Dear Sen. T. Lot

A "scoop" for The Blog from the Core.

Yes. I am "scooping" the whole world here, publishing this personal, private letter that has miraculously fallen into my hands:

Dear Sen. T. Lot:

Thank you very mouch for fluff remark at birthday party by which you have distracted entire USA media establishment, also most of political establishment too.

Until this week, it was me who was being made out to be Living Incarnation of Satan Himself and Number One Enemy of USA.

Now everybody sees that it is you who are # 1 Enemy of USA and Satan Living Incarnate.

Too too bad you have lost influence with White House and will not be able to get WH to quit thinking of me as Living Satan.

But thank you very mouch any way.

Sincerely,

Saddam Hussein

P.S. Any chance you can get UN to make weapons inspectors (giggle giggle ha! ha! snort) go to Ms. Isippi instead? No? Any way, keep on appologizing, okay? Thank you very very mouch!

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Sat. 12/14/02 12:57:56 PM
Categorized as Political.

San Juan de la Cruz

Priest and Doctor of the Church

Today, the Roman Church celebrates St. John of the Cross, friar, reformer, theologian — and poet.

Of the Annunciation

It was an angel he beckoned;
it was Gabriel came;
he waved him away on an errand
to Mary—treasure the name.

She must say the right word, this maiden,
for the wonder of wonders to be;
for the Word to be dressed forever
in flesh by the mighty three.

Three had a hand in the work,
but it worked an effect on one.
Who but the Word made flesh?
Where but in Mary's womb?

The son had a father before;
first had a mother then.
Mother yes, but no mother
conceiving as mothers of men.

He had his flesh of her flesh:
so a new life began.
Now the son of the highest
answers to son of man.

St. John of the Cross
Poems (3rd edition) p. 73
tr. John Frederick Nims

Gerard has a fine blog today on the Saint.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Sat. 12/14/02 11:16:47 AM
Categorized as Literary & Religious.

A Lie Has No Legs and Cannot Stand

But it has wings and can fly far and wide.

I don't remember who wrote that epigram, but it surely applies to the New York Post's defamation of Pope John Paul II, as I have been informed:

Incidentally, Glenn Beck, an obnoxious, ranting radio talkshow host, raved this morning [Friday, Dec. 13] on the air that JP2 had told Cardinal Law to transfer molesters around. I don't know if anyone called and corrected him on it (or if he would have listened if they had), but I hope someone set him straight.

I had never heard of Glenn Beck before, which looks to have been a blessing of which I was unaware. Here is his website, the clutter of which is just about enough to make your head spin.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Sat. 12/14/02 07:27:00 AM
Categorized as Media.

More on the "Previous Condition"

Re: New York Post Defames Pope John Paul II.

Bradley G. Kaiser writes to an e-mail list to which I am subscribed:

The facts of the case are that the molesting priest in question was doing various forms of wickedness (and getting transferred for it), back in the late 80's, early 90's timeframe. He ended up in New Hampshire, where he was arrested and *convicted* by a court of law of child sexual abuse in 1996. JP2's decree *forcibly laicizing* him dates from 1999. IOW, nothing was being "hidden" or "covered up" here; it was well known to everyone concerned, including the civil authorities, by the time the Pope was involved.

Far from "telling church leaders to keep known molesters in place," as some wrongly claim, the decree was REMOVING a known molester from his "place" -- the priesthood. As is apparently customary in such decrees, the decree also ordered him to move away from that geographic location, but permitted the local ordinary to exempt him from that portion of the decree if his "previous condition" (that of being a priest!) would not cause scandal.

(That's obviously not an order the Church could actually enforce physically, but that's beside the point.)

No "smoking gun" here, not even a water pistol.

BTW, "scandal" in Catholic jargon does not mean juicy gossip: it means something that might cause a Catholic to have doubts about his faith — to cause him to stumble, coming from the Latin scandalum, a stumbling block. (See Matthew 18:6-7.)

The whole "previous condition" thing is, I guess you could say, standard boiler-plate for a rescript removing a priest from the clerical state — and, I'm sorry to have to say, from more innocent times when a man having been removed from the priesthood would more likely have been a cause of scandal. Nowadays, at least in the USA, that's among the least of our worries.

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Sat. 12/14/02 07:16:19 AM
Categorized as Media.

I've Been Clarified!

It's about time, you say. ;)

Many thanks to the blogging canonist Pete Vere for his very kind words yesterday at Catholic Light:

Over on The Blog from the Core, Lane Core writes: "Pete Vere, blogging at Catholic Light, seems to agree with my assessment of the term 'previous condition'". Just to clarify (since I needed a pretext to plug Lane's blog, which is one of my favorites), I agree with your assessment Lane!

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Sat. 12/14/02 06:55:14 AM
Categorized as Media.