The Pro-Choice Ethic of a Faithful Roman Catholic: A Reflection by Kate Mroz.
Tag Archives: Catholic church
DON'T PUSH HUMPTY DUMPTY OFF THE WALL by Louise Annarino
DON’T PUSH HUMPTY DUMPTY OFF THE WALL
Louise Annarino
June 25, 2012
Democratic republics in the West did not emerge in full blossom overnight; nor will they in the East. The seeds of power within people must be planted in good soil and be kept moist despite periods of drought. Those who feed the country’s growth are ever in danger of being choked by weeds. Egypt’s journey, and that of other nations seeking some form of democratic republic, is our own.
As we watch the Egyptian military generals write and rewrite laws to secure their power base in the face of shared power with a president and parliament not of their choosing, let us recall the first parliaments in England which were made up exclusively of the privileged few, heirs to the original land barons granted fiefs by their king for military service to protect and defend his crown, and more importantly, his crown jewels. The king was loath to part with his landholdings which generated his wealth. The barons agreed to supply a percentage of crops, minerals, forest, game and resources to the king in exchange for permission to act as lord over the serfs who were attached to the land, and to supply troops whenever called upon to do so by the king. In this way, both the king and his barons grew excessively wealthy. Sound familiar?
In 1215 King John agreed to the Magna Carta, the great charter, which gave legal rights to the Barons and Earls and mandated that the king listen to them and follow their advice. Before the Magna Carta the king called a parliament at his whim with no legal obligation to follow the barons’ advice. The Magna Carta granted no rights to the serfs; but, merely became a tool of the landed gentry (who had personal armies supporting them) to control the king in order to protect their own interests. Sound familiar?
In 1265, following a war between Henry III and Simon De Montfort, De Montfort briefly established a parliament which also included burgesses, representatives from each county,city and town until Edward I, who killed De Montfort in battle, called is first parliament in 1275 which included churchmen,two knights from each county, and two commoners from each town ( the house of burgesses). Since 1327 parliament set the pattern we know today: House of Lords, House of Commons, Monarch.
It took another hundred years to establish that Parliament’s House of Commons controlled granting money raised through taxation to the king (usually to wage war); and wrote statutes creating the law of the land, replacing the writ to the king for favor system of an earlier day.
Overthrowing the leaders of countries does not necessarily mean more power to the people. It took great Britain several hundred years and a civil war to do so. The United States, copied Great Britain’s lead, replacing the monarch with a president. The House of Lords became our Senate; the House of Commons our House of Representatives. There are those who pressured newly-elected President George Washington to accept the appellation Your Majesty. He insisted on Mister, in a new nation where all men are considered equal. And so we say, Mr. President when addressing him.
The U.S. shortened Great Britain’s time-line: 1776 – Declaration of Independence, 1789 – Constitution and first 10 Amendments ratified, 1789 – Judiciaries Act passed, 1803 – Marbury v. Madison. Hopefully, emerging democracies can shorten the time it takes to become nations of law and not men, and avoid civil war. Building a strong middle class will help.
The industrial revolution which began in the 1500’s with the guild movement solidified in 1760-1850. It is no coincidence that the movement to end serfdom occurred on the same time frame. Prior to industrialization in England, land was the primary source of wealth. “The landed aristocracy held enormous powers [through] the feudal system. However, a new source of great wealth grew from the Industrial Revolution, that which was derived from the ownership of factories and machinery. Those who invested in factories and machinery cannot be identified as belonging to any single class of people (landed aristocracy, industrialists, merchants). Their backgrounds were quite diverse, yet they had one thing in common: the daring to seize the opportunity to invest in new ventures. It was these capitalists who gave the necessary impetus to the speedy growth of the Industrial Revolution.”1
In the United States, the Industrial Revolution made the North economically stronger than the South, which barely maintained a landed gentry system on the backs of slave labor and that of poor white sharecroppers. The bloody rise of labor unions prevented this quasi feudal-serf system from taking root in the North. Despite fighting a Civil War to end slavery, and the efforts of labor unions, we still see vestiges of the old feudal system within our economic institutions, policies and practices both north and south. Since the election of our first African-American president those differences in how we choose to govern ourselves have become more overt. Ohio and Wisconsin, as well as every other state,thanks to ALEC, are fighting to protect unions, not just to protect the unions but to protect all workers from being reduced, once again, to serfdom. 2
In China, Thailand, Guam, Africa and all over the globe multi-national corporations are locking in workers for excessively-long shifts, with little or no pay. Human trafficking in workers, slave or forced labor, is on the rise world-wide in every imaginable industry including my favorite – chocolate. 3
What is the connection here? It is that human beings seek power over their own lives. Money is power, so they seek money. The reason taxes are a big deal to both Tea Party Republicans and Liberal Progressives, The US Chamber of Commerce and the churches, Wall Street banks and non-profit organizations, Democratic and Republican parties, the upper class-middle class- and poor is because money buys power. Money bought the King. Money bought the Corporations. Money bought the politicians. We all want money because we all value power. Why? Power brings freedom: the freedom from want, the freedom of choice over need, the freedom of association, the freedom to say no just because we want to do so. If we truly believe we are all entitled to be free, then we must also believe we are all entitled to enough money to feel power over our own lives.
When we are without money for too long we feel powerless as a result. It is this feeling of being powerless which brings out our racism, sexism, homophobia etc. Those who feel powerless resent others who seem to be acquiring power. Hidden in our psyche is the racist belief that an African-American has no business being so powerful when white men now feel so powerless. That is the crux of this election. Even Roman Catholic bishops, losing esteem and power over their flocks due to their misogynist attitude toward women and their cover-up of pedophilia within their ranks are fighting for power by attacking President Obama. Even Christian church leaders accustomed to financial power and preaching its attainment as a Gospel truth, which fell apart in the recession, are attacking President Obama. They have no qualms viciously attacking him, trying to knock him off his game. Unfortunately, his game is governing this country we all love.
What can we do? We can stop attacking people who want power, who want money, who want to feel safe; who cannot feel truly free without these things. We all want these things. We all want freedom.
We can stop attacking each other lest we all end up “Humpty Dumpty”. 4 Despite British and American love of freedom, and each country’s Civil Wars to establish equality among all its citizens and clearly unified governance, neither would suggest civil war as a positive step. We can learn from these past divisive periods. History does not have to repeat itself around the globe, nor within our own borders. We can stop being so afraid that we needlessly try to knock one another off the wall. We can recognize that there is enough wealth to share so that all feel powerful and free.
We celebrate freedom in this country without understanding its roots. No banker, no corporate executive, no shareholder, no priest nor bishop, no Tea Bagger, no liberal, no politician, no judge, no citizen will feel free until they feel financially secure. This was the beauty of a strong middle class; it made everyone feel free. It was an imaginable state of being for the poorest citizen aspiring to move higher through education and hard work; and for the richest executive who fell from grace, a safe place to land. Without a middle class, no American feels free.Not the wealthiest, not the poorest, and not the middle class.
To America and to the world a message of freedom: Build and protect the common man’s wealth, the middle class. The BRITISH COMMONWEALTH is a not a fluke. American economic success since the Civil War is not a fluke. Stop seeking to be excessively wealthy; instead, seek to build wealth within the middle class, a commonwealth within and among nations. With commonwealth comes common power. With such a sense of power comes a sense of freedom and peace. The Eurozone is struggling with this concept as I write.
Look at what Britain accomplished. Look at what the U.S. accomplished. Those lessons will serve us well. this is what President Obama has been trying to remind us. Destroying the middle class destroys our commonwealth, pushes Humpty Dumpty off the wall; and, neither all the king’s horses nor all the king’s men can put us back together again. Life is too fragile for such nonsense.
1. http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1981/2/81.02.06.x.html
2.http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed
3.http://www1.american.edu/ted/chocolate-slave.htm “Presently, about 700,000 children and women are trafficked around the world annually. The UN says that profits for this trafficking amount to approximately $7 billion a year (Anti-Slavery International).”
4.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumpty “In 1648 Colchester was a walled town with a castle and several churches and was protected by the city wall. The story given was that a large cannon, which the website claimed was colloquially called Humpty Dumpty, was strategically placed on the wall. A shot from a Parliamentary cannon succeeded in damaging the wall beneath Humpty Dumpty which caused the cannon to tumble to the ground. The Royalists, or Cavaliers, ‘all the King’s men’ attempted to raise Humpty Dumpty on to another part of the wall, but because the cannon was so heavy ‘All the King’s horses and all the King’s men couldn’t put Humpty together again’. In his 2008 book Pop Goes the Weasel: The Secret Meanings of Nursery Rhymes author Albert Jack claimed that there were two other verses supporting this claim. Elsewhere he claimed to have found them in an “old dusty library, [in] an even older book”,but did not state what the book was or where it was found. It has been pointed out that the two additional verses are not in the style of the seventeenth century, or the existing rhyme, and that they do not fit with the earliest printed version of the rhyme, which do not mention horses and men.”
Filed under POLITICS
FEAR OF DEATH: The Politics of Fear and Loathing
FEAR OF DEATH: the Politics of Fear and Loathing
Louise Annarino
March 21, 2012
Few among us do not fear death. So much so, that most of us refuse to discuss it, nor even think about it. My 2d. grade Catholic catechism instructed me that God made me to show His goodness and to make me happy with Him in heaven. This told me 2 things: life was good, and heaven was good. But, I knew I had to die to get to heaven. I knew I was made to live, then to die, then to live again. Does it make dying any easier to contemplate I shall live again, or still, after I die? Not really. This is merely a theory, a tenet of faith, after all. Who really knows?
One thing I do know; death is not pretty. I have sat near the bedsides of my dying parents and friends. Their physical and emotional suffering, physical deterioration, sense of helplessness, utter dependence on others, and questioning why any of it is necessary is heartbreaking. I struggled to be faithfully present for them, to keep a smile on my face, to offer a gentle touch of personal care, to remain hopeful. I felt terror that I might have to stare death in the face, that my grief might overwhelm the loving relationship we shared, that I could cause physical or emotional pain. And I felt guilt.
I felt guilt that I would continue to live, that I enjoyed my free time, and that I planned for my future. Most of all, I felt guilt because I was relieved I was not the one who was dying. That is the secret we all keep to ourselves. We keep quiet about death because we rationalize that if we avoid thinking or talking about it, it will not happen; not to us. We act as though we are immortal, totally in charge of our world and our lives. We fear death. We have given it a power of its own. In reality, it belongs to us. It became ours the moment we were born. When we run from death we are running from ourselves.
What if an entire culture were facing death? First, we must answer the question, “What is death?” A simple answer might be : the end of life; or, perhaps, a transition from one life or energy form to another. What we really fear is the disintegration of self, the inability to be who we are at our core. The death of our body does not frighten us so much as the death of our soul-personality-inner being. Our essence, the “I” we feel at our deepest level, is immortal, never-ending, never-changing. Truly, we are made in the image of God, for these attributes are those we normally assign to God. We are god-like, on the way to becoming one with God. What we fear is the loss of our personhood, our individuality, the name we call ourselves, our personal power to be us. So even the thought of going to heaven to be one with God is a very scary proposition. We want to maintain our identity, our uniqueness, our control. We don’t even want to give it up to be one with God.
So, if a culture were facing disintegration; if it had to constantly adjust to the attempted merger with identities unlike itself, who might threaten its uniqueness and control…would it be afraid? Would it want to avoid any change to its identity? Would it want to persist in its uniqueness? Would it fear the “other”, no matter how good or god-like the other is? Would it be too afraid to talk about its fear? Would it be angry whenever someone else brought up related subjects. Would it fear a loss of control? Would it fear a disintegration of self ? Can a culture die? What happens when it does?
When I listen to the tea party, Republican leaders, and Republican presidential candidates attack President Obama I hear the fear of death; the death of an ideology, a political party. When I see what appears to be a Sanford,Florida police cover-up of the murder of Travyon Martin; and, when I listen to the phone tapes of his killer, witnesses etc. I hear the fear of death, the death of racial superiority. When I listen to Joe Arpaio, Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona discuss his need to control immigrants, I hear the fear of death; the death of white “good ole’ boy” culture that is “as American as motherhood and apple pie”. When I hear Rick Santorum denounce science and man-made climate change, I hear the fear of death; the death of religious domination of thought. When I tabulate the efforts to deny women access to birth control, reproductive freedom, and abortion rights I see the fear of death; the death of control by men over women. When I hear Governors such as Wisconsin’s Walker and Ohio’s Kasich attack labor unions, regulation of Wall Street and corporations, I hear the fear of death; the death of moneyed interests’ absolute control of wealth. When I hear FOX News and other media sources ignore facts, twist facts, create facts and outright lie I hear the fear of death; the death of media control of information.
What if we admit we will die? What if we admit our “culture” will die? I submit that once we accept death we can get on with living. But so long as we continue to live in denial we must live in fear. I am not afraid of dying. Either I will transition, or I won’t; but, I can do nothing to stop the system. It is an evolutionary scheme I am part of by reason of my birth. And, I am just ornery enough to believe my personality is immortal. I will go on and on and on. I have just as much confidence in my country, my nation, my American culture. It is a culture prepared for change, ready to evolve, eager to accept the “Other”. America is a country which transforms itself into something ever-new. It is this alchemy of spirit which makes us a strong nation. We take the base metal of so many different ethnicities, religions, and ideologies and turn them into gold. This does not make me afraid; it makes me hopeful. It makes me proud. President Obama, despite what the fearful “birthers” would have us believe, is the quintessential American.
Christian liberals marvel at the fear expressed by fundamentalist Christians, fundamentalist Muslims, and fundamentalist Jews. One thing all religions have in common is a story to resolve our fear of death. Perhaps, resolving the fear of death will allow us to enjoy an America where a civil conversation is possible, and we don’t need to lie to one another or ourselves. Now that would be heaven on earth.
Filed under POLITICS
A MAN'S WORLD BUT A WOMAN'S HEAVEN
A MAN’S WORLD BUT A WOMAN’S HEAVEN
Louise Annarino
February 24, 2012
“It’s a man’s world but a woman’s heaven,” Sister Robertine, Vice Principal and teacher of Latin would tell us girls as she took on the uncomfortable task of teaching girls’ religion class our senior year. It was clear she found comfort in such an idea. I had noticed her on many occasions staring down the Principal, Fr. MacFarlane, arms akimbo, the rosary beads hanging from her wide black belt shaking with passion. It was she who would tell me, “I’ll speak to Father about it” when I complained about a school policy or procedure I believed unfair to us girls. Later, when Father altered his position, I knew whom to thank; although, he never acknowledged Sister’s role in the matter. I wondered why he was called “father”, but she was called “sister”. Was she not his equal? Should she not be called “mother”?
Sr. Canisia was a master of power plays. She would stomp about the classroom shouting “Maozeedung!” as she stalked us from behind, trying to teach us world history. When she became utterly exasperated she slammed her fist against the blackboard, then picked up her pace and stomped about, stopping to push aside a desk to wake up a bored student. One such day she suddenly heard footsteps on the stairs. Since Father’s office was directly beneath the classroom, she listened for those footsteps. We all did. She rushed to her desk, put a finger to her mouth and said quietly, “NOT ONE WORD!”
Father strode into the classroom without knocking on the closed door, eyebrows and voice raised he asked, “What is going on here? We are trying to get some work done downstairs!” Her head hanging low Sister meekly replied, “I can’t do a thing with these heathens today, Father. They are simply uncontrollable. SIgh.” As Father began his lecture, Sister looked over the class, her glaze hardened against any potential traitors who would challenge her version of events. None dared. Father left, humphing and harrumphing. Students resumed breathing; and Sister smiled in triumph. She had pulled one over on him. She noticed my deepening grin and her eyes began to twinkle, recognizing a comrade in arms.
As the male caretakers of morality allow themselves to be used by the Republican Party to distract voters from the true sins of the world – poverty, joblessness, lack of health care, racism, sexism, homophobia, destruction of the environment – I think about those nuns who demonstrated feminism in action to teenage Catholic school girls. Their only comfort was a belief heaven awaited them. I wanted that heaven on earth for women, as it existed for on earth for men. I was unwilling to wait until after my death for equality.
Every nun in our high school had a Ph.D. or was working on a Ph.D. Yet, the only fields then open to women were nursing, teaching or secretarial work. A few were librarians or social workers. They had no other comfort than a belief the future would be better. And that belief fueled the girls whom they taught. We became lawyers, doctors, bankers, plumbers, carpenters, engineers, astronauts, and politicians. Heaven became possible on earth. But, not easy, never easy.
The male domination of the world continued. Men “allowed” us a few slots, and continued to believe in their natural right to dominate us. They refused to change the structures, policies and systems which met their needs and supported their success. The needs of women, especially, those with children, required a change in policies, structures and systems which men fought at every turn. In fact, without readily available birth control, most women could never have taken the stage alongside men. There is no need to rehash what we have each experienced for ourselves – women’s struggles to succeed in a “man’s world”. Those who do, do so because of the support of strong men who are not threatened by women’s equality, and with the support of other women. Women have little trouble admitting to ourselves that we cannot do it alone. We are genetically and chemically programmed to work in tandem with those around us, building communities of support within our families and within the larger family of man. We are strong supporters of the 99%.
It is no mystery that the male morality police have been seeking to stop our access to birth control as a means of restricting our options for escape from their dominance and control. They do not like our insistence on assuring the welfare of human beings as they seek wealth and power around the globe. Women cry out against wars. Women cry out against hunger,poverty,racism, homophobia,environmental degradation. They see the connection between such sins and the lack of a possible heaven on earth for anyone else.They cry out to protect their children,and every woman’s child. Face it; we women get in men’s way, and they have had enough! They are angry because they think that the more we have the less they can get. We expect them to share their toys; they want to take their marbles and go home.
Well, women have had enough, more than enough. Women are careful with their anger, realizing the possible harm which could come to their beloved husbands, sons and grandsons;most of whom gave up male despotism decades ago. Women tread lightly.
But, women tread their way to the polls. Women vote. The 2012 election is vital at the local, county, state and federal level. Do we want anti-science climate change deniers on our school boards? Do we want right to work laws which lower wages for all workers while busting unions enacted in our state house? Do we want to protect insurance company profits by returning to days when a pre-existing condition effectively denied you coverage by electing congresspersons who would dismantle Obamacare?
Do we want to live in communities across the United States which would approve Jim Crow laws, restrict to right to vote, deny women access to birth control, demonize immigrants and assure the fulfillment heaven on earth for white men? Or, do we want equal opportunity for all? Do we want the promise of a future heaven on earth because we support every single person’s right to pursue happiness? We cannot elect those who tell us only the 1% have the know-how, the innate ability, and the wisdom to allow us to participate in their heaven. Don’t we really want our own heaven on earth? What arrogance to “allow” us what is our right!
Vote for President Obama, whose message of hope is not just for America’s sons, but for its daughters as well. Vote for President Obama, whose message of hope is not just for African-Americans or white Americans, but for all Americans. Vote for President Obama.
We women recognize voting for President Obama is not enough. we must vote for his support system. We must vote out those racists who undermine every move he makes on our behalf, simply because he is an African-American man. We must vote out those who undermine him simply to protect their golden parachutes. We must vote out those who undermine him simply to protect their excessive profits hidden in off-shore accounts. He is trying to rebuild this country to support ALL of us. we cannot elect those who undermine him simply because we are in their way. A man’s world and a woman’s heaven? Not for long, Not for long…
Filed under POLITICS
OUT IN THE OPEN
OUT IN THE OPEN
Louise Annarino
2-14-2012
Hopefully, this is the last time I shall have to discuss the Roman Catholic Church and the opposition of its Pope and its most conservative of Bishops to progressive political theory, and at times, to President Barack Obama.
I will not discuss the church’s theological positions. It is none of my business. Catholic women are not part of the church hierarchy and have no positional power within its ranks. Some may have personal power with particular members of the church hierarchy; but, personal power is ephemeral at best. Therefore, I am not entitled to any opinion on theological teachings. That has been clear since my baptism.
However, as an American, I am entitled to an opinion on its espoused political positions, and its corporate climate. I am also entitled to question whether as a religious institution it has any right to take a political position. Jesus’ response to his religious hierarchy “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and to God that which is God’s”, Matt 22:21, is not simply a basis for the separation of church and state; although, one could argue such. It was his brilliant repost to a group of rabbis trying to trick him into taking a political position, or to discredit himself as a rabbi. Jesus himself had made it clear he was not a political Messiah, John18:36. The Pharisee rabbis were trying to prove otherwise. The Roman Catholic Pope and Bishops would be wise to follow Jesus’ lead. They are not political Messiahs. They are behaving like Pharisees. Their objective is political and financial power, in the guise of religious freedom. No one has asked them to deny their religious teachings, or practice their faith as they see fit. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, President Obama adjusted the political and financial demands of women’s preventive health care to eliminate any possible religious entanglement argument. The church has been outed;it’s outcry was never about religion. It has always been about politics.When the Bishops met 7 months ago to prepare an attack on President Obama’s health care mandates, they behaved like Pharisees, trying to protect their turf from the President they view as the usurper.
Let’s be clear, a church hierarchy which has treated women and children as second class citizens and done little or nothing to protect them; and, has in fact attacked them with impunity ( witch hunts, pedophilia) posits it should be able to deny any woman, Catholic or non-Catholic, comprehensive preventive health care. Really? For, now that the issue of providing insurance coverage for such care is off the table, the only thing remaining is the health care itself. The Bishops’ continuing opposition is simply opposition to women’s comprehensive preventive health care, period!
Thank you, President Obama, for making it so clear. Now, let us ignore the Pharisees and move on.
At age 10 I wrote a letter to then-Senator John F. Kennedy, and received a personal reply. I sent him several pages listing American Catholics from pre-revolution through 1962 who had served America without becoming a tool of the Catholic church. Presidential candidate Kennedy was deemed an unacceptable candidate since many believed the Roman Catholic Church would try to use him to foster its own agenda, in violation of the separation of church and state. Senator Kennedy used my research in his debate with Richard Nixon. He was the first Catholic elected President of the United States.We know from history that it is dangerous to mix church and state. Millions have died over the centuries as the church imposed its will on the state. Many fled to the wilderness of America to avoid oppression resulting from merger of state and religion. President Kennedy had to overcome this perceived threat. Now, politicians struggle to affirm their willingness to be guided by religious institutions in matters of state. The backlash, should this not be prevented, has a long and bloody history. Women have never fared well under church dominated state action.
I am weary of those arguing the state is denying them the right to practice their religion. They have no right to force me to practice their religion! I have a right to the same comprehensive preventive health care as any other woman, no matter who is my employer; just as I have a right to minimum wage, unemployment benefits etc. Religious belief has no place in determining who is eligible for employment benefits.
annarino writes 