Whoopi Goldberg...Big Whoop

I don’t watch The View.

I tried a few times, many moons ago; but found that even with the presence of conservative Elisabeth Hasslebeck, I couldn’t stomach the show.

I’m also a huge fan of Ann Romney. Huge.

But even her guest spot on The View couldn’t entice me to tune in. Appearing the same week as the presidential debates wherein Candy Crowley made it know, once and for all, that the media bias was real and palpable—as if anyone still needed that confirmation—by derailing Romney with an intentional, unacceptable interruption meant to save Obama with a preposterous spin on Benghazi, I just wasn’t up to one second of Whoopi Goldberg.

I’m no psychic but even I could have foretold what was going to happen.

And I believe Ann Romney knew as well; and that is why I continue to admire this woman of courage and conviction.

As I write this little opinion piece, I desperately want to avoid using the phrase “war on women.” However, having read about Goldberg’s incredibly biased questions thrown at Ann Romney (versus the laughable way the cast of The View treated the Obamas who appeared right after our embassy was attacked and 4 Americans were left dead), I’m not sure if it is possible to avoid identifying that the real war on women comes from the likes of women such as Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg.

Add to the list Sandra Fluke (identified as an “American woman’s rights activist”—really?) and Kathleen Seblious yet another wayward Catholic in an Obama administration.

Where is the outrage from these “activists” when the numbers of unemployment for women is made known and we hear that 800,000 more women are in poverty than when Obama took office?

Where is the outrage from these “activists” when we hear that poverty for Hispanic women is growing at a rate faster than any other group?

And the liberal Twitter universe goes ballistic when Romney—who has a proven record of hiring women—talks about the binder in which the resumes of countless women were made available to him so that he could fill his cabinet posts?

Honestly?

I’ve taken away two things from this week’s nauseating bias towards the Romneys:

1. I will throw out my copy Call Me Claus—the Whoopi Goldberg Christmas movie I own.
2. I have updated my resume and want to know how to get it into the binders of anyone looking for a Catholic writer and speaker.

What Biden Said Versus the Truth of the HHS Mandate

You may feel very confused if you happened to watch the vice-presidential debates and heard Joe Biden say:"With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact."

You may be saying to yourself, "Well, if those are the facts, then what is the problem?!"

But those aren't the facts and it is important for all Catholics to know the facts.

In response to the Vice President's "facts," The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued this statement that is worth reading. In part it says:

Last night, the following statement was made during the Vice Presidential debate regarding the decision of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to force virtually all employers to include sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion, in the health insurance coverage they provide their employees:

"With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact."

This is not a fact. The HHS mandate contains a narrow, four-part exemption for certain "religious employers." That exemption was made final in February and does not extend to "Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital," or any other religious charity that offers its services to all, regardless of the faith of those served.

HHS has proposed an additional "accommodation" for religious organizations like these, which HHS itself describes as "non-exempt." That proposal does not even potentially relieve these organizations from the obligation "to pay for contraception" and "to be a vehicle to get contraception." They will have to serve as a vehicle, because they will still be forced to provide their employees with health coverage, and that coverage will still have to include sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients. They will have to pay for these things, because the premiums that the organizations (and their employees) are required to pay will still be applied, along with other funds, to cover the cost of these drugs and surgeries.

For the full statement, go here: http://www.usccb.org/news/2012/12-163.cfm

For more on the "accommodation," go here: http://www.usccb.org/about/general-counsel/rulemaking/upload/comments-on-advance-notice-of-proposed-rulemaking-on-preventive-services-12-05-15.pdf

Where Do You Write Your Hurts?

Two friends were walking through the desert. During some point of the journey, they had an argument and one friend slapped the other one in the face. The one who had been slapped was hurt but without saying anything, wrote in the sand: Today my best friend slapped me in the face.

They kept on walking until they found an oasis where they decided to take a bath. The one who had been slapped got stuck in the mire and started drowning. The friend saved her. After she recovered from the near drowning, she wrote on a stone: Today my best friend saved my life.

The friend who had slapped and saved her best friend asked: After I hurt you, you wrote in the sand and now you write on stone. Why?

The other friend replied: When someone hurts us we should write it down in sand where winds of forgiveness and waters of love can easily wash it away. When someone does something good for us we should engrave it in stone where it can remain for years to come.

From this wonderful tale of two friends we learn how important it is to write our hurts in sand and to carve our benefits in stone.

This is particularly important for women who, by their very nature, tend to be wounded more easily than men. This isn’t to say that men do not get hurt but that the inherent differences between men and women mean that each has a more specific response to experiences than does the other. It is the understanding that what makes women unique also makes women vulnerable. Women are made to be channels of love, selflessly given through acts of charity and as givers of life, which inevitably translates into a vulnerability of sorts.

It is never in a woman’s best interest to close herself up or “protect” herself with walls as this diminishes or even takes away her God-given “womanly” traits: her ability to “know” the things of God and man—what John Paul II called her “feminine genius.”

Rather, a woman serves God and herself best when she learns to experience the fullness of life as God intended and learns to write her sorrow in sand and her joy in stone.

Making a Mystic a Doctor of the Church

With the upcoming October 7th announcement that Pope Benedict XVI will pronounce that 12th century German mystic St. Hildegard of Bingen is a doctor of the church—as well as announcing that same honor being bestowed upon St. John of Avila—there is a renewed interest in the understanding of “mysticism” with our church.

The church’s history with mystics actually goes back to the Jewish roots of the faith. 

Mysticism itself can best be explained as man’s need to connect with God in ways that transcend his mere day-to-day experiences. Man wants to know God intimately, deeply, privately—to fill that place within his heart which God created for His own indwelling. St. Augustine perfectly captured this earthly feeling when he said, “Our hearts are restless until they rest with Thee.” Augustine’s life (354-386), as told in his Confessions, reflects the ways in which man experiences earthly restlessness and pursues Divine intimacy. 

Jewish mysticism, which dates back thousands of years, has always been a response to that personal quest. It flourished in many countries during Hildegard’s lifetime, including her own Germany. She was a fascinating figure who built a monastery for her nuns and wrote hundreds of letters filled with warnings and prophecies. Some criticized her while others welcomed her words and wisdom. 

Another country that saw the growth of mysticism during the twelfth century was northern Spain where, it is interesting to note, St. Teresa of Avila would eventually experience her own inner mystical conversion in the 1500s and ultimately become, in 1970, the first female doctor of the Church. Now St. John of Avila joins her ranks. 

While we have these mystics in our Church’s history, not all are called to such a state nor encouraged. Looking to the Jewish roots of mysticism, we learn that its study and practice is considered uniquely powerful and was originally forbidden unless a Jewish male was at least 40 years old. This was considered an age where he would have had enough years of Torah study upon which to be firmly grounded in faith since mysticism has a both the potential for the development of good as well as the unleashing of evil. 

The Catholic Church affirms this dual possibility of mysticism and approaches the subject of mysticism with caution. She warns against pseudo-mystics as well as the formation of doctrines, such as pantheism, in which false teachings are perpetuated under the guise of mysticism. 

This paradox of exposing oneself to good or evil in spiritual practices is easy to understand. There is always the potential for ego, if not put fully aside, to become empowered in selfish and delusional ways. In St. Teresa’s writings on her mystical experiences, her humble attitude towards self is ever-apparent. Early Jewish mystics clearly warned that human ego has a way of polluting the heart. In the Jewish “standing prayer” which is called the Amidah, first and foremost the supplicant calls to mind and declares his or her own unworthiness to approach God. The petitioner stands before God in true and complete humility—all remnants of ego and self cast aside. St. Teresa of Avila called humility “truth,” recognizing it as the required approach for such a transforming spiritual experience. Think Galatians 2:20, “I have been crucified with Christ. It is now no longer I that live, but Christ lives in me.”

Sadly, mysticism today is often misunderstood and has most recently been maligned because of new-agers as well as through the disclosure that Madonna (the pop icon and not the Blessed Mother) practices teachings from the Kabbalah, one of the earlier known works on Jewish mysticism. 

Kabbalah (which literally means “tradition” but connotes a “handing down of tradition”), is a school of thought in regards to contemplative prayer and union with God. Studying Elijah was a central point of early Jewish mystics. Reference to the “Chamber” experience appears in Jewish mysticism long before St. Teresa of Avila’s own experience, as shared in Interior Castles. 

The day-to-day practice of contemplative prayer creates a peaceful existence for one’s soul. It is the constant giving of self, and the giving over of one’s will to the will of God, that will bear spiritual fruit. Contemplative prayer, of which the Catechism of the Catholic Church says is an “intense” time of prayer (#2714), the “simplest expression of the mystery of prayer” (#2713) and a “gaze of faith, fixed on Jesus” (#2715) is the form of prayer used by mystics—modern day and those in our Church’s history. 

Catholics have always understood that the earthy passage “matters” and that salvation, given through the grace and mercy of God through His Son, can be lost (Romans 2:2-8, Ephesians 2:8-10, James 2:14-26). Just so, the development of the soul does not occur on its own but does so with a daily commitment to prayer and the pursuit of intimacy with the Creator. The conscience cannot rightly form on its own. Maintaining, or keeping, the gift of salvation—as well as development of the soul and conscience—require an “effort” on our part. The Catechism states that while we may not always be able to spend time in meditation, we are always able to enter into the inner prayer of contemplation (#2710). 

Throughout Church history—from Pope Gregory I to Blessed Henry Suso and beyond—Catholic mystics have given examples of ways in which our soul’s longing to connect with God can be fulfilled. Contemplative prayer, and the ways of the mystics before us, are just a few of the tools we are able to use in answering our call to know, love and serve God in this life and be happy with Him in the next (Baltimore Catechism).