Category: Culture

Posted on

Concerns for Civility: What Do The Scriptures Teach Us?

There’s been a lot of talk about “civility” in the news. Unfortunately it is all wrapped up in politics and is currently being batted about as a thinly veiled political provocation. That is of course paradoxical to say the least (civility used as a kind of club)!  My hope is to avoid all the politics  here and try to focus on the biblical data related to civility. In the end, the scriptural texts strike a certain balance that may be helpful for us to consider, as we shall see.

The word “civility” dates back to about the mid 16th century and has an older meaning that referred to one who possessed  the quality of having been schooled in the humanities. In academic settings, debate, at least historically, was governed by a tendency to be highly nuanced, careful, cautious, formal and trained in rhetorical skill. It’s rules were also prone to refer to one’s opponents by honorary titles (Doctor, professor etc.)  and euphemisms such as “my worthy opponent.” Hence, as the word enters into ordinary usage it comes to mean speech or behavior that is polite, courteous, gentle and measured.

As one might guess, there are a lot of cultural variances in what is considered to be civil. And this insight is very important when we look at the biblical data of what constituted civil discourse. Frankly, the biblical world was far less dainty about discourse than we have become in 21st century America. The scriptures, to include the New Testament, are filled with vigorous discourse. Jesus  for example, really mixes it up with his opponents and even calls them names. We shall see more of this in a moment. But the scriptures also counsel charity and warn of unnecessarily angry speech. In the end a balance of the Scriptural witness to civility must be sought along with an appreciation of the cultural variables at work.

Let’s examine a few of the texts that counsel charity and a modern and American notion of civility:

  1. Words from a wise man’s mouth are gracious, but a fool is consumed by his own lips. (Eccl 10:12)
  2. The quiet words of the wise are more to be heeded than the shouts of a ruler of fools. (Eccles 9:17)
  3. Anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.  (Matt 5:22)
  4. Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen. (Eph 4:29)
  5. Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged (Col 3:21)
  6. With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God’s likeness. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be (James 3:9-10)
  7. Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry (James 1:19)
  8. Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, (Col 4:6)
  9. Therefore encourage one another and build each other up (1 Thess 5:11)
  10. But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips (Col 3:8)
  11. Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification (Rom 14:19)
  12. Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness ( Gal 6:1)
  13. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother. (2 Thess 3:15).
  14. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort [the repentant sinner], so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow (2 Cor 2:7).

So, all these texts counsel a measured, charitable and edifying discourse. Name-calling and hateful or unnecessary expressions of anger are out of place. And this is a strong biblical tradition, especially in the New Testament.

But there are also strong contrasts to this instruction evident in the Biblical data as well. And, a lot of it from an unlikely source, Jesus.  Paul too who wrote many of the counsels above often manifests strident denunciations of his opponents and even members of the early Church. Consider some of the passages below, first by Jesus then by Paul and other Apostles:

  1. Jesus said, “You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good?” (Matthew 12:34).
  2. And Jesus turned on them and said, “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are. “Woe to you, blind guides!…..You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel. “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. ….You hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men’s bones and everything unclean….And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers! “You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?” (Matt 23 varia).
  3. Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me….You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire…..He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.” (John 8:42-47)
  4. Jesus said, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: “‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me (Mark 7:6)
  5. And Jesus  answered them, O faithless generation, how long am I to be with you? How long must I tolerate you!?  (Mark 9:19)
  6. Jesus said to the disciples, “If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!” (Matt 7:11)
  7. Jesus said to the crowd, “I do not accept praise from men, but I know you. I know that you do not have the love of God in your hearts. (Jn 5:41-42)
  8. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables (John 2:15)
  9. Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!” (John 6:70)
  10. Paul: O senseless Galatians, who hath bewitched you that you should not obey the truth,….As for those circumcisers , I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves! (Galatians 3, 5)
  11. Paul against the false apostles: And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve. (2 Cor 11:11-14)
  12. Paul on the Cretans: Even one of their own prophets has said, “Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.” This testimony is true. Therefore, rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith (Titus 1:12-13)
  13. [Peter Against Dissenters:] Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander celestial beings….these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish…..They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done….They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed—an accursed brood!….Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,” and, “A sow that is washed goes back to her wallowing in the mud.” (2 Peter 2, varia)
  14. [Jude against dissenters] These dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings….these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals—these are the very things that destroy them. Woe to them! They have taken the way of Cain;….These men are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm—shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice dead. They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shame; wandering stars, for whom blackest darkness has been reserved forever…..These men are grumblers and fault finders; they follow their own evil desires; they boast about themselves and flatter others for their own advantage. (Jude 1:varia)

Now, most of the passages above would violate modern norms about civil discourse. Are they sinful? They are God’s word! And yet, they seem rather shocking to modern ears. Imagine getting into your time machine and going to hear Jesus denounce the crowds and calling them children of the devil. It really blows a 21 Century mind

I want to suggest to you that these sorts of quotes go a long way to illustrate the cultural dimension of what it means to be civil. The bottom line is that there is a great deal of variability in what people consider civil discourse. In some cultures  there is a greater tolerance for anger. I remember dating an Italian girl for a brief time back in college. I remember being at her house and how she and her mother could really go at it with a heated debate (usually in Italian – Mama Mia!). But no sooner had they very intensely argued over some particular point, say  of preparing the meal,  than they were just fine, as if nothing had happened. Angry discourse was more “normal” for them.Even in this country there are regional differences about civility. In New York and Boston, edgy comments and passionate interruptive  debate are common.  But in the upper Midwest and parts of the Deep South conversation is more gentle and reserved.

At the time of Jesus angry discourse was apparently quite “normal” for, as we see,  Jesus himself engages in a lot of it, even calling them names like, “Hypocrites.” “Brood of Vipers,” “Liars,” “Wicked” etc.  Yet, the same scriptures that record these facts about Jesus also  teach that he never sinned. Hence, at that time such terms were not considered sinful to utter.

Jesus also engaged in prophetic actions like overturning the tables in the temple courts. No one said he’d done wrong,  they just wondered where he got the authority to do this (cf Mark 11:28). In that culture prophets did things like this. No one liked it,  but just like our culture tolerates some degree of civil disobedience, even reveres it, Jesus’ culture  expected things like this from prophets.

Careful –Now be careful here. I am not saying it is OK for us to talk like this because Jesus did. We do not live then, we live now, and in our culture such dialogue is almost never acceptable. There ARE cultural norms we have to respect to remain in the realm of Charity. Exactly how to define civility in every instance is not always clear. An old answer to these hard to define things is “I know when I see it.” So perhaps it is more art than science to define civility. But clearly, we tend today, to prefer a gentler discourse.

On the other hand we also tend to be a little thin-skinned and hyper-sensitive. And the paradoxical result of insisting on greater civility is that we are so easily “outraged” (one of the more overused words in English today). We take offense where none is intended and we easily presume that the very act of disagreeing is somehow arrogant, intentionally hurtful or even hateful. We seem so easily provoked and quick to be offended. All of this escalates anger further and charges of hate and intolerance go back and forth where there is simply sincere disagreement.

Balance – The Scriptures give us two balanced reminders. First  that we should speak the truth in love,  and with compassion and understanding. But it also portrays to us a time when people had thicker skin and were less hyper-sensitive and anxious in the presence of disagreement. We can learn from both biblical traditions. The biblical formula seems to be “clarity” with “charity,” the truth with a balance of toughness and tenderness. Perhaps an old saying comes to mind: Say what you mean, mean what you say, but don’t say it mean.

Here are two videos that display the zeal of Jesus and a bit of his anger. The Passages depicted are John 6 and John 8.

Posted on

Catholic or Consequences: Feds increasingly tell Catholic Entities to Be Authentically Catholic or Lose Religious Exemptions

From  The Cardinal Newman Society (CNS) Blog comes this news release:

Earlier today, January 11, 2011, the federal government continued its assault on the religious liberty of Catholic institutions when the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that Manhattan College could not prevent faculty from unionizing on the basis that it is a religious institution.   Despite acknowledging that the College is recognized as Catholic by the New York Archdiocese, the NLRB reviewed College statements and course content, finding “that the purpose of the College is secular and not the ‘propagation of a religious faith’.”

We have a very important moral tale here.

By way of a disclaimer I want to say that I know nothing of Manhattan College in New York and thus I do not direct my remarks specifically to the College. It may well be that the judges in this case was unfair.  But, generally speaking,  it’s pretty bad when Caesar (i.e. the State) has to tell a Catholic College it’s not Catholic.  This of course is really more the role of a bishop, but it would seem that the bishops have largely avoided making such declarations. In this case a government agency gave the college the “come to Jesus” talk.

Another example  – Again I am not sure if the “non-Catholic” assessment was fair to this college or not, since I know nothing of it. I am more aware of the situation of another Catholic college in the US, (not in DC), which had a similar problem years ago. The accrediting agency did its five year evaluation of this certain Catholic college and returned the verdict that while the academics were adequate, the Catholic identity advertised by the college was a sham. They gave only a provisional accreditation and required the “Catholic” college to do a self study about how to make it’s Catholic identity a true fact  or to be prepared to drop claims to being Catholic. The college in question was, at the time, on Playboy’s top ten list of “party” schools. Drugs, alcohol and sexually transmitted diseases were epidemic. Jello-wrestling and R Rated movies were common in the Student Union. Just about every year students were killed in drunk driving incidents near the campus. The moral life of most students was, thus, in the sewer and campus ministry was ineffective at best. The theology department was also riddled with dissent.  Sadly, it took a secular accreditation agency to blow the whistle and demand reform.

Yet another example – About seven  years ago a Catholic Charities Agency California was informed by a California judge that they would have to provide contraceptives in their medical benefits plan for employees. He refused to accept a claim of religious exemption and ruled that there was nothing “Catholic” about this agency of Catholic Charities since they took primarily government money and gave it to the poor. Further, none of their literature mentioned Jesus Christ or sought to promote the Catholic Faith. Hence, they were secular,  not Catholic,  and thus had no claim to religious exemptions. Here too, I cannot say if the Judge was fair since I have no direct knowledge of Catholic Charities in the particular diocese in question.

It is of course possible to see these matters only in terms of religious liberty. But I want to suggest to you that we have some serious reflection as a Church to make. Perhaps a couple of Biblical examples will set the stage.

1. Abram – In the Book of Genesis we are taught how God chose Abram (later Abraham) and called him to set forth to a new land as the Patriarch of chosen people, (Gen 12). In great faith Abram set out and God led him to Canaan where he eventually settled in Bethel (a name which means “House of God”) (Gen 12:8). But there was a famine in the land and, instead of staying and trusting God,  he left Bethel and went to Egypt (Gen 12:10),  though God had said no such thing. Now Egypt is a symbol of the world and is distinct from Bethel which is a symbol of the “House of God.” And while in Egypt Abram prospered, but sinned mightily by prostituting his wife Sarai,  placing her in Pharaoh’s harem so as to secure his own safety and prosperity (Gen 12:11-15).

Now Abram is chosen by God, he is God’s man and God gave him an inheritance. But Abram forsook his glory from heaven and preferred worldly glories and comforts. God would have to shame Abram back to his senses. The biblical text says:

But the LORD inflicted serious diseases on Pharaoh and his household because of Abram’s wife Sarai. So Pharaoh summoned Abram. “What have you done to me?” he said. “Why didn’t you tell me she was your wife?  Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her to be my wife? Now then, here is your wife. Take her and go!” (Gen 12:17-19)

So it took Pharaoh to compel Abram to leave Egypt (the world) and return to Bethel (House of God). Frankly it is a rather embarrassing moment in salvation history.

2. Another example is Jonah. Jonah was God’s chosen man and designated prophet to go to the east to Nineveh and proclaim a word of repentance to them. But Jonah fled to the west on a ship. A storm blew up that so threatened the ship that the experienced sailors began to pray to their gods. But the chosen man of the one, True God, Jonah remained asleep!  Finally,  after casting lots,  the sailors discovered Jonah was the source of their problem and roused him from his sleep to rebuke him:

What have you done?” (They knew he was running away from the LORD, because he had already told them so). The sea was getting rougher and rougher. So they asked him, “What should we do to you to make the sea calm down for us?” “Pick me up and throw me into the sea,” he replied, “and it will become calm. I know that it is my fault that this great storm has come upon you.” Instead, the men did their best to row back to land. But they could not, for the sea grew even wilder than before. Then they cried out to the LORD, “Please, LORD, do not let us die for taking this man’s life. Do not hold us accountable for killing an innocent man, for you, LORD, have done as you pleased.” Then they took Jonah and threw him overboard, and the raging sea grew calm. At this the men greatly feared the LORD, and they offered a sacrifice to the LORD and made vows to him (Jonah 1:11ff)

And thus it was that pagan sailors were more repentant and moral than God’s chosen prophet. Another great embarrassment to be sure.

The fact is that the Church is to be a light to the world, but it sometimes happens that we fall short and God must allow the world itself to rebuke us. The Christian community is supposed to be self-correcting. It is an embarrassing truth that it sometimes takes Caesar to tell us to give to God what is God’s, to be more serious about our Christian walk, and to be true in our claims to be Catholic.

Another example – More widely known than the cases above, is the recent sexual abuse scandal. The actual abuse was terrible enough but was then compounded by the credible accusations of a lack of action evident in certain dioceses, which meant abuse in those places was often unaddressed and even,  in some cases, covered up.  It really took serious legal penalties to end the problem. The judicial branch of government (which had long been lenient in this matter as well) had to awaken the proper level of outrage. This is perhaps the most lasting disappointment on the part of many towards the Church in this matter.

From the Newman Society blog comes this advice for Catholic Colleges and universities:

It must be noted….that any available exemptions for religious institutions will not apply if a college that was founded as a religious institution has become largely secular. It is therefore vital that Catholic colleges and universities maintain their Catholic identity in all of their programs in order to best protect their religious character and mission.”

 For decades since the infamous Land O’Lakes declaration, too many Catholic colleges and universities have straddled the line between Catholic and secular.  While the Vatican and bishops have patiently encouraged the renewal of Catholic identity, state and federal regulators are increasingly demanding that Catholic colleges justify their claims to be religious.  For all but a handful of faithful Catholic colleges, this is a difficult if not impossible task. … the Catholic Church’s Canon Law and the Apostolic Constitution Ex corde Ecclesiae lay out the requirements for a college to be considered Catholic…..it should be noted that a college that does not faithfully adhere to and apply the Catholic Church’s own law might find it difficult if not impossible to convince a secular court that it is a Catholic institution deserving protection.” [1]

It shouldn’t take Pharaoh to tell Abram to go back to Bethel. It shouldn’t  take pagan sailors to rouse Jonah to obey God. And it shouldn’t take the Federal Government to tell Catholic Colleges to actually be Catholic. But if that’s what it takes, if God has to shame them  into it, so be it . God has a history of drawing Israel to repentance by making use of the nations around them to provoke, shame, and punish them. As Scripture says,

The LORD’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance….[Yet] you deserted the Rock, who fathered you; you forgot the God who gave you birth….[The Lord says], for they are a perverse generation, children who are unfaithful. They made me jealous by what is no god and angered me with their worthless idols. [So] I will make them envious by those who are not a people; I will make them angry by a nation that has no understanding. (Deut 32: varia)

Religious Liberty Threatened – To be clear, there are very serious threats today looming over religious liberty. An increasingly intrusive government and menacing new laws are seeking to unreasonably restrict the Church, and her work of evangelizing the culture. We ought to resist any such attempts to limit religious liberty in this age of highly selective “tolerance.” We have discussed such threats on the blog before.

But the moral lesson in these cases seems to be that we had better get our own house in order. Certain “Catholic” Colleges may go on for a while gleefully dissenting and ignoring Church mandates, but in the end they are going to be called to account by Caesar who will say, “Either give God what God is due, or stop pretending and pay the taxes that every other secular organization pays and observe the requirements every other secular entity does.” In other words, decide what you really are and do so quickly.

For the state to respect the rights of Catholics, Catholicism has to be intelligible. Hence these dissenters also endanger the religious freedoms of those who are faithful. Yes, we need to get our house in order.

One may argue that bishops could have been more forceful, Rome more demanding, or that the Catholic faithful should have voted with their feet long ago and stopped  frequenting  and supporting fake Catholic institutions . But in the end, God may well be allowing a secular authority, which has no understanding of things religious to insist upon truth-telling. In so doing it may well be that God is following an old pattern where Pharaoh had to give Abram a good swift kick in the pants, and where God used nations like Babylon and Assyria to purge and prune Israel.

Catholic or Consequences – Like it or not, the world demands of Catholics what they seldom demand of other denominations: that what it means to be a Catholic should be clear and that it be lived to deserve the title. The secular government may mean harm in this, but God can use it for good. (cf Gen 50:20)

What do you think? Remember, if this post feels edgy, I am doing that to provoke conversation.

Posted on

Memorial Service or Pep Rally? A Reflection on the Tone in Tuscon and What it Says of Our Culture

I must say that I am quite surprised by the tone of tonight’s memorial service. In fact, I as I write this, it is still going on. It seems more like a pep rally. Perhaps my expectations were wrong. Given that six have been killed, I am surprised to hear raucous applause, and wolf-whistling.

From the look on his face, it seems the President is a bit surprised too. I think his remarks were well prepared and of the right tone. It seems clear that he did not prepare to address a pep rally. In a way he had to restore a proper tone to the whole thing. As he said, “Our hearts are broken…yet they are full of confidence” I thought, this is to be the right tone.  Increasingly as the President spoke I think a more proper tone was restored.

To be sure, there is much to celebrate. It was proper for there to be applause when the President said, “Gabby opened her eyes.” There was heroism to celebrate, even some standing O’s to be granted.

But somehow the overall tone, especially early on,  seemed a bit off to me.

I wonder if this is another symptom of how unchurched we have become? Even at the conclusion of the readings from scripture and the liturgically proper declaration, “The Word of the Lord” there was applause and whistles. Very strange indeed.  I realize it was not a church service per se, but it was called a memorial service and some distinction exists in my mind between that and a pep rally.

Age may be a factor too. A lot of college students seem to have been in the audience and perhaps they are less schooled in demeanor in the face of tragic death.

What do you think? Is it just me? Am I becoming an old, stodgy man a bit too early (at 50)?  Is solemnity departing from our culture? Have we lost a shared sense of proper demeanor?

Remember that this is not a political blog per se. You may wish to opine on the political aspects of tonight’s service. But my main concern is the tone of the service and what this says about our culture and how it might reflect on the increasingly un-churched status of many.

Please understand my questions are real. They are not intended as rhetorical questions. Please let me know what you think. My own impressions may be very different from yours.

Posted on

The Role of Fear in Abortion – A Meditation on the Feast of the Holy Innocents

Today we celebrate the Feast of the Holy Innocents, all those young boys in and around Bethlehem, two and under, whom Herod had massacred in order to kill Jesus Christ. We know not their number or their names but the Church lists them as among her martyrs. Some have disputed that they should be called martyrs since they did not submit freely for the sake of Christ but were “merely victims”  of Herod. Nevertheless, the Church has long numbered them in her ranks of martyrs. St. Augustine says of them:

And while [Herod] thus persecutes Christ, he furnished an army (or martyrs) clothed in white robes of the same age as the Lord…. O blessed infants! He only will doubt of your crown in this your passion for Christ, who doubts that the baptism of Christ has a benefit for infants. He who at His birth had Angels to proclaim Him, the heavens to testify, and Magi to worship Him, could surely have prevented that these should not have died for Him, had He not known that they died not in that death, but rather lived in higher bliss. Far be the thought, that Christ who came to set men free, did nothing to reward those who died in His behalf, when hanging on the cross He prayed for those who put Him to death. (Serm. 373, 3, quoted in the Catena Aurea).

Today we honor their sacrifice. And through our honoring of them and worship of God, we seek to atone, for the many sins against human life beginning with abortion and including other forms of murder, and euthanasia, disregard for the safety and dignity of others, mistreatment and indifference to the plight of others, and all other sins against life.

Where does human cruelty come from? Surely it grows in us by stages, for most of us are not born with murderous fear of others. It is bequeathed to us by others and we grow it in our heart. Hatred rooted in fear is handed on down through the generations and the murderous inherit a thinking that there are some who are not worthy of their respect and love. Perhaps they are a threat, perhaps they did something in the past. Perhaps they may do something in the future. Herod was clearly a fearful man, so fearful that he was unmoved by the cries of wailing parents or of suffering infants. His heart had grow cruel through repeated insensitivity inflicted on others, due to raging and irrational fear.

An Old Latin Hymn says, Crudelis Herodes, Deum Regem venire quid times? Non eripit mortalia, Qui regna dat caelestia (Cruel Herod what do you fear in the King and God to come? He seizes not earthly things who  gives heavenly kingdoms). But in the end it IS his fear that drives him.

We know well that Holy Innocents continue to be killed in our world through abortion. And here too it is most often fear that drives the killing. How will the baby be afforded?! What changes will this baby bring that I cannot take? Perhaps the prenatal tests show a possible defect. I cannot deal with this! What if my parents know that I am pregnant? How will this  pregnancy affect my career?! What if my father finds out I got my girl-friend pregnant!? And society says, What of poverty? What of overpopulation? What of deformity? How can we collectively handle all this?

And thus fear drives the current bloodshed. Fear makes us focus on our self,  such that we think too little of what we do to others. Abortion thus becomes an “abstraction,” an “issue” that is debated, a “choice.” It is anything but real. The reality of fetal pain is out of sight and thus less real than the fear. What abortion is doing to our world, that too is less real than the fear. It is the fear that is real, and the fear eclipses everything else.  And fear desensitizes and thus the killing of the innocent becomes plausible, a woman’s “choice,” reproductive “freedom.”

The only solution to fear is trust, faith in God. God alone can set us free from the awful fears that currently drive abortion. We in the Church must be realistic about the fears that many face before the mystery of new life and we must provide reasons for hope and trust. Fear is a cruel task-master and it drives us to do some pretty awful things. One of the most common lines in the New Testament is “Do not be afraid.” Hope, trust and Faith are important to us on this feast of the Holy Innocents.

There is also this dangerous thought on this Holy Feast.

I’ll explain what I mean by dangerous in a moment. But for now consider some biblical facts with me.

  1. When God was drawing close to liberating his chosen people from slavery in Egypt there occurred the order to murder of the all the baby boys among the Hebrews. It is almost as though Satan sensed that God was up to something good and Satan raged through Pharaoh in murderous anger driven by fear. Thankfully the actual numbers were reduced since the Egyptian midwives engaged in civil disobedience, refusing to allow the practice to continue.
  2. At the time of Jesus, when God was preparing to liberate his people from sin, there also occurred the murder of innocent baby boys. Here too it was almost as though the Devil sensed that God was up to something good and he once again raged, this time through Herod in murderous anger driven by fear. Thankfully too this infanticide also ended at some point.
  3. Notice the pattern. When God prepared a great liberation the Devil, raging in fear,  went after the babies. In our time, on a scale as never before, the Devil is going after our babies in murderous anger driven by fear. What is he afraid of? Is God planning something big in the near future? Is there a great liberation at hand? Is there a great advancement of evangelization and conversion in the offing? We can only speculate. But patterns are patterns and Scripture has a way of repeating its patterns and echoing down through the centuries.

Why is this a dangerous reflection? Because I want to make it clear that abortion, the killing of the innocents in our age, is NOT and never can be considered something good, or a “positive sign.” Such a speculation might cause some to wrongly conclude that abortion is part of God’s plan or something we should see “positively.” We should not. It must be fought. It is of Satan, it is rooted in fear.

End the Massacre And the Glory follows – I want to conclude by reminding you that the great liberation that followed the past infanticides did not occur until AFTER those murderous rages were stopped. Hence, to follow the pattern established in Scripture and to see a potentially great and liberating act of God we must first see an end to the slaughter. Work and pray to end abortion. May the Holy Innocents pray for us!

I put the following video together to honor these young martyrs. The musical setting is by Michael Haydn of the hymn for the Feast of the Holy Innocents: Salvete Flores Martyrum – It is from his Vesperae In F for Equal Voices, Soli and Orchestra.The singers are the The Group singing is Collegium Instrumentale Brugense. This music is available at iTunes. The Latin text of this ancient hymn is quite beautiful. I produce here the Latin text followed by a fairly literal translation. I would like to call your attention to the second verse and a very charming detail. That verse described these young, two year old martyrs and holding palm branches (the symbol of martyrdom) but as they hold them they play with them, in the way a young child will often fiddle with palm branches in Church. Beautiful and so very human!

Salvete flores martyrum, – Hail Martyr Flowers
quos lucis ipso in limine – On the very threshold of the dawn (of life)
Christi insecutor sustulit – Christ’s persecutor destroyed (you)
ceu turbo nascentes rosas. – like the whirlwind does the budding roses.

Vos prima Christi victima, – You Christ’s firstfruits
grex immolatorum tener, – A flock of tender sacrificial victims
aram sub ipsam simplices – right up by the very altar
palma et coronis luditis. – now play with your palms and crowns

Iesu, tibi sit gloria, – Jesus to you be glory
qui natus es de Virgine, – who were born of the Virgin
cum Patre et almo Spiritu, – with the Father and loving Spirit
in sempiterna saecula. Amen. – unto to eternal ages. Amen.

Posted on

Cardinal Wuerl on Fox News Sunday – A Reflection and Commentary

This morning on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace interviewed Donald Cardinal Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington, and also my Archbishop, and, lest we forget, the sponsor of this blog! The full video of the interview is at the bottom of this post and I encourage you to see it all. However, here, I would like to focus on a few issues and and add, if I be so bold, my own commentary as well to the remarks of Cardinal Wuerl. As always in such formats,  I will present the original questions and answers in bold, black, italic font. My own remarks in normal text red.

WALLACE: As you look across America, let’s talk about the spiritual state of our union as we approach 2011. I know one of the things that concerns you are all the shouting, talking heads on TV, and all the divisive blogs, and you say they come out of the same mentality as road rage. Explain.

WUERL: I think what happens is when people don’t feel they are accountable for what they’re saying — and that often happens when there is no one there to challenge what you are saying — people can — some people tend to say things that really need to be modified. They need to be contextualized. I think what we have to say to ourselves, as we look at this great country and all of the wonderful things that are a part of our history and our life together, we need to be respectful of each other. We need to be talking to each other out of the same tone that we would if we were directly across the table from someone. And that — that is a little bit of a challenge today because with blogs and with all the ease of communications, we sometimes forget directly across the table from us— I personally experience a rather bifurcated life in this matter. I think the Cardinal is quite right in noting that certain settings feature a rather terse and harsh tone, e.g.  on certain blogs, on the Internet, talk radio and to some extent on TV “talking head” panels. But in person I often experience the opposite issue in that people don’t often speak as directly as I would like. I can sit in specific meetings and many people do not come right out and say what they mean. They hedge, “beat around the bush” and equivocate rather than speak directly to the issue and express their opinion clearly. This happnes interpersonally at times also.

One thing I admire about Cardinal Wuerl is that in his meetings, and I sit on many Archdiocesan panels and boards, the Cardinal encourages frank discussion and the airing of differing views. It helps us craft a realistic policies and responses to situations when all the views are on the table and there are no “pink elephants” in the room that every one ignores. Certainly there is an insistence on civil discourse in these sorts of meetings. But in the end, frank, honest, candid discussion is helpful. In many cases however I think that such discussions are rarer in our wider culture than I would wish.

Perhaps this is why some are so strident in settings where their true identity may not be known and where they don’t personally interact with their “interlocutors.” In effect they celebrate a kind of freedom,  to the extreme,  that they do not feel comfortable doing face to face.  There is thus some value to the  “protected” and “incognito” or faceless quality of Internet discussion. However, the Cardinal is right in pointing out that accountability is often less in such settings. This is true in terms of both tone and content. In relationships that involve real, physical presence we can be held accountable for being unkind and, because we cannot so easily “sign-off” from discussions or relationships of this sort,  we will tend to be more careful how we treat others.

It is also true, that Internet discussions are really back and forth monologues more than real conversations. Right now I am typing and you will later (now) read and perhaps type back. Right now I have a monologue going and you cannot interrupt me, or challenge me, either on my tone or content. I might, as the Cardinal points out, need to modify what I am saying or how I am saying it based on your feedback. Further, as the Cardinal notes, one-sided conversations that occur especially in opinion based blogs often lack context. Talking about an issue is fine but context is important and recounting the “rest of the story” is not often respected.

An additional factor of opinion based blogs, radio shows, and news channels,  is that they tend to attract people of like mind so that the conversation lacks depth and many of these subsets become increasingly isolated and opaque. What therefore touts itself to be a wide open discussion increasingly appears as a closed circle of like-minded people in the  corner of the room at a cocktail party saying things to each other and going unchallenged in any substantial way.

In terms of this blog, we are discussing ways of widening the conversation and bringing more people to the table. Fr. Robert Barron is very good at doing this. He is able to engage people in a conversation who would never THINK of going to a Catholic blog. He does this by going out into the culture and commenting on things that most Catholic bloggers don’t (e.g. Bob Dylan as theologian, movie commentaries, etc.) At any rate we’re thinking of bring a lively conversation of the culture to bear more and more here and yours truly (age 49.5) is challenged to keep up with all the latest cultural stuff, especially among the young. More on these ideas later.

WALLACE:…Cardinal, the church does have some problems. And I want to pull up some polls. According to surveys, 75 percent of Catholics attended church weekly, back in the 1950s. That’s now down to 45 percent. And while 31 percent of Americans say they were raised in a Catholic family, only 24 percent now describe themselves as Catholic. Question, how do you account for that?

WUERL: I think what we’re facing is the erosion because of the heavy, heavy influence of secularism. We live in a world, and particularly, our country, that is awash in the continuous repetition of the secular view. And all these statistics say to me is, I’m not doing as good a job as I should in preaching the Gospels. I am not doing as good a job as I need to do in getting the rest of the story out there. And the rest of the story is it’s wonderful to live in a technologically advanced, highly scientific world, but with that is also the gift of faith, and what faith brings to that whole world. Those statistics simply say to me I need to be, the church needs to be much more effective in telling the story of Jesus. I like this answer. We DO have to be sober about the secularization of our society as the chief cause of the erosion of our numbers. But, as the Cardinal points out, this is an explanation, it is not excuse. It simply means that we will have to redouble our efforts and do a better, more effective job of preaching the gospel. We have talked about that a lot on this blog and will talk of it more!

WALLACE: Cardinal, even during the Christmas season, this is still a Sunday morning talk show, so I’m going to ask you about a political issue which has a strong moral component. How do you feel about the repeal of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell,” the ban on gays serving openly in the military?

WUERL: You have to put that in context of what the church would be concerned about. When we’re dealing with the question of military readiness or morale, those are issues that we have to really hear from others on. What the church is concerned about and what it brings to this debate, this discussion, are two realities. One, the understanding the long, long teaching of the church that every human being is worthy of respect. Every person must be embraced and respected and treated with fairness. Then you also have to take the rest of the Gospel message, the rest of Jesus’s message that human sexuality has a purpose. And this is not for simply personal satisfaction. Human sexually has to be seen in the context of the great gift of love, marriage, family. And so when the church addresses any of these issues that touch on sexuality, that is our starting point. And that’s why we often times are viewed, I think, as an opposition voice, because this is a highly, highly focused society on the pleasures of life. And the church is saying that’s true, but there is also responsible sexuality. – An excellent response and distinction: respect for the person, but clarity on moral issues. We live in a culture where many people insist that the Church do what she cannot. We simply cannot set aside Biblical and Dogmatic teaching on moral issues. We can surely respect that people struggle with them. But many people insist that, until we approve of what they do, we do not really respect them, that somehow, in our disapproval of something they do we intend to offend or disrespect them. But this not so. That someone takes offense at something you or I say does not mean we actually gave offense and even less that we intended to give offense.

The Catholic Church is careful to distinguish between a person’s orientation and their behavior. We also distinguish between temptation and sin. For  example, that someone struggles with and is often tempted to anger does not make them a bad person. However, we cannot give approval to the unrighteous venting of anger. The temptation or orientation to anger is, of itself,  morally neutral, the giving way to that anger in a harmful way is not morally neutral. It is the same with sexuality. Most people suffer some degree of sexual temptation. This is not, of itself, sinful. What is sinful is to give way to it, whether through fornication, adultery, pornography, masturbation, etc. Thus, the homosexual person is not bad because of an orientation and the manner in which they are tempted sexually. Rather, what is bad is, not the person, but the acts that flow from the temptation by yielding to it.

I understand that even with this distinction (respect for the sinner, clarity about sin) many Gay people are not satisfied. What they want is approval of the acts. But the Church cannot give this. Yet, as the Cardinal says, and that is every human being is worthy of respect even if we cannot approval all of what every human being does, starting with the man or woman in the mirror. We do not intend therefore any disrespect, we do not intend to offend. That some do take offense and feel disrespected is regrettable and we in the Church  invite them to consider that our concerns are rooted in sincerely held Christian principles, rooted in biblical revelation, and the teaching of the ancient Church, and that we cannot simply cast aside what we sincerely believe to be reveled by God in this matter.

WALLACE: So are you in favor or against the repeal of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell”?

WUERL: That is a question that has to be worked out politically. And there isn’t a specific Catholic Church position, but whatever happens, it has to be seen in terms of the church’s teaching position. And that is, human sexuality is something that is supposed to be exercised responsibly and within the context of marriage. It is good for the Cardinal to avoid getting into a policy discussion of exactly how the US military should handle this. In this blog many have remarked with anger how they consider the US Bishops often transgress their role by getting involved in matters of policy. It is clear that the Bishops must advocate moral principles and set forth a Biblical and Christian vision regarding matters of justice and the moral life. But that does not mean that they should comment on every specific issue regarding policy.

The Cardinal has articulated clearly enough that the Church insists upon sexual responsibility for all people. How the military chooses to regulate itself or its members around possible threats to military discipline related to sexual matters involves prudential judgments, judgments that they are best fit to make.

It is also possible in this answer that Cardinal Wuerl is deferring to Archbishop Timothy Broglio who is the Archbishop for Military Services and may have more of a reason to comment directly on policy matters in this regard since his priests who serve in the military are directly impacted by the decision. You can read his statment here: http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=36796

WALLACE: And we have — and I apologize. We have about 45 seconds. In this special season, what message do you have for Christians and non-Christians alike?

WUERL: Christmas is a time when we all can look with hope to the future. That’s part of the message of Christmas. There is the best in each one of us. And we’re all capable of bringing out the best. And to do that together with one another, in a very pluralistic society, says that we can look to the future with hope, because if we respect and love one another, there is nothing we can’t accomplish. Yes, hope is the best note on which to end. The Pope also does this very well in his book Light of the World. In that Book Peter Seewald is often alarmist, but the Pope always goes back to the hope that is rooted in the promise of Jesus Christ that the gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church. Cardinal Wuerl has the same principled balance: sober about the challenges we face, but rooted in hope for we serve a Lord who said: “In this world you shall have tribulation, but have confidence. I have overcome the world (John 16:33).

Posted on

Former Revolutionary Becomes Big Brother – Steve Jobs and Apple Refuse a Pro-life and Pro-Marriage App

The video at the bottom of this post was produced by National Organization for Marriage. It details an unjust pulling of a pro-life app from the Apple Store.

Back in November, Apple took down an  app called “Manhattan Declaration” after receiving nearly 7,000  signatures in protest. The app in question had originally been approved by Apple. But it would seem its pro-life and anti gay Marriage stance upset some people.

As you can see by the name of the App it is a reference to the Manhattan Declaration which is a very well worded declaration stating traditional biblical values on a number of key issues including abortion, marriage and religious liberty. The document is carefully and respectfully worded. Here is a summary of the declaration contained in its opening lines:

We, as Orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical Christians, have gathered, beginning in New York on September 28, 2009, to make the following declaration, which we sign as individuals, not on behalf of our organizations, but speaking to and from our communities. We act together in obedience to the one true God, the triune God of holiness and love, who has laid total claim on our lives and by that claim calls us with believers in all ages and all nations to seek and defend the good of all who bear his image. We set forth this declaration in light of the truth that is grounded in Holy Scripture, in natural human reason (which is itself, in our view, the gift of a beneficent God), and in the very nature of the human person. We call upon all people of goodwill, believers and non-believers alike, to consider carefully and reflect critically on the issues we here address as we, with St. Paul, commend this appeal to every one’s conscience in the sight of God.. (Excerpt – Manhattan Declaration).

While the whole scope of Christian moral concern, including a special concern for the poor and vulnerable, claims our attention, we are especially troubled that in our nation today the lives of the unborn, the disabled, and the elderly are severely threatened; that the institution of marriage, already buffeted by promiscuity, infidelity and divorce, is in jeopardy of being redefined to accommodate fashionable ideologies; that freedom of religion and the rights of conscience are gravely jeopardized by those who would use the instruments of coercion to compel persons of faith to compromise their deepest convictions.

Because the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage as a union of husband and wife, and the freedom of conscience and religion are foundational principles of justice and the common good, we are compelled by our Christian faith to speak and act in their defense. In this declaration we affirm: 1) the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every human being as a creature fashioned in the very image of God, possessing inherent rights of equal dignity and life; 2) marriage as a conjugal union of man and woman, ordained by God from the creation, and historically understood by believers and non-believers alike, to be the most basic institution in society and; 3) religious liberty, which is grounded in the character of God, the example of Christ, and the inherent freedom and dignity of human beings created in the divine image

As you can see, the document is respectfully worded. Over 480,000 people, including Cardinal Wuerl  (and yours truly). This is far more than the mere 7,000 who protested the app.

The bottom line is that Apple and Steve Jobs have taken down the app that would lead you to http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/home.aspx and encourage you to read and sign the Manhattan Declaration.  Now mind you, there are over 300,000 apps available and some of them take you to some pretty edgy and controversial sites. There are any number of political apps, and others including pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage sites. For Apple to take down this app amounts to taking sides in the matters of abortion, gay “marriage” and religious liberty. Given the numbers of apps and the number of Apple users, this amounts to a kind of censorship. Jobs and Apple have no reason to limit discussion on these important topics and ought to take a careful look at what they are becoming. An individual (Jobs) and a company who once advertised how they could take on “Big Brother” with their products have now become what they once rebuked.

It is true, Apple is NOT the government. It is also true that Apple is a private company and can decide what to market in their Apple Store. However when a company becomes as large and influential as Apple has and then engages in this sort of bad behavior, they cannot avoid the charge that they have become a kind of “Big Brother” themselves.

Go to the Manhattan Declaration site ( http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/home.aspx )   to read and sign the declaration, if you have not already done so.  You can also sign a petition there asking Steve Jobs to reinstate the App. You can also e-mail Steve Jobs here: [email protected]

Posted on

Is the Abbreviation "Xmas" Really a Secular Slight of Christmas? Or is it Something Else?

Forty years ago, when I was in grammar School, the militant secularism of today was almost unknown. The war on Christmas so common today was lampooned in those days by cartoonish figures like the “Grinch who stole Christmas,” or “Scrooge” in Dickens’ A Christmas Carol.  Back in those days there were laments that Christmas was too focused on toys and Santa and not enough on Jesus. That, however, was an internal Church and family matter. But in the secular world, Christmas was still the common term used everywhere: Christmas trees, Christmas sales, Christmas holiday, Christmas break. It’s Christmastime in the city!

In the public schools I attended we sang Christmas Carols at the annual Christmas concert. And I don’t just mean the secular “Jingle Bells…Rudolph the Rednose Reindeer” variety, but even strongly Christian and religious songs: Joy to the Lord the Lord is is come!…..O Come All Ye Faithful….Come let us Adore him, Christ the Lord!….What Child is this who laid to rest on Mary’s lap is sleeping. In High School (in the 1970s) the Choir even sang O Magnum Mysterium by Victoria. Very high church…and all very religious. It was Christmas after all!

The rampant and militant secularism of today which banishes the word “Christmas,”  banishes Christmas trees, Santa, and even the word “holiday” (since it is rooted in Holy day) becomes:  Happy Winter Festival to you too! That sort of militant secularism, and triumphalist atheism was unknown forty years ago except in some very limited circles.

And yet during those times there was a common usage of the abbreviation “Xmas” It was common to get a Christmas Card and someone wrote, “Merry Xmas.”  I don’t recall any of us thought of it as a secular thing in those days. I remember, as a child,  asking my mother where the expression came from. She explained that “X” was the first letter in Greek for “Christ” and she promised to show me the symbol next Sunday in Church. Sure enough the next Sunday she showed it to me on the Church wall. It was really what looked to me like a P and and X. It was the “Chi – Rho” symbol you see at the top right of this post. Chi (X) and Rho (R) being the first two letters for Christ (x= ch in English and what looked like a P to me was really an “r” in Greek).

From Sacred to Secular – So Xmas WAS a Christian abbreviation for Christmas. It hasn’t been until more recent years that I have heard some claim that Xmas is an attempt to “keep Christ out of Christmas.” It is understandable that some would think in this was since, to the uninitiated, it looks like Christ has literally been “X’d out.” It takes a little explaining to recognize Christ in that “X” and, as world becomes more secular, and many Catholics are not taught the meaning of ancient symbols any longer, it certainly does look like Christ is missing from “Xmas.” Historically he is  not really missing at all. But this not well understood.

Historical Roots of the “X”  – The use of “X” for Christ comes from a time prior to the printing press when books were literally “manuscripts,” that is, “written by hand.” Abbreviations in those times were common. In the ancient manuscripts of Gregorian Chant there are many abbreviations like sclorum = In saecula saeculorum, Dne = Domine, ala = alleluia. In many manuscripts “X” or the “chi rho” symbol were used for Christ. Ink, paper and time were precious and Abbreviations. To some extent these have returned in the text world: LOL, IMHO, CUL8r, etc.

So “Xmas” does not really have secular roots or imply some intentional omission of Christ. It is an ancient abbreviation.

However, many today do take exception to its use and it CAN in fact be an attempt to “X” Christ out of Christmas by some. In virulently secular times where it is considered acceptable to exhibit outright hostility to Christmas and Jesus, it would seem Xmas is problematic. Other things being equal, we want to be as explicit as possible that it is Jesus Christ to whom we refer.  We should also be sensitive to the fact that many are bothered by the term Xmas even if we are not.

Advice – Generally speaking I avoid the term today even though, due to my training, it does not bother me. Tactically speaking I also avoid it due to the fact that we need to unambiguously announce Jesus and “X” just doesn’t do that anymore. However, we should also avoid being too easily offended in  a matter such as this where usage has recently shifted. We may take offense where none is intended. Thin-skinned Christians are not helpful to turning the tide of anti-Christian fervor today.

So, in the end, perhaps a middle ground regarding the term “Xmas.” Avoid its use for the reasons stated but do not easily take offense regarding it either. There are bigger battles.

This video is from the Merriam Webster site. They have many videos and interesting words studies here: http://www.merriam-webster.com/video/index.htm

Posted on

It’s a Wonder-filled Life. A Meditation on the Mystery of Our Life

Most of you have seen the movie, “It’s a Wonderful Life.”  More on that in a moment. But for now, the word “wonderful” is most commonly understood by most people simply to mean “really great.” But the word “wonderful” actually means “filled with wonder.”

Who  of us can understand the incredible mystery of our own life? And not merely considered in itself, but also how it interacts with the lives of others and the events of this world? Why are we here now? Why do we meet and know the people we do? How does our life affect others, not just in the obvious ways but also the hidden ways unknown to us?

Imagine that one day you stayed late at work one day rather than take the commuter bus. Your open seat caused two people to meet who later married, had three children, one of whom will discover the cure for cancer. This is something you will never know, but God does. Maybe another day you drove a little slower than the driver in back of you wished, but your slower pace meant that your irritated tailgater was not in an intersection at just the moment he would have been killed in a horrible accident had he kept his pace. I know you may think these to be trivial examples but consider the mystery of each moment and all the “alternate universes” that would result if even a small change took place in our actions!

Our lives are mysteriously intertwined. We have almost no idea how even the little things we do cause enormous ripples and chain reactions that affect dozens, hundreds or thousands of people from moment to moment. What if I never wrote this post and you never read it but instead were reading something else right now, (good, or bad). The possibilities are almost endless as to what might happen had I not written and you not read.

God has us here in this place at this time for a reason. We have some very particular purposes in his plan and he alone knows them all. Try for a moment to appreciate your dignity in this regard. You have a critical role in a cascade of events that ripple from your life and your place in God’s plan. No one can take that place and your role is critical to millions of subsequent transactions in God’s wonderful vision.  Psalm 139 has this to say:

O LORD, you have searched me and you know me. You know when I sit and when I rise;  you perceive my thoughts from afar. You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. Before a word is on my tongue  you know it completely, O LORD.  Such knowledge is too wonderful for me,  too lofty for me to attain. For you created my inmost being;  you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;  your works are wonderful. All my days  were written in your book  before one of them came to be. (Selected verses).

 The movie “It’s a Wonderful Life” is an extended meditation on this topic and if,  for some strange reason,  you have not seen it then you know what you must do! The protagonist of the movie “George” seeks to end his life and wishes he had never been born but an angel from heaven takes him through the strange and sad “alternate universe” that would result had he never been here. It is a world of terrifying loss for many and George comes to discover the dignity and necessity of his life in God’s plan.

In God’s vision no one can be said to be unnecessary or of limited importance. We have absolutely no way of knowing that and given the intricacies of human interaction and the ripple effects thereof we are pretty foolish for thinking we have little importance. Rather, it seems we are quite essential.

Enjoy this summary of the Movie “It’s a Wonderful Life” and remember that “wonderful” means “filled with wonder (and awe).”