Category: Uncategorized

Posted on

Is It Really About the Children? Taking Concern about the Sexual Abuse of Minors to the Next Level

In recent years, the Catholic Church has come under great scrutiny in terms of the sexual abuse of minors. Painful though it has been, it has been salutary in many ways. That such abuse has occurred, even once, let alone with the frequency we have all discovered, is both tragic and scandalous. That the Church has been scrutinized, and called to account by many, has meant that an increasingly serious and comprehensive set of protective measures has been put in place to root out the sexual abuse of minors. This both helps to protect the young and purify the Church.

Consider the graph to the upper right and we shall see that the reports of this sinful and abusive behavior came rather suddenly on the scene in large numbers about 1960, and peaked in the early 1980s. I recall that, about that time (1985), in this Archdiocese we were rocked with some allegations that brought some very painful sins to light. Cardinal Hickey however, began a very through investigation of the problem, and was one of the bishops at that time who undertook a rather sweeping plan to ensure that young people were protected from this in the future. As a seminarian during those years I was expected to attend seminars that alerted us to the problem and we were all given extensive psychological testing and background checks to ensure we were free of any past sins and offenses in this matter, and free of any tendencies toward them.

As you can see by the graph above right, the number of reported incidents drops precipitously after the mid 1980s. While it is true that in 2002 the issue heated up in the news, the incidents that came to light at that time were largely from 20 to 30 years prior. The real anger at that time had more to do with the failure to discipline and remove abuser priests, a failure that had, or was still occurring, in certain dioceses. But in terms of actual incidences, you can see that the number has come dramatically down to its current level. Though not zero, which is the only acceptable number, we do see a remarkable drop. The graph at the left indicates a dramatic drop in the number of abuse cases by priests ordained after 1985. This too demonstrates that, by that time, most dioceses were very careful to do background checks and perform psychological testing that prevented abusers from entering the priesthood.

Hence, the painful period where sin in the Church has been laid bare has had the salutary effect of purifying the Church and, even more importantly, seeing that children are adequately protected from abuse.

So where do we go from here? How serious are we, as a society and a Country, about making sure that children everywhere are protected from sexual abuse? For if our concerns are really about the children, then we must come to see that the Catholic Church is not the only place children have sexually abused. And we must come to see that some non-church settings, children are still being abused in large numbers.

One of the most dangerous places for our children in terms of sexual abuse are the public schools. Consider clicking on this Google news search for stories about arrests for sexual abuse of minors allegations in the last month. You will see page after page of news items about teachers being arrested for sexually molesting the young people under their care. The search “teacher, student, sex, arrest” yields over 550 news reports (30+ Google pages). (Hat tip to Mark Gray for this Google information)

Note two observations of the media coverage of this. First, the stories are being covered. Hence it would be wrong to say the media is “ignoring” the story. Secondly, however, there seems to be no connecting of these stories. They are all considered to be individual cases, unconnected if you will. These stories tend to be framed as an individual teacher who is just “a bad apple.”

And this failure to connect these individual cases and see them as linked to an overall problem that must be addressed, endangers children.

When the abuse cases in the Church arose, they were seen collectively and it was proposed (rightly to some extent) that there was a problem in the Catholic Church, that something linked all these cases together in the wider culture of the Church. Some (incorrectly) blamed celibacy, others the culture of clerical exoneration, still others to the lack of oversight and discipline by the bishops, and “cover-ups.”

Problem in the Public Schools? But in considering these (very) numerous cases in the public school system, few in the media or elsewhere seem to be willing to propose that there is a problem in the public schools, that there is something that links these cases together. What exactly that problem is, is currently debatable. But the point is, who is demanding investigations? Who is demanding a systematic analysis of the public school system or insisting that further measures be instituted to protect children? Who is looking into the kinds of background checks that the schools perform before they hire teachers? Are there psychological tests to weed out potential abusers? Are there seminars for the teachers to help them recognize the signs of potential abuse taking place on their campuses? Are students taught about their rights and what to do in bad situations? Is there a climate of openness and concern that encourages students to report situations which make them feel uncomfortable, or when they feel they are receiving unwanted attention from a teacher or staff member? What are the procedures for dealing with credible allegations? Are public school systems properly vigilant in protecting children from predators?

Who is asking these questions and probing the “wider context” of the school systems in this country? Are we doing enough to protect our children? Apparently not. Look again at the Google link listed above. We are not dealing with a small problem here, it is widespread, and sadly, common.

Are we willing to take this issue of the sexual abuse of minors to the next level?

And while we are at it, are we willing to address the sexualization of children that takes place in our culture especially in ads, on sitcoms, in movies and music? Why do we tolerate TV shows that depict sexually active teenagers? Why is it so difficult for mothers to buy modest clothes for their daughters at most stores? Why do companies like  Abercrombie and Fitch which advertise padded bras and swim tops for 8 year olds, and sell thongs to preteen girls, continue to make money? In short, why are we as a culture not more outraged at the sexualization of children and young teenagers? Sexualizing children and teens does not help protect them from predators who are already confused. If we are serious about protecting the young from sexual abuse, then we ought to stop having such a high tolerance for this sort of thing in our culture. We have discussed this previously on the blog HERE.

I realize that some who read this post will want to read it simply as a priest deflecting attention from the Church. I can and will deny this allegation and have stated clearly that I think the Church has received rebuke, properly. But frankly dear reader, my motivations in raising this are beside the point. The questions I raise remain valid, if we are going to be serious about protecting children. Is our concern really about children and, if so, are we collectively willing to take our concern about the sexual abuse of minors to the next level?

I am interested in your responses and observations.

Posted on

From Tombstone to Living Stone – A Meditation on the Epistle for the 5th Sunday of Easter

By his resurrection Jesus has brought us from death to life. He has snatched us from this present evil age (Gal 1:4), and from the death directed desires of our body (Rom 6:12), and made us into a new and living creation (2 Cor 5:17). As such, we have exchanged the tombstones that once indicated we were dead in our sins, and have become living stones in the spiritual edifice which is the Body of Christ, and also the Church.

In the Epistle for today’s Mass (1 Peter 2:4-9) we are summoned to this new life and told what some of its characteristics are. Let’s take a look at how we go from being tombstones to living stones by seeing this epistle in three sections.

1. The Call of salvation – The text says: Come to him, a living stone, rejected by human beings but chosen and precious in the sight of God, and, like living stones, let yourselves be built into a spiritual house

Notice first the invitation that is made – Come to Him! Let yourself be built! The entire Christian life is based on our response to an invitation to accept Jesus Christ and to let him transform our life. We are to say, “yes” not only to Jesus, but also to what he can do for us. He will take our broken, crumbling lives and rebuild them. And in what sense will he do this?

Well look next at the images that are offered:

Living Stones – a Stone is an odd image for life. Generally we can think of nothing less living than a stone. So the text says living stones. What does it mean to be a living stone? First it means to be alive! To be full of life! Secondly it means that some of the better qualities of stone are to be ours. A stone is firm, not easily moved, weighty, and able to withstand a heavy load. And thus, we too are to be strong and firm in our faith; not easily moved about by the currents of the world, or tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes (Eph 4:14). Stable and firm, we are also able to carry the weight and difficulties that this world imposes. And, we are able to support and carry others in their time of need. Yes, living stones: strong, firm, not easily moved and alive, quite alive!

a spiritual house – The image is that we as living stones make up, in a spiritual sense, the walls of the Church. Together we are fitted into a wall that is strong and sure. Thus, we are not saved merely unto ourselves, but we are saved also for the sake of others. Together, and by God’s grace, we depend on one another to carry our share of the weight. All the stones in a wall do their part. Remove one stone and the whole wall is weakened and threatened. Only together, with all doing their part, is the wall solid and sure.

2. The Choice for salvation – The text says, whoever believes in it shall not be put to shame. Therefore, its value is for you who have faith, but for those without faith: The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone, and a stone that will make people stumble, and a rock that will make them fall. They stumble by disobeying the word, as is their destiny.

Simply put we have a choice to make and that choice will determine if Jesus is the cornerstone who supports us, or a stumbling block over whom we trip and fall. It is an interesting thing that when someone is being rescued at sea that some reach and grab the life ring that is tossed to them, others resist and fight attempts to save them, seeing it as something that will cause them further danger.

What is meant here by cornerstone? We usually think today of a ceremonial stone with an inscription and possibly some historical things inside. But the cornerstone, here, refers more to the stone at the bottom of an arch or row of bricks that supports the whole arch. It had to be a very carefully crafted stone since all the other stones depended on its integrity and perfect shape to support them. And this is Jesus Christ for us. We are all leaning on Jesus, and he is the perfect stone who carries our weight.

But for those who reject Christ, he is a stone over whom they trip and fall, a stumbling block. Surely Jesus wants to save us all, but some reject him and thus, he becomes as a stumbling block. What this means is that we cannot remain neutral about Jesus, we have to decide, one way or the other about him: Yes = salvation, no = condemnation. Thus he will either be a cornerstone or a stumbling block, there is no third way. To those who knowingly reject him, he is a stumbling block. And this image also explains some of the venomous attacks on Christ and Christianity from the world. For when one trips over something and falls, he tends to turn and curse what caused him to fall.

So the choice is ours. May it be Christ, and may he be our cornerstone, The only One on whom we lean and rely. Only this will bring us from being tombstones to living stones.

3. The Characteristics of salvation – The text says, You are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people of his own, so that you may announce the praises” of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

Note four characteristics of those who are no longer tombstones, but are living stones:

Our Pedigree– the text calls us a “chosen race.”  We reflected earlier on making Christ our choice. But here the text reminds us that before we chose him, he chose us. If we got an invitation to dinner at the White House, we would sense that we had “made it” and would proudly tell our friends of the great dignity we had received. Yet, too easily we make little notice that we are chosen by God and invited to the great Wedding Feast of the Lamb. The fact is, we are chosen, we have a pedigree. We are of the household of God. And this is a very great dignity, greater than any worldly dignity, and able to overcome any indignity that the world heaps upon us. We are a chosen race.

Our Priesthood – All of us who are baptized into Christ Jesus are made priest, prophet and king. And this “royal” priesthood, while different from the ministerial priesthood of the men who minister the sacraments, has this similarity: every priest is enabled to offer a sacrifice pleasing to God. In the old Testament, priests offered something distinct from them, usually an animal, such as a lamb. But in the priesthood of Jesus Christ, the priest and the victim are one and the same, for Jesus offered himself. Hence, all the baptized are equipped by God to offer the pleasing sacrifice of their very self to God. Herein is a very great dignity given us by Jesus: to have a perfect right to stand in his Father’s presence, praise him, and offer a fitting sacrifice. The ministerial priests of the Church bring us the sacraments, and only they can do this.  But every baptized believer shares in the royal priesthood wherein they freely offer themselves to God.

Our Place – The text calls us a holy nation. The word “holy” means to be “set apart.” Hence we are called out from the many, to be a people that is set apart for God. And while all are invited to Christ, only those who accept the invitation, receive the grace to be called a holy nation. As such we should understand that our role is not to “fit in” with this sin-soaked world, but, rather, to stand apart from it, to be recognizably distinct from from it. Our behavior, our priorities, our love, our joy, and charity should be obvious to all. To be a holy nation is a great honor, but also a great responsibility. May the curse of scripture never be said about us: As it is written: “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you. (Rom 2:24)

Our Proclamation – the text says the Lord has acted in our life so that you may announce the praises of him, who called you out of darkness into his own, wonderful light. Yes the Lord has been good to us and is changing our life! If you are faithful, then you know what he has done for you and you have a testimony to give! Scripture says elsewhere that we were made for the praise of his glory (Eph 1:6). Do people hear you praise the Lord? Have you glorified his name among the Gentiles (Rom 15:9)? Do people know of your gratitude and have they heard of your witness to the Lord? Can you articulate how God has called you out of darkness into his marvelous light? You ought to be a witness for the Lord! This is a central and necessary characteristic of those who are no longer tombstones, but living stones.

This song points to Jesus as the cornerstone on which all of us who are living stones must lean:

And here is another old hymn that speaks of standing on Christ, the solid rock:

Posted on

Genie in a Bottle?

Is Jesus a genie in a bottle? We might think so, given his words in today’s gospel: “If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it.” Given this, instead of asking, “Show us the Father,” like Phillip did, we might be tempted to demand: “Show me the money!”

But consider what else Jesus said. He insisted that he didn’t speak on his own, but that he said what the Father wanted him to say, because he is in the Father, and the Father is in him.

We aren’t one with the Father in the way Jesus is. However, we are united with Jesus by the Holy Spirit at baptism. The Father works in Jesus, and Jesus works in us, through the Spirit. This allows us to pray in his name. When we do this, we’re not speaking on our own. Instead, we’re inspired to say what Jesus wants us to say.

This is the key to understanding, not only Jesus’ promise to fulfill our requests, but also his insistence that we’d do the same works he did- even greater ones! Not through our power, of course, but through his. Jesus will do what we ask him to do- when we ask what he wants us to ask.

After all, he’s not a genie in a bottle. He’s God’s Son, dwelling in our hearts.

Readings for today’s Mass: http://www.usccb.org/nab/052111.shtml

Photo Credit: puuikibeach via Creative Commons

Posted on

Square Dancing as an Image for the Church?

Years ago, in High School, I dated Paula, who liked square dancing. So, most Saturday nights we were down at the community center, she in her petticoats and dress, I in my jeans, button down western shirt with a scarf tie and hand towel.

Square dancing has some basic moves that beginners learn. And so it was that Paula and I started with the basics. But in square dancing there are different levels, and so eventually we cleared the floor and watched those who knew the more advanced moves. Sometimes there were several levels of dancers. I remember being amazed at the complicated moves the move senior members had learned and wondered how I would ever master it. But, little by little the moves were learned, and we got to stay on the floor just a little longer as the months and years ticked by.

Image of the Church? I was over at YouTube and came upon the video below of a square dance group that’s pretty advanced. I remember many of the moves they do, but some of it was above what I ever learned. And  suddenly it occurred to me that I saw an image of the Church.

Please forgive me. I know you think I must be theological geek at this point. Surely as a young man I never gave a thought to the Church, in terms of square dancing. But now with this great love for God and for the Church, I can’t help it, I see the Church in square dancing. Just a few thoughts:

1. Every Square Dance needs a caller and, if the dancers in the square are the body, he is the head. He calls the moves, and the dancers must listen and respond. He has the authority to set direction and maintain order. If a square falls into disorder he reestablishes order by calling them home. Not only that, it is also the role of the Caller to teach new moves and drill the dancers until they master it. So the caller is the source for unity and direction for the square.

This is also the role of the Pope and the Local Bishop in the Church who also have the authority to set direction, maintain unity and restore order when necessary. It is also their role to teach the faith, along with their priests and catechists until the faithful master the Christian walk (dance).

2. As long as everyone listens carefully, and fulfills their particular role in the particular moves, the dance continues. But when, usually through error, one or more of the dancers veers away from the directed move, the square either stumbles or falls apart. As long as the dancers are open to learn, the square will continue to get better, and become a good, and disciplined group who increasingly enjoy advanced square dancing.

So too with the Church. When all listen carefully and do their part, the Church is strong and well ordered. When the faithful do not listen, or persist in error, the Church stumbles and is less effective. Disunity leads to a poor Christian walk (dance), not only for individuals, but also for groups and parishes. But if the faithful are willing to learn to and grow, the dance of faith becomes deeper and richer, more enjoyable, and just plain fun.

3. Everyone has a role, but not the same. When the caller calls a dance move, what you do in response depends on where you are in the square at that time. You might just stand still while others move, or you might be the one who switches positions. And all this varies from move to move.

And so it is with the Church. We have varied and different roles depending on where we are in the Church. Some of our roles are stable but others change depending on the situation. As a pastor, I am a leader and teacher in my parish. But at a meeting with the bishop I am a learner and a man under authority. In the parish I may take the lead when it comes to teaching the faith, but I may need to learn from my parishioners when it comes to understanding some technical legal matter, or car repair, etc. In such cases many of my parishioners can show me the way. We all have different gifts and talents and they all interact in various ways, depending on the situation. At times we lead, at times we follow, at times we stand still, while others move about us. All at the direction of the caller.

4. There is an etiquette to square dancing. There are bows, and curtseys, there’s a way you hold a lady’s hand, and there is a graciousness expected by all. Especially for those in higher levels, proper attire is also expected. Timeliness is also important since it is necessary to have eight people to form a square and get things underway. Thus everyone needs to be committed and timely. If just one of the eight is late, seven others are left standing. In larger groups, where there are numerous squares, people can mix and match a bit, but one missing member always impacts many other people.

In the Church too, basic kindness and generosity are also expected and necessary. Where there is Charity and truth, God himself is there. Further, people must be true to their commitments and be timely or many others suffer.

5. There is a great intricacy to square dancing where many aspect are interacting at once. It is almost mind-boggling to watch as the dance unfolds.

So too with the Church, there are many layers and great intricacy at work. Some are praying, some are studying, some are raising children, some are preaching, some are evangelizing, some are caring for the poor, some are praying in front of abortion clinics. But all are responding to the great call of the Shepherd Jesus speaking through his Pope and Bishops, through the Scriptures and the Tradition. It is a great dance of wonderful intricacy, and everyone interacts at different levels, all at once.

So there you have it: the Church as a square dance. Enter the dance, learn the moves and have a great time.

This video shows Square Dancing at a more advanced level. I got close to this, but never this good. Paula’s parents could have danced like this in their sleep.

Here’s how a caller teaches a new move:

Posted on

Homeward Bound

When asked what heaven will be like, an American bishop wrote of his first visit to his parents’ native village in Italy. Because he had seen pictures of it for years, everything looked familiar to him when he arrived in person. “I know this place,” he thought. “I am finally at home.” He hoped that he would feel the same way- that he was finally at home- upon entering heaven.

Heaven is indeed our true home, as Jesus explained in today’s gospel. He was speaking during the Last Supper with his disciples, who were troubled that he was soon to leave them. Jesus soothed their fears by explaining that his departure was a good thing, because he was going to prepare a place for them in heaven. Yet he would return one day to take them to their heavenly home- the Father’s house

There is room for us in the Father’s house, too. This is hope for us when life gets hard. It reminds us that we’ve not yet arrived at our final destination, as this life is but a way station to a “better place.” As he did with his disciples, Jesus tells us not to worry, because regardless of where this life takes us, we are always “homeward bound.”

http://www.usccb.org/nab/052011.shtml

Photo Credit: heretakis via Creative Commons

Posted on

Treadmills in the Dark

For whatever reason, my garage’s light switch is in the kitchen. One night, while I was in the garage, running on our treadmill, someone accidentally flipped off the lights. For a few scary moments, I found myself in complete darkness, running fast, but going absolutely nowhere.

My experience is a metaphor, I think, for how many people live their lives today: they run around like crazy, but their lives have no real purpose or direction. Kind of like running on a treadmill, in the dark.

Jesus, in today’s gospel, said that he didn’t want people to “remain in darkness.” That’s why “he came into the world as light.” By believing in Jesus, we know what life is about, and we know the direction in which our lives should go, because Jesus lights the way. With Jesus, our lives have purpose, peace, and hope.

Living in darkness can be frightening. My children sometimes admit that they’re a little afraid of the dark, and I completely understand. They prefer to sleep with a light on. Jesus invites us to do the same thing: to keep the light on- his light- to scatter the fear that darkness brings.

As Pope Benedict assures us: “(Christ’s) light will dispel all darkness from your lives, and fill you with love and peace.”[1]

Readings for today’s Mass: http://www.usccb.org/nab/051811.shtml

Photo credit: SashaW via Creative Commons

[1] Ubi et Orbi message, 12/25/07

Posted on

Be Sheepish

Sheep, to many Americans, are weak, subservient, and dim-witted creatures. We say “to follow like sheep” when describing unthinking, spineless loyalty. To look “sheepish,” is to look guilty. That’s why when Jesus refers to his followers as sheep, we’re not always sure how to respond.

Jesus and his contemporaries, however, held sheep in high esteem. Sheep were considered honorable and noble animals, because they suffer in silence and are obedient to their shepherds. Some were kept as household pets, and were fed by hand. Ownership of sheep was a sign of wealth. They were offered in sacrifice, not because they were worthless, but because they were so valuable. Jesus himself was called the “lamb of God.”

By calling us sheep, then, Jesus isn’t putting us down. Instead, he’s speaking of how precious we are to him; it’s a reflection of his love. In today’s gospel, he insists that we, his sheep, are the Father’s gift to him. We’re so valuable, that no one can snatch us out of his hand; we’re so treasured, that he gives us eternal life, to be with him forever.

Readings for today’s Mass: http://www.usccb.org/nab/051711.shtml

Photo credit: A Roger Davies via Creative Commons

Posted on

Stephen Hawking Should Stick to Science and Stop Theologizing. And We Should be Very Sober about One of His Very Dangerous Philosophical Assumptions

CBS News seems to have confused Stephen Hawking with a Theologian or spiritual guide. For recently they focused on an interview published in the Guardian wherein Hawking calls heaven a fairy tale for those afraid of the dark.

Well, first of all Mr. Hawking, I am not afraid of the dark. Secondly, you should stick to science and stop trying to psychoanalyze believers. And as for CBS News and the Guardian, please note that Mr. Hawking is a scientist. He is no more qualified to opine on life after death or make psychoanalytic pronouncements than some random person on the street. Smarts in one area doesn’t make him an expert in all areas. Perhaps CBS News would like to interview me on string theory? Of course Mr Hawking and many others might object that I wasn’t exactly the best “go-to guy” on this topic. And that would be true. Asking Mr. Hawking to opine on heavenly matters and the psychological makeup of believers is in the same vein as trotting out Hollywood stars to testify before congress as “experts” on global warming, or some other highly technical matter. Mr Hawking’s opinion on believers or the afterlife is of no more value than anyone else. He is entitled to his opinions on this matter, but it doesn’t deserve to be in headlines and is no more true because he is smart in other areas.

Further, I hope you will note a VERY DARK philosophical assumption he makes at the end of the article. Beware, for he is an influential man.

Let’s look at excerpts from the CBS article. These are excerpts of the longer article which you can read HERE. The original article excerpts are in bold italic typeface. My remarks are in normal red typeface.

Physicist Stephen Hawking believes there is no afterlife (so what?), and that the concept of heaven is a “fairy story” for people who fear death. While he is entitled to his opinion, he has never met me and is not able to know why I believe in life after death. Further he is not a trained sociologist or psychotherapist. He cannot really know the motivations of everyone who believes. Frankly he is also showing himself a poor scientist here. For a good scientist looks for real data and knows that large scale phenomenon (like, say, faith?) are not usually explained by simplistic, single source causes. There are usually a variety of causes and influences at work. For example, when a leaf falls from a tree there is surely gravity, but also wind resistance, and the presence of obstacles that influence its descent.

Mr. Hawking is also condescending and (heaven forfend!), judgmental. For what if I were to say Mr. Hawking does not believe in an afterlife because he fears judgment, or because the existence of God is “inconvenient” to his vision and chosen moral life. You would likely say I should not talk like that, and that I had no real way of knowing that. Exactly. And Mr. Hawking has no business making judgments about my motives either. He doesn’t have a clue as to why I believe in heaven. I don’t fear death any more than he does. I believe in an afterlife because some one I trust, (God and the Church) have revealed it to me and taught me of it.

In an interview published in the Guardian, Hawking – author of the bestselling “A Brief History of Time” – said that when the brain ceases to function, that’s it. This is not a scientific statement, it is philosophical belief on his part. It cannot be verified scientifically, one way or the other, that existence ceases when the brain stops functioning. He is entitled to his belief, but that is what it is. This is not a scientifically verifiable statement. That a renowned scientist is speaking in this way may give the impression that this is science, but it is not. He has moved beyond science and is now in the realm of philosophy.

“I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail,” he told the Guardian’s Ian Sample. “There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.” Reducing the human person to a brain or computer, or to merely our physical components, is also philosophy, not science. It is true, science can only deal with the material, for that is its realm. But to say that physical matter is all there is, or that there is nothing outside of what science can measure, is not a scientific statement, it is a philosophical one.

Consider if a blind person insisted that there was no such thing as light, concluding this merely because he could not measure it with his senses. But of course for him to assert the non-existence of something merely because he cannot measure it, is both arrogant and wrong. Science too would be wrong to conclude in some absolute sense that there is no soul, or nothing beyond the material, merely because science cannot measure it with its own tools. There are just some limits to science, just as there are some limits for a blind person. Science is not bad because it cannot go beyond the material, any more than a blind person  is bad because he cannot see. But what IS bad is to insist there is nothing beyond merely what I can sense, or measure. Not only is it bad, it isn’t science, for science cannot prove the non-existence of non material things. It just isn’t set up to do that. To say that nothing exists beyond the material is a philosophy, it is not science.

We have already discussed Mr. Hawking’s incapacity to psychoanalyze believers as afraid of the dark. Indeed his caricature of us is dripping with arrogance and thinly veiled superiority. Would I be psychoanalyzing him if I suggested that his superstar status has gone to his head? I guess I would. I withdraw the remark, your honor!

Hawking, 69, who has survived for nearly five decades with a motor neurone disease that doctors believed would kill him while he was still in his early 20s, said he does not fear death. He also said that having lived with the prospect of death from his incurable illness has ultimately led him to enjoy life more. He has dealt with his disease heroically

…Hawking rejects an afterlife and emphasizes the need for people to realize their full potential on Earth. It is an old and tattered claim that belief in heaven somehow limits our concern for this world. The Christian world is replete with examples of those who have powerfully cared for and impacted the people of this world and the world itself. Indeed, Mr. Hawking might reflect of the debt he owes to belief and to the Church for things like the great universities of Europe, the scientific method, the existence of hospitals and modern medicine. Faith doesn’t just make people “other-worldly” it also gives them hope and insists, in its truest form, for great love for the people of this world and for all God has created.

When asked what is the value of knowing why are we here, Hawking replied, “The universe is governed by science. But science tells us that we can’t solve the equations, directly in the abstract. We need to use the effective theory of Darwinian natural selection of those societies most likely to survive. We assign them higher value.” This is so limiting. It is also philosophy, not science to say this. Mr Hawking is entitled to have a philosophy, but when he says the world is “governed by science” and then goes on to philosophize, that looks pretty silly and contradictory. Further, Mr. Hawking, if you ask me, is edging dangerously close to eugenics in what he says here. What exactly assigning a “higher value” to certain societies looks like as a practical matter is uncertain in what he says, but I sense a growing darkness here, not light. Margaret Sanger and Adolph Hitler may well be smiling as he says this. BEWARE!

Hawking said that our existence is down to pure chance, (Again, philosophy here, not science, Mr Hawking cannot prove this statement scientifically) and that one’s goal should be to “seek the greatest value of our action.”

Well there it is. I will say, not only is Mr. Hawking a poor theologian and psychotherapist, he is also engaging in a very dark and dangerous philosophy in applying once again (as did Sanger and Hitler along with others) a natural selection to societies (races?). Watch out, Mr Hawking is influential, we may be in for some very dark days ahead.

How say you?

Here’s Fr. Barron’s take on Stephen Hawking’s last foray into philosophy and metaphysics some months ago: