David French on Memorial Day and Tulsa

David French writes about the importance of remembering both our country's achievements and its failures.   

New Leader of Congregation For Divine Worship

 

Francis selects low-profile Roche to replace Cardinal Sarah at Vatican liturgy office

ROME — Pope Francis on May 27 named a relatively low-profile British prelate to replace Cardinal Robert Sarah as the leader of the Vatican office charged with overseeing most of the global Catholic Church's liturgical rites.

Archbishop Arthur Roche, who had served as the No. 2 official at the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments since 2012, is now the office's prefect.

Roche, 71, had been leading the Vatican office on an interim basis since February, when the pope accepted Sarah's resignation. Sarah had turned 75, the traditional retirement age for bishops, in June 2020.

Beyond Roche, Francis also appointed new No. 2 and No. 3 officials for the congregation. Bishop Vittorio Viola, until now the head of the Italian Diocese of Tortona, north of Genoa, will serve as secretary. Msgr. Aurelio Marcias, formerly a department head at the office, will now serve as its under-secretary

While in Leeds, Roche had also served as the chairman of the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), set up by bishops' conferences across the English-speaking world after the 1962-65 Second Vatican Council to help in providing translations for Latin-language liturgical texts.

During Roche's tenure at the commission, much of its authority had been assumed by a Vatican committee, known as Vox Clara, which had been created by Pope John Paul II in 2001 to specifically evaluate English-language liturgical translations.

Francis decentralized authority over how the texts used in the Catholic Church's liturgies are translated from Latin into local languages in 2017, moving most responsibility for the matter from the Vatican to national bishops' conferences.

Unusually, the official commentary from the Vatican worship office at the time of that change came not from Sarah, then the office's leader, but Roche. The archbishop said then that the pope's changes reflected a hope that the Vatican and bishops' conferences could work "in a spirit of dialogue" about liturgical translations.

MY TAKE

Appointment wise this is pretty much standard Francis. 

In the case of Sarah like that of Muller at the CDF, Francis has put up with someone who was not really on board with his program. When the time came for the appointment to be up, Francis simply accepts the resignation but does not give the guy any new appointment. Francis does not like the idea of promoting someone to get them out of the way.

At Worship just like at Doctrine, Francis has promoted the second in charge. In both cases those people were quiet good workers who did not have an agenda of their own. Francis really likes good workers!  Just do a good job and you are likely to be promoted. You don't have to be a strong supporter of  your boss. 

In the case of Worship the new guy is really an old guy who took part in the old system where things happened at the level of bishops conferences rather than in Rome. Francis wants to get back to that. 

P.S.

There are rumors that Francis will repeal Benedict's policy on the Extraordinary Form, returning to individual bishops the right to determine if, when and where the Extraordinary Form will be celebrated. Benedict had installed protections that allow any priest to celebrate it, and required bishops to provide Masses in the EF if a group requested it. Francis has often questioned those who want the EF. Recently he greatly reduced the celebration of the EF at Saint Peters by eliminating private Masses by clerics in the Vatican. No longer mass with server and no congregation.  Reader and congregation are required.

Looks like the Reform of the Reform is over even while Benedict is alive. But, of course, Francis has done this all very gently.  The new guy will be perfect for rolling out the roll back in the EF.  

The EF movement now has to hope that one of their guys, e.g. Sarah or Burke, becomes the Pope. There never really was much support among the bishops for the EF. They mainly view it as a nuisance. I think the cardinals would be very wary of electing an EF advocate as Pope. Benedict was really the best hope for those who prefer the Pre-Vatican II Mass.

Wuhan Lab Leak Theory

It seems that the scientific consensus has been that COVID-19 had a natural origin, that it started out as an animal virus which crossed species, perhaps with bat to human transmission.  Or maybe through an intermediate species, such as pangolin.  That is, until it wasn't the consensus any more.  The lab leak theory was dismissed early on in the pandemic by most in the scientific community, But lately it has gained traction again.  What happened?  

I attempted to find objective news sources to shed some light on the subject.  But that wasn't easy; I was able to find plenty of right wing and conservative news sources (Fox, New York Post, National Review, etc.) which basically said, "See?  We told you so!"  However, this article, Wuhan lab leak: Why scientists are interested in this Covid origin theory (msn.com) has a good discussion of the facts.

Staying grounded in reality

 Do you ever find it a struggle to discern what is real from what is fantasy?  Do you feel a temptation or an urge to recede from the struggles and evils of real life, into an unreal world which is arranged more to your liking?  Is the inability to stay rooted in the real world a recognized psychological malady?  Is there a diagnostic term for it?

A listening session with a bishop

The Holy See's announcement of a new synodal process which includes intra-diocesan consultations reminded me that I once sat in on a listening session with a bishop.

EPIDEMIOLOGISTS ON THE PANDEMIC

 IMPLICATIONS FOR CHURCH AND WORSHIP 

Summary

While small group events, (a bible study with a dozen people) or even a larger group event (such as a choir rehearsal) are safe if everyone is vaccinated, church worship services are risky (only 8% of epidemiologists are now willing to attend them) because the number of new cases per day is still high and many people are not yet vaccinated.  Vaccines are not one hundred percent effective; the higher the number of unvaccinated persons, and the higher the incidence in the community, the higher the risk of infection of a vaccinated person and their transmission of the virus to others who are at greater risk. Vaccinated persons at higher risk and/or caretakers of persons at high risk need to pay attention to what epidemiologists are doing and saying.

 Of the 723 epidemiologists who participated in the survey, 35 percent work for governments. The rest are mostly academics. The questionnaire was distributed to two major professional groups, the Society for Epidemiologic Research and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, as well as some individual scientists. The survey was done from April 28 to May 10. Not all epidemiologists answered every question

With Hugs and Haircuts, U.S. Epidemiologists Start Returning (Carefully!) to Everyday Life

“Overall, the epidemiologists’ advice was to hold on to most precautions just a little bit longer, particularly when it comes to indoor activities or those with large groups of strangers.” 

 Most epidemiologists (74%) hiked or gathered outdoors with a friend, and saw doctors for non-urgent appointments (64%).  The persons in these situations were safe and reliable.

 Epidemiologists said that vaccinated people should continue to limit the number of people they see especially indoors since vaccines aren’t one hundred percent effective.  

 Less than half (43%) of the respondents interacted outside within 6 feet without a mask (43%). Even fewer hugged or shook hands when greeting a friend (39%), or visited an older relative or friend in his/her home (35).  In all these situations vaccine status is less predictable  

 The more people that are in a space, the more chances the vaccine has to fail. This is especially true if the vaccine status of other people in the space is unknown.

 Almost every one stayed away from gyms (15%), weddings and funerals (10%), church services (8%) sporting events, concerts and plays (6%).

 Epidemiologists were even concerned about outdoor events, if the crowds are large and uncontrollable such as protests and concerts. They advise against attending such events

723 Epidemiologists on When and How the U.S. Can Fully Return to Normal

“Although government mandates are lifting, these experts say the pandemic won’t really end nationally until more people, including children, are vaccinated.”

 The true end of the pandemic, when it is safe to return to most activities without precautions, will need at least 70 percent of Americans of all ages to be vaccinated according to the epidemiologists. They think this will happen, but not as quickly as many Americans want.

 The respondents agree that Americans’ reluctance to accept vaccines is the biggest threat to ending the pandemic, along with the arrival of new variants and people’s unwillingness to observe social restrictions in the meantime.

 They were asked about masks before the new C.D.C guidance. “In particular, they say that masks are a norm that should continue. More than 80 percent of them said people should continue to wear masks when indoors with strangers for at least another year, and outdoors in crowds.”

 The epidemiologists took a long term general health perspective. They hoped that people would have to travel for work less often. They wanted expanded grocery delivery and takeout restaurant options to continue, as well as tele-health visits for routine medical appointments. Many buildings have improved their ventilation systems, more upgrades will pay off when it comes to other respiratory diseases. They also hoped people would keep habits that make them healthier in general: avoiding things like going to work when sick, shaking hands and even blowing out birthday candles. In other words they don’t want to return to the old normal but want a new healthier normal.

Hundreds of Epidemiologists Expected Mask-Wearing in Public for at Least a Year

This survey was taken before the new C.D.C guidance. In the survey, 80 percent said they thought Americans would need to wear masks in public indoor places for at least another year. Just 5 percent said people would no longer need to wear masks indoors by this summer.

“Unless the vaccination rates increase to 80 or 90 percent over the next few months, we should wear masks in large public indoor settings,”

In large crowds outdoors, like at a concert or protest, 88 percent of the epidemiologists said it was necessary even for fully vaccinated people to wear masks

One-quarter of the epidemiologists in the survey said they thought people would need to continue wearing masks in certain settings indefinitely, and some said they planned to continue to wear them in places like airplanes or concert halls, or during the winter virus season.

MY OPINION

When at the present time over ninety percent of more than seven hundred epidemiologists say they think it is too risky to attend church (along with sporting events, concerts, and plays) we ought to pay attention.

Why are events like church services so risky even for people who have been vaccinated?

Epidemiologists recognize that no vaccine is one hundred percent effective.  Vaccinated people can get the virus, be hospitalized and die. Therefore vaccinated people should continue to avoid places that carry the highest risk of exposure both for their own sake as well as that of vulnerable people among their contacts.

Assuming one is vaccinated, the most important risk factor is the number of new cases per day in one’s local area. If that were zero, there would be very little risk.  If there are only ten new cases per day in one’s city or county that would mean (assuming people will be infectious for two weeks) that there are at least 140 infected people who know they have the virus. The actual number who have the virus might be two or three times that many, maybe even five hundred people.  Right now new cases per day are far too high in almost all parts of the country.  Church services, sporting events, concerts and plays have the potential of having too many people who could spread the virus.

The second most important risk factor is the number of unvaccinated persons that one may encounter. Unvaccinated people are far more risky that vaccinated people.  Limiting one’s interactions only to vaccinated people greatly reduces one’s risk.  If one could be sure that everyone at church, a sporting event, a concert or a play were vaccinated, then these would be much safer events. As long as these events don’t require proof of vaccination in order to attend, they will remain very risky as long as the number of new cases per day is high.

Some people will attend these events because they are risk-takers, or because they think the benefits outweigh the risks. The value of the epidemiologists’ opinions is that they verify what is truly risky regardless of one’s willingness to take risks, or how one weighs the risks versus the benefits.

  

Rome Keeps American Bishops Busy

Pope Francis: The People of God must be consulted before the October 2023 synod of bishops

Pope Francis has decided that the synod will open in the Vatican and in every diocese throughout the Catholic world in October 2021. It will first go through a “diocesan phase” (October 2021 until April 2022) and subsequently a “continental phase” (September 2022 through March 2023) before concluding in “the universal church phase” at the Vatican with the synod of bishops in October 2023.

In an interview with Vatican Media, the cardinal explained that “the first and greatest innovation is the transformation of the synod from an event into a process,” as now each assembly of the synod develops in successive phases: the “preparatory phase, the celebratory phase, and the implementation phase.” He emphasized that the purpose of the first phase is the consultation of the People of God. He recalled that the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) “teaches that the People of God participate in the prophetic office of Christ” and “therefore, we must listen to the People of God, and this means going out to the local churches.”

 The aim of the diocesan phase is “to consult the people of God, so that the synodal process is carried out through listening to all the baptized,” who, as the Second Vatican Council said, “cannot err in matters of belief.”

He said the general-secretariat will send the bishops a preparatory document, accompanied by a questionnaire and a vademecum (handbook or manual) with proposals for consultation in each local church.

 The diocesan consultation will conclude with a moment of discernment, after which the local church will send its contribution to the bishops’ conference. The conference will then hold an assembly and engage in a period of discernment on the inputs that have come from the dioceses, after which they will produce a synthesis and then send it to Rome.

So the American Bishops will have to set aside time in their June meeting to figure out if they are going to do anything in a collaborative way instead of each bishops doing his own thing in his own diocese. Then they are going to have to spend  time in November figuring out how they are going to summarize all their individual diocesan reports into a grand report which is due by April 2022. (Maybe the Vatican will allow them to finalize it at their June 2022 meeting.

But then they are not done. They have to engage in the continental phase. It is not clear how the Vatican is defining continents. If North America and South America are separate where is the dividing line. But the Vatican may choose to treat the Americas as one continent. They like that idea. And its has some plausibility geographically and historically as being the New World.  I suspect there may to a little of both. Maybe North, Central and South American reports with an overall attempt to interrelate them. 

Now they have a worthy opponent, not just poor Joe Biden preoccupied with all our national and world problems. 

Yes Francis and the whole Vatican ready to be critical at the diocesan, national, and regional levels. The bishops will need all the resources of their big funders who want to do Francis in. I suspect the bishops will not lack that money nor right wing lay talent.. Their problem is lack of talent among the bishops. And of course Rome is very good at discerning between grass roots activity and false top down activity. 

 

A Different Take on the Mid-East Troubles

 NYT columnist Thomas Friedman makes the case that Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas need each other.   Opinion | For Trump, Hamas and Bibi, It Is Always Jan. 6 - The New York Times (nytimes.com):

 (Here is a link to the article in case you are paywalled out of NYT:  For Trump, Hamas and Netanyahu, it is always January 6 | Deccan Herald)

"There are many ways to understand what is happening today between Hamas and Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu of Israel, but I prefer to think about it like this: They are each having their own Jan. 6 moment."

Will the Current USA Pandemic Incidence Continue to Decline?

 Summary

The current decline in new cases at the rate of 2% per day is not the first decline.  The January –February decline at the rate of 2.5% ended in stagnation in March.  The July-August decline at the rate of 1.5% ended in the great spike which began in mid-September.  Can these past declines help us predict what will happen in the rest of this calendar year?

The courtesies of sharing one's vaccination status

I was (mostly) gently upbraided by one of our parishioners after mass yesterday.  I wouldn't want to say anything which would identify him, so I can't give the full context of our conversation here, but we were speaking about something where the question would naturally arise, Are you vaccinated yet?  So I asked him.  

And he refused to answer. 

Transitions

This is my homily for yesterday, which was the celebration of the Ascension of the Lord for the Chicago Archdiocese (and most US dioceses).  The readings for the day are here.  Sorry for being a day late; come to think of it, I'm usually a dollar short, too.

What Qualities Should a Pastor Have?

 We found out a few weeks back that our pastor was being transferred, and we would be getting someone new.  New to us, that is.  We are still waiting to hear who he will be.  It is a little past the time when pastoral assignments are normally announced, but the past year and a half  have not been normal times. There are a lot of things to be taken into consideration, and we understand that.  But there are always things people hope for (and hope against!). So I would like to discuss some of the things I hope for in a pastor.

A bridge partway to normal

In Illinois, our governor has announced that we're able to enter the next phase of our COVID journey.  The state is calling this next phase the "Bridge Phase".  It is supposed to be the bridge between restrictions and pre-pandemic normal life.  Depending on what activity one wishes to do, the restrictions have been eased up slightly.  Or considerably.  Or not at all.

The bridge phase went into effect yesterday.  Among the main provisions:

• Dining out: very slight changes.  For indoor dining, tables must remain six feet apart, with no parties larger than 10.  These are unchanged from the previous phase.  Standing capacity (which I assume refers to taverns) has gone from 25% of capacity to 30% of capacity
• Health and fitness centers: capacity has gone from 50% to 60%.  Indoor class size maximum remains unchanged at 50.
• Offices, retail and similar business settings: from 50% of capacity to 60% of capacity
• Meetings, conferences and conventions: for large events, from the lesser of 250 people / 25% of capacity to the lesser of 1,000 people / 60% of capacity
• Theaters, performing arts centers and spectator sporting events: for large venues, from 25% of capacity to 60% of capacity

Various retails are setting their own rules.  None can be more permissive than the state permits, but some will choose to be more restrictive.  Walmart and Sam's Club has announced it won't require masks anymore if that is permitted in the local community.  Other retailers including Target, Kroger and Walgreens will continue to require masks for its shoppers.

For the Catholic churches in the area, some things also are loosening up.  The archdiocese sets its own rules, based on CDC guidelines, consultation with local and state public health officials, and its own judgment.  Among the new guidelines:

• Mass seating capacity: has increased from 25% of capacity to 60% of capacity.  In addition, seating distancing has been reduced from six feet to three feet
• Communion: face shields no longer need to be worn by those ministers who are fully vaccinated.  Other provisions (ministers must wear masks, recipients must sanitize hands, lines must be single file) remain in effect
• Instrumentalists, including wind instrumentalists, can now return, if they are fully vaccinated and can provide proof to the pastor or music director
• Choirs can resume, for those choir members who are fully vaccinated.  They must provide proof of vaccination to the pastor or music director, must wear masks at all times, and must stay at least six feet apart from one another
• Masks: must still be worn by all at mass, for now.  All at Catholic schools also must continue to be masked, for now
• Registration and sign-in: continues to be required for liturgical services, for now 

Pre-eminent Moral and Political Evils

 

I think Jim raised a good question about how do we determine what is a pre-eminent evil.  I have a totally different framework for discussing this and so I am starting a new thread.

As a social psychologist trained in both psychology and sociology I see analysis of evil at the individual and societal levels to be totally different.  As a psychologist trying to understand individual behavior it useful to know that variable A actually effects variable X  at the individual level when everything else is held constant or randomized in the laboratory. However in the social world variable A may contribute very little to variable X because it functions in one way at one level of variable B and maybe another way or not at all  at some level of variable C. In others  words how we change a society can be very different from how we change individuals within that society. 

Pre-eminent Moral (individual) Evil

At the individual level, the taking of the life of another individual is obviously the pre-eminent moral evil. It can only be done when our own life or third party’s life is threatened, and then only as a last resort. 

In the case of abortion, the church automatically excommunicates an individual who procures an abortion. This is reserved to the bishop, who in many cases delegates this to any priest with faculties to hear confession.

If the bishops are so concerned that the faithful clearly understanding that abortion is a pre-eminent moral evil why are they not focusing upon Catholics who actually have abortions. 

Why not make the process of getting the abortion excommunication lifted a lengthy, time consuming and very public process as in the early church?  Many abortions would not happen if Catholics realized that abortion is more than another form of birth control (which many Catholics practice while going to communion) but rather something that is deeply evil.  

Of course many Catholics who have abortions would decide simply to leave the church rather than go through some repentance program.  Other Catholics would simply say that this proves the Church is against women.  The bishops have made a “prudential” decision that it is better to attack a few usually far distant politicians than to confront the problem in their own diocese and parishes. But how is that any different than Catholic politicians who make similar “prudential” decisions in the political world?  Bishops! Remove the beam in your own eyes!

Pre-eminent evil on the societal level is completely different.

NUCLEAR WARFARE. There is no doubt in my mind that in the period of the cold war, nuclear warfare  was THE pre-eminent evil. Vast numbers of people may have died and vast areas of the world may have been destroyed, and the consequences might have lasted for centuries even millennia.

Many people voted against Goldwater because the Democrats raised the specter that he might lead us into nuclear war.  That issue has receded into the background with the breakup of the Soviet Union, but voting against Trump because of his instability was justified by this pre-eminent life issue alone.

CLIMATE CHANGE. While this will take a longer time to happen, it results could be just as devastating as nuclear warfare. More importantly there is no quick fix to prevent it, as there is in the case of nuclear  disarmament.  People may disagree about the extant and the timeframe for climate change, but voting against Trump is also justified on this pre-eminent life issue alone.

PANDEMICS. While a global pandemic once looked like a far off issue, right now it is the pre-eminent life issue. We came very close to a global health meltdown. In fact with the rate of virus mutation we could still end up with an even far more devastating pandemic. If not with this virus type then with the next type. We must organize our country and the world against pandemics.  I think Trump lost the election on this pre-eminent life issue.

So we have THREE PRE-EMINENT LIFE ISSUES all of which threaten the world with mass destruction and mass loss of life that could last for decades, maybe even a century.  Note I have kept to human life issues. I have said nothing about social and economic issues. They have a clear impact upon quantity as well as the quality of human life. How do we prioritize these three human life issues and relate them to abortion

Francis  has FOUR PRINCIPLES for pursuing Peace and the Common Good. The third is  Realities are more important than ideas

There also exists a constant tension between ideas and realities. Realities simply are, whereas ideas are worked out. There has to be continuous dialogue between the two, lest ideas become detached from realities. It is dangerous to dwell in the realm of words alone, of images and rhetoric. So a third principle comes into play: realities are greater than ideas

This is a very scientific approach. How we evaluate these three pre-eminent life issues will in fact depend upon a lot of data, analysis and good theories. We are not going to find the answers from theology. Good and wise people are going to disagree about what resources we should devote to each life issue. 

How do these three pre-eminent life issues relate to abortion?  The answer is simple. Abortion would cease completely if individuals simply stopped choosing abortion.  Catholics are not forced to have abortions. All these other social pre-eminent life issues depend heavily upon government action. Abortion is one that could be solved by individuals at the personal and community action level. Why make it the chief priority of government?   

Of course as a Democrat I think that raising the minimum wage, supporting  unions, free college education, universal health care, universal child care, paid family leave, paid sick leave are all pro-life issues. All of these create an environment in which people are encouraged and supported to have children, and therefore less likely to have an abortion.  

Why when I can vote for these three Pre-eminent Life Issues as well as encourage more people to have children would I ever consider voting for someone who might or might not have appointed a Supreme Court Justice, who might or might not overthrow Roe vs. Wade which might or might not end abortions.  That sounds more like playing the lottery than being a responsible citizen.

 

 

 

 

Some thoughts on that letter from the Holy See to Archbishop Gomez

What follows are some miscellaneous thoughts about the letter sent by Cardinal Luis Ladaria, SJ, the Holy See's prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), to Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles, the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).  The letter addresses the highly-publicized intention of some American bishops to have the USCCB issue a consistent set of guidelines on the worthiness of pro-choice Catholic politicians to receive communion. 

To the best of my knowledge, the actual text of Ladaria's letter has not been made public, but some reporters have seen it.  My analysis and comments are based on the story in America by Gerard O'Connell, the magazine's Vatican correspondent.  NewGathering readers interested in additional commentary on this topic may read Jack Rakosky's post here.  

The ministry of Catechist in the Church

 Francis has given the American Bishops some more work. Perhaps it will keep them out of trouble

The ministry of Catechist in the Church is an ancient one

Therefore, after having taken all things into consideration, and by apostolic authority

I establish

the lay ministry of Catechist.

9. I invite the Episcopal Conferences to render effective the ministry of Catechist, determining the necessary process of formation and the normative criteria for admission to this ministry and devising the most appropriate forms for the service which these men and women will be called to exercise in conformity with the content of this Apostolic Letter.

Earlier this year the Pope determined the women could be given the permanent ministries of Lector and Acolyte. So the bishops will have to do the same things as above for both those ministries. 

It a good time to think about how our parishes might look if with had laity instituted in all these of these ministries. 

Think about your parishes and parishes with whom  you are familiar. How many of these might their be, what might be their duties, how might they related to one another, various ministries in the parishes, priests and deacons and various paid people in the parish, e.g. the choir director, pastoral associates, business managers, etc. What relationship might they have to parish schools?  RCIA? 

Should all these ministries be mostly voluntary as is the case with deacons, or should we institute a lot of our paid parish personnel into these ministries?

Do you have any concerns about turning limited term appointments to reader, Eucharistic ministers, and religious educators into more permanent ministries? What are the advantages and disadvantages to this? 

Just Because You're Paranoid, Doesn't Mean They're Not Out to Get You

You may have read this article, from Jim McCrea's email thread.  I wanted to bring it over here and discuss it a bit:

"While district of San Francisco state Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat, has hailed the University of California Health System as embodying the state's progressive values, he has also lambasted its contracts with facilities that he said forbid gender-affirming and abortion health care."

"These contracts often include partnerships with Catholic-affiliated institutions like Dignity Health, the largest hospital provider in California, which, according to its website, "agree[s] not to perform certain services like elective abortions, elective sterilization or in-vitro fertilization."

"Wiener has said these restrictions "endanger lives" and, now, he wants to pass legislation that would bar UC Health from contracting with hospitals that prevent UC physicians and medical students from providing reproductive and LGBTQ-inclusive care, including: contraception, tubal ligation, abortion, gender-affirming care and treatment for incomplete miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy."

"...Senate Bill 379 would ensure that, moving forward, UC Health would only affiliate with hospitals that will allow its staff to provide all necessary care. The bill cleared the Senate Health Committee in late April and is scheduled to be heard May 10 by the Senate Committee on Appropriations."

Vatican sends letter to U.S. bishops:

 

Don’t rush the debate on Communion, politicians and abortion

Against the Republican Bishops plan to win the political game against the Democrats by scoring touchdowns against Democratic politicians, Pope Francis has just moved the goalposts outside the stadium.

Of course he can say that he did not do that personally. However his Jesuit head of the Congregation on the Doctrine of the Faith obviously regards his position as a mandate from the Pope under the Jesuit's vow of personal obedience to any mission of the Pope. And as a Jesuit he is required to have total unanimity with his superior by manifesting any doubts he might have about how to proceed in this mission.

1. The bishops are preparing a document which will require two-thirds approval by the bishops plus Rome before it becomes policy for all the bishops. Essentially the CDF has made it clear that near unanimity will be required for approval by Rome, i.e. this must unite all the bishops. When Ratzinger was head of the CDF under JP2 he gutted the authority of bishop conferences by maintaining that they could only teach as the college of bishops by unanimous vote. The CDF is regarding this document as more of a doctrinal than a disciplinary document. 

2. The  deliberations about this must be conducted in a serene manner. Francis has made clear that synodal government is not a parliament  but rather a discernment of the will of the Holy Spirit. Yes there will be differences of opinion. These must be honestly faced. But they must find a way that transcends the differences to bring about unity. He declined to implement the recommendations of the Synod of the Amazon on married priests and women deacons even though they had the required number of votes precisely because they polarized rather than brought about unity. 

3. The deliberations must involve actual personal dialogue with Catholic politicians. The bishops must understand why Catholic politicians are pro-choice and what understanding they have of the Church's teaching. The CDF letter calls them pro-choice rather than the bishops favorite word pro-abortion. In other words, the bishops cannot deny communion to a straw man.

4. The document cannot apply just to politicians but must apply to all the faithful.  While most of the bishops might be willing to have some other bishop confront a politician, and many might be willing to do it themselves, few are going to be willing to confront Catholic Democrats in the parishes. Those could retaliate to even the possibility by withholding their financial support. Is not going to happen.

5. The document cannot apply just to abortion  but must include other issues that disqualify people from communion.  What are they? Evidently more than life issues like euthanasia and the death penalty.  What are the chances that the bishops would agree on what these might be. Probably zero.

6. The bishops must consult with other bishops conferences around the world and get their No Objections.. Now that might not be difficult if the document was just about abortion and just about politicians. But are other bishops conferences around the world going to agree to including laity and a bunch of other issues. Again zero chance.

With this long road ahead are the bishops going to be willing in June to approve by majority vote the development of a document to be presented to them in November.?  Before this document most people thought they would. Now it is up for grabs. since the CDF has raised all these additional requirements for ultimate success.

Mother's Day Angst

I had a nice Mother's Day, hope any NG readers who are moms did as well.  Our older son and wife came for lunch, and sprung for take-out, so we didn't have to prepare a meal, which was appreciated. It was especially appreciated that now we can get together, since the adults are fully vaxed.  2020 was a long year without much in person family contact.  Our family celebrations of Mother's Day and Father's Day tend to be pretty casual, with visits or phone calls, and small gifts; not a big production.

Faith and Attitudes Toward Covid Vaccination

 

Religious Identities and the Race Against the Virus:

 Engaging Faith Communities on COVID-19 Vaccination

The above is a link to the full report, which has an executive summary. However there is also a webinar including slides which can be accessed here: Faith-Based Approaches Can Positively Impact COVID-19 Vaccination Efforts.  The first thirty minutes of their ninety minute program is a fine graphical presentation much of which I have summarized in one chart below.

Attitudes Toward Vaccination (%)

	Acceptor	Wait and See	Only if required	Refused
Americans	58	19	9	14
Democrats	73	15	6	6
Independents	58	20	9	13
Republicans	45	32	12	23
		Hesitant
Jewish	85	10		5
White Catholics	68	23		8
White Mainline	63	24		13
Unaffiliated	60	28		12
Hispanic Catholic	56	34		10
Mormon	50	33		17
Black Protestant	49	32		19
While Evangelicals	45	28		26
Hispanic  Protestant	43	42		15
White: 4 yr. degree	77	16		7
Black: 4yr. degree	66	25		9
Hispanic:4yr degree	66	26		8
65 and older	79	13		7
50-64	58	27		14
30-49	48	35		17
18-29	49	33		18

My Comments

"Tis the Season for Change (updated)

May is usually the time when we find out about impending changes at the parish and diocese level.  This past weekend I was visiting family in my hometown, which is in the Grand Island Diocese.  At the Saturday evening Mass, their pastor made the announcement that Msgr. James Golka, of Grand Island had been named as the successor to the retiring bishop of Colorado Springs, CO, Bishop Michael Sheridan.  The pastor said, "We of the Grand Island Diocese are honored that one of our own was chosen as bishop of Colorado Springs.  We congratulate him, and wish him all the best. But his shoes will be hard to fill, especially as clergy are already so thin on the ground here."

Update: On the subject of clergy assignments, be sure to read the article from The Tablet on Jim McCrea's email feed, "The None-Makers: Is Anybody Minding the Store?"

Is the Pandemic Here to Stay?

 A wake up call this morning! 

My comments:

1. This is a global problem. As long as there are places in the world in which the Virus is raging, it will mutate. Those mutations often will favor ease of transmission as in the B.1.1.7 virus. They may cause worst cases as in the B.1.1.7 virus.  They may be more vaccine resistant  which does not seem to be the case in terms of the B.1.1.7 virus.  Our only options are to vaccinate everyone every where, or to drastically curtail travel to and from the USA. Since neither of these options are likely, a virus that is both more resistant to the vaccine and easily transmissible will likely reach the US very quickly before we are on the alert. 

2. This is a US problem. We have been unwilling to engage in the severe lockdowns, intrusive tracking of cases, and quarantining of people that have enabled other countries such as China and New Zealand to contain the virus without vaccines.  We have done a very poor job of doing all the testing, and analysis of test swabs that could enable us to detect new dangerous forms of mutations, some of which could originate here as well as being quickly imported from other countries. 

3. We have been unwilling to mandate vaccinations, or  require people to show proof of vaccination in to order to enter into buildings, or to engage in outdoor activities without social distancing. We have a libertarian problem in that many people are unwilling to alter their behavior for the benefit of others. 

4. With the present variants of the virus, children to not seem to be primary sources of transmission of the virus, nor in most cases do they get severe cases. That could all change if the virus becomes more like the seasonal flue. With the new variants of the virus severe cases have migrated to younger and  younger people, they may eventually cause severe cases in children. So ultimately we will not be safe until we have vaccinated children.

5. For the foreseeable future each of us personally will be safe only in bubbles of people whom we know have been vaccinated. We will not be safe in large meetings nor in places where  masks and social distancing are not practiced. These will all be areas of virus transmission. 

Are we going to continue Mass with masks and social distancing without congregational singing for the foreseeable future since we are likely to have some unvaccinated persons in the congregation?  Or are we willing to institute Masses with singing reserved for the vaccinated? 

6. If at any time in the future any where in the world the virus mutates in to a form that is highly resistant to present vaccines, we will have to go back into social isolation until new vaccines are developed, that would take another year, and then another six months to be administered.

Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

Are Americans too insular?

I recently read an article in The Atlantic that makes an argument that I have made many times in recent years -  America needs to learn from others in order to "make America Great Again".   Americans need to travel more, and not in group tours or cruises if they can afford to travel independently (generally independent travel is significantly less expensive than tours, at least the "high" end tours).. They might as well go to an Imax for travel movies- except that the Imax theaters don't have as good of food as even most street carts do in other countries.

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/07/to-make-america-great-again-we-need-to-leave-the-country/259653/