It’s a matter of conscience…

Posted on April 18, 2012 by Bob

I think that most of us would agree that a pharmacist should take action if he suspected drug abuse. In particular, there is a huge problem in FL with doctors giving away scripts for pain meds. Maybe there are some who are doing it out of altruism, but I think it’s fair to say that some doctors are in it for the money.

Well, some CVS stores stopped honoring scripts from high prescribing doctors.

CVS could have just raked in the profits and said nothing (or perhaps they feared liabilities, but that doesn’t seem to be the case from the article). I prefer CVS’s commitment to prevent drug abuse of a highly addictive drug.

Someone, or several people running the local part of the national chain of pharmacies decided to act on their conscience, rather than honor a doctor’s script.

Is that right or wrong?

Posted in Morality | Leave a comment

Opposition to Abortion and Party Politics

Posted on April 17, 2012 by Bob

Mark Shea has written a guest post over at American Catholic, entitled Opposition to Abortion Does Not Take Away the Sins of the World. He has made an important point about the current political tendencies of conservatives. Just this past Saturday I listened to a local radio show where the host and a guest suggested that the social conservatives shut up and help the Tea Party advance fiscal conservatism. That is, they’re willingly to take my vote, but social issues such as abortion (and gay “marriage” and the HHS contraceptive mandate) aren’t important to them. This is nothing new. I’ve been arguing with fiscal conservatives over the priority of issues for more than a decade. But there’s something new in my relationship with fiscal conservatives, and that’s the sense that they’re embarrassed to have social conservatives hanging around. And if a social conservative is also a fiscal conservative (such as I am, as well as many other social conservatives), it’s not enough to erase the weirdness felt by the more socially moderate fiscal conservatives. Yes, I wholeheartedly agree that the fiscal conservative will welcome our vote this November and will promise us something, but after November they will still want us to shut up,

So I agree with Mark that conservative Catholics shouldn’t sell their souls or their faith to such a party or ideology. But I do part with Mark, not with what he actually said, but with the implication of what he said. Mark correctly said that our faith does not end with abortion, and that our politicians (that is, politicians of our particular tribe) should also be concerned with the spiritual and corporeal works of mercy. Good stuff. However, even though Mark did not say that he endorsed the federal government’s take over of the spiritual and corporeal works of mercy, one could easily walk away with the impression that he favors some sort of government involvement. As for me, I’m a big proponent of the idea of subsidiarity.

Over at The Catholic Thing, Peter Brown has a thoughtful essay, “The Limits of Subsidiarity.” Go over and read it, but please come back. Brown sees a battle between Solidarists and Subsidiarists. It’s interesting stuff. He claims that although subsidiarity has worked well in the past, modernity has changed things. He writes, “Subsidiarists have not yet come up with a modern model that better manages risk.” For my reply, I’d like to borrow Josey Wale’s line as he concludes a personal peace treaty with Chief Ten Bears in the movie, The Outlaw Josey Wales, “That’s true. I ain’t promising you nothing extra.”

In a world full of ideologies, it’s tempting to claim that you too have got the magic key that unlocks all solutions. But proper conservative, one who knows and understands conservative principles would be more inclined to say and repeat often, “conservatism is the negation of ideology.” The Catholic Solidarist is likely to be a liberal who thinks that the magic key is Washington whereupon all solutions emanate. The U.S. bishops, if they have not learned from the bloody noses given to Catholic Charities and other Catholic programs for failing to acknowledge the heavenly sweetness of the homosexual lifestyle and for failing to introduce Abortion as the eight sacrament, are inclined toward a power sharing arrangement with Washington, something akin to Church and State happily progressing forward to a better future. Sadly, under Obama, the federal government doesn’t seem to understand this friendly little arrangement. There are no magic keys, unless we talk about Christ and his Church.

Frankly, I’m a little bit jealous of the government hiding away and hoarding all the social problems to itself. I don’t feel comfortable in being forced (through taxes) to have someone else take care of them. It de-personalizes the love I’m supposed to have for the poor, the sick and the hungry. Indeed, it seems that the government is jealous of his prerogatives, since the news regularly comes up with charities forced to fold for failing to come up with the fees or necessary paperwork. Only BIG charities can survive, and if it turns out that you’ve left-over and untouched food from a wedding (or some other celebration), don’t you dare hand it over to a charity for the poor and hungry. These acts might offend a government bureaucrat who has a job to keep.

I do believe in subsidiarity and solidarity. I do want to embrace both. It can’t possibly be that the only solidarity is through proper bureaucratic channels or as a hired social worker. One of Lord Acton’s famous quotes is “Liberty is not the power of doing what we like, but the right of being able to do what we ought.” We ought to resurrect the ought. The libertarian idea of a collection of individuals should sent to the firing line, shot multiple times and buried, encased in ten feet of concrete and lead. But so also the socialist/Catholic idea that we can “love” the poor. the sick, and the hungry through our votes for our party which will take someone-else’s money and have someone else “take care” of the problem for us. I’m kind of hoping that Christ’s words will be prophetic, that the poor will always be with us, not because I wish for an increase in suffering, but because I hope for an increase in love. Of course, this all depends on a government that allows religious expression beyond the confines of our skulls.

Quo Vadis, Peter?

Posted in Politics, Religion | Leave a comment

The problem of lying

Posted on February 23, 2012 by Bob

Hat tip to Mark Shea for pointing out the problem that lying causes for those who support man-made global warming. He links to Megan McArdle’s blog entry on The Atlantic magazine’s web site. Megan McArdle writes:

After you have convinced people that you fervently believe your cause to be more important than telling the truth, you’ve lost the power to convince them of anything else.

 
This should be etched into the heart of anyone who ever tries to convince another about an issue, cause or religion. The success of lying completely depends upon the listener’s belief that the speaker is telling the truth. That even applies to the hard cases like the Nazis knocking on your door when you’re hiding Jews. If it were common knowledge that it is morally permissible to lie in that situation or it were commonly known that most people would lie in that situation, why should we work on the base assumption that the Nazi agent would ignorant of the possibility that people lie about the Jews hiding in their attic? Additionally, lying is a skill, and so also the ability to detect lies is a skill. Wouldn’t it be a safe assumption that knowing the atmosphere of lying, the Nazis would send skilled agents capable of detecting lies? And, personally, would you decide to become skillful at lying so that you would be successful in telling lies to skilled lie detectors? Or would you practice the virtue of honesty for your entire life?

Posted in Morality | Leave a comment

Pro-Life Happytalk and Not so Happytalk

Posted on February 22, 2012 by Bob

Here is a recent letter by Dr. Peter Kreeft about his personal contribution to the pro-life cause. It’s unsettling because, as much as he has done, he sees his contribution as falling short of what he should have done. But I’d rather that you read his words than my interpretation of it…

On the other hand, the following Youtube video is an audio of a rousing homily given in opposition to the HHS mandate. Perhaps the slumbering Church in America has finally awakened to grave injustice. Perhaps we will hear more homilies like this, rather than the fluffy happy talk,.. Maybe, just maybe the Catholic conscience will be pricked.

 

Posted in Morality, Politics, Religion | Leave a comment

The Sinner, Dr. Indifference and the Thin Man

Posted on January 5, 2012 by Bob

Since I live in Massachusetts, it’s my privilege to encounter “pro-life” Catholics. That is, they’re in full agreement with the Church’s teaching that abortion is a terrible evil, but they can’t see forcing their morality upon others.

Of course, Dr. Paul passes the ideological purity test. He’s opposed to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, for the same sorts of reasons he would oppose a nation-wide pro-life law. Unlike the “pro-life” Catholics above, he realizes that the overturning of Roe v. Wade (and Doe v. Bolton) would not make abortion illegal in all 50 states.

So I wouldn’t be able to have this short dialog with Dr. Paul as I would with the “pro-life” Catholics. P-LC: “Oh, I don’t want to force my morality on others.” Me: “So do you oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964?” P-LC: “Oh no. Discrimination is wrong!” Me: “So you’re okay with forcing your morality on others?” Thankfully, most Americans are not as ideologically pure as Dr. Paul.

Ryszard Legutko points out that liberals (in America, this would include conservatives and libertarians) focus on procedure. They might agree with you with an expression of empathy, but they will say that the First Amendment protection of free speech allows that a nude strip club be placed in your neighborhood. And that, they will say, is the end of the argument. And in Dr. Paul’s eyes, President Lincoln committed the unpardonable sin of ignoring the Constitution during a rebellion that threatened to destroy the union (“How dare he!”).

Suppose that there were a pond in a park. Surrounding that pond is grass. Ringing both the pond and the grass is a path for those to enjoy the park. There is a man in the pond. The man is drowning. I imagine Dr. Paul as a man who would see the drowning man, and upon seeing the sign, “Keep off the grass!”, he would start looking for a non-grassy path to the pond. As Mark Shea notes, the Constitution is sacred scripture for Ron Paul.

Ryszard Legutko also notes that liberals have a thin anthropology. While procedure would have Dr. Paul indifferent to the plight of the unborn, Ron Paul is not the thinness of the big three. As almost everyone perceives, the Thin Man is Mitt Romney. I’m reminded of this quote of Kirkegaard’s that Peter Kreeft brought up in one of his talks.

Let others complain that the times are wicked. I complain that they are paltry; for they are without passion. The thoughts of men are thin and frail like lace, and they themselves are feeble like girl lace-makers. The thoughts of their hearts are too puny to be sinful. For a worm it might conceivably be regarded a sin to harbor thoughts such as theirs, not for a man who is formed in the image of God. Their lusts are staid and sluggish, their passions sleepy; they do their duty, these sordid minds, but permit themselves, as did the Jews, to trim the coins just the least little bit, thinking that if our Lord keep tab of them ever so carefully one might yet safely venture to fool him a bit. Fye upon them! It is therefore my soul ever returns to the Old Testament and to Shakespeare. There at least one feels that one is dealing with men and women; there one hates and loves, there one murders one’s enemy and curses his issue through all generations—there one sins.

At the opposite pole, the passionate Sinner is Rick Santorum. He seems to have a passion for justice, and even when he sins, it is borne of a passion for justice. He does have a blood lust against the enemy. He’s infected with the neoconservative fever for war. I would love to ask Rick, “You’ve spoken eloquently about the human dignity of all men, including the yet to be born. What happened to the human dignity of the men you would have tortured or subjected to so-called ‘enhanced interrogation’?”

Of the big three, the Thin Man, Dr. Indifference, and the Sinner, I find myself drawn to the thickest of the three, the Sinner. It’s not that I support his sins, but that I see him to have the greatest potential for an interior conversion. Like the militant saints of St. Ignatius or St. Francis who once desired war, God has something to work with. There is meat on the Sinner’s bones.

I don’t dislike Dr. Indifference. His thickness comes from his passion for ideological purity. He would martyr his campaign for the cause. And so he is much preferred to the Thin Man.

As for the Thin Man, I don’t have much to say about him.

Posted in Politics | Leave a comment

Michael Voris and Amazing Grace

Posted on July 21, 2011 by Bob

There is no doubt that Michael Voris stirs things up. Voris claims to cut through the clutter and expose what’s wrong with the Catholic world. Many conservative Catholics — who are figuratively dying to get the capital ‘T” Truth out and who tire of waiting for Catholic bishops to grow a spine and speak the Truth (without all the watering-down caveats) — are embracing Voris’ take-no-prisoners approach. There are other conservative Catholics who dislike Voris’ video productions on tone and substance.

In this blog post, Mark Shea takes on Voris, in the way that only Mark Shea can. It’s full of life and passion, and I respect that. Some might say that Michael Voris uses a similar style. I disagree. For one, Voris seems to enjoy creating an Us versus Them situation (in which those who support Voris are Us, and those who oppose Voris are Them). And the focus on anger and outrage (whether justified or not) creates a cartoon image, “HULK SMASH!!”

There are some revolutions, in which all control is lost.

On this particular issue, I think Voris is partially correct. I long for a Latin Liturgy to return the Chant to a pride of place. However, whether or not “Amazing Grace” should be sung by Catholics is another issue altogether. I happen to like this song, and I fear that a Harry Potter-like debate will ensue on the theological merits of the song. In this, Voris has moved the debate into a place it does not need to be. There will be emotional squabbles about the song itself, setting up two opposing camps with pitchforks pointed at each. Michael Voris is a divider.

A simpler approach, one that treads on safer ground, is to point out that “Amazing Grace” is not chant. But then again, this is America where egalitarian opinions would demand that “Amazing Grace” is in seamless artistic harmony with chant. America will probably be the last country to eliminate widespread liturgical abuse.

Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

Walk in the Wilderness

Posted on July 5, 2011 by Bob

A Walk in the Wilderness

Today, I took a took an eight and a half mile walk from Maynard to Hudson, MA (click on the picture to the left for a more detailed map). The  first stop was at St. Bridgets, praying the Rosary and then daily Mass.

After Mass finished at 9:30 am, I made the first of many crossings of the Assabet River. While I walked, I was in awe of the greenery of New England. It would not take long for the trees and plants to over take any area which had been cut.

After the river is the Stow line, and Erikson’s Ice Cream. Unfortunately, it was too early to purchase ice cream.

Near the Stow Shopping Center is a bit of history. First it was merely Paul Revere’s Midnight Ride. Then it turns out that there was another guy named Dawes who rode too. Well, it turns out that Dr. Samuel Prescott (who happened to be out at night a little too late with a lady friend) met up with Revere and Dawes. It turns out that Prescott completed Revere’s ride to Concord (Revere was captured) and continued on to Gardner’s Inn (I’m not sure of the name here) in Stow.

I stopped to purchase a drink at Shaw’s in the shopping center. The blacktop added 15 degrees to the day’s heat. And then I passed the Stow Police Station and neighbor Union Church of Stow. It’s a plain white church with decorative stain glass windows.

The next stop was in the center of town, at the Unitarian Church of Stow and Acton. This was the fourth building that held the First Parish of Stow, and in the previous buildings, they were also town meeting halls. People tend to forget that the Puritans had no separation of church and state. Their idea of religious freedom included a combination of church and state. If I remember correctly, the parish voted to become Unitarian in 1840 (Congregational Churches would vote on doctrine). The bell, since recast, was made by Paul Revere & Sons.

Next stop was the Randall Library which does have Internet access, however I suspect their machines are severely infected with viruses because of poor performance. I sat down at the several war monuments in front of the library.

I tried to make a stop at St. Isidore’s, just past the town center, however I found the front doors were locked. I stopped at Russell’s Convenience Store for a drink and a snack and then headed toward Hudson.

This was the worse part of the trip. While the walk along Rt 117 was pleasant with trees for shade and sidewalks, the trip south (actually 62 West) on Rt 62 toward Hudson was uncomfortable. There were no sidewalks and various parts of the road were so narrow that I was forced to walk on the road. Additionally, there was a high volume of traffic (which kicked up dirt and sand).

The one point of history was a marker for Pompositticut Plantation in 1630 (what Stow was called before becoming incorporated as Stow). There are a couple of golf courses off of the road which are not visible. The Stow portion of the road has a lot of curves, but crossing over the Hudson line, there tends to be more straightaways. There is definitely less shade in Hudson, than Stow. It seems that Hudson keeps the trees and brush away from the road, while Stow is much more tolerant of growth.

Before getting to Hudson’s Main Street, I passed the Hudson Gun Club and entered the bike trail constructed over the old railway line (Assabet River Rail Trail). I ate at Main Street Pizza and Subs just off the trail and I recommend the place. Customer service is friendly, and seem to remember their repeat customers. Additionally, there are a couple of pictures of the Blessed Virgin Mary hanging near the cash registers.

The final stage of the journey was tough due to the lack of shade and the time (it was afternoon). I passed a friendly mother and her child, but it seemed that most were keeping off the trail due to the heat. I decided to avoid the planned stops at St. Michael’s, the Unitarian Church of Hudson and Marlboro and St. Luke’s Episcopal because it was close to home and because of dehydration. I made a stop at the Hudson Library to cool down and get early access to the Internet. It turned out that I needed a card number (which I don’t  have), so I enjoyed the air conditioning for a bit, before heading for Central Street Market for a drink before the final leg home.

Overall, the walk was good, except for the portion between Hudson and Stow. Both Hudson and Stow have sidewalks or trails for an enjoyable walk except that the two towns are not connected. Stow is more fun because of the shade and the points of historical interest.

Posted in Miscellanea | 1 Comment

NPR throws away principles in religious reporting

Posted on June 28, 2011 by Bob

Some folks admire NPR for its quality of reporting. This is not an example of quality reporting.

The issue at hand is NPR’s claim that women have been ordained as Roman Catholic priests. Over at his blog, Fr Z is clear:

No woman can ever be validly ordained a priest.

This is not merely a rule, but it is also a teaching of the Catholic Church.  The Church teaches that she is powerless to ordain women. For those who believe that the Pope has magical powers to declare anything to be true, and change teachings and rules on a mere whim, this must be difficult to understand. They are probably scratching their heads, saying, “What? The Catholic Church is powerless? That’s not my idea of the Catholic Church.”

Sadly, it is very hard for people to shake off their perceptions for what is real and true. At his blog, Father Z continues to correct a very flawed NPR article and over at her blog, Stacy Trasancos points out the meaning of “pretend”.

And this brings up an interesting point, how would NPR treat someone who was falsely but seriously claiming to be a U.S. senator or the CEO of a large corporation like GM? What if that person claimed she was a surgeon or psychiatrist?

Additionally, there are clues that the author of the NPR piece recognizes that a woman claiming to be ordained as a Catholic priest is a controversial issue. But as journalist Mollie Hemingway points out, the author of the piece ignores some basic rules of reporting:

Did I mention that nowhere in the entire story is an official within the actual Roman Catholic Church quoted? Isn’t that weird?

I know that stories about Roman Catholic Womenpriests and other similar groups are like catnip for reporters, but we shouldn’t just throw out all of our reporting principles. When the whole point of the story revolves around a disputed claim, it’s usually not a good idea to ignore one side.

This isn’t about picking sides or favoring one group over another but, simply, giving readers information. It’s a journalism thing.

Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

Is this the end of the nation?

Posted on June 27, 2011 by Bob

A friend writes,

Robert, what happened in NY is the end of the nation, isn’t it? I am forecasting that the tax system as well as business will collapse under a new avenue for people to abuse marriage laws. How are you staying chipper in the midst of what we now witness?

( I’m open to being reassured that all will be well. )

Even when we know of things such as the fall of Rome, historians still dispute the actual year of the fall (many will attach it to the death of the last Roman emperor in the West, who was completely powerless).

I hesitate to say that any one thing marks the fall, because for one, it comes off too shrill. Secondly, people will see that the nation is still muddling along despite these bad decisions.

It’s a bit like bundling the straw of bad decisions on a camel’s back (that is, the nation’s back). We really don’t know when or which bad decision will break the back and cause a collapse. We may be in collapse now, or we may be re-invigorated through a dictatorship (which often happens when a culture loses the capacity for self-rule).

I’m certain that the following attacks on the family are fatal
1) Contraception (with abortion being the last resort for failed contraception). This changed the meaning of sex, and later, with abortion, the meaning of the human person.
2) Divorce, especially no-fault divorce, in which marriage is no longer life-long.
3) Same-sex “marriage” removes procreation from the purpose of marriage.

I’m a little less certain of this, but on the political side we’ve become too individualistic and libertarian. There needs to be a balance between individualism and communitarianism (and that balance rests on the family, which is the basic unit of civilization). It may seem like a paradox, but as the family and other social institutions collapse, that rugged individualism we admire turns into dependence on the state. We are becoming dependent on government to ensure our welfare, which occurred most recently in the passage of a massive healthcare bill. Our bloated welfare state is turning into the bread and circuses of Rome.

From my reading of history, Rome fell to the barbarians for two basic reasons.
1) De-population.
2) Loss of virtue – Romans became pleasure-seeking.

The seed of hope rests in the fact that America is a deeply religious nation. I admit that the walls of Protestantism are crumbling. But there is hope that Catholicism can re-vitalize Christianity in the nation. Catholicism has the intellectual firepower to defeat secular humanism. And when people turn back toward God, they will regain the capacity for self-governing because they have become virtuous again.

BTW, my capacity to remain chipper does not correspond at all to the current news. The source of happiness remains with God, and so what peace and solace I find is more related to an effective prayer life. I’m always seeking to improve this, even though I stumble a bit here and there (I’m currently in a stumbling period).

I hope that you find something useful in all that.

There’s another thing. Catholicism has a robust theology on suffering. As the nation feels the strain of its bad decisions, it would be useful for individual Catholics to be prepared to assist Christ in transforming that suffering-to-come into grace.

Posted in Morality, Politics | Leave a comment

Re-opening the Blog

Posted on June 25, 2011 by Bob

After several years of neglect, I’m going to start posting again to Whispers in the Wasteland. I’m going to keep Agapas Me as a place for the deeper philosophical and theological reflections, and use Whispers for quick commentary. I hope the kindling from Whispers will feed the fires for Agapas Me.

This is an open post. Please feel free to post any comments you like (within the limits of good taste). The comments can be about old posts, site design, any topic you might like to see posted in the future, or anything that is of interest to you. I’m trying out something new with respect to comments (so as to reduce spam), so I’d like to know if there are problems with comments.

The first time you comment to this blog, the comment should be held in moderation. After I approve your first comment, that comment will appear, and follow up comments should appear without the need for moderation.

Posted in Miscellanea | 2 Comments