Conscience

A Priest Echoing the Voice of Jesus

Posted on February 21, 2012 by Father Joe

Reflecting upon my own formation, we had opportunities for clinical pastoral care but were offered little in the way of understanding human psychology. Priests can certainly become proficient counselors over time but rarely just out of the seminary. The priest learns a great deal over the years as he undergoes his trial by fire. He becomes a master on the human condition, both good and bad. Of course, few clergy are professional psychologists or social workers. We are ministers of the Gospel and priests of the altar. We speak the language of faith in a world that has an increasingly difficult time with translation. We want to save marriages and better people’s lives, but always in terms of the redemptive work of Christ. We desire for people to find healing in a personal and corporate relationship with the Lord.

When a priest or teacher begins to talk about Jesus and religion, some people turn us off. Young people often do this and have not yet mastered masking their distraction. They know from their primary catechism that Jesus loves us but have rarely reflected upon what this really means. The full sacrificial dimension of this love has yet to seep deep into their soul and personality. They can recite the theme but do not feel its significance. If they truly appreciated the depth of Christ’s love, they would be brought to tears and would eagerly try to expunge sin from their lives. Jesus loved us so much that he died for us, to forgive our sins. This was no stoic act, but one filled with conviction and emotion. God would have us receive and return this love in kind. I would pointedly ask each listener, “Jesus loves YOU, what does this mean to YOU?” Jesus dies for them by name. He knows them better than they know themselves. He knows the problems they face and is ready to shower his grace upon them. Jesus can help and he wants to help. But have we truly invited Jesus into our life? Is he real for us or just a name we hear in church and read in the Bible? Jesus had to deal with feelings of abandonment and fear as well. The agony in the garden resonates with our own fears and sense of loneliness. You may have cried in your pillow but he wept at the death of his friend Lazarus and again when he sweated blood on the Cross. Jesus had his own relationship troubles. The leadership of his own people sought his life and his beloved apostle Judas betrayed him. His family thought that he was out of his mind. His friends often failed him. He knew, first hand, what we all go through. Maybe we have sought compensation in material things? Maybe we have raised the value of money and things over the needy and faith? Maybe the desires of the flesh have supplanted a true love of persons and God? Maybe our response has been to turn inward instead of outward? Jesus tells us to look to him. The answer is not to be found in the distractions of the world. He is the Way and the Truth and the Life.

There are many voices in the world that would lie to us. They tell us that happiness can be found in a bottle, drugs or sex. They are traps set by the evil one and his minions. Such paths are dead-end roads that will leave us with a sense of nowhere out. Too many who get lost listening to these voices are tempted to destroy themselves, wrongly thinking that it is one way out of the cage of a painful and meaningless existence. But this is the final lie on the road to hell. Instead, we listen to the voice of Jesus. He knows what you are facing and he wants to help you. Jesus is himself the medicine for the soul. He wants us to share his life and love. He will give his Spirit to any who ask. It does not matter what we have done. God is gracious and merciful.

Filed under: Conscience, Discipleship, Faith, Forgiveness, Priests, Sin | Leave a comment »

Out of My House! Ever in My Heart!

Posted on February 19, 2012 by Father Joe

Many, if not most people, struggle with a sense of inadequacy. I am no exception. We had a visiting priest at my home parish who preached in harsh and very pointed tones. He was right that we were unworthy of a Savior like Christ. A problem is that the most egregious sinners view such indictments as referencing everyone but themselves while those truly struggling to follow Christ place all the guilt and blame upon themselves. The themes in the homilies bothered me and precipitated a type of nightmare. I dreamed that during one of his sermons, the priest began to stare at me and, in front of everyone, demanded that I get out of God’s house! I was overwhelmed with shame. Then I woke up. Years later, when I was accepted for the seminary, I dreamed that I was being vested in the body of the church. The green chasuble was enormous. When I put it on, it literally buried me. Like a blanket, I was lost in its folds. Again I awoke with a deep sense of shame and unworthiness.

During my first assignment as a priest, I was placed in charge of youth ministry. I visited the school classes and ran both a junior high and high school teen group. As a priest, I was assigned to the parish where I had served as a deacon. The children used their crayons to draw me cards of congratulation over my ordination. One of those efforts was by a boy in the fourth grade. He and his sister were wonderful kids. But, as children grow up, they sometimes move in dangerous directions. As a high-schooler, [name deleted] and another boy were coming to teen meetings high on alcohol. I tried to intervene. Nevertheless, I could not expose the other teens to their intoxication and the accompanying vulgarity. When he interrupted a meeting of the CYO leadership in the gym (he wanted to play basketball), he became belligerent when I told him to leave. He charged me with favoritism and then accused a boy and girl on a recent youth retreat of sinning together right under my nose. Again, he was either on alcohol, drugs or both. I told him that until he cleaned his act, he would not be welcomed back. He cried, over and over, “Don’t say that Father Jenkins, don’t tell me that I can’t come back!” The confrontation became loud. He was led out. Maybe a more experience priest could have reached him? Did I try hard enough to save him? I guess I will second-guess myself forever. I never saw the young man again. No, that it is strictly true. I did see his body in a casket. One evening we got word that he and his friend had gotten into a shootout with police. They attempted to rob a convenience store. His friend had a wounded arm. [Name deleted] got hit in the side and it punctured his liver. The alcohol in his system poisoned him. He died. A few of the teens came with me to the funeral. His parents had broken up and he had abandoned the Catholic Church for a Baptist community of faith. The minister offered an hour of praise, but not a word about the demons in his life. I am sure his parents took solace but the sad truth was not satisfied. A few faulted me for not doing more. But I had forty kids to worry about. I thought I did my best. None of this mattered. The experience still haunts me. The years go by and still I regularly bring him to mind in prayer. Did I fail to be as gracious and forgiving to him as God had been with me?

The faces of many young people are replayed before my imagination. Some have passed away, like [name deleted], one fell off the rocks into the water at Great Falls and another committed suicide. A few have stayed with the Church, but a vast number of them have defected from the faith and live lives far removed from the moral mandates of the Gospel. I pray and hope that they will return to the fold. Like parents who sometimes wonder where they went wrong, many priests also feel culpable for not better inspiring their youth to love the Lord and his Church. We rehearse in our minds all the things we did wrong or speculate what we might have done differently. We keep them in our hearts with a priestly and fatherly love, yes, even when there are long periods of silence and detachment.

Filed under: Conscience, Discipleship, Youth | Leave a comment »

Posted on January 5, 2012 by Father Joe

What is Conscience?

In speaking about conscience, it might be best to first say what it is not. It is not the comical stereotype of an angel on one shoulder and a devil on the other, whispering opposing advice. Neither is it merely an arbitrary feeling that something is either good or bad. Conscience is an attempt of the mind to make an appropriate judgment about whether an action is either right or wrong. True judgment demands knowing the facts and deliberating over them (applying moral standards) prior to an action. We are obliged to follow our conscience even when a false judgment is made. However, as soon as we learn otherwise, (that an action we thought good is actually bad), we must accordingly adjust to agree with a now properly formed conscience. Judgment can be flawed for all sorts of reasons. Nevertheless, we are obliged to follow our conscience even when a false judgment is made. As soon as we learn about our error, that an action we thought good is actually bad, we must accordingly adjust to agree with a now properly formed conscience.

What are some of the ways we can make misjudgments? Well, we might be perplexed, scrupulous, lax, etc. When in doubt, we suspend judgment and do not act until a “certain” conclusion has been reached. Conscience needs to be properly informed and a judgment must be made according to the appropriate law (i.e. natural law, the Ten Commandments, and especially the law of love).

We are Accountable

In all of visible creation, only human beings are called by God to accept responsibility for their actions. We are neither pre-programmed robots nor animals who live according to blind instinct. We have been given free will and an intellect capable of discerning God’s design from both the natural order and from revelation.

Set Free by the Truth

Given the present situation, in the Scriptures and Tradition, we find guidance for ourselves as we continue upon our search to discover what is worthy of us as human beings. In the formation of conscience, the Catholic Christian needs to consider that the power to bind or to loose from sin which was given the apostles, still resides in the Church, and principally in the bishops under the direction of the successor of St. Peter. Rather than a principle of enslavement, it needs to be viewed as one of liberation. “The truth will set you free” (John 8:32).

A Dynamic Christian Conscience

There are extremes in conscience which might not be viewed as healthy. The “static” conscience would have the Church spoon-feed everything. This dismisses the power of the Spirit to enlighten us; it is a fleeing of responsibility. The “dynamic” conscience goes to the other extreme of embracing revolution or even rebellion. No one can tell them what to do, even the Church! The true path is between these two. “We can qualify this as the dynamic Christian conscience. This is the conscience which leads us to have a responsible attitude to someone, to Jesus, to the community, to the Church, etc. Every person who fits into this category feels a responsibility for a progressive search and striving to live out a life ideal according to the mind of Christ” (Formation of Conscience by the Canadian Bishops).

Filed under: Conscience | 2 Comments »

The Commandments

Posted on January 3, 2012 by Father Joe

Our Relationship to God

1. You shall not worship false gods.
2. You shall not take the name of the Lord, your God, in vain.
3. Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.

Our Relationship to Each Other

4. Honor your father and your mother.
5. You shall not kill.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not steal.
8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
10. You shall not unjustly desire what belongs to your neighbor.

The Greatest Commandment

Jesus asked, what is the greatest commandment? His answer echoes the pattern in the Decalogue of our relationship to both God and to neighbor. Christ says that we are to love God with our whole heart, with all our mind, and with all our soul. Loving ourselves as precious in God’s eyes, he reminds us to love our neighbor as ourselves. This is not a static kind of love; it means forgiving and not rendering evil for evil.

Reflection on the Decalogue

The first commandment reminds us that ours is a jealous God; there is no other before him. He is the one and only! He does not want us wasting our lives on false gods or empty superstitions. Even though there may not be many traditional worshipers of idols cast in stone or bronze, or of figures from nature like the sun or animals, this prohibition is still violated. We see this in dangerous occult toys, like tarot cards and Ouija boards. These things are hazardous to our souls because they sidestep God’s dominion over his will for us. They might even invite spiritual evil to penetrate our lives. This commandment also condemns sacrilege whereby persons, places, or things sacred to God are defiled. Even interest in the popular horoscopes can sometimes escalate beyond simple curiosity and become habitual false guides. God wants us to follow him alone.

The second commandment urges us to treat God’s name respectfully. This necessarily prohibits blasphemy, making false oaths in God’s name, and cursing.

The third commandment tells us to make the Sabbath day holy. For Christians, this obligation is transferred to Sunday. (It is interesting that most Protestant religions accept at least this one precept or legislation of the Roman Catholic Church. Otherwise, along with our Jewish brethren, they would respect it on Saturday.) We sanctify this day by prayer, worship, avoiding unnecessary work, rest, and joy. Therefore, something like failing to participate at Mass on Sunday is not merely a violation of the laws of the Church, but in a very direct manner, an infringement upon this commandment to give God his due.

The fourth commandment exhorts us to respect our parents by loving and helping them, especially when they are in need. While young and under their immediate authority, children must obey their parents. Reciprocally, parents must give a Catholic education to the children entrusted to them. Their spiritual and material welfare is essentially in their hands. The parents may extend or endow school teachers and others with something of their own authority. This commandment speaks to us in a less direct way about authority in general. All just authority comes from God. We are called to obey spiritual and civil authorities when they make legitimate demands. However, if there is a conflict between the laws of human beings and those of God, God comes first.

The fifth commandment prohibits us from either harming our own bodies or those of others. This commandment expands beyond murder or suicide to the various partial degradations: including such things as mutilation, striking another, harmful drugs, drunkenness, and carelessly taking risks with our lives. Abortion is a direct violation of this commandment. Our right to choose should never be deemed a higher priority than another person’s right to life.

The sixth commandment, taken alone, forbids all external sins against chastity. Once sexual activity is condoned outside marriage, as in fornication, it is logically difficult to confine afterwards, as in adultery. The premise is already adopted. Some fifty percent of the couples who live together prior to marriage eventually get divorced. The seed for failure is already planted. Sin is a mighty poor preparation for the nuptial sacrament. Considered with the ninth commandment, all interior sins against chastity are likewise condemned. The human sexual powers are given for the propagation of children and for the fidelity of a man and woman in marriage. Outside of marriage, it is a great evil to exercise these powers, which are not simply expressions of our flesh, but of our very persons— who we are! Inside of marriage, these powers must not be distorted in their purpose or in the motivation of two people in love drawn to union. Lust, even in marriage, is a sin and degradation to what it means to be truly human. It re-categorizes the beloved from a personal subject to an impersonal object. Instead of self-sacrifice and surrender— thinking of the other’s needs and happiness— we selfishly treat the other as a disposable thing with which we can seek our own gratification. If the beloved is no more than an object, then the stage is set for adultery because objects are interchangeable. This is the antithesis of the Gospel. Marriage is called to be a permanent union. Adultery is a gross violation of that permanent union which is to reflect the fidelity between Christ and his bride, the Church. The adulterer plays the role of Satan who would lure us away from our divine groom and from the wedding banquet of heaven.

The seventh commandment rejects stealing and unjust dealings with another. Even if we accept stolen goods, we have broken this commandment. All sorts of things fall under this heading: idling, charging unfair interest, not paying debts, not giving a just salary, and stealing someone’s good name. Restitution is demanded in cases where we have stolen or damaged the goods of others. This last matter draws this commandment to the eighth.

The eighth commandment would have us be a people of truth and good will. We are not to lie or to slander others. If we stumble into this sin, then we need to repair the damage caused by our falsehoods.

The ninth commandment, as mentioned under the sixth, requires us to be mindful of our thoughts. To occupy ourselves with sexual fantasies regarding others, not only breaks down our will in reference to actions, but degrades the one whom we are imagining. This is destructive to the dignity of the person who is reduced to an impersonal object, as in obscene films and other pornography.

The tenth commandment, like the ninth, reminds us that God wants our conversion, both in external action and in our internal disposition. To be open to the grace of his presence, we must free ourselves from within, of those persons or things which we might covet before God. In actuality, we might not explicitly commit a sin against justice, but we might “want” to do it. Even this needs to be weaned away. We need to reach a point in our spiritual life where we do not WANT to steal from or to hurt another.

We Are Shown the Way

There is much which could be discussed in the life of the Christian that falls under discipleship. Jesus shows us the way to the Father. His Mother hears the Word of God and it bears fruit in her very flesh, as the Woman of Faith. Like new Christs, the Twelve and all the followers of Jesus in history reveal something of what it means to be a disciple. During the course of any Christian study, commandments, confession, communion, baptism, and the sacrament of the sick deserve their own attention. All these things speak to our following the call of Christ. We pursue him out of love and obedience.

Precepts of the Church

1. To keep the day of the Lord’s Resurrection holy by worship at Mass on Sundays and on Holy Days of Obligation. We are also to avoid activities which would hinder renewal of soul and body, e.g., needless work and business activities, unnecessary shopping, etc.

2. To lead a sacramental life: to receive Holy Communion frequently and the Sacrament of Reconciliation regularly.

Minimally, to receive the Sacrament of Penance at least once a year if in serious sin.
Minimally, to receive Holy Communion at least once a year, between the First Sunday of Lent and Trinity Sunday. (However, weekly Sunday Mass attendance is still required.)

3. To study Catholic teaching in preparation for the sacrament of Confirmation, to be confirmed, and then to study and to advance the cause of Christ.

4. To observe the marriage laws of the Church; to give religious training by word and example to one’s children; and to use parish schools and/or religious education programs.

5. To strengthen and support the Church. This consists in assisting one’s own parish community and parish priests, as well as the worldwide Church and the Holy Father.

6. To do penance, including abstaining from meat and fasting from food on the appointed days.

7. To join in the missionary spirit and apostolate of the Church.

The Beatitudes (Matthew 5:3-10)

Blessed are the poor in spirit; the reign of God is theirs.
Blessed are the sorrowing; they shall be consoled.
Blessed are the lowly; they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for holiness; they shall have their fill.
Blessed are they who show mercy; mercy shall be theirs.
Blessed are the single-hearted; they shall see God.
Blessed are the peace-makers; they shall be called sons of God.
Blessed are those persecuted for holiness’ sake; the reign of God is theirs.

Corporal Works of Mercy

1. To feed the hungry.
2. To give drink to the thirsty.
3. To clothe the naked.
4. To visit the imprisoned.
5. To shelter the homeless.
6. To visit the sick.
7. To bury the dead.

Spiritual Works of Mercy

1. To admonish the sinner.
2. To instruct the ignorant.
3. To counsel the doubtful.
4. To comfort the sorrowful.
5. To bear wrongs patiently.
6. To forgive all injuries.
7. To pray for the living and the dead.

Filed under: Commandments, Conscience, Discipleship | Tagged: Conscience | 5 Comments »

Our Pro-Life Commitment

Posted on August 28, 2010 by Father Joe

The Cemetery of the Innocents

Here is a picture of me and the Knights of Columbus who set up 721 crosses that represent the children lost to abortion in one hour of one work day. This MEMORIAL OF THE INNOCENTS was set up at Holy Family Church in Mitchellville in 2009 and every year since then. We often have it up until the annual March for Life in Washington, DC. We received a lot of support although there were a few complaints. One lady argued against putting such a thing up at Christmas time. I explained that Advent and Christmas was the perfect time. During Advent we recall the Christ-child in the womb and on Christmas he is born. We are reminded that every child is a reflection of the Christ-child. Another person argued that it was insensitive as she was a pro-choice Catholic. I told her that she was deceived. There is no such thing as a pro-abortion Christian; abortion attacks the central mystery of the Incarnation. Abortion is murder and as such it is a repudiation of Christ’s Gospel of Life.

One of my favorite memories is working with the American Life League back in 2005 and the CRUSADERS FOR LIFE. Here is a reposting of the news around that event at my old parish, Holy Spirit Church:

A.L.L. Crusaders Come to Washington 2005

A dozen young people from colleges across the country walked from Augusta, Maine to Washington, DC in “Defense of the Catholic Church” and to spread the message that you cannot be Catholic and pro-abortion. Nevertheless, while many have applauded young people for taking up the “right to life” cause, this group of remarkable crusaders was purportedly banned from speaking in churches by several dioceses like Philadelphia and Baltimore.

Myself, Dr. Grier & a Crusader

The American Life League ran a series of stinging ads challenging the American bishops to enforce canon law and to protect the Eucharist from sacrilege when pro-abortion politicians and others (who have made such “public” stands) take it upon themselves to receive Holy Communion. The young people have shown no spite or anger, only sadness that some of the nation’s shepherds have chosen to remain on the sidelines. One priest remarked that the ads in protest were so severe that the American Life League owed the leaders of the Church an apology. However, others thought that these good men should at least have shown the same respect and hospitality to the young marchers for life as they have in the past to the high profile anti-life politicians. While they were able to find lodging in the city, they attended 9:00 AM Mass at Holy Spirit Church on Friday, July 30 and were invited to say a few words afterwards. I contacted the archdiocese’s Pro-Life Office several weeks earlier about the matter to insure a level of approbation and to insure proper discretion. (Although the ads pained him, to his credit, Cardinal McCarrick did not formally forbid the young people to speak in his churches. Throughout, nothing the young people said violated the archdiocese’s rules against participation in partisan politics– they did not name politicians by name, did not tell people for whom they should vote, and spoke with respect in regard to the Church’s shepherds.) Following the celebration, a reception was held in the Parish House were the young people had a hearty breakfast and got to meet parishioners. Also in attendance was SK Reginald Grier, a parishioner, a fourth degree Knight of Columbus and volunteer member of the archdiocesan Office for Black Catholics. John Stakem, a Knight of Columbus from St. Pius X Council, and past parishioner was present, too. John Stakem and Joseph Markauskas were long-time pro-life volunteers and were involved with the local pregnancy center. Joe and Betty Markauskas had even offered to give the young people housing while in town. We were very pleased that the director for the Forestville Pregnancy Center was present, Chyllene McLaughlin, along with her assistant. We wanted to communicate to these young people that they were not alone. Holy Spirit Parish, the Knights of Columbus, and the Pregnancy Center in the larger pro-life community, was very much behind them.

ALL Crusaders at Holy Spirit Parish

May God bless them for their sacrifices and may their witness bear fruit.

DISCUSSION

FRANK: News releases indicate that the Church after Vatican II had converted the Kennedys and other Catholic politicians into believing that the liberal backing of the culture of death is acceptable.

FATHER JOE: What news releases were these? Cite them; I would like to read further. As far as I recall, John Kennedy was chastised by churchmen for his liberal response about how little his faith would inform his work as president. As for the other Kennedys and the issue of abortion, I fail to see how Vatican II can be blamed for their pro-abortion stances. I have read and studied all the Vatican II documents and post-conciliar documents. Nothing comes to mind that would condone such thinking against the Gospel of Life. Are we throwing mud again? Give me specifics, please.

FRANK: Having attended the seminaries after Vatican II where the divinity of Christ was challenged, as well as the papacy, and all that was to be infallible before the “Catholic reformation” of 1962-1965; what is your take on recent developments and the continued blasphemies to this day condoned by the Church where the USCCB still can’t come to a consensus to deny our Lord to baby-killing Catholic politicians?

FATHER JOE:

Certainly there was a heightened stress upon the humanity of Christ in many theological schools after Vatican II. However, I do not recall ever being taught that Jesus was not a divine Person.

Fr. Patrick Granfield taught my class on the papacy at Catholic University and his lectures defended the Holy Father’s authority with a great deal of explanation.

Those things that were changed were not deemed infallible but rather mutable accidentals. This thinking was even shared by Pope Pius XII prior to Vatican II on matters like the prehistoric generation of human beings and the liturgy.

A revision of the liturgy was in the working stages going back to the 1930′s and 40′s. The reformed liturgy we have now has lasted a few decades and will probably remain for many more, although with the old liturgy alongside and with continuing adaptations by the Holy See. We have had to suffer the experimental phase, but Pope Benedict XVI said that such has come to an end.

As for the passivity of churchmen in reference to Holy Communion and the standing of pro-abortion politicians, such is also not attributable to Vatican II. The Church has gone through periods in the past where it was the lackey for parliaments, kings and queens. The Popes made clear statements from the 1600′s onward that slavery was detestable and should be abandoned. However, Catholics owned slaves in the colonies and later in the United States of America. The Jesuit landowners of Maryland had slaves. Bishops were often mute on the subject, except for admonishing their baptism in the faith. Dissent is not something new but something very old.

PADRE XYZ:

Father Joe, Your welcome to the pro-life young people did not go unnoticed. I know it cost you personally. I think you can be rude and you definitely lack tact, but it did take some nerve to stand virtually alone and make the challenge against silence or business as usual. You honestly shared your heart to the bishops and your brother priests.

You asked…

Would you give communion to Nazis who promoted the murder of Jews?

Would you give communion to White Supremacists who incited the lynching of Blacks?

Why should we prize the life in the womb any less or their murders as somehow less grievous?

Silence befell all the big guns. You lost a lot of friends that day. If you had career hopes in the church, they were suddenly shattered. Hushed and whispered voices were the only response, “How do we shut this priest up?”

You became an embarrassment. I could not do what you did. You angered a lot of people. You took a promise of obedience and you were reprimanded for your slight as an act of betrayal. Some of us witnessed it, although you were left unnamed.

You changed after that, became quiet, even sullen. It was as if something died in you. You gained weight.

I know you were disappointed in me. But to be frank, I was afraid. Who are we to question the shepherds over us? What happens if we tell the majority of Catholic politicians they are no longer welcome at the altar?

Take care of yourself.

FATHER JOE: I was going to erase this comment. I still might. If you are who I think you are, email me. Peace!

(I am not really brave. I speak my mind and I love the Church. When all is said and done, I do as I am told. I am the Church’s man. Some would contend that I am too conservative or right wing. But how can we be too committed to the Gospel of Life? Every day I work to control my temper. As long as I can remember, I have been very passionate about our faith and its values. Am I ambitious? Like most priests, it is nice to know that one is appreciated and that one’s talents are acknowledged. However, by comparison to most priests that I know, my rating would be very low. It is not false humility but the truth when I say that I count myself as the least of my brothers. As for the bishops, it must be a frightful responsibility they carry. Who would want it? They are criticized from every side. It is easy for us to judge, but we do not walk in their shoes. Pray for priests and pray, especially for our bishops. They are Christ’s apostles in the world today.)

DR: I nominated you for a pro-life blog award (FATHER JOE Blog).

JOHN: Fr. Joe, abortion is murder. These babies can’t speak for themselves. Other bishops have stood up and said priests should not give communion to pro-choice politicians as they have the power to stop the murder (Bishop Burke-former bishop of St. Louis archdiocese and Bishop Finn of Kansas City diocese, for instance.) I’m glad priests like you and Fr. Frank Pavone speak out on this issue. It’s a serious matter and it should be treated as such. Thanks for all you do.

LENBER:

“President Bush has had a very cozy relationship with the Vatican, and set a presidential record by meeting with the Pope six times.”

Very cozy indeed, sometimes for the good, and at other times for utterly and criminally contra-productive [things], such as siding with Bush in Criminal Wars (for the Vatican just Abortion is a Crime) or siding with Israel on their Criminal Occupation of Palestine.

All Thanks to Vatican II Double Crossers.

FATHER JOE: I am not sure I would coin the Bush Doctrine or International efforts in such negative terms. However, as for the Pope, you seem to be terribly deceived. The Vatican opposed the invasion of Iraq. Tarek Aziz (the former president) was a Catholic. He made a retreat in Rome and saw the Pope (John Paul II) the week prior to the invasion. The state of Israel is also not entirely happy that the Vatican, again and again, sides with Palestinians (who are largely Islamic but include an ancient Christian community). Formal recognition and diplomatic ties were held up because of Vatican concerns for the Palestinian people. The late Arafat, at the end of his life, remarked that he saw the Vatican as his ally in the conflict for Palestinian rights. Zionism was condemned by both the UN and by the Church. Arafat used to attend the Christmas Mass in Bethlehem with his wife (who is a Christian). The Catholic Church is no one’s stooge, not for Bush and not for Israel. The Holy Father (both JPII and BXVI) has spoken to President Bush, (he meets a lot of people) and they share much in regard to the unborn, however on matters like the Middle East and capital punishment, there is a great divide.

MICHAEL:

Tomorrow marks the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Think of the millions of lives that were snuffed out in this “free” country.

May God have mercy on us!

GENUS LILIUM:

I am completely against abortions. I have children and I have learned that some vaccinations are grown off of human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue, not to mention all the other chemicals, heavy metals, and animal products. That seems like it might be a problem to me. Now that I know this, would it be wrong for me to continue to vaccinate my children? Is it just a money scheme? I really don’t want that stuff in my kids.

Filed under: Bishops, Catholic, Church, Conscience, Discipleship, Eucharist, Morality, Politics, Priests, Pro-Life, Right to Life, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin, Social Justice, Youth | Leave a comment »

China, Business & Human Rights

Posted on January 31, 2006 by Father Joe

Laura Walker runs a great BLOG. I commented on her post, “Let Them Do Their Business.” I made a few comments of my own.

For the whole thread visit her site at http://www.laurawalker.org:

Am I missing something fundamental? How does Chris Smith justify interfering in Google’s business?

The decision by Chris Smith, a Republican congressman from New Jersey who chairs a House subcommittee on Human Rights, to call for a February 16 hearing to examine the operating procedures of US internet companies in China, represents the first signs of what could become a serious backlash against Google and other internet companies in Washington that are perceived as capitulating to the Chinese government.

What are the hearings supposed to accomplish? Why not let Google incur the righteous wrath of the global market? Why should the government get involved?

Chris is a man of conviction who believes in justice and the right to life. He has even been critical of fellow Republicans who made too many compromises. I have heard him speak many times and have had several personal conversations with him, even on the steps of the Capitol (two women I know work in his office). He reminds me of Jimmy Stewart’s MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON.

If he ran for President, I would probably vote for him.

Chris Smith is a wonderful pro-life politician who is very concerned about the issue of human rights. He wants to send a sign to the Internet business community that it should not collaborate with governments that seek to silence and to oppress their people.

Back in 2002, China blocked access to Google from Chinese computers and attempted to create its own search engine, with limited results. In return for access, Google has created software to exclude content not approved by the Chinese government.

Although not mentioned here, Chris Smith no doubt also wants to send a message to Microsoft (MSN) that they are not exempt from such an investigation either. They also censor their search engine for the Chinese and have even taken down Chinese BLOGs deemed political by the government. I read of one case recently where the information provided about the identity of the Blogger was used by the Chinese government to prosecute the man responsible. That means that collaboration with the Communists by Internet companies in the U.S. could lead to the imprisonment or even the torture and execution of men and women in China.

I would say that was pretty important and given that Chinese slave labor provides many of our goods today; it is doubtful that the business community left to itself would do anything about it.

Of course, it was our government that has permitted trade with China, despite human rights concerns … and Chris Smith is only one man.

NOTES:

CHINESE TRADE
Smith, who is chairman of the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, continued, “Through the efforts of the Clinton Administration, we have abandoned the American ideals of freedom and democracy for the sake of marginally cheaper consumer goods from China. We have squandered our patrimony of liberty for the profit of corporations who want access to China’s inexpensive labor market. It is time to do an about face, to condition expanded trade relations upon respect for internationally recognized, fundamental human rights. If we can promote sanctions for video games and rock-and-roll, why can’t we do it to preserve human rights?”

CHINA & GOOGLE
“It is astounding that Google, whose corporate philosophy is ‘don’t be evil,’ would enable evil by cooperating with China’s censorship policies just to make a buck,” said Smith, who has been a leading human rights advocate since being elected to Congress. “China’s policy of cutting off the free flow of information is prohibitive for the growth of democracy and the rule of law. Many Chinese have suffered imprisonment and torture in the service of truth – and now Google is collaborating with their persecutors.”

GW’s old man, the first George Bush, would agree with arguments that it is better to allow unrestricted business cooperation with China. Although, it seems that we have become as dependent upon their goods as they are with our money. Many of the social changes about which we hoped have failed to materialize. As for myself, I would also argue for political and economic relations with them; but always with strings attached. Our treatment of Taiwan after the Nixon/Ford Administrations has always bothered me. As for Hong Kong, the British made a treaty with a China that no longer existed; they should have been given sovereignty. But those are my pet notions. While our country is no paragon of virtue, nations and the world community do have an obligation to insure that businesses and organizations do not trample upon basic human rights. Collaboration with evil makes one an accomplice, for which God will judge each and every one of us. Utilitarian arguments are out rightly rejected by the Catholic Church.

I recall the arguments about opening Western businesses to China when the first President Bush gave most favored status to China; and certainly no one wants to isolate China from the rest of the world. However, economics is the only wedge short of military intervention that we have with the Communists. Do we sacrifice human rights at the altar of consumerism and materialism, either of the Socialist or Capitalist variety?

This growing middle-class in China is still less than one percent of the population. Most of the wealth generated goes to a few hundred families among the upper Communist hierarchy. Middle-class in China translates to making between $3,000 to $12,000 a year, what would rate as the poverty level in the U.S. Many of these will themselves have a servant or maid that is paid $50 a month. 70% of the 1.3 billion population are peasants who earn about $100 a year!

Guess what? Finding computers in schools and coffee-houses, the majority of the bloggers and those questioning Chinese politics are from the poor! Religious persecution is still a predominate cause for Internet censorship and prosecution. This includes the Chinese who reject the Patriotic Catholic Church and accept the authority of the Pope. The Internet is giving people in China a voice to speak out about oppression. Big business left to itself does not care about this; even many in government do not. People who embrace the basic human values in government and business must work together, not only against oppression in lands like China, but also against the passivity and blindness of so many in the West.

I generally believe that government should not interfere with business; however, I qualify this with the exception of human rights. When Prell Shampoo a few years ago was purportedly adding human fetal material to shampoo as “animal protein”– individuals, organizations and government got involved and asked questions. We have fair labor laws that try to preserve safety and dignity to workers. Products produced by companies must face safety requirements. Again and again, when it comes to human rights, governments and other organizations must get involved.

China might be on the other side of the globe. But they are people too with basic human rights and dignity. We should not enable, either through inactivity or secondary collaboration, those who would silence the voice of the poor, those yearning to be free.

A television news report announced that because of contracts with companies like Matel, 90% of all toys sold in the U.S. are manufactured in China. Few Chinese children will ever play with such toys. Autom Catholic Religious Goods catalogues advertise inexpensive articles, almost all from China. However, all of it is reserved to foreign export and domestic circulation would be regarded a crime. Heck, even my DVD Player has “Made in China” on the back.

Dollar Stores came into existence because of this trade. Other nations could step in, but there is no underestimating its vast scope.

Critics are right, while it would cost us, the U.S. could flex its business muscle for the sake of human rights. But each year the interdependence seems to become more pervasive. There may come a day when such an action would be too costly.

To illustrate how things have so rapidly changed, it was only in the 1980’s that the last television set wholly manufactured in the U.S. was produced (ZENITH). Japan, Hong Kong, Korea and now also China produce them for us. When it came to clothing, many of us always looked for the “Union Label” and took pride in wearing shirts, pants, and dresses manufactured in the U.S. But the cost disparity became too much for the poor and the average working man. This started happening in the 1960’s. I recall my first concession to the trend when my mother bought me a new coat for school. It was the mid-1960’s and the coat’s label read, “This coat is manufactured by the free people of the Republic of SOUTH VIETNAM.” Evidently it was an effort to support our allies economically while in conflict with the Communist North. I wore that coat with pride, even though I was only in the fourth grade, because (in my mind) it symbolized freedom and justice.

By the way, there was an expose some years ago about Walmart where reporters followed shirts and pants from China sweatshops to the U.S. They found that they were sold at Walmart carrying the designation, “Made in the U.S.A.” When challenged about this, the executives at Walmart said that there was nothing deceptive for while the clothes were of Chinese origin, the attached label was indeed, made in the Unites States.

Not deceptive? The label? And these are the people who are supposed to stand up for human rights and justice?

The dilemma about the Internet is just the newest wrinkle in this situation: how far do you collaborate with thugs to make a buck? Where arguments might be made that trade helps the poor and middle class of China; for an American or Western company to assist in the restriction of information and free speech of Chinese dissidents is something else. And to hand over information that leads to the arrest, imprisonment, and maybe torture of such people is the worst case scenario.

I am not utterly opposed to trade with China.

But I do have problems with Google installing censorship software at the behest of the Chinese government that blocks religious sites like the Vatican and Free the Fathers and Blogs where men and women yearning to be free speak out.

The Chinese tried to create their own search engine back in 2002 and made a mess of things. We should not be helping them in this. It is a criminal act, at least in the eyes of God.

DISCUSSION

FATHER JOE:

I am not an isolationist. What one critic said to me was correct; we bargain with the devil every day.

We can hope that our relationships with the Red Chinese and Moslem extremists will make a difference; but we should never let down our guard and directly cooperate in human oppression. Communism is not dead, and instances of free enterprise can disappear tomorrow if the dragon awakens. Some of our so-called allies in the war against terror are themselves corrupt and oppress minorities, women and others. Is the pacified Westernized Islam that we see here at home the true faith of Mohammed; or is its genuine face really the Hamas and the extremism that we see in the Middle East and now parts of Africa and Asia?

Trade with China will not in itself prevent a new Cold War. Indeed, their military buildup is largely financed with our own money. Oil money in the Middle East can also translate into a fearful New World. I am not sure what we can do about much of this. Such questions will not be resolved by bloggers, but at least we have the freedom to speak, which some do not have. And Western and American companies should not help to silence voices.

I only wish people in all walks of life would more effectively engage these issues and that politicians would devise a clear plan about where our policies are taking us. We tend to be so short-sighted, instead of looking to the horizon.

ERIN:

I don’t disagree with the things you’ve posted either; in fact, I agree strongly with the statement that we should stand up for human rights, individually and as a country. However, I think if Google can get a working window to the internet into China, even with severe restrictions and censorship in place, isn’t it better than nothing? It’s a start – a way for the poor people of China to start looking around and seeing the possibilities of the internet. And hey, if the porn sites can so creatively sneak around our own censorship models and find ways to get their sites seen, can’t the Underground movements of China and other oppressed areas find ways to speak out and communicate with one another and the outside world?

FATHER JOE:

I guess it all depends upon how seriously Google cooperates with the Red Chinese government. While I am all for the censorship of pornography sites, the protection of children, and the prosecution of those who criminally exploit others; the Communists would use political and religious censorship to oppress their own people. Should Google cooperate in human oppression? What if the censorship software identifies dissidents who could suffer arrest or murder? People still disappear in China. Hackers might find their way around censorship software, but most poor Chinese Blog operators and general users only have elementary computer skills. The issue is bigger than Google. If the poor Chinese can get past the national portal to the Internet, they deserve protection within the international community. The Web can be a great tool for democracy; or we can ruin it like we did so much else of the media.

Filed under: Conscience, Discipleship, Morality, News, Philosophy, Politics, Religious Liberty, Sin, Social Justice | Leave a comment »