Hey everybody,
It’s the last Tuesday of Ordinary Time, and you’re reading The Tuesday Pillar Post.
Advent kicks off on Sunday, and with it, a period of looking forward, towards the coming of Christ at Christmas, and the coming of Christ at the end of time.
I heard a cleric say in a homily recently that for most of us, the coming of Christ at the end of time will be “after our pilgrimage on earth is complete.”
In other words, this homily said, we can pretty well trust that we’re going to die before the Lord returns — after all, he hasn’t returned yet, and it’s been a very long time.
Guys, I think the homilist meant well, though I must admit that I don’t recall his point. But I think we should be counting on Jesus coming back any day now. We should be looking for it, and we should be ready.
Advent is meant to shake us out of complacency about the fact that Jesus is actually coming back, and that we can’t be caught unawares, unprepared, assuming that we’ve got a couple of decades to get our lives together, or get serious about renouncing sin, or get busy about the work of evangelization.
Advent means to say: “Look! Jesus is coming, like, real soon. We don’t know when, but it could be now. Let’s be ready for the day of judgment.”
Now here’s some good news for those of us in the United States. Before Advent, we have Thanksgiving.
There are a lot of dates people claim as the “first” Thanksgiving in America, though I think any Catholic might reasonably look to August 15, 1559, when the first Mass was recorded on what is now U.S. soil.
But today’s date, Nov. 26, also has some claim to being the first Thanksgiving — not the first observance, but the first Thanksgiving-as-federal-holiday, and maybe the first four-day-Thanksgiving-weekend. That’s because in 1789, just a year after the Constitution had been ratified, George Washington declared that Nov. 26 would be a national day of Thanksgiving.
Washington’s idea was kind of penitential. Sure, he said that we should render God “our sincere and heartfelt thanks,” but he also emphasized that we should “beseech [read beg] Him to pardon our national and other transgressions,” so that we might live virtuously together.
We don’t really think about that penitential part very much. But we could.
We kick off the day with a kind of half-examen — we’re supposed to recollect about what we’re thankful for, what blessings we’ve received. It wouldn’t take much work, knowing that both Advent and the Lord are coming, to complete the parentheses, as it were, and also reflect on where we need to repent, on how we’ve rejected the blessings of our lives, most especially the blessing of grace.
And it wouldn’t hurt to think about how we could become a blessing, too.
I was reading yesterday an old interview with my former boss, Archbishop Charles Chaput, and I was struck — as I’ve been before — by his plain language on a crucial subject:
“We can't preach the Gospel and not live it. If we don't love the poor, and do all we can to improve their lot, we're going to go to Hell. It's very clear from the gospels that we have the duty to do that.”
“If we don’t love the poor, and do all we can to improve their lot, we’re going to go to Hell.”
That reality demands something different of each of us, depending on what we’ve got, and what we need, and what God asks of us, and how we respond. But, rest assured, it does demand something real and concrete from each of us.
And Thanksgiving — just three days ahead of Advent — might be the right time to ask God what it demands of us, especially as we look around, many of us, at the embarrassing plunder of material resources he has entrusted to us.
“If we don’t love the poor, and do all we can to improve their lot, we’re going to go to Hell.”
Christ is coming. Maybe in our lifetimes. Maybe even before the parade ends, the Lions and Bears kick off, and before we have much more chance to share our blessings. So we should do it.
The news
Georgetown said no. Lovely was told that changing her test day would be unfair to other students in the class. The students disagreed, and said they’d be fine with it.
Georgetown said no. According to Lovely, one administrator “told me I could have planned better … and that I knew I had final exams.”
Well, there was a big online backlash about this last week, when students circulated a petition urging Georgetown to let their pregnant classmate have some accommodation for her criminal law test. They suggested doing otherwise would be, well, criminal.
But Lovely told The Pillar that the accommodation she got was a one-off — a bow to public pressure that won’t help the next pregnant student who needs an adjustment, let alone students who need accommodations for their disabilities.
And other students at Georgetown law said that for a Catholic, Jesuit university, Georgetown’s accommodation policy leaves a great deal to be desired.
Lovely and her classmates are calling for a change to the process — for a transparent and consistent approach to accommodating students with extra needs.
For The Pillar, Leah Libresco Sargeant reports.
Her on-the-ground reporting is definitely worth a read.
Join the renewal in Catholic Education! The M.A. in Catholic Education program at the Augustine Institute equips educators of all subject areas to bring Christ to the center of their classroom. Grounded in Catholic theology, the curriculum includes a detailed study of Christian anthropology, the liberal arts, the art of teaching, and more. Offered on campus, online, or hybrid. Learn more!
Fr. Jacques Sawadogo, a priest of the Ouahigouya diocese, talked with The Pillar last week about his country’s suffering: “In the small cities and villages the terrorists are making the lives of the Christians very difficult. They are chased away from their villages, and many churches have been burned. In my diocese there are three or four parishes which are cut off.”
“When the terrorists arrive, they order women to wear the veil, and men to grow a beard and cut their trousers short. If people do not want to abide, they are given 24 hours to leave, or they will be killed, and their houses burned.”
The terrorists control about 60% of the country. And according to Sawadogo:
“When the terrorists come, it is not only the Christians who are persecuted or killed, but also Muslims who just want to live their life, or who have good relations with Christians, or who are just not ‘Muslim enough’.”
Read what’s happening here, and pray for the people of Burkina Faso.
—
Poland’s bishops held a landmark meeting this month with abuse victim advocates.
One abuse victim representative described the Nov. 19 meeting as “extremely open” and “frank.” Another said it was “historic.”
So what happened? Read about it here.
The Association of Vatican Lay Workers, known by its Italian initials ADLV, complained Nov. 21 that Vatican’s management of the pension fund has long been opaque, and said employees were “exhausted by cuts.”
Mostly, they say, they’d like to see Vatican financial transparency about their retirement accounts.
The parish did not specify what the “incident” was, although it indicated that diocesan safe environment policies and “standards of behavior” were at play, and said that Martins had been directed to leave both the parish, and the diocese — a relatively unusual step in such cases.
The Pillar made an initial report on the parish announcement, and the end of the relic tour, on Saturday.
On Monday, Martins’ attorney contacted The Pillar — via a “cease-and-desist” — giving the priest’s side of the story.
Martins’ attorney said the priest had touched a student’s hair while trying to “build rapport” with her and other students, and that an “outraged father” had called the police, insisting (apparently) on investigations.
The lawyer said an initial investigation by police had not led to charges.
For its part, the Diocese of Joliet said this was an “accurate but incomplete” account of things, and said there were “additional facts” not recounted by Martins’ lawyers.
“According to our policies, these were boundary issues, not sexual misconduct,” a diocesan spokesperson told The Pillar by email, but did not elaborate on the alleged “additional facts.”
“The police investigation may indicate something more but that remains to be seen,” the spokesperson wrote. As it stands, the priest has been temporarily removed from ministry by his religious order, pending the outcome of the police inquiry.
Martins is an immensely popular speaker and writer, with a podcast which reportedly reproduces, in dramatic audio dramas, his experiences as an exorcist. That’s why, in addition to his work displaying relics at parishes across the country, his case has gotten a lot of attention.
For what it’s worth, there’s still a lot that’s unknown. And if you want to know what I think about all of it, well, that’s too bad — we’ll doubtless be doing more reporting on it, and that comes before my viewpoints on the matter, as an issue of fairness and integrity.
—
But there is one part of this story I’d like to discuss. If you spend a lot of time online, you know there is a small-but-vocal-contingent of people unhappy with the way The Pillar reported this story, or even that we filed an initial report at all.
Well, a nationally popular relic tour came to an end because a parish announced a police investigation into a well-known priest with a top-of-the-charts podcast and some very popular books.
That announcement is news, and that’s why we wrote up the announcement — knowing full well that an initial write-up isn’t the whole story, and it’s not meant to be, but it’s often what gets the ball rolling, and it provides information about what has happened, in contravention to misinformation —like reports that the priest had broken his ribs a few weeks back (true) and that’s what brought the tour to an end (false).
But it seems a lot of people are mad because our initial report said the priest was facing a police investigation over “alleged inappropriate conduct involving children.”
This, they said, was not an accurate summary of the parish announcement, which called the circumstances an “incident” involving “students,” for which police had been called.
A group of online commentators, including “What Women Want” star Mel Gibson, seem to expect an apology for that summary language, suggesting it implies sins against the sixth commandment, rather than the then-unspecified allegation the parish recounted.
I’m sorry, but I just can’t do it. If the police are called because of your conduct, and you’re directed to leave the diocese, the conduct alleged against you is, as a matter of tautology, alleged to be inappropriate.
No one calls the police to allege that you are acting within the bounds of propriety. No one calls the cops and charges that you’re doing something right. As a matter of conscience, I just can’t pretend that the word “inappropriate” can, should, or does have only one meaning, and that that meaning is only, and necessarily, sexual. It’s just not a reasonable limitation to impose on the use of language. I’m not willing to surrender the word “inappropriate” to the ghettoes of designated euphemism.
But I want you to know, Pillar readers, that I thought about it. I thought about it a lot. I did the necessary self-reflection, consultation, and discernment.
Ed will tell you that ordinarily, when people are mad at me en masse on the internet, I go through a cycle of self-doubt and insecurity, wondering if perhaps I really have done everything wrong, and if I should go back and change everything, and if I’ve really messed up.
He gets annoyed when I go through those cycles of self-doubt, especially as he seems immune to social media anger. And in fairness, I get annoyed when Ed awfulizes things himself, and imagines that Pillar is one bad week of subscriptions away from pennilessness, his family one subscriber’s expired credit card from the poor house.
But on this “inappropriate” issue, I’m really not plagued by that paranoia.
I think “alleged inappropriate conduct” is an apt descriptor for a scenario in which someone calls the police on you. I don’t think that means the allegation has been proven, and I don’t think people should presume, by that phrase, that we’re implying the worst possible thing they can possibly imagine. That’s just not rational. If someone picks up the phone to call the cops about you, they’re alleging your alleged conduct was allegedly not appropriate. That’s how it is.
Also, I’ve realized something which may sound basic, but which has taken me years of having a public-facing job to learn: Not everyone who disagrees on the internet is acting in good faith.
Now, Pillar readers and subscribers, I encourage you to have a spirited (and charitable) conversation in the comment section about whether we should have published this or that or some other story, if that’s what you want to do.
My observation about you guys is that you’re acting in good faith, and that we might disagree, but we’re all really discussing what’s best for the Church, and how to go about achieving it.
But it’s taken me far too long to accept that many people performatively accusing us of willfully ruining lives by using this word instead of that word — or no words at all — just aren’t acting in good faith. Some people writing in to say that Flynn tries to “make a buck by destroying priests” might not be coming from a desire for real conversation.
And it’s taken me a long time to learn that no matter how friendly I am, how much I try to engage them and explain myself to them, some people still won’t like me. I like to be liked, so that’s a sincerely tough nut to swallow. I just can’t win ‘em all. But that’s life, I guess.
Here’s the deal: The Pillar will always do our best to report the news as well as we possibly can. Full stop. Sometimes you’ll agree and sometimes you won’t. Full stop. And we’ll all have to live with that reality. Full stop.
Now perhaps you think our journalistic conduct is not appropriate on this story or that. Perhaps you want even to tell me that. That’s fine with me. I’ll know what you mean by those words, and what you don’t.
The Maximus Saga
I went with my dad, brother-in-law, and friend of The Pillar Fr. Daniel last night to see “Gladiator II” at a late-night showing.
I’m not going to write a full review, but I’ll offer a few points:
— First, the lighting and set design of this movie is really, really bad. “Gladiator II” is meant to take place in Rome, a city that’s nearly always sunny, and that’s beautifully sumptuous, for an abundance of fruit trees and flowers in near every courtyard.
Ridley Scott’s Rome is a darkly lit rocky place with hardly even a hint of natural beauty. It looks like the burnout sets from “Band of Brothers,” and that’s just not Rome (apart from when the Allies are bombing it, I guess).
Anyone who has ever spent much time on the Italian peninsula will tell you this place just doesn’t feel like Rome, and that cheapens the movie.
— If you loved “Gladiator,” you’ll like “Gladiator II” well enough, but that’s it.
The movie had a fairly similar plot to the first one, and a similar main character (that’s a plot point), but none of the emotional resonance.
Everyone felt solidarity with Maximus Decimus Meridius, commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions and loyal servant to the true emperor, Marcus Aurelius. (Despite that particular emperor’s tendency to make a lot of martyrs out of the early Christians, but I digress.)
Everyone liked standing by Maximus’ side in the arena, because everyone had journeyed the long road which had taken him there — and everyone knew how badly he wished to be home.
With Lucius, the son of Maximus, there was little of that same solidarity. I never found a reason to care about him.
Instead, “Gladiator II” felt like we were getting a necessary update to the Roman Empire Skywalker Saga — like we had to endure this film, and know what happened, just for the hope that maybe “Gladiator III” will be amazing.
— Denzel is awesome. In this movie, and in every other. The guy never misses.
— The CGI baboons were distractingly bad. The rhinos too.
— Overall, if you want my advice, save your money for Moana 2. It’ll be the superior Thanksgiving sequel, I’m sure of it.
What can I say, except you’re welcome?
Speaking of Rome
You asked for it, you got it. You readers and subscribers have asked for a long time now for a Pillar trip to Rome, so Ed and I, next year, are going to give it a try.
We’re going to Rome from Dec. 2-10 next year, and you’re invited. We’ll be guided by Pillar SuperFriend Joan Watson. We’ll pray, we’ll learn, we’ll look at old and/or sacred stuff, we’ll debate, we’ll record a live episode of the The Pillar Podcast.
You should come.
If you want to sign up today, you can, right here. You can give this to a spouse or friend for a Christmas gift.
If you want to come to a Zoom information night, you can sign up right here.
And listen, we know this trip is expensive, and not everyone can afford to go. So on Dec. 22, we’re going to have a raffle, and choose one Pillar subscriber for a free spot on the pilgrimage, airfare and all.
If you want to sign up for that raffle, you can do it right here.
To be eligible for the raffle, you need to be a paying subscriber, and signed up on the form above, by Dec. 22.
If you want to be a chaplain on the trip, drop me a note. If we get a lot of interest, I’m not quite sure how we’ll make a choice, but we’ll figure that out soon, I promise.
If you come, I’ll introduce you to the best butcher in Rome. We’ll eat this, and it’ll be glorious.
—
In the meantime, please be assured of our prayers. Please pray for us. We need it. And remember, seriously — Christ is coming.
Yours in Christ,
JD Flynn
editor-in-chief
The Pillar
