Why I am still Catholic

People have asked me why I am still Catholic after all that has happened in the last few years. My response has often jarred them. I will not leave the Church founded by Jesus Christ for a church founded by mere men. It's the most honest answer. History shows Catholicism to be the first form of Christianity, and Jesus promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church. The mistakes of priests, bishops, lay people, whatever cannot therefor persuade me to walk away. God led me back here; what excuse could I ever have for turning my back?

Catholic CCM Singer

Rachael Lampa is one of the few Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) singers who is Catholic. The song included in this blog is off of her first album.

Fr Ray Martin, removed in Baltimore

I have waited to write on this subject because my heart was torn to pieces over this. Five years ago, FR Tom Malia, was removed for breaking rules. Once again, we lose a priest we love. This blog isn't to argue about the decision; it's to give voice to my own feelings on the matter. I miss Fr Ray. Tomorrow will be the second weekend without him. I am singing in the choir tomorrow, and I dread entering my church, just as I did last Sunday. No priest is perfect, but Fr Ray helped me and many others. Do I want the Archdiocese to let him return? Yes. Do I think they will? To a parish, yes. To us, no.

Those of us who were here in 2002 know how this works. We've been burned before like this. It hurts in the worst way. Tears, mine and others, have been cried and will be for awhile. Fr Ray is a beloved priest, as Fr Tom was. But I am no longer a 22 year old girl who believes that the power of our suffering will get us what we want. I do believe that God will use our pain and this time to do something positive. I am willing to fight for Fr Ray, and I wrote an email that basically begged the Archbishop to let him come back, but I can accept the decision if he doesn't return. I have to. I am not in control of the situation.

There is one thing I will do, however, come hell or high water: do what I can to protect our community. Fr Tom put tremendous effort into making us into a real community, and Fr Ray put tremendous effort into holding our community together after Fr Tom was removed. Damaging the community does nothing for what these two priests worked so hard for. Talking to my fellow parishioners in the hallway before Mass last Sunday, I tried to convey the idea that we need to stick together. I also tried to convey that in the last hospitality email I sent out. Yet I am just one parishioner. I can only do so much.

As for Fr John Williamson, I believe him when he says he did not make this happen or want this to happen. The rumors that he was involved to advance his career are unfounded. Anyone who saw his confusion and vulnerability last Sunday knows that. We have a duty to show our priests respect and concern. I don't like that some parishioners have hurt Fr John. He is relatively new, and, speaking personally, I have no attachment to him. I have great attachment to Fr Ray, but I think I can love and respect Fr Ray without hurting Fr John. They are both good priests, and this is not a popularity contest. Regardless of what the Archbishop decides about Fr Ray, at this moment Fr John is leading us and we need to pray for him and help him. The care of three parishes has just been laid on his shoulders without help from another priest. Let's not forget that we are not the only ones suffering right now.

With all that said, if they do not return Fr Ray to us, I will be sad for quite awhile. To no longer laugh with him, to no longer confess to him, to no longer receive his guidance, to no longer walk down West St and see him working on his garden or playing with his dogs, is a concept foreign to my mind. I may not be hysterical over this like I was about Fr Tom, but the heaviness in my heart is greater and the taste in my mouth is even more bitter. We have had Fr Ray longer. He has been there for me more times than I can count. My eyes are filling as I write this, but I am determined to remind my fellow parishioners that we have to keep our community together.

Read this

"The Rapture Trap" by Paul Thigpen

Love this song

Song of Love

God Help Me

Forgive Me

Pray

Come To Jesus

Jesus Take The Wheel

Curl Up Somewhere

I'm ready to hibernate for the winter, to curl up somewhere, and forget the world exists. I feel like dropping out of the dating scene entirely. Not that I plan on becoming a nun. It's not for me. Being Catholic is great, but I don't have that sort of calling. Still, dating is exhausting.

Life Is...

Life is crazy at times. Like my Irish red hair, I never know if it will keep a straight path or take a sudden curve. Usually, it takes a sudden curve. Life, not my hair. My hair is something I can control, for the most part. Life, in large part, remains beyond my control.

My life is full of schoolwork, church stuff, writing, dealing with chronic illnesses, and getting barked at by my pug. Not to mention friends and family. Not barking, but it's close enough.

I get so moody. Stress floods into my life, trying to drown me.

Another cloning paper that year

Human cloning is not an ethical procedure because the procedure will be abused when attempting to use it to improve the quality of human life. It is important to understand what human cloning is as well as the repercussions of such an act. The experts remain divided on this issue. People all over the world remain divided on this issue. Some are for human cloning; some are against human cloning. It is my belief that human cloning is an unethical action.
Dr. Nabal Bracero, a reproductive endocrinologist at Johns Hopkins, says, “Reproductive cloning is the term use to describe the process by which the nucleus of a somatic cell (i.e. any cell of the body of an adult that is not a sperm or an egg) is transferred to the cytoplasm of an egg that had its own nucleus removed. In this way the genetic material (DNA) of an adult will be expressed in the environment of the egg cytoplasm to produce an embryo based on this adult DNA bypassing the process of fertilization. More simply, to give instructions to an egg cell to produce an embryo according to the genes of an adult cell and not according to the genes that comes from a sperm and an egg during fertilization. Is this ethical? Although this is a huge topic in a nutshell the main problem that I have with reproductive cloning are the following. Reproductive cloning in animals has resulted in specimens who suffer from serious metabolic diseases that experts suggest is a direct result from the cloning techniques used today. For example, these young animals suffer from premature metabolic aging, suggesting that this adult DNA may be able to produce an embryo but still carries the message of "old DNA". Therefore, is definitively unethical to expose humans to a treatment which is frankly dangerous in animals at this point in time. Reproductive cloning also could pose an obstacle to the refinement that the human set of genes (genome) has been undergoing during thousands of years. This asexual form of reproduction would probably bypass many of the usual checkpoints necessary in order to remove bad genes from the genetic pool. On the other hand, many hardcore bioethicists see a huge threat to the dignity of the human being in this non-classical form of reproduction. Here, I tend to agree that any form of mechanistic approach towards reproduction may be a threat to the essence of the human spirit. However, nature has been cloning people for thousands of years in the form of identical twins (which by all definitions are human clones) and these people do not seem to live their lives in a less dignified way. Then again, these clones are perfectly arranged by nature (God!) and do not have the problems of ‘old DNA’ discussed above.“ (Bracero)
Justine Durrell writes, “In simple terms. Cloning occurs when a female’s donated egg is enucleated…and injected.” She calls this process SCNT. She notes, “The SCNT cloning process does not require a sperm donor. Clones are likely to differ from their donors more than twins differ.” (Durrell)
Bernard Gert is an ethical professor. He says, ”It may give rise to a genetically stratified society. Individual may be genetically engineered to provide various tasks-e.g., as warriors. If genetic engineering were permitted, the technology would be utilized inappropriately. Technology cannot justifiably be used to provide benefits to only a few. The present lack of knowledge should restrict genetic engineering to genetic repair.” (Gert p70-72)
One writer, E. V. Kontorovich, says, “The possibility of human cloning now looms imminently, unseen but real. Cloning would take the humanity out of human reproduction. Death and bodily infirmity are concomitant with human existence and in the long run unavoidable. Longevity cannot justify a practice that is basically wrong. There is nothing heartless about saying that people should resort to alternatives besides cloning, like adoption. Advocates of cloning like to sidestep the idea of organ farming with visions of growing organs, not a fetus. Cloning may benefit some, but… in the long run it undermines the advancement of the human species.” (Kontorovich p101, 103)
Human cloning could cause numerous problems within society. There is a solution, however. Since human cloning does not have any function within society, it should be banned.
Jane Maienschein, a biology professor, believes in the regulation of genetic engineering. She says, “ The ability to splice genetic sequences into living organisms …raises fears that we are…unleashing something that we will not be able to control. Certainly it is wise and sensible to ask …where such boundaries might exist. Astonishingly, this work is largely unregulated. Most occurs in fertility clinics. The reaction to those first cases of recombining DNA in the 1970s is instructive. The scientists themselves quickly saw that applying the techniques could lead to the irreversible creation of ‘unnatural’ genetic ‘monsters.’ They called for careful consideration of what they knew.” (Maienschein p151, 153, 154-155)
George Annas, chair of the department of Health Law at Boston University, thinks human cloning should be banned. He says, “There are no good or sufficient reasons to clone a human. Replication of a human by cloning would radically alter the very definition of a human being by producing the world’s first human with a single genetic parent. It is the manufacture of a person made to order. This change…represents a challenge to human dignity and the potential devaluation of human life. Cloning is replication, not reproduction. Applying this technology to humans is too dangerous to human life and values. Cloning has no real military or paramilitary uses.” He also speaks out on “cloning a dying child. This should not be permitted. This encourages the parents to produce one child in the image of another. It encourages all of us to view children as interchangeable commodities. No one should have such dominion over a child. Only government has the authority to restrain science and technology until its social and moral implications are adequately examined. We have a number of options. The first is for Congress to simply ban the use of human cloning. One of the most important procedural steps a federal Human Experimentation Agency should take is to put the burden of proof on those who propose to do extreme and novel experiments. Cloning proponents should have to prove that there is a compelling reason to approve research on it.” (Annas p183-190) These experts either believe in regulation or banning. They are convincing in their arguments. Human cloning should be banned.
Others oppose these views. Their arguments are not so convincing. Oliver Morton, an editor, (on genetic engineering) says, “Biology is about life. It’s just an accident of history that, until recently, everything alive was more or less natural. It [genetic engineering] is unnatural, but it’s not bad. The natural has no special moral status. Now medicine can offer us more than ever before.” (Morton p57, 62)
One expert, Lee M. Silver, a molecular biologist, says, “Scientists who work directly in the field of animal genetics and embryology were dismayed by all the attention that now bore down on their research. The cloning of Dolly broke the technological barrier. There is no reason to expect that the technology couldn’t be transferred to human cells. Real clones will simply be later-born identical twins-nothing more and nothing less. Cloned children will be full-fledged human beings. Opposition to cloning on the basis of safety alone is almost surely a losing proposition. There is no scientific basis for the belief that cloned children will be any more prone to genetic problems than naturally conceived children.” (Silver p91, 93, 95)
In Canada, Jason Scott Robert reports, “Bill C-13 proposes to regulate various elements of the creation of novel beings. The bill deals with the circumstances under which chimera and hybrid making would and would not be permitted, where the hybrid or chimera is created in part from human biological materials. Creating either type of creature is prohibited under the bill.” (Robert) The fear is obviously that a creature only partially human would be created. What implications would this have for the human race?
Nancy Gibbs reports, “ We think of science as a clean and logical place where, with the right skills and instruments, you can see the world in a grain of sand. So what happens when you cross science with a circus full of clowns and tricks and gaudy lights, where everything is for sale and nothing is for real? The science circus comes to town when groups like the Raelians claim to be cloning children.” Unproven claims being made is one more danger of cloning.
The facts of human cloning speak for themselves. The procedure has not yet been perfected on animals. How can such a procedure be justifiably used on human beings? How can that be ethical? Human cloning is not an ethical procedure. It cannot be used to improve the quality of human life.

Lisa Messenger
English 102 1077 TR 12:30
Essay 4


Works Cited

Annas, George. Opposing Viewpoints

Bracero, Nabal. Personal Interview. March 2003

Durrell, Justine. Article Untitled. Trail October 2002
Gert, Bernard. Opposing Viewpoints
Gibbs, Nancy. “Abducting the Cloning Debate” 2003
Kontorovich, E. V. Opposing Viewpoints
Maienschein, Jane. Opposing Viewpoints.
Morton, Oliver. Opposing Viewpoints
Robert, Jason Scott. “Regulating the Creation of Novel Beings” 2002
Silver, Lee M. Opposing Viewpoints.

More on cloning

There is widespread controversy over whether or not human cloning is ethical. Experts are divided on this issue. It is my belief that human cloning is not ethical. It is a procedure that will not be used to enhance human life. It will be abused.
There are experts who believe that human cloning is ethical. Oliver Morton, an editor, (on genetic engineering) says, “Biology is about life. It’s just an accident of history that, until recently, everything alive was more or less natural. It [genetic engineering] is unnatural, but it’s not bad. The natural has no special moral status. Now medicine can offer us more than ever before.” (Morton p57, 62)
One expert, Lee M. Silver, a molecular biologist, says, “Scientists who work directly in the field of animal genetics and embryology were dismayed by all the attention that now bore down on their research. The cloning of Dolly broke the technological barrier. There is no reason to expect that the technology couldn’t be transferred to human cells. Real clones will simply be later-born identical twins-nothing more and nothing less. Cloned children will be full-fledged human beings. Opposition to cloning on the basis of safety alone is almost surely a losing proposition. There is no scientific basis for the belief that cloned children will be any more prone to genetic problems than naturally conceived children.” (Silver p91, 93, 95)
Bernard Gert is an ethical professor. He says, ”It may give rise to a genetically stratified society. Individual may be genetically engineered to provide various tasks-e.g., as warriors. If genetic engineering were permitted, the technology would be utilized inappropriately. Technology cannot justifiably be used to provide benefits to only a few. The present lack of knowledge should restrict genetic engineering to genetic repair.” (Gert p70-72)
One writer, E. V. Kontorovich, says, “The possibility of human cloning now looms imminently, unseen but real. Cloning would take the humanity out of human reproduction. Death and bodily infirmity are concomitant with human existence and in the long run unavoidable. Longevity cannot justify a practice that is basically wrong. There is nothing heartless about saying that people should resort to alternatives besides cloning, like adoption. Advocates of cloning like to sidestep the idea of organ farming with visions of growing organs, not a fetus. Cloning may benefit some, but… in the long run it undermines the advancement of the human species.” (Kontorovich p101, 103)
The experts remain divided on this issue. People all over the world remain divided on this issue. Some are for human cloning; some are against human cloning. It is my belief that human cloning is an unethical action.

Cloning

The Solution

Human cloning could cause numerous problems within society. There is a solution, however. Since human cloning does not have any function within society, it should be banned.
Jane Maienschein, a biology professor, believes in the regulation of genetic engineering. She says, “ The ability to splice genetic sequences into living organisms …raises fears that we are…unleashing something that we will not be able to control. Certainly it is wise and sensible to ask …where such boundaries might exist. Astonishingly, this work is largely unregulated. Most occurs in fertility clinics. The reaction to those first cases of recombining DNA in the 1970s is instructive. The scientists themselves quickly saw that applying the techniques could lead to the irreversible creation of ‘unnatural’ genetic ‘monsters.’ They called for careful consideration of what they knew.” (Maienschein p151, 153, 154-155)
George Annas, chair of the department of Health Law at Boston University, thinks human cloning should be banned. He says, “There are no good or sufficient reasons to clone a human. Replication of a human by cloning would radically alter the very definition of a human being by producing the world’s first human with a single genetic parent. It is the manufacture of a person made to order. This change…represents a challenge to human dignity and the potential devaluation of human life. Cloning is replication, not reproduction. Applying this technology to humans is too dangerous to human life and values. Cloning has no real military or paramilitary uses.” He also speaks out on “cloning a dying child. This should not be permitted. This encourages the parents to produce one child in the image of another. It encourages all of us to view children as interchangeable commodities. No one should have such dominion over a child. Only government has the authority to restrain science and technology until its social and moral implications are adequately examined. We have a number of options. The first is for Congress to simply ban the use of human cloning. One of the most important procedural steps a federal Human Experimentation Agency should take is to put the burden of proof on those who propose to do extreme and novel experiments. Cloning proponents should have to prove that there is a compelling reason to approve research on it.” (Annas p183-190)
These experts either believe in regulation or banning. They are convincing in their arguments. Human cloning should be banned.

L Lisa Messenger
English 102 1077 TR 12:30
April 17, 2003
Essay: 3

Works Cited

Annas, George. “Human Cloning Should Be Banned” 1997

Maienschein, Jane. “Genetic Engineering Should Be More Closely Regulated” 2000

Another old paper

Mary, the mother of Jesus, plays an extremely important role in the Catholic Church; however, her role is often misunderstood. She is not a goddess, as some claim. Catholics do not worship her. She is a saint; in fact, to Catholics, she is the greatest of saints. Catholics calls Mary their spiritual mother. They are willing to place their prayers in her hands and trust her to pray for them to God.

"Mary is the flowering of all the faith that waited through the centuries for the coming of the Messiah. She is the greatest and humblest of the anawim, the poor in spirit" (Foley 180). Mary's consent to be the mother of the Messiah gave her a special place to Catholics. The Messiah is the same as the Christ. It's a Savior figure. Mary consented to be the mother of the Savior; she consented to be the mother of God.

Mary's role is much less significant to non-Catholics. Orthodox Christians also see Mary as a saint, but most Protestants do not give special status to Mary. One thing that often surprises people is that Martin Luther, who broke away from the Catholic Church to form the Lutheran church, had a strong devotion to Mary.

Catholics often say novenas, or nine day prayers, to Mary. They say that she gives them special help. They will carefully point out that this prayer is not worship. To Catholics, praying to a saint is just asking someone already in Heaven to pray to God for whatever the request is.

"Catholics honor Mary because they love her. She, too, is one of them…. She, too, had to be redeemed; she, too, had to make a decision to trust God absolutely" (Foley 183). Mary's humanity is fascinating to Catholics. As a fellow human, they feel that they can fully understand her. Her possibilities are their possibilities. If she could trust God so much, perhaps so could they.

"Mary is given veneration above that of all saints…. This veneration, called hyperdulia, is expressed in official dogmas, feasts days, and in multiple forms of private devotions on the part of Catholics. Her role as a woman in relation to the mystery of the church and salvation is of great importance today" (Dues 118). Even through all this, Mary is still not one to be worshipped. Catholics believe that God alone is to be worshipped.

Mary was not always so venerated. The early church gave no special attention to her, which is common knowledge amongst Catholics. It was only as the church progressed that Mary became a central figure.

Mary is a common figure in apparitions. Some Catholics claim to have had visions of her telling them things. These claims are investigated by the church and are either approved or discredited. Mary has influenced countless other saints. Many saints claimed to have had visions of her. Some of the popular devotions to her, such as the Miraculous Medal, came from visions, which is also common knowledge amongst Catholics.

Even with Catholics knowing that Mary is not to be worshipped, they still must be careful not to overstep boundaries in their veneration. The Pope "emphasized that devotions to Mary should be Trinitarian and christological in their focus, give due place to the Holy Spirit, [and] show a clear awareness of the church…" (Dues 122). Catholics always try to keep Mary in perspective.

Two of the most well known devotions to Mary are the rosary and the "Hail Mary." Both of these things are common knowledge amongst Catholics. The "Hail Mary" is a simple prayer. The rosary is a prayer that involves saying an "Our Father," meditating on one of the events in the Bible, and then saying the "Hail Mary" a certain amount of times after each meditation. There are four different series of meditations, called mysteries: sorrowful mysteries, joyful mysteries, glorious mysteries, and the mysteries of light. The mysteries of light are a new addition to the rosary.

In reference to Mary's spiritual motherhood of all Catholics, the Catechism says, "By her complete adherence to the Father's will, to his Son's redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church's model of faith and charity" (274). By taking this several steps further, the church says Mary is the mother of all Catholics.

Mary is a saint, a role model, a mother, and a mystery to Catholics. Her role is the Catholic Church continues to evolve in the modern world. Her role is certain to continue to change as the role of the church continues to evolve in the lives of Catholics. No matter how much her role evolves, she remains mother and helper to Catholics across the world.

Old Paper

Lisa Messenger
English 101-2015
Mr. Dowdye
Informative essay
March 11, 2002
648

Being Catholic In America


It may be hard to express your spirituality in this world. It is definitely difficult to

be Catholic these days. There are many reasons why it is so difficult. One reason is

American culture conflicts with Catholic values. Another reason is child abuse by some

members of the clergy. Also, there is conflict with other Christian denominations. Lastly,

things , such as terrorist acts, cause people to wonder if God really exists.

American culture stresses the importance of being rich and caring about only

yourself. Catholic values stress the importance of taking care of others as well as

yourself. Catholics try to follow Jesus in helping the poor and ill. American culture tells

people that if they are beautiful they will be loved, but Catholicism tells them that God

loves unconditionally. In America, the poor and the ill are basically considered to be of

lesser value than the rich and healthy, but Catholics are aware of the fact that Jesus saw

the poor and ill as very worthy people. American society is based upon wealth, fame,

beauty, and class; in contrast, Catholicism is based on love, faith, and hope. It is difficult

to follow Catholic values when this culture has so many opposite values.

There is the shameful child abuse by some members of the clergy, although, not

by all the clergy. This has caused great pain and suffering in many lives. It has caused

arguments among Catholics, as well as between Catholics and others. For example,

catechumens in the

Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults at a local south Baltimore church are beginning to

question whether or not they want to belong to a denomination where the officials do not

report child abusers while claiming to be followers of Jesus. There are no easy answers

for something like this. To a rational person, it is obvious that such a violation of a

person's dignity calls for justice. It can be hard to remain loyal to the Church under these

circumstances. The recent news reports of this type of situation are finally bringing

justice into these situations. At the Cathedral of Mary Our Queen, a priest was arrested

by the FBI for viewing child pornography.

Another hindrance to Catholicism in America is the conflict between Catholic

Christians and Protestant Christians. One reason for this is that Catholics ask the saints to

pray for them, and some Protestants misinterpret this as a form of worship, although,

Catholics do not worship anyone other than God. Another issue is that of statues in

churches. Communion has also caused a debate. Catholics believe that Jesus is actually

present in the bread and wine, and a some Protestant denominations also believe that, but

certain Protestant denominations refer to this as cannibalism. This problem affects

Catholics in America and other countries.

The terrorists acts on September 11, 2001 have caused some people to doubt

God's existence. That is a problem for Catholics, Protestants, and people of all religions.

The shock of such an event can do psychological and spiritual damage to a person. There

was a lady who, when being interviewed on television, said that she did not feel like

attending church or praying because she had lost someone during this tragedy.

Being Catholic in America can be full pain and strife. Whether one experiences

cultural conflicts with values, abuse by a member of the clergy, conflicts with other

Christians, or the doubt caused by an event such as terrorism, the decision to become or

remain Catholic is one that is difficult, and, a times, it can be a questionable decision.

Having talked to many Catholics, it seems that this is something they think about quite

often, especially in these last few months since the World Trade Center and the Pentagon

were attacked and with the recent public knowledge of child abuse within the Church.

Time will tell what happens to Catholicism in America.