On clear articulation

                                             On Clear Articulation for Clergymen.

 
'If they only could preach." So lamented the Reverend William Sloan Coffin, Chaplain at Yale,
and man of prestigious achievements and stature. He was speaking of the value and uniqueness of the Mass which he thought was without equal but unfortunately and often, was lacking good preaching. My personal lamentation is far less classy. If only Catholic preachers would articulate their words, I would be content with inferior preaching of the Word of God. H At least I could know what they are saying. And likewise hear them! How often I have sat and wondered what the devil is this guy actually trying to say?


 I live in a religious house with more than twenty priests, all of whom speak publicly at various times representing official Catholic teaching. Some of them articulate like a low grade Public school graduate. Besides garbling, many speak mechanically without intelligent interpretation! What kind of PR is it when our spokesmen slur their speech with a mechanical sing song style? Is this a component factor to the modern complaint that going to "Church" is boring?

 
For example, one cleric speaks as if he had a huge plug of phlegm in the back of his throat as his words struggle to emerge through the filmy barrier. What message can get through? Another one speaks as if his lower mandible is wired shut. Really as if he had a broken jaw. His upper lip is frozen and his words sneak out apparently meaning something. His mumbling is exceedingly difficult to unravel especially for unfortunates like me who have hearing problems. Besides he drops his voice as if he were becoming really "cool" with a terribly relaxed poise. Still another speaks with such an overwhelming rapidity, the listeners feel like they are on the A train to Brooklyn. One of the resident scholars has a new dental plate which molds his mouth into a permanent look of " sucking a lemon." He has become so cool that he, in a studied manner, lowers his voice as if the CIA were investigating his secret life with electronic devices. Another bellows away in a manner he considers fantastic but instead his listeners hear a strange Caribbean accent with emphasis on the wrong syllable. Still another, while articulating clearly enough, works his way through words with an annoying ponderous style.. I am frustrated. When is he going to get to his point? With his heavy intonations and plodding Slavic penumbras, I get to chomp at the bit and interiorly scream for closure to any one of his ideas! And on and on and on. In the style of the famous Henry Higgins, the expert in speech, I jocosely lament "Why can't they be like me?"

 
And yet, it may be more than mere elocution . Perhaps, it touches something much deeper. Recently I attended a Mass at a Slavonic Church with a young, clear faced Slavic priest leading the congregation which was largely old country in origin. Though I understand nothing in Slavonic, though the beautiful Church had terrible acoustics, though I am hard of hearing, I left the Church feeling uplifted and grateful. The young priest was enormously reverent and totally immersed in God. I wish I could have shared in his holiness through his words but at least he "messaged" to me a contact with the Lord by his posture and manner. Maybe my lament is not only about the absence of worldly speaking skill in Church presentations but more profoundly about the lack of personal God-contact in priests.

 
As I re-read the above, a sudden thought strikes me. Perhaps, I am writing to myself. Let me be careful about my articulation but even more let me be aware of the greatness of God and the world of the spirit. This little outburst of mine becomes a meditation. Well, what do you know?

If priests only preach!

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

If priests could only preach!

The male form of speech is used since in the Catholic Church there are no
women .priests.

I have huge experience in radio and television and can detect the style which conveys the message.

Stem cell research and Catholicism

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH VIGOROUSLY SUPPORTS STEM CELL RESEARCH AND TREAMENT (draft prime)

 

 

In the framework of Catholic thinking, the Fifth Commandment (Thou shalt not kill) requires explicit protection of human life from the moment of conception until actual physical death. Also by a series of "penumbras and emanations," a sensitive Catholic conscience includes (under that commandment) the need of good diet, exercise, appropriate recreation, regular check-ups, avoidance of unnecessary risks to "life and limb" and good medical research. Such a conscience is highly compatible with, and indeed necessary for a sophisticated spiritual life. Indeed, real Catholicism and real science make congenial bedfellows. Within recent history, Pope John Paul II worked strenuously to exploit the resources of reason and science to enhance a Catholic understanding of "how God works." More recently, for example, the Archbishop of Melbourne, Australia, Cardinal George Pell, offered $150,000 in grants for research into adult stem cells as a concrete commitment to morally licit scientific innovation.

 

Such an offer reflects an accurate picture of the Catholic Church and its vigorous support for the remarkable work done with stem cell so far. There have been some strikingly successful treatments, using stem cells, for spinal cord injuries, leukemia, Krabbe's Leudodystrophy (a rare degenerative enzyme disorder) Parkinson's disease and several others. The stem cells derived were from various sources. Sometimes, from pregnancy related tissues like umbilical cords, placentas and amniotic fluid. Other times, from bone marrow, livers, epidermis, retinas, skeletal tissues, intestine, brain, dental pulp.

Some clinicians are using fat from liposuction for significant numbers of adult type stem cells. Some have used neural stem cells from cadavers—as late as 20 hours after death.

 

Clearly, such medical breakthroughs are very exciting inasmuch as stem cells can potentially be used to replace and heal damaged tissue in the body in a manner previously unknown. The enthusiasm for such research has rightly reached a very high level of expectation ---almost as if, in the future, one might have a "repair kit" in the medicine cabinet ready for any medical emergency. However, as is the case in things human and scientific, one must exercise some caution, step back for a moment and examine what we are saying. There are possibly some "catches" in the case. And there are some very real negatives which must also be examined.

 

The above rosy assessment focuses on adult stem cells or miscarriages. It does not accept what amounts to "the baby killing" mode of obtaining stem cells. But even with the inclusion of the miscarriage possibility, it does appear that adult cells are preferable to embryonic stem cells. There are huge

reasons why adult cells are preferable. They naturally exist in our bodies in the microenvironment of an adult body as natural repair mechanisms for many of our physical ills. They "fit." Whereas, when we introduce embryonic stem cells into an adult microenvironment, something seriously negative can happen. Scientific caution is necessary here. With the use of embryonic stem cells, teratomas (or tumors) can develop which cannot easily be controlled. Immune system reactions can occur. These cannot be sloughed off as minor points. If transplanted cells are attacked by the immune system, the entire tissue will be the target of what can be a disastrous attack. This is the tissue in which the "foreign" cell resides. (i.e. embryonic cell in adult microenvironment)

 

Dr. Maureen L. Condic, professor of neurobiology (University of Utah, School of Medicine) in an article appearing in First Things, Jan. 2007, questions the whole notion of embryonic stem cell research. She notes that since 2002 (NIH database) there have been 80+ highly funded research projects investigating human embryonic stem cells. In 2006, NIH anticipated spending was "just $24,3000,000." There have been 900 research papers submitted since 2002 plus an additional 1,000+ papers investigating animal research. Dr. Condic wrote in 2002: "…..there is no compelling scientific argument f or the public support of research on human embryos." She informs her readers that scientists define serious scientific challenges as problems that have stubbornly resisted the best attempts of science to solve them. After 30 years of billions of dollars spent and countless hours of research with no results, immune rejection and tumor formation are still serious scientific and medical challenges. What has come of all the futile research? Using the "line" of Ron McKay of NIH (relative to the admitted studied ambiguities of some lobbyists) which states that "…people need a fairy tale…",Dr. Condic asks her definitive question. "Isn't it time Americans recognize the promise of obtaining medical miracles from embryonic stem cells for the fairy tale it really is?"

 

Dr. Tad Pacholczyk, neuroscientist from Yale, Harvard Medical and Massachusetts General Hospital solidifies her point. He states the following: " Adult stem cells have been used successfully in human therapies for many years. But on the other side NO therapies in humans has ever been successfully carried out using embryonic stem cells." In the light of this information it does seem unintelligent and imprudent to cut into the funding for already proven therapies using adult stem cells and re-direct the money to an unproven and highly resistant "possible."

 

Hence, one finds it difficult to understand the ambiguous positions of famous names who drumbeat the virtues of embryonic stem research. Television and radio commercials sometimes feature Hollywood types who plead disingenuously for ESCR (Embryonic stem cell research). This is sometimes done very slickly for funding without ever actually mentioning that human embryos are involved! The trick is to play on human sympathy. Sometimes, it is done most successfully on an uniformed public. It prompts one to ask several questions. What is their real motivation? What is their scientific information? Is it a case of mere ignorance, misplaced compassion or it agenda? It has been suggested that there is the possibility of enormous amounts of money to be made.

 

Does the Catholic Church support stem cell research? Of course. Catholic concern for the treatment of illness has been legendary throughout the ages. However, as a spiritual and humanitarian leader, it cannot and does not support the barbarism of cloning which, as a procedure, specifically destroys a human embryo in order to extract embryonic stem cells. While there been an almost fevered race to generate a human clone, there have been only a few reports of alleged human cloning, none of which is verifiable. Some have been clear chicanery promoted by a "quasi-religious group for its own publicity" (Cf. Dr. Condic) The most outrageous was that claimed by a South Korean group (March 2004) led by Hwang Woo-Suk. The miracle has been accomplished. "We have eleven patient-specific stem cells lines from human clones……" Immediately, there was a clamor to have the Bush restriction on ESCR removed. However, it was soon discovered that Hwang's "miracle" was a scientific fraud and that all the claimed cloned stem cell lines were fakes. Dr. Condic assures us that this should be no surprise. It is extremely difficult to clone any animal. Human cloning would be much more difficult than any other.

 

Even Dolly the sheep must be seen in perspective. Dolly was born as an abnormal. And the only one to survive to live birth out of 277 cloned embryos! How difficult to clone anything! Also, Dolly had to be "euthanized" due to her poor health. This was not so highly publicized as her birth.

 

However, with all of the above said, let us suppose that modern technologies, now available ( or soon will be) are able to use embryonic type stem cell without crossing any moral lines. Suppose those germ cells (which can be derived from the testicles) can be transmuted into embryonic-type stem cells and have the same alleged flexibility claimed for ones derived out of embryos! The Church would have no objection since there is no killing involved here.. But we would insist (as with good science) that research be done on animals first.

 

While we say "Yes, Catholicism is highly supportive of stem cell research and its use to alleviate human ills" at the same time we say " We are highly supportive of the culture of life which means we oppose the culture of death which is inherent in embryonic stem cell research which remains a highly speculative project."

 

 

 

 

 

When I think of my own stance on life…….

W

hen I think of my own stance towards life, it is important for me to consider my own spiritual convictions. I believe in a merciful and loving God Who views me as His son. I firmly believe that He sent His own beloved Son, Jesus, for me and the whole human race.Even for the crummy, the nasty, the selfish, the coarse and the insensitive. I believe that He established His own beautiful, if sinful, organization called His church. That Church is not a museum of saints but a hospital for sinners! Such a humanistic attitude is symbolized by what I call the most significant ( if not most beautiful) church in the world !

 

 

W

hen one sees this magnificent masterpiece, one cannot but marvel at the wonders God has wrought ! I am very pleased that I am a catholic! And I believe the Holy Father's encyclical DOMINUS JESUS where it is written that the RC church is THE church in the whole world. No amount of fancy talk can get around the teaching. Some geek with an esoteric STD arrogantly says the Pope is mixed up ! But please, theologians, show me something like St Peter's in Rome. All you have is a capacity to 'bawl" Blowin' in the wind, on eagle's wings and Koombaya !

O

iy!

 

 

Was Jesus REALLY Jewish? I thought He was Irish—at least half Celtic!

 

 

 

 

[Enter Post Title Here]

 

 

On clear articulation in clergymen