"All I needed was a friend to lend a guiding hand, but"

Maggie May always reminds me of fall. So, here is Rod Stewart and the Faces. This is our traditio.

SARCASM ALERT Our Friday traditio is a good time to mention this, largely because traditio features celebrities: I learned something in today's "news" that I don't really care much about, namely that David Spade is the father of newborn daughter borne to a Playboy Playmate- I suppose there are those who are our mates and those with whom we just play in a certain way like they are our mates. In a deeply moving display of fatherly affection and loving commitment to his child's mother, Jillian Grace, "The 44-year-old comedian told TMZ.com earlier this year that he had a brief relationship with Grace, and would accept responsibility if confirmed to be the father of her child". If you are still unconvinced, Spade, according to his publicist, "plans to visit her on his first break from filming the CBS sitcom 'Rules of Engagement,'". I feel compelled to comment on this for two reasons. First, in light of the Holy Father's message to participants of the Meeting about what it means to be a protagonist. Second, in light of this post and link over on Paper Clippings, entitled Perpetual adolescents.

More important than a rock n' roll reminiscence or celebrity "news" is remembering Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, who, when she is raised to altar, will have her memorial on this day. Please see Rocco's post "Give God Permission". Rocco reminds us that it is she who said: "There is a terrible hunger for love. We all experience that in our lives - the pain, the loneliness. We must have the courage to recognize it. The poor you may have right in your own family. Find them. Love them". It does take courage to admit to ourselves, but especially to others, that we are hungry for love, which, by its very nature and design requires an Other. After all, God can only be love because God is a Trinity of persons. This fact, this insight, is all the apologetic needed for this foundational dogma that sits atop the hierarchy of truths. Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, pray for us.

An urgent question for today

With a deep diaconal bow to Suzanne over at come to see, here is the Holy Father's message to The Fraternity of Communion & Liberation for the annual Meeting for Friendship Among Peoples, known as The Meeting. Here is a part of His Holiness' message regarding the theme of this year's Meeting- Protagonists or Nobodies. Toward the beginning of his message, he asks,

"What does being a protagonist of one's own life and of that of the world actually mean?

"The question has become urgent today because the alternative to protagonism seems all too often to be a life without meaning, the grey anonymity of so many 'nobodies' who get lost in the folds of an amorphous mass and unfortunately unable to emerge with a noteworthy face of their own.

"Then the question should be more focused and could perhaps be rephrased: what does a face give a human being, what makes a person unmistakable and guarantees his/her existence full dignity?
"The society and culture in which we are immersed and of which the media are a powerful sound box are largely dominated by the conviction that fame is an essential component of personal fulfillment. To emerge from anonymity, to succeed in imposing oneself on public attention with every possible means and pretext is the goal pursued by many.

"Political or financial power, prestige acquired in one's profession, a display of wealth, the renown of one's own achievements, even the ostentation of one's own excesses... all this is quietly taken to be 'success' and a 'triumph' in life. That is why the new generations aspire increasingly to idealized professions and careers precisely because they bring them into the limelight, which enables them to 'appear,' to feel that they are 'somebody.' The ideal for which they strive is represented by cinema actors, the mythical celebrities of television and of the entertainment world, by athletes, soccer players, etc.

"But what happens to those who have no access to this level of social visibility? What happens to those who are forgotten, if not actually crushed by the dynamics of worldly success on which the society they live in is based? What happens to those who are poor, defenseless, sick, elderly or disabled, those who have no talents to forge ahead among others or no means to cultivate them, who have no voice to make their own ideas and convictions heard? How should one perceive those who lead a hidden life, of no apparent importance to newspapers and television?

"Contemporary men and women, like all people down the ages, strive for their own happiness and pursue it wherever they think they can find it. Here then is the real question the word 'protagonism' conceals, which this year's Meeting proposes for our reflection: In what does happiness consist? What can truly help people to achieve it?"

Archbishop Niederauer addresses Speaker Pelosi's Meet the Press comments

As promised, I am posting the link to Archbishop George Niederauer's response to comments made in two interviews late last month by Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, published in his archdiocesan newspaper, Catholic San Francisco. Speaker Pelosi is a canonical resident of San Francisco. He begins his response stating, "Last month, in two televised interviews and a subsequent statement released through her office, Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and a Catholic residing in the Archdiocese of San Francisco, made remarks that are in serious conflict with the teachings of the Catholic Church about abortion. It is my responsibility as Archbishop of San Francisco to teach clearly what Christ in his Church teaches about faith and morals, and to oppose erroneous, misleading and confusing positions when they are advanced." You can read the rest of the public correction, entitled San Francisco Archbishop George H. Niederauer addresses recent comments made by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi by clicking here. I urge everyone to read the whole thing because His Excellency does a really great job in a very short space of setting forth of the church's teaching on a number of issues that are very relevant to the discussion we have been having here.

Perhaps more important than the opening paragraph are the two closing paragraphs, in which Archbishop Niederauer, charateristically, shows what it means to be a pastor by teaching and shepherding. In doing so he also corrects those who think it is their perogrative, not his, to make certain determinations, particularly about the serious matter of denying communion: "Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and my predecessor as Archbishop here in San Francisco, wrote in 2004: 'No bishop is eager to forbid members of his flock from receiving the precious Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, who invites us into communion with Himself and his Body, the Church, as grace and salvation.' In that same year, the U.S. bishops acknowledged that pastoral sensitivity, and they endorsed the following approach to this question of denying Holy Communion: 'Given the wide range of circumstances involved in arriving at a prudential judgment on a matter of this seriousness, we recognize that such decisions rest with the individual bishop in accord with the established canonical and pastoral principles. Bishops can legitimately make different judgments on the most prudent course of pastoral action. Nevertheless, we all share an unequivocal commitment to protect human life and dignity and to preach the Gospel in difficult times.' From that statement I conclude that it is my responsibility as Archbishop to discern and decide, prayerfully, how best to approach this question as it may arise in the Archdiocese of San Francisco.

"I regret the necessity of addressing these issues in so public a forum, but the widespread consternation among Catholics made it unavoidable. Speaker Pelosi has often said how highly she values her Catholic faith, and how much it is a source of joy for her. Accordingly, as her pastor, I am writing to invite her into a conversation with me about these matters. It is my obligation to teach forthrightly and to shepherd caringly, and that is my intent. Let us pray together that the Holy Spirit will guide us all toward a more profound understanding and appreciation for human life, and toward a resolution of these differences in truth and charity and peace."

Obedience

At the beginning of the fifth chapter of St. John's Gospel, Jesus heals a crippled man at the pool of Bethesda. He heals him on the Sabbath and tells the man to take up his mat and walk. Upon seeing the man carrying his mat, which was a direct violation of strict Sabbath observance, some Pharisees called him on it by asking him why he was carrying his mat on the Sabbath. He tells them that the one who healed him told him to carry it. Why would Jesus tell to him to do that? It doesn't matter, the man himself knew nothing except what Jesus told him. He was obedient to what Jesus told him despite the fact that he did not understand.

By the time the man told the Pharisees who had healed him "Jesus had slipped away" (v. 13).

Later, Jesus saw the man "in the temple area said to him, 'Look, you are well; do not sin any more, so that nothing worse may happen to you'" (v. 14). It is important to note that Jesus is not threatening the man. He is not saying to him that if he sins he will once again be unable to walk, or be afflicted by some worse physical ailment. No, Jesus is saying that sin results in the worst thing happening to us, the loss of ourselves, the abandonment of our I to that which does not ultimately satisfy us.

We avoid sinning by following Jesus, by being obedient to Him, even when we do not fully understand why he is asking something of us. What Jesus asks of us is nothing less than what the church teaches. Of course, this obedience, this adherence, is only possible once we have experienced an event that becomes an encounter, once we know who Jesus is: the Incarnation of God, who is love. In last Sunday's Gospel, taken from St. Matthew, Jesus tells us, "Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it" (Matt. 16,24). Of course, Peter and the other eleven did not know what he was talking about, they did not comprehend, but neither did they leave, they remained, they adhered. This forces a question: Did the cross make sense to Jesus when it became clear to Him that it was what the Father asked of him?

Begging for bread

Tonight School of Community was about questions. I was left kind of speechless because of the questions. So, here I offer a kind of post hoc synthesis. The kind of questions to which I am referring, the kinds of questions we posed to each other, are not the kind that can be given a satisfactorily definitive answer. In a nutshell, given the transitory and uncertain nature of our lives, how do we live? What does it mean to live this way, in the manner of a Christian? We often engage in a lot of high faltun' theological language about being Christian, how it should shape who we are, inform our choices, about how we are changed in baptism, in confirmation, in confession, by the Eucharist. I reject none of this language because of the Mystery it seeks to express when we use it authentically, but what does it mean existentially? What does say to me about my life? What does it mean when somebody I know dies? What does it mean when I am worried? What does it mean when I can't muster the will to give a damn? Mere words are powerless to comfort me. What can comfort me, or, more accurately, who can comfort me? A companion. What is a companion?

I am going to leave that question hanging for moment and turn to Giussani, who, when discussing freedom, asked: "So then, where does our trouble lie in having a clear idea of certain words that are fundamental for life?" Certainly in the Movement we recognize that the essence of CL is our need for companionship. Hence, companionship, like freedom, is a word fundamental for life, not to life, but for life. What is CL if not a companionship? Just like our mistaken idea that freedom is synonymous with choice, which mistake can be summarized well in lyrics by the band X, "Now there are seven kinds of Coke/500 kinds of cigarettes/This freedom of choice in the USA drives everybody crazy", our often incomplete and/or mistaken idea as to who is, or is not, a companion is the result of us being "alienated by the common mentality" (both quotes are from Is It Possible . . . pg. 60).

So, as human beings possessed of reason and able to use language to either be phony or to express, if incompletely, something authentic from our experience, let us look at who is a companion. Companion in English is basically a compound Latin word: com + panis= with bread. Hence, a companion is one with bread. We are beggars, that is, protagonists when we ask questions that arise from our lives, to paraphrase John Waters, we are questions looking for an answer, which is but another way of stating Giussani's axiom that the human person is a direct realtionship with the Mystery. I once told somebody that CL without SofC is like the church without Mass, not only impossible, but unimaginable. So, when we pose our questions, the ones we are not looking for someone to answer with some pious platitude that is spoken with the intention and expectation that now we can feel alright about an untimely, ironic, and absurd death, we are begging for bread. The best imaginable companion is the One who not only gives us the bread for which we beg, but who becomes bread for us. It is this same One who gathers us together in our schools. How did we all manage to come together here, now, for this encounter, in which we pose the questions that make us a companionship of beggars?

John Waters at the Meeting

A month ago I posted A question in search of an answer after reading The Utopia of a Hope Uprooted from Tradition, written by John Waters and appearing in Traces (Vol. 10-No. 6-2008). I was deeply moved by his piece. Now, Sharon, who is blogging live from The Meeting in Rimini, Italy, writes about Waters' presentation in a discussion on the theme of this year's Meeting, Protagonists or Nobodies. Here is a snippet from his remarks:

"Recovering from alcoholism, Waters said, 'I was an egomaniac with an inferiority complex'. This is a way to describe our culture. We believe we create everything, that we are all-powerful, but we have no hope. What is the point?"

I have not written much on The Meeting because Sharon is there and kindly posting very informative and insightful updates, with John Waters at Meeting 2008 being the latest.

Labor Day

Today is a day that honors workers. Work is honorable. Work gives us dignity. It does not matter what work you do, as long as you are contributing to the good of society. It seems that we live at a transitional time for workers as traditional jobs either disappear or are sent overseas and the jobs that replace them are often less skilled and lower paying. This is the global economy, at least at present. Even good jobs are different, computer and technology driven, work in the information age, which requires a massive shift in vocational training. I come from workers. My Dad was an industrial worker and spent his working life, first on a road construction crew, then working on a dish washer assembly line and, finally, landing a job in a waste-water treatment plant. He also went to barber school and worked on Saturdays in a Barbershop near the dishwasher plant. I used to hang out there a lot as a little kid. This is where I learned most of my politics. It was a pretty good course in political science from the bottom up. My Mom worked in a pay roll office. Even now, after her "retirement," she continues to work.

Issues surrounding work are vital in this election. Foremost among these issues is health care. One of the leading reasons that U.S. workers have been rendered far less competitive in the global economy is the unsustainable cost of health care in this country, which is footed by the companies and workers. It also continues to increase at an almost exponential rate. Even in some countries where wages are higher, like Canada, companies, like G.M., are more likely to keep plants open because health care is not paid for by the company, making it profitable to keep these plants open. Now, this is not an argument for a single-payer government system. It is an argument for the recognition that health care, like roads, is a social, not a private, like big screen t.v.s, good. As Catholics we believe that adequate health care is a human right. Access to pre-natal care is an important component of being pro-life.

Another issue, of course, is wages. The right of workers to organize, that is, form unions for the purpose of collectively bargaining, is a right workers have without reprisal, so says church teaching unequivocally. Bob Edwards Weekend this past Saturday dealt with this issue extensively. Edwards spoke with Steven Greenhouse, a New York Times reporter who talks about his book The Big Squeeze, which chronicles the decline in the treatment of U.S. workers. He also interviews Philip Dine, who talks about the challenges facing workers, including the hostility to unionization despite the desire of some 53% of unorganized workers to organize. The hostility often takes the form of implied threats about plant closings, etc.

Finally, the issue of immigration looms large here. We need a humane solution to this problem and it is a problem. While it is true that there are jobs that immigrants do that U.S. citizens won't do, primarily seasonal work. In far too many instances it is the case that immigrants are willing to work for wages that U.S. citizens cannot make a living earning. Besides, illegal workers are often given no benefits, are cheated on wages, and exploited in many other ways. There is good news on this front, both candidates make a great deal of sense on immigration and both propose comprehensive and humane legislation and enforcement to deal with this vital issue.

In a Labor Day statement, written on behalf of the U.S. bishops, Bishop William Murphy, of Rockville Center, New York (i.e., Long Island), chairman of the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, writes:

"An informed conscience moves beyond personal feelings and individual popularity. An informed conscience asks first what is right and true. An informed conscience examines the candidates and the issues from the perspective of human life and dignity, the true good of every human person, the true good of society, the common good of us all in our nation and in this world."

This is as good a way of explaining both proportional reasoning and seeking the common good as you will find.

Number 52 of Faithful Citizenship puts the matter rather clearly:

"The economy must serve people, not the other way around. Work is more than a way to make a living; it is a form of continuing participation in God’s creation. Employers contribute to the common good through the services or products they provide and by creating jobs that uphold the dignity and rights of workers—to productive work, to decent and fair wages, to adequate benefits and security in their old age, to the choice of whether to organize and join unions, to the opportunity for legal status for immigrant workers, to private property, and to economic initiative. Workers also have responsibilities—to provide a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay, to treat employers and co-workers with respect, and to carry out their work in ways that contribute to the common good. Workers, employers, and unions should not only advance their own interests, but also work together to advance economic justice and the well-being of all."

In the meantime pray for the people of Cuba and pray that Gustav decreases in force and speed as it makes landfall, sparing the cities of the Gulf coast that stand in its path.

On a lighter note and only because Cathleen Kaveny went there first, The Daily Show and Colbert on [Gov.] Palin. WARNING: Daily Show language from 3:00 to the end is quite crude.