An Anniversary That Means a Great Deal to Me (if not anyone else)

On this date in 1980 I had an eventful day: I entered the seminary of the Stigmatine Fathers and Brothers. I moved from my home in Woodbridge, Va. to Watertown, MA; actually the Stigmatine House of Studies at 229 Watertown St. in Watertown. I transferred from George Mason University to Boston College and changed my major from Government to Philosophy. It was quite a change.

I write this because as I look over the grand sweep of my life (so far) this is a pretty big day. Previous to this I had visions of graduating from George Mason, going to University of Virginia Law School and spending my career as an attorney. By my sophomore year at George Mason I began to understand that this wasn’t going to fulfill me. The idea of switching to becoming a Catholic priest seemed unbelievable, but somehow attractive. I entered the Stigmatine seminary that day convinced that God would take care of me and prevent anything bad from happening.

He did (take care of me) and didn’t (prevent anything bad from happening). But from that day I’ve never seriously thought about becoming a lawyer, and I’ve never thought about a career away from being a public person of faith. Since that day I’ve been a seminarian (with both the Stigmatines and the Paulist Fathers), a priest with the Paulists, a Director of Religious Education (running a CCD or Sunday School program), a Youth Minister (working with teens), a resident manager in a home for teen mothers, and (finally) a hospice chaplain.

When I look back on the person I was 32 years ago I barely recognize myself. On the other hand I recognize I would not be the middle aged man I am today if my younger self hadn’t taken that step on that day, in that place.

I’m also grateful for all the brave men and women who have crossed my path. Not all of them would predict I’d be where I am now, but all of them had a part in who I am now. My thanks.

The Justice Chronicles Volume 7: Paul Ryan and Ayn Rand

Yesterday we learned that Governor Mitt Romney has chosen Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate. There is lots to talk about, and I’ll be doing more talking in the next few months. Right now I want to focus on Paul Ryan’s views on the role of government.

When he was in college Paul read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand (1905-1982) and was immediately taken by it. Much of his political philosophy comes from her views: what she calls “Objectivism.” She holds that:

  1. Reality exists as an objective absolute–facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes, or fears
  2. Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s sense) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.
  3. Man–every man–is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.
  4. The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but historically, had not yet been) a complete separations of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.

Religion composes the only true difference in their beliefs: Paul is Catholic and Ayn was a strong atheist. In an interview in 1964 she was asked: “Has no religion, in your estimation, ever offered anything of constructive value to human life?” This is her answer:

Qua religion, no—in the sense of blind belief, belief unsupported by, or contrary to, the facts of reality and the conclusions of reason. Faith, as such, is extremely detrimental to human life: it is the negation of reason. But you must remember that religion is an early form of philosophy, that the first attempts to explain the universe, to give a coherent frame of reference to man’s life and a code of moral values, were made by religion, before men graduated or developed enough to have philosophy.

Paul wishes us to believe that you can be a follower of Ayn Rand and a Christian, but can we? How do we square an entire philosophy based exclusively on self interest when Jesus gave his life to save all humanity? How does the pursuit of one’s own self interest find any common ground with a faith that demands that we be our brother’s keeper?

This is not just academic discussion. Paul has proposed a federal budget that is very much in agreement with Objectivist views. He calls it The Path to Prosperity and you can download a copy here. It is clearly a path to prosperity if you are already rich. It makes horrific cuts to programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and a host of other programs that provide basic services to the poor while providing generous tax cuts to the richest among us.

If this budget plan aligns with Objectivist values, what does Christianity say? In 1986 the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops wrote a document called Economic Justice for All: A Pastoral Letter on Catholic Social Teaching and the U.S. Economy. This is their opening paragraph:

We are believers called to follow Our Lord Jesus Christ and proclaim his Gospel in the midst of a complex and powerful economy. This reality poses both opportunities and responsibilities for Catholics in the United States. Our faith calls us to measure this economy, not only by what it produces, but also by how it touches human life and whether it protects or undermines the dignity of the human person. Economic decisions have human consequences and moral content; they help or hurt people, strengthen or weaken family life, advance or diminish the quality of justice in our land.

In paragraph 8 they state: “As a community of believers, we know that our faith is tested by the quality of justice among us, that we can best measure our life together by how the poor and the vulnerable are treated.”

The election is 84 days from now and we have a clear choice to make. More later.

Nomination Update

A few months ago I set up a grid to keep track of the Republican delegate count. It appears that tonight Mitt Romney wrapped up the necessary delegates. I have therefore removed the counter. I’ll no doubt resurrect something like that in 2016.

What Happens to Rick's Delegates?

The long primary season several candidates gain delegates, but not enough to secure the nomination, and they drop out. Rick Santorum is the latest. OK so what happens to his 250 to 280 delegates? Well, that depends. States pick their delegates differently and have varying rules about them.

The clearest article I’ve read on this is from the Washington Post. It starts with Rick having 281 delegates. Of these, 84 are from states with nonbinding delegates: delegates from Iowa, Colorado, Minnesota, Washington, and North Dakota have always been free to vote for whomever they want. You can imagine they have been contacted by other campaigns by now.

The remaining 197 delegates are bound to vote for Santorum at the convention unless Santorum releases them, and of this writing he has not. He did not end his campaign but only suspended it; had he ended his campaign that would have released his delegates.

His decision to suspend his campaign essentially gives the nomination to Mitt Romney. To the extent that Rick did not have enough delegates to block Romney’s election, Rick’s bound delegates will likely go through the motions of voting for him in the convention.

Thoughts on Rick Santorum's Departure

We got word today that Rick Santorum has suspended his campaign. I’ve been thinking for several weeks that I wanted to post something on his campaign and why this Catholic won’t vote for that Catholic. Now it seems it doesn’t matter.

He suspended his campaign for several reasons: he was well behind in the delegate count, he was in danger of losing the primary of his home state of Pennsylvania, his daughter’s health continues to weigh on him, and he’s realizing that he can’t assume the Catholic vote.

Before saying anything else I have to say that I respect his decision to stay close to his daughter. She is living with Trisomy 18, a genetic disorder. It’s normally fatal fairly soon after birth and the fact that Bella is still alive at age 3 is a testament to her strength, her family’s support, and (frankly) her access to the health care that Rick Santorum would continue to deny to 15% of our population.

As a Catholic I’m most interested in his assumption that he had the Catholic vote in his back pocket. He has made some public stances that he assumed would garner my support, but in fact had the opposite effect. I proudly declare myself Catholic, think of myself as faithful to the True Faith, attend Mass, participate in the life of my parish, and think the nut case far right is out to lunch on the issue of birth control and other Catholic issues.

I’ve written recently about the fact that the Vatican, the American Bishops, and Timothy Cardinal Dolan have opposed President Obama’s directive that some Catholic institutions provide birth control as part of their health coverage. They have framed this as an assault on the Catholic Church and religious freedom. Married Catholics like me frame this as the ongoing war on married couples. We applaud women like Sandra Fluke who speak from a place of truth and integrity. We pray for the day the Catholic prohibition on birth control goes in a direction that makes sense beyond the celibate male clergy.

Additionally, I’m astounded by his attack on President Kennedy. For many of use who grew up in the 20th Century, John Kennedy was our Catholic icon. Among other things he was able to articulate to the United States a Catholic belief that was true to our traditions without claiming that a Catholic President is an agent to the Pope. As a candidate in 1960 John Kennedy was perceived by many as just this: the Pope would call and the President would follow orders. Catholics like myself have always found this preposterous, but many non Catholics of that time needed reassurance.

On September 12, 1960, Senator Kennedy spoke to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association and said this:

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute; where no Catholic prelate would tell the President — should he be Catholic — how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference, and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him, or the people who might elect him.

Frankly, I find this articulate and accurate, and enough non Catholics thought so in 1960 to elect him president. Mr. Santorum (who was 2 years old at the time) said this to George Stephanopolous on February 26th:

To say that people of faith have no role in the public square? You bet that makes you throw up. What kind of country do we live that says only people of non-faith can come into the public square and make their case? That makes me throw up and it should make every American who is seen from the president, someone who is now trying to tell people of faith that you will do what the government says, we are going to impose our values on you, not that you can’t come to the public square and argue against it, but now we’re going to turn around and say we’re going to impose our values from the government on people of faith, which of course is the next logical step when people of faith, at least according to John Kennedy, have no role in the public square.

This is troubling on a few levels. First and most obvious, how can a man running for President be so unable understand another person’s speech? At no time did Kennedy claim that he wasn’t a man of faith, only that he would not take orders from the Pope on how to run the county. Second, does he equate faith with the inability to think independently? In other words can I, as a Catholic, discern my own views, or do I have to lockstep with the Pope on all issues.

I guess that means Mr. Santorum and I are very different Catholics.

And I’m praying for his daughter.

Coming out of Florida

I’m writing this as the results are coming in from the Florida Republican Primary. It’s been a tough few weeks for the candidates, and it points to more months of negative campaigning, Super Pacs, and unlimited bloodletting.

Coming out of the South Carolina primary it appeared that the Gingrich campaign had some momentum, and this was of great concern to the Republican establishment. The Romney campaign came out with strong negative ads and won Florida.

I’ve update the table and you can see there is no more agreement than before.

The race is still on. Nevada is next.

The Republican Delegate Race: 2.0

Four years ago I tried to keep track of the delegate count for the Republican and Democratic primaries and it gave me a headache. That headache has already returned and I’m taking a new strategy. My headache was caused by the fact that several news organizations keep a delegate count, but none of them agree. This year I’ve decided to take a different track. I’m setting up a page to keep track of the counts of a few different organizations. We’ll see how it happens. You can access this page here.

Iowa: Let the Delegate Race Begin

Tonight the voters in Iowa meet to begin the process of choosing a candidate for president. The Democratic nominee is a given, and most of the news is in the Republican caucus. Starting tonight I’m planning to keep track of the delegates that each candidate wins. Four years ago I found this to be a headache as no two outlets had the same number. Nevertheless I’ll try again.

As a strong Democrat I have to confess fascination in watching the Republican race. With the exception of Mitt Romney who started moderately and has stayed there, there has been a series of what I call the Republican Vomit Comet experiences. It’s clear to me that Mitt is the Republican equivalent of 2004’s John Kerry: nobody is thrilled about him, but they need to find somebody to beat the incumbent. As Republican voters look to someone else to nominate, they find someone, shoot him (or her in the case of Michelle Bachmann) to the top of the polls, find out it’s just not going to work and drop him back to single digits.

It began with Sarah Palin who flirted with running, but elected to pass. Since then we’ve seen the same arc with Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, most recently, Newt Gingrich.

As I see it now, the Republican nominee is going to be Mitt Romney, or perhaps the dark horse, Rick Santorum.

If it turns out to be Rick, you heard it here first.

By the way, my Dad is out of the hospital! Thank you all for your prayers.

Now COPD is personal

As I write this my father is in Fairfax Hospital and I’m asking for prayers from everyone who reads this.

He’s been feeling badly for the last few weeks; he’s been diagnosed with COPD. This isn’t much of a surprise as he smoked a pack and half of cigarettes for about 40 years and the cough he developed earlier this month was thought to be a common cold.

Having a cough is more an irritant than anything else but he also developed swelling (edema) in his abdomen and left leg. The good news is that a doppler test (developed by my friend Lori’s father George Leopold) ruled out a blot clot.

The bad news is that he was having a hard time speaking and we didn’t know why. The hospital called at 3AM and told him to go to the Emergency Room. His sodium level was low (111) and we think it’s a bad combination of his hypertension medication Linisopril and Hydrochlorothiazide. That explained why he was so sluggish. The Lisinopril is a good idea but having Hydrochlorothiazide wasn’t. It’s a diuretic which is normally a good idea for hypertension but it lowers both potassium and sodium which messes with heartbeat. The doctors have changed the medication to stop the diuretic and we all hope it’s the beginning of good news.

I pray it is. My father is a good man, but he doesn’t enjoy being a patient; it’s hard for him to ask for help or be the center of attention. It will be good news for everyone when he gets to go home and I pray and hope he comes home soon to my mother (who he has been married to for nearly 54 years). They belong together.

I love them more than I can say.

Updating the Candidate's List

Every four years I put myself through the torture of following the candidates for President and if you look at the left column of this page you can see as many of the serious candidates as I can find.

Today Herman Cain announced he is “suspending” his run for the Republican nomination. It’s a technical thing and I can’t imagine he will gain the nomination. Suspending instead of ending his candidacy allows him to continue to raise money (though I can’t imagine anyone contributing) and spend money. I suspect he’s doing this so he can close his books and pay his campaign staffers. More about him later.

I also looked at the links I have for other candidates. For several I’ve updated the links when they’ve changed the URL. Others have broken links and I can’t find a campaign page and I’ve deleted them. Here is that list:

Democrat
Jeff Boss
Republican
Herman Cain
Bob Forthen
Roger Nichols
John Revelis
Green
Winona LaDuke (this was actually a mistake: there is a web page to draft her but no page where she says she wants to be President. There are several names being mentioned for the Green nomination but I haven’t found anyone who has announced).
Libertarian
Jim Duesing
Independent
Jim Duesing
James Cooper
Temperance Alesha Lance-Council (this was also a mistake. Her web page is about her candidacy in 2008)
If you are running for President and have a web page, please email me.
Now onto Herman Cain. My last post spoke of his 9-9-9 tax plan, but it’s been clear for the last several weeks that his campaign was doomed.

Charges of sexual harassment are nothing new in political campaigns and they are always bothersome: they turn on he said/she said. What troubled me about this was that the story was first broken by Politico.com in October and they gave the Cain campaign 10 days notice that they were going to publish the story. You can read the original posting here. With 10 days notice the campaign didn’t have a coherent response; at first they attacked Politico.com without denying the charges. Then they couldn’t explain why the National Restaurant Association settled with women who claimed he harassed them. As the weeks went on it just got worse; his poll numbers fell through the floor and it became clear that he was not electable. I give him credit for figuring this out.

The charges notwithstanding, he should have done a better job responding to this. Our President has to respond quickly and coherently to all sorts of things: world leaders who make stupid and provocative allegations, countries or groups that threaten violence, or just plain bad news. The fact that Herman Cain and his campaign fumbled so badly on this told us that he was nowhere near ready to lead the country. He may have had good management skills, but our President needs the type of skills he showed us he doesn’t have.