Month: February 2012

Bishop Braxton’s two sides

1. He’s orthodox and willing to do the bold thing, here telling the ad libbing priest to honor the mass as is, and 2. He’s autocratic, as in his (here reported) non-consulting of his personnel board.

As St. Catherine of Siena-St. Lucy pastor in Oak Park a few years back, he bounced a non-tenured black nun from the staff after presenting her a contract that reportedly took her out of the pulpit, from which she had been declaiming in regular rotation, including on Mother’s Day Sunday, on which she talked up black power.  (Not kidding, was there.)

But he also enthroned himself for mass, moving the presider’s chair to front and center, from which he took a comfortable slightly leaning pose, hand to cheek, with portable altar moved to one side.  And set up yellow crime-scene-style tapes one Sunday blocking off the back pews because he wanted worships (in half-filled church) up front.

That said, he’s a very smart guy, if only he could get over himself.

ChicagoCatholicNews.com » Popular priest who strays from Roman Missal resigns.

Vas ist das Guttmacher Institute?

“[A] non-profit organization that promotes reproductive health and . . . started as an arm of Planned Parenthood”?  

Oh?

And its 98% of Catholic women claim?  Even when “a supplementary table in the report, on page 8, appears to undermine that statistic, since it shows that 11 percent of Catholic women currently [use] no method at all. “?

Huh?

The claim that 98 percent of Catholic women use contraception: a media foul – The Washington Post.

The study is here, btw.

Obama vs. church? You mean the scandal-tainted one?

I have generally held off endorsing accusations of biased coverage, instead finding my own examples and simply asking what’s going on here or something like it.  

But this scenario: punish Dolan with a Vatican scandal linked somehow to him to save Obama self-inflicted embarrassment, ah, there’s a case worth investigating and maybe even getting mad about.

In Desperate Attempt to Save Obama, NPR and AP Hype Another Catholic Church Scandal – Big Journalism.

Conscience butt out when gummint speaks

The bothersome thing about the birth control discussion is the ongoing defense of conscience as regards resisting church teaching combined with disrespect for conscience as regards government mandate.

Chi Trib today on the point is interesting.  It’s Rex Huppke on birth control etc. in John Kass’s spot, which I would link if the Trib site were not so uncooperative in the matter. 

More later on this, but have to get off now to post-mass breakfast with my friends Winnie and Mair.

Later: Ho-kay, Trib has Huppke-column link now.

In context of the above about conscience, consider what Notre Dame liberal studies prof Clark Power said.

Power — who spent seven years in a Catholic seminary [relevance not at all clear here] — said in an interview: “Some people see it as a liberty issue, and I understand that. But we all know there’s another issue: What about the consciences of Catholics?”

I’ll say.  What about them?  Shouldn’t gummint respect them and not make them buy what they don’t want?

Undoubtedly some Catholics would consider a world view that runs afoul of the church’s teachings to be disqualifying. They’d say, “Sorry, if you feel that way, you’re not a Catholic.”

Not quite.  Rather, it’s “Sorry but we’re not cooperating.”

But Power believes this: “The only way I know to do things right and morally is to have frank and honest discussions about things.”

Yes, and even then you might not know.  And if Power thinks birth control hasn’t been discussed by Catholics, he’s got no business teaching under the golden dome.  Especially in a time of increasing govt incursion into religion.

“The Artist” as tedious

Just saw “The Artist” and cannot recommend it.  Moved very slowly, by which I mean interest (mine) was not held.  It did get me to stay to the end out of curiosity: would the hero do this or won’t he?  etc.

He didn’t speak a word, as you know: it’s a mostly silent film, except for the music, which is fine.  I’d call it a musical with pantomime and a caption here and there to keep you up on things.  Which is a silent film, is it not?

I went very much of my own accord and out of my way — to a cinema on a Saturday afternoon — so did not go seeking to nitpick.  But it’s a moviemaker’s movie.  Buffs will glory in it, I suppose, not least because it’s about movie history, the switch to talkies and the inability of silent stars to make the switch. 

Not quite in this case: the hero doesn’t want to switch.  We never discover if he could talk.  But he has something else going for him, which I won’t tell.

The female lead is a love.  No problem watching her on the silent screen.  Nor do I want to condemn the overall effort.  The problem is not the silence but the story line and how long (and melodramatically) it took to unwind.

Go see it if you want, I can’t remember when anyone went or not to see a movie on my say-so.

Later: More I think about it, the medium is also to blame in itself.  You take talking away from your characters, and what happens to your story?  They are reduced to pantomime, as above.  No wonder the early silents dealt in such obvious images as the lady strapped to the tracks as the train approached and the mustache-twirling villain congratulated himself.