Single-Issue vs. Singular Issues

The same September 18, 2008, issue of the Baltimore-archdiocesan newspaper that yielded yesterday's base-article also carried a reader's letter; I reprint it here in full as published (with the usual tweaking of punctuation; I withhold only the writer's name). 

Disclaimer: © 2008 The Cathedral Foundation, Inc., 880 park Avenue, Baltimore MD 21201 (correspondence to: PO Box 777, Baltimore MD 21203), 888-768-9555, Mail@CatholicReview.org 

Beware of single-issue politics 

In your Sept. 11 issue, you published three articles on abortion: criticism of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her statements about when life begins; the Republican Party platform which "decried the practice of abortion and repeated its call for a human-life amendment to the U.S. constitution"; and George Weigel's column posing abortion questions to Senators Obama and McCain. 

(Weigel I do like and regard highly... outside of the political fray.) 

I believe the Bush administration is responsible for the last eight years of economic havoc: the widening gap between rich and poor, rising unemployment, increasing food and fuel prices, home foreclosures, a roller-coaster stock market which is eroding the life's savings of millions, and a national debt that is beyond anyone's imagination. 

I understand you[r] desire to uphold and advance the Church's moral teachings, but I submit that we should not lose sight, in this political season, of its teachings on economic and social justice. The Republicans should be held accountable for their record on those issues. The Republicans promote single-issue politics; this tactic has succeeded for them in the past. Let's not give them their way again.  

Last week regular contributor Spartacus sent me a link to an October 20 article at TruthDig, "End of a Catholic Commandment?", that looks at the reality of many American Catholics' not falling in line behind certain too-rigid members of the Church's clergy who stress thumb-up/-down on abortion should be the litmus test of our vote-determination. 

I am not in the clergy, though I hope to be… at the very least, a member of a professed/avowed religious order, Deus et ecclesia volent. I am not a theologian. I am not a politician, nor legal expert – Church nor civil law. I do not profess greater wisdom and/or deeper spirituality than any members of our clergy. And perhaps I do err in leaning on my open-eyed discernment and reasoning, over exclusive, blind obedience to the pulpit, in selecting the women and men whom I will honor with my vote on Tuesday (if not sooner). But – to jarringly quote Martin Luther (very different circumstance!) – God help me, I can do no other. 

Don't panic; the Church has my full obedience in matters of faith, morals, and teachings. My disagreement is only with this specific interpretation of one's civil – and, yes, spiritual – duty to vote and give say in the political process. 

Back to TruthDig: here's the full article; the author is E. J. Dionne (I'm familiar with him through his work with the Washington Post, and appearances on NPR): 

Disclaimer: © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group 

It has become commonplace in American politics: Certain Roman Catholic bishops declare that the faithful should cast their ballots on the basis of a limited number of "nonnegotiable issues," notably opposition to abortion. Conservative Catholics cheer, liberal Catholics howl. And that is usually the end of the story.

Not this year. Catholics, who are quintessential swing-voters and gave narrow but crucial support to President Bush in 2004, are drifting toward Barack Obama. And this time, some church leaders are suggesting that single-issue voting is by no means a Catholic commandment.

In an interview on Monday, Gabino Zavala, an auxiliary bishop in the Los Angeles Archdiocese, said his fellow bishops have long insisted that "we're not a one-issue church," a view reflected in their 2007 document "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship".

"But that's not always what comes out," says Zavala, who is also bishop-president of the Catholic peace group Pax Christi USA. "What I believe, and what the church teaches, is that one abortion is too many. That's why I believe abortion is so important. But in light of this, there are many other issues we need to bring up, other issues we should consider, other issues that touch the reality of our lives."

Those issues, Bishop Zavala said, include racism, torture, genocide, immigration, war, and the impact of the economic downturn "on the most vulnerable among us, the elderly, poor children, single mothers".

"We know that neither of the political parties supports everything the church teaches," he added. "We are not going to create a culture of life if we don't talk about all the life issues, beginning with abortion but including all of them."

Zavala was careful to say that he did not want to take issue with any of his fellow bishops. But his view contrasts with that of others in the hierarchy.

Earlier this month, for example, Bishop Joseph Martino of the Scranton (Pa.) Diocese issued a letter warning that "being 'right' on taxes, education, health care, immigration, and the economy fails to make up for the error of disregarding the value of a human life." He added: "It is a tragic irony that 'pro-choice' candidates have come to support homicide – the gravest injustice a society can tolerate – in the name of 'social justice'."

Bishop Zavala's desire to speak out with an alternative view is a sign of how much has changed in four years: progressive Catholics are now as organized as conservative Catholics were in 2004. At Web sites such as prolifeproobama.com, they are arguing that the abortion question does not trump all other concerns.

The impact of the new Catholic politics could be substantial. Catholics are often a decisive electoral group partly because church membership ranges from upscale to working-class whites, a large community of Latinos, and a significant number of African-Americans.

Catholics typically make up about a quarter of the electorate, and they are strategically located. White Catholics are important in such swing states as Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, while Latino Catholics make up a notable share of the populations of New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, and Florida.

Polls have varied in measuring the Catholic shift toward the Democrats, but Obama seems to be running ahead of John Kerry's 2004 performance. According to the network exit polls, Bush carried 52 percent of the Catholic vote to 47 percent for Kerry. By contrast, a mid-October Pew Research Center survey showed Obama leading John McCain among Catholics by a margin of 55 percent to 35 percent.

Washington Post surveys over the same period have found more modest Catholic gains for Obama. A Post tracking poll released Monday showed Obama and McCain splitting the Catholic vote at 48 percent each. Obama's Catholic share probably stands somewhere between the Pew and Post numbers. But even a split among Catholics could mark a sufficient improvement over Kerry's performance to tip key states the Democrat's way.

In many respects, Catholics simply reflect the country as a whole in moving toward the Democrats because of frustrations with the economy and the Bush years. But the Catholic debate entails a very particular argument over what counts as a commitment to life. To an unexpected degree, this election could hang on the struggle of Catholic voters with their priorities and their consciences.  

I was almost jumping out of my chair as I read the article and dug out some basic links, and poked around further – this is what I've been saying! Dionne puts it far better than I can; I feel… not vindicated, but relieved. I'm not looking for vindication amid my uncomfortable awareness of disagreement with men (and women) I regard quite highly. The backup, though, is just what I need. What we need: as Catholics… and all Americans. 

Amen. 

Next up: a Catholic clergyman-columnist weighs in from mid-America. 

 

"Toward a More Profound Understanding", part 2

Here's a long-due followup, folks… and I still don't have all the info on the matter as I want. 

I reprinted here a few weeks ago an article on over-the-line words by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, whom I regard and respect highly. And I mentioned that "I have a later article (9/18/08) that states Pelosi did agree to meet with Niederauer." I've been hoping for further backup to follow on that, but haven't seen anything… so here's what I've got so far. Catholic News Service (CNS) first posted this article on September 10; I caught an abbreviated version in an archdiocesan newspaper. 

The text is reprinted (i.e., copied without permission – though with apologies to any legalities-stickler) directly from the CNS site; I'll stick my neck out further by including first the copyright information. I'm doing so because I want to get this article out, and to a few more sets of eyes, and not leave the Speaker hanging, so to speak: 

Copyright (c) 2008 Catholic News Service/USCCB. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed.
CNS · 3211 Fourth St. NE · Washington DC 20017 · 202.541.3250 

Further personal disclosure: Joe Biden may be considered a friend of the family, in that my late uncle and aunt (who lived in Delaware for decades) would over many years visit and meet with him with some regularity, and their daughter – my cousin, of course – worked closely with the Senator on his presidential bid, and (I assume) is still professionally associated with him. 

I also disagree with his slight weaseling out of his own "Meet the Press" question: it's not just personal judgment, Joe. (I do, still, quite look forward to his taking the helm as vice-president in January. He is good… and, yes, a politician.) 

Here follows the article; readers may notice that some of its text repeats portions of Dan Morris-Young's earlier article: 

Pelosi agrees to meet archbishop; Biden remarks also draw criticism
By Catholic News Service

SAN FRANCISCO (CNS) -- Responding to an invitation to meet with him to discuss church teaching on abortion and other topics, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she would "welcome the opportunity" to meet with Archbishop George H. Niederauer of San Francisco "to go beyond our earlier most cordial exchange about immigration and needs of the poor to church teaching on other significant matters."

In a letter delivered to Archbishop Niederauer Sept. 5, Pelosi offered to "meet at your earliest convenience" to discuss a statement by the archbishop that said Pelosi's remarks were "in serious conflict with the teachings of the Catholic Church" on abortion, the beginning of human life and the formation of conscience.

But the furor that arose after Pelosi said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Aug. 24 that church leaders for centuries had not been able to agree on when life begins received further fuel Sept. 7 when Sen. Joseph Biden, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, responded to a similar question on "Meet the Press."

Biden, who like Pelosi is a Catholic, said he accepted Catholic teaching that life begins at conception but did not believe that he could impose his beliefs in the public policy arena.

"I'm prepared as a matter of faith to accept that life begins at the moment of conception," he said. "But that is my judgment. For me to impose that judgment on everyone else who is equally and maybe even more devout than I am seems to me is inappropriate in a pluralistic society."

Biden's remarks drew an almost immediate response from Archbishop Charles J. Chaput and Auxiliary Bishop James D. Conley of Denver, who said in a Sept. 8 "notice to the Catholic community in northern Colorado" that the Delaware senator "used a morally exhausted argument that American Catholics have been hearing for 40 years: i.e., that Catholics can't 'impose' their religiously based views on the rest of the country."

But, they said, "all law involves the imposition of some people's convictions on everyone else. That is the nature of the law.

"American Catholics have allowed themselves to be bullied into accepting the destruction of more than a million developing unborn children a year," the notice added. "Other people have imposed their 'pro-choice' beliefs on American society without any remorse for decades."

Archbishop Niederauer said in his Sept. 5 statement that he regretted addressing the issue so publicly, because Pelosi -- a Democrat who represents the San Francisco area -- has been a dedicated public servant who has promoted some legislation that is in line with the social teachings of the Catholic Church.

"But the widespread consternation among Catholics made it unavoidable," he added.

Archbishop Niederauer told Catholic San Francisco, the archdiocesan newspaper, Sept. 9 that his office would be "comparing calendars" with Pelosi's office to schedule a private meeting.

The archbishop said reaction to his statement had been "mostly positive."

"People have said they feel it said what needed to be said," he added.

Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia and Bishop William E. Lori of Bridgeport, Conn., chairmen of the U.S. bishops' pro-life and doctrine committees, respectively, had criticized Pelosi Aug. 25, saying she "misrepresented the history and nature of the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church on abortion."

Since the first century, the church "has affirmed the moral evil of every abortion," the two chairmen said.

The two chairmen also issued a lengthy critique of Biden's comments Sept. 9, saying that "the obligation to protect unborn human life rests on the answer to two questions, neither of which is private or specifically religious."

The first question is when human life begins, they said, adding it is a matter of "objective fact," taught in embryology textbooks, that life begins at conception. The second, "a moral question, with legal and political consequences," is which human beings "should be seen as having fundamental human rights, such as a right not to be killed," they added.

"We have no business dividing humanity into those who are valuable enough to warrant protection and those who are not," Cardinal Rigali and Bishop Lori said. "Such views pose a serious threat to the dignity and rights of other poor and vulnerable members of the human family who need and deserve our respect and protection."

The U.S. bishops' Administrative Committee, meeting in Washington Sept. 10, endorsed the views expressed by Cardinal Rigali and Bishop Lori and said, "As the teachers of the faith, we also point out the connectedness between the evil of abortion and political support for abortion."

The full body of bishops will "discuss the practical and pastoral implications of these serious matters" when they meet in Baltimore Nov. 10-13, the Administrative Committee said.

Archbishop Niederauer said many Catholics "have written me letters and sent me e-mails in which they expressed their dismay and concern about the speaker's remarks."

"Very often they moved on to a question that caused much discussion during the 2004 campaign: Is it necessary to deny holy Communion to some Catholics in public life because of their public support for abortion on demand?" he added.

Church leaders should be cautious when making judgments about who is worthy of receiving holy Communion, he said.

"The practice of the church is to accept the conscientious self-appraisal of each person" when he or she approaches for Communion, Archbishop Niederauer said.

Bishop Michael J. Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Colo., took a stronger position in a statement issued Aug. 26.

"Those Catholics who take a public stance in opposition to this most fundamental moral teaching of the church place themselves outside full communion with the church," he wrote in his statement, "and they should not present themselves for the reception of holy Communion."  

(I will have more to say on this issue – from my viewpoint as Democrat, liberal, and penitent Catholic.)

In the "Meet the Press" interview, Pelosi said specific considerations must be undertaken during each trimester of a child's development before an abortion can be performed.

"This isn't about abortion on demand. It's about careful, careful consideration of all factors ... that a woman has to make with her doctor and her God," she said, adding that her goal is to make abortion safe and rare while reducing the number of abortions nationwide.

Though critical of Pelosi's statements and stands on abortion and other life issues, Archbishop Niederauer described the member of St. Vincent de Paul Parish in San Francisco as "a gifted, dedicated and accomplished public servant" who "has stated often her love for her faith and for the Catholic Church."

In her response, which Pelosi released to the media, she thanked the archbishop for his "gracious remarks regarding my love for the Catholic Church and my Catholic faith."

Contributing to this story was Dan Morris-Young in San Francisco.

 

More Fear, More Hatred

Fellow left-leaner Janet -- I hope she's okay with my using her first name here -- happened upon a posting here from a couple weeks back, and took time to respond:

-----Original Message-----
From: Janet [mailto:donotreply@wordpress.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:26 PM
To: A. Gene Childe
Subject: [MT2mb] Comment: "The Politics of Fear and Hatred"  

New comment on your post #576 "The Politics of Fear and Hatred" Author : Janet (IP: [numbers] . [URL]) [E-mail] [URL] [Whois]

Comment: 

I frequently get annoying e-mails along these lines, as my family is uber conservative. (I've jokingly suggested they change their Republican symbol from an elephant to an ostrich... they didn't find it as funny as I did.) I'm amazed that they continue to forward this [junk] without a) verifying its authenticity via snopes or any other reliable publication b) considering whether or not this is hateful, prejudicial, or divisive and c) fixing the grammatical errors. Because seriously, the people formulating this spam probably dropped out of high school to work in pa's garage. 

Intelligence. Please. Obama 08.

Well! Credit goes to regular submitter Spartacus; I was just relaying his rant. (I don't share her apparent opinion of high-school dropouts either, per se: my late-great father-in-law never completed high school himself. And he and his late wife -- both rural country-folk -- were rabidly anti-conservative.) I replied to Janet, bcc-ing Spartacus: 

-----Original Message-----
From: MT2mb
To: JanetPlanet@Yipee.com
Subject: Re: The Politics of Fear and Hatred
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:29:24 -0400

Hi, Janet:

Thanks for the comment! The kudos goes to my friend Spartacus, of course.

Here's a further solution I recently heard about, and I'm just itching to try for myself… Whenever you get one of those forwarded brain-is-vacant or I-live-to-hate emails, and you know the person who sent it, make an immediate contribution in that person's name to the most liberal, far-left-of-center agency you can think of. It needn't be big $$, but make sure you include the "friend's" email address and mailing address. Barack, of course, would love the contribution… but there's no reason, in theory, you couldn't donate, say, five to twenty bucks in their name to, the Green Party, for example, or even the Communist Party. Planned Parenthood can do the trick… or even a wiccan, satanist, or neo-pagan group. (Not that I'm particularly fond of these.) 

[Let me repeat that: I really don't endorse the wiccans / neo-pagans / satanists et al. ...or even Planned Parenthood. I name them here only with the intent of shock-value to the ultraconservatives.]

What will happen is that this person will likely receive a warm thank-you from that agency/movement, and you will have canceled out, in part and in principle, whatever contribution they've made to their own favorite far-right cause. You may (or may not) wish to let this "friend" know in advance that they'll be getting the thank-you because of a donation some kind-hearted soul made in their name… which you will repeat and continue every time they send you such garbage/vitriol. End result is a decrease in the bad junk in your inbox… plus a few more shekels for some folks who may genuinely need it.

A few cycles back, I had a leftist Democrat friend who every major election would stick to his Republican wife's car-bumper the classic sticker, "Vote Republican – it's easier than thinking!" And every time we get one of those stupid (evil, even) forwarded emails, the sender has just underscored this axiom.

Myself, I'm in the odd position of being a very comfortably, liberally left-of-center Democrat… yet also firmly Catholic and anti-abortion (plus anti-war and anti- death-penalty, of course)… and still feminist. This stance I haven't taken because some pulpit-pounder told me to, or even because the Church takes the unequivocal stand against abortion, but because years of reflection in faith and in science have carried me there, from a previous, solid pro-abortion stance. (First date with a girlfriend in 1989 was to a pro-"choice" rally in Washington DC.) My heart remains with the women who feel they have no other choice/option, even while I disagree with their "solution".

And I don't buy into the position argued by some of my Church's clergy that anti-abortion is the determinant of how I really ought to vote. Social justice, equality, proper stewardship of resources (both ecological and economic), and other needy- and future-focused issues are what my candidates must embrace. If s/he supports abortion… well, yes, I have some genuine difficulty with that, but I'm not about to vote for the other guy for that reason alone.

Consistently the right favors loosening the reigns on the corporate world, and gutting governmental intake via taxes… to the point where social services and education are cut to the bone, if not marrow. And if they oppose abortion at the same time? Sorry, Father – I will not make myself a bedfellow of these types. No, thanks. I agree with the criticism that that is single-issue voting, regardless of how so many of my fellow Catholics howl at being so called.

I don't claim to be wiser, or just smarter or kinder, than some of the particularly saintly religious folks who urge such single-issue guidance. I love them, but simply can't take that step.

Pardon me there; I pushed my own button… I've blogged on this before, and will be putting up at least one or two more postings on it before next Tuesday, and we'll see.

Take care, and vote, and get a bunch more people to do so – see if you can get some homebound or carless folks out to the polling-places. Good luck!

Regards,

Aging Child

From the Quill: Little Brown One

Thinking still of Tiger, yesterday, I remembered something I wrote a little over ten years ago. (I include it below, but it's not free for the taking, people, all right? …unlike some of the more-crappy things I've written and posted here. Besides, I have the drafts.) 

Since his death, I find that I keep stumbling over the little Tiger-stuff – which is a typical experience when someone's left us, whether moved across state lines, or overseas, or on to their maker... all of which I've endured (and survived) with loved ones. E.g., for me it includes even little things like scratching his jowls while dinner heats up in the microwave, pushing his fluffy tail out of the popcorn-bowl while watching TV, and so on. 

When I laid him to rest Friday afternoon, it was following on a couple hours of very difficult, frustrated digging through rocky backyard soil that really is more rock than soil. Two hours' work had yielded barely enough depth and breadth for Tiger and his soft blanket and toys (but not the cat-pillow that should have gone along), and I still worry that it wasn't deep enough, that some scavenger may yet come along and undo the work. So atop his low, broad mound (which also describes his own generous shape in life, come to think of it) I set four large paving-blocks; they'll stay there through the fall and winter; come spring, I might just expand Mother's garden to enclose his own plot, and lay down a couple more inches of topsoil and flowers… maybe catnip. 

Dr. Tiermann's office had offered to cremate him and return the ashes (90$), or include him with other animals being cremated (25$... and no ashes back). This would have saved me that labor for certain, but I begrudged the expense… and something about that far-easier option felt a little like a cold return for all the years he's warmed and entertained the family. Nor would I have considered simply putting his body in a bag and leaving it out with the trash, and his last load of used litter. 

No. 

Once before this, on a much smaller scale, I was confronted by an animal's body, and what to do with it. During a lovely sunset in late June of 1997, I heard an odd scrabbling-sound on the concrete balcony, and stepped outside to find a wild English sparrow (I believe she was female) flapping around in some desperation. She hadn't flown into the glass, so I had no idea why she was there, nor why she was in distress. 

But I picked her up, held her, and realized she was dying… and held her while her life ebbed away to nothing. Then I discarded her body sadly in the dumpster (no yard there in our third-floor apartment), feeling while doing so that I'd done something really vile and dirtying to something pure and pretty. 

Then I went inside and wrote a verse to this little bird, and cried. 

Little Brown One 

Little brown sparrow,

fluttering, feathering on my balcony,

As you scraped around, flapped about,

gently I picked you up,

Held your quivering fluff in my palm,

felt the life still filling your chest.

Eyes still open, you must have seen me;

and crying out, did you thank or fear me?

All I could do was hold you;

All I could do was stroke you;

All I could do was whisper and soothe.

I told you it was okay;

twittering myself, I told you to sleep,

To dream and fly again,

the sunset pink and peach around us.

Your feathers were soft as angels,

your tail still twitched, eyes closing;

And I said, Let go of the hurt,

It’s okay. It’s all right;

Let it all go, Relax, Relax,

Be at peace, Fear no longer.

There was nothing I could do!

There was nothing I could do!

(nothing beyond my own mortal powers)  

Little brown one, tan and soft and fluffy,

cupped dying in my hand:

All I could do was watch the life leave you,

the breath go away, the eyes squeeze shut;

All I could do was mourn your gentle passage,

and whisper that your life was special.

Thank you for coming to me!

Thank you for giving me your last moments!

I hope you lost your fear, and knew me,

knew I wished you only peace and comfort.

I hope your last thoughts were free of pain,

threshold of a dream of flight unending.

Thank you for trusting me!

Thank you for living those last moments!

I can only feel honor that I held you,

privilege in guiding you home;

I can only wonder why it all happened,

feel tears that I watched – held – you die.

It felt to me so evil, after such beauty,

to cast your little corpse away.

But I knew, I think, that it was okay;

that while your body rests with the trash

Your spirit, your soul, is still flying,

and your song fills the skies of heaven.

I wish I were an artist!

I wish I could encase your body in gold,

enwrap you forever in glass agleam!

I wish I could show all the world your beauty,

or hear even once your song...

"In what distant deep, or skies..."

Mrs. Dawn Bosco – his former owner (or ownee) – was on the send-to list of yesterday's note on Tiger; she has a very deep and compassionate soul, and shared with me her own measure of sorrow: 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mrs. Bosco
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 5:05 PM
To: 'Aging Child'
Subject: RE: Burning Bright  

Gene, 

I share your sorrow in Tiger's passing. I thank you with all my heart, for giving him such a loving home to live out his life while I tried to be there for [some strong family demands of my own]. I did get to see Tig during a visit just prior to your Mom taking ill so I know he was a happy kitty with all of you. I know too that these companions are not people; but, special comforters sent by God to bring some measure of unquestioning love into our sometimes bleak lives. I thank God for the joy of Tiger, and all my other pets over the years. They have been great, helping to soften sad times and heighten the happy ones. We have been blessed with them in our lives. 

Thanks again for being Tiger's adoptive family. 

Love,

Mrs. B 

I wrote her back: 

-----Original Message-----
From: Aging Child [mailto:AGeneChilde@YouWho.com]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 10:41 PM
To: 'Mrs. B'
Subject: RE: Burning Bright 

Good evening, Ms. B.,

And thank you for your kind words – at least as much on my mother's behalf, and my daughters', as my own. It is through you that he came into our home, and your prior years of loving care for him (and the dogs' attention on him also!) certainly prepped him for the sideshow Mother's home can sometimes turn into… as you well know.

I did tell Mother about Tiger this evening – and most interestingly, she very much seemed to know already: she was crying, and asking how Tiger was doing… so I gently told her (choking up badly, I admit), and we talked about him for the next hour. I suspect he may have passed by her room on the way to his next home, and purred something in her soul's ear, waiting with her awhile until I showed up.

At Mother's request, I posted on her bulletin-board a large Tiger-picture that Shellie took a while back and Mew had printed up. Mother said it would make his passing easier for her to bear, not harder, with his big fuzzy face right there by her bed.

I agree deeply with your sentiment: There is no question that God gives us these companions to serve as additional conduits to us of His unconditional love. And they teach us as well about responding to such trusting hearts, and expressing love and devotion ourselves. I get annoyed at certain priests, and other religious figures, who insist that our animal-friends will not be there in Heaven – these men likely never had a big slobbery snout slathering their cheek, or a warm fuzzy curled up next to them on the couch, purring away in contentment and closeness. (And they take their scripture far too hogwash-literally and narrowly.) 

Other priests – e.g., the saintly Benedict Groeschel – express their own feeling that, since God's grace and love accompany us beyond this life, so too will those literal, walking and wagging loving friends He's given us. The Bible itself states unequivocally that at Jesus' name (which means "God will save"), "every knee should bend, of those in Heaven and on Earth and under the Earth" – and St. Paul doesn't write "men's and women's knees"; last time I looked, every animal had knees, from grasshopper to goose to… Tiger. 

The poet Charles Laurence Dunbar wrote (and fellow poet Maya Angelou embraced) the words, "I know why the caged bird sings". I think that's why dogs' tails wag, and Tiger purrs… it's not just because there's a ball or brush in someone's hand, either. 

Gene 

My daughter Shellie had written me shortly after I spoke with her about her "baby": 

-----Original Message-----
From: Shellie Childe [mailto:C.Shell@YabbaDoo.com]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 6:45 PM
To: Aging Child
Subject: RE: Burning Bright  

Thought you might like this: 

"No amount of time can erase the memory of a good cat, and no amount of masking tape can ever totally remove his fur from your couch." 

:] 

quotegarden.com has a whole bunch of quotes about cats - mostly hilarious and so very true 

…prompting from me: 

-----Original Message-----
From: Aging Child
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 11:08 PM
To: 'Shellie'; 'Portia'
Subject: RE: Burning Bright  

Thanks – especially for the laugh. Almost nothing is as funny as a cat (although you come darned close, and then some) being him/herself… just troll YouTube for funny cat videos. 

P.S.: I did include Tiger's brush with him – I wrapped him in one of Grandmother's soft couch-blankets (but the pillow was too large) – and added a dingle-ball, his Morris catnip-pillow (freshly doused a couple days ago), and that colorful chair-tied mouse he'd beat mercilessly for no obvious reason. 

Love, 

Dad 

She answered: 

-----Original Message-----
From: Shellie Childe [mailto:C.Shell@YabbaDoo.com]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 11:10 PM
To: Aging Child
Subject: RE: Burning Bright  

Awesome. Make sure you save some catnip/food/treats. I feel a need to leave some for him the next time I'm over. 

I'd heard pretty quickly from "Chuckles", complicit scriptwriter for this blog, and at one point a near-enough neighbor to my mother that she visited with her and Tiger on a regular basis: 

-----Original Message-----
From: Chuckles [mailto:Chuckle_Wilson@Scooby.com]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 10:59 PM
To: 'Mrs. Bosco'; Aging Child
Subject: RE: Burning Bright  

I believe God lets us know when something happens. My mom knew when her sister died and kept asking for her that day. Couldn't think of anything else. I miss that big ball of fur too. Strange how he touched so many. 

giggles 

And fellow contributor – no stranger to the love and devotion of furry companions himself – Spartacus wrote as well: 

-----Original Message-----
From: "Spark" le Klaus [mailto:SpartaCuss@Yabbadoo.com]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 5:59 PM
To: Aging Child
Subject: RE: Burning Bright  

I'm sorry to hear of your loss. 

Pets may "not be people", but I maintain they are just as much a part of our families as anyone else, and it is entirely right/natural to mourn their passing. 

Tiger was lucky to have such a loving family to call his own. 

…eliciting from me: 

-----Original Message-----
From: Aging Child
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 11:28 PM
To: 'Spartacus'
Subject: RE: Tiger, Tiger…  

Thank you kindly, Sparks. 

And I appreciate your perspective – you can see by the email traffic I've been bcc-ing you on that it's a common and reassuringly inescapable sentiment, too. I'd be the last to put a sweater on a dog or cat (although I did send Tiger off in a soft blanket), yet I agree with Twain's sentiment that a house just isn't a home without a cat or three in it… ditto a slobbery dog, too. 

(P.S.: If the subject-line's origin snuck past you (e.g., Chuckles didn't recognize it), it's from the first line of Blake's "The Tyger".) 

And this afternoon I took a call from Dr. "Mitchell Tiermann", DVM, owner of the veterinary office where Tiger was taken care of. (Not too long ago, he was also Chuckles's boss.) He had the rest of Tiger's test results. First: hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. That is, his heart had deteriorated, and swelled greatly – he was within days, at very best, of sudden death. And second, he'd indeed had a kidney infection, as seen by the blood in his urine. 

My sister Mew, who has had to say goodbye to a number of sweet cats herself over the years, takes this to point out a likely kidney failure for Tiger, had he had no heart trouble. 

There is, of course, some genuine closure for us in knowing the reasons why the poor fluffy fellow's heart finally gave out. Again, it's quite likely the stress of leaving home for the clinic, after the discomfort of his failing heart and kidneys, was a bit too much. Yet he did have the comfort of being back home. 

And we had – have – the comfort of his being part of that home.

"...Burning Bright"

The following is an email I sent out earlier today to family and some close-to-home friends:

It is with great regret and deep sorrow that I announce the passing this afternoon of Johannes-Tiger Bosco-Childe.

Our Maine coon-cat had recently been showing very troubling signs of a flareup of his previous kidney problems – obvious pain (he'd taken to crying), loss of appetite, and so on – so I brought him to his veterinary office yesterday. Test results (urinalysis, X-ray, EKG, etc.) indeed showed urine crystallization, and a pink tinge that indicated a possibility of blood; his heart – and this was new – showed serious enlargement (likely feline cardiomyopathy, though no trace of a murmur). Further results are due Monday.

When I picked him up this afternoon and brought him home in his carrying-cage, he was expectably vocal about not wanting to be in it, and just wanting to be back home – almost leaping out of the cage (I'd left its gate open) before I could get us in my mother's front door. Once in the house, he wasted no time getting out of his cage, and headed for the steps to the basement… and his litterbox, and Mother's bed (which he'd taken to sleeping under). But he stopped at the stairwell doorway, hunkered down almost sphinxlike, and started his pain-cry again. I petted and soothed him, and after a bit he got up, went down to the top step / landing… and started crying once more. I kept him company for a bit longer, but needed to return to the vet's for his medicine.

When I got back maybe fifteen minutes later (~3:30?), he was still there… and had simply rolled onto his left side, and already breathed his last. He was still warm, and soft… and already gone.

The veterinarian was as shocked as me when I got hold of her – I was still stroking Tiger there on the step – and she ventured that it was likely the stress of the trip to her office and back had been too much for his heart, and I'm inclined to concur. She explained that Tiger had shown no signs of distress, or even given cries of pain, while there at the office; if they'd suspected in the least that there was the chance his heart would let go, they'd have kept him there.

I reached my older daughter Shellie at work after a bit, and let her know – Tiger had been her baby, ever since we inherited him from Mrs. Bosco most of ten years ago (we figure he was about fifteen). Daughter-two Portia, too, has been deeply fond of him, and remembers overnights a few years ago when we'd get up in the dark and brush him and giggle at the static-electric sparks; Tiger never minded the attention, of course. And Mother loved – loves – him with the particularly rich fondness only mothers can exhibit.

I found it was hard to keep the tears at bay while telling Shellie – and I've never been one to elevate our pets, our family-companions, to fellow-human status, nor mourn their passing in the same way I've wept at the end of friends' and relatives' lives. Still, there is a genuine bereavement to my heart. And I don't have a clue how to break this to Mother… and so I won't, and would really encourage each of you to do the same, please. One failed heart (Tiger's), and a couple broken ones (mine and my daughters'), is enough for now. Attached is a photo I took of him this past Saturday, there on the couch enjoying some late-afternoon sun; I'll be going outside in a little bit to lay him to rest. That cat-embroidered pillow there behind Tiger in the photo, by the way, will be going with him, as will his brush (that latter being Shellie's gentle suggestion).

Fur and purr

Pets are not people, however warm and fuzzy (or feathered, or gilled, or scaled) and affectionate they can be… even while heroic at times. The passing of a pet – again, I need to use the word "companion" – , and especially one of many years, is nonetheless a sad event, and their fresh absence does of course leave a void in our hearts. In time, there'll be another cat (or two) here, purring away and shedding and filling the litterbox… though not until after Mother's back home. For now, though, it'll be a lot emptier.

Rest well, Tiger. Thank you for sharing your life with us.

Love,

A. Gene Childe

 

"Sign, sign, everywhere a sign..."

-----Original Message-----
From: Mrs. Bosco
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 12:00 PM
To: [a bunch of Christians, depth unknown]
Subject: Fwd: I chose #2

This one should keep us all thinking.

I chose #2, now you pick one.

This is a true story of something that happened just a few years ago at USC. There was a professor of philosophy there who was a deeply committed atheist. His primary goal for one required class was to spend the entire semester to prove that God couldn't exist. His students were always afraid to argue with him because of his impeccable logic. Sure, some had argued in class at times, but no one had ever really gone against him because of his reputation.

At the end of every semester on the last day, he would say to his class of 300 students, "If there is anyone here who still believes in Jesus, stand up!"

In twenty years, no one had ever stood up. They knew what he was going to do next. He would say, "Because anyone who believes in God is a fool. If God existed, he could stop this piece of chalk from hitting the ground and breaking Such a simple task to prove that He is God, and yet He can't do it." And every year, he would drop the chalk onto the tile floor of the classroom and it would shatter into a hundred pieces. All of the students would do nothing but stop and stare. Most of the students thought that God couldn't exist. Certainly, a number of Christians had slipped through, but For 20 years, they had been too afraid to stand up.

Well, a few years ago there was a freshman who happened to enroll.

He was a Christian, and had heard the stories about his professor. He was required to take the class for his major, and he was afraid. But for three months that semester, he prayed every morning that he would have the courage to stand up no matter what the professor said, or what the class thought.

Nothing they said could ever shatter his faith...he hoped. Finally, the day came. The professor said, "If there is anyone here who still believes in God, stand up!' The professor and the class of 300 people looked at him, shocked, as he stood up at the back of the classroom.

The professor shouted, "You FOOL!!! If God existed, he would keep this piece of chalk from breaking when it hit the ground!" He proceeded to drop the chalk, but as he did, it slipped out of his fingers, off his shirt cuff, onto the pleat of his pants, down his leg, and off his shoe. As it hit the ground, it simply rolled away unbroken. The professor's jaw dropped as he stared at the chalk. He looked up at the young man, and then ran out of the lecture hall.

The young man, who had stood, proceeded to walk to the front of the room an d shared his faith in Jesus for the next half hour. 300 students stayed and listened as he told of God's love for them and of His power through Jesus.

You have 2 choices:

1. Delete this and never look at it again.

2. Pass this along t o your Christian and non-Christian friends, giving them encouragement we all need every day When you choose option 2, you have chosen to STAND UP

In light of the many jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a little different:

This is not intended to be a joke, it's not funny, it's intended to get you thinking..............

Isn't it funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the world's going to hell?

Isn't it funny how we believe what the newspapers say, but question what the Bible says?

Isn't it funny how everyone wants to go to heaven provided they do not have to believe, think, say, or do anything the Bible says? Or is it scary?

Isn't it funny how someone can say "I believe in God' but still follow Satan (who, by the w ay, also 'believes" in God)?

Isn't it funny how you can send a thousand jokes through e-mail and they spread like wildfire, But when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about sharing?

Isn't it funny how the lewd, crude, vulgar and obscene pass freely through cyberspace, but the public discussion of Jesus is suppressed in the school and workplace?

Isn't it funny how someone can be so fired up for Christ on Sunday, but be an invisible Christian the rest of the week?

Are you laughing? !

Isn't it funny how when you go to forward this message, you will not send it to many on your address20list because you're not sure what they believe, or what they will think of you for sending it to them?

Isn't it funny how I can be more worried about what other people think of me than what God thinks of me?

Will YOU pass this on? I did.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: MT2mb
To: [sign-seeking Christians]
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 12:00 PM
Subject: RE: I chose #2

This is an old classic that's been zipping around the 'net for over a decade, and carries a quaint, simple black-and-white image of the triumph of God's will/way over non-/anti-God.

It also most likely never happened; see: http://www.snopes.com/religion/chalk.asp. But it makes for a nice little fable.

In the Christian world – and even in the early Christian community – we see that many people turn to God seeking a sign that something is/isn't so or to be. While this practice is more common among the evangelical Protestants, it's certainly not unknown among the Catholic and Orthodox as well.

The subtext, though, when you look at it, is a lack of trust in God. The beautiful devotion (mostly Catholic) to Jesus as the Divine Mercy focuses specifically on trusting in our Lord, and is noted for the simple, humble phrase, "Jesus, I trust in You". The whole concept, and embracing it – as Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant or agnostic – is worth much consideration, thought, and meditation.

Even during the years of His ministry, Jesus was faced with shallow, distrustful sign-seekers; see Matthew 12:38-40 – here Jesus bluntly points out that the only sign to be given to "an evil and unfaithful generation" (as much our own as his) was to be "the sign of Jonah", a metaphor of His death and resurrection… and thus our redemption. What more sign do we need that He's in control?

(I saw a bumper sticker a few years ago: "If God is your copilot… switch seats!")

Let us keep our eye on Him, and our trust more on His redeeming grace, and less on petty, mundane demonstrations of (non)breaking chalk. Nor is there any dichotomy between science and faith, either – science confirms the order and structure and wonders God has placed in our universe; faith is our standing in awe and appreciation of it, and then saying, "Thank you."

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mrs. Bosco
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 2:25 PM
To: Aging Child
Subject: Re: I chose #2  

Gene,

     I did not mean to send you off on a religious rant. You need to seriously contemplate a monastic life of prayer and theological research. I think you would be very content.

Mrs. B 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: MT2mb
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 4:03 PM
To: 'Mrs. John Bosco'
Subject: RE: I chose to...

Good afternoon, Ms. B:

Believe it or not, my buttons don't push very easily, thank you, ma'am [doffs hat politely]. I sent my note back up through the send-to list… with the intent not to rant, so much as just to encourage a bit more spiritual thought on everyone's part (especially my own!). Thus no criticism intended, of course, even of the message itself.

Nor are you in any kind of need of spiritual deepening! You were raised well in the faith, and practice/live it beautifully, with indeed a ready trust that I myself am still working up to (i.e., "duc in altum", and all that).

Still, we both know that there are some sincere folks out there who, with perhaps a cautious, judicious nudge, might find their own perspective of the spirit quite able to widen beyond some of the teeny-tinier stuff.

Have a great weekend… and if you're out near here, swing up to her rehab facility and give my mother a happy hello!

Always,

Gene