2003 LETTERS
November
October
September
July/August
June
May
April
March
February
January

Little Notes

Confessions
Talk About Movies
Roamin' Catholic
Follow Me




Contents © 2003
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.

LETTERS
May 2003

---

I can only suspect how I got on the mailing list of your "rag." Do you really think that people care if Lucy Killea receives Communion or not? Please get a clue. Try reading our local paper or watching the news to see what people really care about.

Jeanette Arthur

Via e-mail


REPORT THE FACTS

The addition of 'Roamin Catholic' to San Diego News Notes is a great idea. I think it is a very helpful resource for local Catholics as well as visitors to San Diego.

Stanford Espedal reports on the traditional as well as modern parts of the Church itself, along with those persons involved with the Mass. To identify one of the readers at Mass as dressed in "blue jeans" is simply doing what a good reporter is supposed to do, report the facts. It implies a casual atmosphere as I read it. Nothing more.

John Giery

San Diego


THE SPLEEN, THE HASTY JUDGEMENTS

Before I read anything else on News Notes' arrival, I go straight to the Letters; there, in full view, are the reasons why the Church is in such dire conditions of distress and turmoil. For the most part, and aside from those letters written with some semblance of forethought and restraint, is the range from careening lunacy to rampant egotism that subjects the Church to the sarcasm, ridicule, and hostility that has been evident for the last generation. The spleen, the hasty judgements, the militant ignorance: to this we've come?

Thank goodness for correspondents such as "Anonymous," B.J. Rutherford, Ralph Ballmer. I fear that Mr. Ballmer may have an onset of hypertension when he learns of the new appointee to the St. Francis de Sales Center [seminary].

I assure all the unhappy writers that I will remember their chagrin as I pray another chaplet of the Divine Mercy.

Ad majorem Dei gloriam,

Harry Wade

San Carlos


I'LL BUY HER A DRESS

Wow! That was quite a response from Karen A.T. Horn [April Letters]. All this personal history because you described hers and others' attire at Mass. I'm sure Miss Horn is an outstanding Catholic, self-sacrificing, devoted, loyal, and all the other attributes she stated. But wait a minute. As I remember, the article did not attack or insinuate anything against her character or piety but took exception with her attire and that of others attending Mass.

I'm going to take advantage of this opening into the way Catholics dress/undress for Mass. It's shameful. I've heard Father Groeschel on EWTN say that some people dress more for going to the beach than going to Mass. I'd like to add that I think they dress as if they are going to clean out the garage.

Observe the Protestants when they attend their church functions. Most of the women wear dresses. The men are in shirts and ties. The children, too, are well-groomed and wear their Sunday best. And PLEASE spare me the excuse, "well, at least I'm at Mass." They would not be allowed into a reception at the White House, so why would they give less to enter the House of God?

As for affording clothes, I'll be happy to donate some money to Miss Horn for a nice dress. As a senior widow, I, too, find myself at times in a financial bind. I shop at re-sale shops. Recently I purchased two lovely dresses at $3 each.

Besides proper dress in church, we need to return to silence. Our churches have become more of a social gathering than a prayerful, spiritual community.

Since the priests and the altar servers wear vestments and special garments, perhaps the extraordinary ministers could wear a robe? I've seen shorts worn on the altar. A robe would cover this and add a bit of dignity to all who serve at the altar.

There is so much hate and anger in our world, may God help us to be kind and charitable in our exchange of ideas and accept criticism without unnecessary reaction.

Mrs. A. E. R.

Rancho Bernardo


PLEASE, FATHER

Whenever I attend Mass at St. Francis Church in Vista, I leave praising God for the blessings of living a secular life in a secular society.

Father Ramon Marufo asks in the Church Bulletin (22-23 February), "Have the tragedies of 9/11 embittered us so much as a nation that the only means to rectify is to go to war risking the lives of our young men and women in the military or innocent citizens [of Iraq] who will be referred to as collateral damage. Can we change our hearts to forgive?"

It is remarkable that Father often refers to the events of 9/11 as "tragedies". For as long as I have been alive, the term "tragedy" has referred to the misfortunes of innocents which sometimes occur during the business of living. When a child is afflicted with a life-long handicap, or someone is run over in the crosswalk, when famine hits a nation, or when a tornado destroys homes and lives; these events are truly "tragic" and defy human understanding.

Respectfully, what occurred on September 11 was not a "tragedy" in any sense of the term. September 11 was the brutal murder of more than 3000 innocent Americans who were simply fulfilling their obligation to report for work. Would Father condemn the deliberate downing of the airplane in rural Pennsylvania by the American heroes aboard as a despicable act of "not forgiving" the hijackers who planned to fly into the Capitol or the White House? Would not a pre-emptive bullet to the back of Adolph Hitler's head saved millions of innocent lives? Indeed, was the slaughter of Jews in the death camps just a "tragedy"? Al Queda's reign of terror on Americans is of the very same genre and of the identical genesis as the murder of Jews by Hitler.

No, dear Father, neither I nor my children will forgive Islamic terrorists for 9/11, and it is just frightening and sad that Catholic clerics find it so easy to casually dismiss mass murder with feigned piety. Keeping Americans safe is the issue secular America is now considering with regard to Iraq. Suggesting that those who are working so hard to enforce UN resolutions, virtually alone in the world, would dismiss loss of life as "collateral damage" is just a cheap shot. The goal, Father, is to preserve precious human blood; American and Arab blood. America's war in Afghanistan is a model of preserving innocent life and liberating an enslaved nation. Praise God for America! When Saddam Hussein orders the gouging out of people eyes, cutting out their tongues, gassing Iraqi civilians, or the rape of little girls in front of their parents does Fr. Marufo call these "tragic" events deserving of our "forgiveness"? Please.

Would that Catholic clerics had spent as much energy paying attention to the disaster they created in the American Church by welcoming gay pedophiles in the priest hood than critiquing the honest clean-up of neglected world affairs left by their favored and ever-forgiving, President Bill Clinton.

John Harper

Oceanside


THE PEACENIK CHURCH

Rod Dreher of National Review has a good point. The Roman Catholic church has lurched to the left in order to draw attention away from its moral decline. The abuse scandal continues: Cardinal Mahony of the LA diocese now resists the district attorney in court as he asks for documents about several priests with which Cardinal Mahony attended St John's Seminary. A priest accused of abuse was working until recently for the USCCB suddenly shows up at the mansion of Cardinal George of Chicago. He had previously taught at the notorious St John's Seminary in Camarillo, where San Diego diocese candidates are sent for graduate theological studies.

In order to compensate for its moral failings, the Church through its social ministries has lurched far to the left away from mainstream Catholics. It now opposes capital punishment of men like Sergeant Akhbar who killed two officers of the 101 Airborne division while in combat in Iraq. It opposes the war in Iraq itself as a newly-coined "sin against peace." Bishop Gumbleton of Detroit leads the peacenik Church, appearing at demonstrations with Danial Ellsberg. In fact, the Pope seems to be accomodating Saddam Hussein in a manner chillingly similar to Pope Pius XII's alleged accomodation of Hitler and Mussolini. In opposing the war as unjust, the Church has left our Catholic combat troops and combat chaplains dangling in the wind.

The Church encourages, even traffics in, illegal immigration. In the UT March 30, 2003 article headlined "Mobile Consulate brings services to Guatemalans" San Rafael Parish allowed its facilities to be used for providing illegal immigrants phony identification cards called consular cards. This type of activity shows that this diocese scoffs at our immigration laws which seem to constitute a new class of social sin.

Our diocese even embraces homosexuality, which is at the root of the abuse scandal which envelopes several dozen dioceses. At USD, a homosexual group lobbies openly for homosexual admission to the Boy Scouts, and for homosexual unions.

It is only a matter of time until homosexual pederasty and violation of civil law is accepted by the left-wing church while it becomes a mortal social sin to be a patriotic conservative Catholic. Our social ministries seem dedicated to driving retro-conservatives out of the Church.

Ralph Ballmer

Escondido


OPEN LETTER TO BISHOP BROM

Last summer I attended a protest at the San Diego Zoo where the homosexual "community" had a "circuit party" to celebrate "gay pride." More than 100 of us stood in the hot sun, enduring catcalls, obscene gestures and vulgarities from mostly young males who believed they were celebrating some sort of liberation while accusing us of hate. Many of those young people contracted the AIDS virus that night. All of them were actively living in direct contradiction to the teachings of the Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Church and were in a state of mortal sin. To say so is not judging, but stating a direct observation of objective truth. And our sad world has grown more accepting as another year has passed.

Many of the protesters were from Protestant churches where the entire weekend of sodomy was denounced and the protests encouraged -- which got me thinking: What did our Catholic leadership do about this issue? The answer: nothing. I don't necessarily expect priests to endorse or promote a protest at Sunday Mass, but we didn't hear ANYTHING about this event and why it was so wrong and harmful. Excellency, your silence and the silence of your priests was deafening. Many of us took this silence as an indication that either you either didn't care, or heaven forbid, approved. Your Excellency, is it asking too much for you to show us some leadership on this issue? Human nature being what it is, I am not surprised that many Catholics pick and choose which rules they will follow, but I was hoping that perhaps our bishops would not pick and choose which morals they will teach. Will you please show us some leadership on this issue this year? Are there any other sins in your book besides the death penalty and abortion? We're waiting to see what you will do and wondering why it is you have done nothing so far.

Irv Woodruff

Leucadia


PLEA FOR COMPASSION

Although I am not a Catholic, I regularly read News Notes with great interest. I enjoy being exposed to differing views and find much of the discourse in these pages to be heartfelt and sincere, if not always aligned with my beliefs.

As I read Jeff Foxmore's letter in the April issue, I had similar feelings -- "I don't agree with some of his basic concepts, but I can understand his position and he has at least thought out his argument" -- until coming to the conclusion of his letter: "Isn't it odd that a man prancing down the road in a tutu will shriek that no one has the right to judge him on what he does in his bedroom? Maybe it's what he's doing in our face, that we don't care for (nor have to sign off on), whether he likes it or not, and regardless of whatever evil "laws" he can brainwash or bully lawmakers into passing."

In two sentences, Mr. Foxmore betrays his complete lack of basic knowledge of the personal and social issues he purports to understand, and seriously erodes his credibility. He boils the entire issue of pedophilia and homosexuality down to a simple syrup and then pours it on crossdressers, and by association all transgendered people, who are no more prone to pedophilia and/or homosexuality than any other arbitrary social group, and who, as a group, have absolutely nothing to do with the matter at hand. He uses his obviously well-honed language skills to dehumanize men who do not fit with his personal view of what is proper dress, by choosing to describe a man in a women's clothing as "prancing," a term almost always used to describe animals, and only in a mocking and pejorative way with people. He also characterizes instances of male human beings speaking out in an attempt to enjoy the same basic human rights that he enjoys, as "shrieking." The implication is, of course, that only women shriek, and being womanly or having feminine personality traits is in and of itself something worthy of scorn. It would not surprise me to find that he feels the same way about "real" women who possess these traits, either.

Transgenderism, transsexualism, and intersexuality are all separate legitimate medical conditions and those who are affected by them may or may not be gay, or pedophiles; just like doctors, or teachers, or Catholic priests, or people who drive Volkswagens. Some people are forced by the incongruities of genetics, biology and social/family/church expectations to decide which sex they want to present as, and may not be 100% convincing either way. Some people have the decision made for them as children, often with disastrous results. As someone who has struggled with this exact condition since I can remember (with almost zero family, church, or medical support), I can assure you that while choices are involved, no one would choose to be the brunt of the disdain and lack of compassion that Mr. Foxmore's words display; proudly, at that.

Did God make a mistake when I was born almost totally androgynous and when my puberty partially feminized me further, leaving me with male genitalia and breasts, and shorter than the average woman for the rest of my life? Am I wrong to try to put together a physical look to present to the outside world that will cause the least discomfort for all concerned; even if it doesn't match the genitals that 99.99999% of the outside world will never see? Do I owe it to the world to hide myself from view, or to surgically alter myself to be more pleasing or less threatening to those who cannot accept me as I am, exactly as God made me? Am I deserving of the physical violence that I have been subjected to my entire life, because of my looks? Thankfully for people like me, Mr. Foxmore and others like him do not have the final say.

Mr. Foxmore has a problem with being exposed to a number of human conditions that people who share his viewpoint have tried to eradicate for thousands of years, almost always unsuccessfully, sometimes through absolutely barbaric means. He seems to be under the impression that millions of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered people somehow need and seek his approval of their existence and possession of basic human rights. Perhaps in times when church, state and family held absolute power of life and death over their subjects this was more of a concern for people labeled as "queer," but it is mostly just an annoyance anymore. Attempting to assert some kind of moral authority over others who are not your children, especially in matters which you don't understand, just makes you look desperate, and in the end, un-Christian. Just to make absolutely sure you understand, Mr. Foxmore: There is no place for you to "sign off" on anything, your signature or other approval is not required, or relevant in the least. Sorry. We took it up directly with God, and he said that you don't have that authority. Look it up if you don't believe me.

While I cannot disagree with his statement: "...Reasonable people may also not want their children, or perhaps themselves, forced into association with people who are public about their private behavior, homosexual or not."

I would beseech Mr. Foxmore and those who agree with him to really look at how often they take for granted their ability to be public about their private behavior, sexual or not. It is a part of being human, and denying this humanity to an entire class of people is not the way to further social hamony, instead it is a grave injustice that hurts everyone. Obviously, there are limits to what is acceptable in public, at work, in church, around children, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, and all people should be held equally accountable for their offenses. But even something as simple as referring to a significant other or wearing the "wrong" colored clothing can be grounds for being accused of "flaunting" or "promoting" a gay or otherwise different lifestyle. "Normal" men and women can discuss personal, family, and even biological situations tastefully and without complaint, even showing off sonogram pictures of their (sexually derived) unborn fetuses at work without fear; for someone like me, discussing many natural biological and life situations by default becomes a discussion of transgender "lifestyle". Often times, the subject is breached as a result of an innocent assumption or observation by a friend or co-worker that cannot be addressed without talking about "it", or lying. Either one could get you fired, or worse. What may seem to be good-natured teasing or even a routine background check can put someone in serious physical danger, should the wrong people get wind of it. Finally, people who claim to not want to be exposed to these things are often the first to point out differences in people and "out" them as being somehow odd, forcing them to further discuss the issue. For example, had Mr. Foxmore not chosen to label me as a homosexual pedophile by the flimsiest of associations, I would never have said a word or had any interaction with him at all.

While my lifestyle is affected by my gender issues, I did not choose this like one chooses a golfing or traveling "lifestyle," nor do I like the extra attention; like most transgendered people, I really just want to be left alone, and judged on my personal merits as a human being, and not by what is between my legs.

Perhaps when Mr. Foxmore and those who agree with him stop jabbing people with the sharpened sticks of derogatory speech and bigotry and legal harrassment, the "shrieking" that he finds so uncomfortable will die down.

Tina Thomas

San Diego

TOP