Papal Visit to America

Something Beautiful Has Begun
April 11, 2008; Page W7

Vatican City

At the open-air mass in St. Peter's on April 2, the third anniversary of the death of John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI spoke movingly – he brought mist to the eyes of our little group of visiting Americans – of John Paul's life, and the meaning of his suffering. "Among his many human and supernatural qualities he had an exceptional spiritual and mystical sensitivity," said the pontiff, who knew John Paul long and intimately. (Those who hope for swift canonization please note: "supernatural." Benedict the philosopher does not use words lightly.)

He spoke of the distilled message of John Paul's reign: "Be not afraid," the words "of the angel of the Resurrection, addressed to the women before the empty tomb." Which words were themselves a condensed message: Nothing has ended, something beautiful has begun, but you won't understand for a while.

AP

Pope Benedict XVI

Benedict was doing something great leaders usually don't do, which is invite you to dwell on the virtues of his predecessor.

We did. You couldn't hear Benedict without your eyes going to the small white window in the plain-walled Vatican where John Paul's private chambers were, and from which he spoke to the world. Quick memory-images: the windows open, the crowd goes wild, and John Paul is waving, or laughingly shooing away a white bird that repeatedly tried to fly in and join him, or, most movingly, at the end, trying to speak and not able to, and trying again and not able to, and how the crowd roared its encouragement.

Oh, you miss that old man when you are here! You feel the presence of his absence. The souvenir shops know. They sell framed pictures and ceramic plates of the pope: John Paul. Is there no Benedict? There is. A photo of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger being embraced by . . . John Paul. It's now on my desk in New York. They have their hands on each other's shoulders and look in each other's eyes. A joyful image. They loved each other and were comrades.

When I was writing a book about John Paul, I'd ask those who'd met him or saw him go by: What did you think, or say? And they'd be startled and say, "I don't know, I was crying."

John Paul made you burst into tears. Benedict makes you think. It is more pleasurable to weep, but at the moment, perhaps it is more important to think.

A Vatican reporter last week said John Paul was the perfect pope for the television age, "a man of images." Think of the pictures of him storm-tossed, tempest-tossed, standing somewhere and leaning into a heavy wind, his robes whipping behind him, holding on to his crosier, the staff bearing the image of a crucified Christ, with both hands, for dear life, as if consciously giving Christians a picture of what it is to be alive.

Benedict, the reporter noted, is the perfect pope for the Internet age. He is a man of the word. You download the text of what he said, print it, ponder it.

* * *

Now he is the man at the window. What do we see? This is what I saw as his popemobile came close by in the square: tall man, white hair, shy eyes, deep-set. He is waving, trying to act out pleasure at being the focus of all eyes, center stage. He is not a showman but a scholar, an engaged philosopher nostalgic for the days – he has spoken of them – when he was a professor in a university classroom, surrounded by professors operating in a spirit of academic camaraderie and debate. But, his friends tell you, he enjoys being pope. He has become acclimated.

There is a sweetness about him – all in the Vatican who knew him in the old days speak of it – and a certain vagueness, as if he is preoccupied.

He lacks an immediately accessible flair. Popes didn't use to have to have flair, but now perhaps it is expected of them. John Paul was many things – theologian, canny anticommunist – but he was a showman, too. Woo woo, he teased the cheering children of America on his first trip. John Paul II, he loves you! Such a small thing, and yet somehow it broke your heart. The world then needed the liveliness of faith, its joy, its gaiety even. I was told this week his Vatican hadn't quite approved of what they saw as his antics. Well, that's why God didn't make them pope.

* * *

Now Benedict comes to America, his first trip as pope. The highlight in the Vatican's eyes is his address to the United Nations. No one knows what he will say. He will no doubt call for peace, for that is what popes do, and should do. Beyond that? Perhaps some variation on themes from his famous Regensburg address, in September 2006.

There he traced and limned some of the development of Christianity, but he turned first to Islam. Faith in God does not justify violence, he said. "The right use of reason" prompts us to understand that violence is incompatible with the nature of God, and the nature, therefore, of the soul. God, he quotes an ancient Byzantine ruler, "is not pleased by blood," and "not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature." More: "To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm." This is a message for our time, and a courageous one, too. (The speech was followed by riots and by Osama bin Laden's charge that the pope was starting a new "crusade.")

The trip begins in Washington, and the White House has announced that the pope and the president will "continue their dialogue on the interplay of faith and reason." (This prompted a long-suffering Bush supporter to say, "I'm seeing the collision of matter and antimatter.")

Catholics who hope for a successful visit have some anxiety that a distracted Vatican apparatus, working, sort of, with a confused American team waiting on decisions, will fail to allow Benedict to be what he is to best effect, to break through and reveal some of his nature. An American journalist took it upon himself to remind papal representatives that the pope turns 81 while in Washington. Perhaps people could be urged to sing . . . "Happy Birthday"? Benedict some time back wowed a group of schoolchildren when he spoke to them of Antonietta Meo, who may in time become the church's youngest nonmartyred saint. Is he meeting with schoolchildren here?

Another small fear, born of hearing him last week at the mass. Benedict spoke in many languages including English, which he speaks fluidly and with a strong German accent. This is an accent that 60 years of World War II movies have taught Americans to hear as vaguely sinister, or comic. The nicer commentators may say he sounds like Col. Klink in "Hogan's Heroes." I hope he speaks even more than usual about love, for that may remove the sting, as love does.

* * *

I forgot to say that as he went through the crowds last week, after the mass, thousands from all over the world ran toward him, reached for him, applauded. It was festive, sprawling, and as they cheered, for a moment St. Peter's felt like what Benedict said it was in the days after John Paul's death, the beating "heart of the world." It was rousing, but also comforting. Afterward I thought: Nothing is ended, something beautiful has begun, we just won't understand it for a while.

See all of today's editorials and op-eds, plus video commentary, on Opinion Journal¹.

When Do We Die?

When Do We Die?
A long-established criterion for determining death is under growing scrutiny.

April 8, 2008

8:30 PM EST

Thirty-six hours after Zack Dunlap had an accident last November with his souped-up ATV, doctors performed a PET scan on Zack and found there was no blood flowing to his brain. After informing his parents, the doctors declared Zack brain-dead. Then followed the call to the organ harvesting team to come and retrieve organs from Zack. As they were being flown in by helicopter to the Wichita Falls, Texas hospital where Zack lay presumably dead, nurses began disconnecting tubes from his inert body. It was only then that one of Zack's relatives who happens to be a nurse tested Zack for reflexes. Not only did Zack respond to pain, he was later able to tell a stunned television audience and Today Show host Natalie Morales that he heard the doctor declare him brain-dead, and how much that ticked him off.

Stories like Zach's seem to be more prevalent of late, and more disturbing. They occasion reasonable doubt about three related issues: the reliability of the brain-death (BD) criterion as a standard for determining death; the degree of rigor with which such determinations are made; and whether the medical establishment is not dangerously biased toward organ harvesting as opposed to long-term, potentially regenerative care for persons who meet the loosest standard for BD.

Until recently, the general consensus had been that BD -- the irreversible and complete cessation of all brain function -- constituted a sufficient criterion for establishing that a human individual has, in fact, died. However, the consensus surrounding BD has been challenged of late. Opponents, most notably Dr. Alan Shewmon, Chief of the Department of Neurology at Olive View Medical Center, UCLA, point to cases of individuals who have been declared brain-dead and have "survived" with the aid of artificial respiration/nutrition for weeks, months, and even years. Shewmon has published a controversial study of such survivors that has posed a diametric challenge to the neurological standard for determining death. In testimony before the President's Council on Bioethics, Shewmon observed:

Contrary to popular belief, brain death is not a settled issue. I've been doing informal Socratic probing of colleagues over the years, and it's very rare that I come across a colleague, including among neurologists, who can give me a coherent reason why brain destruction or total brain non-function is death.

There's always some loose logic hidden in there somewhere, and those who are coherent usually end up with the psychological rationale, that this is no longer a human person even if it may be a human organism.

The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) established a set of Guidelines for the determination of brain death in 1995 which currently remain a point of reference for many hospitals and physicians throughout the country. The AAN guidelines lay out diagnostic criteria for making a clinical diagnosis of BD. The guidelines note that the three "cardinal findings" of brain death are coma or unresponsiveness, absence of brainstem reflexes, and apnea (the cessation of breathing). It further outlines a series of clinical tests or observations for making these findings. The guidelines also note that certain conditions can interfere with clinical diagnosis, and recommends confirmatory tests if such conditions are present. Finally, the guidelines recommend repeated clinical evaluation after a six-hour interval (noting that such time period is arbitrary) using a series of confirmatory tests that are described in the document.

A recent study published in the journal Neurology, noting widespread variations in the application of the AAN Guidelines, drew these conclusions:

Major differences exist in brain death guidelines among the leading neurologic hospitals in the Unites States. Adherence to the American Academy of Neurology guidelines is variable. If the guidelines reflect actual practice at each institution, there are substantial differences in practice which may have consequences for the determination of death and initiation of transplant procedures.

Such variability in applying a uniform criterion of BD, in addition to the growing number of survivors of BD, must give us pause. And so must the growing societal pressure to donate organs -- notwithstanding the genuine hopes that organ transplants holds for millions of people.

That pressure arises from the fact that the numeric gap between available organ donors and patients who need organ transplants continues to grow every year. A recent survey indicated that in 2006 over 98,000 organs were needed for patients on US transplant waiting lists.

Complicating matters, the number of available organs through donation from brain dead patients has remained stable for a number of years. And while organ donor cards and growing use of advance medical directives have occasioned a slight increase in the numbers of cadavaric transplants, more organs are needed than are currently available.

Consequently, transplantation services are pressed to find new and ethically acceptable ways to increase the number of available organ donors. Some advocates of a less rigorous application of BD have gone so far as to openly consider the moral licitness of removing organs from anencephalic newborns, and from persons diagnosed as being permanently comatose or in a permanent vegetative state (PVS). And some members of the medical profession believe the solution lies in redefining BD so as to make it less restrictive.

One such approach would define BD (and consequently death itself) as cessation of all higher level (cortical) brain functioning -- even if there were activity in other areas of the brain. Such was the proposal suggested by Dr. Robert Veatch of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics at Georgetown University in his testimony before the President's Council on Bioethics two years ago. "We could shift to a new definition of death that would classify some of these permanently comatose persons as dead," affirmed Veatch. "In fact, a large group of scholars now in rejecting a whole brain definition has [endorsed]... a higher brain definition where some of these patients would be legally classified as dead."

"But would the ordinary citizen accept such a definition?" he then asked. In response, he pointed to a study done at Case Western Reserve University looking at the opinions of ordinary citizens in the State of Ohio. The results were startling. Of a population of 1,351 citizens who participated, 57% considered the person in permanent coma to be dead, and 34% considered the person in a permanent vegetative state to be dead. Furthermore-again on Veatch's interpretation of the data -- with regard to the propriety of harvesting organs, in the case of a more rigorous application of the BD criterion, 93% percent thought it acceptable take organs. But in the case of permanent coma, 74% would procure organs, and even in the case of PVS, fully 55% percent would procure organs.

Veatch ended by exhorting those present: "I suggest that it's time to consider the enormous lifesaving potential of opening the question about going to a higher brain definition of death or, alternatively, making exceptions to the dead donor rule."

Food for thought-and potentially for nightmares.

Admittedly, proponents of BD would question, in cases of survival after a BD determination such as that of Zach Dunlap, whether the criterion was applied strictly enough when they were declared brain dead. That's a legitimate question.

But research like Dr. Shewmon's and the growing list of survivors of BD are not only generating uneasiness in the medical field but also among potential organ donors who fear succumbing to some physician's premature diagnosis of death. It seems to me that such uneasiness is warranted, and that the time has come for a much more rigorous moral and medical evaluation of the propriety of the BD criterion.

____

Rev. Thomas V. Berg, L.C. is Executive Director of the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person.

February 10, 2008

Christology Assignments Class 2010

Deacon Bill McKenzie

Assignments have been made below for each student, from the Raymond E. Brown Christology text books for the remainder of the semester.

In addition, the class as a whole is required to read and prepare for discussion, on the dates indicated, the chapters in Pope Benedict’s XVI’s book: Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church.

Grades will be allocated on the quality of the class presentation of each student and participation in the class discussions.

Lent

Text Book: Raymond E. Brown – A Crucified Christ in Holy Week

Class Week 1 – Feb 16 (Double Period)

Deacon Bill McKenzie

Class Week 2 – Feb 23

Robert Brunton – The Passion According to Mark

Frank Devereux – The Passion According to Matthew

Class Week 3- Mar 8

Dayle Geroski – The Passion According to Luke

Paul Grutsch – The Passion According to John

Class Discussion: Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church

Chapters 1 thru 4

Easter

Text Book: Raymond E. Brown - A Risen Christ in Eastertime

Class Week 4- Mar 29

Robert Hauert – The Resurrection in Mark

Robert Klein – The Resurrection in Matthew

Class Discussion: Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church

Chapters 5 thru 8

Class Week 5- April 12

Edward Krise – The Resurrection in Luke

Ronald Manning – The Resurrection In John – Ch.20

Class Discussion: Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church

Chapters 9 thru 12

Class Week 6 – April 26

Jose “Trini” Merlo-Quintero The Resurrection in John - Ch. 21

Philip Miles – The Church Begins in Jerusalem

Class Discussion: Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church

Chapters 13 thru 16

Pentecost Sunday May 11

Text Book: Raymond E. Brown – A Once and Coming Spirit at Pentecost

Class Week 7 – May 10

John Paul McGuire – The Jerusalem Church of one Mind

Wayne Nacey – Diversity in the Jerusalem Church; Expansion to Judea and Samaria.

Class Discussion: Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church

Chapters 17 thru 20

Ordinary Time

Text Book: Raymond E. Brown – Christ in the Gospels of the Ordinary Sundays

Class Week 8 – May 31

Francis Przybylek – Pg. 20 – Discourse: Mission Sermon Mt. 10:1-42

Felix Rentas – Pg 20 – Discourse: Sermon in Parables Mt. 13:1-52

Class Discussion: Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church

Chapters 21 thru 24

Class Week 9 - Jun 14

John Wojcik – Pg 20 – Discourse: Sermon on the Church Mt. 18:1-35

Gerald Zukauckas – Pg 20 – Eschatological Sermon Mt. 24:1- 25:46

Class Discussion: Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church

Chapters 25 thru 28

Class Week 10 – Jun 28

Class Discussion and Review: Jesus, The Apostles and The Early Church

Chapters 29 thru 31. Final.

Liturgy Class Notes March 29, 2008

Liturgy - work of the people - a form and arrangement of public worship laid down by a church or religion

• ready to give of ourselves - guide the people -

• our role is serving deacon and priest, singing in choir

• when in sacramental role, make sure people can hear, proclamation skills

Penitential Rite - Form C - recognize that God loves them -

Common items -

• responses the same; Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy
• subject - Jesus Christ - Christological statements - crucial
• positive statements in nature - majesty of Christ, his work in our midst
• "Lord have mercy" reflection of positive statement -
• No- to saints, Father, Holy Spirit -
• Go to the action of Christ - not our action

Examine self-constructed penitential rites

Job Market - The Shoe on the other Foot?

Brothers;
Reminds me of how blessed I am to have a good job. I hope you enjoy.

Your Men of Ten BlogMaster

Your BlogMaster in Brazil - in prayer of some type.

Obama's 'punished with a baby' Comment Sparks Protests

Obama's 'punished with a baby' Comment Sparks Protests

4/4/2008

Catholic News Agency

"I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby," Obama said.

PHILADELPHIA (CNA) - Christian leaders in the U.S. are demanding that Sen. Barack Obama apologize for comments he made referring to babies as a “punishment”.

While addressing a campaign rally in Pennsylvania last weekend, Sen. Obama said, "When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important prevention is education, which should include -- which should include abstinence education and teaching the children -- teaching children, you know, that sex is not something casual," he said.

"But it should also include -- it should also include other, you know, information about contraception because, look, I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old," he added.

"I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby," Obama said.

The Christian Defense Coalition responded to Obama by saying that his comment is “not only a slap in the face to every child born to a young mother, but it diminishes the great joy that children bring to their families regardless of the circumstances in which they were born.”

Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, also commented on Obama’s campaign for change, saying, "Senator Obama talks about bringing change to America. However, when it comes to his policies on abortion he is strictly 'old school.'

Every recent poll shows that America's emerging generation is embracing a culture of life and desires and end to the violence that has resulted in the deaths of over 50,000,000 innocent children and wounded so many women.”

A demonstration protesting Obama’s pro-abortion policies was held yesterday at 3:30pm at West Chester University, where Sen. Obama made a campaign stop.