GREAT ADVICE IN ADVERSITY

St. Catherine of Siena was a renowned Dominican who lived in the northern Italian city of Siena.  She was a fearless papal counselor, and eventually a stigmatist.  She died in 1380, and was declared a Doctor of the Church because of her keen intellect.

This piece appeared today in Magnificat [1] and I found it to have great insights when any of us finds our self in the midst of adversity.  I pray that you will find it useful on your own spiritual journey:


Virtue is proved in difficulty just as gold is proved in fire.  For if in difficulties we were to give no genuine proof of patience but try to avoid the difficulty...this would be a clear sign that we were not serving our Creator, that we were not letting ourselves be governed by him in accepting humbly and with love whatever our Lord gives us. 

It would not give evidence of faith that we are loved by our Lord.  For if we truly believed this, we could never find a stumbling block in anything.  We would value and reverence the hand that offers the bitterness of adversity as much as the hand that offers prosperity and consolation, because we would see that everything is done out of love.

The very fact of our not seeing this would demonstrate that we had become servants of our selfish sensuality and spiritual self-will, and that we had made these our Lord and were therefore letting ourselves be governed by them.

Since this servitude to the world and to our spiritually selfish will is deadly, we must flee from it.  It gets in the way of perfection, keeps us from being free servants of God.  It makes us want to serve God in our own way rather than God's--which is not right and makes our service mercenary.  So much evil comes of this!

I tell you, then, we must follow this way and teaching that he has given us.  God wants to do everything by using intermediaries.  We see clearly that we were not created by ourselves but that God himself made his charity an intermediary.  By means of his pure love he created us in his image and likeness so that we might share in and enjoy the eternal sight of him.  

But we lost this through the selfish love and sin of our first father.  So to give us back what we had lost, God gave us his Son as intermediary, and this mediator took on the blows [in our place]--since the war [between us and God] had been so great that there was no other way this peace could have been made.

Why?  Because the infinite God had  been offended, and finite humankind who had sinned could never, by any suffering they might have borne, have made satisfaction to the dear infinite God.

So the blazing depth of God's charity found a way to make this peace.


May we all find this a wonderful meditation and reflection throughout our Advent and Christmas season!


[1]  Magnificat is a monthly small booklet which offers various Catholic prayers, the Mass formularies for each day of the month, and many other spiritual insights for all of us.  Their website:  www.magnificat.com

PERSECUTION and PERSEVERANCE

[This is a wonderful meditation during times of distress, agony, and difficulty]

PERSECUTION and PERSEVERANCE

By John Janaro

Lord Jesus,

I am struck dumb,

immobile,

inside and outside.

My heart is shrouded by this misery;

my eyes, which look upon your holy face,

are stricken, assaulted by the light,

aching red, longing to be shut beneath their lids.

I have no voice

except an inner cry,

a mute, distressed animal whimper

that cannot even summon itself to ask for mercy.

My fingers drift

away from my hands,

and the tokens of your love

are beyond their reach.

How do I pray?

O Lord, where is the longing of my prayer?

Jesus, Mercy,

hear the struggle of breath;

Jesus, Mercy,

hear the scream inside

the shaken contours of this skull,

with brain pierced

by some fiery blade.

O God, Love!

Hear the endless noise,

the pounding,

the howling of skin and nerve,

muscle and joint:

this cacophony of pain

that groans all through the place

where I once felt that I had a body.

Jesus, Mercy, forgive me.

Jesus, Love.

Jesus, I offer.

I long for these to be my words to you,

but lips are speechless quiver,

and thought and heart are frozen in exhaustion.

Prayer is ice that does not flow.

Prayer is a voice of distant memory;

it feels like a still corpse

beneath my soul’s total turmoil.

In the end there is nothing

but the hollowness that holds a thing called me

wanting you.

I want you, Jesus.

[John Janaro is the author of Never Give Up: My Life and God’s Mercy]

50th ANNIVERSARY OF THE DEATH OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

For all of us who were living on November 22, 1963, we recall vividly where we were on that fateful day in our country's history.

I was ordained the year earlier in Fresno, CA, and had been sent to the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC, to get a master's degree in social work.  We were all in our classes at the University when someone came to the classroom door and informed the professor what had happened in Dallas.  The class was immediately suspended.  It was late in the morning.

By this time word had spread across the Catholic University campus, and all classes were ended.  What struck me first was the total silence that prevailed.  No one spoke.  No one gave any commentary.

Since the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception is on the edge of the campus, everyone began walking towards the Shrine.  It was incredible to experience these long lines of students streaming silently from every direction towards the Shrine.  All in silence.  There were many processions of people in shock and grieving, silently lifting up their own prayers to God.

After we filled the huge interior of the Shrine, all remained in silence.  Recall that 1963 was before the end of the Second Vatican Council and the liturgical reform which permitted special Masses in the afternoon.

Then, someone began praying the Rosary out loud.  We all joined in and filled the Shrine with our prayers which echoed the pain, sadness and sorrow of our hearts and souls.  I recall being in disbelief that our well loved President had been killed, taken from us.

After the Rosary, many of us lingered about in the Shrine seeking some solace in the midst of our grief.  Then everyone departed going back to their residences or dining rooms.  Lunch time conversation was muted and   painful as we tried to cope with the enormity of what had happened.  I recall feeling so empty--unlike anything previously.

All of the radio stations began playing classical music fitting for such a sad day in our lives, interrupting now and then for a brief news update.  The few television channels likewise played somber music as the networks tried to put together some programming--satellite TV trucks and 24 hour news had not come about yet.

The evening network news featured such greats as Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather who helped lead the nation into its time of mourning and reflection.

Once Air Force One had returned to Washington with the body of President Kennedy, his wife Jackie, and President Lyndon Johnson, plans for a State Funeral began.

There was a large number of priest-students at Catholic University, and I recall all of us celebrating Mass the next morning for the President, his family, and our nation.  A prayerful and somber mood settled across the nation's Capitol.

Once the time and location for each of the Funeral events was set, it was obvious that we priests could not go to more than one event.  So many Washington streets would be closed, and there would be no way to get from one location to another.

Three other priests and I decided to go to the sidewalk across the street from St. Matthew's Cathedral where the Funeral Mass was to be celebrated.  The day of the Funeral was very cold, but clear.  We arrived in front of the Cathedral at least two or three hours before the Funeral so that we would have a good viewing place.

The Funeral Procession came from the Capitol to St. Matthew's Cathedral with many heads of State present.  Almost all of these heads of State walked in the Funeral Procession--an incredible sight, and not something that security leaders would ever allow today.

Some of the heads of State I recall seeing in the procession were Soviet First Deputy Premier Anastas Mikoyan, French President Charles de Gaulle, Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, the Duke of Edinburgh representing Queen Elizabeth II,  British Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home, Irish President Eamon de Valera, Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie, Queen Frederika of Greece, and King Baudouin I of the Belgians.  It was amazing to see all of these world leaders walking in solemn procession to the Cathedral.
Charles de Gaulle and Haile Selassie were particularly impressive because both were very tall men.

Cardinal Richard Cushing of Boston was the main celebrant and homilist.

After the Funeral Mass, most of the dignitaries were taken by automobile to the Arlington Cemetery where President Kennedy was to be buried.

I recall us making our way back to the University and viewing the Committal Services on local television.

It is amazing how strong the emotional and spiritual impact can be when a tragedy occurs.  I can recall the details of November 22, 1963 just as vividly as 50 years ago.  The same is true for all of us who remember exactly where we were on 9/11.

May God continue to watch over and protect all of us living in our great Nation.

IMMIGRATION REFORM DOABLE: COALITION NEEDED

Now that our national fiscal issues have been resolved for at least a few months, it's time to enact solid comprehensive immigration reform.

It's interesting that here in California more Republican House members are moving towards a comprehensive approach.  Why?  Because so many of them represent agricultural areas of the State, and their farmer constituents are begging for help because they can't find enough local labor to help with all aspects of the agricultural year, especially at harvest time.

We need to reach out more proactively to all of our House members, including more conservative members--Democrat or Republican.  Our best allies will come from the broad agricultural community:  individual growers, farm organizations, State Farm Bureaus, and the like.

Perhaps we have been too narrow in reaching out to diverse groups to form a broader coalition to get comprehensive immigration reform.  It's interesting that several States which have passed local restrictive laws dealing with immigrants have found great opposition from their agricultural groups.  A few examples:  Colorado, Arizona, Alabama, and Georgia.  We have achieved new partners from those State Farm groups, as well as other Church communities.  In the South, many Evangelical Churches have rallied in support of our immigrants and immigration reform.

Let's proceed forward actively to recruit new partners and collaborators as we make a renewed effort to pass decent and comprehensive immigration reform.

NOW IT'S TIME FOR IMMIGRATION REFORM

With the fiscal crisis in Washington now resolved for at least a few months, now it's time for Congress to move forward with immigration reform.

The Senate has passed a comprehensive Bill to fix our broken immigration system.  Now it's time for the House to take up that same Bill and vote on it.  Many Congress-watchers believe that the House has enough votes to pass the Senate Bill if the Speaker would abandon his stated goal that a majority of House Republicans must agree to the Bill before he brings it up for a vote.  On Wednesday night he suspended that informal rule to pass the fiscal package.

I urge him to do the same with the pending Senate Bill that is now in the House.

Our brothers and sisters who live and work in our midst, albeit in the shadows of our society because of their unauthorized status, deserve respect and dignity as human beings.  They are here because there are low-skilled and low-wage jobs which Americans will simply not do.  We have created a magnet to attract them here, and having benefited from their hard labors, we now have an obligation to offer them an earned path to full legal status.

You and I still have work to do:  send an email to your Representative in the House urging them to put aside petty objections and to vote for the Senate Bill which is now before them.

May the Holy Family of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph intercede for us on behalf of all immigrants in our midst!

GOVERNOR JERRY BROWN ON ABUSE VICTIMS

October 12, 2013

To the Members of the California State Senate:

I am returning Senate Bill 131 without my signature.

This bill makes amendments to the statute of limitations relating to claims of childhood sexual abuse. Specifically, it amends and significantly expands a 2002 law to "revive" certain claims that previously had been time barred.

Statutes of limitation reach back to Roman law and were specifically enshrined in the English common law by the Limitations Act of 1623. Ever since, and in every state, including California, various limits have been imposed on the time when lawsuits may still be initiated. Even though valid and profoundly important claims are at stake, all jurisdictions have seen fit to bar actions after a lapse of years.

The reason for such a universal practice is one of fairness. There comes a time when an individual or organization should be secure in the reasonable expectation that past acts are indeed in the past and not subject to further lawsuits. With the passage of time, evidence may be lost or disposed of, memories fade and witnesses move away or die.

Over the years, California's laws regarding time limits for childhood sexual abuse cases have been amended many times. The changes have affected not only how long a person has to make a claim, but also who may be sued for the sexual abuse. The issue of who is subject to liability is an important distinction as the law in this area has always and rightfully imposed longer periods of liability for an actual perpetrator of sexual abuse than for an organization that employed that perpetrator. This makes sense as third parties are in a very different position than perpetrators with respect to both evidence and memories.

For claims against a perpetrator of abuse, the current law is that a claimant must sue within eight years of attaining the age of majority (i.e. age 26) or "within three years of the date the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered that psychological injury or illness occurring after the age of majority was caused by the sexual abuse, whichever period expires later?" However, for claims against a third party ? e.g. an organization that employed the perpetrator of the abuse ? the general rule since 1998 was that a claimant must sue before he or she turns 26. A later discovered psychological injury ? no matter how compelling ? could not be brought against a third party by a person older than 26.

When a number of high profile sex abuse scandals in both public and private institutions came to light, many felt that the third party limitation rule described above was too harsh and that claimants over 26 should be able to recover damages for later discovered injuries from certain, more culpable entities.

In 2002, the California Legislature weighed the competing considerations on this issue and enacted SB 1779, which did the following: (1) It identified for the first time a new subcategory of third party defendants which no longer would have the protection of the age 26 cutoff for claims. Going forward these defendants ? entities who knew or should have known of the sexual abuse and failed to take action - now could be sued within three years of the date of discovery of a claim. (2) Looking backwards, SB 1779 also revived for one year only (2003) all claims that had previously lapsed because of the statute of limitation. This very unusual "one year revival" of lapsed claims allowed victims relief but also set a defined cut-off time for these lapsed claims.

In reliance on the clear language and intent of this statute, the private third party defendants covered by this bill took actions to resolve these legacy claims of victims older than 26. Over 1,000 claims were filed against the Catholic Church alone, some involving alleged abuse as far back as the 1930s. By 2007, the Catholic Church in California had paid out more than $1.2 billion to settle the claims filed during this one year revival period. Other private and non-profit employers were sued and paid out as well.

For the public third parties covered by this bill, however, a very different result occurred. There is no doubt that in 2002, when SB 1779 was enacted, it was intended to apply to both public and private entities. Indeed, it would be unreasonable, if not shocking, for the Legislature to intentionally discriminate against one set of victims, e.g. those whose abusers happened to be employed by a public instead of a private entity. However, due to a drafting error, the California Supreme Court held in 2007 that SB 1779 did not actually apply to public or governmental agencies. So, unlike private institutions, public schools and government entities were shielded from the one year revival of lapsed claims. As a result, the similarly situated victims of these entities were not accorded the remedies of SB 1779.

In 2008, the Legislature addressed this unfair distinction between victims of public as opposed to private institutions. Note, however, that the bill enacted, SB 640, did not restore equity between these two sets of victims. Instead of subjecting public/governmental entities to all of the provisions of the 2002 law, the Legislature only allowed victims of public institutions to sue under the new rules prospectively-from 2009 forward-and provided no "one year revival" period. In passing this 2008 law, I can't believe the legislature decided that victims of abuse by a public entity are somehow less deserving than those who suffered abuse by a private entity. The children assaulted by Jerry Sandusky at Penn State or the teachers at Miramonte Elementary School in Los Angeles are no less worthy because of the nature of the institution they attended. Rather, I believe that legislators, in good faith, weighed the merits of such claims against the equities of allowing claims to be brought against third parties years after the abuse occurred. The Legislature concluded that fairness required that certain claims should be allowed, but only going forward.

This brings us to the bill now before me, SB 131. This bill does not change a victim's ability to sue a perpetrator. This bill also does not change the significant inequity that exists between private and public entities. What this bill does do is go back to the only group, i.e. private institutions, that have already been subjected to the unusual "one year revival period" and makes them, and them alone, subject to suit indefinitely. This extraordinary extension of the statute of limitations, which legislators chose not to apply to public institutions, is simply too open-ended and unfair. For all these reasons, I am returning SB 131 without my signature.

Sincerely,

Edmund G. Brown Jr.

Governor of California 

DRIVERS PERMITS FOR CA IMMIGRANTS

Governor Jerry Brown signed into law a provision allowing unauthorized immigrants across California to apply for and receive State-issued drivers permits.

I applaud this new law since it accomplishes many positive goals:  it recognizes the presence of many brothers and sisters among us without proper legal papers, and extends to them respect and dignity; it will ensure that all drivers on California roads will have studied for testing, and have taken a driving exam; it will require all such persons to have proper automobile insurance; and it will make our roads safer for everyone.

Some 1.4 million California immigrants would be eligible to apply for the new driving permits.

The new driving permits will appear differently from regular California drivers licenses which bear the logo "DL" for Driver's License.  These special permits will bear the logo "DP" for Driving Privilege, thus reducing their possible usage for other identification purposes.

It is expected that the Department of Motor Vehicles will start issuing the new driving permits by September or October of 2014.

While this step forward for our immigrant brothers and sisters is important, it does not address all of the other major stumbling blocks facing unauthorized persons in our country.  We must still insist on comprehensive immigration reform to bring all immigrants out from the shadows where they now live in fear, hardships, and discrimination.