MH - The Heart of the Matter

Michael Moriarty - yes, the actor-turned-activist - has a good column on Terri today at the website Enter Stage Right. I bring you this for a couple of reasons: first, because I think it's a well-written column:

The visionaries of the postmodern world of the United Nations believe that the moral delusions of the entire Judeo-Christian civilization – America in particular – will be exposed as such and its memory relegated to a Dark Age, which will eventually be as relevant to man as his ancestor's evolution in the Cro-Magnon era. To these postmodern visionaries, the ultimate triumph of science is inevitable.

I personally believe that the zenith of this value system will face its Waterloo in the election year of 2008. The socialist federations of the United Nations – and the American scientists, artists and philosophers who agree with its ideology – will see a majority vote "no" to it for a third time. America's voters will elect another George W. Bush, who has clearly stated on several occasions that he opposes Terri's being taken off life support.

Second, I think it's worthwhile to bring different websites to your attention. I learned about this myself in a reference from Dawn Eden's blog. Now, I was probably the last person to learn about it - you're all probably wondering "where has Hadley been all these years?" I knew that Moriarty was quite outspoken, had left Law and Order and the country over disputes with Janet Reno over censorship - but the MSM had given me to believe that he was just something of a nutcase. Well, maybe he is - but people have said the same about me. One of the great things about joining the blogosphere is that been introduced to all kinds of new and interestig sites and articles that I really enjoy reading, and I hope you will too. I find Moriarty's writing provocative, usually right-on, and eminently quotable, as in this situation - one that encapsules many of the complaints about capitalism that I've been voicing in my Distributist series:

Even the conservative, spasmodically pro-life voice of business has supported Terri's husband. The costs alone, like those of sheltering convicted murderers, make life support counterproductive to the community. Therefore, the pro-capital punishment constituency will most likely welcome Terri's death. That she committed no crime is no more persuasive than a pro-choice woman's decision to abort her child for being an inconvenience to her lifestyle.

It sort of makes a weird kind of sense, doesn't it?

Well, not to me, but I'm a romantic. I believe that a human race without sentiment is worse than one with excessive sentimentality. The wheels of historical justice will eventually vindicate the intolerable pain that Terri's parents are now suffering.

Check this site out more often, especially some of their recent articles on Terri. I don't agree with them on everything - perhaps I'm not as staunch a capitalist and individualist as they are, and Moriarty's comment "the pro-capital punishment constituency will most likely welcome Terri's death," isn't right in my case, nor is it in many other cases. But as I said in my earlier post today, capital punishment is (or should be) an issue that people can debate and disagree about while maintaining a respectful, civil dialogue. Heck, as I suggested, I'd be more than willing to be convinced that the death penalty is unnecessary.

To conclude Moriarty's thoughts:

This will of course place the United States on the record as being for the heart of love and courage over the increasing obsession with the powers of human intelligence. The drama of Terri Schiavo will be a seminal chapter in America's Third Millennium History. That and the eventual overturning of an abomination devised by the Supreme Court – the Roe v. Wade decision of January 1973 – will mark an end to the intolerably deep inroads of an indifferent and scientifically tyrannical philosophy carved into an America that was originally founded upon our "inalienable right to life."

If Terri Schiavo isn't at the heart of the matter, then 1.5 million abortions in the United States each year have no more meaning than the death of one million Africans every year from starvation, ethnic cleansing and genocide, which the UN has neglected as indifferently as the Supreme Court rendered its decision to stop Terri Schiavo's heart.

MH - The Way of Suffering

The title of a very, very good column by Larry Kudlow at NRO. Kudlow, a Catholic convert and a man who has faced his own struggles over the years, is one of those few economists to grasp the subtle shades of life, that there is something to life beyond the raw numbers. Some economists may view Easter in economic terms, representing little more than lost revenue due to stores being closed, but Kudlow sees more to it than that. Doubtless being a convert has a little more than something to do with it.

I've been liking Kudlow more and more over the past few years, and never more so than in some of the things he's written regarding Terri. Read the whole thing, but here's an excerpt:

“Bid to Save Terri Schiavo Is All But Finished.” That was the Easter morning headline in the Washington Times. But she will ultimately be saved, either in this life or the next. As Father Neuhaus suggests in his exploration, Schiavo’s suffering is another example of those “who in their troubles find themselves, as they say, at the foot of the cross.” Haven’t we all been there? Isn’t suffering in pursuit of God’s will the exact center of religious life? Isn’t the life of faith all about steep costs and consequential losses on the road to greater wisdom and a better, more faithful life?

For those who understand, accept, and believe in this, Father [Richard] Neuhaus is certainly right when he says, “If what Christians say about Good Friday is true, then it is, quite simply, the truth about everything.”

This just points out to me what the real meaning of the Schiavo affair is. It's true that for the country one of the major impacts is in the area of judicial power. There are, as many pundits have pointed out, major contradictions involved, ones that can find people keeping strange and unusual allies. But for me, what this really does is point out the strange (or maybe not so strange) dichotomy in our culture regarding life and death. We fear death, and at the same time we crave it. How can this be? My thought is that in the end, it all boils down to time. If you accept that, the rest falls into place.

Time, and how to manage it, has become a multi-billion dollar industry. We never seem to have enough of it, and we do whatever we can to enjoy it. We undergo medical procedures to extend it, we seek cosmetic aids to ignore the effects of it, we flaunt lifestyles that deny it. No matter how old you are, you want to live as if you were twenty, thirty, fourty years younger. The great enemy of time is death, and we do everything we can do deny it. What we truly want is immortality.

But what if we can't enjoy time? We talk about "the quality of life," which really means "the quality of our time." And if we can't have it the way we want it, then we take our lives and go home - or in this case, to the grave. Then we choose death, as if to say "it's our way or no way at all."

For those who believe this, of course, they fail to realize that the only Way that really counts is His Way, and to that end we must cooperate with it as much as possible. This, as Kudlow points out, means embracing suffering - not running away from it - when it comes our way. Some fail to, or refuse to, understand this. But death is a part of life, like it or not, and to a great extent the way we face death tells a lot about the way we approach life. The quality of life means different things to different people, but for those that have done their part, however great or small, to assist in the killing of Terri Schiavo, there is one, and only one, definition for the quality of life. It is their definition, and it is that intolerance that we will be forced to live with in the months and years ahead.

MH - The Fallacy of "The Seamless Garment"

Well, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is at it again. They're now looking at that old chestnut of the 80s, the late Joseph Cardinal Bernadin's "Seamless Garment," that draws a kind of semi-moral equivalency between capital punishment and abortion.

"We cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing. We cannot defend life by taking life," Cardinal Theodore McCarrick told a news conference last week in Washington, D.C. You remember Cardinal McCarrick, of course. He's the one who gave such a, shall we say, creative interpretation of Cardinal Ratzinger's letter regarding denial of communion to pro-abortion Catholic politicians. One might be tempted to wonder if Cardinal McCarrick is accurately representing the USCCB now, except for the fact that the bishops have, in every area throughout the years from tax reform to calls for a nuclear freeze, made their viewpoints distressingly clear.

Proponents of the anti-death penalty policy cite, in part, a recent Zogby Poll showing that Catholics are moving away from support of the death penalty. "In past surveys," Zogby said, "Catholic support for the death penalty was as high as 68 percent. In our November survey, we found that less than half of the Catholic adults in our poll now support the use of the death penalty." Of course, one has to ask whether bishops are now planning to run the American church based on public opinion polls. In that case, they'd better be willing to question the church's stand on abortion and divorce as well.

But it would be too easy to sit here and take potshots at some of these death penalty opponents. Easy, and ultimately pointless, because there is a serious issue here, one that deserves to be taken seriously even if some of its supporters do not. A great many people oppose capital punishment for very legitimate reasons, and while I might disagree with them, I have the utmost respect for them and their opinions. Surely this is an area where people can still have respectful disagreements. And let me be the first to state that this will not be a scholarly analysis of capital punishment – what it really boils down to is looking at what the church teaches and asking whether or not the United States meets the criteria that makes capital punishment virtually unnecessary.

For many, the “Seamless Garment” must be quite tempting. It unites the strongest points of the liberal opposition to the death penalty, which is offset by their almost fanatical devotion to abortion on demand; and the conservative pro-life movement, which is compromised by their attachment to sometimes harsh economic policies.

In uniting the two, half from column L and half from column C as it were, they must feel they get the best of both worlds. By eliminating the extremes, so goes the thought, they have created a philosophy that, precisely because it irritates so many in each camp, must be a sound one.

The Catholic Church has traditionally recognized the legitimacy of capital punishment, but during the reign of JPII, church teaching has become increasingly anti-death penalty. Cardinal McCarrick cited this rationale, saying that the Pope and other Catholic leaders believe the state "should forego this right if it has other means to protect society." He said that's the case in the United States.

Does all this mean that Catholics are bound, in good conscience, to oppose capital punishment? First, as always, let's take a look at what the Catechism of the Catholic Church has to say:

2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."

In other words, while continuing to acknowledge that the state has the legal authority to put a prisoner to death, the church discourages the state from exercising this authority unless there is no other way to protect society - which, according to the CCC, is highly unlikely.

The Holy Father has driven this interpretation as part of his unending quest to reaffirm the dignity of the human individual. It should be noted that this is not an infallible declaration by the Holy Father - I don't know that it is even his interpretation of past teachings of the church. It’s his personal opinion. Of course, the opinions of the Pope count for a lot more than yours or mine - maybe ten or twelve times as much.

Why, then, do I appear to be disagreeing with him? Well, as learned as the Pope is, he is not an American, not familiar with the legal system in this country. And, notwithstanding Cardinal McCarrick, one has to ask whether it is in fact true that in the United States "cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically non-existent."

As a nation, we are reluctant to execute prisoners – those who think we’re trigger-happy should look at the ratio of executions to those on death row (according to the Department of Justice, 3,374 inmates were on death row in 2004, while only 59 were executed). And we should be reluctant when it comes to execution. Our legal system must be dedicated to ascertaining the guilt of the individual beyond a reasonable doubt – including automatic appeals and use of DNA and other technology. While the appeals system must be reformed and streamlined, there’s no question that we should be very, very sure of what we’re doing. Complete certainty, as is the case in all other walks of life, is impossible.

Some argue that executions cut short a life that could possibly be reformed while in prison. This may be true, although there’s no way to prove it. What we do know is that there are many cases of prisoners who have experienced a true conversion while awaiting execution. Impending death has a way of focusing the mind on what’s truly important – we’re familiar with stories of people suffering terminal illnesses who use the knowledge to put their spiritual house in order –make amends, set things straight, say what needs to be said while there is still time. Add to that the redemptive power of suffering (if encountered during that final journey) and one could argue that impending death becomes the great engine that powers conversion.

There are other pros and cons to the death penalty, but they are really tangential to our particular discussion. For the core of this argument relates to the ability of the state to secure some means of protecting society short of execution. And for that to be the case, the state must show both the means and the will to effect such a solution.

Is this the case? Are we really doing all that we can to keep society safe from homicidal criminals? This is not a rhetorical question, but one asked in true sincerity. I’m in full agreement with the Pope’s statement, provided that such a situation exists in the United States. Cardinal McCarrick and others say it does. I do not agree.

Too many times we put murderers behind bars for limited periods of time (in some states, the average sentence for murder is less than seven years). Overburdened penal systems are often forced to let prisoners out early in order to accommodate the increased flow. Murder victims such as Polly Klass, Dru Sjodin and Jessica Lunsford testify to the threat posed by released sex offenders. We've seen prisoners and prison guards terrorized and killed by inmates (and we should acknowledge that the dignity of man includes safety for those serving time in prison). And we know terrorists, like mob bosses before them, are often able to operate their organizations even from prison.

Faced with this, we must ask ourselves whether or not we truly have a situation in which "cases . . . are very rare, if practically non-existent." In fact, I would argue that we lack both the will and the means to enact a penal system engaged in "effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor." In other words, the elements that make the death penalty an excessive form of punishment – fitting the definition set forth by the CCC and by JPII – do not exist here.

Perhaps if we had the determination to do what it took - for example, to introduce mandatory life-without-parole sentences for certain criminals guilty of offenses such as murder, child molestation, and terrorist acts, to more closely screen prisoners up for parole, and to take every step to ensure that those in prison pose as little threat as possible to others - I might agree that the death penalty is not necessary. But until this happens, my conclusion is that in this country we have not yet reached the Holy Father’s goal of being able to protect society without recourse to the death penalty.

Rather than calling for an end to capital punishment, perhaps the bishops would be better served by calling for genuine creation of a system that might truly make capital punishment an unnecessary alternative.

MH - Reflections on the Triduum Just Past

Welcome back from your Easter break, everyone. Remember when schools actually called it that? At some point it transitioned to "Spring Vacation," and I guess now it's become "Spring Break," which we all know is just a polite term for unrestrained orgies. Oh well, that's progress.

We hope you all had a nice Easter. We had a rare burst of springtime here, with sun all weekend and temperatures in the 50s - perfect weather to remind us of the spring rebirth that is implicit in the story of the Resurrection.

We attended the Easter Vigil on Saturday night, marking the end to a typically dramatic, emotional Triduum at St. Agnes. It started on Holy Thursday with the Solumn Mass of the Lord's Supper, as I mentioned last Thursday night. For the final time before the Vigil, the organ is played and bells are rung during the Gloria, one of the most memorable moments of Holy Thursday. After Fr. Zuhlsdorf chanted "Gloria in excelsis Deo," the organ played for over a minute, a very sinister-sounding solo riff (I wish I knew what piece it came from), while the church bells peeled and the Sanctus bells were rung, clanging away unseen as if they were the bells preceeding the appearance of Marley in A Christmas Carol, before the schola chanted the remainder of the Gloria. It was a moment of indescribable drama. There was Fr. Zuhlsdorf's homily, the washing of the feet of six of the Altar Boys, the solumn procession with the Blessed Sacrament to the altar of repose, and the stripping of the altar. This merely set the stage for Good Friday.

What does one take away from Good Friday afternoon? The silent, solumn entrance; John's account of the Passion sung in Latin; the singing of the Improperia (Reproaches) during the Veneration of the Cross; and Allegri's Miserere sung during Communion, all as the sunshine of the late afternoon streamed in through the stained glass windows, and the dust particles danced in its beam as if they were remnants from so many Good Friday services through the years. Confessions were heard in the chapel downstairs, and there was something good about standing in the long lines in the silent room, watching the afternoon shadows lengthening, and being told by the priest that Christ died for us on this Good Friday afternoon so that our sins might be forgiven. Then, that evening, the final Stations of the Cross for Lent, and the opportunity to venerate relics of the True Cross.

I was struck by the Vigil Mass this year because we were still in March, still on Standard Time, and the church was totally dark when the small candles were lit at the beginning of the vigil, hundreds of pinpoints of light bobbing as if at sea, casting heat and light throughout the church. Fr. Zuhlsdorf sang the glorious Exsultet, the Litany of the Saints was chanted in Latin, the congregation renewed its baptismal vows (Fr. Altier reminded us to respond with conviction - "Let the Devil hear you!"), while the choir sang Josquin des Pres' Pange Lingua mass. The statues were unveiled, flowers adorned the altar and sanctuary.

Fr. Altier's homily was typically excellent, reminding us of the meaning of this night:

Therefore, Our Lord speaks to each one of us and says, You are the light of the world. He is the light of the world, and yet He tells each one of us that we are the light of the world. He also says, If the light is in you, then everything is bright; but if your light is darkness, how dark it is. On this night of the Resurrection, Our Lord has dispersed the darkness. He has broken through the chaos of death, and He has won for us the forgiveness of sins and eternal life. He has called each one of us then to choose life, to choose supernatural life, to reject sin and to live according to the grace of God given to us through the Holy Spirit, Who is the gift of the risen Christ. Each one of us baptized into Christ shares already in His Resurrection, and we are called to live in this world of darkness as the light of the world, to live holy lives, to live Christ-like lives, to allow the Holy Spirit to guide us, to inspire us, to fill us with His light and with His love. Even in this world, as all of the pressures surrounding us tell us that we are to give in, that we are to be like everyone else, that we are to sin, the Holy Spirit within us tells us that we are to rise above death and darkness, that we are to shine like a brilliant light, and that the life which is given to us through water and the Holy Spirit is to help us to reject death and to spring up to life everlasting.

And with that we arrive at the joy of Easter.

In a time when darkness seems to be increasing hourly, casting its shadow across our world, it is good for us to remember Who has the power to dispel the darkness, and how He expects us to share in spreading His light. The forces of darkness will keep trying to beat us down, to make us tired, to fill us with despair, to spread darkness within us. As Terri faces her death, as so many other things around us invite us to taste of that despair, let us call on the energies given us during the Triduum and let the love of Our Lord fill us, refresh us, prepare us once again to do battle in His name.

Many times we will win and sometimes we will lose, but we will always fight the good fight, run the good race, and know that Our Lord is there at the finish line, arms outstretched as they were on the Cross, waiting with His Divine Mercy, waiting for us.

MH & JH - Happy Easter

He'll be back on Sunday.

We'll be back on Monday.

MH - Falling Under the Good Friday Spell

"You see, that's not how it is. It is the tears of repentant sinners, that fall like holy dew today to moisten field and meadow; thus making them fertile. Now all creatures rejoice in visible signs of the Redeemer, to whom they dedicate their prayers. Since they cannot see Him on the Cross, they look up instead to man redeemed, who feels free from dread and the burden of sin because of God's loving sacrifice. The grass and flowers of the meadows notice that the foot of man does not trample them today, but that, as God, with heavenly patience and mercy, suffered for man, so mankind today in pious gratitude spares nature with gentle tread. Then all creatures give thanks, all that blooms and soon will fade, and nature now absolved from sin today enjoys its day of innocence." *

These words come from the Good Friday Music in Act III of Richard Wagner's final opera, 1882's Parsifal.

In 1858 Wagner wrote to Mathilde Wesendonk: "... if this suffering can have a purpose, it is simply to awaken a sense of fellow-suffering in man, who thereby absorbs the creature's defective existence and becomes the Redeemer of the world by recognizing the error of all existence. (This meaning will one day become clearer to you from the Good Friday morning scene in the third act of [Parsifal])."*

Parsifal was and remains one of Wagner's most controversial works, and also one of his most moving. (It's also, at an average running time of four-and-a-half hours - not including intermissions - one of the longest operas ever written.) And it's tempting to read too much into Parsifal. Tempting, and also dangerous. Although Wagner's references seem obviously to refer to Christ, others have said that they could apply to Buddist doctrine as well. In fact, if you read the libretto of the opera you'll notice that Parsifal himself speaks only of the Redeemer - in the famous Good Friday scene it is only Gurnemanz who mentions the name of God.

In addition, Wagner was, of course, a notorious anti-Semite, which makes Christian use of his words particularly dicey. And Wagner was never particularly accurate in his theology in the first place - he sees the Holy Grail as not only the vessel used by Jesus at the Last Supper, but also the receptacle for the Blood that flowed after He was pierced by the Spear. (The sacred Spear is also crucial to the plot of Parsifal.) Read this essay from the 2003 Met Opera broadcast of Parsifal for more on Wagner's confused theology.

On the other hand...

Some point to Wagner's use of Good Friday (rather than Easter) as the day of redemption as a further misunderstanding of Christianity. But here I think we may be onto something. As we have stated many times in these pages, Catholics have what is perhaps a unique insight into the nature and necessity of suffering. Wagner recognizes, even if it's only inadvertenty, that without Christ's sacrifice on Good Friday there can be no Easter Sunday. This is the purpose for which He was born: to suffer and die for our sins, so that in His Resurrection we might all be reborn into eternal life.

And with this it's perhaps time to cut to the chase. Although it may be impossible for us to ever know exactly what Wagner had it mind when he wrote Parsifal, the fact remains that Parsifal has always been associated with Easter. Most classical music radio stations play selections from it on Good Friday (usually an arrangement featuring the Prelude and Transformation Scene in Act I and the Good Friday music from Act III). When the Met stages it, it's done around Eastertime, with the radio broadcast on the Saturday before Palm Sunday and a performance on Good Friday itself. Whatever Wagner might have intended, the popular interpretation (such as it is) is that it is a Christian work.

And what a work. The music, some of Wagner's most stunning and lovely, emphasizes Alan Wagner's comment that "The contradictions melt away, transfigured, in the incredible beauty of his music." For those disposed to view it through a Christian lens, the symbolism and meaning are powerful and moving. For an opera there are unusually long stretches where there is no singing at all, just the "beauty of his music."

And the message is there: in the Act I commemoration of the Last Supper, and of Parsifal's sharing in the suffering of the Amfortas, ailing leader of the knights who serve as guardians of the Holy Grail (Parsifal feels in his heart the pain fron the wound in Amfortas' side, a wound that is the result of past sin, a wound that refuses to heal). In Act II, where the temptress Kundry attempts to seduce Parsifal into sin (as she had Amfortas) - first by an appeal to sensual pleasures with a kiss (the kiss of betrayal?), then by pity for the life she has led (having been cursed to eternal life for having mocked Christ on the Cross). In an echo of the Devil's tempting of Eve in the Garden ("your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."), Kundry tells Parsifal "If you are a redeemer, what evil stops you, from uniting with me for my salvation?" Parsifal resists Kundry's temptations and regains the Spear from the evil Klingsor. And in Act III, where after a search of many years (reflected in the slow, weary atmosphere of Wagner's music for the act's Prelude; music that you'd never hear at the beginning of a 4 1/2 hour opera), Parsifal relocates the knights of the Holy Grail, baptizes Kundry, and uses the Spear to heal the wound in the side of Amfortas, thus winning redemption both for Kundry (who finally can experience death, and therefore rest), and Amfortas (whose wound is healed by the relic of Christ's sacrifice).

As I said, one must be careful here. Christ is never mentioned by name - the description above is the Christian interpretation. But, as Fr. Richard John Neuhaus has said, "The Catholic sensibility, however, going back to the patristic era and its happy use of 'the spoils of Egypt,' is inclined to embracing truth wherever it is found." And Parsifal is far from what one would describe as "the spoils of Egypt." If God is present in everything, then it's surely not hard to believe that the truth of His sacrifice is present in Parsifal as well, even if Wagner himself was confused about it.

In a letter to King Ludwig, Wagner wrote,

"Today is Good Friday again! - O, blessed day! Most deeply portentous day in the world! Day of redemption! God's suffering! Who can grasp the enormity of it? And yet, this same ineffable mystery - is it not the most familiar of mankind's secrets? God, the Creator, - he must remain totally unintelligible to the world: - God, the loving teacher, is dearly beloved, but not understood:- but the God who suffers, - His name is inscribed in our hearts in letters of fire; all the obstinacy of existence is washed away by our immense pain at seeing God suffering! The teaching which we could not comprehend, it now affects us: God is within us, - the world has been overcome! Who created it? An idle question! Who overcame it? God within our hearts, - God whom we comprehend1 in the deepest anguish of fellow-suffering!"

1(It might not be coindidental that Wagner makes a play on begreifen, to take in, and ergreifen, to grasp, which suggests Luther's translation of the first chapter of St. John's Gospel:Und das Licht scheint in der Finsternis, und die Finsternis hat's nicht ergriffen. [John 1:5])*

Ultimately, writing about Parsifal is one thing. Experiencing it is another. Wagner isn't to everyone's liking, of course (Mark Twain famously said that Wagner wasn't as bad as he sounded), but to experience the beauty and emotion present in the music he composed and the poetry he wrote for Parsifal is surely worth taking a chance. Watching the Met's version on DVD last Saturday night, one can't help but be stirred by the music and moved by the lyrics. Parsifal tells the rest of the story begun in other Easter productions, making it the perfect conclusion to our pre-Easter film festival.

In the dark days that we all know lie ahead, we can look back at the words with which I began this post: "the tears of repentant sinners, that fall like holy dew today to moisten field and meadow; [will make] them fertile. Now all creatures rejoice in visible signs of the Redeemer, to whom they dedicate their prayers . . . as God, with heavenly patience and mercy, suffered for man, so mankind today in pious gratitude spares nature with gentle tread. Then all creatures give thanks, all that blooms and soon will fade, and nature now absolved from sin today enjoys its day of innocence."

Let this be our meditation for Good Friday, as we reflect on the death of Christ on the Cross. And as we think of Terri Schiavo, and Pope John Paul II, and all our other friends, loved ones, and relatives in need. Tread softly and pray unceasingly, in the days and nights to come.


*This English translation and commentary are copyright © 2001 by Derrick Everett. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. See this link for more.

MH - Holy Thursday

Fr. Zuhlsdorf was the celebrant at tonight's Mass. His homily was a reminder that tonight is the anniversary of both the institution of the Eucharist through the Mass, and the creation of Holy Orders. Without the Church, there is no Priest. Without the Priest, there is no Eucharist.

He also quoted from the Holy Father's Holy Thursday letter to priests:

In priestly spirituality, this expectation must be lived out through pastoral charity, which impels us to live in the midst of God's People, so as to direct their path and to nourish their hope. This task requires from the priest an interior attitude similar to that of the Apostle Paul: "Forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on towards the goal'' (Phil 3:13-14). The priest is someone who, despite the passing of years, continues to radiate youthfulness, spreading it almost "contagiously" among those he meets along the way. His secret lies in his ``passion'' for Christ. As Saint Paul said: "For me, to live is Christ" (Phil 1:21).

As the Holy Father said, "Vocations will certainly not be lacking if our manner of life is truly priestly, if we become more holy, more joyful, more impassioned in the exercise of our ministry. A priest 'won' by Christ (cf. Phil 3:12) more easily 'wins' others, so that they too decide to set out on the same adventure."

Finally, Fr. Zuhlsdorf spoke to the 30 altar boys who were part of tonight's procession. St. Agnes is famous around the world for the beauty of our liturgy, and our altar boys are one major reason why. People see the responsbility they carry during the Mass, and the reverance with which they go about it. Fr. Zuhlsdorf reminded them that they were all an inspiration and a reminder to the priests of St. Agnes, and that the priests in return would continue to serve them and the parishioners of St. Agnes in their spiritual needs. Since St. Agnes has produced 25 priests in the last 25 years and currently has 11 young men in the Seminary, they too receive inspiration from serving at Mass.

Now the church is darkened. Confessions are being heard until midnight. Christ is reserved in the side altar, and the high altar and sanctuary have been stripped. It is a lonely place without Him there, and it will be lonelier still tomorrow. Don't let Him be alone - join Him tomorrow on His Way of the Cross.

MH - Our Assignment As Part of Holy Week

Hadleyblogger Mike emails with some comments that we all can take to heart:

You know I think about faith, and I'm struck by something . . . We should be [praying for Michael Schiavo]. The hardest part about being a Christian is in praying for him. I'm sure you'll find a better way of linking this to the Holy Week, so I'll leave that up to you.

Actually, Mike puts it pretty well. If left entirely to me, I'd probably make a shambles of what needs to be said, but fortunately Our Lord left us with the words:

"You have heard that it was said, `You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. [Matthew 5:43-48]

Most of you are already probably doing this. It's something that I've always had trouble with, and maybe this Holy Week gives me an opportunity to work harder on it. If Michael is the evil man that many have portrayed him as, we must, as Christians, pray for his conversion. If he is not, however - if he sincerely thinks he's doing the right thing - all the more reason to pray for this misguided man, that the truth of God comes to him, a truth that can never contradict itself. After all, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. And we must also pray for those who wish the pro-life movement malice, who (as Peggy Noonan put it earlier today) are in love with death. While death is not to be feared, neither should it be embrased as an alternative to life.

The tragedy of this whole situation is that so many lives are being hurt by it. Our hope is in the knowledge that God can bring good from any situation. Let us finally pray for the grace and the wisdom to accept the good that He will reveal from this.

MH - Happening Here and Now

Dawn Eden shares an email from a reader who finds the truth about Terri in the words of Chesterton. GKC's description of the crowd that gathered around the Cross on Good Friday:

The mob went along with the Sadducees and the Pharisees, the philosophers and the moralists. It went along with the imperial magistrates and the sacred priests, the scribes and the soldiers, that the one universal human spirit might suffer a universal condemnation; that there might be one deep, unanimous chorus of approval and harmony when Man was rejected of men.

We wonder how that could have happened, just as we ask how an event like the Holocaust could have happened in our "enlightened" age, while at the same time America is engaged in a holocaust of its own against its unborn, its elderly, and its disabled. But the events of the last week are indeed playing themselves out in this country, and will continue to do so long after Terri Schiavo's life has ended.

Well, perhaps "long after" is a little bit of a stretch. It may not take that long. The concluding comments echo what I've been thinking, but this says it with a much greater impact:

But America today is like Rome was then - the best and highest accomplishment of human beings, and yet it's still not enough. It's failing the test, and in the same way that Rome failed. If 'the confident sanity of the conquerors of the world' is not a fair description of America, I don't know what is, and yet this is where it has brought us. We know what came after Rome; what can come after America, I don't know, but I do think that THIS America is not one that can resist the avalanche that's just started under its feet.

I've quoted Jefferson before (and, by the way, what must the Founders think of all this?), and I'll do it again: "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever." After Pearl Harbor Admiral Yamamoto said (or at least is credited with saying) "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve." How ironic that we are now in Japan's shoes, awaiting the terrible resolve of God's awakened justice.

MH - In Love With Death

The title of another dead-on column by Peggy Noonan. Is there another writer around who can cut to the heart of the matter and see what's really important in the way she can? Here are some excerpts, but by all means read the whole column.

God made the world or he didn't.

God made you or he didn't.

If he did, your little human life is, and has been, touched by the divine. If this is true, it would be true of all humans, not only some. And so--again, if it is true--each human life is precious, of infinite value, worthy of great respect.

Most--not all, but probably most--of those who support Terri Schiavo's right to live believe the above. This explains their passion and emotionalism. They believe they are fighting for an invaluable and irreplaceable human life.

[...]

Everyone who has written in defense of Mrs. Schiavo's right to live has received e-mail blasts full of attacks that appear to have been dictated by the unstable and typed by the unhinged. On Democratic Underground they crowed about having "kicked the sh-- out of the fascists." On Tuesday James Carville's face was swept with a sneer so convulsive you could see his gums as he damned the Republicans trying to help Mrs. Schiavo. It would have seemed demonic if he weren't a buffoon.

Why are they so committed to this woman's death?

They seem to have fallen half in love with death.

[...]

I do not understand why people who want to save the whales (so do I) find campaigns to save humans so much less arresting. I do not understand their lack of passion. But the save-the-whales people are somehow rarely the stop-abortion-please people.

The PETA people, who say they are committed to ending cruelty to animals, seem disinterested in the fact of late-term abortion, which is a cruel procedure performed on a human.

I do not understand why the don't-drill-in-Alaska-and-destroy-its-prime-beauty people do not join forces with the don't-end-a-life-that-holds-within-it-beauty people.

I do not understand why those who want a freeze on all death penalty cases in order to review each of them in light of DNA testing--an act of justice and compassion toward those who have been found guilty of crimes in a court of law--are uninterested in giving every last chance and every last test to a woman whom no one has ever accused of anything.

[...]

Our children have been reared in the age of abortion, and are coming of age in a time when seemingly respectable people are enthusiastic for euthanasia. It cannot be good for our children, and the world they will make, that they are given this new lesson that human life is not precious, not touched by the divine, not of infinite value.

Once you "know" that--that human life is not so special after all--then everything is possible, and none of it is good. When a society comes to believe that human life is not inherently worth living, it is a slippery slope to the gas chamber. You wind up on a low road that twists past Columbine and leads toward Auschwitz. Today that road runs through Pinellas Park, Fla.

MH - An End to Democracy?

Catholics in the Public Square reminds us of the provocative 1996 First Things symposium on "The End of Democracy? - The Judicial Usurpation of Politics." As Christopher tells us,

"The stated purpose of the symposium was not to advocate 'noncompliance to resistance to civil disobedience to morally justified revolution,' but to question the future prospects of a country host to 'a growing alienation of millions of Americans from a government they do not recognize as theirs . . . an erosion of moral adherence to this political system' and 'the displacement of a constitutional order by a regime that does not have, will not obtain, and cannot command the consent of the people.' "

This symposium was much-discussed at the time, and in light of the reprehensible court rulings regarding Terri, this seems a timely reminder. Excerpt:

The government of the United States of America no longer governs by the consent of the governed. With respect to the American people, the judiciary has in effect declared that the most important questions about how we ought to order our life together are outside the purview of "things of their knowledge." Not that judges necessarily claim greater knowledge; they simply claim, and exercise, the power to decide. The citizens of this democratic republic are deemed to lack the competence for self-government. . . .

Take some time and read the whole discussion here. If one suspects, as I do, that some type of Divine Retribution may be in the offing, then one might also ask if it will be even harder to convince Christians that this is a country worth fighting for.

Doctor Who and Symbols of Christ

By Mitchell

My friend Badda-Blogger emailed me this essay (when he told me about his ideas I replied that he had to write it up and send it to me), which I am delighted to share with all of you. You might remember Badda - he's the one who came up with the provocative analysis that found links between Frosty the Snowman and the Resurrection of Christ. Well, he's done it again, this time with a series that ranks as an all-time favorite of us both, the British sci-fi classic Doctor Who. After reading this you might be prompted to check the show out. Conversely, you might think we're both crazy. Be that as it may, I thought it was time for a change of pace from our previous posts. Enjoy!

*****

Springtime typically conjures up images of rebirth… the end of winter and the return of green grass, not to mention the rediscovery of our driveways. The Resurrection of Jesus plays heavily in the Catholic faith, of course. Now we see another return… that is, if you are a science fiction television fan. The long running, but long missed, British series Doctor Who comes back to television this Saturday (at least in Great Britain) after an absence of almost nine years.

For anyone who knows nothing of Doctor Who, it started in November of 1963 (the first episode was aired the day after the assassination of John Kennedy) as an adventure in time travel and other worlds. Stories alternated between historical settings like the Aztecs or the French Revolution and science fiction-styled adventures. Each type of story would hopefully entertain families and spark an interest in historical events and science. Over the course of 26 years the main character, the Doctor, remained fairly mysterious although the series revealed him to be an alien from the future. He is only known as the Doctor, he comes from the planet Gallifrey, and he is part of a class of Gallifreans known as Time Lords who can change their appearance(regenerate) after severe injuries or accidents. Time Lords are pledged to non-interference (because of their vast powers), but the Doctor can not resist meddling in the affairs of the downtrodden… especially those on Earth. Unfortunately, the series was cancelled after its 26th season. (For more information about Doctor Who just do a web search, look on the BBC website, or visit Outpost Gallifrey (at www.gallifreyone.com, or check the Doctor Who link on the sideboard for more details than you probably care to know.)

In 1996, the Doctor returned to TV screens in the form of a one-off movie put together by the BBC, Fox, and Universal in the hopes that after seven yeras, American and British audiences were ready for a new series. For one reason or another, the series was not to be. However, the movie did succeed in rekindling interest that spawned more stories of the time-traveling Doctor in books and audio recordings.

You probably wonder why anyone would even think of comparing a fictitious do-gooder with Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Firstly, I’m a Catholic who grew up with the Doctor so I’m very excited to see his triumphant return. Secondly, the comparison has already been made in the television movie.

Don’t get the wrong idea. No one really thinks Christ is a time-traveling alien, nor does anyone believes the Doctor brings redemption for our souls. Some of our greatest heroes can be modeled after the Savior. Consider the similar comparison to the film superhero Superman. Really, it’s all for fun, to honor our heroes, and to honor Christ. Some fans will grumble that I’m justa Red State, Bible-thumping, Jebuz worshiper desperate to force my beliefs into my surroundings. I respond with: whatEVER. ;) (Such folks are often easily annoyed… just tell them you will pray for them and they get unhinged.)

The first possible allegory in the film is the Doctor’s regeneration. The Old Doctor (Sylvester McCoy) has died on an operating table and has been locked up in the morgue’s fridge. His face twists into his new form (Paul McGann) as he regenerates... the regeneration is obviously symbolic of The Resurrection. Shortly after, he breaks out of the room while wearing his shroud - symbolic of Christ’s tomb. The Doctor walks into a storm-tossed locker room where he sees his (new and unfamiliar) image in a few mirrors... he collapses on his knees and shouts, "Who... am... I?" Rephrase that into “I am who?”...hmmm, we've probably heard that somewhere before. (I understand this may beforcing a square peg into a round hole, but you can see why I might want to force-fit this example.) The shot eventually pulls out to reveal the New Doctor with his arms outstretched in a manner similar to his crucifixion.

To play with numbers for a moment, note that Time Lords can regenerate twelve times... a welcome number to Christians as it evokes the apostles. This means that Time Lords have thirteen incarnations... Christ and the apostles makes thirteen. (Just for reference, the Old Doctor was the seventh body and the New Doctor is the eighth.)

Eventually, the Doctor meets the medical doctor who operated on him, Grace Holloway (make of her name what you will). The Doctor tries to convince Grace that he is a Time Lord, comes from the planet Gallifrey, has two hearts, and has come back from the dead. Grace states that only children would believe someone can come back from the dead. (Of course, Christ often said you had to have the faith of a child.) To her surprise, the Doctor confronts her with the fact that she became a doctor because of her childhood dream that she could hold back death. How would he know that if he apparently only just met her? Perhaps the Doctor learned a little something about Dr. Holloway in his travels... that's believable in Doctor Who, I guess. However, such knowledge (and similar knowledge of other characters in the movie) is also symbolic of divine omnipotence. (Later in the movie, the Doctor tells a young security guard that he shouldn't answer the easiest looking essay question on his upcoming college literature exams, and he tells a young friend, Chang Lee, to avoid San Francisco on New Year's Eve in 2000.)

The next Christ reference comes when the Doctor's arch-enemy, the Master, plots against the Doctor in his time travel machine called the TARDIS. The Master, like the Doctor, is a Time Lord from Gallifrey, but he is evil - he no longer can regenerate like the Doctor, and is forced to possess and take over a human body to cheat death. (Read into that what you will.) When the Doctor mentions the Master to Grace, she specifically asks, "Is he like the Devil?" She asks in disbelief though, as if she's humoring a madman.

(Of course, I remember a friend refer to C.S.Lewis' comments on whether Jesus was the Christ. Said Lewis, he's either lying, crazy, or telling the truth. If I remember correctly, the Doctor never appears to lie in this movie.)

Back to the next reference. The Master has snuck into the Doctor’s TARDIS to spy on the Doctor with the Eye of Harmony (see below). He sees the Doctor's eye and retinal pattern, which looks like a human eye. The Master says this means the Doctor must be half-human. What does this suggest? Well, Christ is both God and man. The reference with the Doctor is that he is both human and Gallifrean, a mortal and a Time Lord. While alien and very different from us, he is also like us, and shows genuine affection for Earth and humans. In a sense, he loves us and frequently struggles to protect us and keep the world safe. The Doctor even admits to someone (with Grace nearby) that his is half-human on his mother's side. Well, of course he is. If we use the Doctor as a reference to the Christ, he simply must have a human mother ... Mary, Mother of Jesus is the obvious answer.

When the Master meddles with the TARDIS and the Eye of Harmony, strange things begin to occur, such as the Doctor being able to walk through a large glass window. This is hardly walking on water, but I thought it might be worth mentioning. Further evidence of weird goings-on: news reports of catastrophic weather such as record-breaking tide levels, flood warnings, and snow in Hawaii. Of course, we’re familiar with disastrous floods in the Bible.

In the last third of the film, the Master captures the Doctor after taking over Grace's will. He orders Grace to attach a bizarre looking metal device to the Doctor's head so his eyes will be forced open. The thing fits around his head with spikes (or nails) securing it in place... of course, it looks like the Crown of Thorns.

Obviously the Doctor gets free, Grace shakes off the Master's possession, and Chang Lee discovers the Master's evil nature. After all this, the Master kills both Lee and Grace. Eventually, the Master is sucked into the Eye of Harmony and is defeated (and probably dies). With the power of the Eye of Harmony, the Doctor brings both Lee and Grace back to life... just like Lazarus.

Let me go out on a limb for a minute. One element of the film's plot involves a colossal power source within the Doctor's TARDIS, the time machine he travels in. The power source is called the Eye of Harmony... which may not be symbolic of anything, especially considering the name was used in the series many years ago. However, I wonder if something is up.

The Eye of Harmony may only be opened by a human, and neither the Doctor nor the Master can do it since they are both Time Lords. Since they're humans, both Grace and Chang Lee can open the Eye, and they're forced by the Master to do it. The Master hopes to use the open Eye to steal the Doctor's remaining regenerations, after which he will force the Doctor to look into the Eye. If that happens, the Doctor says, his soul will be destroyed. Not only that, if the Eye isn't closed Earth will be sucked through it... which must mean the end of the world.

Could the Eye of Harmony represent... I don't know, salvation, redemption, forgiveness, heaven, the end times? It must be something even the Master (a Time Lord, and thus greater than mortals) cannot attain on his own. He's trying to steal the Doctor's lives... perhaps he's stealing souls, and he can only do this with the Eye of Harmony, which he can only open with the aid of humans. Is there some kind of connection between Satan corrupting man to steal souls, to prevent souls from entering Heaven, to keep souls from triumphantly earning a place in the presence of God?

I'm probably reading a little too much into the Eye of Harmony, or if I'm not I'm probably getting needlessly complicated. However, am I reading too much into the references to Christ? I think not. In fact, the story was set in the days before January 1st, 2000... a date some speculated would see the Second Coming of the Christ since it was a rollover year. (Of course, the new millennium actually occurred on January 1st, 2001... but who's counting?)

The film might have more references, but I haven't really gone over it with a fine tooth comb. In addition, since so many Doctor Who fans (like many sci-fi types) seem to bristle at the thought of any Christ reference, my online fan resources are a little limited. You might very well think that Doctor Who fans (and sci-fi fans in general) cannot tolerate Christianity... I couldn't possibly comment. ;) Actually, I was fairly surprised how many conservative, Republican, religious, and/or Christian fans there are out on the web, but I was also fairly surprised at how many contrarians there are, too. (To be fair, most of them are pretty well behaved and have a good sense of humor.)

Happy Easter to everyone... and welcome back to the Doctor! It's been a long time since May 1996.

MH - Making the World Safe For...

Many bloggers have picked up this story, but I thought I'd link to Veritatis because he has the picture to go along with it.

All I can say is that it's nice to know that the crime rate in Florida is so low that the police have nothing better to do than arrest kids trying to get water to Terri. It reminds me of the story Fr. Benedict Groeschel told about being arrested during a protest at an abortion mill and then strip searched by police afterward.

I still think that people are sometimes too generous with the terms "Police State" and "Nazi" (although not "Commie," because God knows there are enough of them around), but the fact is there are a great number of people - some in blue uniforms, some in black robes - who cannot be trusted with authority and power of any kind.


UPDATE: More pics from Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam. I suppose these officers could make the Nuremburg defense, that they're just following orders. Then again, I'm sure the Romans said the same thing after the Crucifixion.

MH - Check Out These Sites

There has been some excellent writing on Terri's situation in the blogosphere - much better than I'm capable of doing. A lot of it comes from the blogs we link to on our sidebar (which I trust you're checking out from time to time):

Insight Scoop has a very good summary of new and recent articles.

Veritatis Splendor has done terrific writing all through the crisis, picking up a lot of interesting articles including a summary of the prayer vigil held here in St. Paul last night.

GetReligion discusses this morning's ruling, including a sharp critique of the actions of the two judges voting against Terri.

And Blogs For Terri contains the latest news and action items.

One continues to marvel at the blogosphere and how it has forever changed the face of news reporting. You have to wonder if this kind of effort would have been possible even five years ago...

MH - What Comes Next

Yesterday I mentioned that we have to be careful to avoid bitterness and despair should Terri die of starvation. That doesn't mean that we do nothing, however. Blogodoxy has an excellent suggestion:

If what seems inevitable happens, I can only hope the political backlash will be sustained and clear. Judicial impeachments for contempt of Congress would be a good start. And "term limits" (via elections) would be good for the hypocrites who are now crying "states rights" but claim federalism when it comes to killing unborn babies or determining whether same sex marriages are a constitutional right.

Wake up, folks. The bread and circuses come at a price.

MH - Appeal Denied, Starvation Continues

I'm sure you already knew this. The Schindlers will continue to appeal. We'll all continue to pray. Andy McCarthy at NRO (who has written exceptionally well on this) had an excellent post on the tactics used by the opposition:

But then it actually happens ... slowly. You're powerless to stop it, and ... you find your life goes on. There are kids and jobs and triumphs and tragedies and everyday just-getting-by. An atrocity becomes yet another awful thing going on in the world. After a day, or maybe two, of initial flabbergast, we're talking again about social security reform, China, North Korea, Hezbollah, etc. A woman's snail-like, gradual torture goes from savagery to just one of those sad facts of life. As is the case with other depravities once believed unthinkable, it coarsens us. We slowly, and however reluctantly, accept it. We accept it. The New York Times no doubt soon "progresses" from something like "terminating life by starvation," to "the dignity of death by starvation," to "the medical procedure that opponents refer to as starvation." And so the culture of life slides a little more. The culture of death gains a firmer foothold.

Why drag it out, McCarthy wonders? Just cut off her air. "But no judge, even in Florida, would ever have had the nerve in Terri's case to permit 'the medical procedure that opponents refer to as asphyxiation.' Too crude. Too quick. Too obviously murder of a vulnerable innocent. Brazen, instant savagery might wake us from our slumber. For the culture of death, better that we sleep."

As Christ reminds us, we must all stay awake...

MH - Easter-Themed Movies

Every year during Lent, just as we do during Advent, the Hadleys spend the last couple of weekends watching seasonal movies. Whereas Christmas movies tend to emphasize the secular nature of the holiday (even though in many of them a spiritual component lurks somewhere under the surface - Miracle on 34th Street, It's a Wonderful Life, A Christmas Carol, We're No Angels, Holiday Inn, Going My Way, etc.), with Easter movies there's no avoiding the central theme of the season.

This year's choices were no exception - Ben-Hur, The Robe, King of Kings, and Parsifal. I'll deal with Parsifal in a separate post, but for the first time this year I was struck by a commonality that ran through the other three movies. Perhaps it was because of our double viewing of Passion of the Christ last year, but even though I've seen these other movies several times, this was the first time I'd noticed that there is virtually no discussion as to the underlying cause of the Crucifixion.

In Ben-Hur, this is probably no surprise. After all, the true story is Judah Ben-Hur's (Charlton Heston) struggle to survive slavery, revenge himself against Messala (Stephen Boyd), and find his imprisoned mother and sister. The Passion, although it plays a pivotal role inthe movie, takes place mostly in the background. We're convinced of the cruelity of the Romans (except for Ben-Hur's adopted father Quintus Arrius, played magnificently and movingly by Jack Hawkins) and it goes without saying that they bear the ultimate responsibility for Jesus' death - but we don't see any of the political machinations that accompany it. This was the first year that we'd seen Ben-Hur on DVD, and because we're so familiar with the movie we decided to watch it with the commentary track, provided by Heston. The DVD also features a Making Of documentary, and it is through these extras that we learn how the overt religious elements of the movie were "toned down" in comparison to the numerous stage versions and the silent version that had been made some years before. This was news to me, because I thought the religious message of the Crucifixion was clear. We see Jesus on the Cross (from the back; director William Wyler chose not to show the face of the actor playing Him, Claude Heater), we see the storm raging at the moment of His death, His blood running down the Cross and mixing with the water on the ground, the same water that cleanses and heals Ben-Hur's leperous mother and sister. Doesn't seem to get more clear-cut than that. I suppose what they meant was that the movie dealt with this more subtly than in previous religious epics, which, truth be told, could get a little over-the-top.

However, while Ben-Hur tells the story of this Jewish family's life, King of Kings tells the story of one Jew in particular - Jesus. (There's a wonderful side story that Heston tells in his autobiography about appearing as John the Baptist in The Greatest Story Ever Told, which we didn't watch this year. Told by his agent that it was the lead part, he replied that he could guarantee that John would not be the lead role in any movie named The Greatest Story Ever Told.) Jeffrey Hunter does a pretty good job playing Jesus, although he tends to be overshadowed by Miklos Rozsa's dazzling score. There's always been some snickering about Hunter's "blue-eyed Jesus," but for my money he plays the part convincingly. There's also an intriguing secondary story about Barabbas (a scenery-chewing Harry Guardino) and Judas (a reserved Rip Torn), and the idea that Judas' motive for betraying Jesus was to force Him to become the earthly king in order to save Himself - not realizing until it's too late that you don't get very far by forcing the Savior's hand. This story does suggest the political in-fighting and the resentment by radical Jews when they realized Jesus wasn't intending to establish His Kingdom by force. However, the focus is again on the Romans and their suspicions that Jesus is a troublemaker. He worries Pilate (Hurd Hatfield), a man who himself has designs on becoming Caesar. Pilate's spy Lucius (Ron Randell), a Centurian who treats Jesus and John with compassion in sporadic meetings with them, and who comes eventually to believe in Him, reports back on the ferment Jesus is creating with His preaching. Lucius is eventually appointed a kind of "public defender" in Jesus' trial, since Jesus won't speak on His own behalf. Christ's Way of the Cross, needless to say, pales a bit in comparison to the version seen in Passion.

Finally we have The Robe, more of a love story than anything else; the story of the Roman soldier Marcellus Gallio (Richard Burton) responsible for the Crucifixion of Jesus. He also wins Christ's Robe when they cast lots for it, but winds up going mad when confronted with the Robe. His love Diana (Jean Simmons) convinces Tiberius to give mad Marcellus a break, and Tiberius orders Marcellus back to the Holy Land to find and destroy the Robe, which was taken by Marcellus' runaway slave Demetrius (Victor Mature). The thought is that destroying the Robe will break it's mysterious spell and return Marcellus to health. Well, you probably know the rest of the story: Marcellus is befriended by Christians and finds out they aren't so bad after all, he is reunited with Demetrius (who in the meantime has joined forces with Peter) and is cured by the Robe, and winds up converting to Christianity himself. He then winds up being captured by the evil Caligula (Jay Robinson), who gives Marcellus a choice: deny Christ and live, or worship Him and die. Marcellus chooses Christ, Diana chooses Marcellus and Christ, and both of them walk a path to the firing squad that becomes a stroll to the Pearly Gates. It's easy to make fun of this movie, the first ever made in widescreen, but it is a visually rich film, with music that alternates between overbearing and sensitive, some fine action scenes, and as one critic says, the story of the conversion of Marcellus can be inspiring. What is missing, however, glaring - the role the Jews played in the death of Christ. From the beginning it is the Romans who tracked Christ down, who wanted to rid the kingdom of this troublemaker, and Pilate is assigned the sole responsibility for what happens.

It's kind of hard to know what to make of all this. Some will, no doubt, point out that Jews wielded power in the Hollywood studios of that era; and this may well be true, although one risks the spectre of anti-Semeticism by raising it. Perhaps the movies of the '50s and '60s were already shying away from assigning blame to the Jews for the death of Jesus, which the Catholic Church would formally declare in the '60s. Even today, as we read the story of the Passion in the Masses of Palm Sunday and Good Friday, many Missals remind us that the Church does not hold the Jewish people as a race responsible for the Crucifixion. Pilate, after all, could have done more than wash his hands, couldn't he? (I wonder if Pilate is the patron saint, as it were, of the modern American judiciary?) Ultimately this entire observation of mine is probably more interesting than it is important.

It does, however, illuminate the controversy that engulfed Passion of the Christ last year. If all you know of religion is what you see in the movies, you're probably woefully uneducated as to the entire story of the death of Christ. If you consider yourself primarily a member of a special interest group, you undoubtedly see finger-pointing everywhere you look. I was never a member of the "blame the Jews" movement, if indeed there is a widespread one among reasonable people, but watching Passion and then watching this year's Easter parade of movies did demonstrate one thing to me - that the Golden Age of movies, like so many other golden ages, isn't always all it's cracked up to be. These great old movies of the past, and they were great ones, still didn't give you the entire story. Which, hopefully, is one reason why serious filmmakers still make movies.

MH - And So It Goes...

And so it goes. The judge ruled against Terri's parents this morning, which I assume most of you already know. They're appealing, and while we don't know what the result of that will be, one must wonder if we're being asked to prepare for the inevitable. For there has been an air of inevitability about it all, for me at least, and I ask myself if this pessimism is a contradiction of my faith.

One can only gasp at what Terri's parents have gone through, for the experience has been so tiring for those of us following it at a distance. We have not been involved in it personally, as so many volunteers and bloggers have, and if we are tired we can only imagine how it must affect them. They are performing heroically, and we hope their rewards will be great.

So what happens now? Well, there is always hope - we must never forget that. Continue to pray, continue to work, continue to fight. And yet I can't help but ask myself the question looming in the outer edges of my mind, as it moves nearer and nearer the center. What if?

If, then, we are being readied for the worst, we must realize what Our Lord asks of us. No bitterness, no hatred, no sense of despair. If Terri dies, we will pray that she will soon join her Creator where she will know no more tears, no more suffering, no more pain. For her husband, the judges, and those others who joined in making her death possible we will pray that this event, in some way known only to God, will change their hearts and convert their actions. We know God's promise that even those workers who enter at the eleventh hour will share in the rewards of Heaven, and so we hold out hope for those who at this time may seem to us hopeless. All the while we marvel and give thanks that God's storehouse of mercy is so much stronger and more vast than our own.

The news does seem dismal. Cruxnews.com carries this report of fresh fears for the Pope's health, and we think to ourselves, "Oh, great. Just what we need." I recognize a certain selfishness in my own thoughts - the idea that this news is bad for me - before remembering that I am hardly affected in the same way that the Schindlers are, or the Holy Father. Donne reminds us that "No man is an island," and I suppose that explains why bad news about those close to us, or those whom we have come to care about, affects us to the extent that it does.

However, this being Holy Week, we must try to draw strength from the message of redemption that Christ offers us. No matter what happens to Terri, no matter what happens to JPII, we pray that we will someday be joined with them in Heaven, where they might thank us for the prayers we offered for them, and where no doubt we will discover the times they prayed for us. Is that too sentimental an idea? I hope not, because I'm not really one given to sentimentality. If it is, though, then I'll chalk it up to my inability to adequately translate the hope that is at the center of God's message to us.

Continue to trust in that hope. Pray for Terri and her family, pray for JPII, and pray for the grace and peace that only God can give us, that no matter what the outcome, we will not let the forces of the Evil One infect us with despair and hatred. Tears, yes; sorrow, certainly. But hope, always.

MH - "Err on the Side of Life"

...is the theme of today's Lileks column, which manages the herculean feat of linking Terri, Elian Gonzalez, and Star Trek, and makes it work. His main target: the knee-jerk lefties who find something to support in every liberal cause, and something to oppose in every situation that even smacks of "life." Says Lileks, "Some people wouldn’t care at all if she died, unless she had been the sole occupant of a hospital in Baghdad leveled by an errant Tomahawk; then you’d see her face in every protest march."

What I find particularly interesting is his tie-in to classic Star Trek; specifically, the episode that features the crippled former Enterprise captain, Pike:

I remember being horrified by him as a kid, because it seemed the perfect smothering claustrophobia nightmare: unable to exist outside a motorized iron lung, face scarred to immobility, unable to communicate beyond a pathetic beep. But it never occurred to us why he was still alive, why someone hadn’t slipped him the needle or put a pillow over his face in the dark of night. That didn’t seem like an option. No, you suffered, and you suffered like this.

Of course, we all know what happened, right? An elaborate plan was set in motion to steal the flagship of the fleet, proceed to a restricted location one could not visit without pain of execution (if I remember correctly, going to Talos IV was the sole capital crime left on the books – which meant that the death penalty had been eliminated, presumably as a sign of enlightenment) and return the crippled man to the land of the giant throbby-head-vein librarians so he could live out his life in his head, free from physical constraints.

[...]

But wouldn’t it have been easier for Spock just to come back and kill Pike for his own good? Wouldn’t it have been logical?

What's so interesting (to me) about this line of thought is that it points out how addled our times have become. Here we are in the '60s, the free-loving, authority-challenging, anything-goes decade, talking about Star Trek, Gene Roddenberry's bastion of secular humanism (and before anyone writes to complain, I loved the original Star Trek, humanism and all); yet when it comes to the idea that the distant, enlightened future would permit mercy killing - well, apparently that was unthinkable even to them. As Lileks says, it just wasn't "logical."

Lileks presents a balanced approach - he can understand those who might, in the name of compassion, sincerely think that death is the best for Terri, but he has nothing but contempt for "those who hear 'err on the side of life' and automatically bristle, because they hear the voice of someone who, damn their black and God-addled brain, once sent $10 to a politician who opposed parental notification law that did not have a judicial review." His conclusion about these "God-addled" types? "You may not always agree with that sort of person. You may have no need for them. But you never think you have need of any chocks until you're in the truck, and you realize it's rolling down the hill. Backwards."

Isn't that the slippery slope we're all afraid of?

MH - The Political Significance of Terri Schiavo

Much has been written about this, especially in the last few days since Congress got involved, including some very good analysis of this at NRO. Moral implications aside (and I don't mean to minimize this; it is, in fact, the most important aspect of the case - just not the center point of this post), the significance lies in such a dramatic example of judicial usurpation of the rights of Americans. This is definitely not what the Founders had in mind.

Now, most of us have been seeing this coming for a long, long time. In that sense, this is nothing new - just, as I mentioned above, a most dramatic example. But I think we're coming to a crossroads here in America. Is this going to continue to be a republican democracy - or perhaps I should ask whether we're going to retain at least the illusion that we function under this kind of government - or are we going to acknowledge what this country is in fact becoming, a liberal oligarchy ruled by judges who operate under no restraints by the public.

Mark Levin puts it dead-on in this NRO post this morning:

The right to live, or more specifically, the right not to be killed, is a fundamental right. And it's a right recognized in our founding document, the Declaration of Independence. So ingrained in our society is the notion of life, that the 8th Amendment prohibits "cruel and usual punishment" (even short of death) and the 14th Amendment prohibits states from depriving any person of life without due process of law. This has nothing to do with federalism, unless you ignore the 8th and 14th Amendments. (Unlike the Left, that contorts the 14th Amendment, I'm recognizing its literal meaning.)

[...]

We must not allow the Left to define the terms of this debate. It is willing to make almost any argument to protect the supremacy of the courts. And even though Congress here is instructing the federal courts to review the case, the Left objects to any congressional exercise of constitutional authority over the judiciary. As Rep. Jim Moran (Dem, VA) said yesterday, "The judiciary has spoken."

Somehow in this country, we got the idea that the courts were gods, and their words sacrosanct. It is true that the judiciary was created as a balance against the legislative and executive branches, but that those branches in turn would have some balance over the judiciary as well. It's called the system of Checks and Balances, for those of you who remember your high school civics - or at least did back when they taught those kinds of things, before schools became dominated by multicultural sensitivity training.

There has been much discussion in recent months, a great deal of it arising from the Iraq War, as to whether or not some Catholic Americans are guilty of putting their country before their Church. I have asked myself many times how much allegiance I can give America considering her dark descent into wickedness. My own opinions on the war are mixed and not worth going into in the context of this post. However, I do believe that our Catholic theology can inform us in our position on what the government can and must do for Terri Schiavo. And, regardless of our feelings regarding our country, we must not fail to look at Terri's case in context of what it means for American jurisprudence, and the future of America's people. If America is to remain, in any sense, a "last, best hope" - if it is to remain worth saving - we must act now, and we must not be afraid to do so as Americans, regardless of what our religious convictions are. I don't believe it shows any disrespect to the moral implications of Terri's situtation to say that there are national implications as well, and that we should care about what they are.

Courts exist to interpret the legality of laws, not to create them. For some time they've been creating them, often where no legal basis exists, and usually with hostility to religion - we've seen it advance from prayer in schools to abortion to display of Nativity scenes and the Ten Commandments to homosexual marriage to euthenasia to Terri Schiavo. This is long past a slippery slope - it's an avalanche. Which is why Terri's case is so important. It's already beyond asking where this is going to stop. We're now at the point where we ask "with who's life will it stop?"

MH - The Schiavo Primary Documents

These are important documents and well worth reading for a complete overview of what's happened. Visit this post at NRO for the rundown.

MH & JH - Holy Week Posts...

...may be somewhat more sporadic than usual, and (barring emergency) virtually non-existent during the Triduum, except for a Good Friday meditation that will go up on Thursday or Friday.

Just wanted to let you know, in case you start to miss us!

MH - We All Should Be Saying This...

"All kinds of people will now say that this is a 'sad' case. This is not a 'sad' case. This is an evil case. This is an outrageous case. This is a time for anger—productive anger."

Ed Jordan, writing on MediaCulpa about the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. MediaCulpa is an excellent source for news and action updates on Terri.

Many thanks to the always-excellent Dawn Patrol for this quote, as well as this very interesting story from Judge Robert Going. Dawn's excerpt:

"It was much easier to keep my mouth shut and pray for the unborn than to take the risk of attempting to influence society against a culture of death. I’ve got a wife and four kids to support."

After that, how can you not read the whole thing? Or pray?

MH - Peggy Noonan on Terri Schiavo

Read what she has to say here. As I've said before, I could put almost every one of her columns under the category "Wish I'd Written That." Excerpt:

At the heart of the case at this point is a question: Is Terri Schiavo brain-dead? That is, is remedy, healing, physiologically impossible?

No. Oddly enough anyone who sees the film and tape of her can see that her brain tells her lungs to breathe, that she can open her eyes, that she seems to respond at times and to some degree to her family. She can laugh. (I heard it this morning on the news. It's a childlike chuckle.) In the language of computers she appears not to be a broken hard drive but a computer in deep hibernation. She looks like one of those coma cases that wind up in the news because the patient, for no clear reason, snaps to and returns to life and says, "Is it 1983? Is there still McDonald's? Can I have a burger?"

Again, life is mysterious. Medicine is full of happenings and events that leave brilliant doctors scratching their heads.

But in the end, it comes down to this: Why kill her? What is gained? What is good about it? Ronald Reagan used to say, in the early days of the abortion debate, when people would argue that the fetus may not really be a person, he'd say, "Well, if you come across a paper bag in the gutter and it seems something's in it and you don't know if it's alive, you don't kick it, do you?" No, you don't.

So Congress: don't kick it. Let her live. Hard cases make bad law, but let her live. Precedents can begin to cascade, special pleas can become a flood, but let her live. Because she's human, and you're human.

JH - Whither Thou Goest?

Illness and family duties have prevented me from writing for quite some time, but I had to weigh in on this.

The Court has ruled that Terri Schiavo's feeding tube be removed, and so it has. I am overcome with emotion, which often gets in the way of a clear thought. However, all I can think is that there is some reason for this and some lesson to be learned here. God grant us the wisdom to discover it.

The only thing left to do that perhaps we haven't done enough of is pray for our enemies, for surely The Husband and The Court are the enemies of those who hold life dear. If Jesus can say from the Cross, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do", can we do less? Pray for Terri, pray for her parents and those who have struggled to keep her alive, but pray too for those who are in most need of God's mercy.

MH - Reflections for the Sixth Friday in Lent

The Fourth Sorrowful Mystery: The Way of the Cross

Over the past few weeks we've discussed our role in the Passion of Jesus, our responsibility for the pain He suffered. Now, with Palm Sunday this weekend, it seems appropriate to consider the role His Passion plays in our lives.

The Way of the Cross is filled with what might appear to be setbacks for Christ. He falls several times; he becomes so weak that Simon is conscripted to carry the Cross for Him. He is mocked, spat upon, beaten by the soldiers. One of the more memorable scenes in Mel Gibson's Passion is one where Simon reassures Jesus to hold on just a little while longer; soon He will arrive at His place of execution, which after all this will almost be a relief. Imagine that - Crucifixion will be a relief.

And yet, as we know, He could have stopped it at any time.

And yet, as we know, He didn't.

The Way of the Cross is illustrated in more detail in the Stations of the Cross, the 14 stages of Christ's journey. In illuminating this mystery, let's consider three of those Stations, representing the three falls of Christ on His journey. From these falls, we should carry the message of persistence. Facing death, Jesus instead chose to get up each time, to continue. This is what He asks of us as well.

Faced with sin, faced with failure, it would be so easy for us to give in to despair, as did Judas. The Devil whispers in our ear, encouraging us to take this path. You've already sinned, already screwed up, he says. Who could love you now? You're beyond help, what difference does it make what you do? Go ahead, one more sin won't hurt. Wouldn't he like us to believe that? And when we're down and out, it's pretty easy to latch on to.

This is the message of Jesus: don't give up. Despite all our hopes, our prayers, our best intentions, we are fallible human beings, given to sin, likely to fall again. Rather than following the example of Judas, let's look to Peter as our hope. After all, what could be worse than denying Christ, not once but three times? And yet Peter did not give up. He believed in the message of Our Lord, endured his trials and anguishes (one legend says he wept so deeply that his tears wore grooves in his face; another that for the rest of his life he would wake up each morning at the same time, the time that he denied Jesus), carried them with him and learned from them. But the important part is that he didn't cease believing, didn't stop trying to carry the message of Jesus.

Therefore, let's take that as our inspiration this week. As we welcome Christ into the city on Palm Sunday, knowing what comes next and realizing the part we play in it, let's be encouraged by His own example that no matter how bleak things seem, we have to get up and keep going. Many of us may be faced with this in the wake of Terri Schiavo, as we wonder what the next week will bring. It would be so easy to give in and give up, to let despair overcome us. Don't do it. Keep praying, keep hoping, keep trying.

Jesus' love and forgiveness are eternal. Whether we be the first workers in the field or the last, His rewards are there for anyone, there for the asking. The Fourth Sorrowful Mystery teaches us to continue to try, to get up when we fall, to trust in His love and His promises. Let us link our falls to His, in the secure knowledge that by doing so, He will link His Resurrection with us.

MH - Wish I'd Written That...

"The Treloar Building was, and is, on Olive Street, near Sixth, on the west side. The sidewalk in front of it had been built of black and white rubber blocks. They were taking them up now to give to the government, and a hatless pale man with a face like a building superintendent was watching the work and looking as if it was breaking his heart."

Raymond Chandler, The Lady in the Lake

MH - St. Patrick Missed This One, Too...

An old story, but I thought I'd go with the flow on "Green Day,"...

A British theatre company has renamed a stage version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame in order to avoid offending anyone who suffers from the disability.

Derbyshire-based Oddsocks Production company has renamed their version of Victor Hugo's classic novel The Bellringer of Notre Dame.

MH - Happy St. Paddy's Day

Sure and it's St. Paddy's Day, and a happy one to you, laddie.

Unless, that is, you go to this school, where today is officially known as "Green Day."

Looks to me as if the good Saint missed a few snakes here and there...

MH - I'm So Hip I Have Trouble Seeing Over My Pelvis

Hadleyblogger Peter directs our attention to this piece from Michelle Malkin on the P.C. rewrite of the NIV translation of the Bible (examples: Out: "When God created Man, he made him in the likeness of God."In: "When God created human beings, he made them in the likeness of God." Out: "Saints" (deemed "too ecclesiastical"). In: "God's chosen people." Out: "with child. "In: pregnant.") "Amen" is also out, apparently, replaced with "Word."

What caught Peter's eye, and ours, was Michelle's link to Molten Thought's "hip" translation of the 10 Commandments:

1. I am the cool mack daddy of the dope hype flow. Give me props and mad respect.
2. Don't be kneeling for some bling bling.
3. Don't be throwing my name around, be it J. Hovah or Yah Diddy.
4. Yo, Sunday is "funday", ya dig?
5. Respect your moms, your pops, or whoever it was raised you, unless they whack.
6. Thou shalt not bust a cap in someone's ass.
7. Don't be running around on people like they don't know.
8. No five-finger discounts.
9. Don't front.
10. If your neighbor's got a fly crib or a pimped-out set of wheels, that's they bidness, not yours.

Very funny, but I'm afraid someone's going to think it's a good idea! Peter adds: "A guy from work said each of the commandments should be punctuated with 'b***h'. He's right... it just sounds right."

(And another 500 points to anyone who can identify the source of this post's title!)

MH - Good Thing She Wasn't Married to Michael Schiavo

Relapsed Catholic with a link to an article about Kate Adamson, a woman in a "vegetative state" whose feeding tube was "at one point removed for a full eight days before being reinserted due to the intervention of her husband (also a competent lawyer)." She's now talking about her experience.

"Terri Schiavo, although not nearly as severely disabled as Adamson once appeared to be, is slotted to have her feeding tube removed at 1:00 pm this Friday." (Emphasis mine.)

Need we say more?

MH - Libertarians and Social Conservatism

My late and much-missed friend Duane, who was my treasurer and close advisor during my disasterous state legislative campaign of a few years ago, was one of the nation's foremost experts on ethanol. He was dead set against it.

However, I'm not writing about ethanol today; I'm writing about Libertarians.

What brings these two points together is that Duane once addressed the state Libertarian Party convention on the subject of ethanol, and why the government should not be subsidizing ethanol production. The Libertarians had a great deal of appeal for Duane; he truly was one who felt that "no government intervention" was a good start. The few political disagreements we had were generally about the role of government as a reflection of societal mores - I felt that sometimes the government was obligated to pass laws that reflected those mores, even if the laws themselves weren't totally unenforceable. Drug laws are a good example - conservatives with libertarian leanings, such as Buckley, argue that laws against drugs don't prevent them from being abused, and in fact lead to a black market that does society even more harm. I'll acknowledge that there's truth to that arguement - outlawing drugs certainly isn't going to make them go away entirely - but my counterarguement was that a government that legalized drug use was making a tacit statement about the moral values of the society which it represented.

(Nowadays, perhaps drug legalization would accurately reflect our society's values, but be that as it may, I still think it's a bad idea.)

The point is that law isn't just on the books for enforcement; it also tells us about ourselves - what we value, what we don't. I think the only area of this arguement where Duane agreed with me was abortion; being a good Catholic, he felt that abortion was one instance where the government should get involved. It troubled his sense of consistency, though, to make an exception in that one area.

The reason I bring this up is that recently there were two good articles on Libertarians and Conservatives. The first, from Jeremy Lott at GetReligion, discusses the sometimes tenuous connection between the two groups, and asks whether there's a divorce in the movement's future. In his post Lott warns against "dividing voters into economic conservatives and social conservatives," something that I've started to do in my discussions of Distributism; therefore, I don't know if I completely agree with him.

However, implicit in his arguement (I think) is one that I used to make when I was out on the stump: that bad economic policy often results in conditions that cause the ire of social conservatives. For example, many (if not most) social conservatives agree that one of the reasons for the disintegration of the family is the welfare policy that essentially replaces the father with the government as the primary breadwinner in the family, thus rendering the male (in his mind) as dispensible. Relieved of his burdens of supporting the family, he no longer has any incentive to stick around once he's impregnated his inamorata. Social conservatives, therefore, find it in their own best interest to be economic conservatives as well.

The split usually comes when economic conservatives take the position of being social moderates or liberals; this brings me to the other post, courtesy of Dawn Eden, which argues that "the nature of libertarian philosophy invites strong arguments against abortion." (Emphasis mine.) Dawn links to this very interesting argument from Dr. Joseph S. Fulda, entitled "Abortion: Is Pro-Life a Libertarian Position?" Among his points: "It used to be understood that the laws of nature were not subject to legislative repeal or voiding by the courts and that natural results flowing from voluntary actions are in no meaningful sense 'imposed.' "

This is a very interesting, nuanced argument, one that you don't usually see. Which is one of the great things about the Internet and the blogosphere - it brings information to light, and to people who wouldn't previously have been exposed to them. Read both of these pieces and let them simmer in your mind for awhile.

MH - I Just Don't Know What To Say..

...So I'll post the story.