Eulogy for my Grandfather

In the Old Testament, the prophet Micah tells us: “You have been told, O man, what is good, and what the LORD requires of you: Only to do what is right, and to love goodness, and to walk humbly with your God.” Through the amazing Gift of God’s grace and love, Pop-Pop’s life was a constant witness to this verse of scripture. 

Pop-Pop did what was right

In every role and call of his journey, as son, brother, husband, father, friend, serviceman, veteran, and employee, his was a life of quiet faithfulness, of selflessness, of sacrifice, of doing what is right even when it was not easy.

Pop-Pop loved goodness

To love goodness is more than just loving good things, but loving things in the right order, and to the right degree. He knew that God is the ultimate good, and that the primary way he was to love God was by loving Mom-Mom. By grace, he knew this and lived this, in some big ways but mostly countless small ways, day in and day out for 64 years, making a total gift of his very self to his beloved bride. And since the best thing a father can do for his children is to love their mother, than I don’t think Uncle Jim, Aunt Jeanne, Mom and Aunt Barb could possibly have had a better father in this world. Mom-Mom of course knew this and lived it fully too, and their witness has touched everyone here and countless others over four generations. So far. Now reunited for three days, with eternity still to go, they are just getting started!

With that love of God and Family as the foundation for everything else Pop-Pop then loved and was grateful for so many other good things of this earth: smoking a pipe while reading the Inquirer, sharing a Manhattan with Mom-Mom, conversation in the shade of the front yard maple tree, a Harry Kalas home run call.  Indeed, from the most transcendent goods to the simplest pleasures, from Almighty God to a cold beer, from family to a meal at the Springfield Inn, from the freedoms of this country to a side-splitting night with the Crazy Eight, Pop-pop loved goodness wherever it was found.

Pop-Pop walked humbly

He was very much like a St. Joseph figure in our lives. Humble and hidden, but always present. Always protecting and providing and loving. Despite traveling in the war to every continent and crossing the equator thirty times, Pop-pop knew that there was more true adventure to be found in home and hearth than in going far and doing great things in the eyes of this world. History books will not record him, but his life has an eternal significance. The depth and breadth of love and laughter found in the row home on North Penn St, or the twin on Woodland Ave, could never be found in any dozen Main Line mansions, and Pop-Pop’s humble walk with God is at the heart of this great reality.

St. Francis of Assisi is said to have admonished his brothers: “Preach the Gospel always, and only if necessary, use Words.” I only very rarely heard words from Pop-Pop’s lips about Jesus, but his life proclaimed the Gospel as truly as any great missionary or evangelist, and I thank him so much for all that he has taught me about being a Christian husband and father. For me, and I’m sure every one of us here, no words were necessary to hear the message of his life loudly and clearly. And so we say thank you, Dick Farrell, for preaching the Gospel, for 90 years of doing right, of loving goodness, and walking humbly with our God. We are here today praying for you; please pray for us to learn from your example, and to grow closer to Christ our Lord.

Eternal Rest Grant unto Him O Lord … and May Perpetual Light Shine Upon Him.

James R. "Dick" Farrell

January 3, 1920 - May 5, 2010

(Delivered at his funeral mass, May 7, 2010 St. Dorothy Church Drexel Hill, PA)

A reckless duel to the death

Last month we bean farmers gave a little talk as part of a panel on spirituality in married life at our old parish. Here is what we had to say:

Juniper--

“There are people who try to ridicule, or even to deny, the idea of a faithful bond which lasts a lifetime. These people – you can be very sure – do not know what love is.” -- John Paul II, Letter to Families

We sometimes tend to think that this denial of the essential meaning of marriage is a modern phenomenon. But G.K. Chesterton, writing 100 years ago, defended marriage when it was held in contempt by George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells, and the rest of the cultural elite of England. On the idea of permanence of marriage they were particularly perplexed. To them, the promise to love and honor one person ALL the days or your life, was on the order of vowing something utterly outlandish, like a man swearing to not leave Hyde Park until he counted all the leaves on every tree. It was a nice poetic sentiment, but not to be taken seriously. It was predictable and understandable that the man in Hyde Park would get bored and go home to tea before finishing the first tree, and the man who promised to love one person all of his life, was going to find himself sooner or later feeling differently and it was perfectly ok for him to not be bound by his vow. In this view to make a vow was fine, but to make a vow where there was an expectation that you would keep it no matter what, that was too much! That was a reckless vow, and you shouldn’t make a reckless vow.

But Chesterton said no to his contemporaries: reckless vows are the best kind! Reckless vows (that are kept) are exactly what we need! In his essay, “In Defense of Rash Vows” he says:

“[The opponents of marriage] appear to imagine that the ideal of constancy was a yoke mysteriously imposed on mankind by the devil, instead of being, as it is, a yoke consistently imposed by all lovers on themselves. … It is the nature of love to bind itself, and the institution of marriage merely paid the average man the compliment of taking him at his word. Modern sages offer to the lover …. the largest liberties and the fullest irresponsibility; but they do not respect him as the Church respected him; they do not write his oath upon the heavens, as the record of his highest moment. They give him every liberty except the liberty to sell his liberty, which is the only one that he wants.

Five years ago, the beautiful Jacoba and I were in love, and wanted nothing more than to sell our liberty. To be bound together so closely that our love would take flesh and those children would be protected and nurtured by the very intimacy, exclusivity and indissolubility of our vows. The liberty to give yourself away is more than what we want, it’s what every heart needs, it’s the source of every vocation, and every child needs his parents to have made this seemingly reckless tossing away of liberty.

So how did we come to the moment of making those reckless vows, and learning just how wild and reckless they were?

Jacoba -- 
Juniper and I met in January 2002, during a pilgrimage to Italy organized by Fr. Paul Dressler. As we were dating and falling in love, we felt more and more that we were called to marry each other. Two years later we returned to Italy on another pilgrimage, and were engaged in Assisi, at the Basilica of St. Clare.

We had a sense that big things were in store, we were both committed to a living out our Catholic faith, had a devotion to St. Francis in common, and felt convinced that we could serve God better together than as individuals. It seemed on every big issue we were so in sync. We also were so excited by the Church’s great vision and reverence for marriage and by John Paul’s Theology of the Body. On Valentine’s Day when we were engaged, Juniper bought us two books written by Greg Popcak-a Catholic psychotherapist: “For Better Forever: A Catholic Guide to Lifelong Marriage” and “The Exceptional Seven Percent: The Nine Secrets of the World’s Happiest Couples”. A main theme of the books was that marriage was about helping our spouse become the Person God created them to be, not what you want them to be, and that we need to love our spouse, even when we don’t think they deserve it or we don’t feel like it. That seemed an odd thing to say – we were so in love, we could never conceive of a moment where we would think the other person didn’t deserve our love and affection or wouldn’t feel like giving it. What on earth was he talking about? Stay tuned. … anyway, we devoured the books, and took all the quizzes. And according to our quiz results – we were practically already an exceptional married couple …. Well, an exceptional engaged couple I guess. We were so excited to start our lives together and do great things. In short, we felt very ready to get married (and quite honestly looking back, were just a little bit self righteous toward all the other couples getting married who didn’t quite “get it” like we did!)

And so on that day, I think Juniper and I were ready to drink from the well of grace of the sacrament, put our Dr. Popcak quizzes into practice, be the Theology of the Body made real in the world, magically transform into “holy married people”, raise some holy kids, convert the world, and then ride off into the sunset. Since we were so tuned into the meaning of vocation, and so excitedly asking God for all these graces, they were naturally going to start pouring out.

But I have learned though that when you pray for some virtue, God gives you the opportunity – many opportunities to put that virtue into practice, with His help of course, but also with your efforts. We were not quite ready for what that was going to mean.

Juniper  --
Then, the honeymoon was over and reality sat waiting at home, prepared to punch us in the nose. Remember Chesterton said our vows were reckless, but honorable. They were reckless because we could not know what the future held and we could never understand ahead of time a common feature of every marriage. What’s this common feature of marriage? Again we turn to Chesterton:

 "Marriage is a duel to the death that no man of honor should refuse". GKC (Manalive)

This became real for me when I was married about 10 days and learned the importance of twist ties. Every man in here knows that the purpose of the twist tie on a bag of bread is very limited. It’s to keep the bread in the bag on the way home from the store. When the bag is opened, you throw the twist tie away!! Bread bags are closed by holding the end, spinning the bag around, and then tucking the top of the bag under. Voila! Closed bread bag! Jacoba had this strange idea that the twist tie was to be kept, and used to close the bread bag. What was my response to learning of Jacoba’s preference? Was it agreeing to use twist ties from then on, because, even if I didn’t quite see why, it made her happy, and I had vowed only a few weeks before to love her and honor her all the days of my life, and wouldn’t doing that small thing without complaining or making it in to a big deal be a small way to honor her? No, what I did was explain to Jacoba that I was right, that my approach still keeps bread kind of fresh and more importantly saves two seconds every time you open the bag of bread, and over a lifetime of bread that adds up! Jacoba failed to see the genius contained in this solution. What happened? Chesterton’s duel to the death happened!!! All the carping and snapping at each other over twist ties and dozens of other things, after having just spent so much time reading and thinking and praying and preparing to start our life together was a little disconcerting.

But that’s the reality, there is indeed a duel taking place. But it isn’t a duel between Jacoba and me. It is a duel between who we are called to be and our selfish fallen natures. A duel between whether we will grow more like the Holy Family, or more like the Average Modern Family. That’s why Chesterton adds that no one with honor would refuse the duel, because it is the duel to become holy! And isn’t that the reason we wanted to get married in the first place! Well here was our chance. Not by big things, but in small things. You win the duel to become holy by living your vocation, which whether it is to marriage or not consists of one essential thing -- to make a gift of yourself, to forget about yourself for the sake of another. He must increase. We must decrease.

Flannery O’Connor had a character who said “she thought she could be a martyr if they killed her quick”. Sometimes the really big things, the big sacrifices are relatively easy. It’s the small every day challenges to faithfulness and dying to self that are for some reason so difficult, even for someone you love so much. Love in reality is a harsh and dreadful thing compared to love in dreams, says Dostoevsky. But no one who has known real love would ever trade it for the love of dreams. Real love is Christ on the cross. Any real vocation is going to bring you there with Him.

And so here we are, we’re married. That is to say we have recklessly vowed to enter a duel to the death! We go to the duel hand in hand, with our children gathered around us, and with God’s help, we will win the battle, and one day we’ll all together see Him face to face.

So who is the real three year old?

"In fact, I don't understand why I act the way I do. I don't do what I know is right. I do the things I hate. Although I don't do what I know is right, I agree that the Law is good." Romans 7:15-16 (Contemporary English Version)

My oldest son is newly three, and has been channeling these verses an exasperating number of times each day. His misbehavior six to nine months ago was easier to deal with for a lot of reasons, but I think his language development is part of what makes it harder. I mean, the boy is talking in paragraphs now, so I tend to act like he must also have a richly developed inner dialogue going on, that his conscience is clearly telling him what’s right and wrong. So whereas when two year old KB was tough to deal with, I tended to think, “well, he’s still a baby.”, but now each moment he, with apparent forethought, disobeys, it feels like a personal affront toward me or Rosey. But I know that’s not right. He’s not near the age of reason, and the task of forming that conscience is just beginning and will be more arduous than it was teaching him the alphabet and counting to twenty.

But still, several times I’ve found myself thinking: “KB, why don’t you just TRUST me! I know your still a little boy, but even if the subtleties of moral theology are lost on you, or you’ve never given any thought to the natural law reasons why jumping on your little brother is wrong, or quite know what it means To Honor Your Father and Mother and why that’s actually really important, wouldn’t it still makes sense to, you know, LISTEN to us?? Look what we’ve given you kiddo! We’ve loved you from the moment we knew of your existence, we prayed for you and prepared for you. We’ve given you a warm home, nourishment, toys climbing the walls! We’ve given you most everything you’ve asked for, and so many things you didn’t even know you wanted or needed, and it has all redounded to your good, has it not? Remember your fear last summer at the lake? But you let me hold you and you were safe AND had fun? Don’t you feel loved by us every day in our words and hugs and kisses? Don’t you see we would do anything for you? Do you think we would ever do anything to hurt you? Isn’t there enough evidence for you to know we seek only your good? And heck, failing all that, we’ve just been around a heck of a lot longer than you. We know how things work and how they don’t. You have a lot to learn, so for pete’s sake just let us be in charge!!!”

Oh. Sweet. Merciful. Crap! The loving 2x4 of spiritual insight gives quite a welt on the head: I’m constantly acting like a three year old before my own Father in Heaven. At best:

“Brian, why don’t you just TRUST me! I know you live with the mark of Adam, but I’ve given you an intellect to understand quite a bit of moral theology, and I went ahead and wrote the law on your heart, and if that seemed muddy I put it on tablets, and then summed it up in two sentences in case that seemed too long! And yet you ignore it, a lot more than seven times daily. Why? Look what I’ve given you! Before I formed you in the womb I knew you and loved you. I’ve given you a powerful heavenly being to constantly watch over you for all your earthly existence and eternally thereafter, and prepared the hearts of your parents to receive you and teach you and to cooperate with me. I gave you legs to walk, eyes to see, ears to hear! I’ve given you most everything you’ve asked for and many things you didn’t know you wanted or needed, and it has all redounded to your good, has it not? Remember that time where I asked you to take that step, and you were scared, but you trusted me and let me walk with you, and it led you to so many blessings, to what you hold most dear? Don’t you feel loved by me every day in Word and Sacrament? Don’t you know I’ve done everything for you; I’ve given my life away? Do you think I would ever do anything to hurt you? Isn’t there enough evidence for you to know I seek only your good, your True Good, not the counterfeits you are always seeking? And heck, failing all that, I’m GOD, and I’ve been around a heck of a lot longer than you. I know how things work since I made them. You haven’t. You have a lot to learn, so for pete’s sake just let Me be in charge!!!”

I’ll try, Lord. I’ll try. But the thing is … I don't understand why I act the way I do. I don't do what I know is right. I do the things I hate. Although I don't do what I know is right, I agree that the Law is good.

St. Paul… Pray for us.

Immaculate Heart of Mary… Pray for us.

Sacred Heart of Jesus… Have Mercy on us.

My son examines my conscience

We have a small crucifix that we didn't realize was in the range of Kenny's growing reach. It disappeared one day this week and got mixed in with his toys. A short while later, a two year old being a two year old, the crucifix was launched from the living room and landed in the dining room, separating the corpus from the cross. Rosey gathered the pieces, explained to Kenny how we have to show respect for sacred objects (and that, for that matter, throwing ANYTHING inside the house isn't permitted) and assured him that I would fix it when I got home from work. So what was I greeted with when I arrived home? Kenny runs to me yelling: "Daddy puts Jesus back on the cross! Daddy puts Jesus back on the cross!" I'm told he'd been repeating it most of the afternoon.

Touche, my son. Touche! To be more precise, I helped put him there in the first place. But point taken. Bring on Lent.

Divine Adoption

Two couples we are friends with have completed adoptions in the past few months. At the Baptism of the first child on Holy Family Sunday, the priest emphasized that we are all adopted. We are all divinely adopted sons and daughters of the Father. And of course, there is nothing lesser about being adopted, in fact, this Divine Adoption creates a deeper and more unending bond than parenting of the "natural" order. Our parenting on earth is really a sharing in this Divine Parenting.

On Sunday we went to a Mass to welcome the other couples' new son and daughter, twins from an orphanage in Uganda. As we spoke to D and J afterwards, they related the rather incredible conditions the twins lived in, and the long, physically and emotionally arduous 7 week journey to meet them and finally bring them home.

I've been thinking of the lengths they went to to unite with their children, and of the long, trying road that brought B and R their beautiful son. Given all this, my prayer over the past few months has been peppered with this concept of Divine Adoption. What does it mean for my marriage, for my fatherhood, for my life as a Christian? One thing is for sure, since getting married, and especially since becoming a dad, Theology is a whole heck of a lot more personal. If that makes any sense.

I'm still pondering this and can't quite articulate all the insights, but I was thrilled to come across this profile of Blessed Columba Marmion on Ignatius Insight. Here's the tidbit that knocked me over:

Though Marmion was not opposed to the more abstract theological mode of St. Thomas Aquinas and the scholastics, he had a different point of departure, said Fr. Groeschel. "Abbot Marmion in some ways was the beginning of a movement that became known, under Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI, as the 'New Evangelization.' That movement begins theological and religious investigation with the self," an approach that "comes directly from the great statement of St. Augustine: 'You have made us for yourself, O God, and our hearts are restless until they rest in you.' It relates to how a person experiences their need for God.""One of the things about Abbot Marmion," Fr. Groeschel added, "is that he ain't fooling. He's a deadly serious spiritual writer."

This seriousness is reflected in the theme of Divine adoption that forms the great motif of Marmion's works: because God became man, men can become adopted sons of God. The doctrine of Divine adoption is, of course, found in the New Testament, and has always been taught by the Church, but Marmion brought a special depth of insight to its expression. Indeed, some of Marmion's admirers believe he will one day be declared a Doctor of the Church -- the Doctor of Divine Adoption.

According to Fr. Tierney, "A lot of the Eastern fathers wrote about the idea of Divine adoption, but they put it into technical language. Marmion brought it down to the level of the ordinary man. Marmion's definition of grace is that it is nothing more than the life of Christ in the soul. That is why he chose the title, Christ, the Life of the Soul. Grace is the life of Christ in the soul, which we get at baptism and which we build on right on up to the day we die."

Blessed Columba Marmion, Pray for all of us, the Adopted Children of God.

7 Quick Takes Friday -- Vol 1

1. I came across Jennifer F's Conversion Diary a few months ago. I thought the "7 Quick Takes Feature" might be a good way to get back into blogging. My only hesitation -- it looks like after clicking a half dozen of the links, that everyone participating in the meme is a blogging Catholic stay at home mom. Is there room for me to join the ranks of the 7 quick takers?

2. I haven't ordered any seeds for the garden yet. The catalog from seedsavers.org arrived before Christmas, and I've been frozen by indecision. Think there's a lot of cereals to choose from at the grocery store? Try selecting from among 60 varieties of peppers! And the pictures don't do them justice, in the catalog, they are accompanied by descriptions that beat anything J. Peterman has ever written. But how the heck will I know what I'll be up for eating in August? Time to bite the bullet and place the order or I'll miss the chance to get the salad greens in the ground.

3. This excerpt from the Consitutions of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal has been on my mind now and again since coming across it a couple of years ago:

36. The friars of each house
will periodically evaluate all personal and communal goods to assure that only
those things necessary for our life and work be used by the friars. This
evaluation must take place in each fraternity four times a year, before the
feast of St. Francis, after Christmas, during Lent and after Pentecost.

As Lent begins, Rosey and I have really been looking at what this would look like to implement in our family. Obviously we are not called to poverty in the same manner as these lesser brothers. But we are clearly called, as is every Christian, to generosity, simplicity, and a sparing-sharing lifestlye that gives to the poor and focuses on Christ. The practicality of beginning a quarterly check on our desires might really help us in this manner. I envision developing a family examination of conscience, not just around looking at what we've already accumulated and should give away or get rid of, but to proactively submit the "stuff" we're thinking of getting to the test of whether it will bring our family closer to Christ or pull us away. Are there new ministries or outreaches God is calling us to support with prayers, fasting, serving or giving? What are we being called to sacrifice or forego to bring this about? More on this hopefully to be posted during Lent.

4. My third annual Lenten beard begins today to ensure sufficient scraggliness for Ash Wednesday. Along with giving up popcorn, having a non clean shaven husband is Rosey's Lenten sacrifice. Luckily I'm willing to help.

5. Phillies spring training! My favorite story so far has nothing to do with what happens on the field, but how one player has kept his ego in check and feet firmly on the ground throughout a 20 year career and is using his riches to reach out to others: The Moyer Family's Christmas in Guatamala . I especially like the message Jamie sends to his children -- to whom much is given, much is required; and we need to go and meet the poor and serve them in person, not simply mail out a check, however big it might be in absolute terms.

6. If all the current crop of young Jesuits in formation are anything like this guy, we're in for an Ignatian revival in the Church.

7. Beer is out of the house for Lent. The plan is for me to get the basement sufficiently cleaned up to finally set up the home brewing kit that was a gift from my brother in Christmas 2007. I want to time it so the first batch finishes on Holy Saturday night. A joyous Chestertonian feast will ensue to celebrate Our Lord's Ressurection! Huzzah!

Mondays with Chesterton

When we were children we were grateful to those who filled our stockings at
Christmas time. Why are we not grateful to God for filling our stockings with
legs?

A Conversation at Bedtime (or, St. Joseph don't get no respect)

Kenny: Crissmiss comin!
Me: That's right, Kenny. Are you ready to welcome Baby Jesus on his birthday?
Kenny: Yesh!
Me: Good. Do you know who Jesus's mommy is?
Kenny: Maaarrrrreeeeee!!!!
Me: That's right. Who is Jesus's Daddy?
Kenny: Um .... God.
Me: Very good. Jesus is God's son and he sent him to be born here as a little baby like your brother Paul because he loves us. But do you know who was Jesus's daddy on earth? ...

Kenny: staring blankly

Me: ... someone who lived with him and Mary and taught him things and played with him and protected him?

long pause. and then ...

Kenny: Oh, I know! Sheep!

Mondays with G.K.

I have a number of posts in various stages of draft, but am having trouble finishing them. In an effort to unclog the blogger's block, I figured a gimmick might be in order. So here is the first installment of Mondays with G.K., where I'll post each week a timely (at least to my mind) excerpt from Chesterton's writings, sometimes with my commentary, but hopefully not enough to ruin it.

At Christmas we do our best to give shelter to the Christ Child in our homes and our hearts. Here Chesterton turns that around to an even deeper truth: that in the very act of God becoming homeless, we will find our own true home.

There fared a mother driven forth
Out of an inn to roam;
In the place where she was homeless
All men are at home.
The crazy stable close at hand,
With shaking timber and shifting sand,
Grew a stronger thing to abide and stand
Than the square stones of Rome.

For men are homesick in their homes,
And strangers under the sun,
And they lay their heads in a foreign land
Whenever the day is done.

Here we have battle and blazing eyes,
And chance and honour and high surprise,
But our homes are under miraculous skies
Where the yule tale was begun.

A child in a foul stable,
Where the beasts feed and foam;
Only where He was homeless
Are you and I at home;
We have hands that fashion and heads that know,
But our hearts we lost---how long ago!
In a place no chart nor ship can show
Under the sky's dome.

This world is wild as an old wife's tale,
And strange the plain things are,
The earth is enough and the air is enough
For our wonder and our war;
But our rest is as far as the fire-drake swings
And our peace is put in impossible things
Where clashed and thundered unthinkable wings
Round an incredible star.

To an open house in the evening
Home shall all men come,
To an older place than Eden
And a taller town than Rome.
To the end of the way of the wandering star,
To the things that cannot be and that are,
To the place where God was homeless
And all men are at home.

Our New Family Bible

As a dad, I'm trying to come up with ways to make the faith something important for the boys. In looking around the house last month, I noticed we have perhaps a dozen different bibles in several different rooms, but nothing much distinguishes them from the books next to them on the shelves. I thought it was important to have a well made family bible that could be passed down through generations, and a special place to keep it, to show without words that the Word of God is important in our family.

After a good bit of research we purchased the Ignatius Family Bible, and are thrilled with it. It's an excellent translation, has beautiful artwork interspersed throughout, a full concordance, and the coolest part: a 16 page family record section to record our family tree, and all the sacraments our family receives, and other significant events. I look at what's been recorded (our marriage, the boys' baptisms) and am reminded of the great work God has done. I'm reminded that the things recorded in this book, and how I cooperate with God to see that the graces received in those events are nurtured, will be my ultimate legacy as a Catholic dad. I pray that if God wills, we'll fill in during the years ahead those many blank spaces with baptisms of children yet to be born, first Eucharists, first Confessions, Confirmations, and when the time comes and the Bible is well worn, marriages, ordinations, or religious professions.

Tomorrow, after Thanksgiving Day Mass, we'll bless our bible using this short prayer service (PDF) from the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston.

Some thoughts on the election and a challenge to us all (Part II: Political Action)

Tom at Disputations raises an important point I think:

According to Bishop Hermann,

The question I need to ask myself is this: What kind of witness will I give to Him when I go into the voting booth this election day?

I respectfully submit that more important is this question: What kind of witness will I give to Him when I come out of the voting booth?

We have more than half a million minutes a year when we're not voting. When we come forth from that voting booth, do we stay tied hand and foot, in effect dead until it's time to go back in and vote again? Or do we come forth and live in such a way that, not only do people know how we voted, they know why?

So what will we do with the half a million minutes a year when we're not voting? Voting is a small part of political involvement, but for most Catholics it's our only involvement. This can't continue. Because Pro-Life Democrats are marginalized, we had Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton competing with each other to promise goodies to the pro-abortion lobby. Because Republicans take the vote of pro-lifers entirely for granted, the candidate who in 2000 was opposed because he wasn't reliable on pro-life issues, is painted as a Pro-Life savior in 2008, when it's clear the issue was barely on his radar. We appear condemned to resorting to proportionalism and lesser-evil voting as the situation just gets worse with every election. Does it have to be this way?

I can't recommend enough this article by Fr. Rob Johansen on this issue. Excerpt:

The idea that we need to align ourselves with the party or candidate who most closely lines up with Catholic teaching is fine, as far as it goes. The problem is that it does not go far enough: It is hardly the robust, evangelistic, sanctify-the-world posture that our vocation to holiness and call to apostleship requires. In the fourth century, St. Ambrose stood up to and rebuked the Roman emperor Theodosius. Were he transported to our own time, I cannot imagine that he would find this policy sufficient.

As Deal W. Hudson has recently pointed out, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' document "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship" has some serious flaws. But it does provide a valuable teaching that addresses our Faustian bargain:

As Catholics, we should be guided more by our moral convictions than by our attachment to a political party or interest group. When necessary, our participation should help transform the party to which we belong [emphasis mine]; we should not let the party transform us in such a way that we neglect or deny fundamental moral truths (14).

Looking across the Catholic political landscape, it seems that we have far more Catholics who are in danger of being -- or have been already -- transformed, than we have Catholics who are making any headway in transforming politics.

So where are the Catholics in politics? The teaching of the Church and of our bishops instructs us to take our faith as our starting point and build our politics around that. Instead, we choose our politics and then see how we can shoehorn it into our faith. We find ourselves having to explain away the conflict between the tenets of the Faith and our political allegiances in order to defend our Faustian bargain.

Let me repeat that message from the Bishops: "When necessary, our participation should help transform the party to which we belong; we should not let the party transform us in such a way that we neglect or deny fundamental moral truths (14)."

So how might we get engaged? Here's a few thoughts.

First, for Catholic Democrats, whoever you voted for, go and join (i.e. send some Membership Due$) Democrats for Life of America. Work to support the 95-10 Initiative and the Pregnant Women Support Act. Read Angelo Matera on the need to open a second front in the American Pro-Life movement and Mark Stricherz on how the party that fought for the little guy came to such an abominable position on the littlest guys. Get on the horn to elected pro-life democrats and thank them for their support, and encourage them to be less timid and more forthright in advocating their views. Reach out to moderate Democrats who in all likelihood haven't ever given abortion much thought beyond sloganeering. They've come to their position out of ignorance and laziness, and are ripe for conversion on the issue.

I'm thinking in particular of someone like Patrick Murphy, whose district includes most of Bucks County and part of NE Philly. Mr. Murphy is an Archbishop Ryan grad, weekly Mass-goer, and was president of the St. Thomas More Society in law school. And he's a congressional co-sponsor of the Freedom of Choice Act. I can't imagine though that this was any more than a pro-forma, "oh yeah, I'm pro-choice, I'll sponsor that." sort of action. He ran for congress out of deep conviction on ending the war in Iraq and working for economic justice, and it seems clear to me that he just simply takes for granted the pro-choice position as being consistent with the rest. Pray for him, e-mail, write and phone him until you know each of his staffers by name, send him things like Serrin Foster's talk: Women Deserve Better than Abortion or other things in a similar "out of the box" vein that are more likely to get a hearing and harder to dismiss. He is certainly reachable, we just have to show him we're serious. I'd put his colleague on the other side of Philly's suburbs, Cardinal O'Hara grad Joe Sestak, in the same category. I really think a wide swath of moderate Democrats can be moved toward a pro-life position with a combination of intellectual engagement and credible threats to not vote for them if they don't change or significantly improve their positions. The second part is critical, if you're not willing to ultimately withold your vote on principle despite substantial agreement on other issues, you won't see a lot of change among particular politicians or the party leadership. But let a couple incumbents lose, and you'll see others come around and the leadership recruit Pro-Life dems to run in the future. This has already happened in a several districts in the south in 06 and 08.

The Republican party of course also desperately needs transformation on life issues. In the aftermath of the big electoral defeat there are some party members trying mightily to recast the party in the Guliani mold, going to bat for every jot and tittle of libertine economics and Wilsonian internationalism, while throwing social conservatives under the bus. Dale Price rather humorously calls this the "Godbotherer heave-ho Project", but the results of a successful effort would be far from funny. My first suggestion to prevent this from happening would be to improve the delivery of the message, without at all watering down our commitments. Angelo Matera makes that point in advocating a Pro-life movement within the Democratic Party, but I think it applies in spades for the Republicans:

Right now the Catholic “culture of life” strategy has been to ally with Bible Christians, who have a visceral and simple attraction to life and family issues.

They are an important ally in the culture war.

But their approach is limited, often relying on harsh language about eternal damnation that fails to distinguish the sinner from the sin. They aren’t good at articulating the ethical reasoning behind the moral law, which is based on love and human dignity.

Pope John Paul II’s theology of the body is one example of how the Church has developed new insights that go far beyond “dos” and “don’ts” to reveal the beauty and dignity of marriage. This is missing from most current debates.

I mean no disrespect to Evangelical friends, but I think this is in very broad strokes an accurate observation. What can be done to get this started? Sending legislators copies of Alcorn's Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguements and Kreeft's Unaborted Socrates would be great. Those books are very readable for someone without a philosophical background, and give strong, carefully reasoned answers on why abortion is wrong and why that should be recognized in law. Borrowing liberally from the message and style of Feminists for Life and their Women Deserve Better campaign would also help to short circuit the stereotype of pro-lifers as women-hating misogynists. It's also an electorally superior message. Pro-life politicians face a skeptical, unsympathetic media that will pounce on anything that sounds irrational or angry. Educating politicians to deliver a sound and compassionate message is critical to the viability of social conservatism within the party.

Secondly, significant efforts must be made to challenge socially liberal republicans in primaries. There seems to be very little of this that gets any traction. How Arlen Specter fought off Pat Toomey for the PA Senate nomination in 2004 is a mystery to me. I heard it argued in the subsequent general election (by none other than Sen. Rick Santorum, I think) that pro-lifers, depsite the presence of a pro-life third party candidate, should vote for pro-choice republican Specter over pro-choice democrat Hoeffel because that will keep the Republican majority in the senate, and that will ultimately help the pro-life cause. Talk about selling your birthright for a mess of potage! That's pretty far out on a very thin branch don't you think? The advice given above to the Democrats above has to apply here: work to change positions of those in your party, but if they don't you have to decline to support them with your vote. No wonder the Republicans take pro-lifers for granted. If Pro-life votes help elect the Arlen Specters and Mike Castles of the world, well, something is seriously wrong.

For the rest of us (or for the folks in the above categories who get discouraged trying to transform their own party) there is the big task of funding and creating a viable third party alternative that will truly promote Catholic values. Here's Fr. Johansen again:

And then what? Some of my fellow Catholics have decided that the best option is to vote third-party. Steve Skojec explains:

We've heard a lot of talk this election cycle (and the one before it . . . and the one before that . . .) about stopping a great evil by voting for a lesser one. And yet, the only certain outcome of constantly choosing the lesser of two evils is the perpetuation of evil.

The problem is that third-party candidates have little to no chance of being elected in national races. Those who do vote third-party are frequently accused of "throwing away" their vote.

But this need not be the case. If sufficient numbers of Catholics decide to opt-out of electoral politics as currently played and organized themselves, wouldn't they begin to exercise greater political clout? That is how politics works, after all.

What if Catholic Democrats, tired of having to choose between social policy and defending the right to life, said, "We're going to withhold our votes until the leadership takes our life-issue concerns seriously. When the national party is ready to countenance a legislative initiative that will meaningfully restrict the abortion license, we'll give you our support"?

And what if Catholic Republicans said, "For 30 years you have taken our support for granted on life issues. Unless you seriously reign in foreign adventurism and reject the Guantanamo-and-rendition assaults on human rights, we will withhold our support"? Eventually, political necessity would force them to pay attention (or if they didn't, we'd at least have our integrity). But as long as we are willing to sell our principles for a mess of political pottage, we will continue to be weak and ineffectual.

Catholics make up some 25 percent of the population, but we exercise an influence far smaller than our numbers. We have been manipulated and divided by partisan political hacks: Whenever someone raises the point of the primacy of life issues in making political decisions, he is automatically considered by those on the Left to be shilling for Republicans. Whenever someone makes an argument for protecting those who are injured by the rough-and-tumble of the free market, he is automatically dismissed as a tool of the Democrats. Surely we can do better as disciples of Christ.

Will any Catholics step forward to lead us beyond the constraints of the two-party game? Whether it means a third party, or making our power felt within our existing parties by changing the rules of the game, something must be done. If we are to fulfill our call to sanctify the world, we must engage in politics in light of the gospel, and not by the categories of those more concerned with elections than the Kingdom.

So here's the deal, whether it's working to transform the existing parties or creating a third party alternative, we all must be doing something to make the Culture of Life message more viable in the political arena. We've come out from the voting booth. Do we stay tied hand and foot, in effect dead until it's time to go back in and vote again? Hell, no.

St. Thomas More, patron of politicians, Pray for Us.
St. Ambrose, who confronted the Emporer, Pray for Us.
Mary, Mother of the Unborn, Pray for Us.

Part III ... on moving from Political involvement to broader work to change the culture, still to come.

Some thoughts on the election and a challenge to us all (Part I: How I Voted)

I've tried several times to write and post something on the results of the election and what it means for Catholics, but I'm faced with having thoughts in a lot of different directions and I'm not sure how to tie them all together. I want to look particularly at the issue of abortion, and how we as Catholics can do better at moving the culture in this area, and how all of us, regardless of general political bent, spend too much time compromising and have pathetically low expectations of what God is calling us to do.

First, I figured I better lay my cards on the table. I did not vote for Barack Obama, which I don't think will be a surprise to many readers. But neither did I vote for John McCain, which could well be a surprise to some. I failed to see how Barack Obama's moral awfulness compelled me to vote for the 30% less evil candidate. I didn't support the cannibalism of embryonic stem-cell research; said no to the Hegelian Mambo. I would have like to have voted for Chuck Baldwin, but he wasn't on PA's ballot, and Pennsylvania essentially does not tally or report any write in votes. So I voted for the candidate with the most pro-life position among the four on the ballot (Ralph Nader was also on): Bob Barr. There are other reasons beyond the pro-life issue that led me away from both the major parties: not letting the Department of Defense be, you know, a Department of DEFENSE; and their swearing of everlasting fealty to big corporations. Now I'm not a capital L or small l libertarian, there's plenty in that approach I object to, but in the absence of Chesterton, Schumacher or Schriner being on the ballot, Bob Barr will certainly do.

Second, I don't want to condemn anyone for their vote. This is not least because I'm aware that some would condemn my vote as not having done all I could do to limit the greater evil of Obama by voting for the lesser evil of McCain. Indeed, even in many of the Bishop's pre-election statements, the message seemed to go beyond "you can not vote for x" to "you must vote for y". This gave me great pause; I do not take the statement of any bishop lightly. But ultimately I came to my decision through much consulting of the catechism, scripture, encyclicals and prayer. I think my conclusion is consistent with those, along with what I took as each Bishop's underlying message, that Life is a fundamental and primordial right, and this must be reflected in our voting. So, I'll assume you all did the same. We prayed about the issues, the candidates, what a vote is and means and what we want it to accomplish, entered the voting booth and cast our ballot, or maybe didn't cast a ballot, a la Alisdair Macintyre in 2004. Now, If you voted for Obama I think you weighed the issues incorrectly, or maybe bought into what I can only describe as the preposterous Kmiec Doctrine* that Obama was the real pro-life candidate. If you voted for McCain I think you were too willing to trust his and the party's commitment to the pro-life cause. The Republicans are Lucy holding the football, and we pro-lifers are Charlie Brown, thinking "this time I'll really kick the football" and we come running and fall flat on our backs. Every. Single. Time. And Lucy smiles, knowing we'll be back for more in 2012, and she doesn't have to let you get to kick anything then either. But again, I just think you're wrong not sinful. Well, we're all sinful, but you get my point.

But voting is done now. And we have a new president-elect. So what happens now? In upcoming posts, I'll lay out why it's important to engage in both the political and cultural spheres, and some concrete ideas on what we can be doing.

* Although I find Prof. Kmiec's position completely untenable, I also found this perspective helpful. Given the GOP's complete disregard for just war theory and their defense of torture, it's understandable that a Pro-Life, Anti-war person would look to jettison the GOP. But it's darn foolish and weak to turn around and embrace the Dems instead.

An Open Letter to President-Elect Barack Obama

Had I written this I don't think I could have been as conciliatory. But the purpose isn't devestating rhetorical flourishes, but to actually engage some of the positive things President-Elect Obama has said and to ask him to act accordingly. I continue to pray for a Saul to Paul style conversion for him on the abortion issue, but just having him postpone FOCA and enter a sincere dialogue with the Pro-Life community would be a fine start.

From Vox-Nova.com:

President-elect Barack Obama,

As American Catholics, we, the undersigned, would like to reiterate the congratulations given to you by Pope Benedict XVI. We will be praying for you as you undertake the office of President of the United States.

Wishing you much good will, we hope we will be able to work with you, your administration, and our fellow citizens to move beyond the gridlock which has often harmed our great nation in recent years. Too often, partisan politics has hampered our response to disaster and misfortune. As a result of this, many Americans have become resentful, blaming others for what happens instead of realizing our own responsibilities. We face serious problems as a people, and if we hope to overcome the crises we face in today’s world, we should make a serious effort to set aside the bitterness in our hearts, to listen to one another, and to work with one another

One of the praiseworthy elements of your campaign has been the call to end such partisanship. You have stated a desire to engage others in dialogue. With you, we believe that real achievement comes not through the defamation of one’s opponents, nor by amassing power and using it merely as a tool for one’s own individual will. We also believe dialogue is essential. We too wish to appeal to the better nature of the nation. We want to encourage people to work together for the common good. Such action can and will engender trust. It may change the hearts of many, and it might alter the path of our nation, shifting to a road leading to a better America. We hope this theme of your campaign is realized in the years ahead.

One of the critical issues which currently divides our nation is abortion. As you have said, no one is for abortion, and you would agree to limit late-term abortions as long as any bill which comes your way allows for exceptions to those limits, such as when the health of the mother is in jeopardy. You have also said you would like to work on those social issues which cause women to feel as if they have a need for an abortion, so as to reduce the actual number of abortions being performed in the United States.

Indeed, you said in your third presidential debate, “But there surely is some common ground when both those who believe in choice and those who are opposed to abortion can come together and say, ‘We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier activity, and providing options for adoption, and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby.’”

As men and women who oppose abortion and embrace a pro-life ethic, we want to commend your willingness to engage us in dialogue, and we ask that you live up to your promise, and engage us on this issue.

There is much we can do together. There is much that we can do to help women who find themselves in difficult situations so they will not see abortion as their only option. There is much which we can do to help eliminate those unwanted pregnancies which lead to abortion.

One of your campaign promises is of grave concern to many pro-life citizens. On January 22, 2008, the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, when speaking of the current right of women in America to have abortions, you said, “And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president.”

The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) might well undermine your engagement of pro-life Americans on the question of abortion. It might hamper any effort on your part to work with us to limit late-term abortions. We believe FOCA does more than allow for choice. It may force the choice of a woman upon others, and make them morally complicit in such choice. One concern is that it would force doctors and hospitals which would otherwise choose not to perform abortions to do so, even if it went against their sacred beliefs. Such a law would undermine choice, and might begin the process by which abortion is enforced as a preferred option, instead of being one possible choice for a doctor to practice.

It is because of such concern we write. We urge you to engage us, and to dialogue with us, and to do so before you consider signing this legislation. Let us reason together and search out the implications of FOCA. Let us carefully review it and search for contradictions of those positions which we hold in common.
If FOCA can be postponed for the present, and serious dialogue begun with us, as well as with those who disagree with us, you will demonstrate that your administration will indeed be one that rises above partisanship, and will be one of change. This might well be the first step toward resolving an issue which tears at the fabric of our churches, our political process, our families, our very society, and that causes so much hardship and heartache in pregnant women.

Likewise, you have also recently stated you might over-ride some of President G.W. Bush’s executive orders. This is also a concern to us. We believe doing so without having a dialogue with the American people would undermine the political environment you would like to establish. Among those issues which concern us are those which would use taxpayer money to support actions we find to be morally questionable, such as embryonic stem cell research, or to fund international organizations that would counsel women to have an abortion (this would make abortion to be more than a mere choice, but an encouraged activity).

Consider, sir, your general promise to the American people and set aside particular promises to a part of your constituency. This would indicate that you plan to reject politics as usual. This would indeed be a change we need.

Sincerely,

Deal W. Hudson
Christopher Blosser
Marjorie Campbell
Mark J. Coughlan
Rev. James A. Nowack
Craig D. Baker
Susan DeBoisblanc
Megan Stout
Joshua D. Brumfield
Ashley M. Brumfield
Michael J. Iafrate
Natalie Navarro
Matthew Talbot
Paul Mitchell
Todd Flowerday
Henry C Karlson III
Darren Belajac
Adam P Verslype
Josiah Neeley
Michael J. Deem
Katerina M. Deem
Natalie Mixa
Henry Newman
Anthony M. Annett
Mickey Jackson
Veronica Greenwell
Thomas Greenwell PhD
Robert C. Koerpel
Nate Wildermuth

Toast from my Brother's Wedding

Happy 1st Anniversary to my brother Todd and sister-in-law Megan! I was privileged to be Todd's Best Man, and deliver this toast:

---
In a card he gave me last night at the rehearsal dinner Todd asked me to “always keep dishing out the brotherly advice”. Now, I would have kept it coming anyway, but it’s nice to finally hear a kid brother ask for it! So today I have some brotherly advice to a brother and a new sister. And against my better judgment; I’m taking that advice from two country songs.

Clint Black has a song called “Something that We Do”.

I remember well the day we wed
I can see that picture in my head
I still believe the words we said
Forever will ring true
Love is certain, love is kind
Love is yours and love is mine
But it isn't something that we find
It's something that we do

He continues on to say:

Love isn't something that we have
It's something that we do
Love's not just something that we're in
It's something that we do
Love isn't just those words we said
It's something that we do
Love isn't someplace that we fall
It's something that we do

I’ll add my lyrics – love isn’t a feeling. Love is a decision, and it’s a decision you don’t just make once. Today is a beautiful day that you will remember forever, but what’s most beautiful is the way today sanctifies all the days to come. Some days ahead are going to be exciting and memorable, others painful and difficult, but there are also going to be a lot of days that are hum drum, run-of-the-mill, maybe even a little boring. But it will only seem that way – because now even those regular days have an eternal significance – each and every day is a day you are called by God to live out in big and small ways the vows you’ve made today. As the Blues Brothers’ would say – You’re on a Mission from God.

The other song is “I come from a long line of love” by Michael Martin Murphy. A man is explaining to his fiancée why he thinks their love and marriage will last and he says:

I come from a long line of love
When the times get hard, we don’t give up
Forever’s in my heart and in my blood
You see I come from a long line of love

Todd and Megan, you are blessed to come from a long line of love. From Mom and Dad and Mr. and Mrs. Garrison you have been given great examples of love that has endured because of those daily decisions of self-sacrifice. And I know there are many other examples of great marriages in our extended families and going back in our family trees. Tonight I also wanted to point out who I think have been the most incredible example of married love in our lives -- the marriage of Mom-Mom and Pop-Pop -- a marriage of almost 64 years -- of 23,262 days of seized opportunities to show love to one another in countless ordinary and extraordinary ways. Although we miss Mom-mom so much, we now have her as an advocate and a support from heaven. So if ever there are times when love is tough, say a prayer to Mom-mom and I know she will send you encouragement and strength to love even when it might be hard.

And so, I’d invite everyone now to raise your glasses … And mom-mom in heaven you can raise your Manhattan … And let’s all wish Todd and Megan a lifetime of happiness … and many, many thousands of days of showing their love to one another.

---
And to all my married readers -- remember that "Love is Something that You Do" and show that love today. Mom-mom will raise her Manhattan in your honor too.

Please say a prayer today for blessings on my brother's marriage, and for the soul of my Grandmother, Bernice Farrell.

(also posted at catholic-dads.blogspot.com)

Mawwwage ...

...is what bwought us togethew that day. Mawwage, that bwessed awwangement, that dweam within a dweam. And wove, twue wove, wiww fowwow us fowevah... So tweasuwe youw wove.

Four years. Wow.

I wish Sen. Biden could find some shame and humility

But I guess that's hard to do when you give incoherent gobbledygook for answers, the same nonsense you and Rep. Pelosi gave on MTP that was entirely discredited, and still receive fawning headlines like "Biden balances his faith with social responsibility" Give thou me a break!

"To sum it up, as a Catholic, I'm a John XXIII guy, I'm not a Pope John Paul guy." -- Joe Biden

"You keep using that word. i do not think it means what you think it means." -- Inigo Montoya

Paul finds the door to fairyland

We welcomed Paul Vincent Lester into the world and our family at 3:26AM on Thursday.

As Paul was on the threshold of birth, in a moment of calm between the violence of contractions, our midwife said “I always wonder what they are thinking at this point.” I’m not sure what he was thinking right then, but I think in the days leading up to birth babies begin to “get it”. They begin to think, “this is all very lovely, but there must be something more.” Perhaps Paul was thinking along these lines:

By the Babe Unborn

By G. K. Chesterton

If trees were tall and grasses short,

As in some crazy tale,

If here and there a sea were blue

Beyond the breaking pale,

If a fixed fire hung in the air

To warm me one day through,

If deep green hair grew on great hills,

I know what I should do.

In dark I lie: dreaming that there

Are great eyes cold or kind,

And twisted streets and silent doors,

And living men behind.

Let storm-clouds come: Better an hour,

And leave to weep and fight,

Then all the ages I have ruled

The empires of the night.

I think that if they give me leave

Within the world to stand,

I would be good through all the day

I spent in fairyland.

They should not hear a word from me

Of selfishness and scorn,

If only I could find the door,

If only I were born!

Welcome Paul, my son. You found the door. I’m your dad, and my job is to let you know, as big and wonderful as this new world seems, there’s one more Door to go through! Just like your heart began to long for more than the dark of the womb, you’ll begin to notice that the fixed fire in the air and deep green hair growing on great hills point to one more Place, your final destination. Let’s find that door together Paul, and be born once again.

Chastity, Obedience, and Broadband Access

"Even the patience of our brothers was being tested by our slow internet."

--Fr. Daniel Van Santvoort O.Cist., quoted in this week's Time Magazine, explaining his Welsh monastery's decision to get broadband access.

Indeed. Job put up with a lot. But slow internet? Heaven forbid. I'll go out on a limb and predict that this monastery has fewer than five novices over the next ten years. Look, the Lord giveth broadband access, and the Lord taketh away the heart of Monastic life. I'm struck by that word "even" in the quote. The assumption is that the monks, by nature of their vocation, are very patient people. So if the internet makes them impatient, it must be an authentic trial and beyond what they should be expected to sacrifice. An alternative vision, if I may, Fr. Daniel – if your patience is being tested by your dial up connection, you’re doing a bad job of being a monk. You’ve created a life where every minor annoyance is a distraction from your Beloved, when the very vocation you’ve chosen is supposed to keep you turned towards Him. The horse left the barn pretty far back in your list of compromises.

I'm harping on this even though it violates an important spiritual suggestion I heard recently from a friend: "when it comes to following the Lord, keep your eyes on your own dang paper!" I'll justify it on account of what I'll call "trickle down gospel living", or the "universal call to mediocrity".

In “The Restoration of Christian Culture” John Senior advocates that the universal practice of Christian laity ought to be a “tithe of time for prayer”; about two and a half hours per day. After recognizing what the reader is thinking – “how is that possible?” he first blames lax contemplative religious for not keeping their vigils and praying less than eight hours a day, and then active religious and secular priests for not being faithful to the breviary and praying less than four hours a day. The lack of commitment of prayer from those whose vocations are designed to be more focused on prayer than work, leads those whose vocation are focused more on work than prayer to throw their hands up and strive for what is only a pittance. Of course, Senior also recognizes a whole slew of economic, cultural and technological realities that prevent the typical Christian from praying two plus hours, but he asserts that had we been committed to prayer we never would have let them become an issue in the first place.

The monks with broadband are the same thing. They proclaim in Time magazine that simple living is just dang hard, and the message the world hears is why should we try at all? Of course, a factual commitment to simplicity and poverty is positively essential for a committed prayer life. And the more the message of materialism is heard and taken to heart, the less it will even occur to us that we ought to be praying.

St. Anthony of Egypt, Ora Pro Nobis

St. Benedict, Ora Pro Nobis

St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Ora Pro Nobis

The weekend's haul

You know you're a nerd when ....

You have a spreadsheet to track your garden production, and can compare it to other worksheets from 05, 06 and 07. AND you are thinking that simply tallying the numbers of vegetables picked really isn't enough ... that next year you need to go to weighing everything, which will also allow for accounting of herbs and leafy vegetables not included in the current data.

This is what my poor wife has to live with.