A conditional "Yahoo!"

Will Pope Benedict choose the lesser of two "evils"?

The Roman Catholic church has taken the first step towards what could be a historic shift away from its total ban on the use of condoms.

Pope Benedict XVI's "health minister" is understood to be urging him to accept that in restricted circumstances - specifically the prevention of Aids - barrier contraception is the lesser of two evils.

The recommendations, which have not been made public, still have to be reviewed by the traditionally conservative Vatican department responsible for safeguarding theological orthodoxy, and then by the Pope himself, before any decision is made.

The rethink, commissioned by Pope Benedict following his election last year, could save millions of lives around the world.

Holding my breath over here...

"God Hates Americans!"

Ha ha ha.

In unrelated news, here's an International Herald Tribune article about the importance of Catholic-Anglican cooperation in the face of Christianity's decline in the West -- and major problems inside both denominations. It's written by a Jesuit priest (no big surprise there) and raises some good points.

Pope Benedict and Archbishop Williams have their work cut out for them as they face a common enemy - secularism and the disappearance of the Christian faith in the West. By the year 2020, we're told that 80 percent of all Christians will be people of color who live in the southern hempisphere. The average Christian in the world today is poor, often living as a minority in a non-Christian country.

Yes, our theological differences remain, but what we can do together we must do together.

Amen.

Eek.

Wow. Bush really is trying to inflict as much damage as he possibly can before he loses power. Lucky us.

The Bush administration has appointed a new chief of family-planning programs at the Department of Health and Human Services who worked at a Christian pregnancy-counseling organization that regards the distribution of contraceptives as "demeaning to women."

... "A Woman's Concern is persuaded that the crass commercialization and distribution of birth control is demeaning to women, degrading of human sexuality and adverse to human health and happiness," the group's Web site says.

They have every right to hold that opinion and work to advance it through their own organization, but why is someone who views sexuality that way being put in charge of my sexual health without any input from me?

Unexpected mercies

Buried in this rather run-of-the-mill (but interesting) WashPost article today about how religious groups are taking advantage of the latest generation of cell phone technology to spread the Word is the following:

[Users] can open their phone and get a quick reminder from [pastor Greg] Laurie, wearing a black, short-sleeve shirt on stage at his evangelical megachurch in Riverside, Calif., that ... "God has never been disillusioned with you because he never had any illusions about you to begin with. You think he didn't know he was getting a flawed, sinful person?"

Yeah, I'm generally no fan of evangelical megachurches, but I can't put into words how badly I needed to get that message. And to hammer the point home, this was in my (long-neglected, I'm afraid) devotional reading this morning, in William Barclay's commentary on Matthew 26:31-35:

[Jesus] knew that his disciples were going to flee for their lives and abandon him in the moment of his deepest need; but he does not rebuke them, he does not condemn them, he does not heap reproaches on them or call them useless creatures or broken reeds. Far from that, he tells them that when that terrible time is past, he will meet them again. It is the greatness of Jesus that he knew human beings at their worst and still loved them. He knows our human weakness; he knows how certain we are to makemistakes and to fail in loyalty; but that knowledge does not turn his love to bitterness or contempt. Jesus has nothing but sympathy for those who in their weakness are driven to sin.

Dispute the translation or the interpretation if you will, but the point nourished my soul in a way that it hadn't been fed in months. It's so easy to get caught in the trap of overpunishing myself for my failures, and doing so in ways that only serve to separate me still more from God. It's tempting, and natural, to assume God is as disillusioned with me as I am with myself. But Laurie is right: God knew better all along. Even when I, like Jesus' disciples, thought I was safe from my own weakness, He was already prepared to meet me on the other side of the valley into which I've stumbled.

(Yes, I'm back from vacation. No, I do not want it to be over. Yes, I have a kickass tan.)

Steven vs. Stephen

I'm taking a quick vacation but thought I'd leave you with the eternal wisdom of "The Daily Show's" Even Stevphens – specifically, the Islam vs. Christianity and Existence of God segments.

"First of all, Steve, it's not MY logic, it's GOD'S logic, as written in the Bible, every word of which is true, and we KNOW every word of it is true because the Bible SAYS that the Bible is true – and, if you remember from earlier in this sentence, every word of the Bible is true! Now are you following me here, or are you some kind of mindless zealot?"

Wow, it's been a while.

So... I wish I had an exciting explanation for my prolonged absence, but I don't. Just chalk it up to a 2,600-mile move, a new job and all the complications that come with making major life changes like those. Thanks to all of you who have continued to discuss things in the comments -- I'm kind of amazed!

Today I went to church for the first time in nearly four months. Again, I lack an exciting explanation for why I didn't go. For a while I worked myself into this crazy guilt cycle where I'd convince myself I would try really really hard to get up in time to go (I work late into the night, even on weekends -- but not that late, really), and then I inevitably wouldn't get up, so I'd berate myself for the rest of the week and vow to try even harder next Sunday, rinse and repeat. "Come on!" I would tell myself. "Remember how awesome your church in Virginia was? Remember how many incredible friends you made there and how much you grew spiritually? What the hell is wrong with you? Get moving! You're behind schedule! Loser!"

It took me a while to remember that I didn't move to Virginia and immediately find an awesome church and incredible friends. It took a good six months to a year, in fact, before I started to settle in, and it was two years before I really felt at home. I will find the right church when I'm ready; in the meantime, my job is to just ... show up. Somewhere. Anywhere (well, almost).

So thanks for hanging in there. I'll get back in the swing of things soon, I promise. Apologies to all whose e-mails I haven't returned -- I hadn't checked that inbox in six months; it was nothing personal!

Great idea! Or not.

Oh boy. Just what the U.S. Catholic Church needs: one more apparently arbitrary change that directly affects lay members who are already on the brink of alienation.

Some of the changes they did adopt are minor, but in other cases Catholics will have to learn longer and more awkward versions of familiar prayers. For example, instead of saying, "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you," in the prayer before Communion, they will say, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof."

Call me nutty (and I know many of you do -- it's OK; the feeling is probably mutual!), but the new translation seems to lose a lot of the meaning inherent in the old one. "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you" is broad enough that it could be taken to mean "into my heart," which is how I always thought of it. "Under my roof" adds jarring literalism that distracts from the intensely personal moment of "Yes, please, come in." Oh well. It's not my problem now. My sympathies are with those of you who will have to put up with it.

In other news, the Episcopal Church just made history by doing something the Catholic Church will never, ever do. God bless Bishop Jefferts and her efforts on behalf of Christian unity.

Finally, via Slacktivist, a hilarious "Da Vinci Code" Q-and-A. I had no intention of seeing that movie until I ran across a completely random protest of the film by a wacky Catholic group -- they were camped out on the sidewalk in front of a theater downtown with a bagpiper, of all things, yelling about how "The Da Vinci Code" is blasphemy et cetera. I was sorely tempted to go buy tickets for all of them just to piss them off. And I hated that book. Freaks. Shame about the bagpiper.

What is Catholicism these days?

The Philadelphia Inquirer has an intriguing series this week about the Catholic Church and its place in the U.S., the world and the hearts of its members. The "Catholic Crossroads" package is here. Of particular interest is this article about how the Church in Europe is dealing with the dramatic changes that have emptied pews and further secularized countries that were traditionally Catholic. At odds with the trend of secularization is the growing population of European Muslims, who are tugging things in yet another direction.

I can't help but think that the Church as an institution won't be able to solve the problem. What it can do is work harder to grow those Christians who attract everyone around them -- the people you meet and think, Man, I want some of whatever that person is on. (No, not the Paris Hilton types. We know what those people are on ... and it's not free.)

I guess it's the same old problem -- we just need to find new ways to tackle it. The old ones don't seem to be working.

England at a crossroads

Giles Fraser has a thoughtful piece in the Guardian about the peculiarly English breed of Christianity, its slow disintegration, and how it might be revived without falling prey to the wild-eyed fundamentalism that plagues so many other countries (including ours).

What's being imagined is a more energetic and vigorous church. And if the transformation to an entrepreneurial model is followed through, it will undoubtedly see many more people coming to church. But it will also see religion conducted beyond the hesitancy for which the old Church of England has always been known. And that will make it unstable and unpredictable. As the old order breaks apart, the worry is that we may release the genie of English religious fanaticism from the establishment box in which it has been dormant for centuries.

I imagine that many evangelicals are hoping that Fraser's last statement turns out to be correct. But that risk of fanaticism is inherent in the task of rebuilding the church: The process does, as Fraser says, involve a certain amount of instability. Does the risk negate the necessity? No, but it does mean those who disagree with the fundamentalists need to take an active role the institution's regeneration. And it can be regenerated.

Unwrapping our gifts

I cantored at my Catholic church today. (Yes, I'm still two-timing.) It's been eight months since I stopped taking voice lessons, I've been out of choir for a year and a half, and I hardly ever sing anymore except when I'm cantoring (every three weeks or so). Not surprisingly, my range has lessened; I can't hit a high G with confidence or ease, even after I've warmed up for half an hour. The lower notes, too, are less confident. I don't hit them quite as precisely as I did a year ago. Nobody notices (it's a very small difference), but I notice, and it annoys and saddens me at the same time.

Worst of all, though -- because I never had this problem before -- is that I lose my place in the music, sometimes twice in one Mass. It's embarrassing because it's noticeable, and it's shameful because I know I should be better than that. Humility is a good thing, but humiliation makes me want to give up. (Hey, it doesn't take much these days.)

And then there's that nagging feeling deep down inside that I'm burying this wonderful, beautiful, joyful gift God gave me. He gave it to me in order that I might use it to glorify Him and edify His people. It's on me to pursue ways to make it flourish and reach my potential as a vocalist. Voice lessons may be out of the question for the moment (I can't fit them into my day -- why don't they make days 25 hours long? That would work), but nothing prevents me from practicing what I learned. I could do better. I could offer God more than I am. But I'm not.

How many other gifts am I casting aside? Which ones am I "too tired" or "too busy" to use in His service? I have to cut myself a little slack because of medical issues and work, but the responsibility ultimately lies with me -- with my choices. I need to make different ones. That's what love is: acting, not just saying or thinking. Maybe part of my current spiritual malaise can be attributed to that. Choosing to honor God with what I can give Him will strengthen my relationship with Him.

... I hope.

(Sorry for the silence lately. Work has been pretty hellish. Posts may be sporadic for a while.)