as she moves closer to that exalted position on the judiciary.
Nonetheless, her ability to rise that rapidly has been quite a clever move on the part of some to alter the
high court’s centrist leaning, and to try to impose a new type of “national morality,” as it seeks to modify the ethical standards of our great nation. If you don’t think so, consider the following:
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan reportedly “considers abortion rights to be settled law” (USA Today, May 21, p. 5A). You can bet that during her confirmation process you will have heard a number of Senators echo that assertion.
Yet, America’s courts and legislatures have a proud history of changing “settled law.” We have, on various occasions, recovered our senses and recognized the equal dignity of those who were deprived of their rights and even suffered violence (which was given legal cover under a different name; this legal cover was mistakenly recognized by the Supreme Court for a while, but then such decisions were overturned). The Dred Scott v. Sandford (1856) case is the most commonly cited instance. In it, the slaveholder's right to property eclipsed and subsumed the slave's right to freedom. But our Constitution was eventually amended to correct the error, though it took a little time to undo that decision.
Decisions like Lochner v. New York (1905) show us another error: employers' right to contract eclipsed and subsumed the workers' rights to humane conditions and hours. These abuses were corrected by subsequent Supreme Court decisions like Muller v. Oregon and Bunting v. Oregon. Then the "Separate but equal" doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) sanctioning segregation was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education some 58 years later. Also, erroneous decisions like Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) institutionalized child labor. But this was overturned 23 years later by United States v. Darby. A new development -- a "pedagogical moment" -- occurred here in Constitutional law.
The question was whether constitutional rights applied to children, too. The answer was “yes.” Many reversals of Supreme Court cases came about when new evidence was brought forward that made it clear
that someone's rights, not previously recognized, were being violated. Thus, Justice Louis Brandeis brought forward the facts about how workers were being harmed.
We are now witnessing the same trend regarding the children in the womb. Evidence that has been around for quite some time demonstrating their humanity is finding its way into legislatures and courts. One of the most striking instances comes out of South Dakota. Federal courts have upheld South Dakota’s law requiring that abortion providers tell women that the procedure destroys a “whole, separate, unique, living human being.” This came about because of the evidence presented to the court regarding the humanity of the unborn child.
With hundreds of embryological studies, and massive evidence of the harm abortion does to women, such evidence, combined with new legal concepts, can challenge Roe vs. Wade in the same way its erroneous ancestral decisions were challenged. Interestingly enough, the very day after Roe v. Wade was decided, the front page of The New York Times said, “Supreme Court Settles Abortion.” Yet, it has remained the most unsettled issue on our national landscape.
The facts above should shape the way that senators, Supreme Court nominees, and all the rest of us speak about Roe v. Wade and the so-called “right” to choose an abortion. History should shape our language, and should strengthen our hope that the abortion policy can change again, just as radically as it did in 1973. May we pray fervently and work hard for that change!
Very Rev. Canon Tom
From the Pastor
July/16/2010
E. Paul Weber, faithful sacristan, church opener and reader for our early morning weekday Masses for many years, was called home to the Lord while I was on retreat. It’s something of an understatement to say that we will miss him and his service to our parish. To me, he embodied the spirit of volunteerism that characterizes a true Catholic and Christian believer – service to God and His Church because he loved God and his church, without looking for something in return. That is what is often referred to as true stewardship, since we are all stewards of God’s gifts to us.
Paul always wanted to be close to Jesus, and we pray that he has found that abiding closeness now. May his family (both by blood and by faith) always be inspired by his example of loving service. May he enjoy God’s presence as a final reward of a job well-done on earth!
Beginning this Tuesday, the bridge over the Intracoastal is closed until December 13th. This will create a challenge for some of our parishioners and visitors to get to church. Fortunately, the alternative bridges at Atlantic Avenue and Woolbright Rd. are still available. It may take a little extra time and planning, but we still look forward to having you join us for Sunday worship and our parish activities between now and then.
Catholic News Service this past Tuesday featured a national article they picked up from our diocesan editor for the Florida Catholic newspaper, parishioner Linda Reeves. She wrote about the story of another parishioner, Jack Foley, and his efforts to help the people of the Gulf coast region to clean up after the environmental disaster brought on by the BP oil spill. Previously, Jack had worked in our parish office here, and is still involved with the responsibility of guiding our Sunday Mass ushering when he is in town. Congratulations to both of these parishioners!
The annual trek to our parish mission in Guatemala is underway as you read this. Our Knights of Columbus from this parish are joined by Knights from Royal Palm Beach and distinguished guest Knights (Florida Knights State officers, including the past State Deputy, his son and his brother, as well as our State Treasurer).
We’ll be working at the library in the Father Tom Moran Education Center, building tables and seats for the students, and finishing off the library that your generous financial support in that special collection last March helped to build. The State Council gave us a generous grant this year for the trip. There is a fine article about our efforts in the July edition of the Coastal Star newspaper by C.B Hanif; I think you’ll enjoy the write-up, complete with some pictures of last year’s trip.
The annual installation of new officers of the K of C in our parish took place last week, and I wish to congratulate the new officers (as previously listed in this bulletin). I also extend my gratitude to our parish Knights who contributed a generous grant of $2,000 to those of us who are travelling to our Guatemalan mission to help us cover the expenses of the trip. This is part of their charity work, and is the result of their successful fund-raising efforts during the year. God bless Chris Grant, their Grand Knight again this year, and the men who tirelessly
work to help the good of this parish and promote the good of the Catholic Church. Would that more men could join them as Knights in their fabulous efforts at building up Christ’s Body – the Church!
Speaking of installations, there’s a new roof recently installed on our convent, and our men are putting the finishing touches on the rest of the adjoining area to make the house a more suitable home for our Sisters. They express their thanks, as I do, for your generous support of our parish improvement efforts. Many more projects are to be done, but we take them on, one-by-one, with the help of some very special people.
We are well into our 70th year as a parish, and next April, we’ll have a special Mass to mark the closing of this anniversary year. It’s hard to believe that we’ve come so far in these years, including the nearly five that I’ve been here. We have a way to go, including continually trying to work to support our flagship school. Did you realize that it costs an average of nearly $8,500 to educate one of our students? Tuition does not cover all of this, so we’re into fundraising and gift-giving in order to keep it going. Your participation in those activities and your support of our parish through the Sunday collection envelopes each week helps us lower the additional costs that would accrue if we had to make the school self-sufficient, as some dioceses do.
Several people asked about the “removal” of the banner marking the “Year for Priests” that was displayed for the past year in our sanctuary. Well, the year is over, so the purpose for the banner is completed. We’re most grateful to parishioner Joe Santarella, who provided us with that gift which adorned our altar area. Joe also is one of our faithful lectors at weekend Masses. May God continue to bless those who offer their volunteer services without expecting rewards. I can assure you that their rewards are “out of this world.”
Very Rev. Canon Tom
Paul always wanted to be close to Jesus, and we pray that he has found that abiding closeness now. May his family (both by blood and by faith) always be inspired by his example of loving service. May he enjoy God’s presence as a final reward of a job well-done on earth!
Beginning this Tuesday, the bridge over the Intracoastal is closed until December 13th. This will create a challenge for some of our parishioners and visitors to get to church. Fortunately, the alternative bridges at Atlantic Avenue and Woolbright Rd. are still available. It may take a little extra time and planning, but we still look forward to having you join us for Sunday worship and our parish activities between now and then.
Catholic News Service this past Tuesday featured a national article they picked up from our diocesan editor for the Florida Catholic newspaper, parishioner Linda Reeves. She wrote about the story of another parishioner, Jack Foley, and his efforts to help the people of the Gulf coast region to clean up after the environmental disaster brought on by the BP oil spill. Previously, Jack had worked in our parish office here, and is still involved with the responsibility of guiding our Sunday Mass ushering when he is in town. Congratulations to both of these parishioners!
The annual trek to our parish mission in Guatemala is underway as you read this. Our Knights of Columbus from this parish are joined by Knights from Royal Palm Beach and distinguished guest Knights (Florida Knights State officers, including the past State Deputy, his son and his brother, as well as our State Treasurer).
We’ll be working at the library in the Father Tom Moran Education Center, building tables and seats for the students, and finishing off the library that your generous financial support in that special collection last March helped to build. The State Council gave us a generous grant this year for the trip. There is a fine article about our efforts in the July edition of the Coastal Star newspaper by C.B Hanif; I think you’ll enjoy the write-up, complete with some pictures of last year’s trip.
The annual installation of new officers of the K of C in our parish took place last week, and I wish to congratulate the new officers (as previously listed in this bulletin). I also extend my gratitude to our parish Knights who contributed a generous grant of $2,000 to those of us who are travelling to our Guatemalan mission to help us cover the expenses of the trip. This is part of their charity work, and is the result of their successful fund-raising efforts during the year. God bless Chris Grant, their Grand Knight again this year, and the men who tirelessly
work to help the good of this parish and promote the good of the Catholic Church. Would that more men could join them as Knights in their fabulous efforts at building up Christ’s Body – the Church!
Speaking of installations, there’s a new roof recently installed on our convent, and our men are putting the finishing touches on the rest of the adjoining area to make the house a more suitable home for our Sisters. They express their thanks, as I do, for your generous support of our parish improvement efforts. Many more projects are to be done, but we take them on, one-by-one, with the help of some very special people.
We are well into our 70th year as a parish, and next April, we’ll have a special Mass to mark the closing of this anniversary year. It’s hard to believe that we’ve come so far in these years, including the nearly five that I’ve been here. We have a way to go, including continually trying to work to support our flagship school. Did you realize that it costs an average of nearly $8,500 to educate one of our students? Tuition does not cover all of this, so we’re into fundraising and gift-giving in order to keep it going. Your participation in those activities and your support of our parish through the Sunday collection envelopes each week helps us lower the additional costs that would accrue if we had to make the school self-sufficient, as some dioceses do.
Several people asked about the “removal” of the banner marking the “Year for Priests” that was displayed for the past year in our sanctuary. Well, the year is over, so the purpose for the banner is completed. We’re most grateful to parishioner Joe Santarella, who provided us with that gift which adorned our altar area. Joe also is one of our faithful lectors at weekend Masses. May God continue to bless those who offer their volunteer services without expecting rewards. I can assure you that their rewards are “out of this world.”
Very Rev. Canon Tom
From the Pastor
July/08/2010
Can you believe it? An atheist organization is blasting the U.S. Postal Service for its plan to honor Mother Teresa of Calcutta with a commemorative stamp, saying it violates postal regulations against honoring “individuals whose principal achievements are associated with religious undertakings.” The Freedom from Religion Foundation is urging its supporters to boycott the stamp — and also to engage in a letter writing campaign to spread the word about what it calls the “darker side” of Mother Teresa.
Foundation spokeswoman Annie Laurie Gaylor said that issuing the stamp runs against Postal Service regulations: “Mother Teresa is principally known as a religious figure, who ran a religious institution. You can’t really separate her being a nun and being a Roman Catholic from everything she did.”
The stamp -- set to be released on Aug. 26, which would have been Mother Teresa’s 100th birthday -- will recognize the Nobel laureate for her humanitarian work, the Postal Service announced last month. Mother Teresa was a woman universally beloved across the globe for her humanitarian efforts in India and around the world. Her work with the poor and the dying, the disabled and disadvantaged, with refugees, and so on, earned her the Nobel Peace Prize (imagine that, an honor actually earned) in 1979.
“Noted for her compassion toward the poor and suffering, Mother Teresa, a diminutive Roman Catholic nun and honorary U.S. citizen, served the sick and destitute of India and the world for nearly 50 years,” the Postal Service said in a press release. “Her humility and compassion, as well as her respect for the innate worth and dignity of humankind, inspired people of all ages and backgrounds to work on behalf of the world’s poorest populations.” So when the U. S. Postal Service decided to honor her life with acommemorative stamp, most people were happy. But of course, since a Christian is being honored, a group of atheists are "outrageously outraged" and want the Post Office to cancel the stamp.
Postal Service spokesman Roy Betts expressed surprise at the protest, given the long list of previous honorees with strong religious backgrounds, including Malcolm X, the former chief spokesman for the Nation of Islam, and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., a Baptist minister and co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. “In fact we honored Father Flanagan in 1986 for his humanitarian work. This has nothing to do with religion or faith,” Betts told FoxNews.com. But Gaylor said the atheist group opposed Father Flanagan’s stamp, too, but not those for King and Malcolm X, because she said they were known for their civil rights activities, not for their religion. She said, Martin Luther King “just happened to be a minister,” and “Malcolm X was not principally known for being a religious figure,” she said. “And he’s not honorific.”
It seems to me that they’re kind of picking and choosing who they’re outraged over, aren’t they? Martin Luther King Jr. was just as well-known a Christian as Mother Teresa was. I doubt Martin Luther King thought he “just happened to be a Baptist Minister?” And what difference does it make if someone who is being honored for their good works was a Catholic nun or not anyway? Being a Catholic nun or a Christian leader is not something you can separate those two people from. Is the argument, then, that you can’t honor a good person who did amazing things for their entire life simply because they were Catholic?
Gaylor also attacked Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity, saying it was a “wealthy” charity, and that she — shockingly! — was against abortion and wanted to baptize people before they died. She says this is part of the Roman Catholic Church’s “PR machine” to make Mother Teresa a saint (because, you know, canonization as a saint always involves shadowy conspiracies with the USPS!). (I know it’s tough for some people to understand, but Catholics tend to be… anti-abortion, and they want people to be baptized and accept Christ as their savior; they have this whole thing about not wanting people to go to hell -- as crazy a concept as that might be!)
The USPS spokesman Roy Betts has said that the reaction to the Mother Teresa stamp has so far been overwhelmingly positive. Most people love and respect her because of all she did for so many others. Mother Theresa’s charity did indeed massively expand over the course of her lifetime. At the time of her death, 610 missions were operating in 123 countries. The work being done at these missions included: hospices, homes for people suffering from diseases such as leprosy and HIV/AIDS, caring for alcoholics, the disabled, refugees, victims of natural disasters, the poor and the blind, soup kitchens, orphanages, and so on. But I guess because she was, after all, first and foremost a Catholic nun who didn’t struggle with her mission of humanitarian relief in a little hut on the side of some road in Calcutta, so the Foundation wants us to completely ignore all the good she was able to do. She was successful in helping thousands upon thousands of people around the world, but because she was Catholic, maybe all of that should just be ignored. To the Freedom from Religion Foundation, probably a better person to look up to (and whose stamp we should all buy!) is Katharine Hepburn… an actress and an atheist!!!
So, to sum up, the FFRF wants to keep Mother Theresa from being honored — despite her good works and humanitarian efforts — simply because she was a Catholic nun, even though the majority of people seem not to be offended. It seems pretty obvious to me that this is a gross overreaction, and an immature one at that. But let’s not underestimate their efforts or anything. They’re already starting a letter-writing campaign… and you can bet that they believe that will surely teach the Post Office a lesson! But you can contact the Postmaster- General and express your support and gratitude for the Mother Theresa Stamp!!! Write: The Honorable John E. Potter, Postmaster General - U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20260-0010.
Very Rev. Canon Tom
Foundation spokeswoman Annie Laurie Gaylor said that issuing the stamp runs against Postal Service regulations: “Mother Teresa is principally known as a religious figure, who ran a religious institution. You can’t really separate her being a nun and being a Roman Catholic from everything she did.”
The stamp -- set to be released on Aug. 26, which would have been Mother Teresa’s 100th birthday -- will recognize the Nobel laureate for her humanitarian work, the Postal Service announced last month. Mother Teresa was a woman universally beloved across the globe for her humanitarian efforts in India and around the world. Her work with the poor and the dying, the disabled and disadvantaged, with refugees, and so on, earned her the Nobel Peace Prize (imagine that, an honor actually earned) in 1979.
“Noted for her compassion toward the poor and suffering, Mother Teresa, a diminutive Roman Catholic nun and honorary U.S. citizen, served the sick and destitute of India and the world for nearly 50 years,” the Postal Service said in a press release. “Her humility and compassion, as well as her respect for the innate worth and dignity of humankind, inspired people of all ages and backgrounds to work on behalf of the world’s poorest populations.” So when the U. S. Postal Service decided to honor her life with acommemorative stamp, most people were happy. But of course, since a Christian is being honored, a group of atheists are "outrageously outraged" and want the Post Office to cancel the stamp.
Postal Service spokesman Roy Betts expressed surprise at the protest, given the long list of previous honorees with strong religious backgrounds, including Malcolm X, the former chief spokesman for the Nation of Islam, and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., a Baptist minister and co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. “In fact we honored Father Flanagan in 1986 for his humanitarian work. This has nothing to do with religion or faith,” Betts told FoxNews.com. But Gaylor said the atheist group opposed Father Flanagan’s stamp, too, but not those for King and Malcolm X, because she said they were known for their civil rights activities, not for their religion. She said, Martin Luther King “just happened to be a minister,” and “Malcolm X was not principally known for being a religious figure,” she said. “And he’s not honorific.”
It seems to me that they’re kind of picking and choosing who they’re outraged over, aren’t they? Martin Luther King Jr. was just as well-known a Christian as Mother Teresa was. I doubt Martin Luther King thought he “just happened to be a Baptist Minister?” And what difference does it make if someone who is being honored for their good works was a Catholic nun or not anyway? Being a Catholic nun or a Christian leader is not something you can separate those two people from. Is the argument, then, that you can’t honor a good person who did amazing things for their entire life simply because they were Catholic?
Gaylor also attacked Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity, saying it was a “wealthy” charity, and that she — shockingly! — was against abortion and wanted to baptize people before they died. She says this is part of the Roman Catholic Church’s “PR machine” to make Mother Teresa a saint (because, you know, canonization as a saint always involves shadowy conspiracies with the USPS!). (I know it’s tough for some people to understand, but Catholics tend to be… anti-abortion, and they want people to be baptized and accept Christ as their savior; they have this whole thing about not wanting people to go to hell -- as crazy a concept as that might be!)
The USPS spokesman Roy Betts has said that the reaction to the Mother Teresa stamp has so far been overwhelmingly positive. Most people love and respect her because of all she did for so many others. Mother Theresa’s charity did indeed massively expand over the course of her lifetime. At the time of her death, 610 missions were operating in 123 countries. The work being done at these missions included: hospices, homes for people suffering from diseases such as leprosy and HIV/AIDS, caring for alcoholics, the disabled, refugees, victims of natural disasters, the poor and the blind, soup kitchens, orphanages, and so on. But I guess because she was, after all, first and foremost a Catholic nun who didn’t struggle with her mission of humanitarian relief in a little hut on the side of some road in Calcutta, so the Foundation wants us to completely ignore all the good she was able to do. She was successful in helping thousands upon thousands of people around the world, but because she was Catholic, maybe all of that should just be ignored. To the Freedom from Religion Foundation, probably a better person to look up to (and whose stamp we should all buy!) is Katharine Hepburn… an actress and an atheist!!!
So, to sum up, the FFRF wants to keep Mother Theresa from being honored — despite her good works and humanitarian efforts — simply because she was a Catholic nun, even though the majority of people seem not to be offended. It seems pretty obvious to me that this is a gross overreaction, and an immature one at that. But let’s not underestimate their efforts or anything. They’re already starting a letter-writing campaign… and you can bet that they believe that will surely teach the Post Office a lesson! But you can contact the Postmaster- General and express your support and gratitude for the Mother Theresa Stamp!!! Write: The Honorable John E. Potter, Postmaster General - U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20260-0010.
Very Rev. Canon Tom
From the Pastor
July/01/2010
This Sunday, we celebrate the 234th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence for our country from Great Britain. It’s rather difficult for me to fathom that we are now 34 years past the bicentennial celebrations of our nation’s independence. Last weekend, I had the privilege to offer the invocation at south Filipino-American community of South Florida’s celebration that marked the 102nd anniversary of the independence of the Philippines from Spain. I couldn’t help but reflect on the many struggles of both of these nations in order to achieve real freedom from the oppressive tyranny which spawned that struggle in the first place, and how the founding fathers (and mothers) of these Christian-influenced nations prayed devoutly to God in establishing their nations under Him.
I also wonder if our own national holiday of “The Fourth of July” has lost its real significance when it’s one that’s only celebrated with cookouts and fireworks, parades and picnics, while we overlook the important fact that we are supposed to be “one nation under God.” Do we really appreciate and thank God for our “freedoms” when we learn that two-thirds of the world’s nations (China, Cuba and Afghanistan come to mind) still lack such liberties? And these freedoms, won and strengthened throughout the years at the cost of the many lives sacrificed for their preservation and exaltation, are not the kinds of freedom that permit us to do anything we want (those are called ‘license’), but which permit us to build up our “one nation under God,” ready to help others in a similar struggle. The challenges that face our nation today come both from without and within. Without God, I don’t see how we could realistically continue to resist the presence of dangers that threaten the continued existence of our nation. We have been blessed with abundant gifts to build up this nation and to enhance its endurance against those foes who seek its destruction. Outside forces are always a threat to those who seek democratic reforms and find themselves thwarted in their efforts by corrupt politicians and military leaders.
But, much like those pesky termites that often undermine the foundations of our homes, there also are subtle forces that exist even within our nation that try to tear away at the fabric that made this country great. That’s why the signers of our Declaration of Independence, diverse as they were in their religious practices, saw the necessary good that comes from being united as “one nation under
God.”
Amazingly, our freedoms even guarantee that those opposed to our way of life have a forum to express their beliefs that is protected by our freedom of speech. This is another freedom, like that of religion, which can be threatened by sinister forces who are fanatically dedicated to the overthrow of conventional wisdom and democratic governments. The right to speak is so fundamental that the FIRST Amendment of the Bill of Rights includes this promise: “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.” But today’s pro-abortion Congressional leaders read the First Amendment differently. They would have it read: Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech, unless it’s speech about incumbent Congressmen like us. Then we’ll restrict it.
Take the new “DISCLOSE ACT.” The U.S. Supreme Court recently struck down a law that severely restricted groups like National Right to Life from even mentioning the name of a Congressman or bringing his voting record to the public’s attention during the period leading up to his re-election campaign. Congressmen don’t like groups like National Right to Life talking about their records. It’s inconvenient. But, the Supreme Court said, in effect, “too bad. Citizens (and citizen groups) have that right.” They struck down the law as unconstitutional.
However, undaunted by the Supreme Court’s recognition of our free speech rights, now Congress is trying to limit our speech with another approach: punish groups who speak out about them by forcing the groups to provide confidential donor lists and other sensitive information to the government. They call this set of punishments the “DISCLOSE ACT.” Yet not all organizations would be punished. Certain allies of the pro-abortion leaders in Congress, like the mainstream media, are exempt. They can continue to comment about members of Congress without fear of punishment. And the bill is skewed to give advantages to other allies, such as unions. But if you’re any one of a number of other Americans which speaks for the unborn, forget it; the 1st Amendment no longer applies to you. That’s why we have to be particularly astute in guarding our freedoms; and this we cannot do alone. Our prayer to God, if done sincerely, will not go unheeded. He will continue to guide us, if we want Him to do so.
Sadly, too few Catholics seem to understand that the command to ‘Keep Holy the Sabbath’ means that we have the opportunity each week to practice our faith in the spirit of that freedom of religion, and make that prayer an effective means of expressing our gratitude for the gifts that He has so generously bestowed upon us. The disregard by some “believers” of the command of God to give Him the worship and praise that is due Him each week weakens our relationship with Him, and causes us to puff ourselves up with pride in our own accomplishments, as if all these were really possible without help from our God. They have argued their way out of what should be a loving and dedicated worship of God, and skipped out of their primary duty as children of the Almighty One.
Fortunately, this year we observe our Independence Day on a Sunday, the regularly designated day of worship for all Christians, Catholics and non-Catholics alike. If you find that you are not worshipping God each Saturday evening or Sunday, get yourself back to God by making a good Confession before trying to receive what would otherwise be an unworthy Communion. Skipping out on God for some lesser reason means that we are not loving our God “above all things,” as we should. Laziness, indifference, and several other banal excuses for failing to exercise our DUTY to worship our God puts us at odds with Him, because it says that He is not the most important thing or being in our life. That is a fallacious assumption and places us on a very dangerous precipice in this life, as it jeopardizes our entry into the next life.
Hopefully, we’ll take the special opportunity presented by our presence at Mass to thank God for His wondrous gifts, including our
country, our freedoms, our life, health and faith, our family, and the opportunities to use these gifts wisely and prudently for the glory
of God and of His people.