progressive involvement

And they live longer too

Per capita health care costs, 2003:

United States: $5711
Denmark: $2743
France: $3048
Germany: $2983
Italy: $2314
Japan: $2249
United Kingdom: $2317

Pope Benedict, the union organizer

Pope Benedict has released his third encyclical--"Caritas in Veritate," or "Charity in truth."  Typically, Benedict has sided with traditionalist, even revanchist, elements in the church.  On the issue of economics and labor, he sounds more like a socialist. 

He deplores “unregulated exploitation” of the environment, "speculative financial dealing," profit produced by "improper means" without the "common good" at its heart, financiers without "ethical foundation," and the "scandal of glaring inequalities."

Lowering the level of protection accorded to the rights of workers, or abandoning mechanisms of wealth redistribution in order to increase the country's international competitiveness, hinder the achievement of lasting development.

The heart of "Caritas in Veritate" is putting people above profit.  This is expressed, one way or another, in many parts of the document.  He blasts "the right to excess," for example, which exists alongside lack of food, water, and health care.  Waxing poetic on the "rights of workers," Benedict calls for: 

...work that expresses the essential dignity of every man and woman in the context of their particular society: work that is freely chosen, effectively associating workers, both men and women, with the development of their community; work that enables the worker to be respected and free from any form of discrimination; work that makes it possible for families to meet their needs and provide schooling for their children, without the children themselves being forced into labor; work that permits the workers to organize themselves freely, and to make their voices heard; work that leaves enough room for rediscovering one's roots at a personal, familial and spiritual level; work that guarantees those who have retired a decent standard of living.

Fr. Thomas Reese, S.J. (Jesuit) writing in the Washington Post, noted this:

...he (Benedict) is to the left of almost every politician in America. What politician would casually refer to "redistribution of wealth" or talk of international governing bodies to regulate the economy? Who would call for increasing the percentage of GDP devoted to foreign aid? Who would call for the adoption of "new life-styles 'in which the quest for truth, beauty, goodness and communion with others for the sake of common growth are the factors which determine consumer choices, savings and investments'"?

Benedict also proposed several specific recommendations.  See them on the flip.

Nope

The press has universally condemned Mark Sanford, and nearly-universally praised his wife, Jenny Sanford.  It's not difficult to see why.  Sanford's behavior is difficult to defend.  Meanwhile, Jenny Sanford comes from an upper-crust Chicago family with upper-crust blood lines.

Mrs. Sanford has issued a new statement.  It is similar to those she has issued previously in that she, again, says she forgives her husband and looks forward to reconciliation, which, she acknowledges, will not be easy.  Then, she says:

However, his far more egregious offenses were committed against God, the institutions of marriage and family, our boys and me.

I can completely understand why Jenny Sanford is angry with her husband, but I can't really see why the people of South Carolina should be--not about that anyway.  They seemed quite willing to look the other way when Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC) was prowling the state, including his seduction of a woman on her way to be executed.

Mark Sanford should apologize to the people of South Carolina who actually have a stake in such an apology, i.e. those who would have been affected by his unwillingness to take stimulus money for unemployment, and those might have affected if a disaster had struck while he was out on his own "Appalachian Trail."

If the Vatican really could put "time in a bottle," their favorite vintage would be the 13th century

The New York Times reports this morning that the Vatican is "quietly conducting" an investigation of American nuns.  It really hasn't been all that quiet.  National Catholic Reporter had the story at least three months ago, and has been following the story ever since, as have several blogs, including this one.

That said, the Times goes on to note the changes that have occurred in the lives of women religious over the past fifty years.  Most no longer wear the habit, many no longer live in habits, and several work in agencies outside the church.  The sisters fear that the Vatican's real agenda is to turn the clock back to a time when the nuns were submissive and servile.

“They think of us as an ecclesiastical work force,” said Sister Sandra M. Schneiders, professor emerita of New Testament and spirituality at the Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley, in California. “Whereas we are religious, we’re living the life of total dedication to Christ, and out of that flows a profound concern for the good of all humanity. So our vision of our lives, and their vision of us as a work force, are just not on the same planet.”

Two investigations are in process.  The first is an Apostolic Visitation which is being led by Mother Clare Millea, head of the Apostles of the Sacred Heart of Jesus.  She is an American, but lives in Rome.  Her investigation makes no secret of its target.  It investigate all 340 women religious communities, but will focus only on "nuns actively engaged in working in society and the church."  In other words, "Just what are you liberals up to anyway?"

The second investigation will examine doctrine in the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, an umbrella organization which represents 95% of American nuns.  The investigation is being headed by Cardinal Levada, formerly Archbishop of San Francisco, who now heads the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly known as the Holy Inquisition.

Levada is at least upfront about his agenda.  The American nuns have failed to peddle Vatican doctrine on three particular issues:  "the male-only priesthood, homosexuality and the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church as the means to salvation." 

In other words, the American nuns have failed to toe the conservative line on three of the conservative faction's favorite topics, which really can be whittled down to one:  the innate superiority of the men who wrote the rules in the first place.  "We straight Catholic men are the best, and everybody else ought to think so too."  (I wish there were a way for Cardinal Levada to hear the things nuns say out of earshot of the Vatican.)

 

 

Happy Canada Day to our great neighbors to the north

Gross hypocrisy commends itself

From their (religious right's) point of view the cause, the need to police what people do in bed, is, by definition, right, because it’s literally God-given. So the fact that some of those trying to police what other people do in bed are themselves doing nasty things does not reflect on the cause itself — on the contrary, it shows just how necessary more bed-snooping is.

It’s also notable that conservatives are, in practice, more forgiving of their politicians’ sins than liberals. John Edwards and Eliot Spitzer ended their political careers; Ensign and Vitter are still in the Senate, and Newt Gingrich is out there on the Sunday shows, speaking for the GOP. Why? Because where liberals see gross hypocrisy, conservatives see men doing the Lord’s work — which partially excuses their own failings. Liberals think that a man who has an affair is worse if he preaches moral values; conservatives think he’s better. You might say that as they see it, if he interferes with what enough other people do in bed, it doesn’t matter what he does himself.

Paul Krugman

House prices 18.1% lower

This is supposedly a sign that prices are "stabilizing."  Which could be, I suppose, although it also appears that you could say prices are continuing to fall through the floor and be equally as accurate.

The problem

See Paul Krugman at his best today at the New York Times.  His topic is the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill, which narrowly passed the House last week on a vote of 219-212.  Forty some Democrats flaked and voted against it.  Eight Republicans--all in districts carried by Obama--voted for it--and provided the margin of victory.

Considering the situation, it ought to be astonishing that 212 members of the highest legislative body in the United States voted against it.  Global warming is a fact.  It is perhaps the most widely held point of view among scientists in the entire world.  Yet, some weather man in Akron says God won't let it happen, and James Inhofe (R-Awl Bidness) calls him an expert.

I can't help thinking of Jared Diamond's books where he argues that the Easter Islanders and the Scandinavian Greenlanders both failed and essentially became extinct because of they were unwilling to adapt to their environmental situation.  No doubt there was a significant faction of Easter Islanders who said, "We have plenty of trees.  Trees are eternal.  Keep cutting," or a faction in Greenland saying, "We will never change our centuries old way of life, and we will keep eating cows."  Krugman says thus:

But if you watched the debate on Friday, you didn’t see people who’ve thought hard about a crucial issue, and are trying to do the right thing. What you saw, instead, were people who show no sign of being interested in the truth. They don’t like the political and policy implications of climate change, so they’ve decided not to believe in it — and they’ll grab any argument, no matter how disreputable, that feeds their denial.

Indeed, if there was a defining moment in Friday’s debate, it was the declaration by Representative Paul Broun of Georgia that climate change is nothing but a “hoax” that has been “perpetrated out of the scientific community.” I’d call this a crazy conspiracy theory, but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists. After all, to believe that global warming is a hoax you have to believe in a vast cabal consisting of thousands of scientists — a cabal so powerful that it has managed to create false records on everything from global temperatures to Arctic sea ice.

Yet Mr. Broun’s declaration was met with applause.

Southern Baptist Convention makes a fool of itself

WaPo:  The slowly shrinking Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) voted on Tuesday to sever 125-year-old ties with a Texas church that allowed homosexual members to have their photos in the church directory...By the way, the theme for this year's Southern Baptist Convention: "Love Loud: Actions Speak Louder Than Words."

h/t:  Dan 

Christ the Lord defamed again, and yet again

Pastor Urges His Flock to Bring Guns to Church.

Pastor defends video of exorcism of gay man.