Can a Muslim Tell Us Anything About Jesus?

Yesterday, my Facebook newsfeed was on fire with two things. One, Pope Francis' comments about gays. And two, a Fox interview with Reza Aslan, the author of Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth.

The so-called news channels (Source)

Now, I refuse to judge a man based on an interview on a so-called news channel. What passes for journalism today is nothing more than thinly veiled propaganda. I'm reading his book. I'll be reviewing it later.

But the main question I ask is: Can a non-Christian tell Christians anything about Jesus?

I think they can. Two of my favorite paintings of Jesus were done by non-Christians.

Source

This is a painting of Jesus done by a Buddhist using some traditional symbolism found in pictures of Bodhisattvas. Jesus is situated in a desert and directly behind him is the cross. He's seated on a lotus, which symbolizes purity and non-attachment. Both of those are among the highest values for a Buddhist to attain. Between his hands is a tiny heart. That was my latest discovery looking at this picture. I've looked at it for 8 or 9 years now and I'm still finding little things like that to meditate upon.

The White Crucifixion by Marc Chagall (Source)

This one is apparently one of Pope Francis' favorites too. It places Jesus' crucifixion squarely in the history of persecution endured by the Jewish people. Jesus was a Jew. He was born and he died a good Jewish boy. The roots of our faith and practices are all in Judaism. Judaism deserves our utmost respect.

I look forward to the day when my family gets to move into a house with more wall-space so I can hang my copies of these paintings up again.

I think it's valuable to see Jesus through non-Christian eyes. Seeing something fresh gives you a new perspective. From their religious traditions, they might see something in Jesus that you do not see and that always gives good food for thought. As long as we approach it with a discerning spirit, we can never learn enough about our Lord.

Shock and Awe Does Not Promote Dialogue

So, the other day I came across a story. This group called FEMEN stripped off their tops and drenched an Archbishop as he quietly sat there and took it. The group does not agree with Church teaching in regards to homosexuality or abortion. In this "protest," they were particularly addressing his recent comments saying that gays are called to be celibate.

I am all for protests. People's voices need to be heard. I'm all for intelligent, rational people disagreeing. The only way the world will become a better place is if people of different views come to the table to talk things out and compromise.

But, seriously, what were these women hoping to accomplish. The drenched archbishop deciding that gay sex is okay after all? Some devout Catholic watching this deciding that their church is wrong?

Really, all you might have accomplished is riling up your base and giving yourself the smug feeling of, "man, I really showed that homophobe bigot, didn't I?" Yeah, you might catch some headlines, but that's just because most of the world is laughing at you for being the textbook "psycho feminazi." You're not being taken seriously, you're not converting anyone to your cause, and you're not promoting any meaningful dialogue.

I've been there. I've been a protester trying to get attention. I've thrown raw meat all over my school's quad. I've engaged in street theatre. I've organized walk-outs. Except for maybe the meat thing, I've never done anything as stupid as this. My street theatre was at least educational. I invited media to my walk-outs in order to get the word out as to what we were protesting about. Nobody ever got naked. While we stretched the rules, we never damaged anyone's person or property.

You should all be embarrassed, but you're probably on too much of a self-righteous high to care.

 

PS: The Archbishop comes out of this looking better than you do. And I'm not just saying that because I'm Catholic.

HHS Mandate: Cutting through all the misinformation

Offensive political cartoon, but this is exactly how Catholics feel

 
The word "mandate" has been thrown around a lot lately when it comes to healthcare, so I want to start by defining what I mean. The mandate I'm referring to requires all employers to give their employees health care that covers contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs. There are a lot of half truths out there when it comes to this mandate, so I would like to clear some of them up. And then I will tell you what I think.

What is the HHS mandate anyway?

The HHS mandate a product of the ACA. The ACA requires all employers to provide insurance and requires that insurance to cover preventative care. It left it up to Secretary Sebelius and the Obama administration to define what constitutes preventative care. They concluded that birth control and sterilization were part of preventative care. Therefore, all employers are required to have insurance that covers birth control and sterilization.

So, what exactly is the relationship between ACA (aka Obamacare) and the HHS mandate?

The HHS mandate is not part of ACA, but ACA makes the mandate possible. The mandate was added to ACA, it was not part of the original legislation. Therefore, the recent Supreme Court decision about the constitutionality of ACA does not have any affect on the current legal battles about the HHS mandate.

Obama, I'm a democrat, I voted for you. Why do you infringe on my Church?

Isn't there an excemption for religious employers?

Here is the exception:

"The amended interim final regulations specified that, for 
purposes of this exemption, a religious employer is one that: (1) Has 
the inculcation of religious values as its purpose; (2) primarily 
employs persons who share its religious tenets; (3) primarily serves 
persons who share its religious tenets; and (4) is a non-profit 
organization..."

Many (in fact, I may argue most) Catholic employers do not qualify under this exemption. Catholic schools, hospitals and charities do not hire Catholics only, do not serve Catholics only, and their main goal is not to spread Catholicism. In the case of Catholic hospitals and charities, their main goal is usually to serve the poor regardless of their faith. I know many Catholic school students who are not Catholic.

What do I think?

I am against birth control, but not for the same reasons as the leaders of my church. Maybe I'll get into that someday, but not today.

My main issue is the HHS' infringement on first amendment rights. I might not know much, but I do know I'm a huge fan of the first amendment. There are two things I live for (other than my husband and baby):

1) writing

and

2) practicing my Catholic faith

If it wasn't for the first amendment, my head would have been put up on a stake years ago by some crazy dictator.

 Just like this evil girl just did to Santa

The first amendment states:   

 "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or 
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of 
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to 
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The government does infringe on the free exercise of religion when the free exercise is harmful to other people. I don't think that the Catholic Church's stance on birth control is harmful for other people. Catholic employers do have exceptions for women who have a medical necessity for birth control. If there is no medical necessity, supporting birth control would be essentially supporting sex. Sex between unmarried people where artificial birth control measures are used is immoral according to the Catholic Church. Having sex isn't a necessity of life, it's a choice. The Catholic Church refusing to pay for or condone birth control when there is no medical necessity is not robbing anyone of anything they need.

Trying to add some humor.

An analogy I heard a while back goes like this:

Forcing the Church to support birth control is like forcing an Islamic school to serve pork on Fridays.

At first, I found the analogy very offensive. Who in their right mind would equate birth control and halal laws? But as I think about it more, the analogy seems apt. This analogy isn't equating birth control and halal laws. This analogy is equating two things that these religions believe are teachings from God. Just as Muslims feel it is against God's will to eat pork, Catholics feel that it is against God's will to use artificial birth control. According to the First Amendment of our Constitution, the government cannot force a religion to do something that they feel is against God's will.

And if you're going to respond, "Well, 98% of Catholics don't agree with this teaching!" I'm going to have to inform you that your statistic is flawed. The survey that led to that number eliminated all nuns/sisters, all married women, all women who are not sexually active and all women who want to have children. So if you poll only sexually active unmarried women who do not want to have kids, then of course, you'll get the number you want.

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

 
Here are some useful links for (admittedly biased) information:

Defense against frequently used arguments for the HHS mandate

Debunking more myths

Women against the ban: The article and the letter

The National Petition

Last, but not least, the official USCCB website (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops)

The Inconsistent Censorship of Walmart: Fifty Shades of Grey?

As part of it's mission as a family-friendly store, Walmart has an extended history of censoring music, movies, and books. There are some artists that they refuse to carry and there are other artists who have had to release censored versions of their work. Walmart, after all, accounts for 10% of all music sales in the US. They currently refuse to carry any music that has a "parental advisory" sticker.

So, I found it surprising the other day when I was strolling the book section and found stacks and stacks of the latest bestseller, "Fifty Shades of Grey." Knowing that Walmart has also been known to sell censored versions of books, I looked all over the book for any indication that it was censored. It was not!

So, apparently, according to Walmart, lyrics that contain foul language or references to "abortion, homosexuality or Satanism" are not appropriate. But lines like:

“I pull him deeper into my mouth so I can feel him at the back of my throat and then to the front again. My tongue swirls around the end. He’s my very own Christian Grey-flavored popsicle. I suck harder and harder … Hmm … My inner goddess is doing the merengue with some salsa moves.”

That apparently is family-friendly.

Sources for this article:

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/sonoma/01.09.97/walmart-music-9702.html

http://www.pbs.org/itvs/storewars/stores3_2.html


http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/30869645/ns/today-entertainment/t/green-day-lashes-out-wal-mart-policy/#.UAnDt5Fj6uI

http://www.theculturemom.com/women-submissives-fifty-shades-grey/

The Impact of 100 Bishops in Jail (and Graphic Pictures)

In a video, Catholic philosopher and author Peter Kreeft is quoted saying that it would be “wonderful” if 100 bishops were arrested for carrying graphic pictures of aborted babies. The context for this quote is a recent decision by some Canadian bishops to withdraw from pro-life activities where the organizers could not guarantee that such images will not be used.

His argument seems good. He argues that Hitler would have been toppled earlier if the average German saw pictures of what was really happening in the death camps. He argues that the media would have to pay attention to 100 bishops being arrested for the pictures, since they ignored the arrest of one activist.

However, he neglects a few things:

1)      We’re pretty desensitized to pictures of violence. By the age of 18,many of us have been exposed to 200,000 acts of violence on television alone. We would hope that pictures of dead, mutilated babies would still have a shock value. We hope that we’re not that desensitized. But I don’t think we are sensitive to those images anymore. I don’t think that pictures of dead babies have the shock value protesters want them to have.

2)      Offending someone is not a good way to win them over to your side. Think of it from the perspective of a pro-choice person. What would you listen to? Someone yelling at you with a horrifying picture or someone giving you logical arguments and engaging you in dialogue?

3)      Arresting 100 bishops? And it’s not related to the sex scandal? The media as of late only reports things that make the Church look bad. Look at some of the articles at Get Religion. Many well-meaning and not-so-well-meaning journalists depict deeply religious people as ignorant and close-minded. I can only see how the story would be covered: "Those poor, stupid bishops in their religious zeal march around with disgusting pictures and get arrested. And, believe it or not, the disgusting pictures aren’t child porn."

Don’t get me wrong, Peter Kreeft’s heart is in the right place. We need to make a statement. We need to save the unborn. We need to be bold. There are, however, many other ways in which this can be accomplished. Many other ways that doesn’t include incarceration or needlessly graphic pictures.

What do you think? Am I too cynical?

PS: I don't agree with the Canadian bishops' decision, however. As someone who has organized protests before, you can't control what the protesters will do. Nor do you really want to control them. Of course, you don't want a riot or any violence. However, if you invite people to your protest with a list of things they are not allowed to do, you won't get the turn out you want. Numbers speak volumes.

I do not want to write another post like "The State of Catholic Marriage" where I complain but don't offer any solutions. Let me give you some websites of some great pro-life organizations that my husband or I have been involved with in the past that need your help:

The Pregnancy Resource Center in Rolla MO

Lifeline Pregnancy Center in Kirksville MO

We have not contacted any centers in Syracuse yet.

But nearly all (if not all) dioceses have a Respect Life office (For example, the two dioceses we have lived in):

The Diocese of Syracuse NY

The Archdiocese of St. Louis

In defense of Accepting Abundance

"I disapprove of what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it" - falsely attributed to Voltaire

Well, the internets have been alive as of late over a 839-word post by Stacy Trasancos over at Accepting Abundance. She expresses her despair of her children being exposed to PDAs by homosexuals at the park. She doesn’t look forward to her children’s questions, luckily it sounds like they are too young to understand anything now. She doesn’t feel comfortable taking them to the park because of this. The post ends with her, as a mother, expressing her concerns with how the world is going. She feels like she shouldn’t leave the house with so much evil in the world. As homosexuals fight for the freedom to live out their sexuality, she bemoans the loss of her freedom to raise her children in the kind of society she would like to see.

And the response she has received from various pro-gay, politically liberal people on the internet only proves her point. She *feels as if* her family is being attacked by a society that permits such evils as abortion and IVF. Now she *is* being attacked by people who wish her evil and call her unspeakable names. Homosexuals are fighting for the freedom to live as they wish. They want their freedom of speech. What about Stacy Trasancos' freedom of speech? People have the right to speak out for gay rights, why can’t she have the right to speak out for her beliefs? And they are not just her beliefs, they are the beliefs of the entire Church. The attackers should all be ashamed of themselves. They want tolerance, but only for people who agree with them.

I want all of those who are bashing her to know I’m praying for them.

"Lord, we pray for the power to be gentle; the strength to be forgiving; the patience to be understanding; and the endurance to accept the consequences of holding to what we believe to be right.
May we put our trust in the power of good to overcome evil and the power of love to overcome hatred.
We pray for the vision to see and the faith to believe in a world emancipated from violence, a new world where fear shall no longer lead men to commit injustice, nor selfishness make them bring suffering to others.
Help us to devote our whole life and thought and energy to the task of making peace, praying always for the inspiration and the power to fulfill the destiny for which we and all men were created." -Prayer for world peace, 1978

 St. Monica, patron of mothers, pray for us!