Newman Center Response

I'm not quite sure if the Albuquerque Journal will post the letter that I wrote in response to a guest column by Colt Balok that they printed in February 2, 2014 edition of their paper, so I am going to post it here as well for people to see.  If you would like to read the column by Mr. Balok, you can find it here:  http://www.abqjournal.com/346381/opinion/newman-center-change-for-the-good.html

Dear Editor,

I am writing in response to Mr. Colt Balok’s guest column dated February 1, 2014 regarding the Aquinas Newman Center.   While I do appreciate Mr. Balok’s opinion, much of what his writes is only his opinion and not based on anything but that opinion.

First, I have been a parishioner at the Newman Center for the last 6 years.  I am also an alumnus of the University of New Mexico and attended church regularly at the Newman Center when I was a UNM student in the early 1990’s.   When I moved back to Albuquerque in the middle part of the last decade, I made it a point of attending Mass at every parish in the Albuquerque Metro area in the hope that I would find one that would as Mr. Balok put it, “deepen my faith.”  I found that at the Newman Center.

Mr. Balok asserts that Mass is the same each day worldwide, which is not true.  Even within the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, Mass is different at a number of the parishes.  Archbishop Michael Sheehan himself has acknowledge as much when in the January 2014 edition of the Archdiocese’s newspaper, People of God, he discussed the beautiful way in which parishioners at Our Lady of La Vang celebrate the Vietnamese culture in their Masses.

My personal experiences are that not all parishes are the same nor should they be.  I, like Mr. Balok, grew up attending church in the Diocese of Gallup.  I was an altar server at St. Francis of Assisi Church and later Sacred Heart Cathedral in Gallup.  This was a time when there were no female altar servers, only altar boys, and when we always wore heavy wool cassocks and cotton surplices.   Did that make us more pious or devout than those who volunteer at the Newman Center to serve at Mass just because we didn’t wear “polo shirts”?  Maybe we should focus more on the devoutness and dedication of the more than 100 parishioners who volunteer at the Newman Center to serve in the various different liturgical ministries each weekend, than solely on what they wear while doing so.

I have lived in different parts of the country and different parts of the world, as well as having served in the United States Marine Corps, and I have attended church regularly throughout.  I have been to parishes that have had Diocesan, Jesuit, Franciscan, and Dominican priests and have found differences depending on the order of priests.  By far I, as well as most parishioners at the Newman Center, prefer Dominicans.  Dominicans are also known as the Order of Preachers and were founded to preach the Gospel.  Dominicans are known to have produced some of the greatest theological minds throughout the history of the Catholic Church.

Another issue that I take issue with is Mr. Balok utilizing UNM’s undergraduate enrollment number of about 21,000 to make his point as to why the Newman Center should have had someone become a candidate for priesthood.  If we utilize national statistics, then less than 1 out of 4 students at UNM is likely a Roman Catholic.  That leaves us at about 5,000 Catholic students.  However, normally, only those students who live on or near campus will attend church on campus which leaves less than 700 Catholic students that fit that description.  Even if every single one of those 700 students attended Mass every weekend, the Newman Center could not survive.  It cannot survive, let alone thrive, without the support of the 750+ families that call the Newman Center home. 

Mr. Balok says that students “no longer wish to attend Mass at the Newman Center” but this statement is not supported by the fact that every weekend students attend each of the parish’s five Masses, especially the 5pm Mass on Sundays which is primarily for students.  Students participate as Lectors, Eucharistic Ministers, Altar Servers, Ushers, Choir Members, and some are even Peer Campus Ministers.  Mr. Balok purports to talk for the “vast majority” of UNM students but in reality he only speaks for himself and the few people that he talks to that might agree with him. 

While Mr. Balok has been a part of the UNM and the Newman communities for a year and a half, many Newman parishioners have been members of both communities for a decade or more.  If he does not find Mass at the Newman Center “profound and stimulating” then he is well within his right to attend one of the many different Catholic Churches in the UNM area.  Why should the majority of the Newman Center parishioners have to suffer so that he can have the church he judges sufficiently Catholic?  The truth is that like most UNM graduates, Mr. Balok and his friends will leave the Newman Center behind after graduation, and it will be up to the devoted parishioners that remain to ensure that the parish continues to thrive. 

With 220,000+ Roman Catholic parishes worldwide, 17,000+ parishes here in the United States and 91 parishes in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe alone, does Mr. Balok really believe that every single one of those parishes is the same as each other.  He says that “selecting things that fit you personally from a menu is not an option,” and while I do agree with this when it comes to core Catholic beliefs, I wholeheartedly disagree with him when it comes to being able to choose what provides them “spiritual strength, guidance and direction.”  I have rarely seen two parishes that are exactly the same. Even rarer is finding two priests who are exactly the same.  In fact, often in a single parish different Masses on the same weekend are pronouncedly different.  We as Catholics are well within our rights to choose whatever parish we choose for whatever reason we choose and nobody has a right to tell us differently. 

Finally, Mr. Balok points to the idea that the Catholic Church is not a democracy, to which I agree.  As someone who believes in the Catechism of the Church, I’m sure he would agree with me that we should listen to the Pope regarding issues involving the Church.  Pope Francis recently called for a revision of the relations between local bishops and religion orders.  During a November 2013 meeting with the superiors general of the religious orders the pope said, “Dialogue between the bishop and religious must be rescued so that, due to a lack of understanding of their charisms, bishops do not view religious simply as useful instruments.”  The pope also said, “We bishops need to understand that consecrated persons are not functionaries but gifts that enrich dioceses.”

I, and my fellow Newman parishioners that have signed the petition to the Archbishop, see our Dominican priests as gifts from God who help us enrich and grow in our Catholic faith each and every day.  Replacing four Dominican priests with two Diocesan priests makes little sense especially when there is a shortage of priest already in the Archdiocese.  We are the ones who have remained after the students have graduated and left and we are the ones who wish to have a parish where the 64 year tradition of Dominicans being an integral part of our parish is not destroyed in the hopes of increasing Diocesan vocations.  I implore Archbishop Sheehan to reverse his decision and let the Dominicans remain at the Newman Center.

Sincerely,

Rick Carpenter

Aquina Newman Center Parishioner

How Stupid Are We Supposed To Be?

Why do we let politicians, the media, and special interest groups treat us as if we are stupid and lazy?  Is it because we as an American people have demonstrated a willingness to believe without questioning what some people tell us?  Is it that they count on us being too lazy to check?  

The 2009 Ricky Gervais and Matthew Robinson's movie The Invention of Lying put forth the idea about what the world might be like if no one ever told a lie.  Everyone would always believe exactly what everyone else said because nobody even knew what a lie was.  That was until one day the main character, Mark, told the first lie ever.  But because everyone believed exactly what he said, no matter how ridiculous it was, Mark found out that he had immense power to control the minds, beliefs, and actions of the entire world.  As one watches the people in the movie, one can't help but wonder how people can be so gullible and naive.  The sad truth is, we don't have to go far to find people who display many of those same characteristics in real life.  

It seems that as Americans we have become so complacent that politicians, the media and special interest groups believe that if we are told something often enough that we are just going to assume that it must be true.  In fact, they not only believe that, they count on it.  They count on it so much that when people demonstrate a belief contrary to those that they have been force fed, they are painted at having been manipulated or uninformed or even worse, as having their opinion and their vote bought.

Look at the recent discussion regarding the spending that corporations and SuperPACs have been making for political purposes.  One side wants to restore limits placed on these individuals because they believe they are unfairly influencing the outcomes of elections.  Democrats continually point to outcome of the Wisconsin recall elections as one of their cases-in-point.  They say that the outcome was largely due to being outspent in the state by their Republican rivals and their supporters.  They give little or no credence to the idea that the citizens of Wisconsin might have minds of their own and voted the way they truly believed.

It is insulting to believe that just because a SuperPAC puts out a message that people will blinding believe it, but even if for the sake of argument we assume that that may have some validity, if we are going to put constraints on these special interest groups, how about leveling the playing field even further by placing limits on Hollywood and the media trying to influence political views as well?  Of course the argument will be that those things are protected as free speech, freedom of the press and freedom of expression, especially for the writers, producers, directors and actors.  But movies and TV shows are rarely funded by an individual anymore.  They are funded by groups of investors and/or corporations that either believe in the message of the project or they believe in the potential of the project to make them a profit.  Aren't people and corporations that donate money to a SuperPAC donating because they believe in either the message or the ability of the outcome of the SuperPAC's goal to ultimately make them a profit?  I understand that people make the case that donors to these SuperPACs should be disclosed, but we allow anonymous free speech in this country, especially in the age of the internet.

Politicians also believe that we as American have very short memory spans.  For example, yesterday in response to the United States Supreme Court's decision regarding the Arizona Immigration Law SB1070, Congresswoman and Chair of the Democratic National Committee Debbie Wasserman Shultz, said, "I’m pleased that the Supreme Court struck down most of the ill-conceived provisions within this law."  Who reading this doesn't believe that if two days from now the Supreme Court rules similarly on ObamaCare, Congresswoman Wasserman Shultz won't be demonizing the Court?  It is much the same when Democrats point to the alleged political "fishing expedition" by the Republicans regarding Operation Fast and Furious and Attorney General Eric Holder.  Are the Democrats counting on the American people forgetting their similar efforts in 2007 regarding then Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez and the firing of U.S. Attorneys?  

Democrats don't hold the monopoly on counting on short memories on the part of Americans.  Former Republican Presidential Primary challengers of Mitt Romney are hoping that now that they have endorsed Romney for President that the American people will forget all the bad things that they said about him in the primaries.  The only person hoping for that more is perhaps Mitt Romney himself.

Limiting the spending that SuperPACs and corporations can make for political purposes is not the answer, even if we include limits those who cite "artistic purposes" as is often the claim by those in Hollywood.  Rarely when politicians call for limiting one side or the other in any way, is the purpose to really promote fairness in the process.  It is usually to restore the advantage that that side felt they enjoyed before the "unfairness" began in the first place.  

If we as American are willing to turn a blind eye to the manipulation, lies, and dishonest tactics perpetrated on us from the various sides of the political spectrum, then we are bound to continue to suffer for it.  The only way for us as Americans to take back the power and the discourse from the political elite is to ensure that we make our decisions by being well informed.  

A friend of mine from high school and I regularly converse over social media regarding a wide array of political and social topics.  While we rarely agree, I have a great amount of respect for my friend as he rarely relies on information that he hasn't thoroughly researched prior to forming his opinion.  We both come to the discussion with well thought out and well researched views and even when we sometimes cross the line due to our passion for those views, we always manage to return to that sense of respect that we started our discussion with, even if we still don't agree at all.  

My friend and I don't count on just the information that politicians, the media and special interest groups tell us.  We confirm and test that information to see if it is valid and if it can be useful in helping us develop our own opinions.  Part of the reason for that is that we recognize that they each have lied, distorted or ignored the truth, or tried to manipulate people before and we are unwilling to fall for it.  But so many people are willing to still give these groups the benefit of the doubt even after having been deceived.

In his 1987 movie Raw, Eddie Murphy tells a story about a husband whose wife walks in on him and another women in the act of having sex.  The wife storms out of the room and her naked husband follows  her.  When she asks him how he could cheat on her, he responds by saying, "Wasn't me."   When she reminds him that she caught him in the act, he again says, "Wasn't me."  When the wife challenges him one more time, the husband repeats, "Wasn't me."  To which the wife responds, "Well maybe it wasn't you."  Politicians, the media and special interest groups have treated us just like the wife in Murphy's story.  And the reason that they have been able to do it for so long is that we have been willing to believe the lies even when we know the truth, all because it is easier to do so than to have to take the chance that we may have to face the hard truth.  As long as we are willing to take the easy way out, others will let us, as long as we are willing to give them our vote.

Give Me A Break

I'm trying to figure out what about becoming a celebrity makes a person all of a sudden think that they are an expert at everything and that people should do whatever they say.

I'm only saying this because I have gotten tired of reading and hearing about all these "celebrities" championing various causes and ideas where they push their fans to believe exactly the way they do. Don't get me wrong, I believe that all people have a right to voice there opinions (it would be hypocritical for someone writing a blog to believe otherwise), but I don't believe that anyone has a right to tell others how to think, how to feel, and how to believe. This is especially true if you push the idea that those that think otherwise are lesser human beings than you, either directly or indirectly.

I subscribe to Facebook, Twitter and use to be active on MySpace. I follow many celebrities and non-celebrities and I regularly get to read the thoughts they put out into cyberspace. Some ask people to support certain causes or even their latest endeavors, but there are a few that seem to view their fans as a group of pseudo-disciples who are just waiting to follow their every thought and desire. This group (and no I'm not going to mention names) loves to push their idea of self-importance to the extreme.

Again, I believe in free speech, but some of these people remind me of the groups who go door to door looking to convert people to their religion: Some just want to share their stories and beliefs and invite you to their church while others want to tell you how wrong you are for believing differently than them. I don't mind the sharing but keep the righteous indignation to yourselves please.

What makes some celebrities believe that they know better than the rest of us? And why are many of us so quick to believe that they actually do? I don't mind supporting certain causes such as research for diseases, natural disasters and the like, but I do have a problem when it comes to being told how to think. This is especially true in the political and social arenas.

I've never supported a candidate or initiative because a celebrity told me too (although I may have thought twice if a celebrity I particularly disliked shared my same views). I've only given my support if we shared the same views from the start, which I have to admit has been quite rare. I really don't mean this to be about what people believe, because I have no business telling people what to believe either, just don't expect me to adopt your beliefs because you say so and definitely don't treat me like an idiot because I don't.

Craig Ferguson, Not Just a Comedian

I don't know if you watch late-night television. You might be a fan of Jay, Dave, Conan, Jimmy or the other Jimmy, but if you want to see one of the funniest and most thought provoking person on TV you need to tune in to Craig Ferguson.

In case you don't know, Craig is a Scottish born comedian/author/talk-show host that immigrated to the United States around 1994. While he had enjoyed modest success in the UK prior to 1994, most people in the U.S. first saw Craig as Nigel Wick on the Drew Carey Show. While I enjoyed the Drew Carey Show, one of the characters I had little use for was Nigel Wick.

In December of 2004 it was announced that Craig would be taking over the Late Late show from then host Craig Kilborn. I was horrified. Not because I was a Kilborn fan, but because I couldn't imagine giving the Scotsman a full hour show of his own. That was until I saw him on it.

Craig has a unique style for TV. He says what's on his mind and while most of the time it is funny if not hilarious, there are times when he is downright profound. He has never hidden his demons, past or present, and I think he gets strength from them.

There are so many times where Craig has shown his humanity on his show. Three of which come to mind.

In January 2006, Craig talked about his father just a day after he passed away. It was the first time I can ever remember being truly touched by what someone on TV said that I actually cried. I remember thinking so much about what my dad meant to me and how at times I hadn't gotten along with him. A little more than two years later, my dad passed away and I was asked to give the eulogy. If it wasn't for what I had seen two years prior, I might not have been able to do justice to my dad, his life, and what he meant to me. Thank you Craig.

The second was in February 2007 when Craig discusses his past and how he wasn't going to make fun anymore of the problems that Britney Spears was having at that time. I've never heard a comedian make any kind of passionate statement like he did then. I could describe it but I wouldn't do it justice. It probably would be better if you watched the video yourself.

In December 2008 Craig's mother passed away. He delivered another touching eulogy and finished that show by talking more about his mother and her favorite song.

His 2009 interview with Archbishop Desmond Tutu won him the prestigious Peabody Award for broadcasting excellence in news and entertainment.

Besides being a wonderful person, I wanted to also discuss how much I respect him as an American.

Craig became a naturalized citizen in early 2008. During the July 4th celebration in Boston he was asked to give a speech about being an American. It was very moving and very poignant.

Every show Craig starts by saying, "It's a great day for America!" How many of us natural born Americans have that much enthusiasm for our country every day? I wonder sometimes if those of us who are born here take it too much for granted. By God's grace we had the privilege of being born here. Maybe that is why too often we don't appreciate it as much as we should.

We complain about the people who come here illegally but why? Should we fault people for wanting to work hard to live the American Dream and pass that dream onto their children?

Yes, people should follow the law and should come here the right way, but how many of us would risk everything to try to find a better life for our families if it existed in some other country? That's how this country was founded. Columbus, the pilgrims, and the settlers of the west didn't have permission to go where they went, but they did, in search of better lives.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, has the potential to add or detract to our country and it doesn't matter whether you were born here or immigrated here legally or illegally. I am an optimist and I choose to believe that people will add more good than bad.

Throughout our history, we have fought many wars and conflicts against enemies that despise our way of life, yet we now want to persecute those who so desperately want to live that life that they are willing to risk death either in the rivers or the deserts in order to get a chance to have that life.

I'm not saying that people should break the law and be rewarded with easy citizenship through amnesty. We need to secure our borders and provide a way for all those who want to come here to have the chance, but we also need to be humane about what we are doing with the people who are already here, even if they came here illegally.

Because you never know what wonderful contributions people who come here might make in your life, just like the contributions that Scottish-American makes in mine 5 nights a week.

The Blame Game

I constantly are after my daughters to take responsibility for what they do and to stop blaming others. I realize that we all make mistakes (and I've made some big ones in my time), but when the first reaction is to find someone to blame for your problems, we are in big trouble.

Everyone on the national political stage want to blame each other for whatever goes wrong. Just recently I heard members of the Obama Administration, including the President and Vice-President themselves, attempting to blame the Bush Administration for the economic problems we are still facing today.  When they are not blaming former President Bush, they are blaming Europe, or Republicans, or now one of their favorite excuses, "headwinds" Why can't we get the administration that has been in office now for more than 30 months to take responsibility for anything. Sure, they want to take credit whether it is due to them or not (just listen to them talk about all the jobs "they" have created), but when it comes to taking full responsibility for what has gone wrong on their watch, they would rather pass the buck. The Republicans aren't much better however we all need to quit blaming President Bush and others for everything.

The truth is, rarely is there one person or even one group of people, other than ourselves, that is completely responsible for any or all of the troubles we face in life. It should be in adversity that we find strength and common ground to do great things.

Martin Luther King Jr. said, "The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."

I wish we could teach politicians to act like we want our children to act, with a little decency and compassion towards each other while taking responsibility as they should.