The Anchoress

After four days in the house, sleeping nearly continuously thanks to my oxygen-deprived and bleary state, I desperately needed to get out of the house today, and also I needed to buy a card/gift for the Mother-in-Law (who deserves much more than either card or gift), so I ventured out and basically drove a circuit: card shop, gas station (back tire needed air), post-office, church (getting on to the Vespers hour, so why not) and then - feeling totally beat - a reward of coffee to get me home. All went well until the coffee stop, which precipitated a spiritual crisis of sorts.

At Vespers the reading was from 1 Corinthians 6:19-20:

You must know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is within - the Spirit you have received from God. You are not your own. You have been purchased, and at a price. So, glorify God in your body.

My meditation had been one of prayerful regret, running along the lines of “I’ve never treated my body like anything but the Temple of Doom.” I recalled all the times where, considering my body, my prayer had been, “can’t I have a do-over? From puberty on, do-over? And maybe no congenital blood or enzyme issues? No clotting issues? Less boobs and bootie? Can I be built more along the lines of Andie McDowell, then Rosie O’ Donnell, please? (Even Rosie is taller, I’m sure) I’d like longer legs and shorter arms; an overall less-simian sort of stature.”

A shameful prayer, yes, completely unrealistic, ungrateful and un-edifying. I’m well-aware of the fact that I should be daily offering up a prayer of praise that I can simply bring a cup of coffee to my lips, unassisted.

This is why I pray a lot; not because I’m holy, but because I am pathetic. And yes, I also prayed for all the people who ask me to, or who mention things in the comments section, but now that you see what surrounds my prayer, you’ll understand why you should also offer up your own orisons, and don’t put too much stock on anything coming from over here.

Anyway, Vespers was done, I was craving coffee, and since the good monks at Mystic Monk Coffee have not yet figured out how to create a chain of drive-through monasteries at which I may satisfy my daily longing for their incredible, smooth, rich java (truly the best coffee I’ve ever had, see right sidebar), I went to a different drive-through chain for an inferior but fast and hot blend.

Aside: I love the idea of a drive-through monastery/coffee house. At the intercom you hear a chant: “Benedicite...Caaaan weeee heeeelp youuu?”

Me: “Monks! Gimmee coffee! The Dark Roast! The incredible Hazelnut! GIMMEE IRISH CREME COFFEE! And a Novena! And put it in a Saint-of-the-Day cup!”

Monk: “Deo Gratias…Wouuuulllld youuuu like a bleeeeeeeesssssinnnngg with that jaaavaaaa?”

Me: “Yes! Bless me till your blesser is broke and throw in a Pater Noster!”

Monk: “Alleluia Alleluia! Driiiiive thrrroooouugh toooo the seecond winnndoowww In nomine patrie…”

I would love that. But I digress…

So I pull into the drive-through and ask for the large coffee, milk, a packet of sweetener. I am not tempted to any of the other goodies offered because, you know…I’ve just been meditating on how my body is a Temple of the Holy Spirit, albeit one that requires massive amounts of iron to keep it standing, and copious flows of caffeine to keep the doors open.

The woman at the window gives me the coffee with the packet of sweetener ON the coffee lid instead of IN the coffee.

Now, a nice person would probably not waste a thought on it. I, sadly, am not very nice and my brain began whirring another path to purgatory, which I suppose showed on my face, as I looked at the cup and then at the woman with what I hope was merely a quizzical, and not evil, expression.

She said, “I didn’t know if you wanted it in the coffee…”

“Ohhh,” I said, thinking, “you absurd woman, I’m driving a car, what do you think I’d want, to alternately drink the coffee and then stick my tongue into the sweetener envelope as I’m driving? Where is your head?” But before I could say anything cutting the woman said, “it’s my first day…and I’m like, so confused…”

Given my own history of public-stupidity, and since I also did not want to give reign to my always-rouse-able Irish beast, I said, “well, soon it will be second nature to you, and you’ll feel like you can do the job in your sleep! Good luck!” But of course, in my heart, I know I had harbored evil, uncharitable thoughts, and those counted. Dammit.

I drove away understanding that once more, I had failed in love and patience, but my contrition was typically short-lived, as I wondered…”now, how the hell do I drink this? What do I stir it with? I have no pen, no pencil, no straw…my greasy tire gauge? Ewww, no!”

There was a McDonalds just ahead, so I pulled in there figuring, “great, I’ll get a stirrer.” A little devil voice said, “you can’t just drive up and ask for a stirrer; better get a hot fudge sundae, then you can use the spoon to stir your coffee.”

“No, no,” I said, “I just read Vespers and my body is the Temple of the Lord, and I’ve abused my body terribly, and must stop that! No ice cream!”

“Can I help you,” came the voice over the intercom.

“One hot fudge sundae, please!” I called out.

Freaking devil.

“Our machine is broke, we have no ice cream - you want cookies?” Hmmm…was this an angel of the Lord preventing me from sullying the Temple or was it yet another devil, an oatmeal-raisin devil with chewy insides? Aha! I find I can resist the cookie devil because he does not come with a spoon to stir my coffee!

“No cookies,” I called, proudly, “can I just have a coffee stirrer?”

The voice told me I was in luck; all I had to do was ask the kid at the second window. When I did he gave me an odd look, “just a coffee stirrer? No cookies? No coffee?”

My chubby, stretch-marked-flabby doughy-skin-cancered body is the Temple of the Lord! I came away with a stirrer, and a stirrer only.

But that seemed like an awful lot of spiritual angst for a cup of coffee…

I need the monks to build a drivethru, and I need it now!

UPDATE - Jennifer at Et-tu has a much better story with an actual lesson in it. (H/T Julie who links to a much more meaningful, and heart-wrenching, bit of introspection than I have managed.)

I wasn’t going to write about this because - while I know it gets a lot of Catholic blood running - I can’t get that excited about it.

SOME CLARIFICATION FOR THOSE WILLFULLY MISREADING ME: That does not mean I do not CARE about the issue. It simply means that I think we’ve all managed at times to insult and offend the Lord in various ways, and sometimes Eucharistically, and so I prefer to leave the scolding to the ones who seem most comfortable with it. While I’ve often been called a “self-righteous prig” on some issues (daring to disagree with some on solutions to the illegal immigration problem comes to mind) and I don’t mind wagging fingers politically, I’ve never been much of a spiritual scold. I know that’s true because I’m always getting scolded by other, better, Catholic and non-Catholic Christians for not scolding enough! Quite opposed to those charging me with “not caring,” I think I make abundantly clear that I do care, and I do both accept and support the church’s teaching here, and I agree that the complaints are valid. I simply respond to these things differently than others. If that’s wrong, well…Jesus knows there is no malice in my heart and will judge me as he will us all. END CLARIFICATION

But between some emails I’ve gotten from angry Catholic readers, confused (or smuppity) non-Catholic readers, and a few internet forum comments I’ve read that display both astounding anti-Catholic bigotry or a clear lack of understanding, I feel like I should. Here’s a can of worms I’d prefer not to open, but in doing so, I’ll stick to the Q&A style, since they reflect (or are directly taken from) my email.

For the uninitiated, there is a scandal of sorts brewing because former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani received Communion at the Yankee Stadium mass celebrated by Pope Benedict XVI. Note that Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry and Ted Kennedy all took communion at the mass at National’s Stadium without all this brouhaha. The reason we’re hearing about Rudy is because Robert Novak, took NY’s Cardinal Egan and DC’s Archbishop Wuerl to task, pubically scolding them for the fact that these grown-up Catholics, Pelosi, Kerry, Kennedy and Giuliani, communed.

Immediately after the column appeared, Cardinal Egan - who can’t retire soon enough for my money - released a statement criticizing Giuliani, most particularly for Rudy’s not abiding by what was apparently a private agreement between the two men, that he would not commune at the mass.

I know “conservative” Catholics tend to get scrappy on this issue, and more “liberal” Catholics tend to think it’s not much of a deal. Typically, I fall somewhere between the two, which is why I have no friends. So, here we go.

Q: What is the big deal, here? Isn’t Communion just a symbol and a way to “cleanse ourselves of sin?”

A: No and no. Catholics do not believe that the Eucharist is a “symbol” of anything, but rather the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, truly Present. And Communion is meant to draw us into deeper and more personal interaction with Jesus; by the grace of the sacrament, we are strengthened both physically and spiritually and that may help us in our sinfulness, but it is not the “means” by which we “get rid of” the sins we have already committed.

Q: Does that mean all the people receiving Communion are in a state-of-grace and free from sin?

A: Not by a long shot. None of us can know the state of anyone else’s soul…but can assume some are. Those who have recently been to confession for absolution of their most grievous sins and participated in the mass (where the lesser sins of our everyday humanity and brokenness are absolved within the Rite) are in a state of grace, but plenty of people taking communion do not fit that “ideal”. In 1 Corinthians 11:27, Paul writes of the seriousness of the issue:

Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord

For some Catholics, when a public figure receives “unworthily” this creates a public scandal; they fear that others in the church, seeing known proponents of abortion or divorced-and-remarried politicians take communion will both inspire others toward irreverence toward the Lord and weaken understanding of what the Eucharist truly is.

Q: And you think they’re wrong?

A: No, not at all. They certainly have a valid point, and intellectually I can go there. Emotionally, however, I always have a problem with Catholics pointing the finger at other Catholics and going, “ummmmmm…I’m telling!”

Q: Right, because in the end it’s between the politician and God!

A: Well…yes and no. It’s true that - ultimately - what Rudy did was “between him and God”, but - and it’s a big but - Rudy still publicly professes himself a Catholic, and so this is also between him and his Catholic community. This is the problem with community; it is something to answer to, in the same way that a Protestant pastor who leaves his wife for another must answer to his congregation, or a teenager who breaks the speed limit must answer to the judge. The rules are the rules, and Rudy, or Pelosi, or Kerry and Kennedy know full well that when they commune while the cameras are clicking, they’re deliberately riling that community up.

Q: So, you agree with the Novaks and the “conservative” Catholics, then?

A: Errrmrmrmrm…not really. As I said, I see their point, and it is a valid one, but there’s also that part about not knowing what is going on in one’s soul or in one’s heart - what sort of turmoil or even humility may be residing there. I know some would say that real humility would express itself in refraining from communing and, again, in the ideal that is precisely right.

But then there is Jesus, and there is this man or this woman. It seems to me that there is also a humility to be found in letting Jesus be Jesus and do what he does, in trusting that - whatever the condition of the soul of the receiver - Jesus is both larger and deeper than what we (or even the recipient) can know.

I keep remembering that Jesus said he “came for sinners; the well do not need a physician.” We must never be so protective of Jesus that we begin to think Him too small or fragile to be able to do the heavy lifting required to turn a heart. These pols know the score; they’ve had the doctrine explained. If they’re still receiving then we may assume two things - 1) that they are hard-hearted, do not care and wish only to score points with their constituents or 2) they are in dire need of a one-on-one encounter with the Living Christ - even if they do not consciously realize it or express it - and they will thus seek Him out, and take their lumps for it.

I think I will always err on the side of believing the best, rather than the worst of their motives, and give them the benefit of the doubt that they’re looking for the Encounter. And then we must remember, that Jesus had less patience for the Pharisee who stood at the front of the Temple and crowed about how he did everything just right, not “like that tax collector over there…” than for the sinner who kept his head bowed.

Q: So, then you agree with the “liberals!” You don’t think it’s a scandal.

A: Errrrrrrm….not really. There are lots of ways to scandalize a church or to desecrate the Holy Eucharist, and many people who are not public figures commune “unworthilly.” As near as I could tell Giuliani was the only one of the recipient pols caught on television cameras. I have to be honest, when I saw it, I thought, “he’s not supposed to be doing that…” but I also thought his mien and demeanor, his whole attitude was serious, thoughtful and yes, reverent - moreso than some of the others participating. I knew I was right smack dab in the middle of an abiding Mystery.

In the Apostles Creed, we’re told that Jesus “descended into hell” before he rose. In communion He descends into the hell of our own lives - all of our confusion, all of our sins those declared and those unfaced, all of our doubt, all of our love and our hate, all of our fear, our conscience, our deepest longings and our conscious and sub-conscious minds; our very souls - Jesus descends into it, and then we rise with Him. His very Blood courses through our veins.

This cannot leave us unchanged. Even if outwardly, we seem the same, inwardly, we have been penetrated. Some of us are very, very thick-walled; some of us have built astounding fortresses and battlements within us, and Jesus may very well want to go head-to-head, one-on-one so to speak, to tumble them. To descend into our personal “hells” in order to help us rise from them. He is, after all, the Divine Physician. Paul gave us an ideal and a basis for law. But Jesus has always been - ultimately - bigger than all of it.

And so, no…for all that I accept the validity of those crying “scandal,” I cannot cry it myself.

More to follow…here.

Rocco at Whispers in the Loggia has been the indispensable go-to source for complete and timely postings of the texts of each of the many addresses Pope Benedict has made during his sojourn in America. I was happy to see that he (and Fr. James Martin) thought similarly to me, that the pontiff’s brief extemporaneous remarks at the back of St. Patrick’s Cathedral (upon being reminded that it was the precise moment of his election three years earlier) provided a perfect glimpse into the heart of the man:

At this moment I can only thank you for your love of the Church and Our Lord, and for the love which you show to the poor Successor of Saint Peter. I will try to do all that is possible to be a worthy successor of the great Apostle, who also was a man with faults and sins, but remained in the end the rock for the Church. And so I too, with all my spiritual poverty, can be for this time, in virtue of the Lord’s grace, the Successor of Peter.

It is also your prayers and your love which give me the certainty that the Lord will help me in this my ministry. I am therefore deeply grateful for your love and for your prayers. My response now for all that you have given to me during this visit is my blessing, which I impart to you at the conclusion of this beautiful Celebration.

You could sum his remarks up in five words, “Love Jesus, pray for me.” But he is much more elegant that that.

On Friday night there was a youth gathering at St. Patrick’s Cathedral, and a friend of ours, a freshly ordained deacon participated. At one point the sacrament of confession was offered to the young people in attendance. “I made the same assumption that most people would make. I turned around to talk to someone, figuring at that point - at being offered confession - the young people would leave. I was stunned to turn back around and find lines 30 and 40 deep at each station, and a scrambling to find available priests to help out. We figured we would be there all night. For me, it was just extraordinary.”

Rocco saw a bit of what was happening on Friday night as well; he writes about it and adds his own enthusiastic thoughts here.

Martin called Benedict’s homily to clergy and religious at St. Patrick’s Cathedral, “…one of the best I’ve ever heard. Period.” Well, he’d say that, being a priest for whom its message was meant, but in reading it, I really must agree that it’s a stunner. His use of the architecture and structure of that very building as a metaphor for their lives in the church was just brilliant and again, yes, elegant:

“…the stained glass windows, which flood the interior with mystic light. From the outside, those windows are dark, heavy, even dreary. But once one enters the church, they suddenly come alive; reflecting the light passing through them, they reveal all their splendor. Many writers – here in America we can think of Nathaniel Hawthorne – have used the image of stained glass to illustrate the mystery of the Church herself. It is only from the inside, from the experience of faith and ecclesial life, that we see the Church as she truly is: flooded with grace, resplendent in beauty, adorned by the manifold gifts of the Spirit. It follows that we, who live the life of grace within the Church’s communion, are called to draw all people into this mystery of light.
[…]
Like all Gothic cathedrals, it is a highly complex structure, whose exact and harmonious proportions symbolize the unity of God’s creation. Medieval artists often portrayed Christ, the creative Word of God, as a heavenly “geometer”, compass in hand, who orders the cosmos with infinite wisdom and purpose. Does this not bring to mind our need to see all things with the eyes of faith, and thus to grasp them in their truest perspective, in the unity of God’s eternal plan?

He went on to discuss - again - the abuse scandals, and then to exhort the whole church to holiness through the grace of Christ. If you read no other text of Benedict’s visit this weekend, do read this one; it is a tremendous piece that both entertains and instructs and ultimately leads to thoughtfulness and prayer.

Finally, wasn’t the gathering at Dunwoodie and St. Joseph’s Seminary a wonderful sort of “mini” World Youth Day? One of the kids presenting the pope with an American and tri-state-area-based Catholic hero was a friend of the family, and it was thrilling to see him connect with Benedict with a very Italian-style buss to both cheeks. Benedict must be tired - he’s 81 and has had very full and emotional days all throughout this trip - and yet he, the introvert pope, seemed to be as bouyed and energized by the 25,000 young people in attendance as John Paul II ever was. Excellent day!

I agree with Gateway Pundit that Kelly Clarkson sang a good (and youthful) rendition of Shubert’s Ave Maria, although I do wish someone had urged her against the plunging neckline.

Flipping the channels this morning I heard someone complaining that the pope is getting too much good press. Seems fair to me, considering the miserable press he’s gotten since he was Cardinal Ratzinger, and upon his elevation. But don’t get too concerned; as Jim points out here, some members of the press are happy to continue to mischaracterize the pope’s words and intentions.

Over at Godspy.com, Angelo Matera has a great, spot-on piece about How the media is missing the pope’s radical critique of American religion, but the more I listen to the press during this visit the more I realize…they miss a lot.

Gateway Pundit, who has pretty wide coverage of Benedict, makes a great catch:

The Pope yesterday for the first time talked about his youth and the Nazi regime, via BBC:

The Pope told the crowd his own years as a teenager had been “marred by a sinister regime that thought it had all the answers”.

“Its influence grew, infiltrating schools and civic bodies, as well as politics and even religion, before it was fully recognised for the monster it was,” he said.

“It banished God and thus became impervious to anything true and good.

“Let us thank God that so many people of your generation are able to enjoy the liberties which have arisen from the extension of democracy and respect for human rights.”

Meanwhile Zoe Romanowsky notes how a celibate may become “father to the world”

:::SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATE::::

Fr. James Martin looks at the pope’s very long and full address to US bishops at the Shrine of the Basilica of the Immaculate Conception. It is a vast and far-reaching speech, and I’m printing it out to read and comment on more fully tomorrow, but for now I’m intrigued by Fr. Martin’s focus on the terrible scandals which will always be before us.

Even veteran Vaticanologists were surprised that Benedict chose to addressthe problem at such length, and in a public setting…before the world. His earlier comments, en route from Rome, indicated that he would address the issue, but few thought he would tackle the question so directly. Or so soon. Or so publicly.
[…]
But was it enough?

I’ve only written about it once, because I refuse to allow it to define me, but having lived through sexual abuse at home, I can say that really there is no adequate expression the pope can make. Apologies are not enough, but nothing ever can be sufficient recompense for the theft of innocence and trust.

Understanding that NOTHING can be enough, I’ve had to (while excusing nothing) attempt to forgive and move on; I could not have my life held captive to it all. I think victims of clergy abuse must feel similarly to what I have described here, substitute “church/faith” for “Daddy” - either way we are denied a place of consolation and safety to which we were entitled:

The displacement of one who has endured the sexual abuse of a parent is a curious one, because it is not a banishment to a lonely island or a teeming crowd. Rather, it involves planting two feet on either side of a chasm and staring down into a deep fault-line you know you neither deserve (nor want) to fall into, and from which there may be no rescue if you do. “Good Daddy” is on one side, “Bad Daddy” is on the other, and the chasm will never completely close.*

Given his remarks en route from Rome, I suspect Benedict cannot understand it, either - what brought about the abuse, what mindset covered it up. But he clearly - at 81 - intends to face this very painful issue.

Obviously I can’t speak for other victims - of course these people feel justly hurt and angry and betrayed - but when we look at some of the understandable excesses that are borne from that justifiable anger (as may be seen in some comments sections) we have to remember that amid the guilty priests and bishops there was the further complication all-too common in abuse situations: intimidated children did not “tell” a parent.

In a complicated household sometimes parents have a sense that something is amiss but, like a mother who chooses “not to know” what goes on in her house, they don’t look too deeply into it. I have read that some parents, informed by their children, went to legal authorities only to find that that they would not do all they could. And many other parents, for whatever reason, either never knew or chose not to prosecute. It’s the passive-but-malignant second part of the terrible secret of abuse. Back when all of this was happening, one did not “talk” about abuse, either inside or outside the family, which is why bishops, once informed, were - quite reprehensibly - able to simply move bad priests around, and why so many parents must have found the solution an uneasy one, and yet tolerated it. Thank God that part of our culture has changed.

Elsewhere I have written:

Where there is holiness, evil always exists on the periphery or nearby. Jesus in the desert, tempted by Satan who stood right alongside him. Jesus on the cross, thieves on either side. Where there is great light, darkness is nearby - darkness, in fact, emphasizes the light. Peter, whom Jesus constantly favors among the twelve, (even to paying Peter’s temple taxes) contradicting the Lord when he says he will suffer - and testing the Lord on the waters - is a study in the whole premise of the co-existence of dark and light. He embodies it when he sits outside the preatorium, worrying for Jesus one minute and then denying him the next.
[…]
[The Church] is earthbounded by man, by the imperfect humanity which must necessarily run the thing in order to bring the truth and reality and Person of Christ to all of us. We would like the church to be perfect, but it never can be because the church, in the end, is us.

If we look at ourselves as microcosms of dark and light - little versions of this big battle - we see it within ourselves. Where there is holiness, evil is always right there, on the periphery, pushing, and too often prevailing. But conversely, if we are decrying our own hearts- of-darkness and the ways that glamorous evil has enticed us, it is urgently necessary to remember that it goes both ways, that the light - and holiness - are also right there, on the periphery, being offered. We need only grab hold of the Rock of Faith and then let ourselves be formed and trained with the weapons of holiness - prayer, contemplation, humility and openness - that the gates of hell may not prevail.

There are no easy answers, no magic words of apology that will make victims feel healed and whole. The pope has made an important speech and the church in America and elsewhere have taken very solid steps to assure that these awful things may not happen again, and to console victims. She will have to do a bit more and I believe she will; she is treading new waters…but at least the treading has begun.

I pray for all victims and also for the good priests who have been treated to suspicion because of their sinful priest brothers. As the bad soldiers at Abu Ghraib managed to dishonor hundreds of thousands of good men and women, so have these bad clerics hurt tens of thousands of sincere and dedicated priests.

And I pray for the pope who has the thankless job of trying to keep an mighty structure in place while also doing what must be done, all while knowing that for some it will never - can never - be enough.

:::UPDATE::: Benedict met today with several victims from Boston, thanks to that city’s Cardinal Sean O’ Malley. It was the right thing to do; it solves nothing but it helps to start some healing. Thank God.

Fr. James Martin writes:

…Pope Benedict XVI has done what many people, including me, have long prayed for. It is not the end of the crisis. It is not the cure for the crisis. But it is a profound symbol, and in the Catholic tradition a symbol is not “just a symbol.” It is something that points to a reality greater than itself, and in pointing to that reality helps to make it real.

UPDATE II: There is truth here, in what Cardinal O’ Malley says:

“I think it has been very positive, in helping to understand the serious damage that is occasioned by child abuse,’’ he said. “I think in the past, people were not aware of the long-range effects. And, certainly, if you have the opportunity to meet with survivors, it becomes very apparent that this kind of tragic activity in their childhood often marks a person for life and is a source of great distress.’’ [emphasis mine - admin]

I’ve thought about that a lot, myself, about how - 30-40 years ago - abuse (sexual or otherwise) simply wasn’t perceived in the same way it is since the 1980’s, by anyone. If someone did tell a teacher or a neighbor or someone in authority about abuse, there wasn’t much in place to deal with it, even within the legal system. People just had a sort of “this stuff happens, and it’s sad, but buck it up and move on” mentality. When I was growing up dysfunctional families were just “the neighborhood,” and a drunken mother who tossed you across the room or a bad father, well, as I said, they were secrets and we all kept them and blamed ourselves. Our instincts and sensibilities are much more refined these days, and there are child-protection and other laws in place today that did not exist back then.

Amy Welborn links to CNN video of interviews.

*Edited for length - admin

RELATED:
Peter and the Gates of Hell
“Deeply ashamed” B-16
US Sees a very different pope
Benedict’s serious call for seriousness
A great definition of sin

Do you remember this terrible story, wherein a couple lost five of their children in a collision?

Deacon Greg links to an inspiring conclusion to that terrible story.

Now, more than two years after the accident, Mr. Helm has been acquitted on charges of vehicular homicide. Mr. Schrock says he has accepted that he may never know exactly what happened or why. He also says he has a friend he did not have before, Mr. Helm.

“The primary bond there is the accident,” Mr. Schrock said. “We’re both injured by that, physically and mentally.”
[…]
Friendship under such circumstances is complicated, Mr. Schrock said, like pretty much everything else that has happened since the accident. For him, the challenge has been to forgive Mr. Helm without expecting resolution, and to build a friendship regardless of the forces working against it.

This reminds me of a story here on Long Island, where a teenager who was goofing around, stupidly, threw a frozen turkey at a moving car and nearly destroyed a woman’s face, and how that turned out:

Surgeons, who rebuilt her face using metal plates and screws, said the impact might have caused lasting brain damage. But prosecutors say that Ms. Ruvolo’s recovery has been remarkable and that she is once again back at work and living on her own.

Accompanied by several friends and relatives, Ms. Ruvolo, a 44-year-old office manager, came to court wearing a black pantsuit and a gold cross on a chain for her first face-to-face meeting with Mr. Cushing.

Stopping to speak to her on his way out of the courtroom, Mr. Cushing choked on an apology and began to cry. For an intensely emotional few minutes, Ms. Ruvolo alternately embraced him tightly, stroked his face and patted his back as he sobbed uncontrollably.

Many of the two dozen people in court - prosecutors, court officers and reporters - choked back tears.

“I’m so sorry, I’m so sorry,” Mr. Cushing said over and over again. “I didn’t mean it.” Most of their exchange was whispered, but at one point Ms. Ruvolo’s advice to him was just barely audible.

“It’s O.K., it’s O.K.,” she said. “I just want you to make your life the best it can be.”

And we saw this sort of heroic forgiveness among the Amish after their children were slaughtered.

I was at Adoration earlier today and wondering about saints and heroes, and whether it is “easier” sometimes to be a “hero” when things are clearly one or the other - good or bad, black or white - than when things are ambiguous and blurred as so much is, in our age. And I wondered too whether it’s easier to be merciful, when a hurt against you is huge and very, very clear, when it is a “hurt” that you know is going to be with you every day for the rest of your life…maybe when it’s that crystaline - so obvious that you don’t need Oprah or Dr. Phil to tell you you’ve been hurt - you have to forgive or you can’t move on, either. Maybe if you can’t forgive…you kill your own spirit.

I hope I never have to find that out for sure.

Related: The Mystery of Forgiveness
Mea Culpa has its values

see more crazy cat pics

The two big stories of the last 48 hours have been the Spitzer fiasco and the “new sins from the Vatican” nonsense. Priests and Prostitutes? No, mostly prostitutes and the press.

Yesterday I got an email from a reader which read in part:

Has liberal cretinism permeated their minds? I mean, at a time when Christianity is under attack from Islam and secularism, is this a way to unify Christians and save Western Civilization? Am I nuts; aren’t all the saints in heaven shaking their heads over this move?

She was writing about the boneheaded coverage of the Vatican thinking outloud about sin. I referred her to Rule 27: If the news story is from the British press and involves the Pope….DON’T BELIEVE IT.

I suggested to the reader that there would be clarification of all of this coming down the pike, but that she’d probably have hard time finding it in the press.

Today, both Deacon Greg Kandra and Fr. James Martin did a better job explaining what was actually going on:

Greg, who works over at CBS when he’s not deaconing, writes on this from a veteran newsman’s position:

I was assigned to write that story for last night’s CBS Evening News, and the more I read about it, the more it sounded like something else that pollutes the environment: horse manure.

Every story on the wires told a different version. There were seven. No, there were six. It included abortion. No, one of them was stem cell experiments. It mentioned pedophilia. The guy who issued the decree was a monsignor. No, he was a bishop. He was the pope’s right hand guy. No, he was a Vatican spokesman. And on and on and on. It made my head hurt.

Finally, in the afternoon, I spoke with the CBS News religion consultant at the Vatican, Fr. Thomas Williams. He confirmed what I expected: there’s nothing new in the “new” deadly sins — and they aren’t necessarily deadly, and they don’t number seven, and it’s all one person’s interpretation of moral failings that are as old as time itself. The pope had nothing to do with it. It doesn’t change doctrine or dogma one iota. There was no there there.

Fr. Martin talked on NPR about the non-story, and also write an editorial over at America Magazine:

The Vatican’s intent seemed to be less about adding to the traditional “deadly” sins (lust, anger, sloth, pride, avarice, gluttony, envy) than reminding the world that sin has a social dimension, and that participation in institutions that themselves sin is an important point upon which believers needed to reflect.

In other words, if you work for a company that pollutes the environment, you have something more important to consider for Lent than whether or not to give up chocolate.

Fr. Martin takes pains to say he doesn’t think the press’ bizarre reporting comes from a place of malice, but of ignorance. Okay. Maybe. But I am willing to bet when the stories broke as they did, many non-Catholics shook their head with a “there go those damn Catholics again,” and plenty of Catholics had a response similar to one here:

Once again I have to tell my Church to f*** off. I’m really getting tired of that.

How many of those folks will ever see any sort of correction following the sensational headline? And if that’s not a malicious intent, it is certainly sloppiness that serves something other than truth. The press knows full well the power of a headline - what’s that old saying, “a lie makes its way around the world while the truth is still getting its pants on,” . The press knows full well that if it blares a sensational headline, that headline becomes part of the collective subconscious, and the inevitably buried corrections mean nothing. I think we saw such an example in the recent Rudy Giuliani campaign.

And these sorts of things always seem to happen as we approach Holy Week - a little distraction from what we’re supposed to be doing, a little discrediting before the Vatican actually proclaims the Risen Christ. Never fails.

Interestingly, Inside Catholic has a huge symposium on the subject of a recent Pew report on the state of religion in US public life, a report that had lots of Catholics talking and wondering “why do people leave the church?” As we see in this very interesting and provocative symposium, there are a million valid reasons which may be lain at the door of the church itself (and not just the Catholic church), but I do wonder if some of those exits are not helped along by a media eager to court sensationalism over sensibility. I urge you to take the time to read all of the gathered voices over there - Inside Catholic has collected opinions from a wide array of current Catholic writers and many churchmen and churchwomen, too. It is worth your time.

Also worth your time : Bookworm links to a heartugger from Gaza and Israel, whereby we meet an Arab family being helped by Jews:

Dr. Shmuel Zangen, the director of the hospital’s neonatal unit, doesn’t care who he treats. “As a doctor, I enjoy the privilege of not having to think about it,” he says. “It certainly is odd that we take care of Palestinian children while they shoot at us. It’s the sort of thing that only happens in the Middle East.”
[…]
The father is holding the first photos of his newborn twins in his hands. He is worried about the rockets being fired at Ashkelon. He says that he would never have believed it possible that he could be indebted to the Israelis for anything. “What a confusing situation,” he says.

What was it Golda Meir said, “Peace will come to the Middle East when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us.” Maybe that can only happen one family at a time?

Back in Catholicworld, Julie at Happy Catholic gives some timely help for confession and does a nice little Catholic round-up to boot.

And in the rest of the news:

Hillary Clinton is still making excuses about releasing her tax return. Her husband the ex-president won’t cant release their White House papers to demonstrate all that experience she touts, and she won’t release her taxes, but as Mr. Garfield used to say, “what, you can’t trust a little?” Meanwhile her peeps are playing the sly race card and she is disavowing them, but a few Hillarians are growing weary of her game.

Meanwhile those Euro leaders who hate Bush? Some of them are appalled at Clinton and Obama’s talk.

Don Surber looks at a report that says no recession, after all. I still figure we’ll talk ourselves into one.

On the Spitzer front: Gateway Pundit notes that if Spitzer resigns it will be a rare thing for a Democrat to do, and he counts the ways.

Surber notes Spitzer’s repellent narcissism.

Ed Morrissey notes that 25% of our teenage girls have STD’s, which is not related to the Spitzer story except as a comment on the times, themselves.

And Heck, yes says Romney, he’d be McCain’s veep. Naga happen, I don’t think.

Finally, the press’ reluctance to identify political parties when the scandal is about a Democrat continues apace, this time in Detroit.

Amy Welborn has more.

Heh. John Hawkins has a post up with 10 reasons why this blog is not succeeding while others do.

I try! I don’t feel comfortable networking, but I link out! I try to be interesting and varied - most days I post at least three or four new things. Seems I’m just not all that provocative, and undoubtedly I’m too long-winded. Still - it blows my mind that other people manage to support themselves blogging. This little endeavor nets yer girl something under $2,000 per year, and with two kids in college I’ve more and more begun to think all this fun must soon end for a job managing an office, somewhere…but I’ll plug gamely on for a while yet, because you know it and I know it…I’m hooked. So is Melissa Clouthier who is also pounding her head on the desk over Hawkins’ piece!

Speaking of successful bloggers, my dear blogfather, Ed Morrissey who writes brilliantly every single day (ahhh…there’s how you succeed! Be brilliant and steady!) mostly about politics, has written a very good piece on confession - and more specifically on the Vatican’s advise to the faithful to consider modernity and the “new sins” when examining their consciences. In his cleverly-titled piece, Ed writes beautifully about his personal adventures with the sacrament and then:

the addition of sins based on political correctness demeans the process. If pollution is a sin, do I have to give up driving a car? Lighting my house? Burning wood in the fireplace? Or is there a level at which sin arises; if so, will the Vatican provide the formulas? It’s silly, because excessive consumption is already covered by gluttony. This looks like a desperate attempt at temporal relevancy when the Church should be concerned about eternal truths. It’s like watching your parents try to rap.

If the Vatican wonders why Catholics feel that reconciliation has become less relevant, perhaps it’s because the Church tries to impose faddish notions of sin on its members. If the Vatican doesn’t take sin and repentance seriously, why should Catholics?

Perfectly said.

Margaret Cabannis over at Inside Catholic has a little fun with the excesses of the British press, and then writes:

I think I’ll wait until I hear something a little more concrete — preferably from the pope, rather than the British news media — before I start confessing my sins of recycling.

Margaret is referring there to what Amy Welborn calls Rule 27: If the news story is from the British press and involves the Pope….DON’T BELIEVE IT.

Speaking of Welborn, (another very successful blogger) she links to a much more interesting (and off-the-cuff) homily from Pope Benedict, speaking yesterday while visiting a youth center in Rome:

I am confident that [America], established on the self-evident truth that the Creator has endowed each human being with certain inalienable rights, will continue to find in the principles of the common moral law, enshrined in its founding documents, a sure guide for exercising its leadership within the international community.

Amy has a new book coming out soon that looks pretty scrumptious, Mary and the Christian Life. You can pre-order it at Amazon (see below - and whoever ordered the lazer jet printer - THANK YOU!).

Last bit on confession, from Siggy, who is actually writing about larger issues.

Speaking of priests, Deacon Greg has a poignant story about what they need from us.

Secularly, Ace brings us a 19 year old soldier who has earned the Silver Star. Props to Spc. Monica Lin Brown, who - while under fire - pulled wounded to safety and saved their lives. If you need a “female hero” you don’t need to look to politics to find them.

Obsidian Wings looks at all the ways Hillary Clinton is no hero and where Rwanda is concerned, she is even less. Jake Tapper suggests Hillary is going to go My Lai on the Democrats and “destroy the party” to save it - or at least to serve her own ambition. Andrew Sullivan goes a little purple on the subject of Clintons.

Bob Owens disagrees with the idea that if you don’t vote for Obama you are a racist and probably a religious bigot as well. Bob also has a very helpful post up on Fair Use situations and the Associated Press. He suggests bloggers go through their posts. Good advice.

You see that coffee ad just to your right, in the sidebar? The Mystic Monk Coffee? It really is the best coffee I’ve ever had. Made the Hazelnut this weekend. It was unbelievably good! We drank too much of it, then brought a pot to the neighbor’s house and had some more! Please patronize those talented Monks. We want to keep that coffee coming!

Finally, my Elder Son notes that (just in time for his birthday - funny how that happens) a new Dresden Files book, Small Favor, is due out this April 1! I thank reader Busy Bee for the recommendation of two book for my musician sons, Barry Green’s The Inner Game of Music and The Mastery of Music: Ten Pathways to True Artistry. This reminds me of a joke Julie at Happy Catholic posted this weekend:

St. Peter’s still checking ID’s. He asks a man, “What did you do on Earth?”

The man says, “I was a doctor.”

St. Peter says, “Ok, go right through those pearly gates. Next! What did you do on Earth?”

“I was a school teacher.”

“Go right through those pearly gates. Next! And what did you do on Earth?”

“I was a musician.”

“Go around the side, up the freight elevator, through the kitchen…”

I’m currently reading a wonderful bio of John Adams and will be writing more about it soon.

Fr. Corapi hears his own father’s confession:

The Anchoress’ own lovely statue of St. Benedict

…You ought to use the greatest caution, even in doing good things. For it may be that, in carrying out some good works, you are seeking only the favor and good graces of men: or the desire of praise may overtake you, and what is done for outward effect, fail in i