The Beatification of John Paul II

Posted on by
Reply

Between the royal wedding and the death of Osama bin Laden, I barely noticed the beatification of John Paul II–there was a brief, and not-very-edifying conversation at coffee hour over the relic, but other than that, I wasn’t paying attention. I’m not a big fan of canonization, knowing the politicization of the process throughout history and the way the church, and especially popes have used sainthood to cement their power, coopt local devotions, and channel piety. I find the rush to canonize John Paul II somewhat unseemly. There should be time, and historical distance to reflect on and place in longer perspective the achievements, life, and sanctity of people.

That being said, I’m not Roman Catholic, so I’ve “got no dog in this fight” as they say in the South. But there are some thoughtful perspectives, for and against, and some writers who connect John Paul’s beatification with the week’s other events.

Tim Muldoon connects the beatification with the royal wedding, seeing in both stories of hope.

Others are concerned about more negative aspects of John Paul’s papacy, especially the clergy sexual abuse, that many think was swept under the rug during his tenure. Max Lindenman sees it differently.

Ingrid Rowland, the great Renaissance historian, brings another perspective, looking at the beatification in the context of the city of Rome is it is today.

Initial reflections on the death of Osama bin Laden

Posted on by
1

After turning in early last night, I learned the news this morning. Like many, I was troubled by the celebrations that broke out spontaneously. Many of those most affected, whose loved ones were killed directly or indirectly bin Laden or Al Qaida had a natural emotional response to news of his death. But I wonder why a celebration of this sort turned into what one commentator called a “Frat Party.” And there were other comments and actions that put this event on the level of a sports team’s national championship. We haven’t won by any stretch of the imagination. The wars that were unleashed in response to bin Laden’s actions continue; terrorists continue to plot attacks, and our freedoms diminished in the name of these wars.

About rejoicing over the death of one’s enemies:

Susanna Brooks has some brief comments

Rabbi Schmuel Herzfeld asks: “Is it wrong to feel joy at Bin Laden’s death?” and points to the talmudic story that God rebuked the angels for excessive joy when Pharaoh’s army was destroyed while the Israelites crossed the Red Sea.

My Facebook newsfeed was filled with friends posting verses from scripture about loving one’s enemy or Proverbs 24:17: “Do not gloat when your enemy falls; when they stumble, do not let your heart rejoice.” There were also prayers for peace and prayers for our enemies.

I’ve been thinking again about just war theory–Nato’s actions in Libya have raised the issue again. The use of drone aircraft raise significant questions about the exercise of war. Paul Zahl asked whether their use was just in the context of Afghanistan; that they are now being used in Libya as well is perhaps more troubling.

Osama’s death will overshadow the news that Nato made a targeted attack on a site where members of Muammar Qaddafi’s family were staying, resulting in the death of family members. As numerous commentators have pointed out, this is a significant step beyond the original UN mandate.

One of the things that concerns me most, both about the bin Laden attack and the events in Libya is that we continue to abrogate human rights and the rule of law.

An appropriate, Christian (or even human) response to bin Laden’s death is difficult to gauge in light of our competing loyalties to family, friends, nation and Jesus Christ, and the real emotional responses we have to the news. James Martin, SJ, writes on America’s In all Things:

So the question is whether the Christian can forgive a murderer, a mass murderer, even–as in the case of Osama bin Laden–a coordinator of mass murder across the globe.  I’m not sure I would be able to do this, particularly if I had lost a loved one.  But as with other “life” issues, we cannot overlook what Jesus asks of us, hard as it is to comprehend.  Or to do.

For this is a “life” issue as surely as any other.  The Christian is not simply in favor of life for the unborn, for the innocent, for those we care for, for our families and friends, for our fellow citizens, for our fellow church members or even for those whom we consider good, but for all.  All life is sacred because God created all life.  This is what lies behind Jesus’s most difficult command: “I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”

The whole thing is well worth the read.

Sermon Follow-Up: The ABC on “Doubting Thomas”

Posted on by
Reply

From Mark Vernon:

So clearly there’s a pattern emerging. This is a sceptic and the gospel says it’s quite important that in the balance of personalities around Jesus there is somebody who asks the awkward questions who is not a kind of Pollyanna optimist and who eventually will only be convinced by the confrontation of a relationship. At the end of the day, in fact, he says ‘I need to touch the risen body.’ But when Jesus appears to him as a risen body, Thomas doesn’t touch. He says ‘now, I see enough.’

My Lord and My God: A Sermon for the Second Sunday of Easter

Posted on by
Reply

May 1, 2011

The story of Thomas’ encounter with the Risen Christ may be my favorite gospel story. I love it because I have long felt a kinship with Thomas. When I was growing up, I was one of those kids that Sunday School teachers must have hated because I liked to ask uncomfortable questions. I still do. I remember one time in particular when an exasperated teacher responded to one of my questions with “Well, doubting’s a sin.” I thought at the time, if that’s the case, then I know I’m going to hell. I still have questions, I still doubt, but I’ve also learned through life and from the story of Thomas, that far from being a sin, at least for me, doubting opens the door to a deeper faith, it opens the door to a richer encounter with God, and a richer life of faith. Continue reading →

Royal wedding, continued

Posted on by
Reply

So I watched the service, straight up, with no commentary this evening. If you want to see it, it’s available .

I’m a liturgy geek, so it was all wonderful, from Cwm Rhondda to Jerusalem, and  a composition by John Rutter. I especially liked the Parry setting of John Milton. OK, so I want the Deaon of Westminster’s cope, too.

But there was also something quite powerful for me in seeing this ceremony, with the Dean of Westminster, the Bishop of London, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, after having celebrated at a wedding at Grace this afternoon. Both were lovely liturgies, with couples deeply in love and family and friends supportive. But each ceremony also pointed to something much greater than any of us, greater than the love any couple can share.

Some of the words I said were quite similar to words said by the Archbishop of Canterbury; I even read the Bishop of London’s sermon before completing my homily–and was astounded to discover that mine was 70 words longer than his. While watching tonight, I felt deeply connected, not only to the couple whose marriage I witnessed and blessed today, but to the larger communion of people who yearn for love and relationship, across the world.

Here’s the prayer, Prince William and Kate wrote:

God our Father, we thank
you for our families; for
the love that we share and
for the joy of our marriage.
In the busyness of each day keep our eyes fixed on
what is real and important
in life and help us to be generous with our time
and love and energy.
Strengthened by our union, help us to serve and comfort those who suffer. We ask this in the Spirit of Jesus Christ. Amen.

The Anglican Covenant Scorecard

Posted on by
Reply

The Diocese of Michigan says no.

The Diocese of Kansas says no to Section 4.

The Diocese of Colorado says no.

The Diocese of California says “Not so fast:”

We also find great hope in the ongoing Indaba process, noting the Lambeth 2008 Conference set a way forward by departing from legislative process at the level of Communion and instead cultivating conversations that lead to mutual understanding and strengthen our bonds of affection. A wide majority of our members believe that these Communion processes and direct relationships are far more life-giving in the Gospel and Spirit-filled than pursuing the formal structures offered by the proposed Anglican Covenant.

The Diocese of LA votes no.

Maori Anglicans in New Zealand vote no.

Mark Harris’ prognostications for Mid-April are here.

The No Anglican Covenant blog keeps an up-to-date list of resources.

Proposed mosque in Sun Prairie turned down by planning commission

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s the article from today’s Wisconsin State Journal. The reason for refusal was parking–the proposed mosque is in a commercial development that has issues with parking and traffic. The commission’s decision is only advisory and the proposal will come up for a vote at City Council on May 3.

I don’t know the site, I’m not very familiar with Sun Prairie, but I do know from experience that proposed mosques, Buddhist or Hindu temples, even Mormon temples, are often opposed by neighborhood groups because of parking and traffic issues. Such issues are often cover for religious bigotry–one famous example of that was the proposed Mormon Temple in Nashville, TN in the 1990s.

In Greenville, the Masjid shared parking with a church. It worked out quite well, because the church didn’t need its parking lot on Friday afternoons.

I’m not going to cast aspersions on the members of Sun Prairie’s planning commission but I should think that instead of a blanket denial, one might come up with creative solutions to potential problems.

The Harvard Pluralism Project tracks such issues nationwide.

The Royal Wedding–Sorry, I couldn’t resist

Posted on by
Reply

Commentary on the nuptials:

From Theo Hobson:

I am a rather keen Christian. The tradition of my upbringing is the Church of England, the established church. But it became clear to me about ten years ago, that this tradition contained the hugest structural error. It shouldn’t be established: Christianity and establishment are incompatible. The case for disestablishment is probably too obvious to restate, especially for American readers. The interesting question, though, is how Anglicanism manages to dismiss this case, how it justifies its refusal to reform.

He concludes with this:

I wish William and Kate all the best: they seem like the nicest sort of posh folk. But I also want to tell this young man that his future job is religiously problematic, that his funny family is unwittingly stifling the renewal of Christianity in my land.

And did you know that Ms. Middleton had to get confirmed quickly?

I cannot help feeling that if Kate Middleton had been serious about her Christian faith, she would have been confirmed in the Church of England at a somewhat younger age than 29. Having attended such expensive private boarding schools as Downe House and Marlborough College, she would have been offered the chance of confirmation while still in her teens. Prince William, for example, was 14 when he was confirmed. Of course, I know nothing of Kate’s views on religion, but neither she nor other members of her family appear until now to have been regular churchgoers. And while sources “close to Kate” are quoted in the Daily Mail as insisting that she went through the ceremony in St James’s Palace because of a “personal journey” of a religious nature and not in order to avoid the awkwardness of being denied Holy Communion when married to a future Defender of the Faith, it is hard to relinquish the suspicion that she did it more for convenience than from conviction.

The relationship between educational level and religious involvement

Posted on by
1

The Episcopal Cafe asks: More education = less religion? It points to a study of Canadian religiosity by Notre Dame economist Daniel Hagerman mentioned on Freakonomics.

But perhaps it’s not just higher education, but what one majors in. Rosalynde Welch concludes from another study that Humanities and Social Science majors are less likely to be religious after graduating than Science majors. She blames it on postmodernism, the encounter with pluralism, and methodological doubt. Of course, as one commenter on the Episcopal Cafe thread pointed out, members of the Episcopal Church are much more likely to have college and graduate education than the wider public, including the wider religious public.

Hell, continued

Posted on by
Reply

The cover article in Time on Rob Bell and Hell stirred up some stuff in the blogosphere. Here’s Matt Yglesias’ response:

But without hell there’s no reason to think of good and bad, right and wrong as a question of getting over some hurdle of minimum standard of conduct.

Kathryn Gin on why hell still matters:

Whether or not we agree with the issues they champion, the majority of Americans who continue to believe in hell can’t simply be dismissed as fanatical relics of a bygone age. Controversies over hell keep recurring because to its believers, hell stands for more than fire, brimstone, and worms that never die. Hell also represents a backstop on the slippery slope to social chaos in a nation founded not on ethnicity or religion, but on the premise of a virtuous citizenry.

Ross Douthat’s “A Case for Hell.”

The doctrine of hell, by contrast, assumes that our choices are real, and, indeed, that we are the choices that we make. The miser can become his greed, the murderer can lose himself inside his violence, and their freedom to turn and be forgiven is inseparable from their freedom not to do so.