Ecumenical frivolities for the weekend

Quiz: Could you be Archbishop of Canterbury?

Morality Quiz: How good are you?
Kind of silly, but you can post the answers on your own blogs.

Belief-O-Matic. Anything's possible in the land of religion blogs, so here it is: a worthwhile online quiz (!) that will provoke your thoughts about things like the problem of evil and give you an uncannily accurate result.

Unitarian Jihad Marches On

So first a humorist riffed off the Unitarian's democratic and accepting style and created this:Unitarian Jihad

Then a million websites inspired by the concept, likeUnitarian Jihad Name Generator, sprang up
(I'm "Sister Gatling Gun of Patience.")

And then, some enterprising Unitarians who know how to laugh at their own faith used the "Unitarian Jihad" publicity to educate people about Unitarianism.

Awesome. Imagine the USCCB using Dogma as a teaching tool!

The busy Christian's guide to Catholic social teaching

The busy Christian's guide to Catholic social teaching

If you've always meant to get around to reading the important encyclicals on worker's rights and our responsibilities to the poor, check out this summary of the major documents cross-indexed with events in the history of modern work. Enriching and useful.

Pope's shield will include a bishop's stole

CNS STORY: Pope drops papal crown from coat of arms, adds miter, pallium

Did you know that the Blessed Mother is often depicted as a priest in art, signified by a pallium (the white stole worn by a bishop?) Here's a sixth-century image:

marypriest
Originally uploaded by theologienne.

See more of them, many from Vatican museums, here.

And indeed, it was she whose word first allowed the body of Christ to be shared with us.

One of my favorite prayers

Keep watch, dear Lord, with those who work, or watch, or weep this night, and give your angels charge over those who sleep. Tend the sick, Lord Christ; give rest to the weary, bless the dying, soothe the suffering, pity the afflicted, shield the joyous; and all for your love's sake.  Amen.

What are some of your favorite prayers?

This is from the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. (Incidentally, I just learned that the phrase "the iron has entered my soul," meaning that you're sad or disappointed, comes from a mistranslation in the Book of Common Prayer of a phrase that meant "he was laid down in iron" (Psalms 105:18). You learn wonderful things about the Bible from those Norton Critical Editions of 19th-century novels.)

I had the privilege once of going on retreat at an Episcopal monastery, the Society of St. John the Evangelist, and discovered that the rhythm of daily prayer is powerful and addictive. The words from the liturgies used there crept into my head and manifest frequently, considering how unfamiliar I was with them to begin with. I especially loved evening Compline prayer. When you're tired, your thoughts can start to perpetuate on one topic, whether it's a worry about tomorrow or acting out one of your less pleasant characteristics; but when you're allowed to be silent and pray at that time of day, you go to bed in the most extraordinary state of peace. Here, then, are a few excerpts from a Compline service, the whole of which is available here:

The Lord Almighty grant us a peaceful night and a perfect end.
...
Psalm 4
Answer me when I call, O God, defender of my cause;
you set me free when I am hard-pressed; have mercy on me and hear my prayer.

"You mortals, how long will you dishonor my glory;
how long will you worship dumb idols and run after false gods?"

Know that the Lord does wonders for the faithful;
when I call upon the Lord, he will hear me.

Tremble, then, and do not sin;
speak to your heart in silence upon your bed.

Offer the appointed sacrifices
and put your trust in the Lord.

Many are saying, "Oh, that we might see better times!"
Lift up the light of your countenance upon us, O Lord.

You have put gladness in my heart,
more than when grain and wine and oil increase.

I lie down in peace; at once I fall asleep;
for only you, LORD, make me dwell in safety.
...
Lord, you are in the midst of us, and we are called by your Name: Do not forsake us, O Lord our God. Jeremiah 14:9,22
...
V. Into your hands, O Lord, I commend my spirit;
R. For you have redeemed me, O Lord, O God of truth.
V. Keep us, O Lord, as the apple of your eye;
R. Hide us under the shadow of your wings.

Guide us waking, O Lord, and guard us sleeping; that awake
we may watch with Christ, and asleep we may rest in peace.

Lord, you now have set your servant free
to go in peace as you have promised;

For these eyes of mine have seen the Savior,
whom you have prepared for all the world to see:

A Light to enlighten the nations,
and the glory of your people Israel.

Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit:
as it was in the beginning, is now, and will be for ever. Amen.

Guide us waking, O Lord, and guard us sleeping; that awake
we may watch with Christ, and asleep we may rest in peace.

US Church Shows Flexibility on Stem Cells

The last thing I expected to see in a Times article on stem cell ethics was a USCCB spokesman leaving the door open to a future change in the church's position on stem cell research.

"Dr. Richard Doerflinger, deputy director for pro-life activities at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said that the guidelines were drafted by scientists who favored "creating embryos just to destroy them," and that the Roman Catholic Church had not changed its opposition to stem cell research.

"But it would be harder to sustain that policy for the U.S. government if it had been shown that embryonic stem cells were the only way to cure certain disease," Dr. Doerflinger said, noting that that burden "has not been met at present."

Although one wonders how scientists are supposed to meet the challenge of pointing to stem cells as the only way to cure certain disease if using stem cells in research is to be discouraged. Eliminating every possible alternative?

How fascinating it would be to be in the room when experts in the field are coming up with ethical guidelines for this research. The ability to use the technology matters very much to them, but they are the best-qualified people in the world to judge what good and bad eventualities are realistic within our lifetimes, and what needs to be done to protect the good and prohibit the bad.

I wonder what baseline moral reference they use in formulating these ethical guidelines. The Catholic life ethic demands prioritizing life under all its forms, so stem cells are protected because they might have the potential to become life. The Wiccan credo - and the Golden Rule - is "Harming none, do what thou will." A modern version of the Hippocratic Oath strikes something of a balance between the two:
"I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism. . . Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God."

Personal understanding is inherent in each of these great moral strictures. The debate within Catholicism about what constitutes life continues to make this seemingly simple teaching a seat of controversy. The Hippocratic Oath presumes that those who will live by it have well-conceived notions of required treatments and of the responsibility of caring for the living. It doesn't attempt to define every potential application of its tenets; that is left up to the moral sense of the individual adherent. Like religion itself, this code suggests a framework for approaching moral decisions (humbly and with perspective; a good approach for anyone) and assumes, demands, that the individual will consider wisely and decide individually. The ethical guidelines published by the National Academy of Sciences are several experts' well-informed, perhaps contemplative opinions. The fact that these recommendations exist doesn't absolve individual scientists from the responsibility of bringing their own moral senses to bear on their work; nor, as Dr. Doerflinger pointed out, does it mean that the final word on the moral feasibility of stem cell research has been written.

There is a scientific "sense of the faithful": if ethical or practical guidelines are not widely respected by the scientific community, they will never be adopted and will have little effect. Although researchers grumble about review board bureaucracy, most scientists today recognize the importance of independent observation to protect the safety and comfort of those who participate in research. A scientist who defies widely accepted ethical expectations can lose her right to membership in the scientific community; however, if she just does useless, unproductive research, she may stay in the community without ever advancing in it. This is a useful metaphor for Catholic adherence to Church teachings. If we are going to exclude people from our communities (and let's not, for that is no Christian action) let's think about the decision between those whose actions hurt others and those whose decisions only prevent themselves from spiritual growth and fulfillment. We all commit transgressions of both types: thank God the Church is a city on a hill, not an achievement-oriented ivory tower. Let's look at others' choices "with great humbleness and awareness or our own frailty," and remember that commenting on matters of the soul is indeed an "awesome responsibility." Cheers to Dr. Doerflinger for leaving the door open to dialogue.

Unbelievably, a realistic abortion solution

Democrats for Life of America Introduce the 95-10 Initiative

From their website, with my comments:
 
"The 95-10 Initiative is a comprehensive package of federal legislation and policy proposals that will reduce the number of abortions by 95% in the next 10 years. [Congressman Tim Ryan, D-OH, plans to introduce it in Congress soon.]

The “95-10” Initiative will:

Empower Women

Federal Funding for Toll-Free Number Pregnancy Support/National Public Awareness Program
[Further on the site says "Organizations that qualify for the referral from the toll-free hotline must be non-profit, tax exempt organizations that do not provide abortion referral services." Why? This sounds like a way to funnel a lot of funds to faith-based organizations and try to weaken Planned Parenthood.]

Conduct a National Study on Why Women Choose Abortions & Update Abortion Data

Federal Funding for Pregnancy Prevention Education
[Well, Mr. Bush, I'm not crazy about your idea of pregnancy prevention education - let's demand some specificity from our Congresspeople on this point]

Federal Funding for Abortion Counseling and Daycare on University Campuses
[To work against the economic setbacks of an unplanned pregnancy, a burden disproportionately visited on women - the same goal as funding WIC fully]

Provide Accurate Information to Patients Receiving a Positive Result from an Alpha-Fetoprotein Test tests.

Make Adoption Tax Credits Permanent
[There is nowhere near enough talk about promoting adoption - a method of family creation that sidesteps the risks, costs, and ethical issues of IVF and other methods and takes care of humanity's neediest, abandoned kids.]

Ban Pregnancy as a “Pre-Existing Condition” in the Health Care Industry
[AWESOME]

Require Adoption Referral Information
[This would "require pregnancy centers and women’s health centers that provide pregnancy counseling and that receive federal funding to provide adoption referral information." This seems like a balanced requirement - Planned Parenthood would have to offer adoption as well as abortion info - which again calls into question the stricture that groups on the pregnancy info hotlines can't provide abortion info.]

Women’s Right to Know
["Any women’s health center or clinic that provides pregnancy counseling or abortion services must provide accurate information on abortion and the adverse side effects to a woman’s health. Patients do not have to accept the materials if they do not want them." Denouncing recommendations like this earned many choice activists their militant, "pro-abortion" stigma. Women deserve the best information on all potential outcomes of a medical procedure, and if such information dissuades them from the procedure, it's paternalistic to presume that they shouldn't have recieved it.]

Provide Ultrasound Equipment
["Provide grants to nonprofit, tax-exempt organizations for the purchase of ultrasound equipment to provide free examinations to pregnant women needing such services." This is puzzling. I'm afraid the authors of the bill are hoping to dissuade abortions by showing the mother an image of the child, which strikes me as a less admirable tactic than almost everything else this plan proposes.]

Increase Funding for Domestic Violence Programs
[To protect women from being forced into abortion by fear - absolutely essential]

Contraception Equity
[Required of HMOs - hallelujah!!!]


Protect our Children

Fully Fund Federal WIC Program

Require Parental Notification for Abortions
[Doesn't mandate it, but will "prohibit transporting a minor across a state line to obtain an abortion," in other words, guaranteeing that states who think parental notification is the best way to protect minors will be able to enforce it. "Makes an exception if the abortion was necessary to save the life of the minor." Good. And this clause "requires states that have parental notification to inform parents of state statutory rape laws." This seems like a way to encourage parents to go after men who impregnate underage daughters. That's fine, but child-support laws with big teeth would be a wider and more effective way of doing this, placing less burden on a parent who's already struggling with a child's decisions.]

Provide Grants to States to Help in the Promotion and Implementation of Safe Haven Laws
[Which designate places, like hospitals and police stations, to leave a baby with no questions asked]

Require Counseling in Maternity Group Homes
[Breaking the cycle]

Require SCHIP to cover pregnant women"
[State-funded health insurance]

The conflicting nature of church

I've heard Dorothy Day quoted as saying "The Church is my mother, even when she's a whore."

This heartfelt poem/prayer came to my attention today, and though the images it evokes are not mostly in line with my feelings, I admired the way it captured the conflicted, tension-holding nature of the living Church.

How baffling you are, oh Church, and yet how I love you!
How you have made me suffer, and yet how much I owe you!
I should like to see you destroyed, and yet I need your presence.
You have given me so much scandal and yet you have made me understand
sanctity.
I have seen nothing in the world more devoted to obscurity, more
compromised, more false, and I have touched nothing more pure, more
generous, more beautiful.
How often I have wanted to shut the doors of my soul in your face, and how
often I have prayed to die in the safety of your arms.
No, I cannot free myself from you, because I am you, although not
completely.

And where would I go?

- Carlo Carretto

It reminded me of a third-century poem that describes the Divine in beautifully conflicting imagery, the Thunder, Perfect Mind.

Ratzinger in context

With absolutely precision timing, a coalition of religious groups at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government planned a panel on "The Pope and Politics" for today. Even if they put this together after John Paul II's death, which seems unlikely given the caliber of the speakers, no one knew when the new Pope would be elected. They managed to accidentally nail the first day after the news had broken, giving the speakers just enough time to research Benedict XVI. Unbelievable. Let me highlight for you who the panelists were and some of the main points I took away from them.

Mary Jo Bane, a Kennedy school professor, Clinton administration official and practicing Catholic, opened with her concerns on Cardinal Ratzinger's dubious record with regard to ecumenism and social justice. She was uncomfortable with the Cardinal's authorship of Dominus Jesus, which described Jesus and Catholicism as unique paths to salvation (better you read it than trust my paraphrase of her summary; or wait for my analysis here in a few days.) Creating a metaphor that all panelists later referenced, Dr. Bane noted that a Google search of "Ratzinger" with "social justice" made for a short morning's research.*

Richard Parker, an economist who cofounded Mother Jones, sees Benedict XVI as a participant in the church's self-appointed role, for most of history, as fighter against modernism. Dr. Parker said that Vatican Ii, which placed the church in solidarity with the poor and oppressed, might represent a turn of the tide in the Church-world relationship, or it may have been one high point of an ebb-and-flow pattern. (I didn't quite follow his connections there, but I think he saw the Vatican II ethic of prioritizing the poor as borrowed from Marx, a major influence on modern thought. I don't know if that's actually true, but let us hope, for many reasons, that Vatican II was a turning point and not merely a peak.)

Jim Wallis is an evangelical Christian leader who works for peace and economic social justice. His recent book God's Politics envisions religious people's involvement in a new national agenda to find solutions to poverty. He urges the influence of individual moral concerns on political involvement, but noted tonight "Religion must be tempered by democracy."

In response to Mary Jo Bane's concern about Cardinal Ratzinger's record with respect to social justice, Wallis pointed out that Benedict [I wonder if I'm using these names correctly] enters into a potent social justice tradition in which he must exist as Pope. Wallis predicted the the "church of the South", or of the Third World, will be the church of the future for both Catholics and evangelicals. I thought this was interesting given that the Times keeps describing the two Christian branches as particularly at odds in Latin America, depicting evangelical groups as "poaching" Latin American Catholics and constantly noting that the cardinals mean evangelical groups when they refer to "sects". I've beefed with the Times' stance on this before, and continue to expect that a rising religious tide will lift all sectarian boats. I believe the increase in public religiosity here in the US after 9/11 was partially a natural desire for comfort and community and partially a factor of increased interest in Islam inspiring people to learn more about their own faiths of origin.

A Kennedy School student asked [disingenuously] whether religious people with different economic beliefs have a collaborative future. Mr. Wallis called his attention to the discontent many religious voters feel with American political party options, where bioethical issues and attention to the needy often seem to war. He said "True religion shouldn't be ideologically predictable or theologically partisan," and called upon the faithful to challenge recieved wisdom in both politics and faith.

Bryan Hehir, a Kennedy School professor and the president of Catholic Charities, tempered Dr. Bane's pessimism about the new pope, noting that while his intellectual positions are familiar, the pope's pastoral style and public, political role have yet to be developed and revealed. Father Hehir made several concrete predictions, including that Benedict will likely issue a social-justice encyclical within the year, realizing that he hasn't addressed those issues much in his career and that the role of the Pope demands it. The new pope is concerned about purity of thought, Father Hehir noted, and can be expected to choose bishops - and praise or punish theologians - according to their intellectual activity. Contrary to some predictions categorizing his appointment as a placeholder, Father Hehir expects Benedict XVI to be an activist pope - ominous gong sound here - but added that an ideological shift could conceivably occur in the next conclave. (Dr. Bane snorted her dissent here and predicted that geographical, but not ideological, diversity might be expected next time.)

When the conversation turned political, Father Hehir noted that the number of Catholics, otherwise ideologically Democratic, who may be sent to the Republican party by bioethical issues may be sizeable enough to sway close elections like the last two Presidential ones. To concerns about the future of ecumenism under Benedict XVI, Father Hehir pointed out something I had never realized: that Catholic ethics are intended to be based on reason rather than on faith. This makes consensus and dialogue between faiths much more natural. While Father Hehir didn't mention that the Curia's idea of "reason" occasionally runs to medieval-era science, this was great food for thought, and dovetailed nicely with the evangelical Mr. Wallis' repeated admiration for Catholic social teaching.

*Existential question of the day: When they Google your name, what do you want to come up?

Ratzinger Reactions

Ratzinger, the very author of anti-women's-ordination screed Responsum Ad Dubium, pope.

Crystal Chan, a wise woman I am privileged to know, wrote:

"Our faith does not depend on any pope, any bishop, any priest. We are who we are, and the more we can tap into this wellspring of hope, the more we can act out of that hope - and not out of fear.

We are more powerful and resilient than we think we are. In the words of Clarissa Pinkola Estes, "We were made for these times."

We were taught to live compassionately, justly, and in spaces of deepest peace and reliance on God. Like Jesus.

Jesus' path of absolute love got him killed. We always knew that, but we're seeing that truism played out again today in our Church. In our world. But through that path of Christ, life sprang forth in wholly unexpected ways.

We are called to be healers and lovers of all God's creation, but we must really, truly believe that we have this call etched on our soul. Once we do, we can be a more effective servant for Christ and God's amazing Dream."

The point is not who sits in Peter's chair, because the Pope is not the Church. Sifting through papal bulls for the glimmers of God's light, explaining to friends why we stay in the faith, struggling for dialogue with people who think dissent is relativism, is nothing new to many thousands of Catholics like me. May this disappointment ignite us with passion to crack the cement of the world so the Spirit's flower can emerge.

Of Self-ish Things

Socializers are always busy coming up with new ways to lose their inhibitions. Just when you thought drugs and alcohol were so seventies, someone invented foam parties. Nor is this phenomenon limited to crazy college students, who might be too new to full knowledge of self to be always comfortable with full expression of it. It takes partiers of some material consequence to create a market for giant jugs of Dewar's White Label.

I've always wondered why "fun" seems to require forgetting yourself. More "innocent" pastimes, like movies and books (learning's provocative and dangerous, no?) are equally culpable with drugs and drink, at least as far as self-forgetting goes. "Read a P.G. Wodehouse," a good friend in A Suitable Boy prescribes for a broken heart. Dancer in the Dark, a terrible movie which I suggest you avoid, tells the story of a factory worker who distracts herself from her life with movie musicals, the most classic example of "escapist" media. Actually, books or movies don't have to be especially fantastic or improbable to function as escapist - a story with a bit of danger and drama can do a better job of pulling us out of ourselves than one that makes us say "Life is never like that!" with every plot twist. Good "escapist" fare is lifelike, just a little funnier, scarier, easier and prettier - just the way life looks after a couple drinks.

I used to think "To thine own self be true" was a quote from the Bible! I was faintly surprised when I realized it's from Hamlet, largely because I've come across this idea often in the course of my theological searchings. I don't yet have a good grasp of how much self-knowledge might be prioritized in the Bible and in religious tradition versus how much the modern ethic of self-esteem has unconsciously been absorbed by theological thinkers. (Those who think modern "liberal" Catholics are alone in annexing the pet notions of their time should read Bernadette Brooten on Augustine's influence by Roman sexual mores. Everybody read it - it'll spin your head!) I am, of course, aware that Jesus called for death to self and giving of one's self: but this is clearly a different proposition from numbing your self-knowledge in your free time, and may not be inconsistent with the integrated self-knowledge that some modern religious writers call for.

What, then, bothers me so much about the human practice of pursuing "sleep to self" for the purpose of fun? Like anyone who's known a few college students, I'm well aware of the ossifying possibilities of sustained navel-gazing. I don't recommend that. I'm also a compulsive reader who likes her films and even her drinks from time to time - I'm as guilty as anyone of the practice of self-sleep under some of its milder forms.

I recall that I started this blog by talking about inhibitions, and I've veered a bit off the subject. Stifling inhibitions isn't quite the same thing as dying or even sleeping to self, because many inhibitions are societally imposed: they are not all authentic components of the self. It's because people experimented with disabling social inhibitions that we have treatment for mental illness and support for racial equality (and some less exciting innovations, like the male Speedo.) Tearing down inhibitions might cause social embarassment or medical damage, depending on how you choose to do it, but it's part of a continuum of behavior that sometimes shows us that taboos needs to be changed and sometimes reminds us of why they make life more pleasant.

What's nearly indistinguishable from the purposeful deadening of inhibitions is when people drink, or observe Mardi Gras, or (who knows) read excessively because they're unwilling to be alone with their own selves and their own lives. This, I think, is an active devaluation of their God-given lives and characters, a serious lack of pride in God's creation. The world we're born into is not all God would have it: people of good will have the power to make it a more Godly place. Similarly, not all aspects of the selves we know are God-given, although God can certainly make use of even a world-imposed bad trait, a hatred or hang-up or insecurity. Ignoring those bad traits is no way to deal with them; ignoring the good ones is no proper gratitude. This, I think, is the place that self-knowledge has in the life organized around God: to help us to better appreciate and use what God has created in our own selves.

Exploiting the Religious Right

Frist Set to Use Religious Stage on Judicial Issue
"As the Senate heads toward a showdown over the rules governing judicial confirmations, Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader, has agreed to join a handful of prominent Christian conservatives in a telecast portraying Democrats as "against people of faith" for blocking President Bush's nominees. . . .Dr. Frist's spokesman said the senator's speech in the telecast would reflect his previous remarks on judicial appointments. In the past he has consistently balanced a determination "not to yield" on the president's nominees with appeals to the Democrats for compromise. He has distanced himself from the statements of others like the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, who have attacked the courts, saying they are too liberal, "run amok" or are hostile to Christianity.
The telecast, however, will put Dr. Frist in a very different context. Asked about Dr. Frist's participation in an event describing the filibuster "as against people of faith," his spokesman, Bob Stevenson, did not answer the question directly.
"Senator Frist is doing everything he can to ensure judicial nominees are treated fairly and that every senator has the opportunity to give the president their advice and consent through an up or down vote," Mr. Stevenson said."

Poor conservative Christians. If they thought by electing a Republican president they'd see real change on issues like abortion and gay marriage, they're still waiting. Now their faith is being manipulated by a Bush partisan who just wants to see his guy's judges get in. Christian conservatives are a powerful voting bloc in this nation, as anyone who hasn't been under a rock since November is well aware. It's time for them to start attaching demands to their votes. I don't agree with much of the conservative Christian political agenda, but it makes me sad to see anyone's faith used to drag them around like a fishhook through the cheek. Many leading Republicans fluently whip out the religious rhetoric when it suits them, but they demur at working on the issues that are important to megachurch voters - and these voters don't hold the people they elected accountable. When religious people sell their religion short, the image of faith everywhere tatters.

But Is It Art?

Among the other good works of his papacy, John Paul II called for attention to the use of modern media to spread the Gospel. In response to this challenge, some Catholics formed a production company and created a film about the life of St. Therese of Lisieux (www.theresemovie.com). A small-budget labor of love, this film featured unknown performers and was advertised in the States largely by word of mouth, traveling from city to city (the website can tell you if it's playing in yours). I wouldn't say that Therese was everything I hope for in a feature film, but it does credit to the Pope's challenge to use media to make faith come alive. St. Therese's short, undramatic life isn't ideal cinematic material, and her words can sounds sentimental to those of us not reared in the Romantic period. Luke Films depicted her story movingly without veering too much into sentimentality. My main quibble was that the script smoothed over the real radicalism of this Doctor of the Church, such as the elephant-in-the-room fact that Therese wished to become a priest. But it doesn't subvert her story for ideological causes, and it should increase the number of people who care about St. Therese's life and work. It's a good teaching tool which I urge you to check out.
Into this positive future for Catholic film falls the Vatican's recent condemnation of the Da Vinci Code. I forget who pointed out that the Vatican managed to do this after everyone in the entire world had read the book; or who countermanded that that way they avoided contributing to its publicity; both are kind of amusing. The Da Vinci Code, famous for its inaccuracies, has advantage of frankness over Therese of owning to its fictionality. That is, since Therese is based on real events and makes claims to verisimilitude, it allows readers to forget that an editorial voice dictates decisions about the material included in the film. As the Da Vinci Code is obviously fiction (come on, a cool, Vespa-riding Harvard prof?!) it ought to encourage readers to question, rather than accept, the statements it presents as fact. It has done exactly that, as evidenced by the deluge of books and media coverage that followed it, presenting facts about the book's material from art history to papal succession to Mary Magdalene.
The life of Mary Magdalene, in contrast to Therese Martin's life, would make great cinema. Not because Mary was a prostitute: the Vatican announced some decades ago that biblical scholarship could no longer confuse Mary Magdalene with the woman who anointed Jesus' feet and was known for her sexual sin. Jesus cast demons out of Mary, meaning that she might have been what we would recognize as mentally ill. She went on to become a preacher of Jesus' word, a close friend of Jesus, as is clear from the Gospels, and of course, she was the first person privileged to know of the Christian mystery, the Resurrection. Because of the Da Vinci Code and another recent work of fiction, Mary Called Magdalene, which I very much recommend, and because of many works of art and media which do not present the complete Vatican party line, thousands of readers have come to inquire into the truth about this great saint.
It is often useful for the Vatican to reaffirm Church doctrine on issues of the day (sometimes it comes as a smackdown to an already hurting group or as dog-wagging that ignores greater problems). It certainly hurts nothing for the Vatican to restate the official particulars about Jesus' life called into question in the Da Vinci Code. But Catholics and others are perfectly capable of finding out the facts from scholars like Karen King and Elaine Pagels - and waiting years after the book's publishing to act doesn't help the Vatican's relevance any. Our church leaders should be careful to avoid the appearance of denouncing all art and media that doesn't entirely conform to Catholic teaching, but that raises interest in and questions about issues germane to faith. The Curia would be best advised to challenge each faithful reader to carefully analyze all media pertaining to issues of faith - most especially those that lack the clear stamp of fiction.

Sublime & Ridiculous: Friday Frivolities

Two sites for spiritual desktop photos or transcendent midday daydreaming:

Zenzero.com: click on "kaleidoscopes" for jeweled photos and quotes from Rumi. Rumi is a thirteenth-century Sufi mystic poet whose poems make you think without knowing it, so that you suddenly realize his meaning and say "Wow."

dreamofstars.com Art. Sort of celestial pictures of young women, reminiscent of "feminine divine" imagery. More like seventies album cover art than medieval faire souvenirs.

Here: Solidarity and Sustainability: A Newsletter on the Socio-Ecological Impacts of Religious Patriarchy. The most thought-provoking e-junkmail I've ever gotten. Here's the author's description of it: "Reflections on global stewardship and related issues such as patriarchy, misogyny, solidarity, subsidiarity, and spirituality. Analysis of social and religious obstacles to human solidarity and sustainable development. Research on incentives and strategies to overcome such obstacles. The United Nations "Millennium Development Goals" (MDGs) are used as point of reference." Consider the source, of course, apparently an idealist who spams unassuming young bloggers, but it's a worthwhile read nonetheless.

And finally, check out trailers for the Bibleman action video series here. "The full armor of God: Don't leave home without it!"

Religion-related summer opportunities

Here's s site from the Pluralism Project at Harvard with several interfaith-related summer internship opportunities.
http://www.pluralism.org/resources/calendar/summer_internships.php.

(No endorsement by me of any of these programs, of course - just trying to let information flow freely!)

Project Transformation is a faith-based non-profit organization associated with the United Methodist Church; Project Transformation provides an 8-week summer day camp, and a one-week activity-based overnight camp for urban children and youth.? The programs are at eight Dallas churches and one church in Sherman. Project Transformation is currently recruiting young adults for both our summer programs. They are paid AmeriCorps positions, which include a living stipend, education voucher, room, and board. Applicants must be in college, or recent graduates, and interested in urban ministry, especially with children and youth. Information about our organization and programs, including the application, are available at www.projecttransformation.org. Applications for the summer program are due by March 15th. [but I've heard that deadlines were extended, so you should contact them if you're interested.] If you have any questions about Project Transformation, or need any more information, please call 214-946-3600.

The Garrison Institute, a contemplative practice think tank in Upstate NY, is hosting a summer institute to bring together scientists who study the mind and contemplative thinkers - sounds fascinating. http://www.mindandlife.org/ml.summer.institute.html.

The Young Adult Ecumenical Forum is a grassroots, collaborative response to the lack of programming for young adults. The mission of the 2005 Young Adult Ecumenical Forum on Globalization and Poverty is two-fold: First, we will critically examine issues of contemporary concern within the context of the American Church. Second, we will use these contemporary issues as means to empower young adult ecumenical leaders. We will create space for dialogue rather than dogma, and, together,
visualize the role that justice-drive young adults can take within the church. The event will be August 11-14 at Eden Seminary, St. Lois, MO. The application deadline is May 1. You can access a PDF application here.

Bread for the World's and Call to Renewal's
Mobilization to Overcome Hunger and Poverty, One Table, Many Voices.
(www.onetableconference.org)
June 4-7, 2005 at American University, Washington, DC

Pass the peace in 2005!

Disciples Peace Fellowship seeks young adults age 21 and older to travel the country this summer. If you have an interest in pursuing and teaching peace and working for justice, then this is the internship for you! You'll earn approximately $2,000 for the summer, plus most expenses. Room and board are provided by each region. Interns are expected to complete a written report/evaluation at the conclusion of the summer. The internship lasts from the end of May to the middle of August.
More importantly, you will be rewarded by the hundreds of contacts you will make with the youth of our church by working in CYF camps all over the United States.
For an application packet, please contact Sarah Riester, Intern Coordinator, at sarahriester@yahoo.com or 317.466.0980.

Sides & splitting

From the Advocate:

For the second time in less than six months, a Montgomery, Ala., Episcopal church has split from the national church over its appointment of an openly gay bishop in New Hampshire. Nearly 80% of the Church of the Ascension's 1,600-member congregation, including two of its three priests, decided Sunday to leave the church and form a new parish in the Anglican Communion called "Christchurch," the Montgomery Advertiser reported Monday. The new parish will meet at a Montgomery Presbyterian church until a permanent location is found. "This is one of the most difficult decisions my family has ever had to make. There is hardly a person in the parish, including those staying behind, who has not touched our lives in some respect," said Mark Wilkerson, who was a senior warden at the Church of the Ascension and is a member of the Christchurch executive committee. . . . "I am looking forward to worshipping without the internal politics of the Episcopal Church, and I suspect that everybody is looking forward to concentrating on the Great Commission," Wilkerson said. "God loves those who feel like in good conscience that they must leave, and God loves those who choose to stay."

It's thoughtful of Mr. Wilkerson to remind us that God loves those on both sides of an ideological split. Too bad the participants in the debate don't seem able to act with the same love. I read a wonderful piece on the Eucharist that said that when you disparage those who share communion with you, you are insulting the Host who invited them as guests. Leaving a worship communion is like storming out of a party because you consider yourself too good to be seen with the other revelers. Although Protestants schism to start new churches, Catholics, who inhabit a "big tent" in rhetoric, are often equally guilty of dissing the company their Host has provided. (Some Catholics worship in Latin and some with guitars, and both types are capable of devaluing the people and ideas that populate others' Masses.) There are even groups of Catholics who have left, as this Alabama church left their communion, to start new worship communities. I'll explore this Catholic phenomenon more fully in another posts: I have serious reservations about the practice.

A sort of petrefaction must have occurred in the Church of the Ascension, that all dialogue and desire for the parish to work together could be choked off by one issue. When you think of all the beliefs members of the same church have in common, many of which are quite preposterous from outside a faith standpoint, disagreement on one issue of church governance ought to be subsumable in joyous belief in the divinity of Christ and trust in God. It's understandable that a churchmember would feel angry when the hierarchy imposes a decision with which she does not agree, but that's what you sign on for in an organized religion. The Anglican Communion tends to be proud of the fact that their bishops vote and that decisions are handled democratically, in contrast with the Catholic model. Parishioners can't be unaware that this means that rules might sometimes change.

When you leave a church, you're not leaving the bishops, officeholders and theologians who instituted the situations you find disagreeable: you're leaving sisters and brothers in the faith, human pastors who work hard in their callings, people who have served side by side with you and watched your family grow old. It's a sad and misguided step to take, and one which cute off all possibility for dialogue between disagreeing sides. Since we are all invited to the Eucharistic feast, God must have planned for us all to talk to one another.

Suicide by illness?

Commentators on the life of John Paul II have frequently mentioned the example he set in dying with dignity. The pope chose to be treated at his home in the Vatican, instead of being taken to a hospital, in the final stages of his ailing (story). It is brave to face death instead of using machines and interventions to stave off an inevitable occurrence that no Christian should fear; indeed it is dignified. The fact that the Pope chose to let himself drift closer to death instead of partaking of every possible prolonger of life should inspire us to ask tough questions about which choices should be made to sustain life, and when. The Pope, a holy man with no reason to fear death, was conscious enough to perhaps feel himself weakening and to make the choice not to impede his moving on to be with God. A person whose consciousness was snatched from her before she was able to make decisions about the prolongation of her own life does not have the option that the Pope did of fighting death of of letting her ailing body do what it naturally would. There are important reasons for the Church's opposition to the ending of artificial life support: a prominent one is to exclude the possibility of surviving relatives making life-and-death decisions for what may be self-serving reasons, as many believed Terri Schiavo's husband did. But these technologies have been in existence for a second's worth of time in the lifespan of the Church: constant work to understand them better is necessary to provide a useful and pastoral ethics of the end of life.
One of the confusing things about Terri Schiavo's case and cases like it for many people is the question of where Ms. Schiavo's soul was while her body remained sustained by machines. Was her soul attached to her body, remaining in a state of spiritual and moral stasis? Does the soul die with the mental capacity rather than with the body, meaning that it would already have been with God while the debate about Ms. Schiavo raised on earth? In a blog (otherwise offensive) written satirically in Ms. Schiavo's voice, a blogger wrote: "Update from heaven: This place is awesome. Why didn't you guys let me come here 15 years ago?" The notion that the soul is "trapped" in a body until freed by death is a fairly common one, especially when a person's life is as minimally lived as Ms. Schiavo's was after her accident. This is also the sort of unfortunate notion that led to ascetic flagellations and a few condemnations for heresy back when Christianity was young and brash.
"The biblical view of human being is we are whole persons with no part detachable. We do not have bodies, we are bodies. We are flesh-in-unity-with-soul," quoted blogger Donald Sensing. (A thoughtful and faithful piece; if you click, I'd just skim the history of thought on the soul and spend time with his theology.) How are we best to value the body as carrier of - and inseparable creation with - the soul, in an era when technology can keep the body alive indefinitely?
The answer is not simple, and my hope is that difficult discussion will be chosen over easy responses. What do you think?

We're all gonna DIE!!!

That's the message of a new movie, SuperVolcano, coming out on the Discovery Channel this Sunday. I had the chance to see a
sneak preview of it, and I wasn't the only one there a little shaken and stirred. Much like Day After Tomorrow, which came out this summer, SuperVolcano depicts a cataclysmic nature event with enough science to make it sound plausible and enough bureaucratic sclerosity to ensure that a few of the important characters aren't provided for in time and don't survive. The thesis is that there's a giant pocket of magma under Yellowstone National Park (which is true), and when it issues forth, well,
see above.

Folks in the previous century were obsessed with death in a way that strikes us now as creepy and weird. In Huck Finn, Mark Twain writes about a young woman who was always embroidering poetry about bereaved lovers weeping by coffins, making her sound like one of an army of like-minded young ladies. If you've read The Great Train Robbery, by Michael Crichton
(which is a cut above his normal output), or anything by Edgar Allan Poe, you know that Edwardians and Victorians were also obsessed with people who sicken and fall into trancelike states or for some other reason are buried alive by accident.

This summer, I visited the Catacombs in Paris, an underground series of tunnels where the contents of several graveyards were deposited in 1786, when Parisians ran out of room to bury their dead. Probably because it had to be open to mourners, the place became a tourist destination and folks are still strangely fascinated with it - one young woman installed a webcam there, and urban legends of wanderers dying in the passages (like Injun Joe - Mark Twain again!) persist. Walking a mile underground, surrounded on either side by
three-century-old bones piled to chin height, with no way to get out or to tell how far you've gone, is crazy-making. It's not helped by the carved verses in French and Latin that point out how you, the viewer, are soon going to be one of these images of death. Maybe, they elaborate, if you repent now and make yourself miserable and are really lucky, the crushing weight of your sins will be lifted and the best part of your life won't have preceded the dust-and-ashes stage.

All of this business smacks of another culture, another time, another place. Teachers (and Michael Crichton) explain to you how Edgar Allan Poe suffered from clinical depression, and how eras subject to cholera and typhoid had to accustom themselves to death and loss. But I think that action movies, and the pornographic over-coverage of tragic events
on the news, are simply our cultural moment's unique way of wallowing in death, facing the possibility of losing our home and family. Everyone in SuperVolcano and Day After Tomorrow confronts that fear of loss, and viewers confront it with them. It can be strengthening to mentally place ourselves in a position of danger. In the safe space of a movie which we know will end in a few hours, we can reassure ourselves that we'd know how to tell our families we love them and to put ourselves right with God.

Both of these movies happen to depict Americans throwing themselves on the mercy of neighboring countries much poorer than the US. In Day After Tomorrow, there's a heavy-handed Presidential message about how "what we call the Third World is now our host and our greatest hope". In SuperVolcano, Americans aren't so lucky - Mexico closes the border
to Americans fleeing the volcano's path. The authors use these movies, when we're already nervous about the safety of Americans, to slip in the message that many in the developing world confront life-or-death situations we have the power to prevent. I expect SuperVolcano to get lots of attention, and I hope this point won't be lost in the thrall of flashy effects and heightened emotions.

One of the scariest elements of nature-emergency movies is that often people find themselves trapped, conscious that death is coming and powerless to stop it. This is a sped-up and dramatically heightened portrayal of the situation we all find ourselves in. Like those creepy messages in the Paris catacombs, action movies remind us that we'll die someday, and that we'd better be ready. One of my usual imaginings when I'm watching certain-death movies is that I wouldn't be scared in a fatal situation. Of course, that's mostly a nice dream - you can't predict how panic will work on your spirit. But I hope I would remember that death isn't the worst thing that can happen to a person. For someone who believes in God's mercy, death is only a change that will bring her closer to God.

My companions through the Paris catacombs were a family with two young boys. While I was nearly hysterical after a while in the grisly setting, the kids couldn't have been calmer if they were trained doctors. They were asking their parents to name the different varieties of bone and generally seemed to be having a fine time. I don't mean to imply that children have a greater spiritual understanding than the rest of us - I have a lot of problems with such an argument, so this is just a metaphor. It occurred to me that children don't really have any reason to fear death. They haven't lived long enough to entertain the illusion that they are somehow irreplaceable to the world, the sentiment that makes adults think "I'd be sorry to die before accomplishing X." The best thing they know, their parents' love, is something they can't imagine ending, and in fact it's
true that you don't love a person any less because they are no longer with you.

I've often had the experience of watching a movie, or reading a story, that didn't faze me when I was young, and thinking, "Wow, this is really creeping me out. Why wasn't I more bothered by this as a child?" For those of us who've lost that childlike faith in the future, media that make us think of death can give us a good sense of perspective on life. If a volcano were about to hit your house, amusing as I realize that is, what could you do but love your family and trust in God? What else are you going to do tomorrow and the day after?

Fantastic quote

He seems deeply interested in the Church. Are you quite sure he is right in the head? I have noticed again and again since I have been in the Church that lay interest in ecclesial matters is often a prelude to insanity. - Evelyn Waugh, from Decline and Fall

Under the Next Pope, a Second World?

Folks (cough*New York Times*cough) keep portraying the future of the Catholic Church as a football in play between two warring opponents: the First and Third World. We're liberal, they're not. We're irreligious, they're zealous. We don't have enough priests to serve our . . . hey, wait a minute . . .

The fact is, Church problems don't conform to lines on a map. Parishes are underserved the world over. It's tough to imagine how the Church will address any of the problems the Times neatly divides down the middle - religious inaction in Europe and America, poverty and violence in the developing world - when the trend of priests, nuns and brothers dwindling in number shows no signs of reversing. The Church is a community, and the reverberations of changes can span oceans and leap the equator. I am sure that the sex abuse coverups in the American church, and the resulting loss of confidence and committment among American Catholics, hurt Catholic programs that help many people in the Third World. Conversely, if the Church decides to get logical about addressing the African AIDS epidemic (and discover that condoms do stop transmission), Americans and Europeans will take note and be proud. The notion that the First World and Third World, within the Church, have separate and opposed interests is unChristian and just plain inaccurate. We're all working to usher in the whole new world, if you will, that we call the reign of Christ on earth. I hope our coming leader will address some of the concerns that affect all Catholics to help the Church in this work.

This October, bishops will converge on the Vatican for a synod on the Eucharist, which the Vatican has planned to address "the needs and pastoral implications of the Eucharist in celebration, worship, preaching, charity and various works in general." (full text). Wouldn't it be terrible if this wonderful teachable moment, which will occur under a Pope whose direction will be very much unset, were allowed to degenerate into didacticism about whether we may recieve the wafer in the hand?

FutureChurch is sponsoring a petition to be sent to the bishops who will be members of the Synod. Signers are asking members of the synod to consider reinstating marriage for priests and opening the diaconate to women. They're only pressing for women deacons, not priests, at this point because canon law only forbids female priests (an oversight that Ratsinger may be only too glad to fix once he's aware of it. Ooh, snap!) Anyway, despite the trope that the Church is not a democracy, I expect that the large majority of the Synod are people of good faith who will take seriously the concerns of Catholics who love the Church enough to see it change. If your situation permits you to espouse such noncanonical views, please consider signing the petition here.

To be honest, as a cradle Catholic, I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea of married priests. There's a beautiful respect that attaches to a person who truly gives up their whole life to serving the Church - compared to a priest, nun or brother, the ministry of a married person somehow comes to seem more of a career choice and less of a vocation. I realize this may seem derogatory to Protestant and married lay Catholic ministers, and I don't mean it that way. The issue may be more that a little too much is expected of every Catholic priest. Celibacy is a beautiful charism for those who are called to it, and I wholeheartedly support the teaching that some may sublimate the love that would have gone to a spouse and family into serving a congregation. But perhaps the link of a preaching and pastoral charism to a celibacy charism doesn't need to be absolute. Indeed, we all know married or single people who are clearly gifted in preaching and counseling. There are also those personalities, so alien to our pop culture, who seem called to celibacy (to the constant consternation of their older female relatives) despite no interest in ministry. Praise God for our differences! It would be a worthy and necessary challenge to the faithful to encounter Christ personified in someone who has a minivan and kids, as well as - not over and against - the image of a holy loner slipping in and out of social circles, nourished on baked goods from the local ladies.

There's a lot more to be said here, but I think I'll have to leave you hanging for tonight. Peace and contentment be with you!

Short Takes for Weekend Procrastination

For those who often find themselves at the video store frantic in the knowledge that there are a dozen movies they want to see and that they can't remember a single one, printing out this list could keep you from defaulting to Office Space yet again. In 1993, which they decided was the hundredth anniversary of cinema, the Vatican published a list of the 45 best, or most important, or something, films. I was impressed by the number of foreign films included until I remembered that the curia, while ecclesial, is hardly a parochial body. There are interesting films suggested from the various home nations of at least a dozen cardinals, as well as a bunch of those English-language classics (like Gandhi and Citizen Kane) you've always been meaning to watch some day. Plus, at least as common as the what-to-rent dilemma is the struggle to balance one's own highbrow tastes (of course) with the desire not to embarass one's young cousins, elderly parents, or other movie-watching companions to prurient footage. With this list, you don't have to worry!

Enter here to win a spa weekend in Paris!

The Taze Tea Awake flavor bag bears this legend: "Imagine finding yourself on a lush tea estate in India around the turn of the century. Your breakfast tea would have tasted a good deal like Awake." Nothing like a little glorification of colonialism in the morning . . .

Deploring Discrimination, BC Reserves Right to Do It

Last month, students at Boston College voted 84% in support of a referendum to include "sexual orientation" in the college's non-discrimination policy. The president of the college, Father WIlliam Leahy, is still reluctant to make the change, and I've learned that BC students are launching a letter writing campaign and college-wide strike this week. They're asking for support in the form of letters to Father Leahy at william.leahy.1@bc.edu or leahy@bc.edu. If your theology supports it, please consider contacting Father Leahy. For more information, check out www.bcequality.org."

In a letter to the BC campus paper, Fr. Leahy wrote: "I realize that some in our community believe that BC should include "sexual orientation" in its nondiscrimination clause. However, adding the words "sexual orientation" could result in outside authorities interpreting the nondiscrimination clause in ways that would require BC to approve and fund initiatives or activities that conflict with its institutional commitments. As president of BC, I have the obligation to safeguard the University from such intrusion." (Here's the link if you want to read the rest; you'll have to provide your email address.)

I should note that Father Leahy's letter otherwise expressed as much Christian compassion and support for BGTL members of the BC community as one would wish. But I've been racking my brain trying to think of what these "outside authorities" might be, and what they might want BC to do.

As far as I can imagine, if BC changes the policy and says that it does not discriminate based sexual orientation, the "outside authorities" Fr. Leahy mentions will want BC to act as if this is true. In other words, BC will be expected to hire people who might be openly gay, to punish people who discriminate against students who are openly gay, and to fund student groups who might disseminate information on what it means to be BGLTQ. At Harvard, the month of "Gaypril" means our BGLTSA is putting on events ranging from study breaks to a BDSM workshop. It's understandable that Father Leahy might worry about opening the door to such dialogue on his campus. Let alone promoting same-sex relationships, which a Catholic institution can't do, dialogue about sexuality tends to include a lot of discussion and implicit promotion of sexual activity, which is even more hinky from Father Leahy's perspective.

But BC, as the Father points out in his letter, is an academic institution - it's not the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to the delight, I'm sure, of its students. If a BC religion class can teach Hinduism without constant disclaimers, if a BC economics student can write her thesis on capitalism - or communism - and decide she's for it, if a BC professor can support abortion in a letter to the editor and not get fired (which I hope she can do there), then BC is already a space for dialogue and the free flow of ideas. That's education, not indoctrination. That's a university.

There is a difference between allowing BGLTQ groups on campus and teaching communism at a Catholic school. To a certain extent, student groups encourage and promote behaviors in a way that classes don't. It's reasonable to say that a gay student who goes to a gay group is more likely to date another gay student (you can replace gay with Republican, Catholic, Sikh, whatever) than a student who didn't have that option. It takes many to practice Communism, but only two to (gasp!) do that thing that Catholic universities can't promote, even if it means condoms aren't available in the health center. Sex has different consequences than heterodox speech, it's true: potentially more dire ones.

But in Catholicism, gay sex outside of marriage is no better or worse (okay, it's equally as bad) as straight sex outside of marriage. (Granted, gays can't marry in Catholicism, but last time I checked homosexual companionship was still okay, which seems to presume that gay people will be in the same room at some point.) BC promotes the same amoral behavior by allowing Republican, Sikh and Catholic groups to exist that they hazard by allowing gay groups on campus. Sure, there are ways to keep straight and gay people from having sex outside of marriage - but the only way to be sure is to keep them from meeting each other. Separation, silence, lack of dialogue: expressly contrary to the principles of a university.

BDSM at BC?

Father Leahy needs to take that risk.

When I Am An Old Man I Shall Wear A Red Hat

cardtettamanzi
Originally uploaded by theologienne.

Lots of talk about the cardinals. To make your Papal-election pool fully accurate, you'll want this Vatican list of all the eligible electors. One frequently mentioned top contender was JPII's camerlengo - dedicated Dan Brown fans, insert creeping sense of foreboding here . . .

Check out another rumored fave, Cardinal Diogini Tettamanzi. The WSJ describes him as a "conservative moral theologian," but isn't the man adorable? He'd look so cute in a miter and crozier. Good thing, too, because one oddsmaking website is giving him 11/4.(Thanks to RelapsedCatholic for that.)

The major papers' coverage of the next Pope's challenges are blurring some things and overhyping others (imagine!) I keep reading that JPII's successor will be challenged by Islam, a) to strengthen European Catholicism as Islam makes inroads there, or b) to establish better Muslim-Catholic relations, in light of both the Crusades and 9/11. Re the first, it seems to me that a rising religious tide should lift all boats. If European Catholics, lapsed or current, are going to be poached away from the faith by Islam, anybody I've ever heard talk about it has been wrong about what drives their current disinterest. Europe is more secular than the US. Chez His Holiness, most Catholic Italians use contraception. France just banned openly worn religious symbols - an idea repellent to Americans from George Washington to George Bush. The EU couldn't even get a mention of God into its constitution. What's more, Europe struggles with anti-Islam sentiment and racism directed at Middle Eastern and African immigrants, who are most likely to be Muslim. The next Pope will have to deal with lots of problems specific to Europe, but I seriously doubt that Islam will be one of them.

In the New York Times today, Laurie Goodstein quoted a Fordham theologian:

There are disagreements among Catholic theologians, he said, about how to engage with Muslims, and which Muslims to engage. Some theologians want to acknowledge that "there has been a lot of historical damage wrought by people in the name of Christianity on the Muslim people," Mr. Thompson said, while others believe the focus should be on the wrongs perpetrated by Muslim extremists more recently. The next pope should help the church set a clear direction, he said.

Obviously, apologizing for the iniquities of Christians past and present would be an act of justice to Muslims. John Paul II set a dignified precedent for this sort of request for forgiveness. I'd like to know which theologians are out there suggesting we begin Catholic-Muslim dialogue by pointing the finger at those evildoers all mainstream Muslims acknowledge as extremist and wrong. Yup, never let it be said the Catholic Church was afraid to take unpopular positions, such as that terrorism is wrong . . .
Here's the Times article if you want to read the rest of it.