{mosimage}For those working in media education and advocacy, news and comment about papal statements tend to follow a predictable pattern. Within a lengthy speech or series of speeches, there will be mention of church teaching on sexuality. Regardless of what else was said, response will be swift, negative and sneering, sometimes not without an implication that really, perhaps celibate old men should not be addressing such matters at all.
So it was with Pope Benedict XVI’s recent trip to Africa. During a press conference en route, in answer to a question of which he had advance notice, he confirmed the church’s belief that condoms are not the answer to stemming the AIDS crisis. Reacting immediately, the Toronto Star quoted Stephen Lewis, chairman of the Stephen Lewis Foundation, who said the Pope must be “living on the moon” to reject such sound science as condoms as an AIDS preventative. The Halifax Chronicle Herald was perhaps more balanced, stating that condoms are not the complete solution, but editorializing that “Personal responsibility, as the Pope says, is the key. That, however, includes condom use.” In the Edmonton Sun, Lynn Cockburn advises that “the Pope’s attitude toward condoms, abortion and women has got to be significant in the field of paleontology.” Similar comment was available in most newspapers.
So it was with Pope Benedict XVI’s recent trip to Africa. During a press conference en route, in answer to a question of which he had advance notice, he confirmed the church’s belief that condoms are not the answer to stemming the AIDS crisis. Reacting immediately, the Toronto Star quoted Stephen Lewis, chairman of the Stephen Lewis Foundation, who said the Pope must be “living on the moon” to reject such sound science as condoms as an AIDS preventative. The Halifax Chronicle Herald was perhaps more balanced, stating that condoms are not the complete solution, but editorializing that “Personal responsibility, as the Pope says, is the key. That, however, includes condom use.” In the Edmonton Sun, Lynn Cockburn advises that “the Pope’s attitude toward condoms, abortion and women has got to be significant in the field of paleontology.” Similar comment was available in most newspapers.
{mosimage}With just 18 words Pope Benedict XVI ignited an international fury that dominated headlines, dwarfed his good works in Africa and raised serious questions about the Vatican’s media savvy in a media-mad world.
The 18 words were extracted from a comment made by the Pope about AIDS during an in-flight press conference, as follows: “The problem can not be overcome with the distribution of condoms: on the contrary, they increase the problem.”
{mosimage}It is a truism among ecumenists that the pressing importance of Christian unity derives from the mission entrusted by Christ to the Church: to bring the Gospel to all people. Unity, in short, is our mission, but our divisions generally get in the way of effectively working together.
Our present challenges, however, present us with new opportunities for collaboration. This was brought home when I was in Geneva, Switzerland, in early March among my Swiss ecumenical colleagues, most of whom are Protestant and who have been heavily involved in church work.
Our present challenges, however, present us with new opportunities for collaboration. This was brought home when I was in Geneva, Switzerland, in early March among my Swiss ecumenical colleagues, most of whom are Protestant and who have been heavily involved in church work.
{mosimage}The theme for the 2009 ShareLife parish campaign is “You can work wonders.” We should all take a moment to consider those words.
They represent much more than a call to mail in a cheque, or go online to make a credit-card donation, or drop $100 into a collection basket.
That’s not to diminish the importance of fundraising. It’s vital, of course. The 2009 ShareLife appeal must raise $14.3 million to fund its commitments to 33 charitable agencies. So give and give generously.
They represent much more than a call to mail in a cheque, or go online to make a credit-card donation, or drop $100 into a collection basket.
That’s not to diminish the importance of fundraising. It’s vital, of course. The 2009 ShareLife appeal must raise $14.3 million to fund its commitments to 33 charitable agencies. So give and give generously.
Annual meetings of the Administrative Board of the International Federation of Catholic Universities might not be expected to generate a great deal of media interest. After all, discussions about policy, statutes, bylaws, applications for membership, budgetary matters and issues of scheduling and personnel are the general meat of most such comparable meetings: dull fare for everyone save those empowered to care.
The meetings — which I have been attending now for a decade — are, however, more than simply banal and managerial in their design. Among the key benefits of the week-long sessions are the rich opportunities that arise because of exposure to other university constituencies and challenges, the recognition of the common themes that unite us and the common threats that lurk ominously on our collective horizon and the energizing possibilities inherent in academic collaboration, student exchanges and shared research projects.
The meetings — which I have been attending now for a decade — are, however, more than simply banal and managerial in their design. Among the key benefits of the week-long sessions are the rich opportunities that arise because of exposure to other university constituencies and challenges, the recognition of the common themes that unite us and the common threats that lurk ominously on our collective horizon and the energizing possibilities inherent in academic collaboration, student exchanges and shared research projects.
{mosimage}For more than 30 years, the Lenten season has been marked in a special way in the archdiocese of Toronto, with thousands of Catholics demonstrating their faith through a massive act of charity known as ShareLife.
In March 1976, then Archbishop Philip Pocock attracted the attention of the country with a major announcement about the Catholic Church in the archdiocese. Based on principles of faith, the archbishop removed Catholic Charities from the mainstream appeal. In making this announcement, he said, “I am prepared to take the responsibility of sustaining the services of Catholic Charities to the community.” Thus, ShareLife, the annual charitable appeal of the archdiocese of Toronto, was established.
In March 1976, then Archbishop Philip Pocock attracted the attention of the country with a major announcement about the Catholic Church in the archdiocese. Based on principles of faith, the archbishop removed Catholic Charities from the mainstream appeal. In making this announcement, he said, “I am prepared to take the responsibility of sustaining the services of Catholic Charities to the community.” Thus, ShareLife, the annual charitable appeal of the archdiocese of Toronto, was established.
{mosimage}U.S. President Barack Obama surrounded himself with political friends, the sick, the handicapped, churchmen and scientists on March 9 to trumpet his intention to separate politics from science. To enthusiastic applause he announced an executive order that will rescind a ban on government funding for embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).
What utter hypocrisy.
What utter hypocrisy.
{mosimage}The latest economic report from Statistics Canada reinforces the need for swift and decisive action. Governments at all levels must implement policies that are prudent, just and comprehensive, but this is not their problem to solve alone. All of society has an important role to play.
Led by dramatic losses in the automotive and housing sectors, Canada’s gross domestic product shrank in the fourth quarter by an annual rate of 3.4 per cent. The national unemployment rate topped 7.2 per cent in January and will continue to rise, according to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty.
Led by dramatic losses in the automotive and housing sectors, Canada’s gross domestic product shrank in the fourth quarter by an annual rate of 3.4 per cent. The national unemployment rate topped 7.2 per cent in January and will continue to rise, according to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty.
{mosimage}This just in folks, children are bad for the environment — because humans are bad for the environment. But of course! I guess that makes some sense if the environment is the universal ultimate good of the world. And is that so? Do we value the world more than we value human life?
Even if the environment is the ultimate good, how does this argument work? Jonathan Pitt, the UK government’s Sustainable Development Commission chair, states that “Couples who have more than two children are being ‘irresponsible’ by creating an unbearable burden on the environment.” He, of course, leads by example, and has only two children. The assumption is that every couple with reproductive capacity will have only two children and thus this reaches, apparently, the level of replacement for the world population.
Even if the environment is the ultimate good, how does this argument work? Jonathan Pitt, the UK government’s Sustainable Development Commission chair, states that “Couples who have more than two children are being ‘irresponsible’ by creating an unbearable burden on the environment.” He, of course, leads by example, and has only two children. The assumption is that every couple with reproductive capacity will have only two children and thus this reaches, apparently, the level of replacement for the world population.
Too often you will pick up a newspaper and read about the trouble our kids have got themselves into. Today, you will pick up The Catholic Register and only find out the good.
And it’s not just the kids themselves. You can also read about the teachers, the administrators, the parents, all who contribute to the good that our Catholic schools are doing.
And it’s not just the kids themselves. You can also read about the teachers, the administrators, the parents, all who contribute to the good that our Catholic schools are doing.
{mosimage}It was the Marquis de Sade who first put into writing the idea that homosexuality is, for some, an inclination that emerges in childhood and remains more or less fixed throughout life. This view developed, over several centuries, into the modern notion of sexual orientation: same-sex attraction ceased to be a temptation or inclination from which some people suffered at various points in their lives and became something fixed, immutable and fundamental to the personality.
This understanding of same-sex attraction is held more or less universally in mainstream modern culture. Looking at the writings of the press, the gay and lesbian organizations and the North American psychological establishment, one gets the impression that the matter is very simple. Some people are born gay, some people are born straight and some people are born bisexual. It is as unnatural and unhealthy to expect a gay person to have heterosexual relationships as it would be for a straight person to seek out same-sex partners. Whatever your orientation is, it’s that way for life and it cannot be changed.
This understanding of same-sex attraction is held more or less universally in mainstream modern culture. Looking at the writings of the press, the gay and lesbian organizations and the North American psychological establishment, one gets the impression that the matter is very simple. Some people are born gay, some people are born straight and some people are born bisexual. It is as unnatural and unhealthy to expect a gay person to have heterosexual relationships as it would be for a straight person to seek out same-sex partners. Whatever your orientation is, it’s that way for life and it cannot be changed.