HeadlineBistro

Obama Meets the Pope, and a Call for a Higher Standard in How We Consume the News

By the time this is posted, President Obama and Pope Benedict XVI will be sitting down for their first face-to-face meeting – highly anticipated by both political and Church watchers, to say the least, especially in the context of the release of Caritas in Veritate three days ago.

Leading up to the meeting, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told the traveling press that the president anticipates “frank discussion” on issues he and the pope don’t agree upon. Whispers in the Loggia quotes the exchange, in which Gibbs yet stressed a “common ground” approach that can be taken on issues such as outreach to the Muslim world or reducing nuclear arms.

Knights of Columbus leader Carl Anderson told CNA that he’s hopeful the meeting will be a “wonderful opportunity” for both sides of the Vatican-U.S. relationship and, in particular, a significant teaching moment for Pope Benedict.

It’s a chance for the Holy Father to “make clear why the Church’s teaching covers a broad spectrum,” Anderson said, “why it arises from a consistent ethic and a consistent view of the person, and why it is that those in public policy, such as the president, whether he’s a Democrat or a Republican, should try to understand the foundation for the Church’s teaching.”

Facing Death and Affirming Life with the Courage of Faith

There is an interesting story in the New York Times about a community of nuns, many of whom are facing end of life issues. The most impressive aspect of their story is the quiet strength and courage displayed by the sisters facing this most difficult time of life: “I’m not afraid of death,” one sister said who possessed a terminal cancer diagnosis. “Even when I was dying, I wasn’t afraid of it. You just get a feeling within yourself at a certain point. You know when to let it be.”

Unfortunately, despite the interesting subject matter, the article seems to deemphasize the most important aspect of the story. The nuns approach the end of their life with a confidence inspired by their faith and bolstered by living in a community of the faithful. “We approach our living and our dying in the same way, with discernment,” said Sister Mary Lou Mitchell, the congregation president. “Maybe this is one of the messages we can send to society, by modeling it.”  It is explicitly clear that despite the sadness of the event, they approach death with a spirit of hope that they will be soon joined with Christ.

At the heart of 'Caritas in Veritate'

As the news stories and commentary pour in on Caritas in Veritate, one thing is clear: the pope’s encyclical is not an easy one to sum up in an 800-word article.

Pope Benedict’s call for a “true world political authority” for example, has gotten a swarm of headlines, as has his criticism of abuses in the free market (“Pope blasts capitalism ahead of G-8 meeting,” a CNN headline presumptuously proclaims). Plenty of articles zero in on the pope’s exhortation for a return to ethical business practices, as well as attempt to pinpoint which side of the typical right/left theological, political and economic divides Caritas in Veritate falls (the overall consensus: neither).

Undoubtedly all these things are important to the pope, but at the end of the encyclical, no close reader will say that Pope Benedict’s underlying theme was a call for reform in the U.N., criticism of an economic system or even an exhortation for world leaders to suddenly begin thinking generic “ethics.”

After all, he writes, “Today we hear much talk of ethics in the world of economy, finance and business,” such as research centers and seminars on the ethical component of business practices.

“These processes are praiseworthy and deserve much support,” he says – but he adds this major caveat:

“The economy needs ethics in order to function correctly – not any ethics whatsoever, but an ethics which is people-centered.”

That qualifier sums up the real theme of this social encyclical. For Pope Benedict XVI, to live love in truth is to fully express our humanity and to practice true solidarity and fraternity with our global, human family.

Three points to take away from 'Caritas in Veritate'

While the G-8, Congress and parliaments around the world debate the best way to create a “technical fix” to the economic crisis, a stunning caveat was issued this morning. Pope Benedict’s encyclical letter "Caritas in Veritate" leaves the technical fixes to governments but highlights the need for a moral foundation that seems to be missing in government discussions worldwide.

Writing on the need for this foundation, Pope Benedict notes: “Development is impossible without upright men and women, without financiers and politicians whose consciences are finely attuned to the requirements of the common good. Both professional competence and moral consistency are necessary.”

Leaving the technical debate to the politicians, the pope has gone to the heart of the matter.

Of course, at least one commentator has asked who – if anyone – will pay attention. But at least one group will: the American people.

Countdown to 'Caritas in Veritate,' and a stunning interview with S. Korea's head of Planned Parenthood

Commentaries on “Caritas in Veritate” are well underway, as the Catholic world counts down to tomorrow’s release of Pope Benedict’s highly anticipated encyclical on social issues.

Journalist John Allen provides an invaluable “key to reading” the document, pointing out that, in typical Benedict fashion, “Caritas in Veritate” will stress a “both/and” synthesis to perceived dichotomies in Catholic thought.

For example, while some analysts will be quick to emphasize the political and economic implications of the work, Allen points out the pope has gone on record time and again to insist that true social change cannot occur without prior, personal conversion. Both are necessary, and they can’t stand without the other.

The Courageous Priesthood

In the “Year for Priests”, one should pause to view unfolding current events through the prism of the Church and particularly the priesthood. Recent news stories have given dramatic examples of priests who often give courageous witness to the faith despite great hardship, risk, and scorn. Priests are by their very identity and mission perpetually in the position of speaking for the oppressed and the marginalized of society, thus putting themselves at odds with powerful entrenched interests.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Christ affirms that those who follow him and spread the truth of Christianity will be persecuted. Not only was this true in ancient history, but even in modern, progressive times. 

Sad lessons, news on marriage

Another sad twist to the Sanford scandal – apparently, the South Carolina governor’s spiritual mentor was wrong when he told the press that he “absolutely” believed Gov. Sanford’s unfaithfulness to his wife was the first in their marriage.

In a statement to the Washington Times, Sanford admitted that during his marriage, he has been romantically involved with women other than the Argentinean he visited last week.

“Prior to being governor, I crossed lines that a husband should not cross,” Sanford told the paper, “but I have never crossed the ultimate line with respect to unfaithfulness, other than what I’ve already acknowledged in excruciating detail.”

Seeking true common ground on abortion

At Notre Dame, President Obama eloquently preached the value of dialogue – the country’s need, he said, of setting aside divisiveness and finding common ground, particularly on abortion.

The White House says its own abortion policy will seek the “common ground” approach, but another recent story reveals a more realistic picture of the process: a falling out along the same line that Obama seeks to bridge, as pro-abortion groups resist initiatives to support pregnant women in order to dissuade them from abortion.

U.S. News and World Report writer Dan Gilgoff describes the issue at hand as one of packaging – whether the White House’s plan should manifest itself in one bill made up of two components (“preventing unwanted pregnancies and reducing the need for abortion”) or be divided into separate bills. (An earlier article from the Wall Street Journal also echoed this debate).

Gilgoff mentions the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops as one of the major players opposed to including provisions for increased funding for contraception or “comprehensive sex education” in a reproductive health bill – both of which would fall under a focus on pregnancy prevention.

USCCB spokesperson Deirdre McQuade is quoted as saying, “We welcome the opportunity to seek common ground with this administration. … But issues of pregnancy prevention are much more divisive and would only slow down much-needed assistance to pregnant women.”

The U.S. bishops have already shown their support for the Pregnant Women Support Act, legislation that would ensure health care for pregnant women, provide pregnancy and parenting classes at maternity homes and expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to unborn children and their mothers.

Gilgoff includes a telling quote from a director of the D.C.-based Third Way think tank, which touts “a governing agenda to end the culture wars.”

“For the pro-choice community, that bill has lots of incendiary language and coercive policy,” said the director of Third Way’s culture program. “There’s … a fear that support-only would be defined as the new common ground. For the pro-choice side, the most important part of common ground is pregnancy prevention.”

Such a mentality is astonishing and indicative of the pro-abortion movement. “A fear” that supporting struggling, pregnant women would become “the new common ground”? The implication that handing out condoms and emergency contraception is more important than ensuring health care for both mothers and their unborn children? Where is this coming from – the groups that claim to put women’s rights first?

Relying on contraception to “fix” the problem of abortion is, on the moral level, against Catholic teachings and many others' sensibilities, and on the practical level, a band-aid fix to a deep-seated problem.

Whether or not lawmakers and lobbyists agree is one thing, but offering health care and material support to pregnant women and their children should be a no-brainer. To deny that much defies common sense and walks away from any semblance of common ground.

-- Elizabeth Ela, Headline Bistro editor

The Sanford affair and Pope Benedict's remedy of truth and love

The doomsayers are chiming in unanimously: South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s fall from grace last week is yet another blow to the pro-family, traditional values core that feels shut out by the party in power, increasingly abandoned by the GOP and desperate in its search for new leadership.

The politics of the matter aside, even the most casual observer of the Sanford drama, from his bizarre disappearance overseas to his admitted affair with an Argentinean woman, can conclude that things are bad – for the man himself and his family, for his state and for his political party, but also in a larger sense for our society. Cynics might disregard Sanford’s philandering as a sad norm in today’s politics, adding to the growing list of Spitzer, Edwards, Ensign and more, but that in itself is alarming as Americans come to expect less and less from the characters of their elected leaders.

Add that to our total disenchantment with the financial industry and the greed-and-hubris-filled executive decisions that helped to topple it, and American optimism in our country – much less the old vision of a “city on a hill” – isn’t exactly at an all-time high. (Even President Obama’s approval ratings have begun to come down as more voters disagree with his handling of the economy and deficit spending.)

It’s perfect timing, really, for Pope Benedict XVI’s new encyclical, “Caritas in Veritate.” While a major focus of the document is on the global economy, the pope will certainly be insistent on what is required to transform society overall.

The Apostle Paul “tells us (that) the world cannot be renewed without new human beings,” Pope Benedict said over the weekend in a preview of the encyclical. “Only if there are new human beings will there be a new world, a renewed and better world.”

The pope has said before that lying at the heart of the economic crisis aren’t faulty regulations or bad financial systems but original sin.

Asking “does original sin really exist?” Pope Benedict said yes, because “reason – even ours – is darkened; we see this every day. Because egoism, the root of greed, is to want the whole world for myself. It exists in all of us.”

Even Gov. Sanford, in his rambling, self-flagellating remarks at his press conference last week (“It was like watching a man light himself on fire,” wrote John Dickerson on Slate), alluded to something similar.

“I am here because if you were to look at God's laws, they are in every instance designed to protect people from themselves,” he said while apologizing to his friends and family. “I think that that is the bottom line with God's law. … That sin is in fact grounded in this notion of what is it that I want, as opposed to somebody else.”

At vespers last Sunday, Pope Benedict called this “the way of thinking of the old man … directed toward possessions, well-being, influence, success, fame and so on,” when “‘I’ remains the precise center of the world.”

“We have to learn to think in a more profound manner,” the pope stressed – a manner that is based on faith, and in being transformed as a “new person” by Christ’s love.

From the financial meltdown of 2008 to yet another politician’s plummet into the nation’s ridicule, we have certainly seen the destructive effects of greed and selfishness on every level of our society.

Earlier this year, Pope Benedict remarked that “Justice cannot be created in the world solely with good economic models, which are necessary. Justice is realized only if there are just people.”

And if the title of his new encyclical is any clue, his remedy is love – “the test of truth,” he said Sunday. “Ever more we must be measured by this criterion, that truth becomes love and that love makes us truthful.”

“To open hearts to justice and charity,” Pope Benedict has said before, “is to lead to God.”

For today’s society, it’s a step well worth taking.

-- Elizabeth Ela, Headline Bistro editor

Some major stories are flying under the radar.

Crises seem to be stacking one on top of another in recent days. The U.S. recession was the hot topic until the outbreak of swine flu, which was usurped by the stories of North Korean missile threats, which in turn gave way to videos of Iranian election protests, and now, of course, all attention is drawn to the Governor Sanford’s torrid love affair with an Argentine mistress. No, wait, make that the passing of Michael Jackson.  And we are still waiting for the Ark of the Covenant to open.

However, other major issues are unfolding while regular people’s attention is drawn to the eye-grabbing stories.

A major vote in the House of Representatives on energy legislation is scheduled for today that may radically change the American economy. Considering the size of the bill, 1,201 pages, much of the minutiae of the bill's actual details may remain largely unexamined. As many have noted about the legislation and noted previously concerning the stimulus package, various interest groups are aware of relevant sections of the bill that may affect them, but few people can honestly say they have read the entire bill, which seems the modus operandi of Washington.

The crux of the bill, a cap and trade system, essentially taxing industrial carbon output through the sale of carbon credits, is a major reworking of the American economic system, with far reaching consequences in terms of jobs, growth, industry, and productivity, and the prices of almost everything. Caution is warranted especially in light of the precarious financial situation of the country; the CBO recently released numbers indicating the national debt will outgrow the size of the U.S. economy by 2023.

On June 22nd, Most Reverend Howard J. Hubbard of the USCCB and Ken Hackett, President of Catholic Relief Services wrote a joint letter to Congress largely endorsing the legislation, despite remaining “very concerned about the inadequate funding for assisting the poorest people and countries on earth through international adaptation efforts.” They noted the severe impact climate change may be having on the world’s poor and the need to address it.

Their point is well made, and in light of their concerns, all would agree that a national conversation about the bill is needed to fully consider all the issues involved and the possible consequences. To grab an example from recent memory, a more cautious and circumspect approach to the rush to ethanol in recent years may have foreseen the spike in corn prices that was such a burden on the world’s poor. What are the unforeseen consequences of today’s legislation? In 1,201, pages, maybe quite a few.  What is needed is a conversation which should occur when America’s attention is not focused on the King of Pop.

In the letter of Bishop Howard and Mr. Hackett they noted that “we are deeply disappointed that the funding resources committed to international adaptation fall fundamentally short of what is needed initially and that additional increases in resources are pushed too far off into the future. We understand that the current allocation reflects compromise and competing political priorities, but Congress cannot leave the most vulnerable people without adequate help needed to protect their lives and dignity. For us, this is not a marginal matter, but rather a matter of moral priority and policy.” In examining any piece of legislation, we have a moral obligation to take an unbiased look how at the measure affects the most vulnerable. Let us hope that occurs.

Paul Ciarcia, Communications Associate