Rants, reviews, and reflections

Mike's Comments

Category Archives: Religion

TALKING BACK TO DENNIS THE MENACE

Posted on by Posted in Current Events, Movies, Religion

It is surely indicative of our secular era that the error-filled bloviations of media figure and self-styled moralist Dennis Prager have such wide acceptance. I think I’ve finally figured out why, but more on that later. At this point, let’s take a look at his recent column entitled “Noah: One of the Most Moral Stories Ever Told,” sparked by the upcoming release of Darren Aronofsky’s film.

Prager begins by reminding us that he has taught the Torah for more than 40 years, and that most of his teachings are available for download—for a small fee. He doesn’t go into much detail as to why the Noah story is one of the most moral, beyond saying that God hates evil. Dennis does, however, offer this observation:

God values goodness more than any other human trait. Thus, the only reason Noah was saved was that “Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations” (Genesis 6:9).

Odd how Torah expert and proud Jew Prager has forgotten the most important passage for Jews in the OId Testament, known in English as “The Great Commandment” and in Hebrew as “The Shema” (Deuteronomy 6:4-5):

Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD alone! Therefore, you shall love the LORD, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength.

And, just so there is no misunderstanding here, Moses adds (Dt 6:6-9):

Take to heart these words which I enjoin on you today. Drill them into your children. Speak of them at home and abroad, whether you are busy or at rest. Bind them at your wrist as a sign and let them be as a pendant on your forehead. Write them on the doorposts of your houses and on your gates.

It seems quite clear that what God desires most from humans is for them to love Him. Besides, what exactly is “goodness,” other than some vague touchy-feely concept that can score points for a phony like Prager? How much “goodness” does a man need, and how much makes up for his inherent evil? Dennis doesn’t say, but gives us this gem:

When God saw how cruelly human beings treated one another, He decided that He would start over. Once people reach a certain level of widespread evil, life is pointless.

But, Dennis neglects to explain to us how this view squares with another passage from the Noah story (Gn 8:21):

When the LORD smelled the sweet odor, He said to himself: Never again will I doom the earth because of man, since the desires of man’s heart are evil from the start; nor will I ever again strike down all living beings, as I have done.

Have we never again achieved a “Noah” level of evil?

Prager’s most absurd mistake in the piece occurs when he attempts to answer the question “Isn’t the Biblical flood story just a fairy tale?” His gives two answers, and his first one is a double whopper:

First, this is so only if you believe that the Biblical flood story states that the entire earth from the North Pole to the South Pole was flooded and that every living creature from penguins to polar bears, except for the animals and the people on Noah’s ark, was killed. But that is not what the story says. The narrative speaks of the world where Noah lived: It is expressly stated in Genesis 9:10 that there were other animals in the world that were not killed by the flood.

OK, Dennis. What part of Gn 7:21-23 do you not understand?

All creatures that stirred on earth perished: birds, cattle, wild animals, and all that swarmed on the earth, as well as all mankind. Everything on dry land with the faintest breath of life in its nostrils died out. The LORD wiped out every living thing on earth: man and cattle, the creeping things and the birds of the air; all were wiped out from the earth. Only Noah and those with him in the ark were left.

And, please explain how Gn 9:10 proves your contention. Here is Gn 9:8-10:

God said to Noah and to his sons with him: See, I am now establishing my covenant with you and your descendants after you and with every living creature that was with you: all the birds, and the various tame and wild animals that were with you and came out of the ark.

Torah expert Prager wrongly claims that the entire world is not destroyed and cites an irrelevant passage to prove his point.

As to Prager being widely accepted, here’s why:

Even a “Cliff’s Notes” synopsis of the Bible would not dare make such erroneous assertions, but if your audience were those who won’t read the Bible on their own, why not slice and dice Scripture to suit their taste? This is truly cynical. Prager has no problem citing chapter and verse, because he knows his fans will never check it out for themselves. And, the icing on the cake is all that “goodness” nonsense.

Very few people in all human history have ever thought of themselves as evil. I assure you that Hitler and Stalin and their crew, as well as present-day terrorists had good intentions. If bad things had to happen, it was for the greater good, right?

So, let Dennis make you feel good about yourself, and never venture beyond his inaccurate and watered down views of Scripture and morality. You’re basically good people, you have high self-esteem, and that’s all that counts.

BISHOP PAUL S. LOVERDE’S REACTION TO THE HHS CONTRACEPTIVE MANDATE

Posted on by Posted in Current Events, Politics, Religion

The Most Reverend Paul S. Loverde is Bishop of Arlington and spiritual leader of Northern Virginia’s nearly half million Catholics.  He recently commented on the decision by the Obama Administration to mandate sterilization and contraceptive coverage, including abortifacients, in health insurance plans offered by religious institutions, such as colleges and hospitals.

Here are my feelings on his statement:

1.    Loverde asks us “…to be prepared to engage in a strong defense in the civil arena of the basic human right of religious liberty.”  He adds that he “…will speak out consistently in the weeks and months ahead on this gravely important struggle for the freedom to practice our faith as full citizens of this great nation.”

But, I must ask:  Whom do we engage, and whom is he speaking out to?  The mandate is a policy created by an executive branch agency, headed by Kathleen Sebelius, a supposed Catholic and ardent abortion advocate.  Indeed, Sebelius is so owned by the abortion industry that her recent opposition to over-the-counter sales of the Plan B “morning after” pill, in a unprecedented move overriding the FDA, was done only to protect abortion providers.  Of course, her boss Obama was the most pro-abortion member of Congress.

If the mandate is to be reversed, it would take a change of heart by these two, and absent divine intervention, this will simply not happen.

 

2.    One might ask what it takes for a notorious public sinner, such as Sebelius, who brings great scandal to the Church, to be excommunicated.  Then again, why stop with her?  There are several hundred nominally Catholic politicians, some of whom attend mass regularly, who openly defy Church teachings on marriage and life issues.  They do so with impunity because the Church is afraid to act.

You are possibly unaware that Dr. James McMahon, a Los Angeles abortionist and inventor of the partial-birth abortion procedure, was given the sacrament of anointing of the sick and was buried “by mistake” with full Catholic honors.

 

3.    For all the reams of statements issued by Church figures on Roe v Wade since 1973, the faithful are dismayed that Catholic justice William Brennan, one of the majority, was not publicly rebuked, let alone excommunicated.

 

4.    Moreover, most American bishops have embraced the intrusion of the Federal government into virtually all aspects of our lives in the name of “social justice,” quite foolishly not realizing that with such intrusion comes control–secular control.  Thus, their alarm over the present issue, while sincere, is far too little, far too late.

 

5.    Gone is the masterful way in which Pius XII engaged the Nazis, saved lives, and still preserved the Church.  One can only conclude that after World War 2, and certainly after Vatican II, this sort of Church Militant is long gone.  These days, our leadership does little more than craven posturing, whereby Loverde’s statement represents an almost worst case scenario of preaching to the converted.

 

6.    I am well aware of the boilerplate reasons for why the Church does not act.  Washington Cardinal Wuerl is quick to say that the errant Catholic politicians must be disciplined by their home diocese bishops.  How convenient.  Likewise, we are told that overly aggressive actions by the Church could threaten its tax exempt status.

 

So, it’s all about effete legalisms and the dollars.  The Pharisees would surely be proud.

THE PENN STATE, SYRACUSE, AND ENSUING SEX SCANDALS

Posted on by Posted in Current Events, Religion, Sports

Here in the Washington, DC metro area, there are plenty of Penn Staters.  Some of these alums are rabid enough football fans to tackle the 400 mile round trip necessary to attend all the home games.

Needless to say, they are in shock, and many refuse to speak about the matter at all.

While there has been no shortage of media coverage, one topic is strangely absent from any story I have read or watched.  Maybe it’s because the topic is indelicate, although today’s media can hardly be accused of having much restraint.  Perhaps it’s because the topic cuts way too deep.

What I’m referring to is the undercurrent of homoeroticism that exists in all competitive sports.  There is, after all, a fine line between the promotion and admiration of physical perfection, and the tendency to take it a step further.  Likewise, there is a fine line between so-called “horseplay”—the same word has always been used as a cover, going back at least to Bill Tilden—and intentional sexual harassment.

Moreover, for a predator such as Joe Sandusky, few environments can match an athletic locker room.

Inevitably, these scandals will be compared to the pedophilia occurring in the Catholic Church, but I will offer one difference—slight though it may be.  There were a number of priests, including Fr. Leonard Feeney, who spoke out against the rising number of gay priests, and the acceptance of a gay subculture within the priesthood.  These clerics also noted with dismay the overly close relationship between certain priests and their charges.  Sadly, many of those who did speak out were persecuted, and even worse, were ignored.

The records show that the majority of the so-called “pedophilia” cases that occurred within the Church actually involved adolescents, some of whom appeared to be in consensual relationships.  Yet, based on the promise of easy money and the built-in animosity that society has always had for the Church, the lawsuits and media coverage proliferated.

No, I am not justifying any of this sordid behavior, but the word “pedophilia” conjures up the image of a small, defenseless child being molested, which provokes even more outrage.

Contrast this with the fact that no one within Penn State or Syracuse spoke out on these matters until the story had already broken.

If athletics are to be held in greater esteem than religion in this society, more’s the pity that the overwhelming interest is in being a spectator, rather than as participant.

A LENTEN REFLECTION

Posted on by Posted in Religion

The Gospel reading for the fifth Sunday of Lent (Cycle C) is John 8:1-11. This is the familiar story of the woman caught in the very act of committing adultery, brought before Jesus. The crowd notes that Mosaic law stipulates that she should be stoned to death, and asks Jesus what he recommends. It is in this passage that he famously replies: “Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”

At that, the crowd disperses, until only Jesus and the woman are left. The story continues:

Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

She replied, “No one, sir.” Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on do not sin any more.”

This short passage elicits a number of comments…

Within the greater context of the Gospel story, the woman is brought before Jesus for the primary purpose of tripping him up. This popular teacher already has a reputation as being somewhat lenient with sinners. If he condemns the woman outright, he is not merciful, but if he does not condemn her, then he is going against the law. On the surface, to the enemies of Jesus, this seems like a surefire trap.

His answer bespeaks the infinite mercy of God, and also is a verbal gem that stops his accusers cold.

Per the text…

“Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?”

They said this to test him, so that they could have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger.

But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”

What was he writing on the ground? Some say that it was a list of sins committed by the accusers, others say that if the woman was a prostitute, it was a short list of her clients, many of whom were standing there accusing her. At any rate, if she was really caught in the very act of committing adultery, how come her partner does not also stand accused?

At best, this is far from a just tribunal. Indeed, it has been said that we can learn much about a society by the way it treats its women. Just how was she caught, anyway? Was it a set-up from the beginning?

Note that Jesus is not exactly gentle in giving out his mercy. The woman is made to stand before the crowd, suffering plenty of embarrassment—not to mention fear for her life— before she is finally pardoned. Then he admonishes her not to sin anymore. Some texts render it: “But from now on, avoid this sin.”

We are left to ponder whether or not she avoids this sin, all sins, or backslides within days. Interestingly, it is not even known if she is repentant during this process, or if she thanks Jesus for saving her life.

Another theme here is that God prefers conversion to punishment, and surely, conversion is at the very heart of Lent.

LENT, 2009

Posted on by Posted in Religion

On Ash Wednesday, Catholics are reminded that “…You are dust, and to dust you shall return.” This sobering reflection, coupled with the ongoing financial meltdown, should at least make it easier to get in the right spirit for the season. Liturgical expert Mark Searle noted that one part of the Lenten journey is to bring us to compunction—a word etymologically related to “puncture,” as in deflating our egos.

As institutions headed by supposed masters of the universe fell to nothing, it showed us—as if there were any doubt—that no one is superhuman. Well-intentioned, if horribly misguided government policies; smart guys hedging their bets with credit default swaps, that themselves spawned futures markets betting on their success or ultimate failure; and good old untrammeled greed—all playing against a backdrop of regulatory malfeasance, got us to where we are today.

Moreover, the solution proffered by our Government may well end up being worse than the problem, with its multiple trillions in deficit spending.

Is there any good news?

Some speak of a new return to basics. This might even lead to a reassessment of some trends that brought us to our present culture rot. One can only hope…

The three traditional penitential practices of Lent are prayer, almsgiving, and fasting. Given the economic situation, there will be plenty of prayer, and some real fasting. There will probably be less almsgiving, even as the poor will require it all the more.

In his 2009 Lenten message, Pope Benedict XVI highlights fasting, and notes that:

In our own day, fasting seems to have lost something of its spiritual meaning, and has taken on, in a culture characterized by the search for material well-being, a therapeutic value for the care of one’s body. Fasting certainly bring benefits to physical well-being, but for believers, it is, in the first place, a “therapy” to heal all that prevents them from conformity to the will of God.

He continues..

From what I have said thus far, it seems abundantly clear that fasting represents an important ascetical practice, a spiritual arm to do battle against every possible disordered attachment to ourselves. Freely chosen detachment from the pleasure of food and other material goods helps the disciple of Christ to control the appetites of nature, weakened by original sin, whose negative effects impact the entire human person.

Quite opportunely, an ancient hymn of the Lenten liturgy exhorts: “Let us use sparingly words, food and drink, sleep and amusements. May we be more alert in the custody of our senses.”

This Lent, the non-Catholic—along with the Catholic— can take comfort in those words. True, the discipline for many will be enforced by these unfortunate times, although the necessary cutting back will often be a reduction in luxuries, or at least non-essentials.

This Lent, let us all take back custody of our senses. We will be better for it.

THE TWELVE DAYS OF CHRISTMAS

Posted on by Posted in Music, Religion

This seasonal song, describing the days between Christmas and January 6th—the traditional day of the Epiphany (now celebrated in US Catholic dioceses the first Sunday following January 1st )—has been dismissed by many as a cheerful, nonsensical ditty. However, there’s plenty going on here…

For one thing, unlike most other popular songs, and surely unlike most songs as old as this one, there are frequent shifts between 4/4 and 3/4 time. For another, there is inconsistency in the lyrics for the last five days, as well as a misunderstanding of otherwise consistent lyrics for the fourth and fifth days.

Most scholars accept the version that appears in The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes:

Twelve lords a-leaping, Eleven ladies dancing, Ten pipers piping, Nine drummers drumming, Eight maids a-milking, Seven swans a-swimming, Six geese a-laying, Five gold rings, Four colly birds, Three French hens, Two turtle dove, and a partridge in a pear tree.

On the fourth day, note that it is “colly” or (collie) birds, not “calling” birds. “Colly” means black as coal, and thus refers to blackbirds. As to the fifth day, the gold rings refer to ring-necked birds such as the ring-necked pheasant, rather than to jewelry items, in keeping with the first seven gifts being birds.

Theological implications have been invoked for each of the days and numbers, as follows:

12—Points of doctrine in the Apostle’s Creed

11—Faithful apostles

10—Commandments

9—Fruits of the Holy Spirit (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control)

8—Beatitudes:   Blessed are… the poor in spirit, those who mourn, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake.

7—Sacraments:   Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders, and Matrimony.

6—Days of creation

5—First five books of the Old Testament (the Pentateuch)

4—Gospels

3—Theological virtues (Faith, Hope, and Charity)

2—Testaments (Old and New)

1—Savior

In this context the “true love” is God’s love for us, or perhaps God the Father.

Persistent folklore insists that this was all code for oppressed Catholics to use in Protestant England as a memory aid, but clearly this makes no sense. The above points would be virtually undisputed between Catholics and Protestants! Moreover, how does knowing that there are two testaments give one any knowledge of what is contained in these works?

Additionally, various sources will cite different theological matters for the numbers: Five decades of the Rosary (which would be a sticking point with Protestants), three could be the Holy Trinity, and so forth. How can anything be “authentic” if there is no agreed upon edition? Still, even if the song were not a coded message for Catholics, the symbolism described could be accurate.

Since 1984, PNC bank has been calculating the costs of all the gifts in the song, including all repetitions, and this year’s total is $21,080.10, compared to the original 1984 total of $12,623.10. However, PNC’s list uses non-authoritative lyrics for the last four items—nine ladies dancing, ten lords-a-leaping, eleven pipers piping, twelve drummers drumming—and makes the “calling bird” mistake, thus using the price of canaries, and not blackbirds.

As to the literal meaning of the lyrics, we can only speculate as to the significance of the various gifts, as well as the order in which they are presented.

In the meantime, enjoy the song, and have a very Merry Christmas.

HEALTH AND RELIGIOSITY

Posted on by Posted in Health Care, Religion

“Religious Practice and Health: What the Research Says,” sponsored by the Heritage Foundation, was held December 3, 2008 in Washington, D.C. Leading researchers in the field presented their findings about the role of religious practice in health outcomes.

There certainly is a body of knowledge that suggests a positive influence of religion or spiritual practices on health outcomes, and one of Sally Beare’s 50 Secrets Of The World’s Longest Living People is to “have faith.” She cites a meta-study entitled “Religious Involvement And Mortality: A Meta-Analytic Review,” published in 2000, with 125,826 subjects. The study found that attendance at a place of worship can add eight years to the average lifespan and significantly improve health.

Beare also noted that prayer can lower breathing and heart rate, along with blood pressure, according to NIH studies. In fact, some double-blind studies even showed that cardiac patients who prayed needed less medicine. The results cut across numerous religious denominations.

As to the recent meeting in DC, media coverage predictably included the voice of Columbia University behavioral psychologist Richard Sloan, an atheist activist, who likes to hide behind “thoughtful” and condescending posturing. Typical is Sloan’s take that while faith/prayer may bring comfort to many people, there are no scientific methods to accurately measure the value of faith/prayer.

Of course, Sloan could also have said that while love may bring comfort to many people, there are no scientific methods to measure that either. So what? Does that diminish the value of love? One would be hard-pressed to find a better example of foolish scientism.

Sloan’s 2006 book Blind Faith: The Unholy Alliance of Religion and Medicine argues that zealotry for research on the health benefits of religion is a big mistake that poses substantial dangers to a health-conscious, but scientifically illiterate, public and to vulnerable patients seeking care from proselytising physicians. In Sloan’s fantasy world, there are legions of physicians spending more time evangelizing patients than treating them with conventional means.

Sloan was also the guy who attacked the meta-study referenced above, with a rather novel tack that controlled for so-called relevant covariates. His conclusion was that the data suggested a statistically nonsignificant relationship between religious involvement and mortality.

The authors of the meta-study replied that the covariates invoked by Sloan were meaningless. They focused on the positive outcomes of religiosity on mortality, which survive all attempts to debunk with covariates.

Generally speaking, trying to debunk a study with covariates only works when it is painfully obvious that the researchers have overlooked major correlating factors, while overplaying their pet cause and effect.

A notable example was the ludicrous work done some years ago that tried to pin living near power lines with higher cancer rates. Subsequent studies revealed that cancer incidence actually correlated far better with whether the household had whole or skim milk. Sadly and significantly, many residential areas near power lines house poor people, and poverty does correlate well with incidence of cancer.

Ironically, Sloan’s research at Columbia focuses on the mechanics by which psychological risk factors such as hostility, depression, and anxiety contribute to the risk of heart disease. The good doctor apparently has no problems whatever with the voodoo methods involved in “measuring” hostility, depression, and anxiety.

I guess it depends on whose ox is being gored—or perhaps in preserving his place as the media-recognized premier “debunker” of health/religious interaction. Do you think Sloan will instruct his friends not to pray for him when he gets deathly ill?

A CHILD’S CHRISTMAS IN THE 1950S

Posted on by Posted in Religion

When we hear about the good old days at this time of year, it usually refers to the era before the notorious Supreme Court decisions Abington School District v. Schempp and Murray v. Curlett that eliminated school prayer and scripture reading, and gradually removed religion from the public square.

I now offer some remembrances—those of a young child, namely this writer…

While there was slightly more overt reference to the religious aspects of Christmas, there was definitely more mention of the commercial holiday aspect, under the title of “Christmas.” Thus, you would see countless ads about Christmas GIFTS, with a traditional-looking Santa always prominent. Arguably, the only difference with the present is that we now seem to talk about gifts for “the holidays,” and the “holiday season,” with merely the word “Christmas” being uttered less.

Quite often, there would be short television specials featuring some celebrity at home with their family, all well-dressed, and sitting next to an oversize Christmas tree. Sometimes, these would take the form of a short and simple Christmas greeting. Folks my age might remember such a program that showed Mommie Dearest Joan Crawford at home, along with tell-all daughter Christina and her little brother.

Running on TV from 1951 through 1966, and shown in prime time until 1960 was Gian Carlo Menotti’s one act opera Amahl and the Night Visitors. The work was written specifically for television, and its libretto is essentially a riff on the three kings story.

On their way to Bethlehem, the kings—bearing gifts—stop to rest at the home of poor cripple Amahl and his mother. They talk of a special child they are soon to meet, and the mother draws the parallel to her own unfortunate son. In desperation, she even tries to steal some gold, and is told by one of the kings to keep it, as the child they seek does not need gold.

Now inspired by the notion that this child may indeed be the Messiah, the mother wants to offer a gift, but has nothing of value. Amahl, too, wants to give a gift to the child, and without thinking about it selflessly offers the crutch that he has been hobbling about on all this time. At that very moment, his crippled leg is healed, and he joyfully goes off with the kings to give thanks for his miracle cure.

This touching story, replete with beautiful songs, was definitely a Christmas highlight for a musical little kid.

When I was in the third grade, I was in the choir (called the glee club), and we were featured in the so-named Christmas pageant. The theme of the play was not terribly religious, and concerned a little girl who just lost her father, but is rendered less sad by the milieu of the Christmas season. I do remember that the glee club teacher, Miss Gagner (pronounced “Gahn-your”), was a blond, and was by far the best looking teacher in the school.

That same year, a number of kids in my class were asked what Christmas meant to them. Two or three of the girls made much of how cold Baby Jesus must have been in the manger, and wished that they could have brought him blankets to warm him up. One boy said that it was the time that all his family got together.

Another lad said that it was the time to get lots of presents, and was even given the opportunity to advance a somewhat less mercenary observation, but declined, and stuck to his original comment. Finally, a slightly chubby girl, who was by no means the smartest or most articulate in the class, said that Christmas was about the birth of Jesus our Savior. This was followed by several seconds of awkward silence, and we moved on to something else.

I still don’t know what the teacher wanted to hear, but surmise that it was something along the lines of “peace on earth, goodwill to men”, minus too much reference to Jesus. This sort of self-restraint by the enlightened was far from uncommon back then, but it just wasn’t called being “politically correct.”

Fifty-plus years later, I would have to conclude that absent the superficial trappings of a supposedly more religious society, things have not changed all that much. Let those who decry the present day war on Christmas recall that our religion was originally practiced in the catacombs, and even during the best of times has always been opposed by the world.

Perhaps those who believe that the US is a Christian nation, also believe that President Bush is a conservative.

EDUCATION: STRAIGHT FROM THE HORACE’S MOUTH

Posted on by Posted in Current Events, History, Politics, Religion

While the current crisis in Canada and Europe’s socialized health “care” systems is a big topic these days—replete with stories of pregnant women needing special attention, but at a wait of more than nine months—let’s turn to an arena that has been socialized since the mid-19th century: public education.

Here are findings that no one can argue with…

  • We spend incredible amounts of money on public education

 

  • The majority of people, cutting across all demographics and psychographics, is dissatisfied with the results

 

 

  • The official answer to improving the system is always more money

 

 

  • Increased expenditures seldom improve the results

 

Before I go into some reasons behind this sad state of affairs, I must inject some perspective here. The deterioration of the system is not a new phenomenon. Every generation has complained about the kids being dumber than they were, and in some sense, this observation is true.

Horace Mann (1796-1859), the so-called father of American education felt that a common school would be the “great equalizer.” Mann believed that poverty would most assuredly disappear as a broadened popular intelligence tapped new treasures of natural and material wealth. He added that through education, crime would decline sharply as would a host of moral vices such as violence and fraud. [Insert sarcastic remark here.]

Mann’s philosophy of education had six basic precepts:

1.     A republic cannot long remain ignorant and free, hence the necessity of universal popular education

2.     Such education must be paid for, controlled, and sustained by an interested public

3.     Such education is best provided in schools embracing children of all religious, social, and ethnic backgrounds

4.     Such education, while profoundly moral in character, must be free of sectarian religious influence

5.     Such education must be permeated throughout by the spirit, methods, and discipline of a free society, which preclude harsh pedagogy in the classroom

6.     Such education can be provided only by well-trained, professional teachers

Despite strong objections from the clergy, who could anticipate the effect of secular schools, as well as old-time educators who could anticipate the breakdown of classroom authority, his ideas prevailed. Ironically, his insistence on school boards—somewhat separate from local political leadership—made his ideas unpopular with politicians, until the school boards became just one more cog in the political machine.

Few would argue with Mann’s first precept, but the second precept hardly follows from it. The third precept certainly seems egalitarian, and requires that those “diverse” groups at least have some commonality, a hope that is dashed at the moment. The fourth precept attempts to separate morality from religion, and the fifth was an early example of touch-feely language, with the expected consequences. As for the sixth, I’m all for it. Too bad it was never achieved.

Still, dating from Mann’s first Board of Education in 1837, the meltdown would not occur in earnest until 1954. The famous case of Brown v. Board of Education did far more than desegregate the public schools. It brought the Feds—and their money train—whole hog into the public education business. For all his faults, Mann cannot be blamed for this one, as the notion of an overarching Federal government, to a guy who died in 1859, would be as incomprehensible as the Internet.

Add into the mix Murray v. Curlett and Abington v. Schempp (1963), which banned prayer and bible reading from public schools, and we were well on our way to a massive, virtually uncontrollable publicly financed enterprise, that—free from any recognized moral authority—could now succumb to every single politically correct idea that came down the pike. And it surely did, and it surely continues to do so.

Even in relatively successful districts like Fairfax County, VA, the fear of giving offense has been raised to such an art form that psychopath Seung-Hui Cho, notorious for the Virginia Tech shootings, could emerge untrammeled by anything more than reports that he was a little strange. No doubt, some teacher along the way tried to intervene, and was rebuffed by the parents and administrators.

But, what else can you expect? The students are merely a vehicle whereby the state extracts billions of dollars from the taxpayers. Any form of an actual education being imparted is simply an added bonus. Thus, the teachers and students count for precious little in any school district. Ask any teacher or any student.

Could all this be the obligatory results of mindless and conceited do-gooders? As Mann would say, only two months before he died, as president of Antioch College in a valedictory address: “I beseech you to treasure up in your hearts these my parting words: Be ashamed to die until you have won some victory for humanity.” Only an atheist like Horace Mann would try to improve on Christianity, with such grandiose and supra-Gospel hyperbole.

Perhaps Mann could not foresee that Antioch would become little more than a putrid Leftist establishment that is now in danger of closing, due in large measure to its self-imposed role as “boot camp for the revolution.” Then again, he may have relished what happened. Read his bio, and speculate to your heart’s content.

Pundit Henry P. Wickham, Jr put it best:

To step onto its campus was to experience something of a time warp. In the 1960s, it was 1950’s beatnik. Since then, it was and always will be 1968. There was something about Antioch’s campus that was like one of those colonial villages in Williamsburg where everyone dresses in colonial costumes. Antioch students certainly dressed their part with their studied shabbiness. The Bohemianism at Antioch was always a little too self-conscious and self-congratulatory, and the radicalism conventional and, dare I say, boring.

The PC orthodoxies on campus were always stifling and predictable. There was no political, social, or economic issue where anyone could doubt where the Antioch students stood. One could almost mouth the clichés and slogans as they were being spouted.

Thanks a lot, Horace.

A QUESTION OF FAITH

Posted on by Posted in Religion

What better time to talk about faith than during the season of the Church’s most solemn holiday?

Ever since the early 1960’s, especially in light of the Murray v. Curlett and Abington v. Schempp Supreme Court decisions, effectively banning school prayer and mandatory bible readings, there has been endless media devoted to how a once religious nation has become secular. Indeed, hundreds of millions of dollars in donations—not to churches but to political pressure groups—have been spawned by this notion.

To be sure, our country, along with most of the rest of the world, is less OVERTLY religious than it once was, but what if this former state was more of appearance than reality? Ultimately, of course, we cannot look into someone’s heart to see if he really has faith. However, we can examine the context and the evidence.

Prior to the 1960s, if one were asked to name the most Catholic place in North America, the answer would likely have been the Canadian province of Quebec. Famed for its elaborate churches, high number of vocations, and strong influence of the Church in matters beyond those normally thought of as ecclesiastical, few would argue with this contention. Yet, after Quebec’s so-called “Quiet Revolution,” usually dated 1960-1966, the Church’s influence disappeared, and these days, Quebec is one of the most secular places in North America.

Churches have closed, and if you attend a Mass you will find the average age of the congregation to be around 65, if not older. Is it not reasonable to look deeper into this rapid change?

Did hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers have some sort of atheistic epiphany, or rather, did the Quiet Revolution simply free them from one more form of conformity and stricture? If all these Quebeckers really did have a deep heartfelt faith, would it have so easily disappeared?

Mini versions of Quebec appeared all over the United States, with falling church attendance and wholesale abandonment of various traditions, not to mention the embrace of abortion and championing of alternative lifestyles. Nominally Catholic Hispanics (another group touted as “religious”) can be seen regularly violating the most basic Lenten rules of fasting and abstinence—at a fast-food joint near you.

A Mormon presidential hopeful is being supported by a self-described evangelical born-again Christian blogger and “conservative” talk show host, despite the rather obvious point that notwithstanding its invoking Jesus in its formal name, the Mormons do not follow Christian teachings.

[In anticipation of the e-mails…

Contrary to Christianity, Mormons believe that God is only one of many gods; The Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) are three distinct Gods; God was once a man who achieved godhood. And, they believe that Jesus was conceived by physical union between God the Father and Mary; Jesus had several wives; Jesus was the brother of Lucifer (Satan); certain sins are beyond the atoning blood of Christ…Well, you get the picture.]

How deep can the religious roots of our nation be if so many fundamental changes could occur in so short a time? Is it not more logical to explain this phenomenon by giving the spirit of the 1960s its due, in that once the veils of conformity and stricture were lessened or even removed, people no longer felt that they had to fake being religious?

Moreover, widespread faithlessness is hardly a new concern. Many saints have spoken of this…

What do you think? How many of the inhabitants of this city may perhaps be saved? What I am about to tell you is very terrible, yet I will not conceal it from you. Out of this thickly populated city with its thousands of inhabitants not one hundred people will be saved. I even doubt whether there will be as many as that! St. John Chrysostom (347-407)

I had the greatest sorrow for the many souls that condemned themselves to Hell… I saw souls falling into hell like snowflakes. St. Teresa of Avila (1515-1582)

The number of the damned is incalculable. St. Veronica Giuliani (1660-1727)

The greater part of men choose to be damned rather than to love Almighty God. St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori (1696-1787)

Shall we all be saved? Shall we go to Heaven? Alas, my children, we do not know at all! But I tremble when I see so many souls lost these days. See, they fall into Hell as leaves fall from the trees at the approach of winter. St. John Mary Vianney (1786-1859)

If this faithlessness is now more visible, we should regard it as a blessing. The veil has been removed, and in the current environment, we can truly exercise our free will. That’s hardly something to complain about.