Category Archives: Praying

Preview Of The Election 2024 Chronicles

Posted on by
Reply

Sometimes it seems like election seasons are getting longer and longer and the respite between them gets shorter and shorter. Our next Presidential election is set for November 5, 2024. For no clear reason I’ll start the “Election 2024 Chronicles” category on (or near) May 5th, 18 months before.

It’s already getting interesting. President Biden has already announced his intent to run for reelection; that’s a concern because he’s already 80 years old. Many of us have concerns about this, but frankly don’t see an alternative. If he does win in 2024 I hope he’ll spend at least part of his term looking forward to a younger successor.

I had hoped he would seek the nomination without rivals but it appears that isn’t happening. Robert Kennedy, Jr. has announced his intent to run and he’s problematic at best. He’s an attorney and spent much of his career in environmental law. That’s good but in the last several years he’s advocated against vaccines and has promoted the lie that vaccines in children make them more susceptible to autism. There’s no way he can win but he may cause some damage.

On the Republican side we already know that former President Donald Trump is running. He’s lied about so many things it’s hard to keep track but he still argues that he was cheated out of the 2020 election. He is currently under indictment in New York for bribing someone to keep quiet about their affair. There are likely other indictments to come.

Right now he is still the frontrunner despite all this. But there are several others who have also indicted they will seek the nomination, and others who we assume will make that announcement soon. They have a problem because they don’t wish to go head to head with Trump but they also want to give a reason voters should support them. My suspicion is that they are aware of Trump’s age (he’s only 3 1/2 years younger than President Biden) and hope that a health crisis will pull him out of the race.

Keep posted. I’ll have more soon.

The War In Iraq, Twenty Years Later

Posted on by
Reply

The date March 20, 2003 doesn’t sound important and most of us don’t remember where we were, but it is an important date. On that day President George Bush announced that American troops began an invasion of Iraq. It’s a good time to ask why we invaded, what happened, and where we are now.

No understanding of the invasion can be understood outside the attacks of September 11, 2001. On that morning we watched in horror as passenger planes crashed into the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, and a field in Pennsylvania (that was likely headed toward the White House). It didn’t take long before we learned that the mastermind behind these attacks was Osama bin Laden; he was in Afghanistan being protected by their government.

But not long after these events President Bush and his administration began to push the idea that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was somehow linked to the attacks. There wasn’t any evidence of this and the Bush administration stopped pushing it but never completely disavowed it. Instead they pushed the idea that Saddam Hussein had both the ability to and intention of attacking us. He possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, we knew where they were, and we could confiscate them. Further, they claimed that the conquest of Iraq would be a cakewalk. Ordinary Iraqis would see us as liberators. Six weeks later, on May 1st, President Bush announced Mission Accomplished on the USS Abraham Lincoln.

In the years since then we’ve learned that none of this was true. It wasn’t a cakewalk, we weren’t seen as liberators and we didn’t accomplish the mission in six weeks. So what happened?

Today I heard an excellent podcast on this. The podcast is called On The Media and the link to this episode is here. It’s true that members of the administration “cherry picked” information that made their case and they gave too much credibility to sources who made unsubstantiated claims.

But the podcast shows that those behind this campaign felt that the only path to peace for the United States lay in “liberating” nations like Iraq and that the Iraqis suffered so much under Saddam that they would welcome us. President Bush also talked about the “axis of evil,” countries that included Iran and North Korea.

War is horrible and should be used only as a last resort. Saddam Hussein was never a threat and all we did was lose thousands of lives and leave a country that is broken to this day.

We need to remember this next time there is a call to war.

Fifty Years After Vietnam

Posted on by
Reply

Fifty years ago this week the United States ended its involvement in the war in Vietnam. For the uninitiated, before World War II the nations of Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam were colonies of France and called “French Indochina.” After the war Vietnam declared itself independent but France attempted to regain control. But in 1954 at the battle of Diem Bien Phu fell to Vietnamese troops under the command of Ho Chi Minh (1890-1969). Ho and his Communist allies controlled North Vietnam but not South Vietnam even though they wanted to. In the late 1950s and early 1960s the United States supported South Vietnam in the hopes to prevent the spread of Communism. By the mid 1960s we were sending combat troops into Vietnam even though there was never a declaration of war. By the late 1960s our government realized that we could not defeat North Vietnam and began negotiating a peace treaty.

On January 27, 1973 we signed a cease fire and pulled out. At the time President Nixon proclaimed victory and made it sound like this would cease hostilities between North and South Vietnam. It didn’t. When our troops pulled out so did our cameras and it came as a surprise to many but the war continued and North Vietnam conquered South Vietnam when their capital, Saigon, fell.

And while the Nixon administration tried hard to claim we didn’t lose the war it was clear that we did. Through a series of lies, missteps and miscalculations our government convinced large parts of our country that our cause was just and the result was honorable. In that time somewhere around 2.5 million troops served in Vietnam and 60,000 died. Countless came back with wounds, both visible and invisible. We learned about napalm, Agent Orange and PTSD.

Did they all suffer and die in vain? I hope not. I hope it brings us to the realization that we should never go to war without a clear understanding of what victory will look like. We had a vague idea that we would “stop the Communist advance” but never recognized that some residents of South Vietnam supported the North. We didn’t recognize that we couldn’t always tell who the enemy was or what a random person would do. We dropped troops in the middle of the jungle and told them to hold our position. We didn’t mark success by territory taken but by the daily death count (remember that from the TV news? Each week we were told how many North Vietnamese were killed, how many South Vietnamese and how many Americans).

Since then we’ve sent troops into different places, oftentimes with the same result. Let us honor our Vietnam vets but promising we will do better by today’s veterans

Thoughts on Pope Benedict XVI (1927-2022)

Posted on by
Reply

As 2022 wound to a close we received word that Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI died after a long illness. Many of us remember him as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger when he headed the Congregation For The Doctrine Of the Faith under Pope John Paul II. The two of them made things difficult for us liberal Catholics who hoped that after Vatican II the Church would continue to update her teachings. We had a list: birth control, homosexuality, priestly celibacy and female clergy.

They went in a different direction, feeling that the Church went too far after Vatican II. They also believed that the Church was becoming too secularized and was moving away from its core values. When Pope John XXIII called for Vatican II he used the image of opening the windows and letting in fresh air; many of us felt John Paul and Ratzinger spent their time slamming the windows shut.

In 2005 John Paul died and Cardinal Ratzinger was elected Pope XVI. As we all suspected it was more of the same. He was 78 at the time and it felt like the only saving grace would be his age. Because of declining health he resigned in 2013 and became the first living ex Pope since Gregory XII in 1415.

As much as John Paul and Benedict frustrated me, I have to confess my opinion has softened over the years. I’m aware that while they often saw the Church as a fortress in need of being defended, their background provides some answers. Both grew up at times and places where the Church truly was under attack, when our future was far less than certain.

John Paul was born in Poland in 1920 and when he was 19 his nation was invaded by Nazi Germany. Wanting to be a priest he studied in secret and was ordained in 1946. But when the war ended, persecution of the Church did not. Poland fell behind the Iron Curtain and was dominated by a Soviet Union that barely tolerated the existence of the Church and openly hoped she would die from lack of support. Of course that didn’t happen. The Church was hardly new to government persecution going back to the Roman Empire but the Soviet Union didn’t fall until 1989.

Meanwhile Benedict, seven years younger, felt the more immediate brunt of Nazi Germany. He was drafted into the Hitler Youth as a teenager and later into the German army. After the war he resumed his studies and was ordained in 1951. At the time Germany was partitioned and he had the good fortune of living in West Germany. East Germany, like Poland, was dominated by the Soviet Union.

Both attended Vatican II in the early 1960s and supported its views. But in the years after the conclave they both felt that many Catholics went too far. They felt that Church teaching was being watered down and that we were in danger of losing our moral center. Simply put, they found themselves back in the fortress and feeling under attack.

This was good for conservatives, many who were never sold on the reforms of Vatican II. They agreed that the Church needed to preserve its purity even if that led to fewer Catholics. Now, with Pope Francis, they feel betrayed and angry.

I guess all this means that the Church is not in danger. We’re going to do fine.

In the meantime let’s all pray for Benedict XVI.

Thoughts On The Birth Of Jesus: Did It Really Happen The Way We Think?

Posted on by
Reply

Growing up Catholic has given me the gift of imagining how the birth of Jesus looked. Mostly we have a mash up of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke and until I began to study Scripture in college I didn’t give much thought to it. But in the years since it’s become clear that the birth narrative can’t have happened as it is read. Here are some thoughts:

The Census: Luke 2:1 places Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem instead of Nazareth where Mary and Joseph lived. This was necessary as the Old Testament prophet Micah stated (Chapter 5) that the Messiah will come from Bethlehem. According to Luke, Mary and Joseph needed to travel to Bethlehem because the Roman ruler (Caesar Augustus) demanded that everyone return to their ancestral home and since Joseph descended from King David he needed to be there. Matthew (Chapter 2) places Jesus’ birth during the reign of King Herod who died between the year 5 BCE and 1 CE (formally 5 BC and 1 AD) but Luke places this when Quirinius governed Syria who didn’t begin his reign until 6 CE. Now we can put that down to a simple mistake, but there’s more. Say what you will about the Romans, they kept good records. And there’s no record of a census “of the whole world” as Luke states. Furthermore, a census lists where you live, not your ancestors; that means there would have been no need for them to go to Bethlehem. As an aside I was born in Washington D.C. My father was born in Gardner, Massachusetts and his father was born in Notre Dame, New Brunswick (Canada). If you go back far enough my 8th Great Grandfather was born in France. Where do I go for a census?

Virgin Birth: Most Christians believe that Jesus was born of Mary but not of Joseph as she was a virgin (Matthew 1:18). Matthew wrote that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit (Matthew 1:20); this was important because it fulfilled the prophecy from Isaiah 7:14 that they could recognize the Messiah when “the virgin shall be with child, and hear a son, and shall name him Emmanuel.” But there is a translation problem. Most of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew but by the time of Jesus most people read its translation to Greek. The word Isaiah used in Hebrew is “almah” which was translated into the Greek word “parthenos.” But almah doesn’t necessarily mean virgin as much as “young woman.” So why is this important? Throughout history there has been a persistent rumor that Jesus was conceived by Mary and a Roman soldier. It’s not hard to see how the followers of Jesus could look back to Isaiah and see the word parthenos and couple Matthew with Isaiah.

Does this mean Jesus wasn’t the Messiah? No. As I was once told a story can be true even if it didn’t happen the way we think. I’m not a fundamentalist (who believes the Bible is without error in fact as well as faith) because of passages like this. My belief in Jesus does not depend on the accuracy of facts.

If Jesus had a human father that doesn’t negate my belief that he was the Messiah. But I have to admit that the concept of the virgin birth has led to a long held and persistent belief that virginity is good and sex is bad. And that’s bad. There’s nothing I see in Scripture that tells me that sex is bad, or evil, or sinful. And while we rightly revere Mary because of her willingness to give birth to Jesus in some pretty awful circumstances, her marital status should not matter.

So let’s celebrate Christmas this year for what’s good. Jesus brought us redemption, eternal life, and the ability to love in hard circumstances. Let’s not care so much about Bethlehem or virginity.

Vin Scully 1927 – 2022

Posted on by
Reply

I don’t normally write obituaries or tributes, mostly because other writers do a better job. But a few days ago we all learned the sad, if not expected, news that Vin Scully passed away at the age of 94.

Full disclosure, I didn’t grow up a baseball fan. I grew up outside of Washington D.C. and it was a football town. There wouldn’t be a basketball or hockey team until 1974, and baseball didn’t return until 2005.

But I moved to San Diego in 1995 and in 1998 I married a diehard, lifelong fan of the Los Angeles Dodgers, I soon learned that their legendary sportscaster, Vin Scully, had been in the broadcast booth since 1950 and would stay there until 2016. Those who grew up with the words “It’s time for Dodger baseball!” will never forget how he made them feel.

It’s a cliche to say this but Vin made you feel like he was sitting next to you and there was nobody else there. He was a wealth of information but he wasn’t just a trivia buff. While all broadcasters know the names of the superstars, Vin knew about everyone. He made a point of knowing the names and stories of those making their debuts. He spoke about them as if he had known them since high school and had been rooting for them all along.

He was also a classic gentleman. Those who knew him spoke glowingly of a man who was just as kind and generous in person as he was in the broadcast booth. Without saying it you could tell that his integrity informed everything about him.

He will be missed. Rest in peace Vin.

July 4, 2022: It’s Been 246 Years. How Are We Doing?

Posted on by
Reply

It was a temperate 72 degrees on July 4, 1776 in Philadelphia, not the image we often get of oppressive heat and stuffy rooms. On that day, in that place, something incredible happened. Fifty six British subjects signed a document that declared that they were no longer part of the British Empire but were instead an independent nation.

From the point of view of King George III (1738-1820) it was nothing short of treason. He saw this as a rebellion that he would put down and punish harshly. This document would be Exhibit A on executing these men.

These 56 were not a diverse group, at least by modern standards. They were all white, Christian (including one Catholic), and men of some wealth. Some were farmers, some were lawyers, some were merchants, but all had the wealth to gather in Philadelphia. They all had a great deal in common, including their belief in revolution.

Previous generations were told that their ultimate loyalty rested with the king (or queen) and they had the power of life or death over everyone. But a 33 year old farmer and scholar from Virginia wrote this:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

.

In other words we are primarily subject to God, not the king. We have rights that not even the king can violate.

We’ve made a great deal of progress in the last 246 years, but we’re far from done.

  1. We ended slavery in 1865. This was perhaps the largest task of all. The framers of the Constitution (13 years in the future) recognized that there would be no United States unless slavery were allowed to continue in the South. Slavery constituted our greatest challenge and it led to a conflict that nearly destroyed us. Today, 157 years after the abolition of slavery, we’re still reckoning with full racial equality. But the fact that most of us recognize this gives us hope.
  2. We have never reverted to governance by royalty and we have never come close. Several of our Presidents have been jeered at with the epithet “King.” If you watch the 2012 movie Lincoln he is referred to as “King Abraham Africanis I.”
  3. Freedoms of press, speech, religion, and assembly are entrenched. We think nothing of writing to the local newspaper criticizing our leaders, often not even thinking that citizens of other nations wouldn’t dare. We need to look over our shoulder when we walk into our place of worship.
  4. When we see discrimination we’ve done what we can to stop it. Women now vote. People of color can now live where they choose. Recent conflicts over marriage equality, once thought impossible, are now the law of the land.

And yes, we still have a long way to go. Today we are divided in ways we haven’t seen in our lifetimes. Good people on each side accuse others of wanting to end our democracy. But our history gives us great reason for hope.

Next year I hope I’ll be commentating on our 247th birthday. I’m confident I’ll still be hopeful.

The Justice Chronicles, Volume 40: Abortion and the Right To Bear Arms

Posted on by
Reply

Each year the Supreme Court ends its session in June and oftentimes our nation eagerly awaits a few major decisions. It’s a little known fact but anyone can contact the Supreme Court and they will mail you a bound copy of the opinions. I’ve ordered copies of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (abortion) and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (gun control). I had hoped to read both decisions before writing about them but I won’t receive these opinions for a few weeks and I didn’t feel I could wait to at least something. I’ve already written about Dobbs in January

So think of this as a preview (for your consideration).

In 1973 the justices ruled in Roe v. Wade that no state could ban abortion. The majority opinion was written by Justice Harry Blackmun (1908-1999) and ruled that any decision concerning a woman’s health belonged only between the woman and her doctor. Government held no role in this.

Opposition to this ruling came swiftly. The Catholic Church condemned it immediately and evangelical Christians took it on in the early 1980s. They argued that the primary relationship wasn’t between mother and doctor, but between mother and unborn child. They argued that the unborn child was a person from the moment of conception and was due all the rights of any person. Abortion, simply put, was murder.

Since I haven’t read the Dobbs opinion yet I don’t know what reasoning they chose to overrule Roe, but I’ll let you know as soon as I know.

The gun control case appears to make a decision in fairly narrow grounds. All 50 states allow someone to conceal a gun when he is out in public. Some require a permit and a few, including New York, make granting a permit more difficult. Nine states (including New York) require a resident to apply and show cause. That is, he or she must show a need for additional protection above and beyond the need for ordinary citizens. I imagine that would include someone who has a restraining order against someone with a history of violence or an off duty police officer.

Again, I haven’t read this opinion but I will be happy to share mine when I have one.

And Now Uvalde, Texas. Had Enough? The Republican Party Hasn’t.

Posted on by
Reply

Last week we learned the name of another small city with an elementary school: Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. In the last 23 years we’ve also learned about Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado; Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut; Marjorie Stoneman High School in Parkland, Florida. There are several more, but you get the point. Each of these schools lost students to gun violence.

This type of mass murder also happens outside of schools as we learned of shootings at St. Francis Hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma; Tops Friendly Market in Buffalo, New York; Mandalay Bay Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada; Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida. And this is only a fraction.

I wrote a longer article in 2018 and I don’t wish to repeat it here. I argued that it was time to outlaw the purchase of assault rifles. They have no place in legal activities such as hunting. Simply put, they are weapons of war and are designed only to kill a large number of people in a short time.

After every massacre the National Rifle Association and the Republican Party attempt to frame them as mental health issues. This allows them to divert attention away from the guns and their responsibility for the deaths.

After Sandy Hook in 2012 it briefly appeared that the deaths of students that young would shame those groups into talking seriously about reasonable gun control. Alas, no.

As I write this there are some Republicans who are feigning interest in reasonable legislation and I’d like to believe them. I hope I’m wrong.

Kent State, Fifty Two Years Later

Posted on by
Reply

If you’re under fifty May 4th probably makes you think of the Star Wars franchise (May the Forth Be With You) but for older generations it’s a day of mourning.

On May 4, 1970 at Kent State University in Ohio four people were killed by members of the Ohio National Guard. About 300 students were on campus protesting US participation in the war in Vietnam.

They were ordered to disperse and tear gas was used to end the protest. You read the details but at some point several guardsmen fired into the crowd. The four killed were:

May they rest in peace.