The Catholic church and Trump

I correspond at Christmastime with a friend from my college years who just happens to be a Catholic priest. This year we’ve gone back and forth since Christmas due to his support of, and my lack of support of, Trump for president. It surprised me that he was a Trump supporter, but I’m finding out that a good number of Catholic priests supported Trump for president, and rallied for him from their pulpits. I’m also finding out that this did not sit so well with many of their parishioners who could taste and smell the hypocrisy of this blatant support of a man who basically has little to no understanding of Christian principles and behavior. I am not trying to change my friend’s mind, but I want to present the other side, as it were, because it strikes me that the Catholic Church doesn’t really pay much attention to or listen to its followers. Perhaps it doesn’t need to do so, but I think it would behove them to do so.

The American Catholic church’s blatant support of Trump has upset many parishioners who react to the hypocrisy--how we as normal Catholics have been told for years to ‘abide by the laws of the church, to avoid adultery, to not steal, to not worship idols, to follow the commandments’. Sex outside of and before marriage are mortal sins according to my priest friend, therefore adultery must also be. Yet Trump was held up as a savior of the USA in many Catholic churches, because he is (presumably) anti-abortion. He is also a liar, a cheater, an adulterer, but those sins were not discussed from the pulpit. Yet priests have been lecturing about the evils of sexual immorality for years when it pertains to normal married couples and young people. Yet during the entire pedophile scandal, there was not one peep from the pulpit about the crimes of pedophile priests, how they belonged in jail, how they had betrayed the loyalty and confidence that parishioners had in them. Likewise with Trump--no criticism of him, only held up as savior. Cardinal Dolan in NYC was/is also a Trump supporter, and he has been criticized roundly for failing to acknowledge how parishioners felt about this: (https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2020/05/04/cardinal-dolans-praise-president-trump-was-pastoral-failure). People who are staunch Catholics, who go to mass every Sunday, who pray and read Catholic literature--are quite upset about the utter hypocrisy they are witness to, as I am. The Church will surely endure, but it lost many followers due to the pedophile scandal, and perhaps its support of Trump will result in the same. The Church can say that it is no problem to lose followers, but perhaps it should still take a look at why they leave. The reasons are not always frivolous, as is often stated by well-meaning priests who have their heads in the sand.

And just as a reminder to those who thought otherwise, the Church was forced to deal with the pedophile scandal by external organs and institutions. It did not seem as though they took it seriously enough, at least in the beginning. They reassigned pedophile priests to other parishes. They wished to deal with it as an internal matter, and it is not. Pedophilia is a crime. The children who were victimized were hushed up, pushed aside, and held down by church leaders who knew what would happen if the truth came out. These children did not choose to be ‘victims’ of evil behavior. Neither did their parents.

I have never particularly identified with any societal group. I don’t trust group mentalities, and that includes blind loyalty to any religion. I am not blindly loyal to science either. My loyalty is to God and Jesus Christ. I will speak up when I see wrongdoing, as do many Catholics. We don’t interpret Christ’s words ourselves; we read the Bible and know what we have been taught through the years. After many years of Catholic education and churchgoing, we can at least do that. Apart from the pope when he speaks “ex Cathedra” about matters of faith and morals, the clergy are human and fallible. My father always made the point that the church was a human institution, founded by Christ, yes, but run by men; I believe that GK Chesterton made the same point. Priests are human beings first, and fallible like the rest of us.  

Trump is not a good example for children, nor for marital partners be they male or female. I know both married male and female Trump supporters. There is nothing Christian about one partner in any marriage spewing out his or her belligerence and aggression toward their families who don’t share their blind worship of Trump, who don’t want to listen to their constant daily screaming about socialism and the end of America. Trump is not holding a gun to these people’s heads and telling them to behave this way. But they bought into his hype. Misery loves company. Trump’s anger and frustration with his own life have seeped into the minds of these people in an insidious way. They are not poor, downtrodden or victims. Trump is no longer president, and they are still spewing their rage and frustration. They are acting as though they have been victimized and that the country will go down the drain with Biden--illegal immigrants flooding into the country, taking jobs away from Americans, etc. etc. Who has ‘victimized’ these people, I ask? They are privileged beyond their wildest dreams--they own their own homes, several cars, they have hobbies and they travel, they eat out, they have good jobs and good incomes. What the heck is wrong with them? They should know better. 

If there is a role for the Catholic Church in all this, it is to support a ‘live and let live’ philosophy. Or a ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ philosophy. Isn’t that what we are called to do as Christians? It doesn’t mean that we have to necessarily like everything about our neighbors or other cultures, but ‘do no harm’ is a good mantra. My view of Christian behavior is for the most part shaped by my parents, who tried to live a Christian life as best they could. If they had their prejudices, they kept the basest of them to themselves, as I wish most people would do. I don’t want to listen to you spew your bile and your hatred. That’s MY prerogative. My soul will be forever glad for my parents’ good example. My mother always said ‘if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all’. She also said ‘you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar’. I do believe that Trump could have learned something from my mother and my father about how to behave.

Reflections on hypocrisy in the world

We live in an age where everything about a person can be googled, dissected, and disseminated in the time it takes to empty the garbage or clear the dinner table. If that person happens to be a politician, they should know they are prey for the media and social media predators just waiting for them to make a mistake, say the wrong thing, feel the wrong feeling, express the wrong facial expression, hug the wrong person, write the wrong email, curse under their breath, and so on. The list of sins is long, likewise the punishment for transgressions against some code of behavior that has careened toward the bizarre, as in, no one could possibly live up to it. You'd have to be an angel. Some people can respond as Trump does, with a Twitter tirade that shuts most people up and out, but most people do not. Most people have a sense of shame, a sense of guilt, a sense of hypocrisy, a sense of ethics. Most people will say 'mea culpa' and mean it. But it surprises me how many public personas seem to be clueless when it comes to understanding that they are prey. They think they can live as normal human beings (who are at least afforded a modicum of anonymity). It surprises me that anyone would want to be a politician or public persona these days. Why would you willingly expose yourself to the intense and withering scrutiny of the media and social media organizations that will nail you to the wall within two seconds for any perceived hypocrisy, even though they fail to see their own hypocrisy. Christ said “Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! Remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter in your brother’s eye.” But hypocrisy has rooted itself firmly in the world; it is so often the way of the world. I would like a return to a time when dissection and public shaming were limited because there were boundaries for what was decent reporting and what was not, because we risk moving toward a world of politics inhabited only by sociopaths and psychopaths--those who are immune or impervious to what others think of them or their actions, those who will retaliate in a swift and cunning way. If we reach that point, we can kiss democracy goodbye.

I do want truth in media, and I want to believe that the media are interested in the pursuit of the truth and of facts. The reality however often seems to be something quite different--the pursuit of money, ratings, and reputation seems to be paramount for many such organizations, whether they are arch-liberal or arch-conservative. I am sick to death of having the pot stirred each day, of being perturbed by the endless onslaught of crises, hypocrisies, dramas, soap operas, and sins on a daily basis. I don't see the point of it, unless it is to destroy faith in democratic government and principles upon which most Westernized societies are based. Our democracies seem to be undergoing dismantling from within our own countries. We are continually forced into polarizing positions, into a 'divide and conquer' mentality. I cannot ever remember it being this bad. I cannot ever remember that I woke up each day dreading watching the news or reading the newspaper, dreading any form for political discussion or polarizing conversations. Because I dread all of it at present, and I walk around with a foreboding of bad times to come. If I let all of the nonsense in, life will become joyless, depressing, and hopeless. Life will become faith-less. I believe that faith and hope are necessary for life to continue. If there is only hopelessness and despair, there is no point in continuing, and no point in working to save the planet. We cannot continue to appeal to 'crisis mode' in people; it is not a way to motivate people to change. It only creates anger and frustration. The way to get people to change is to educate them with the facts--rationally, clearly, calmly--without hysteria, panic and aggression, without a dangerous flock mentality, without infantile behavior on the part of politicians and leaders of the free world, without a media hell-bent on destroying all that is good in society. We don't need more positive thinking, we need more focus on the good people in the world, who are going about their lives in a rational and good way, who live modestly and who give back to the world what they take from it, who understand that doing unto others as you would have them do unto you, is the best way to live life.

The hypocrisy of the Green Party here in Oslo

I've translated this article from Vårt Oslo (Our Oslo) from Norwegian to English, so that you can read about the hypocrisy of the Green Party politicians and urban environmental agency here in Oslo. This is a typical stunt from them; usually they chop down healthy trees to make way for their beloved bike paths. But this time, they chopped down healthy trees so that they can plant cherry trees in their place. Is this hypocrisy? You bet it is. This has happened in other parts of Oslo, where trees have come down to make way for bike paths. And of course we need bike paths so that the entire population of Oslo can bike year-round and not use their cars for transport (the real agenda). We don't need any more bike paths in Oslo; it is not a bike-friendly city and it is nonsense to think that it ever will be. I don't believe for a minute that these lovely trees were sick. I do believe that these 'green people' have an agenda, and that they will stop at nothing in order to achieve their goals. These people are ruining Oslo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The protected lime trees in Thorvald Meyers gate have been cut down. What's happening?

By Anders Høilund    15. September 2019 00:16

The linden trees (also called lime trees or Tilia) in Thorvald Meyers street, from Nybrua to Olaf Ryes plaza, are history. The annual rings on the 70-80 cm high stumps show that the trees were 20-30 years old.

"I often pass by here, and suddenly one day the trees were gone. I thought, oh my God, what happened. I had previously read in the zoning plan that these trees were to be preserved", says Tom Ole Bergerud.

Bergerud understands that if the trees were sick, it was right to fell them. But the stumps tell a different story--that these were mostly healthy trees.

The stumps left behind after the trees came down are dry and fine and show that the trees were healthy and had a steady growth.

"I understand that sick trees must be felled, but all these trees did not become sick all at one time. The stumps left behind look mostly fine. If the reason for felling them is that the trees interfered with the power lines, then any new trees will do so as well" says Bergerud.

The Thorvald Meyers street zoning plan states that trees to be preserved are marked on the zoning map as 'not allowed to be removed' unless there is documented disease or significant damage to the trees. The lime trees that were felled were marked as preservation-worthy.

The lime trees in Thorvald Meyers street were felled one recent September evening. "The trees that were felled will be replaced by new trees in the spring and autumn of 2020. We will plant cherry trees that have a beautiful pink bloom in the spring. There are no plans for more trees to be felled now", writes Hilde Elisabeth Håve in the Urban Environmental Agency.

Assessment of tree health was carried out by an arborist in the urban environmental agency. There are also requirements in the zoning plan for independent control of the arborist's assessment. This is done by AB Trepleie AS, according to Håve.

“The trees that were felled had poor growth conditions and were characterized by disease. The Urban Environmental Agency applied for an exemption from the regulations, which was granted because the trees' health was so poor, and because it would facilitate the planting of healthy trees in the future. Exemptions from regulatory plans in Oslo are handled by the Planning and Building Agency, Håve writes to Vårt Oslo.

"The trees that stood here were lime. They are easy to prune. Cherry trees are also fine, but why switch to that tree species? I would like to know the reason for that" says Bergerud.

Håve explains that cherry trees were chosen because the municipality has good experience with these trees in streets with limited space, as they are significantly smaller than lime trees.

"Since we had to replace the trees anyway, it was desirable to replace them with smaller trees that are easier to maintain. We do not see that the regulations provide any guidance for species selection or that this is something to be exempted from. The Urban Environmental Agency does not specify that one specific species should be planted or that it must protect those that stand there already, rather, the overall aim of the regulations is that there should be trees in the designated locations" she writes.

One of the reasons the lime trees had to be felled was that they became too large for the pavements in Grünerløkka despite sub-optimal growth conditions. They had grown out to the tram line, and at the same time came too close to house walls, according to Håve in the Urban Environmental Agency.

Tom Ole Bergerud thinks the upgrade of Thorvald Meyers street is commendable, but that the trees could have been kept.

"New trees need time to grow big, which of course will not happen for many years" he says.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It never ends--now the Pope says that nuns were sexually abused by priests and bishops

How deep does the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic church go? Very deep, as it turns out. It seems that every time I turn around, there is a new allegation of abuse. Now the Pope has acknowledged that nuns have been sexually abused by priests and bishops:  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/05/world/europe/pope-nuns-sexual-abuse.html . I didn't see the statistics presented anywhere, but I'm sure they will be available shortly. It wouldn't even matter to me at this point what the actual numbers are. What appalls me is how the Church initially responded to the victims--by ignoring them, by supporting the abusers, or by sweeping all of it under the rug to be dealt with at a later time, or never dealt with. The latter was the modus operandi until the past few years when the outing of criminal priests became a reality and forced the Church's hand. One wonders if they ever would have dealt with the sexual abuse scandals had they not been forced to.

I am disgusted by the entire business and appalled by the hypocrisy. Here we grew up with all these strict ridiculous rules regarding sex--no premarital sexual activity short of intercourse, no intercourse, and no birth control. All were grievous sins. That's what we were told. Even married couples were made to feel that practicing birth control put their souls at risk. The truth is that most lay Catholics behave much better than many of the priests who have been preaching to them all these years. We grew up with the fire and brimstone sermons. We feared going to confession, feared being reamed out, but if you ask me, our sins pale in comparison to the sins of the sexual abusers, the pedophiles, and the rapists (all criminals) that were and are found in the Catholic clergy. I saw a comment in the New York Times to the above article that said, and I quote "The Pope does not seem to understand that the Church is burning to the ground. The credibility of the Pope's statements and the Church's actions are questionable." I agree with the commenter; it scares me that we may be living in a time where all the things that we took for granted were good and true, are in reality, quite the opposite, and are now being exposed for the shams they actually are. The question is--what remains when the dust and ash settle--when the fire is over. That's what scares me. I no longer believe that the Church is the road to heaven. I know that it is possible to honor Christ without having to believe that. Do I still go to Church? Yes, I do--because I like the celebration of the mass and that one hour a week to reflect on something other than the rampant materialism that characterizes the world. But the part of me that doubts, the part that is confused, the part that is furious--all those parts are growing stronger by the day. I don't know if I will be able to contain them. I am no longer patient inside. I would prefer a quiet mass without sermons. Sometimes I sit in the pew and listen to yet another uninspired irrelevant sermon and I feel like standing up and yelling--talk about the sexual abuse scandal in the Church, tell us what you are doing about it, condemn it and the perpetrators, talk about the misuse of power, the abuse of children and women. Talk about the inequity between men and women, talk about the patriarchies that have ruined the lives of women and children, talk about the refusal of the Church to take women seriously and to allow them to become priests, talk about spousal abuse (physical, emotional, psychological), talk about the brutality of the messages that many of us grew up with. But I don't think I will hear any of those sermons in my lifetime. So much of our childhood was about fear of authority, about instilling compliance in us, about having absolute power over us. I no longer have that fear, I am no longer compliant, and no one has absolute power over me. Those days are long gone. I rely rather on the fact that if God made us all in his/her image and likeness, that we were given a powerful brain by that same God, a god-like brain, that God intended for us to use wisely, humbly and gratefully. I for one, have chosen to use it in those ways.

Some reflections on the status of women on Mother's Day

I have been preoccupied with balance between the sexes since I was a teenager, with an atmosphere of mutual respect and love as the foundation of a relationship. Over forty years later, I don’t see much of it in modern society and I find that immensely disappointing. I watched the women in my mother’s generation raise their children and live within the constraints of the times they lived in (1950s-1960s). Most of them did not work outside the home, and the few that did (in my neighborhood) were considered to be unusual. There always had to be an excuse for why they worked—they needed extra money to help with the mortgage, or they needed to supplement their husband’s income if he was sick or on disability, etc. In addition, many of them took care of parents and other family members who were old or sick, respectively (unpaid work). Rarely was it considered that a woman, a wife, a mother, would want to work because she enjoyed working, because she wanted to put her education to use, because she wanted to contribute to progress in society in this way, because she wanted to give something back in the form of her intelligence, diligence and hard work. It was not considered that she might want to be a part of the process, might want to make a difference, and might want to matter. Wanting to work, to pursue a career had and has nothing to do with wanting to abandon her role as a wife and mother. It had and has to do with honoring herself and her unique talents.

I write this today, on Mother’s Day (in the USA), because I find it astounding that women haven’t come further in the USA than they have when it comes to childcare and working outside the home. I find it astounding that Europe is light-years ahead of the USA when it comes to federally-funded childcare centers. I find it astounding that we are still arguing about the importance of providing childcare for women in 2017 in the USA. I find it astounding that women still find that they need to defend themselves when they have children and want to work, whether part-time or full-time. It is not that they cannot work, no, there are jobs for them. Of course there are jobs for them; this is 2017. But there is still a limited support system in place to make it easier for them to do those jobs. So most of the women I know who raised their children during the past thirty years worked part-time or relied on family members to help them juggle it all. The few wealthy ones found nannies that they relied on while they pursued their careers. I am not going to argue for or against working full-time or pursuing a career for women who have children. I believe that feminism gives us the possibility of choice, and each person must choose wisely and live with her choice. But if women choose to work, then they should not be subjected to the subtle critical judgment that still exists—that she is a bad mother for wanting to leave her children and be part of the workplace. You might say that I am wrong, that this is not the case. But it is. Just take a look at the current president surrounded by his cronies who want to return the USA to a time when women had little or no say in society and in their relationships. They are white men of privilege who view women and children as their possessions and their trophies. Many of them behave like hypocritical banal evil men, not unlike many of the men in Hitler’s regime, who were married with their family lives intact while they broke up Jewish families and destroyed their lives. These men spout the importance of family values while doing exactly the opposite—they do what they want, when they want, and how they want. They promote a culture of attacks against women, they bully women, they diminish women (think Trump’s behavior toward most women he dislikes)--in short, they do not respect women, no matter what they say. They are not nice men. Some of them have been accused of spousal abuse (e.g. Steve Bannon http://www.snopes.com/2016/11/14/steve-bannon-was-accused-of-domestic-violence/). So these are not men you would want your daughters to marry. These are men who purport to know what is best for women and children. These are men interested only in power, control, money and prestige; they cannot really love their wives or their children, because real love is not about controlling others or using them as trophies. If you are interested in controlling others, you do not love them. These kinds of men I simply cannot abide. I want nothing to do with them. I do not believe in dialoguing with them, because you will simply be shouted down, squished under their thumbs, bullied, diminished, disrespected, told you are stupid, dismissed, ignored, frozen out (in the workplace), told you are ‘too emotional’, too difficult. The list of abusive terms and behaviors is endless. These men should teach a course—How to keep women down. Even in the church, women’s roles are limited; men rule the roost. It simply has become boring to consider that old men in funny hats in Rome are telling us how to live our lives. While I respect the current Pope for his kindness and compassion for others, I have little use for the hierarchy of the church. I am more preoccupied with having a personal relationship with Christ. I remember back in the 1980s when I was young and foolish and didn’t grasp the depth of men’s power in the world, that I argued with a priest about the phrasing “Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her…..” There was so much emphasis on the first part of this statement when I was growing up, that wives should obey their husbands. I argued with the priest that the latter part of the statement was just as important, and that I had no interest in obeying a husband unless he loved me as Christ loved the church. That put an end to that discussion, since most men simply cannot hold a candle to Christ. I guess I could have been considered a smart-ass at that time; I say now—good. More power to me. But after a lifetime of fighting injustice toward women in the workplace, and there is plenty of it, I am tired. I am leaving it over to the next generation. You’ll find me in my garden now.

It is astounding that in 2017 that women are still subject to abusive behavior publicly and privately. I applaud the women who stand up against these men, who fight them, who challenge them, who sue them, who take them to court (e.g. for spousal abuse), who call out their behaviors. I applaud the women who do all these things while raising their families, working full-time, and taking care of aging parents. I applaud the women I know today, on Mother’s Day, because without them, the world would simply not be a place worth living in. But I believe that the time has come to take another route toward changing the world. I believe that women should turn their backs on the type of world many of these men stand for. They should not marry them, they should not have children with them, and they should ignore them. I hope the younger generation of women will find it in their power to defeat these kinds of men. I will support them even if I cannot lead them. I cannot wait for these dinosaurs to die out.