On Monday, I posted on my blog a distinction which ought to be made between anti-Catholicism and counter-Catholicism. I ended on a kind note towards the counter-Catholics--many of whom are my friends--but before that had this to say about the anti-Catholic crowd:

Compare this to the anti-Catholic bigot and his line of argument. It relies as much on insult and mocking as anything. He'll blaspheme the Eucharist, hurl verses out of context trying to "prove" that the Church is the "Whore of Babylon," scoff at the clergy and any number of doctrines and practices. Often he will not wait for an answer. For him, any stick is fine so long as it can be used to beat the Church. His arguments are generally dilatory or sophistical in nature, with little interest in getting to the truth of the matter or seeing the Church as anything other than the tool of the anti-Christ.

He relies on Mr Jack Chick and Mr Lorraine Boettner to (mis)inform them about what the Church really teaches. He lives inside an impenetrable wall through which neither reason nor logic and facts concerning the Church can reach. Aside from Chick and Boettner, there are a few very good examples; Mr James White of alpha-omega ministries; really, any program which targets specifically active Catholics for "conversion to Christianity" is likely run by anti-Catholics; this website is another great example (which started the conversation). Charity may be extended to all of these folks--some believe (albeit falsely) that they are acting in charity--and God knows they need it, but they have made themselves outright enemies of the Church. The only other things which may be offered is prayer and witness in action.

I should address a few loose ends from these remarks. There is hope even for the anti-Catholic crowd, if only a glimmer. However, even the distinction between counter-Catholics and anti-Catholics doesn't go quite far enough, because there are two broad groups of folks who fit into the anti-Catholic crowd. I will call these two categories "hard anti-Catholicism" and "soft anti-Catholicism." There are myriad small distinctions between them, but I will be writing more broadly today.

There are a number of challenges facing Catholic schools in the 21st century, some unique and others age-old. One seeming minor challenge which will become a major challenge is brought to light by two cases, one in the Denver Archdiocese and the other in the Boston Archdiocese: both involve the children of same-sex couples. These two cases were handled similarly by the school's administrators (in one case, the children will be allowed to complete this year, but not to enroll next year; in the other, the child is denied enrollment altogether), though differently by the bishops of those two dioceses. His Excellency Charles Chaput, Archbishop of Denver, has stood behind the decision of Sacred Heart of Jesus School, stating (emphases mine) that

The policies of our Catholic school system exist to protect all parties involved, including the children of homosexual couples and the couples themselves. Our schools are meant to be “partners in faith” with parents. If parents don’t respect the beliefs of the Church, or live in a manner that openly rejects those beliefs, then partnering with those parents becomes very difficult, if not impossible. It also places unfair stress on the children, who find themselves caught in the middle, and on their teachers, who have an obligation to teach the authentic faith of the Church.

A scandal is sought in our ranks,
The Enemy desires a reason for his minions
To renew their persecutions of the Faith,
Rarely does he look in vain for willing accomplices:
There are many men who are cruel,
Who are callous, many who torture and murder--
They love not their fellow men.
In one age, they persecute by cross or sword,
In another by disenfranchisement and loss of honor,
Often it is accompanied by rampant despoiling--
Plundering our earthly treasures, pillaging our homes,
At times with subjugation and oppression,
Whether by crown, minaret, or the hammer and sickle--

Dark rumors surface in whispers which
Escape the lips of of the self-styled "street informants,"
A scandal once hidden is now unearthed.
It's been taken by the gutter press and used:
In their hands, it is little more than a cudgel,
Meant to batter, to bludgeon their target.
Soon the mainstream press discovers the secret,
And in their hands it becomes a sword unsheathed,
Swung wildly, still it can be used to smite,
Though emboldened by this weapon they overplay
Their seemingly unstoppable hand--they swing at too
Much--and so themselves are exposed.

Note: This is more of a speculative post. I have endeavored to make it consistent with the teachings of the Church, as far as they go. However, it goes beyond what is taught and into the real of speculation. All of my posts concerning faith, morality, theology, etc are subject to the magisterium of the Church, and through said magisterium to my local bishop, and should be subordinate to the teachings thereof, even if said bishop has better things to do than to read my blog and offer his imprimatur. Since this is a more speculative post, I think that it is especially important to re-iterate that point.

_____

Yesterday morning I was conversing with my friend, Mr Andrew Elster, during our weekly work-out session (and beyond into breakfast). He mentioned talking to a colleague from work about infants, Baptism, and salvation. His colleague's position was something along the lines of "Unbaptized infants are damned to hell, since they are as guilty of Original Sin as anybody else, but have not had the time to develop faith nor the grace which comes from baptism." This opinion--or something like it--is actually fairly widespread, both amongst Catholics and Protestants; it is also the cause of much consternation amongst said groups, for an infant who dies before baptism (to say nothing of the unborn murdered in the womb) is now condemned to hell through no fault of his own, but rather through Adam. An extension of this can be applied to those who are outside the Church, particularly those who lived before Christ and those who have never heard the Gospel message.

Of Truth in all its beauty I am a seeker,
And of knowledge, understanding, and wisdom--
Each of these gifts teach me to judge with equity,
To treat others as being equal to myself.

To each his fair share I pledge to give,
Let me not be known for cheating and stealing,
Nor for taking what is not rightly mine to take--
I will demand nothing I've not earned.

To him who has no voice I lend mine,
For those who have nothing I'll lend my arms--
But I'll not do this at the rich man's expense either:
For he too must be accorded his rights.

I have long been a fan of science fiction stories, though my reading of said stories was curtailed somewhat by my time in college. It is therefore with some pleasure that I was able to pick up one of the classics of science fiction form the last century and read it. I came across Mr Walter M Miller’s A Canticle for Leibowitz by reading from the blog of Mr John C Wright--himself an accomplished writer in the genre--who mentioned it as a favorite of Professor Peter Kreeft’s. Having grown up in a generation which is at time deliberately isolated from the past--sometimes by itself, sometimes by the so-called adults of our childhood, who had by-and-large consciously rebelled against tradition, authority, history, and reality--I had never heard of this book.

I picked it up expecting something extraordinary, amazing, awe-inspiring, thought-provoking, and entertaining. I was not disappointed. There are several criteria for which I look when reading a science fiction novel. First and foremost, it is a novel, and thus should contain a good and compelling story. Second, because it is a work of science fiction, there should be a sense of wonder; this also applies to fantasy stories. For science fiction, the wonder is in what a future or alternative world might hold, with the development of technology and the discoveries of new sciences; for fantasy stories, it is the wonder of a different world altogether, whether in the enchantment of the forgotten past or the magic of a different reality. Finally, the book should reveal to us something about ourselves, the world, or the ultimate truth which underlies our existence.

Moved by careless action,
Spurred to headlong hast,
Many act without forethought,
They rush to their lives' ends.

Tis better to look judiciously,
And then consider taking the leap,
Caution never fails to protect
Those who plan well ahead.

In a life of hectic activity,
With never a moment's pause--
One of relentless motion--
When will you stop to rest?

It is wise to long remember,
Even as all others forget:
Providence is slow, imperceptible,
But the devil works in haste.

I am ever grateful for hospitality,
But I don't wish to impose on good graces,
Nor to place undue stress on my hosts.
'Tis not my prerogative to do so,
I'll not overburden with my presence--
I've stayed quite late.

Here I stand, no further will I fall,
This level at last I'll maintain,
Even if I cannot advance,
Even as I desire retreat.

Buffeted, battered, and bruised,
By sirens' songs tempted,
Goaded by malicious taunts,
My step scarce does falter.