Seasons of Grace

We, the on-line community, were all talking about it yesterday:   Newsweek magazine sent out an advance copy of its cover for next week’s issue, featuring far left political commentator Andrew Sullivan’s offensive story titled “Why Are Obama’s Critics So Dumb?”

Sarah Palin, already no fan of the abrasive Sullivan, tweeted to Newsweek:  “Know what’s truly dumb? Giving a cover story to the Trig Truther conspiracy kook writer who thinks I didn’t give birth to my son.”

Palin was referring to Sullivan’s assertion, back during her vice presidential campaign, that she is not Trig Palin’s real mother, and that she “faked the pregnancy to avoid embarrassment for her daughter [Bristol] or for political gain or some combination of reasons.”

Well, yes, Andrew Sullivan is an incendiary radical.  Or, more fairly, he is an HIV-positive homosexual activist, a libertarian, a proponent of legalizing marijuana and prostitution.  His amoral ponderings have appeared in The New Republic, The New York Times Magazine, Time, the Atlantic Monthly, The Daily Beast, and The Sunday Times of London. 

Palin’s Twitter message brought a sneering response from Sullivan, who insists that he “doesn’t know” whether Sarah Palin gave birth.  He reiterated his demand that Palin produce medical records. (Umm…. Medical records are a confidential matter and none of his business, right?)

So I’m not expecting much from the cavalier Sullivan, who somehow never learned proper manners when he was growing up.  But my question is, Why would Newsweek—a purportedly “neutral” news magazine—offend half of its already-declining readership by carrying this offensive article, and by giving it cover status? 

Name-calling, bandying about words like “dumb” and “insane” [Sullivan used that word, too]:  That’s the stuff of kindergarten classrooms.  By second grade, good parents and concerned teachers have helped children to get beyond “sticks and stones” to real dialogue.

Newsweek’s editors do understand—don’t they?—that here in the good old U.S. of A., where we have the right to free speech, adult Americans discuss and debate issues, present viewpoints, analyze results, and then we vote—at the ballot box, for sure, but also with our pocketbooks. 

If you are still a subscriber to Newsweek, perhaps it’s time to cancel your subscription.

If you enjoyed this post, then you might consider subscribing to our feed via RSS. Thanks for visiting!

One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”
Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.

Martin Luther King, Jr.
“Letter from a Birmingham Jail”
April 16, 1953

Was Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. a Thomist?

Well, yes. Thomas Aquinas argued that laws bind the conscience—that is, obligate one to obey—only when the laws conform to “eternal law.”

St. Thomas Aquinas, in the Summa Theologicae, argued that we must obey laws only

• when they conform to “eternal law,” the law of God, and
• when that eternal law is self-evident—is exhibited in the universal principles of practical reason (what we call “natural law”).

To be just, a law must be good as to:

1. its end: it must be ordered to the common good;
2. its author: it must not exceed the jurisdiction of the one who imposes it;
3. its form: it must not place disproportionate burdens on any of the subjects involved.

Thomas Aquinas taught that a law that is unjust in any of these ways does not impose any obligation. That is, a law ceases to have binding force if any of these is true:

1. the law is not ordered to the common good, but merely to the private good of those who impose it;
2. it exceeds the authority of those who impose it; or
3. it places disproportionate burdens on any of the people in the community.

Aquinas explains that an act that does any of these things is more like an act of violence than like a law. It may share some features of a just law, but it is not a law in precisely the same sense.

So Aquinas teaches, as does St. Augustine, that an unjust law is no law at all. The only way in which an unjust law may obligate is indirectly—when it is clear that disobeying it would lead to evils worse than obeying it.

Aquinas’ third argument against an unjust law is that human laws do not obligate when they bring injury and loss of character on human beings—when they oppress the poor and humble. Oppressive laws, Aquinas taught, are perversions of law, acts of violence; and no one need feel guilty about disobeying an unjust law.

So Martin Luther King, Jr. is, in fact, a Thomist. In his famed Letter from a Birmingham Jail, he argued that a nonviolent campaign follows four stages:

1. collection of facts to determine whether injustice actually exists;
2. negotiation in order to resolve the matter peacefully;
3. self-purification, in which there is careful preparation for nonviolent direct action;
4. direct action through nonviolent means.

Were the civil rights protestors in 1963 offending God when they broke the law and sat at a lunch counter, or refused to give up their seat on the bus to a white person? No, said Dr. King; and to prove that, he cited Aquinas’ argument. “Any law that degrades human personality,” said King, “is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality.”

What King did was skillfully apply Aquinas’ Third Objection—teaching that the South’s segregation laws were unjust because of the moral and physical injury they induced.

Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., continues his legacy of peaceful protest today—reminding us that her uncle was pro-life. Had King lived to see the dire consequences of Roe v. Wade, the innocent children torn apart in the womb, he would have applied Aquinas’ logic to this most pressing societal ill.

If you enjoyed this post, then you might consider subscribing to our feed via RSS. Thanks for visiting!

St. Francis of Paola was a humble man of god, a hermit who spent six years in a remote sea cave near Paola, on Italy’s southern seacoast.  He founded the Hermits of St. Francis of Assisi, a contemplative order approved by the Holy See in 1474.  In the year 1492, the year Christopher Columbus discovered the New World, Francis renamed his community the “Minims”—“the least”—because he wanted humility to be the hallmark of his friars.  He is the patron saint of sailors; and in 1963, Pope John XXIII named him the patron of Calabria.

Since 2007 a 3.5-ton bronze statue of Francis of Paola, wearing his brown Franciscan robe and with one arm extended in a blessing, has stood on the seabed off the coast of Calabria.  It’s one of several submerged statues along the coastline, underwater shrines popular with tourists and  fishermen and scuba divers. 

But sometime in December, the 7.2-foot bronze statue mysteriously disappeared from its concrete moorings 95 feet beneath the surface of the sea.  The Italian carabinieri (police) and Coast Guard are perplexed as to what happened to the heavy saint.  They are investigating reports of a large statue-like object which was seen in the back of a van on December 30 or 31.  Others suggest that a large boat, fishing illegally off the Italian coast, may have snagged the statue in its net.

The mere existence of such an underwater shrine sparked my curiosity, leading me to explore the wonders of the Internet seeking other “divers’ shrines.”  Here are a few of them:

Christ of the Abyss (Italian:  “Il Cristo degli Abissi”).  This submerged bronze statue of Jesus stands 56 feet below the water’s surface in the Mediterranean.  It’s located off San Fruttuoso, near the site where Italian diver Dario Gonzatti, the first Italian to use SCUBA gear, died in 1947.   

Christ of the Abyss – Key Largo.  This 8 ½ foot, 4,000-pound statue is made from the same mold as the Italian one.  Since 1966, it has stood in 25 feet of water near Dry Rocks, off Key Largo, Florida, in the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park.  It’s one of the most visited diver sites in the world.

Our Lady at Cirkewwa.  Divers near Malta’s northernmost coast frequently swim past a statue of Our Lady in an underwater cave near the picturesque harbor of Cirkewwa.  Since the statue was placed in 1987, Cirkewwa has become a popular destination for tourists.    

Our Lady of Lebanon.  This statue is currently on dry land.  In 2005, a young couple celebrating their wedding anniversary submerged the statue in 39 feet of water, facing the historical ” Lady of the Seas church” on the coast of Batroun.  However, Lebanon’s largest underwater statue was brought to the surface by looters and sold to a millionaire collector; but with the help of the young couple, it has been recovered, the pirates were jailed, and the statue will be re-submerged at a different site.   

Bien Unido Double Barrier Reef – Underwater Grotto.  In the Philippines, a new underwater shrine allows Catholic divers to combine prayer and play, visiting statues of the Virgin Mary and the Holy Infant Jesus.  The 14-foot statues were installed in 2010, sixty feet below the surface on the Danajon Reef, to remind illegal fishermen that God also created the seas and the creatures that live there.

If you enjoyed this post, then you might consider subscribing to our feed via RSS. Thanks for visiting!

I know—I’m coming really late to the dance. In the last several months, everyone and his brother has jumped into the fray to beat up on Denver Broncos’ starting quarterback Tim Tebow.

Actually, though, what I want to do is something quite different:  I want to use this winsome young man as a foil, merely to talk about PREJUDICE.

I have in mind two kinds of prejudice:

1. Prejudice Against Faith.  The prejudice against Tim Tebow and, by extension, against all people of faith.  The prejudice on the part of sports reporters, the entertainment media, even his teammates.
2. Prejudice Against the Catholic Faith.  The prejudice of the Tebow family, especially his father Bob Tebow, toward Catholics.

Let me explain.

First, reporters and writers from the secular left have decried Tebow’s “in-your-face” expressions of faith.  Religion is okay, they tell us, but should be kept private—not flaunted on the field nor vocalized in every post-game interview.  Athletes, even Tebow’s own teammates, have mocked his on-field bended-knee prayer posture.  All the “Tebowing” talk has become a cliché on late-night talk shows and radio sports channels.

Actually, though, the sports pages are replete with stories about athletes who take their faith seriously. 

• Brian Dawkins, a teammate of Tim Tebow’s on the Denver Broncos, is actually more outspoken about his faith than is Tebow. 
• Pittsburgh Steelers star Troy Polamalu is known among his teammates for his spiritual devotion.  The Greek Orthodox Christian prays during the action—crossing himself before every play and sometimes after.  Of the team’s 2006 Superbowl win, Polamalu said it was “really beautiful and a blessing.  But success in football doesn’t matter.  Success in anything doesn’t matter.  As Mother Teresa said, God calls us not to be successful but to be faithful.  My prayer is that I would glorify God no matter what, and not have success be the definition of it.”
• New York Giants kicker Jay Feely, who was second in the NFL last season with 148 points, is a devout Catholic who seeks to use his football stardom to affect people’s lives in a positive way.  He described a particular meeting with a sick little boy:  “That was my moment of clarity.  It solidified my faith.  That was when I understood my life as a man….”
• Minnesota Vikings backup quarterback Mike McMahon, a lifelong Catholic, carries a rosary and prays every day. 
• German soccer legend Franz Beckenbauer recommitted himself to his Catholic faith after meeting Pope Benedict XVI in 2005.  “Benedict XVI leads people to the Church,” Beckenbauer told aMunich newspaper, “and I am the best example of that.”

So why, then, is there an outcry among some groups, who urge Tebow to keep his faith private?  Is it possibly that his strongly pro-life television commercial filmed with his mother, that aired during last year’s Superbowl, has offended some  viewers?  Or has the climate just become more toxic for faith?

Then, there’s another kind of prejudice—that demonstrated by believers of some Christian denominations toward adherents of the Catholic faith.  And unfortunately, it would appear that Tim’s father Bob, and probably Tim himself, fall into this group.

Somehow as we’ve cheered Tebow’s public acts of piety, we’ve failed to notice some discriminatory messages emanating from his father’s Bob Tebow Evangelistic Association (BTEA), the missionary organization in the Philippines to which Tim contributes both financial and hands-on support.

Bob Tebow’s missionary efforts in the Philippines began in 1985.  Bob, his wife Pam and their five children lived in the Philippines from 1985 to 1990, preaching the gospel, planting churches, and establishing a staff of Filipino national evangelists, which now number 52.  In addition to training the BTEA staff, Bob also began holding seminars and conferences to train local Filipino pastors. 

Among the BTEA’s missionary efforts is an orphanage, Uncle Dick’s House, which is now home to 50 orphans, and a boat ministry intended to reach every small island in the Philippine island chain. 

On the BTEA website, Bob Tebow claims, “In a country of 92,000,000, it is estimated that over 65,000,000 Filipinos have never once heard the gospel of Jesus Christ.  Currently, there are 41,949 barangays (villages), and 26,675 (64%) of them have no evangelical church of any kind.” And, he adds, “…many Filipinos would believe in Jesus if they were just given the opportunity.”

BUT….  In actuality, the Philippines are a strongly Catholic country.  According to the most recent data, fully 82.9% of Filipinos are Catholic.

Bob Tebow believes that Catholics are not Christian, that they do not believe in Jesus, and that they need to be converted to Tebow’s particular brand of Evangelical Protestantism.  His life-long ministry has been devoted to “converting” Catholics away from their faith.

That is an insidious prejudice, and one which must be countered by Truth.

If you enjoyed this post, then you might consider subscribing to our feed via RSS. Thanks for visiting!

“We’re offering prayers of thanksgiving,” said Paul Undlin, senior pastor of Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Church.  “This whole thing has been a weight on my shoulders.  It’s been a cloud over my ministry, over the whole church.”

He was referring, of course, to the case of Hosanna-Tabor Church and School v. EEOC, the Supreme Court’s “ministerial exception” case which was decided this week by a landmark 9-0 vote. 

He accepted congratulations on the Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of the church; and he expressed his relief that his time could now be spent, not poring over lengthy legal briefs, but on the work of the gospel. 

*     *     *     *     *

All eyes are focused this week on Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Church in Redford, Michigan.  Hosanna-Tabor Church and School v. EEOC is, by some estimations, the most important religious-freedom case to reach the Supreme Court in the history of our country; and the generosity and deeply Christian perspective of the ministry staff at Hosanna-Tabor was truly an inspiration.

Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Church is a small community church affiliated with the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.  According to Pastor Paul J. Undlin, there are about 250 members; and typically, 163 of them worship at the church each Sunday.  Pastor Paul, as he prefers to be called, has been at the church for 3½ years (since June 2008), and so was not present at the time of Cheryl Perich’s employment, nor was he involved in her dismissal.

Still, Pastor Paul explains that the flurry of briefs that crossed his desk, and the calls that came whenever the story appeared in the news, took a good amount of his time.  He wanted to be sure that he and his staff were well prepared—that their words would convey the “right” message of truth and grace.

He wanted to be sure, too, that they did not speak ill of the former teacher who had opposed them in the court fight.  “She was ill used by the EEOC,” Pastor Paul explained.  “She was taken advantage of by them.  They have dragged her along on this seven-year journey, as well.”

He was grateful for the case’s resolution:  The Obama Administration’s over-reaching was ruled unconstitutional by a unanimous 9-0 ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States.  “How often,” Pastor Paul asked, “has the Supreme Court been unanimous?” He pointed out, though, that it was to be expected.  “You don’t have to look far into the Constitution to see the ministerial exception!” he avered. 

The first few words of the First Amendment would, in fact, seem to support his view: 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

THE CASE AGAINST HOSANNA-TABOR CHURCH AND SCHOOL

Well, actually, make that simply “Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Church.”  The school actually closed three years ago—merging its elementary program with that of another school, and making the reinstatement of former fourth grade teacher Cheryl Perich a moot point. 

Perich, according to court documents, began her employment at Hosanna-Tabor School in 2000 as a lay teacher; but upon completion of a program of theological study at Concordia College, she was invited to become a “called” teacher, a member of the ministry team.  Perich accepted their call; as a member of the ministerial team, she taught classes, taught religion, and led worship services.  She became ill, however, early in the  2004-2005 school year, eventually being diagnosed with narcolepsy; and the school contracted with a lay teacher to replace her for the year.  When Ms. Perich announced in January that she was ready to return to the classroom, she was not welcomed back by the school, now under contract with another teacher. 

Perich did not take the news well, even when the school offered to cover part of her health insurance costs.  She threatened to sue—but the confrontation backfired and the parish, displeased with her attitude, rescinded her call and her employment was formally terminated on April 11, 2005.  

In the case, she had not sought to be reinstated; since the school no longer exists, that was never an option.  She did, though, hope to receive back wages, punitive damages and other benefits.

A small church like Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran had little hope of raising the funds necessary, had the Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff.  Pastor Paul admitted that had they lost, the church would have been forced to close.  The ministry would have simply disappeared.

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S RECORD OF OBSTRUCTING RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

Since the start of the Obama Administration, the federal government has been pushing, demanding, inserting itself into the private affairs of the churches. 

Bishop William Lori, testifying before the House Judiciary Committee in October 2011, cited recent examples of government usurpation of the rights of religious institutions:

• In August, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued regulations to mandate coverage of contraception (including abortifacients) and sterilization as “preventive services” in almost all private health insurance plans.  There was an exception for certain religious organizations; but the exemption was so narrow that few would qualify—and the exception does nothing to protect the conscience rights of insurers or individuals.
• In May 2011, HHS added a new requirement to its cooperative agreements and government contracts for services to victims of human trafficking and to refugees who are unaccompanied minors.  Under the new policy, highly qualified service providers (such as the USCCB’s Migration and Refugee Services) were barred from participation in the program because they could not in conscience provide the “full range” of contraceptive services—namely, abortion and contraception. 
• The State Department’s U.S. Aid for International Development (USAID) is increasingly requiring contractors, such as Catholic Relief Services, to provide comprehensive HIV prevention activities (including condom distribution), as well as full integration of its programs with reproductive health activities (including provision of artificial contraception) as part of their international relief and development programs.  Under this new requirement, some of the most effective providers helping to prevent AIDS inAfrica and other developing nations will be excluded.
• The federal Department of Justice (DoJ) has ratcheted up its attack on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was passed during the Clinton Administration in 1996, by mischaracterizing it as “bigotry.”  In March 2011, the DoJ stopped defending DOMA against constitutional challenges; and in July, the Department began filing briefs attacking DOMA’s constitutionality, claiming that supporters of the law could only have been motivated by bias and prejudice. 
• The Department of Justice also sought to undermine religious liberty in the critically important “ministerial exception” case, Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC.  The Department of Justice could have taken the position that the “ministerial exception,” though generally providing strong protection for the right of religious groups to choose their ministers without government intrusion, didn’t apply in the case before the court.  Instead, the DoJ attacked the very existence of the exception, in opposition to a vast coalition of religious groups urging its preservation through their amicus curiae briefs. 

Religious liberty has been in the crosshairs at the local level, too, with the redefinition of marriage. 

• In New York, county clerks faced legal action for refusing to participate in same-sex unions, and gay rights advocates boast how little religious freedom protection individuals and groups will enjoy under the new law. 
• In Illinois, Catholic Charities has been driven out of the foster care business because it recognizes the unique value of man-woman marriage for the well-being of children.

If you enjoyed this post, then you might consider subscribing to our feed via RSS. Thanks for visiting!